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 AboutLUA00-053 Vol. 1 of 2 ±�ompson LUA00-053 Parties of Record _ " __.._ From: Karen Codiga To: Kaufman, Fred; Thompson, Joan Date: 12/7/00 11:33AM Subject: Re: LUA00-053 Parties of Record I-have added this name to our party of record list, however, as the official "yellow"file is with the Hearing Examiner's office, I am forwarding this memo so to them so that they can add it to the file. Joan, if you have any questions, please call me. Thank You! Karen, -7282 >>> Elizabeth Higgins 12/07/00 10:37AM >>> Please add the following to the list: Norman Perry 1224 S. 7th Street Renton,WA 98055-3067 Thank you CC: Higgins, Elizabeth t I . I '•C f • • Mr.Ken Adams ,• Mr.James Baker Mr. &Mrs.Thomas Barr 706 Renton Avenue So. 524 Mill Avenue So. 802 High Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Ms.Dianne Beatty Mr. &Mrs.Brian Beckman Mr.Pat Bellport I 1730 SE 7th Court 435 Cedar Avenue So. 411 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Barton Bennett Mr.Douglas Bergquist Mr.&Mrs.Mike Bishop 1807 SE 7th Court River Ridge Estates Homeowners Assoc. 326 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 1801 SE 7t Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Dino Boscolo Mr.&Mrs.Claude Bouchard Ms.Ruth Bradley 915 High Avenue So. 1506 Beacon Way South 709 High Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Douglas Brandt Ms.Darlene Bressan Mr. &Mrs.John Burkhalter 610 Renton Avenue So. 901 High Avenue So. 901 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Margaret Burkhalter Ms.Dina Calhoun Ms.Eleanor Cantrell 715 Jones Avenue So. Mr.Robert Davis 1416 South 7th Renton WA 98055 433 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Ralph Carter Mr.Timothy Cogger Mr. &Mrs.Barry Conger 630 High Avenue South 609 Grant Avenue South 1301 South 9th Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bert Custer Ms. Gina Custer Ms.Cheryl Danza 714 Cedar Avenue So. 1209 South 7th Street 706 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Robert Elliot Mr. &Mrs.Quentin Ellis Mr.Dale Fountaine 300 Renton Avenue So. 715 High Avenue South 617 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Don Faull Sheri Frank/Grant Anderson Mr.&Mrs.W.Free 804 Renton Avenue So. 426 Cedar Avenue South 1012 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Frank Gallacher Mr.Bob Gambill Ms.Lily Garfield 719 Jones Avenue South - • Seattle Public Utilities, 10th Floor 265 Maiden Lane East Renton WA 98055 710 Second Avenue Seattle WA 98112 Seattle WA 98104-1714 Ms.Patricia Gilroy Ms.Rosemary Grassi Ms.Kathy Griffin 535 Renton Avenue So. PO Box 1188 (422 Cedar Av S) 1425 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Aim Grinolds Mr.Manly Grinolds Mr.Roger Grinolds 324 Cedar Ave. So. 1223 South 3`d Street 330 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.John Guiliani Ms.Bambi Gunderson Mr.Russ Haag 1400 South 7th Street 1107 South 4th Street 704 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Cynthia Halse Mr.Frederick Hartley Mr. &Mrs.Dan Hemenway 15404—167th Place SE 701 High Avenue South 1712 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98058 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Sharon Herman/Chuck Lyden Ms.Pat Hodgsen Hopkins and Chombers 711 Jones Avenue South 620 Renton Avenue South PO Box 691 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Margaret Houser Diane Hyatt/Terry Stange Mr. &Mrs.W.Jaeckel 2331 SE 8th Place 720 Cedar Avenue South Falcon Ridge Newsletter Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 2342 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bill Johnson Mr. &Mrs.Phil Johnson Mr.Wayne Jones,Jr. 1425 Beacon Way South 350 Renton Avenue South Lakeridge Development Inc. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 PO Box 146 Renton WA 98057 Ms.Agnes Koestl Mr. &Mrs.Ken Kraght Ms.Ruth Larson 428 Renton Avenue South 527 Renton Avenue South Renton Hill Community Association Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 714 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Randy Lemke Ms.Elizabeth Lewis i. . wayne Liston 415 Cedar Avenue South 1525 South 011 Street — t Place SE Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98 S L.. ►,,,,_ god i 1 1J d b .1„ial..40---Lis- 1-1 I 1 ' Ms.Barbara Lux Mr.Robert Lux Mr. Carl Maas 1412 South 9th Street - • • 1410 South 7th Street Ms.Kathy McGatlin Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 1724 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Ms.Mary MacDonald Mr. &Mrs.Michael Mack Mr.Louis Malesis 802 Cedar Avenue South 906 High Avenue South 1718 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Eric Mastor Mr. &Mrs.Don Miles Mr.Keith Moberg 808 Renton Avenue South 532 Renton Avenue South 627 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Clint Morse Marianne Nicol/Mark Johnson Ms.Roseanne Nolan 525 High Avenue South 316 Renton Avenue South 2048 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Elsa Norris Mr.Bentley Oaks Ms. Cathy O'Neill 1513 South 7th Street 1321 South 7th Street 575 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Paul Ossorio Mr. &Mrs.Deone Perlatti Mr.Gino Petralia 708 Renton Avenue South 1520 South 9th Street 813 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Janice Potter/Mr.Dwight Potter Ms.Josephine Potter Ms.Paula Provin Falcon Ridge Association 1314 South 7th Street 712 Renton Avenue South 2411 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055-3065 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Dana Reiman Mr.Wayne Rossman / Mr.George Salurmini 1410 Beacon Way South 533 Grant Avenue South I 519 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs. Slapnick Mr.&Mrs.Louis Sutter Mr.Rick Thibodeau 531 Grant Avenue South 721 High Street 1000 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Lynn Thrasher Mr.Mario Tonda Joe Vanderpool/Elsa Norris 904 Grant Avenue South Mr.Victor Tonda 1513 South 7th Street Renton WA 98055 1308 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 i Mr. Jack Wardell . Mr. &Mrs.Larry Welch Mr.James Wilhoit 523 Renton Avenue South • 310 Renton Avenue South 910 Grant Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Rich Yarbrough Mr.Dean Yasuda Mr.Dick Zugschwerdt 338 Renton Avenue South 2058 SE 8th Place 802 Grand Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Bill Collins Mr.Kevin Oleson Mr. &Mrs.Mark DeWitt 420 Cedar Avenue South Renton School District#403 501 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Transportation Department Renton,WA 98058 1220 North 4th Street Renton WA 98055 Mark&Kimberly K.Mehlhaff David&Victoria Miles Rod Kunnanz 532 Grant Avenue South 1510 South 6th Place 810 High Avenue Souoth Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Marty L.Zander Dan O'Rourk 806 High Avenue South 501 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 A.F. and Nancy Alexander Steve Johnson Robert Mountjoy 1518 Cedar Avenue South 1514 Beacon Way South 810 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Debra Goltiani Darlene Moore Jason Donahue 811 Jones Ave. South 1511 So. 9`h St. 419 Cedar Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Newell/McSherry Elizabeth Prescott Mr. &Mrs.Gerald Hanger 815 Renton ave. So. 435 Cedar Ave. So. 905 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ruth Helsey Rachel Johnson/Mykel Papke Resident Marvin Wright 620 Grant Ave.So. / 707 Renton Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 ��_ -� Camron Smith Grant Anderson Roger Knutson 2140 SE 8th Place 426 Cedar Ave.So. 805 Jones Ave.So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 4 • 4 e 1 v 1. Mr. &Mrs.Richard Weitz • Mr. &Mrs.Johnson Hugo Chaves 718 Renton Ave. So. • • 1333 Beacon Way So. 326 Cedar Ave. So.• Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Gilroy Paul Lammer Jack Holt 1316 So. 10th Street 15234 SE 176`h Pl. 1517 So. 6th St. Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98055 Resident Residents Residents 300 Renton Ave. So. 316 Renton Ave. So. 1729 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Egan Mary Breda Jeff Fettinger/Martin Cibis 810 Grant Ave. So. 900 Grant Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Steve Briggs Tomac Patricia Gilroy 600 Grant Ave. So. 912 Grant Ave. So. 535 Renton Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Melanie Thompson Resident Resident 1307 So.9th 626 Renton Ave. So. 1724 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Resident 801 Jones Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. D ETERSON • HERITAGECONSULTING r. Nc, i \Ii_ l, r. 'S RENTON HILL AIRPORT WAY . 4030Kir Lake Washington / s a,, � Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 �� Kirkland,WA 98033 S 2oa ST ty Tel(425)827-5874 �,." -L7`-i_1 \ j ( / T\\ I�s�9 s 3ro sr Fax(425)822-7216 • )�co\ >�i I \ ` �( �i S 4tA ST 1\\+ /\ 1 \\\ ,-� Na o m SITE 2 1 \ \ �/fi �----.\--- \ ` 3 yWAy gKEN. Ldli J I %; I /9' I N.:::- T. _ _, \ \ GRAD o H u, '+Y� �_--��. c2 I I a ma Z Sr. 7TH 3T. % <r _J. S8956' E_829.34' \ \ i a PN/L/P `,�. 2 = CO 7 I -t1--\\-- S1OQMIWATER 42 41 37 39© © PARK J _I I_ \ �S. \N IRAG7 �� .14:01:::11 iz, I SW 16th o S 37 ��%��' ROD' • ST A 'IC ^� ti �I _ i '1 III -6---I- S UCfT OR 4 200' 0 200' H I- 1-----1 1 �, © �� ilia I I -I.l Io \ -�� RD_An ©� \ VICINITY MAP: Q W 2 SCALE 1'=200' \ 28 �V3� \ y NOT TO SCALE W O 4/12/00 �-�c-- 27 ' his 1 1---I--J \ -ll-� ©R'_D �_•• GENERAL NOTES: IG �_ I \ ``� ICI 1-- _�II- OWNER.: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT Q J NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH I y5 1RA\Lr I- 300 SW.7th Cl . 13478'40" 25.00' 58.68' \ �� 23l --� C- RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 �- \'''��' JI DEVELOPER: BENNETT DEVELOPMENT C2 2877'12" 125.00' 62.08' I -I I I I I I I \'',..:. .6 © 1-- 9 LAKE BELLEWE V ` SUITE 100 A MEi r�' L/5 TRACT ,-1 / BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 98005 1 I -1 I I ©� (425)709-6508 i� -�- I 6,G4 W 1 CONTACT:RYAN FIRE 56 I I - 1-- I L / . \ �,. U ENGINEER: PETERSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1 Y _� \\+L ` 4030 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N.E. . SUITE'200 I I- I `_1 / -�- ` /\ \ _ KIRKLAND,WASHINGTON 98033 _ J ,. \ \ '\\� (425)827-5874 z 4 1 I---I - I \ \ \--i CONTACT:JENNIFER STAG P.E KEY MAP SURVEYOR: MEAD OILMAN&ASSOCIATES SCALE 7'=200' P.O.BOX 289 a a WOODINVILLE, WASHINGTON 98072 (425)486-7252 B CONTACT:EDWARD ANDERSON,P.C.& BENCHMARKS/DATUM: w - TOTAL AREA:(+/) 10.35 ACRES(GROSS) g BENCHMARKS CITY OF RENTON#415-N7/4 COR.SEC.20-23-5 TOTAL AREA WITH R.O.W. 2.04 ACRES a a a a a a a a a a CASED 4'X4'CONC MON 17/2'BRASS DISC&X', f E.OF o 80 THE INTX.OF S 77H ST.&JONES AVE.S NET AREA 83I ACRES ELEVADON-347.34' CITY OF RENTON f418 TOTAL LOTS 57 RESIDENTIAL LOTS A SIE/G CASED CONC MON W77H 1/4'BRASS PIN,11'i S OF THE INTX.OF PROJECT MANAGER MAX. S 77H ST.&RENTON AVE.S. ALLOWABLE DENSITY 800 DU/ACRE DESIGNED ,L SONG £(£NATION=JOSBO' PROPOSED DENSITY: 6.86 DU/ACRE CADD a DENNEY DATUM.' NAND 88(CITY OF RENTON) ZONING: R-8,URBAN RESIDENTIAL CHECKED ,L SONG DATE 4/70/00 PROPOSED USE: SINGLE-FAMILY,DETACHED FILE NAME PPlHFR25 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXISTING USE: SINGLE-FAMILY,DETACHED IHAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST BOUNDARY FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD G/LMAN&ASSOCIATES QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH,RANGE 5 EASE N.M.,IN KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS` TOPOGRAPHY: FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD OILMAN&ASSOCIATES COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION,SAID POINT BEING DIE TRUE POINT F,R OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 895637'EAST ALONG DIE NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION UTILITIES/PURVEYORS: �. y��s A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH �•� ,�'�� T . 0143''8'WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 818.33 FEET,' C��1X.i THENCE SOUTH 7145'12'WEST A DISTANCE OF 109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY EWER/WATER: CITY OF RENTON 1/`� I 1 2M0'15' OF THE CITY OF NO T ES CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT7 48.2• FEET THENCE NORTH 44' 20'15'VEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASIEDA MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 7748.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE STORM DRAINAGE: CITY OF RENTON 5 WESTERLY £DISTANCE OF 33.74 FEET TO TS OF SAID /VLBON; THENCE NORTH TIE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.•EAST ALONG SAID ViESTERLY LIMITS CAS/POWER: PUGET SOUND&ENERGY ` �' �'_: LOT AREA'S(LISTED IN SQUARE FEET) TELEPHONE: US KEST ssTOBAL��v�V)ab 1. 5,990 13. 5,482 2S 4,750 J7. 5,527 49. 4,750 CABLE: AT&T EXPIRES:9/9/00 2. 5,353 74. 4,965 26. 4,750 SE 5,500 50. 4,749 FIRE DISTRICT: CITY OF RENTON 3. 4,875 15. 4,750 27. 4,750 39. 5,500 57. 5,825 STAMP NOT VALID 4 4,625 16. 4,750 28 4,750 40. 5,500 52. 5,863 UNLESS SIGNED AND DATED 5. 4,504 IZ 6,090 29. 4,750 47. 5,500 53. 4,750 SCHOOL DISTRICT: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT J403 6. 5,557 I8 Z584 30. 4,750 42. 5,500 54. 4,750 Z 5,799 19. 7,319 31. 4,754 4.D 5,500 58 4,750 • 8 JOBNUMBERHERM-0025 5,44J 20. 8,318 32. 4,946 44. 5,500 56. 4,731 - 9. 4,750 27. 5,000 33. 6,721 45. 4,750 57. 6.660 70. 4,750 22. 5,000 34. 5,549 46. 4,750 p 11. 4,750 23. 4,85I JS 6,905 47. 4,750 SHEEP NUMBER ./ c 12 5,625 24. 4.750 J6. 7,406 48 4,750 /OF iiimiNmilli SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. D ETERSON \ \ \� EX. SSMH ! N]/4 CIX7.SEG 20-23-5 '\ / / _\ I IC O NSU LT-1 NG \\ RIM 336..' FOUND CASED CONC MON. \\ 2s // \ 1 I \ (. I \ I I 1� \ • LTR.CH/,L.328.2(NW.SW) / \\ 5 ` ��\ I I EX CB.7YPE n / 1 3 \' 't' ce. rrPE,i TOP C8..4 � I —/� 4030 Lake Washington \ • \s- COULD NOT OPEN / . / • � T Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 \ �D�/ `O\ �• / If 334.7(SW) EX. CB TYPE l / i Ma—� 7 /£331.8(SE) I TOP J435 I I I Kirkland,WA 98033 'X. SSMH� �• / '/E JJl.6(NW) • 12'IE 340.4(5)/ 1 I I Tel(425)827-5874 UM 337.7 \\ \ 12•lE 340.5(118) I :72.CHNL.J76.9\;(JFSW) \ �\ I cs CAN / 1 11 Fax(425)822-7216 PTU GA 11 z01. / '" iY •\ R/AV 46.6 r ip-_ _ ---- -k 1. 15'YECETARY£ - x1 1-- V- i .Y -. __ O '/( l CIF CNN(.340.1(NE.SW) - i-G BUFFFR-- - - �A 2 11-1-11.-1-7"- • ' ,5 i / \ r---'15 -. %/ 6'WOOD fENCE r 50' /- 50' ^ 50' Q = v) . 40,11 '- - ' 'flu -`--- �\ �` "• II 4 r. 8 '/ /o '. "V '/ reset,- L \ I I T�`= h 33 / a k ce n. 4L / 4r / �' I �L' I 1 Q N. ilIEX. CB TYPE/I - X .. • , 12•/E 140.9 N) i l cTA _ : o/ j '-• / /` I I \` -I'-�\ \'k\I C. / I \ \\\ ♦I i\ �l�il ` 1 ; 1 1 / // // ./�-- �d' I I J \ \� 2 • oiP1 \I / \t � \,\1. \ ` ;Z / / / 191' /' \ 1 �.\ W W �- 50' 50' \ \ itil �I IYY I \y �1� +\\ may\ ►' `�.�'�=��r+�oo_ /=_.I. _._.__�I ] C\\ • Gf/ Q. ` t� wM_ ��1 I i \\l\�/`��\\\ ; ;��f y - -� _ I a '•�ROAD A�s -=�,� W o 'elk" / Iv I\,\\� •\ -0---e-- tom• 4 I/ �.1 2 1 -1 1N.. I 'I I 'uf 7Yn{1' 1.4 /i `r\Pa \ �\\ \ sa._- i�j1��r� i I I 16 so' �6d�b 1� O II // //' \ , \ Oak \i'\ /r �`��;'}: — 1 i 10 r---:�5 ter— 7 7Ro PIL I / I "3h�\ \ \\ \�\ I I /Jv \-/ _—_j L 1 f--'`1 r rt` � ::`i � ► 1 PARK NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH \\\ / I \`� \\ \\110 ��\.m• I TRACT ��\ \ �' Jae s�- I I t I' j m. I 5,4025.1 x / \/ / - in I/ 4,5' � 1 4,7 E I'/1 4 7 I C1 13478'40" 25.00' 58.68' \ / \�� \; \I l // 5,4o s r. _/`l/ 1 p I' X I / s ^� C2 2877'12" 125.00' 62.08' \\\ / \\�!��/ 1 ( /9 1•�1t- -- 1, u.. \\ 1 /I I 1 hull 3D• I \\\ \\`INip. \v//'/▪/ // `•' - gil1� �:,. 1 so• ''so // 51353 x/. // S.a*rotis. / 1.1 64 • • \\ V\\\`E•\\• \\)///lY -1 > ``` ,.\\\ \.. 66 OZI-, EKlaaaaaaaaaa /I -\\ iilimilmmm ,L smc \ \\ I\�\ \ \\ // \\\ 9Q �\ _S1 c. PROJECT MANAGER • \ \\ ��1 \ \ / / \ -->� DESIGNED ,E STEM -r\\ \` \ + \`',. C / // \ • NV_r O: - CARD: B.DENNEY i•�\ \\\�� \Z _ �? 4 �///\�\ • ,j/`l/ CHECKED. .L smc DATE: 4/7woo . i -c\\cG .\ \\\• \��\\ /;• / \ / /// • FILE NAME PP2HER25 SCALE I.-40' I CITY .. ....... :\` \ \�♦ \ \�,�\ 6 /< 5 /�,y 1 \ ]'\ \ \\ \ \ 4,504 sL Pia IP ARNOLD PARK `:�\ \ \\�-\ \�\a. \ten //� //: /O J .� #010" Q.' •-I p I y �\\ /Sy ')'S \/. /- 5�a /ONAL Y� I'7^\\\ �\\ .;Ay� {�� \`-p"! I EXPIRES: 9/9/00 I111""" \ �a \�. ,�1 \ 3�[`-1, STAMPSIGNED AND ID \ •p ` \ \ UNLESS EIGNED AND DATED \\\\ �4;\��\'1r CT JOBNGMBERHERM-0025 k SIM NUMBER 2DE4 INNI - SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. ❑ETERSON / ECONSULTING ___,.` \ \� I \ c. I \ I I I: ti , �'\\ �\ \ �„ 4030 Lake Washington I \ \ \ Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 \ \ \ �� Kirkland,WA 98033 I I N \ \ Tel(425)827-5874 I 11 N\ �� \ Fax(425)822-7216 40' q 40' I 1 I N \ MMEN \ \ SCALE:1r-40' I ;I \ \� \ O KJI— BSBC — I III __ 'D \ 15'VE0ETA77VE _ \ \ 1.4 _—i —— "(TIP.) —— — BUFFER_ 6"W000 FENCE — ———\ ———\ 1 \ 2 { __ S8936 37 E 829.`3+91. - - o ( 50' / 50' 50' 0' ♦ ♦\50' 50' 0' /' 60' ) �— \ — T r\--1-7 r---7.y -� r--- r- •r�' - ��--i ° -� ilia --� it I `I / 1. 1 I ♦\\�\`\\ 4 Z 3 1--_- I\\ I ;'1 I r I I I I j II ,.. ? 2at 135 m 1� `� 0 \ \ �C I i I - I I I q - I�� f+' —' \ Is _ \ 6�as s.�IS ';i f 1\ Q 1� / /e \ 44\ - '4..T 42 4f 1--�e I 1 'a t LV_- 1_ \ ^ \5sod �\ ssQ 5500 xc I� s,soo x ` Iiit "eV I s I T I s, r#' I s��I 136 zo �..• ,-.--T J \ \ 11 ,,..1111IX 1 \. \ \ 3B0 s.. 4 406' �. CC .. I I ,,11A- --1 I / I11° IIIIC I 1/ci t�\J\ \( Lill Ir%1{I I 1 \�\\ Q �� 1 c( q r.,_-. .,_,..:- + ->.:. \. - -. _ _ -__ -- _ _ 1 _-� ��,,,,�r _ _ \, \\... a - -�-e. i ., .._. _ '+'jar o. 4K ♦\9� ! 'r►�- ••-� A 1 Y ' - -+ )-TiI "`tw ./ L.i:'i a':-'c o"; ;./ BO , �� \7� 6 . -�- \ `) 4 W O 1 ,-'I --•� - • o "'Am, --ROAD A --r 1 -< moo. \\ i-y- . ......41 >. I�'. , 16•' so i • • \\ -. v / \ \\\ 1 1 c ) II 11 fi i �6\ 1501 \♦\\\\. //-tj"' �e '/ 50 � \ \\1 1 \ - / V LJ 1 O C- J Cam/ \:::, Au_ II, �i\ t7---:..-JAik. )1RRR"` I /' I I/ 7VLL✓,1/ I I)ii!, / 0 r� Il :34: ��` „ *' W*M / PARK I / I I/ / I\ ' I // a e ° I. I {/ .�:�; (\ �� 1�ma 1.071.16:1,41/iii_s(1/1 to a �^ _afo4z s.r.. I i h 1 / 1' 11 I, / .# A +##\\\ / .. \ \ oco 45 4s 7 ) /� h. 1 / q\t I aj)�'`i r'" V \_.• 4,750 s.r. I. I 1,750 x6 I I I /I. 4.�ftr I/4,7501s.f •kI 4,749 I 5,825 s.d \ �4 7O1> 4 (_�- .sue. I /4 I 1 I I IIIIIf/r/X rlj"� -1 1 1 syi - \� /e\ I__-_ J L 1--J L/r/`Ifl1 L---J L- / L`✓_-J 11_ o �� I}t _.� I ♦ 50' �! '` 11/ / 50' S0' S0' / 75' �+ \ \ ♦ gg0 / .V.aT \ ♦ S 12.1' / /.(//40 lb5 50' 65' 121' iiii.\I,L\ S illlt lk: �I J '`1 :1 (\ 1 ( 7,�1 / I I• / II • I / 42 `` -+. ►tea p ws-4 -0 I //�// o 4,897 xLX �♦ �.�` •\ -_----\__,, \r,�j'/'//P��s1i�45 / l I l I is"hz_ I 11\'' l �o r �1 � f CD y 11 °' i II / / K4444444444 / /\" I,.� _-,---0 //// - I' 55 / ♦� �17_ AT i� ri lt, 1 1 I 1 I \\„ �S, .'-'" -� // 'I 4 /4, f. I 4.750 s.f. 4,750.:i%"`'C.., fl ^'�+'• il�� y1 , I I'y.'ny� \ P SIM / "(1 $� - / /� ll x I rq +�'�� k'a ,I� ' fl I "�7' I \ PROJECT MANAGER ' / / \ )( a-saw/ II I I i i" I \I 1`I ♦dr Olt ,x' I DESIGNED a 57Elc / / . a �// 1 1- _ 0 1 I I� -I \\. I `1 1"r: � � ---n I 1 1 cam B.DENNEY t{tP. 4 // �♦ .. 0 __ `r- 1^ n ;ij�` z -/.j ♦ Gum, d s7oc x \,625 aI. • /�\ '� I 72 2." _ l jJ..�� .�i / l l./ \\ l/� -•�- 1 50' - - -' i ♦ at I 1 /// `'tiF \ DATE: 4/70/00 yt \ 2 I I /, \-- FILE NAME:PPSNER25 \b. \♦/ / \---'- AA. \ -,_ , , 5.,. /�'_- �"�_a. .AIN.- Now,..Y.-----1J of "0 %/I" n/ /' 5 -� .,rk Tar. r _ / _, / .��\\\\ \`4,so4_xr. //�/i' / • : • rt 0 - i ~-.~�\•\\\ ''wk $2 ��' �0-'4-�X '" /- / h/ ,„ / `_" „\ \ / •/r--//i/�\J - • ,, t �:aorci�aal's rsk . -� ,..0 s¢ y_ // / \. \ \•`\�. \ (� /hk7 0 _k. 25• tisr , / 5•• — 50 vz 1 : I I + // m/cf / ::::::4.7t;k‘i If/ I / / _ ___0_ ,.___ s• ,i1 ,_ r•r-r ;....8‘20• ,/,-- ilc J\ ese \ r \ .7 /I� / / -- = / 6.1 }- .moo I / \\ < r ss rrR)�5*4. . / / \ 7 41-- f h 1 6 / 2 I - L I -. -rl- - ♦� ;' / " I / \ °8y�rsrenea ti \ \ 4 /--\ 99sd—I 4ag/f— \ oxx A' , r ��' rah \ ♦♦ l0� 1"_i / t s \ l_'�eY +�1� f0 1l _ 1 I I s oxAL \ TSry' _ _ I a,7so�.i so sty' ss sr 1 `j_. _ �, 1/O \. 7� s. �`� "-J , I - \I I / I 1 � ^•tip 1 s Co.,—__.---___ ' _ // T / 11\ �4} `_�'/N.1'o / E%PIRES:9/9/00 \y ♦ "'�Cet_-\-� - L -� -J L--- -L _ �J 1-r\, ...1 41i1 '-- \� i,,1; _�1- / �i i _ _f �, STAMP NOTVALm \ G \ ♦ v3' y'�. F \/-- �', .a r / _ ./I�j 1 e Ll=-. \�'--- \ I ` UNLESS SIGNED AND DATED \ Po �\ \ \Ike, ' L/� _ sa Asa s� S Aso' ti r.a'. _ -- \ /f". �� INEMEM \`'c4\\ \ � ac rm _, '%'%, , / Q, -Q #I r �� I. 4.7�sB�`'�;,.' , I \,�, JOBNUMBERHERM-0025 t S E CE ' SHEET 4. SHEET NUMBER 3 OF 4 SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. P ETERSON ?IlEIE SHEET 3 CONSULTING >x� __�y�.� . . �. `. C N C I N F. I. R S 4 // .� J *—7i - -it! %* anal O wn :?`'- i/I I //A / -2 - /\ c 1`- -- \ -- R4.7 / /\ ♦ \ k -"- +<—� /` r JI / o/'- /< Fax(425)822-7216 ��\ \ 4•sa2 s.t / / b, / '•I' 'IL' • • ,� .% i ,n— \ \ `♦ � P �F1,^� ��rjr�.� �1 /�^ / \ EMIMMEI `\- \\ —/;- T-------//4-J - _ .M 1yv�ss�:91or__�aas�s� �— its-1 1 �,�5 \ . \\�/K\ /gg ,-N q - 25• O ,e§BL P 50. \ vz . 1 '16i I I-' i r I // / / 0 \\\ \\\i/�'� I /, �__— '��//�/( i) _ i _ _\� m I I hill 0:_ /� //I j44 (1 1I // \� Q J T ca \♦ '4 if'• /7-' 7--I l-' ca'- .. ` )Osr:j 0 to 4.75O i �g' so. -r 1 �T'61�J /f �giu ��I I— `�`' IO %1^�� // \� 4 2 3 \ \\•�O`'� �\ -F 63\�- �54 ! .��S i% '/:.,:::i:Ltil •,� l',..,-•_iA��. _—'� — r `� 4 CC CC Pa ** ' - - iRAci I / � ( icg# II ,,0 �'"P•/� 2 W i \ \ �► \e 4.568 f/i I— T�-1 r-3b1 ��.1 1--'1 rr I.�� `�/ / a� \ II4. "�A-11 / 1 i' al i' z! 1 z1• I I O \ \ / \ / y� x <s5 /� I 1/ / �/� f �- ter/-I; + -------- ,\ /1 /I / ,,I/-__ 1I 1 1 II " 11 � 24.75u5 II/ o� \ �� 41 O \\\,�; \ [rrFv \ //I /O •./#� �/ I - +- t/r f —64�—— —J 1` ` — U • / / II //' c �1y. /\1/TRACT /1 1 1 N\ ;•'4 - Bs - y � I �� ' 25B3sc� / 1 I I a . R=55• \ i t i�rf --1 0 I I ac' o ao' —�� \V I\I f"'- p 7-1\ \ �'; j\ I 5 1 7588 r. 1 Ip •i I```� \4.r�s .t-_.\ " /�1~ --1 g SCALE: I.A.40• �� 1 \ Io >1l - 1 ` 0 \,..._:_:, - I I > \`- I / ' / 1! I I �VVT`l�� 1 L J �m \\`" i.' /\ \ \ / s4 \ 1;7: s 1 0 I I z44444444444 ..( \ \. e'5�. " I "I \�\ // . In \ — ♦. / ��_ I i• g I---•• ,al--, 1 II I s smc \(\ — \`\ e / \ ('\\— • \n CTpp'-- I I I PROJECT MANAGER \ / , \ < /J \\,�J ,• 4�i I~ '� -jl / I IIL '-I DESIGNED d s1ElC \( Q y \ \\ \��[,qy I I 11 I I CARD 8.DENNEY \ 7,J19�.� I {R,�� \\ /�~�♦ Q. \ 1 \ I 7I1 I/ s.p��sY iI h I I CHECKED. d smc ` IlIiII DATE: 4 10 00 .. . .... \\ /_��'\\\�\_ —,�` 16' _ L11 -(pp'�/T 1 \1 I ��I1 FILENAME PP4HER25 I . • 1 1 \\ `� i\ J6\ I 1 r'0 \I o \ viy., Nip, I,o .f.;, .,.1 'Via''r N \ _,--- ertb-setA A. vo p\ po ' •\5'106, �Cf // \ \ // 'Q'4,0NAL .30, C\ \I \-- -_= / \ \ \ / I EXPIRES:9/9/00 \\ \\\� / \ \ \ STAMP NOT VALID —� II �y\< \ \ UNIESS SIGNED AND DATED \� ��\�\ �� \ ///�� / JOB NUMBER HERM-0025 // \�_ /—I \\ \, /,- \♦/ SHEET NUMBER t: 4 of 4 STAFF City of Renton REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE: October 17, 2000 Project Name: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Applicant: Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 File Number: LUA-00-053, PP, ECF Reviewing Planner: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP • r-q \` I I - - \ 1 \ • \ \ � \ I I 1 1 1 1tr- +_-Ir \,ii-_r _J \ L-__J L-y_-'r---11 ) ----� `r``\I 1\ 1 I T-r.`` 1 11 L---J L-1-_I L--` I ` J L.o •l\` 1 \ I 1 I l ``l.y `.. 1 1\ i i,w irJ L.1_J r T -1 I' i_---1• \ f. ; 1 I I ` .�` 1 1 � t ` '� _ ..._ .___-L.J -yi ' 11 11 I4 ___ -L_JL_ 1 I I _7 I t1 I _--_— rLL J = L 1vi/.J L_J _JJ r-_r_-1 r-_Jl_l f1 +.,I i _-_-_--_-_____-*--- f'i I_J 1_1 r__r_- I _ L �•. r-�-T-� 1 - 1 4: 11 i�yi Ii I I IL--1__cir`,,,'iL-,-- j 1 1 1 I / 1. 1 _ j 1 err-i. j- _, p-Lt2.�S. _-l-_J r~-_�_ �l lY�l`\\` (y ( 1�`.� „ 1 tgg 1 0o• • )p# • LT- I L--1- 1 V'G` r-l�r .4.e q .. 1 1 p� 4 I ., I I I-1 1 -�--I r-J I I nl�---f'�\ 1 . ��....y� � � I 4 )'I » l 1 111 0.. L �F 1 1 Zr___y L== I L__l__�L_J_1�Lir_n_ _ir Rat_ � I I�\``. l`\`�`. L1 1 V 5 i � __i__ r_7 T,r 1-T_:L-_L-S ®rl♦I•..CC�W �. 'I - - - - - _. - - - -I - f I r--1 I r-1 i t r-rll i I I\ �1w �� iii✓ I 1 1 Et 1 I I r'-7--1�-n- 1 L_Jr-- --r--1 I `\'' 1JCZ:Y: i tC�Y h`.< ^.:. i a 11 1 II i.L__ L_J I.L_ __'I_ I I is p \Y/R I/l C.'i� ♦rl i Li ILI I :!. r-ntl II --r-1..n �O �rr::D T�Tr'�\r['.jl,>.()�,� >. J.r-^`\'�J 1 I I 11 L_Ji1--JI I 1 C\ �� T,r _ f �r--T--1 r-a Li Ir--F,--Y-y �ti OAnRneerl ^`J �t'r- 1\ .ar �'C.'?T roll I� J ✓T i ,. r--'+--�r-�_-�,i7.�L--�'--L-'I `i''L ■-- 1" f'-y n 111L1?,-X",,:o uJ-- t r'-I ' s 11 i • �--i--1 f_�...r+-F.(;y-_��-_L_ L_J. u,o ,� o r-7h-��' IlcE "J �f\ `y�/-r� 1� � y- --J L___L.i-�_JL__L_1._I. \1 L_l !„clLI 1 I r .4 %` ' 9 - -- Ti▪ 1Il T. Li- l I I I I .n 1r--1II1 ... • Q1©!--Yr7 (\'\ �TT__7 3��1?%=�-' ', 1.1 % \ `. 1 - r-1--' 1--U r-1---1 .....«.e.... \\ -v. „-i\<LiL\'`>Cf;1,L`=-'71;.i' ; /' .y r.Lc-1 , 1 n ,--I--� `�:J,C�\,1,1�1? : . 1 1 i 1I i 11 1I ., . L 1L 7Bfft Q--- Lr--J-1-v-mil''''J ICI cc `-__------ ♦;\ ;- ru^." \` � Sy — i- ------------ \ 7. �`\ \ ..,.,. �\ �`r Project Location Map ercrpl.doc —__— I — � CNN-drawn ®�� © HERITAGE anlr ARNOLDu+no PPP-SS-7RT EXCII Earmi NEIGHBORHOOD DEruL MAP I 7_ `•,q lI j r-ri 1 rrrrrrTTT71 1 1 �, _ rat-.t 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I 4-1,-I `� tA•`.f fi-IV 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I `'Y�' `__--- J_-J.LL-L_Ii,b> L YI 11•I I I I I,,, I \ JJ•LLLL111J-JJ Z_- .r----1r1r1- i II I 1 Vr rrTTTTTT,rrrrrTT77'1-1 11 I I Ly Iy I.1 I,JI•1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I• %/ %/ 11 -r1 -�rl I I I I 131rr**I 11 1 4AJ� jP.�•�____y Loa..n• _JJL_JJJJJ-J LLL JJJ,LLL111JJJJJ' / ^° / r I I Ir 1 1 11 Fr r r 1 1 1 1 IIII I I r l r T., /ra / I III, 1 1 1 11 I I 1.�-n I I I I I I111 III 11 11)i- Fiat-tii-L-I-La F.'-r"i Fi-F1-Fy-4-I�It-�-I y 1 Ir4 /Fr _I Li_ii_i__J__� 1 -'4,.q LJ-L,_L LLI_11_J_)ILEAC_ list" -T7-7 ri-Ti-T-rlll7 rrll{.`r-17r r'r'l:11--r-- _ // %/'-3-J F�L J 11 1 Li-u LLJ I'", 111 1 3��J: 11 rl I r / iT1'-7 I r'Il rl'--r�l W J-"�)-' / 1 I i : 11 I _.I L_Li1_J1 I:'\ I I II I---1 F-y !11 11 iJ' <i i 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I ( - ,,,-1LJn•J__J L__LL_4.LLJ_.- S>\ 11 11 I IIII 1 III r--T--T-r, "y:T-IT-rrT-7 _7l7Trm-j-� }»-}L11J_LLLL_ I 11a L_ i L1.11,5ra II II II-I•C_a I I I I I I Il' 'S )� , 1 Ip 7= - pI;LL_ll_LLJ_J L= 1LLI , r _ �•F _ _ _ T_ TAR-�nrr�1�'��s;��`\\)�v, 1 I ICL1_L__J.---I•LJ L i i Li Li'L 11u11)� �� 11 11 7- - - - 'FT-r1 -1—. __'III I I I I LJ I I I I I I I I I I '�I I.slIn•� 11 11 L1_1J_1J J 1-II I 11 , gyp;'.I_J I 11 11 r1-r-1-T,-7-r1 ',S'.''a<arL 11 I Lj iJ i i i LI LL, I I I I)/p ,`',(< 1 I _ _ __ _ _ 1ii_1_L• 'r�1_=4_J1 L / I 1. /0pAf :p /e dw E.- gr ,1 Bo�ar��'� i I ' `\. \�laara tarp�� ; / %.••905oo©o.s0000 CIFFti©'' -,ri `y11111u11,^ r-y ilex' I - , lYT r1 ; - I -w _. .. • • \ 00 90 1W ..e0 I b y ', /G/a/ Scale 1" = 50' r•tiiq•nso mic�}�I MERIDIAN. PLAT Of FALCON RIDGE(CEDAR RIDGE) ' n:24•4n I PY^� vOL 129.PC 51-52 ', l , - ° /k zmat.NAVE,88(CITY OF RENTON) 7 _,, al� .tip. i„'''..n„/ • a• ,s.• -— _\__.,•„ CONTOUR INTERVAL 2' •—k- / '1...s^C/r._1 , — ^..a r., /�•' •i' ... f . — �• =� � Cr S.-7114'ST. '� '.�. •`�,,• ail' F`�•�^ (i��' .,,,� // '�• \`�C..,��r -_-_ . 4, l•00 \ `1 1 ?\I ;,.,.O,.S.• t...V..72v&g '.-,-....,., \7`, ElEvAl • 4 i_ d '4� .fix ' o o,, /7 / >l \\�"'o mac'. \ mac`` „� '' '.: ,. bX �7�c�; / y„ I .. l ' .,,,.J't>\:•� °.4•:f� �%�i / P ,„�\ ':;?.,- REFFRFN�cs<<a a 1�.. ... .,>, :: �\ '�II„ moo° y1 '" P \ ��°°�° �.. 100 E., �'° as.. '•►; \, ea',. .,., bA \\\ ,� �E I o s ..*� \-C. \ � ° l. �° - �� .= v • A .m. . ,w»- a / � ' ' � ' a ro I- \-- s-s,‘ ,,-‘,--,: .cr,,,:u1.,L.,-„'.--( „:-...,- e\ , / 0---- ,..,...4 (G, UlAiTTIS*LK LOCATED BASED ON NI SUREACE MINCE T� ti�. je fir= ,I ( . ry ` • " re TRACTO.SRALAA TNT EXACT E"E`,ON:vilSU O \tea \r?y�1 / O. , �• OW, s''a • .,, �, ( GIN/ _ -- �,c /� a.„...g..A..,.. .aA. ..n.•.w _ _ CVIAIW LS I FOFNND Oc‹.'',, ".\\k• \s':--- '••••\''''. 4'._--''!_o__,-4'---_--- --z. /6:---.. .';'..'" ---""" CM.CNNL WEL V.ME CIES'S 111,1 SW SAW CWO NOT OW p �,A c�pA.\�• F, \ „e% j Gam° ( G. ,moo( J - II:lie.7 <CS�'�NV \\, �,�, • ,gipo 6.,. o,� '�� ° IOW MAW. al ID us VALVE I NIAVF TAPoF II.IF TANF ' - µYytl�M,y.e,t MHa�r4 '1Y F.S, �, . I"ItKA u,w,x rnw RtTa MYE.KR Al CV WO 74Os,A 9xoiw9a,.='S ., ‘ •v.( �• .En A.774� ,zam I„ qh¢EEtt K 11,11&.Er,FM YO baW• � I AA Ire rtn°i'o•ro.r a M w.nusmLSZIUM ,+�a M•a„ MW9 f W�,a,MA9,p,ty WLV,.,n.,..4 a, m �DyNAH, , P.,M t.,l,<, ,s a vo P,mvsa: P:pY 'tq,. \} 1 9199 '� �° PROFESSONAL LAND SURVEYORS • ::, _ \� �(y se C'•" . - P.O.BOX 289.WOOpINVIILL WA 98072 (425)486-1252 Q�9\' ' w,[: )_28-99 HEPITAGE ARNOLD • JR 'e•• •\. `., �ENNETT CORPORATION '"i� 9 LAKE BELLEVUE BELLEVUE,WASNINOT0N 98005 ,' I wE ' c. • ` �� ,`... TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY �"•99172 - "'f . ` ��' ° NWI/4, NE1/4, SEC. 20,T. 23 N., R. 5 E., W.Y. • i► \ .I I �K' / \ .,'C \-TT' NN \ ,\ \ ` \ lerl - ' TiFR ..- - _-- — � ---� \ (\ -�\ \/ \....,I «4L :a I RIVER RIDGE \ 1- , . � IX®i / I ROV' ,I,I \ \ \ \\ P � z —¢ o �ri0'o ' / ;--' ‘ _ - ! - 9 I,1{ ` :9 \, - - , / AzmP.T � \- w10_ Y T,' \\ _ n 1 \ce '" Vm �`. �.Olb 4,C�kT r i , i \ { I �: 4,�0 IP 4 �� , I6{0 4 \ \ts \ 1;\\`, zz 1 � I•.� P I I /I STORMWATER--''� L \ 44•\, �43\I� 42 `41'- 4U1 39 38 R1 36 w \ \_1 \ \ I w o I ,• tA�\ � ',`,J1'` I, , ,'.,'7RACY \ .� - \\\ =' _�� a 6),., • Y\\ / , , \,:\ w z I GMk .I I i 4 a ell ,, ,1 ' L--,-/i- _ .. 1\ �� . -'o/'pia ' \ $q l\ {34' Ql \\\ NUMBER DELTA � �\\07 \� `.�,;ry / \/ �\\' ` i / ':x� • LV\ \(wl' \\ 160 0 0 CI 13428'40" '® v '\ \ Y�., 4 -. - iO \ \' 0 O \,✓ w .M i�' i r j'S•�j1 1\'`'�.�,.��.° o ri.'\Y'�:::iii,.).„4" . ��_OAD.aq o I\, \ \ ,3,3� - ' 1Jo w .- 1 R°CPrzI I � R'��`C �''' IQ , e.. `0' /1 hi \0"', : •//' i ~ 1 •��\ �a ' L/s ..' i` PARK 45 / /4.d\ I. i' * 1, \ C- \ 0"3♦ / / i• �y� \ i ,o - ��'' i r a8 41 - 4s 1 . 51O\pf1�\cPi�se , , /��\ \ y / `___ O 1 77��. Y\\11/1\ /a1' i'V-=.. 'I '' C-- li � ... ,v - g- wt, -0 ecV,'',I,, �z of -i \ �•% \`, f o b .V'ui L li\\:\q A i,' _\ 4/��',./"5/�i Q* CI .17-0T o,.GVr`T.;•:l `0 �'RNI 31 gym , i 1 /.�3/• , /p ,, P 0 `Qa_''gip, / pF 3a sr �.\'\ , 6----1j t \�.-57_v:L,i:' / /�r 11 .11441 \.Q e l j1T z =w ® \\\ �� 3 0 �-,�`-_--di�7.� i' 53_,• q-� s 1 1 y 'y' scNE:'•.m' i • �� - '=-ii/d �!l 0'O�i iit I 1 `, , � mF + l \\• 1 .1 •*2 4 fik I;'//>t, •q eA ®� �`-e a �•i//'" uc_r; % \\ \\ J C/Tl'0.=fiENTJN ! ``. Yi'' ,el__ //� n ;q?_ / 1 i \\ \\ y� 1 Z 1 2 PH,LP ARNJLG PARn \, / . _` j -1 ,J` n9 1 * \ 2 I o Q� 07, '_>�s GAs i\ , v`',r2 {] i2, ,1� L, goft _ i `\ \ i 4 \Q .e4 � 'e.. _tea%S`°e .q. G= �' r,70, `i; 1-� - -•'1_.I % / \ e3 r \\, 0�,-Q Acf� I� q ► ; ,ar q zed-�� „{ E $, -'3 \Nt, \ ,'4I ]eC a11_ 1o0 1 0j ' \ •qb—= -4 ,:,:" .1; / t'N NOTE \ 1 �*Ii` /, , \ , 0 . 001 • -2-5-. { �� ENTIRE SITE TO BE CLEARED. \\`�\ ��/\ `-/. 'o,ItA� ) I ,I/. I _-•• - \\�I_ { 1 i i \\ .vim"\ _ a -- /Ai> 7 I ____ m NOTE: i±/A No, \ , •� � jj 1 1 .I 1 1 1 r` 9' y I APPLICANT RETA/N TH£RIGHT y 2 I 1 8 { TO SAW ADDITIONAL TREES \,.---- � '�. , .q +9 / ^/-;{yS.,1,[' "' 1 , r J t k n IF SITE CONDITIONS PERMIT. C--�`*L,S.\/'e'd3- , I \\`\(/,'\-J,A a I / , e /� . I e < L y �'.` \�\ 1 O:]s / / !i ,QUOIL 1 I- TREE RLEGEND \/��. ,I i e/ ��1 �` .n °#G�\ 1 i co 2 m C CEDAR /\ \�\ L H HEMLOCK , .,. ii{ 41 -, \ \\--`"2T. `•F 1 IP PINE -I r --� J I M MADDRONA �,BIRCH ' ''�'VA► \\�-_ _-A-' 6`\ �'T il. I I I I 1 # CONIFER AS NOTED 'may \V \c -- g \O\•..�,, I/ ' 1- -I V- ___-I ° -;DUAL TORfE ORUL USTER ev'' `4`/_y111.\ \\ y l 21 r ' 1 _I 1 ''I z II I 0 INDIy0UA1/TREE DRIOCLUSTER \-N1-0 `- `\\\ !. 1'4° I . 11,1ES 1-_� \ \ / /r 0 —J 0 Z&LARGER M/XED DECIDUOUS \ • z�O,',To VS_ ``a. --`20 y/ 4\ ��'�\ \\ / v lNOIhOUAL TREE OR CLUSTER \ \ / \\ l mo\ `< \\\ \\ \\ iy /� -\N---' \\\, \\ \��/\\/// // i II a MIS, GI . 'r ' \ ,\ \ 9~ @ °FrrX PING MNs"H \ y�� li;`euie°G%ITOP 30 oii o�o.l I it \� \\� \ \\\� w Qyt', r- :- �.-a'�. - -..r_r_Lfr,,,, r TO _it �:'=.,,m.ra,POND - .n. roc�,ca.7=;-r7:� \ —..— o— • �r Lrj'i�- 4 � / �' i°�.u_gms _sue,°s. I I _ . • .N .-- -- --- \ —..—..—..—..—. z r �� 1��4�� ra �yy4•. // _ .�� ` --�I --I----- - -i '. sf'/ -- / i , \ \�\ J _---_�__ TyT \ 1 �91 sl 4+' :ice cc,��_� I __ -� -f01- I I \\`\\ o_ S. TH ST. ?` -.\.If'\ ,\ i` ,; ,ns vim„/ 7,—"°. \I• �� • / ,/ i / r I' •��' • \� Iti.S+, I r \`� z g I ex CB„9cry y` �',w0101,...... - T��►' 1��/ 4yf1 1INISRMMWARR I .�•, \s�` `,4 / i \I I I \ \ \ \� \ \. 0 o I „C sz ee C:� /.. I \ '1fi\�,�\'r 42 41'-'' 40, 3J 30 / 37,_ ,J61 \ \ \ �, \' \ II • z z 1 e, .,,,, / i,:,••ity�or-`• \ ':� i r_ c_t_/ \ -- ::::` r_ ,, i ' i \`\ 1 \\ / \ \`I o I �,` r Q► \ \ ;v Pia Fes;>\ _ i \• \t 3� 1 L NUMBER DELTA ®, \ ��11,'IN 'OW _. _- __ - ./ G 5 n.2 _ ,_ �• ; a a fasza'aD" \;5��\ v,'' • fe• —-r.r.;:. M1 but E z cz 282712" 1 A.0 � H \\ Ft ��" \1 \ \\ . 1. rm•rrz ' / \SY`p`\ i �� ' \\ lI L`/!5' \1\ j i i \r ,,.�\vt i/ I i ' \� \ \ / i /I I\' * j1RACT --- ,i, 1/ /....---- / / \ \ \pu /\ t\q, \\\ l �\ / / i yi I / d \ ,4 �c r:6___ \,yu,// i I I \ I I / ii },Z -w \4w0� I ` \• -_—i�i 56 i$4 1 53� /Is \ /5.2,• I o l I l i l l l r.1. II , I mo.` \ �� ---r..�:-,' +-I `} '//i/f'I 1• - / \ 1 • \ � " -.I/i /�i�u \\ \ \ \ ' !' / � \\` :� 1,.-------- $ p/ \\ \\ l¢ I \ `$� J`` ia \-JN, 4. / \ \I-- - LI 141 i v��y�, 31rA9r _ / _�26 1 \� � / r I `:�`, E7 ::::U ;;1 ALL LOTS TO HAVE/ND/NDUAL `♦�� a" / \ .-.\ -h '( — - / / — INFILTRATION SYSTEMS FOR \\ ''\1•\ ,'Ii. 17 S 1 16`- ,'15 , /1,4 13 , ,/ \,"•••1 :::::q~' / /`� I ROOF&DRIVEWAY RUNOFF. `,L< 9?'�V` u. ' / I r / 11\�-�i as war% \\ I .°<c'z,--� / \� 1 L /b ✓ r' f _I t i_ • -1 \; �r►\ \ ,- \I 1I 1 o'•y+►\ `49- I'I \' 1 I I I- I { '-I �`��`• • 2fl/ 1 1 --� r i I �� I- 1 \ / / � \ i/ / �� \ \J \ //� \ �D -T 'I \� !� `LcTI \20 \ � * `_, 5 /\� ,A /,'\Av ytD -' Via`\ Pt 1+96-4 // \ \\ ,� •, • 3 O ‹ \ \ / N/CON.scs-s /I I \ CM[w �a mow,. X C9 rn u „gp / ♦' / \ - \ • 3+ H� cv lNESw1\ .12 '.+�.AC:,• r' i/!s) I E �/ (.,• / I \\ \\ \\ c„sxMN \ C�" I'•.`�'raSxwri. sl:r I lil \\\ \�\� \\ ----�-_� `•AP' 4 k. 1•a°" :o'_'- s,.c a c`",,`s / n R.na a. l�I_ �, N. R;: :rro:; \w Q14:11, y . ' _.y `��ro 4 / n ° N vOL.:iaacc-rot \\\ \ a nm- «r i P�. s ax ,s. ,��►.. .. � t I! . _ III \ \ Pdp� a "��" `�y!- f'f Ic-s�gar Meswl ' � _ �9`t---____- is .�'5 �° 1--��.mr_ - ______��____� \ I?I 11j � - YT "`tea �' (xcif/4'.16'9 I q___�0% a S. TH ST. �`. ,�.� 'siE�r,- r%' . w,m s rittlt. � :�s�i !'��' �� `\\ / Ap. �• weft �,, \4r`: \K1 142 41—'' 40/ 0 / / 3R-\`\'\361\\ \I t\ \'\\\II 41 D 1 f�j1` / \ �\y` .... am \ d // n,l' �. \`\\ \t \,U NNUMBER DELTA RADIUS ®/ 1, /•yi7.�\\ Y HA/ \(v I eaax(rmj I �F.` T I ' / i µ'a'( \\\ \ i•.. a C! fJ478'4D" 2500' I \.d \\a. .R' P \ \ :ce : C2 DELTA z" f25.DD' F } ,\\ A•L A f ' IA� y a-L'-g —r 4 z /p / },N;)�►��t\ — y ;I i as—\. a i u..r. _ `\ \ 1 `" ` w L1 ow '�/ \:,(i' I. 7 \ I 1' 1 _1_ ! I \l\,\\\\j r I I \ t I / J Pn IAA im j h / i \\ �4\pd1i;, \ c\ S� ;\ .' , ' �� ,,, l.. l i 45 / r46 ``flr!/ .� - 1;49� -,60- / 51 ' '� \ \ ` 3' I / • I mod . ^�__s.. .roaur.r%.o/i r�iliilbl, " I % /'�21 1 111 �t11ti I L. OO E 1 I '_ \�_�� \'lay\ 'i 1�,u' est i!i' +1 c.ii�iXi�, / /',l / // nit t I I% 3a �°�° � �a�7� 1 ^II 5�,/ qLv / / - I /'' f . \`yl1� \\ I''llr F w a s�`T \ \ \�10:\ \--- \ 3 l irl;__�—_'�,�1,/, 56 -rzs \ ,� `I � 1 - , '0 I,,�l ll`-_ --�� — rO] §§ Off`.ys '- ' \ - �/,. = JI LF .�27;---i / \\ // '� 6 4 _ r - \Q 9\ •�j�!» -'HAG in 1 \_ �._ -, ',/?d' 'f 1 _-26 \?- } �;:} / $' —3 I \\,�7\ ',-1 \., `I I-.15 1/i r I o vaosro' F\, --__: ----1i s�J 7h� \ I ��v`\ ' , / i / , T 1 1tl'1 ''i \ I - • / -\.... ---...-. • /e" ,--- ir cc-, . , r _I ct I_ \<•...."103".\>'• , 0 3(-v,18 i tiAtilki: J --b, --49._L 1 g.,. ,_ - ' ' ---1 J � I \-- i L1 oSv.ys \ 48 I I---------1 I e ± 2f I I , I J1/1 I — — I i — t , /J ..W ` 20 '/; \ \ A y / / \ \ \ / i- z • /�' i�__'_Q \\\ \\ 7� \\/// // `. i l I 1— \\ P69C ti�A'.• Nral.+m�u�snscmarx'°�ay'/ '/ \1 il' \\\\ \\\\ \` \ \\ , • 9�\ 7 r /- 1 11 voVER RIDGE \\\ \\\\ \\ \ Q,- L-p —_,—; / - DOING 1 I MON \ \\ ` .' e•�• '.`_ `• _i•� j :'I/1/'/----' - -- ��'- _ 1 i1--_s�.o9-m \\,- IS'MIXII4.121,F__ =� -- t'N`m\r/ro aw.vx '5 z ----- -- -i�� 1�� ,,.., �1��'so' �'--_ ---. _. .- _ Jli. O _. /-_ Eye-,_ -- I �� `Pi,f7ie\��\ 5 S TH ST.T> `0. '•.�F =[(;� p i" •.• i / \ J\ z z I >5 & �`A_�1\`{\\`��\, �/- STORMWAT�� C a��4 \'=.4\I 42'' 40� /39 I 8/1 j-37�- ,I36I \ \ \ \• r\\ ii \.� cc - I .• of�). \\ *1'v\.`/ �'=YF:� � .•.% \� �4 '„ - / i j --- `•\\I / 34i •+ •� W NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH ��/ /�� '.C � \ / ', / ' '-- `\ \ \ \ /'�aarr�.•�''C.3 W Cl 1.M�B'40' 2SD0' S36B' / \I \�\ ��i'.ci� �": a" i�..�r�o �.a...�.. rs..��.-. •• \ \ CO zezrrz^ rzsoa' ezca' Y :\'lam --" '� \a /� ' + /! 4 \ - '115 ‘II ii/I ��/ 1 I": _mil�\�«, \\\\\ V s i L/5 ,,\�/' 1 / \ \4\111 / \ 1 / / '" i i , �\`��VRACT�.' _ 45 46 `�,4j%�i/ 48,\ �.49, -50- �• \ 3Z' / ,`: 1'' y= // !i!i/ / ` i -- eAadosmn/Nub I \i/ sue\ '\ 31 I I CD F a°g s° �l�` \ \ ( ----Jr :• x _,$_,,'1�/ ' 1 / "6 ›.k -W m,,,e,•_50. \` �� `` " --_4/i' \56 55 /54r / STi_ 30111‘' 0 � UQi 0 I\. 4 1A� =111, I i \`\' \•--\?` \\I'l'1 \ �— \ PE 1 ` ''111\ / ‘ s�.~• -/ _- - \+ ! 11 *Il / \ \ toi h _\ �"\ erM\A 4 nr , --:>�T' T, \- _ .mil ///1 l.i \ \ 4[03 -1 \ •‘. .p,4,, , 1`, . ,,,• _- - ,, I, I 2 �\\i `-:�\ 8,-_�(9 1 ,�74rre rr_ 77, 2 - II♦ �-. , / \ \ % 11 fqS/TE AREA=450,846 SF \E ,\ ��/S *'I \_-�_ 'Anil a�� II _ - , -!' 'F , / \ $ r -I AREA OF WORK=450,846 SF o �C '\TKAC1' \ / / 'T 'I ___26 �, .� \\ --,I / • `1 I OUANUT 54,974 CY H2.461 TON) \`� v� / \.\` 1 ' qtA 1 \ 'r `I?, -- .,,„( �� I i6Q \ 16`� '75 �14 - / fit'! /�� F/LL=19.233 CY(28,850 TON) \ 1 9` �`./\ Q� \ /' //, l; r_� 5'/�N� \\ I `µ}'a-is�r'°' I \� ` c -I I \ \ 41` n \\ I 1 I 1/ ,, 1 `.,1 --I y1 / I�o-\ + tj5. 1,,, / / \\. - I I O 11 ` \ \ ' a *]IY181I ` rO ! I-L [ YF EN: V�\`\ \1N f - 23� ,� i t ., ,I I\ ' \ W -/ j`—I — .o `'\ v1y 1- 4I = --I I I — I� - - \ ` \ 21\ II ' ' I — I , . - \ \ i J -I -I I `\,, \ TRACT' ` 20 ram'/1 /�i \ \� / 5. ___/ \\ \ �� \�/ • ...,m .es. t''w' '�""' �' n CITY OF HERITAGE RENTON HILL "'4/2/00 ��p1 RENTON NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP I PER CITY Cavu[urs Ouo a/r/a0 ,us amm.Srtte uw�rs EMI escen.sag/Building^Public Works Dept. �� a Gregg Zimmerman P.E..Administrator NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR �o sraa wpm :w t m I ;3 err --- \*,t,\rr—f—T- T T Ir l:or r r r r T T 7 7 7 11 I \ � 1 I: ' I I IAI I I I I I I I I I I- r, -\ �,1-'T'*4,4--F -1xl 1 I 1 I I 1 1 '1 1 1� 1 4I �1 1 LLF:I I I I"1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1\ y —\ 1_ I.LL_/__i1 , .11JLLLL111111J : / ---_______ MAIN AVE8 / /`---- eNIoe 1 / SR ioa L_ / — MILL AVE 9 % % N I I 1 I I I T T T 1 1 1llmrrFTTTT7771 / / m -rrn�- I�L_LL1111��J41 I I I I I I I I I I° / , / III 1 1 1 1 1 1`I I I I I I I I I I f Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- am / ,:ny / r CEDAflAVE8 14L--1JJJ1_J LLL.L1111.1__1 LLLL1111J.1J" / yti ,------I I-1 TT— "T-1-7—I-1 f—71--- _ _cEE,w AVEa / o'�' / - 1 1 I 1 1 I 11 1 I 11 1i?:i rT 1 T 1 11TTTTTI'l71-j-1T-T / •+0' ' m I I Iil I I I II I! I'rt::: I I I 1 1 1 1 111 1 111 I I 1 1)1, i / ',,� / I �� -�-I---F- -I---I I-T'-rv�:. F--I-I--i--�-i-4--I-t-I-�-1-I�_1l J��N -(�I / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1`:;;; 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1/ / I I I I I I I I I I t..,,-11 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1�}+j° I li / /-� J Ll_1J-1__J—_J L.J_L .`;L1_LJ_1_L111_.J_.� ee/ RENTON AVE 8 / I r7-T7-1 r�-TT-7-r-1-1711 rT-I flwrr—r-- —L 11L_ / / 1-.1 I I I--I I I I I 11 1 1 1 1 I I Imo' �7I r7 I I T-j 1 1 1 1 1 i - I II`_r.., I I I I I I I I�, / /(1 1 1 1 1 1 // / B 1.1- i T 11—i I.i-11r1�H Il it ET_.._ 1 I�-1-i-I-I ;7�_i i i i i 1-- 1111 ( J L_.L11_J 13 I I I I-- 11 F- I I F`J I I I I J- �‹ I 1 ,1 I I I I I I I 1 ( r-- 11,.__1_L1.1__1___1 L__LL_L•_LL_J_L_/ -C \ 1 I I r_- , GRANT AVE a 1 1 1 1 1 1 I T1r-r-1 r ti:,T-TT-T'TT-1 r- �n-7 �\ 1 L�L1LJ_L LL L_. I I1m1 I I I 1%1 I``,I I I I I HIPC-TA 77TTI I I / \�} / I =L_—_L—_1—LJ m L 4- r- ! I I I I I I I) �\\ � / 11 I �j I I--i-- I -1LT11T—rTJr71-�-4-n 171--�y �\\\\\\ Y/ r L1-1__1-- I"1 11 I 1 1 I I I�1---1 1 1 1 1 A \\\\\\\\/ 1 L1_LN/o_± L1—LJI L_ILL ,�o/ ,—L,LLLl % 1 r7—T-1—T1-1 rrrr —T—r-7—r1 r— woe.`- _xiExAVEs I I I I I I I LJ I I I I I I I I I I I )/.4 i, I I 1 I I 1 L1_1J_1J_-I 11 I I I I I I II I Je}� I -J I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I rrrrll-T 1-7-r- Ir..4041E I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 11 )1.'-'/BN 1---I I L__J \\\ I1 1,L1-1J-1_L1_LLLL1_lJ_1_L/✓14§\,,/ I I I I I I 1� JONE8 AV.8. __ / - \�—J L---L—lil _J - - - \\\ \ 1- I - �� ;1 7 1 I 10 \\\ \\ j \\\ o�p0/6 AO — r\ I I \ /(---1 ,/ 4 / /^ 7 i \\ \\ i \\ >�o�' Q°O © te a / \ \ \~' / l /wirs maim / // / ( i \ \< / ®B IMP / / a I /, \ \ \ \ / W1 rain WA / 1 / I /i?/ \\\ \\\ y// ©©� ®©o y'' mo©s n©/ / 11 / y cap/ \\ /\/ / \\ \Jy 9E em Oa L'I� .,/ \ �b// \ / i\ \�/ r `1J11J \,--.A / / / INrERPACE CORP. / / / \ I. \ y \\q§.1 I 1 p ,, <'-----1 / % ,- / / \ \ \� wA4� i /// /- "."1 m \\\-i\\--l1:1 411,,k LC--/-—::—. I , / , ------ / . /i �/ \\ \ \\ \\\\--1� C 11 1 /j j / i�" i / �_ \ \ 1 / Amy \ \\ \ � I I / -,-,.._// / / // ,2,21,, j/ \\\ \\ \\ u l IV�\ I / 11 L L-/ j // \ \--1 `^ -- - - - � I I - - -% — —' — T \�i/ j// \ \ \\• 1 / / / 44 „\�-- \\ \ \\ I \ \\ m /1 / _-- ry�T�\—� \ \\ \\ dam \\ \ / I _____--- \/` \ y ^‘\ \ \ 1N3N35Y3�Ng JS'd I 1 \ r-s, \,v t A\dy\\ \ \\ NOi59i15NYtl1 --_—^ ` _ \ —-- •g) • iti • ---- . . 1 — U • •• _u_ . 1, •. • 1 . rf„ • . 'CD - — . . • C 0 R - R— A 8 ' 1 6 Ai ./4 . --i .r.p wi IE.* : • .. ... Ras . • ------ . .---1----------.--,------- c?4_ vw vh,. .. . • , ..-1-- ._ -.:-.1-7_.: -. ' CD CD / .--27-..1_. 1 \ . . . ....,,..,. . .. ! CEM --_-::- :::::::-1---.7. • • .. . _ -.., • ! RC...-:.: • ' .': • . CIX1=5 ' •1 ..cia- -szio .48,!..._ • --•;:_5._LN,.. _ \ -.:::___ .. .. ( I ... • pFi • -=.6-- -- VD-- ___A -.. . . . •. • •C) ... C'6'• .... -......_\2, . • I cr) `i-•• i • — -d. -..4-- - -<1)ef__--?:_i-i_i CP:\ 1..,___T • .. . . .__:„......_ I4 , . _ 1 . _ 2_ ----1 \ . ..• ...... • --__________ 1 g- ...._, ... C 0 0• • 11 r•7 :r24:•._ ..-_-_- .1---. -‘14-193\71P' .' :: \ 1 1 . --. hia.--• ---:-. L_ .....I. -1 -{- --tr . \\ . I I OM • 1 _I 1 -.:R.,...-8 . 14---44-14044r, • . ,.. • • • • • ,,,-....4-. . ____,_ Bt4 . . . . 0 _•—i 7 -7- + + + —1"A L 1.-re•- • :.__. _. + + r + ' . • --.77-Ch. .----. —I±Ck • Tri.- 7 \ rie5& R—8 _..1..„. ...1..i.,„ 1 i _ :•••› 1•___ :.54. 121....._ .03. -2(1)- 1 :::::-. •.,_ .'i. _15.-1--1 .7..8 .\)--.•, 0 v tO, -., -1-- > -----› --..i -.9th .ce- "I4 ---i•-'0 - - .....8. • -c,a4), - - -„.••-•7 -\,,,,\.4..--,.,.:k:.;.-\.- .:,,•.....,.s\-.---\.- 7•-•-1 t,--q-LA i:-•-s• .....-.„_-L- I.-....--- -.......,_ ...-- - .....-- ..., , ..---.----- .........""....- \.„--- . , R—8 -- • 1 \ L , .._. . \ ---- \ _.. \ / ___ 75*- ---- ,, • •_ _.... .... . RMI.- -,54 •• • i '\R—8• , t , • _.., 1 _ C N ..--- . ...- ..v • 1 ....„---- _... _ RM I _... ....__R_8____... .. _ . co — 1 ----- _-- -\.(44- \ / • f-------- ---..'S -1-1.16t1T-IPT.FITT .1--.7.F•1 .--T-7-1-1' ; . >‘b-kl) \ -s \ — \ . . . , — ---I-- —y-- Qs_ R—) __,..- z s\ . f 1 1 , • , p 1 Z • z 0 NI 11.1 e,-- retAT . NI ;90 , 05-3 May 15, 2000 Elizabeth Higgins City of Renton Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Elizabeth, We would like to be sure the current turnaround at the gate on Beacon Way SE at Phillip Arnold Park, be maintained for school bus access when this development is being designed, and built. Due to the nature of the neighborhood, this turnaround is a requirement to ensure the safety of the buses, pedestrians, and vehicles. School buses need to have sufficient radius to be able to turn around without backing the vehicle (WAC 392-145). We would ask for a minimum outside radius of 55 feet. If you have any questions, or need for clarification, please contact me at (425) 204-4455. Sincerely, Kevin Oleson Operations Manager Transportation Department Eliia ig.gins Phillip Arnold � � w � Page 11 From: "Kevin Oleson"<koleson @ renton.wednet.edu> To: <Ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 9/6/02 10:29AM p�J-" Subject: Phillip Arnold Hi Elizabeth, We are wondering why our request of May 15,2000 (which I am attaching a copy of)was not placed on the developer as a requirement,as has been done with other developments within the city.We specifically requested a turnaround be maintained for the buses,to the point of stating our required radius. The current situation places us in violation of WAC 392-145, and greatly increases the potential for an accident to occur. Currently we are transporting 5 students for Dimmitt, and 18 for Talbot Hill Elementary. We would appreciate you looking into this matter, and getting back to us with your findings. I can be reached at(425)204-4455. If I am unavailable, please ask for Marsha Lammers or Debra Holmes at the same number. Kevin Oleson Operations Manager Renton School District 403 CC: "Rick Stracke"<rstracke @ renton.wednet.edu>, "Marsha Lammers" <miammers@renton.wednet.edu>, "John Thompson"<Jthompson@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Joe Lamborn" <jlamborn @ renton.wednet.edu> CJO Ez CITY OF RENTON t. ':" _: Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Planning Jesse Tanner,Mayor Susan Carlson,Administrator • September 6, 2002 Mr. Kevin Oleson, Operations Manager Renton School District 403 Transportation Department 1220 North 4th Street Renton,WA 98055 Re: Renton Hill School Bus Turnaround Dear Mr. Oleson This letter is sent in response to your query regarding the Renton Hill bus turnaround. Your letter of May 15, 2000, was received by the Development Services Department with other comments on the proposed project. As a result of the comments received, a"hold" was placed on the proposed project on May 26, 2000. The applicant submitted revised plans in September 2000. Because the plans were substantially different, we again requested comments on the project and received them between September 15th and 29a`. You requested that the"turnaround at the gate on Beacon Way SE at Phillip Arnold Park"be maintained. We verified that Beacon Way SE,the gate, and'the park entry were not going to be affected by the proposed development. We did,not understand,however, that your request also included school district property; which was at that time under option for purchase by Bennett Development. 0 There were many discussions held with Seattle Public Utilities regarding use of the SPU Cedar River Pipeline Easement(Beacon Way SE). SPU representatives reminded us many times that . there were no agreements recorded as to use of the 100 foot wide Easement. This includes use of the Easement for residents whose homes front on Beacon Way SE as well as for access to Philip Arnold Park. Because of this situation, there is no public right-of-way that could have been legally"expanded" to include a portion of the development property. The City of Renton, including the Park Department,has no control over what happens on Beacon Way SE. It is regrettable that we did not have a full understanding of the issue. If we had understood that buses turned around on school district property,we would have recommended that an easement be requested by the school district prior to sale of the property to Bennett Homes. Sincerely Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner Cc: John Thompson Neil Watts 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF-RENTON MEMORANDUM • DATE: September 25, 2000 TO: Elizabeth Higgens FROM: Arneta Henninger X7298 SUBJECT: HERITAGE PHILLIP ARNOLD PLAT APPLICATION LUA 00-053 S 7TH CT AND BEACON WAY SE I have reviewed the preapplication submittal for this 57 lot plat located in Section 20, Twp. 23N Rng. 5E, and have the following comments. ACCESS • A traffic study was submitted and is currently under review by the Transportation Division. Separate comments on the access to the site will be provided by the Transportation Division. SANITARY SEWER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7th Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new parcel can be served)y extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main through the proposed subdivision. \/ • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2% • A sanitary sewer main extension will be required for this project. The conceptual sanitary ✓ sewer main shown on the drawing submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for V this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the plat. WATER i • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. �✓/ • There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7th Ct, and a 8"" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from approximately 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. September 22, 2000 Page 2 ,0 411,0 • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: 1. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6" watermain in Jones '� Av S. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water I/ meters and fire hydrants. / 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see plan W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). The water V conceptual utility plan as shown is not approved. • Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured v' along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as a part of this project to meet this criteria. • Water System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for V this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the plat. STORM DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat / application for this project and appears to be in order. • Surface Water System Development Charges of $385 per new single family parcel will be / required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for V the preliminary plat. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary 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 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 of 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 I September 22, 2000 41011 Page 3 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 for the preliminary plat construction. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • The new street interior to the plat must be developed to City standards which are full 32 foot p, pavement width, with curbs, gutters and 5' sidewalks. The conceptual utility plan submitted is approved. • This project will be required to install street lighting._fr/- • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the plat must be undergrounded. Construction // of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works tr inspector prior to recording of the plat. • Traffic mitigation fees of $4 -1=1'0-(based on Selots ) will be required to be paid prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. cc: Neil Watts • • City of enton Department of Planning/Building/Pub Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: rusk RRUt — wad COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,.2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth E LOPMENT SERVICES PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 CITY OF RENTON LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,South 7th Court&South 7th Street SE OF 2 1 2000 SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): b SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preli3y a in o 5go"fs suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional info ation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Ai- cP. ct a Director or uthorized Re re tative Date Signatureof re Rep Routingre Rev.10/93 n City of a ton Department of Planning/Building/Pu Works ' ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: —1—/19.4/1.S\OALtitl\ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,South 7th Court&South 7th Street SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards,reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet,has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 JA2. itio_tifi We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas wheredditional informati is needed to properly assess this proposal. / am , I Signature oktirector or Auth rized Represe tative Date Routing Rev.10/93 Cityor flenton Department of Planning/Building/Pu Works P 10°- ENVIRONMENTAL & IDEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 5Lt el (�(�CUS-1C-W tk COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court&South 7th Street SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional inf rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signat re of Director r A thorized RO-sentative Date Routing Rev.10/93 I ! l CITY OF RENTON - MEMORANDUM DATE: May 11, 2000 TO: Elizabeth Higgens FROM: Arneta Henninger X7298 SUBJECT: HERITAGE PHILLIP ARNOLD PLAT APPLICATION LUA 00-053 S 7TH CT AND BEACON WAY SE I have reviewed the preapplication submittal for this 56 lot plat located in Section 20, Twp. 23N Rng. 5E, and have the following comments. ACCESS • A traffic study was submitted and is currently under review by the Transportation Division. Separate comments on the access to the site will be provided by the Transportation Division. SANITARY SEWER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7`h Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new parcel can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main though the proposed subdivision. • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2%. • A sanitary sewer main extension will be required for this project. The conceptual sanitary sewer main shown on the drawing submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the plat. WATER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7`h Ct, and a 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from about 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. May 15, 2000 • - Page 2 • • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: 1. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6" watermain in Jones Av S. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants. 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see plan.W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan as shown is not approved. • Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as a part of this project to meet this criteria. • Water System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the plat. STORM DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. • Surface Water System Development Charges of $385 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we .will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary 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 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 of 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 `" May"15, 2000 Page 3 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 for the preliminary plat construction. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Per the copy of the letter from SPU dated October 28, 1999, SPU does not allow the use of its rights of way for permanent roads. • The new street interior to the plat must be developed to City standards which are full 32 foot pavement width, with curbs, gutters and 5' sidewalks. The conceptual utility plan submitted is approved. • This project will be required to install street lighting. • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the plat must be undergrounded. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. • Traffic mitigation fees of $40,110 (based on 56 lots ) will be required to be paid prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. cc: Neil Watts • S S CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: May 11, 2000 TO: Elizabeth Higgens FROM: Arneta Henninger X7298 SUBJECT: HERITAGE PHILLIP ARNOLD PLAT APPLICATION LUA 00-053 S 7TH CT AND BEACON WAY SE I have reviewed the preapplication submittal for this 56 lot plat located in Section 20, Twp. 23N Rng. 5E, and have the following comments. ACCESS • A traffic study was submitted and is currently under review by the Transportation Division. Separate comments on the access to the site will be provided by the Transportation Division. SANITARY SEWER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7th Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new parcel can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main though the proposed subdivision. • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2%. • A sanitary sewer main extension will be required for this project. The conceptual sanitary sewer main shown on the drawing submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the plat. WATER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7th Ct, and a 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from about 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. May 15, 2000 2 Page 2 4111) • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: 1. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6" watermain in Jones Av S. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants. 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see plan W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan as shown is not approved. • Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as a part of this project to meet this criteria. . • Water System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the plat. STORM DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. • Surface Water System Development Charges of $385 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary 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 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 of 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 May 15, 2000 Page 3 4111, 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 for the preliminary plat construction. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Per the copy of the letter from SPU dated October 28, 1999, SPU does not allow the use of its rights of way for permanent roads. • The new street interior to the plat must be developed to City standards which are full 32 foot pavement width, with curbs, gutters and 5' sidewalks. The conceptual utility plan submitted is approved. • This project will be required to install street lighting. • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the plat must be undergrounded. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. • Traffic mitigation fees of $40,110 (based on 56 lots ) will be required to be paid prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. cc: Neil Watts CitYoriPton Department of Planning/Building/Puc ✓orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: V.kuSJJakA V' COMMENTS DUE: MAY 19, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 4, 2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth HiggiOFREN_Whs PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Philip Arnold WORK ORDER NO: 78678 P .-"-'� LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court&South 7th Street MAY 0 4 2006 SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 56 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 / l / • We have reviewed this application with pa 'cular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where addition 'nformation is needed t roperly assess this proposal. 4(1 I V°°, Signature of Dire for or Authorized Representative Date at Routing Rev.10/93 } o5r ,. To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor of Renton Members of the Renton City Council b c) fro 33 Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately < N c4 Ten Acres of Property Located Across from 2 mz Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed .deyelopment and gate openings. NAME ADDRESS (o UnAN? 14 vim. S. 1 .�� ( O �a�n4j�o 7' 8/0 h41 S. ,i( 4t L ZA Y_: 8o( lfi( t CO �c. a-. v �O I C cot. a••Q. S a- 6 CIf 161 4 I g/L cj r e5 4 he . .661,i \ 4- -1 .0...7- ,_, _.,--k(.&„ /, ,, r, , e et </ 74-4,>z- I D $. 7j � o iyi�J ��i� 9 ✓t.�_ x o y 1'---Dime.)4 e rr- iz a j=fir r"r _nc (F L cw,) IQ,nd, 1.¢C' ' C, V5 4E'Iyi ,4v v J � 5 , 1_. A/4l/ L:vAJ 4/33 Ce Lv1, A-ve- So Ijem-r Is 1433 C e-bA A-VE So alPri Fr ewe___ 4260 Ct°ddr ave So. - (- - A-1.err_-i 4260 Coda- ave ,S7) 51zJAN LEECKHANJ 435 Gray AA-e. So , ,..e-e- Fes- / 0 / 3 (4 S ./,t A.v e_ S6 � E z- I e-ftn Psct L s Ce d j, A v�.3-0 , i.jrvle v- _SOIN ins . , rA.YtottntA-e (v1/4.c o 316 f-e,Ci 1 r To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor.of Renton Members of the Renton City Council Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed 'development and gate openings. NAME ADDRESS P 96 9aA-6_,S 7/7.41 �n " 70 K-e-.�NN Mr •S , • To: His Honor, Jesse.Tanner, Mayor of Renton ,': Members of the Renton City Council Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately • Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed development and gate openings. NAME • ADDRESS , ;41" 2 / •E +" L e to ¢a l 2 3 L S'L s, v°/ /L 44,•fah,w e L • 2-46 Life }ttc ‘.! 2)11— • (i" ) � S1 4 • To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor of Renton Members of the Renton City Council __ Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed development and gate openings. NAME (� -ADDRESS �4:) ,V\ \ZV\C',. -ycq•t•§a-,;*r r- V ez-A0'1/4' ... 11—(3 5-oc -c. S\)1 N .4'-' 1 IY-7,1 6 Y-<-K,n,14-- _.5;7 A n/47-7,ei..0 /41".7A-0,./ �.,. f P t" - At 57'7 ' J n1 Ac 2 ,e�„/GCJ/V 1 :is. P -�Al 2-, /1. ter: S hi ;- ) ( 7i'.i. 1 ' c..___ ' ir /r' /r ` . • /( z-eAf .4 I it C e etc o tiv e . ,c) , r r 11-�. MO )J-4ft - 5 2- Cm 1 I v S , ��1-1 ��OS� ,..\->17eir-2v ...\- le..----..,-,fr,---- -t-t),--'* .2:3-7 i' c" "Reer,-I-cyl 4,.(..d. S . -P,ei-,-1-0,1 9 g-0 55- 4— ‘ .._4 e_ r_. r ':�, - l p&rf c—, I I (.�?_.I� Q '1-- ..) '.-14-9--1---. . r-C1 , , � 1-v..� S, -- 'v G /(9 rive.S' 9ios.- , e, et4thz_l-ti ,. /e42C2( / .��' / �3 i0- �� - ) 4 '2 — l 1„ i �R 4—(A- E /:. . _ ‘3 S KA-Nt A 5. , A, /1 �...6 '/. L4/ 9" - C t c% r \'+ 6 21 e& 'T) ITS i'ti , *-- ll/ti (2/ 0 '15' ,1'..y - cL_ ///�f-rr�5 . \ To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor of Renton Members of the Renton City Council Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed development and gate openings. NAME I AD SS \/- rival a_444- tc 0 R ^1 ljttAi I)-1 tve A 0 c)\qm1"\-04,1 V-- QVAOISZ _ OW( KO a Al (\Net. &3 \-- ---7-1\1:1-0 q mot) 61,A,(1 I I C» . 1114 sr 07s re) - ,54.:_ la fistk2--e4? - - - ig 4/. -7/ 7 c-q0-7w.3 aie j -1, -e._ _ A )o� Oe�I , 3/O p eer. -, e S . RP�t-IdYLJ -Al ' A * I5I 50 1Lh ST eNTo ) � rrrl�P/fi 3/vk �i �/( 2n a 5 III G, /.."Le Aticte__ LilS^ C.-eh,v Aue_c f7 qpi:{; Zv\ s , 60400 -, rGG� ' >760 > i L f 1'7 ,-,' `-mot J #-=7e L,i� LLa -el-Z- 3° -►-, � s Raithi LI / 'hho,tl'i•ci,e 5/6 /p 5 , Rom ley � J © 'I,\ • 0 hy\5nii ) d b R€nth • , -,e s Pen orb / r . j 7' 2`1 SE 7T'c Q�(:� 0 V., VITA C. `` (,�. ,G'. S. � 4 ' 'T. ,v�.xr� ,t.—_� \ 'T�gzc` e47r Nvge ° ,, ,jam A) ; ./0 G,n. a t1 c 2F 5 a /�. . �a ss_' �- a-S u \ I D ( S L� 7 - a agg0 5 Mi cam- s,) .-owl, � 17 2.. •c 7Th Gl^ RS orb '�'0S, PwP f - . •• • To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor of Renton Members of the Renton City Council - Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed -development and . gate openings. • NAME ADDRESS 127 eku2L-eLi 0J91.4/rea4,-t, 5 e, Pa .4 1/4- -w / C6t- t_ -- --4e- 14,t- /u fr 7 VL ;�( , 1- r.L o J"--i.�/ (v GI rjc. . �� t[.-L=' -� /`^ �-,� d,•t- - A-rzzze se_ _5-S2 41, Jo • 'Ac..70,f/ . 2 -1-( faA- TE--f"r Fern/IN 6i-=r<_- tr G' Cj /2 4/v7 %'i S' •/2 7v/V4e-a) 42-7-1 �' 1R.1 ( r 6et( 6 ./1v'r ALMS' P� iaio( . 1-56 Ac 61-c4,1- Avr ktAtovk 11'Iar� fildfi - - 3-3V 6rxmf Arc s• i .1 • 1. fcr rrt 6r1 33, � atie , ) . /5_-0 Id q g-' _9 , ae GZ 1-- Y) t 4-92✓�. �/� EGG.>. 1(4-Ll7 Wc� To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor of Renton Members of the Renton City Council • Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed 'development and gate openings. NAME ADDRESS fix)/>,) S.es ✓ 11/4016W:CIWW\AW I 5 a il I2,2,v0 /2,61)d-4- S7s Au -)qi S ) 7 A M_( e rcy ,esm17,71) 'tt ' � I a .4) 5 -71.- 131Z )p 4 isEL .MAtI ''35 <'Fn21/442 AVE & • c--7- ./v>C / 1O 50. :75h ,_� /y/� se, 9 57 ` 7 '/ ).. / co J JAI 5. Cio 144a ' 6 2_i . 1\ X 2A 0i /?2Ql fO 5 4 � N `7, Ai i6C�1' 522 L??5/IJ c5, / /Lk- �'� i I 5 F/Y CIA 44 L//OtYAJ 3 s " - ` To: His Honor, Jesse Tanner, Mayor of Renton Members of the Renton City Council __ Subject: Bennett Homes Development of Approximately Ten Acres of Property Located Across from Philip Arnold Park on Renton Hill This is to state our opposition to the proposed development and gate openings. NAME / - ADDRESS_, ;,r , _ 5"G J� . �.( - G /Li + . (' /- ` -�:e 1 od � if-)O )-} ti �4 (,e - 0i.s /� '.. 17ir�(e /3es gym£- f f: i`; 1h , . A /- e , /O 71/ jJ ij(J /1-tGo c .v0 rpet / )- / 3 s 7 7'4 • 5. 7/ A- '. c_ .� )`?ci f. is /3, ,se 1 �.5� . you n ��/( I :. '7o ii-e. 1-0 v^ ,,,Di GS wERbi- ge,a 6-fm.v4 AUG S . - clel %P,t t.ic_c_> ) ./-v rt r `� . / I ,LL S y� ;•�� 1 i";"' C�)�OS Sq.." S. p I l A isr c 52S i ?1,) -Ave C. Fr.\-fn r) c A A 2c!rt A i Sl.l D . CAI 4441.4y S4. RC4,140 4 'EAST f , . X . • 1-1-a4.5 ( -71) ci Aup ni_T-- , ✓_ 4-NA- ,A="12-- b.7'.-.; E*- 7 -A-0-------. • 1-64g5m SZS 111-N , so e jrt fSO ge;cV/t Aft so (trfAc=0 1 r s, : CITY F RENTON ,.u. eafecop Planning/Building/Public Works Department Ciry Mew p Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor Op IVldy 4 LUUU A14y '�Oly•"/K,t t CEP VED ®?880 MAY 5- DO ® SUPERINTENDEN I Superintendent's Office Renton School District #403 300 SW 7th Street Renton, WA 98055-2307 Subject: Heritage Philip Arnold Preliminary Plat/LUA-00-053,PP,ECF The City of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a 56-lot, single family residential subdivision; located at the intersection of Beacon Way SE, SE 7th Court, and SE 7th Street. In order to process this application, the Development Services Division needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Would you please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this letter to my attention, Development Services Division; City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. ji Elementary School: I G l bo f MI 1� Middle School: 2pi4i4i/ 1� High School: Gli 49/() Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the ' pact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes No • .Any Comments: Thank you for providing this important information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-7382. Sincerely, L1\-Labe-t1A tg9tY\S SS Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner school/ /kac 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 :.i• This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer I PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Proposed Heritage Arnold Project Beacon Way Southeast Renton, Washington c�ri0 A'T .Y RECEIVED . OCT 0 9 2000 BUILDING DIVISION • GEOTECH September 9, 1999 CONSULTANTS, INC. 13256 NE 20th Street,Suite 16 JN 9930A Bellevue,WA 98005 (425)747-5618 FAX(425)747-8561 Bennett Corporation 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 204 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Attention: Ryan Fike Subject: Transmittal Letter Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Proposed Heritage Arnold Project Beacon Way Southeast Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Fike: Geotech Consultants, Inc. is pleased to present the results of our recently completed Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment for the subject property. Our work was completed in accordance with our'proposal dated August 18, 1999. Please find the assessment attached. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to Bennett Corporation on this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of additional service, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. scvi/cis(Ectvi2 David Bair Environmental Engineer DB: alt t PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Proposed Heritage Arnold Project Beacon Way Southeast Renton, Washington Submitted by: GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • C&COAd 13CUA.., David Bair Environmental Engineer FS N-• WAS •ov , 4 :1` `Sf02VAL s� .• /1©/, F I I IEXPIRES 8/17/Vr , j James R. Finley, P.E. Principal GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.1 Special Terms and Conditions 2.2 Purpose and Scope of Work 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND RECONNAISSANCE 2 3.1 Location and Legal Description 3.2 Site and Vicinity Characteristics 3.3 Hazardous Materials 3.4 Other Conditions of Concern 4.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION 6 4.1 Previous Environmental and Geotechnical Investigations 4.2 Historical Maps 4.3 Tax Assessor Records 4.4 State Archive Records 4.5 Renton Directories 4.6 Aerial Photographs 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 8 5.1 Regional Physiographic Conditions 5.2 Soil and Geologic Conditions 5.3 Hydrogeologic Conditions 6.0 RECORDS REVIEW 8 6.1 Federal Records Sources 6.2 State Records Sources 6.3 Local Agency Sources 6.4 Assumptions and Opinion of Contaminant Mobility and Site Vulnerability 7.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION 10 7.1 Findings 7.2 Conclusions and Recommendations 7.3 Limitations 8.0 REFERENCES 11 ATTACHMENTS Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Site Plan • Plates 3 &4 Site Photographs Appendix V/S's Site Assessment • GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Proposed Heritage Arnold Project Beacon Way Southeast Renton, Washington 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Presently, the site is undeveloped and covered with trees, brambles, and other native vegetation. The Vicinity Map, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site. Land use in the surrounding area is characterized by single-family residences. Two tunnels from abandoned coal mines underlie the site. Historical research revealed that the northern portion of the site was excavated, then filled with imported material that included construction debris. This assessment did not reveal any recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. A discussion of the scope of our work, our site observations, and our conclusions are contained in this report. 2.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment of the Heritage Arnold property at Beacon Way Southeast in Renton, Washington. 2.1 Special Terms and Conditions The scope of work for our review of this site did not include the examination, sampling, or analysis of subsurface soil or groundwater on the site for potential environmental contaminants. If new information is developed in future site work, which may include excavations, borings, or studies, Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be given the opportunity to review the findings, re-evaluate the conclusions of this report, and provide amendments as required. 2.2 Purpose and Scope Of Work The purpose of an environmental assessment is to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner defense in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA): that is, to make "all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial or customary practice." Our scope of work and the limitations of our study are consistent with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation E 1527: Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase 9 Environmental Site Assessment Process. The objective of a Phase 1 assessment is to minimize potential future liability for environmental problems by demonstrating that at the time this report was prepared, the owner, holder, or buyer had no knowledge or reason to know that any hazardous substance had been released or disposed on, in, at, or near the property. An additional objective of the Phase 1 assessment is to identify potential contamination sources. The goal of the processes established by the ASTM is to identify recognized environmental conditions. The term "recognized environmental conditions" means the presence, or likely GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 2 presence, of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or the material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of the appropriate governmental agencies. Our study included: • • A review of the chronology of ownership and site history, using county assessor records, archival property record cards, recent and historical maps, and aerial photography as primary resources. An attempt was made to identify possible former industries or uses presenting some probability of generating waste, which may have included dangerous or hazardous substances, as defined by state and federal laws and regulations. • A reconnaissance of the property to look for evidence of potential contamination in the form of soil stains, odors, vegetation stress, discarded drums, or discolored water. • The acquisition and review of available reports and other documentation pertaining to the subject property or nearby sites. • A review of a search by Vista Information Services, Inc. (VIS) of available state and federal government records. VIS reported those sites and businesses that are located within the minimum search distances specified by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation E 1527. Additionally, through observations made during our site reconnaissance, we attempted to identify local topographic conditions that may influence the potential for regulated facilities to adversely impact the subject property. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND RECONNAISSANCE 3.1 Location and Legal Description The subject property is an approximately triangular-shaped parcel of land that covers 10.36 acres. It is located on a plateau approximately one-half mile southeast of downtown Renton. The Vicinity Map, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site. The property is situated in the northeast quarter of Section 20, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, • Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington. The tax identification number, as recorded by the King County Assessor's Office, is 202305-9110. 3.2 Site and Vicinity Characteristics An environmental engineer from our firm visited the site on September 1, 1999 to observe on-site conditions and land use practices in the surrounding area. Land use in the immediate vicinity is characterized by single-family dwellings and a park. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. Bennett Corporation • JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 3. 3.2.1 Site Improvements The entire 10.36-acre lot is undeveloped. Potable water is provided by the City of Renton. Storm and sanitary sewer services are provided by the King County Department of Metropolitan Services (METRO). 3.2.2 Building Materials No structures are currently on the property. 3.2.3 Current Uses of Property The subject property is the proposed location for a high-density residential development. At present, the site is undeveloped. The southern portion of the property is covered by trees, brush, and other native vegetation. An unpaved road, now heavily overgrown, leads onto the property from the southeastern border. The northern portion of the property appears to have been excavated (see Section 4.4), then filled. This area contains some trees and is heavily overgrown by brambles. We observed construction debris (wood, plastic piping, pieces of concrete and asphalt, etc.) along with tires, bottles, furniture, yard waste, and other household items. The majority of the casual dumping appears to have taken place on the northern portion of the property. None of the material appears to be hazardous. At the time of our site visit, no major stains, odors, or unusual vegetative conditions that might indicate the potential presence of hazardous contamination were noted on the subject property. 3.2.4 Current Uses of Adjoining Properties • Land use in the site vicinity is characterized by residential development. More specifically, the property is bordered as follows: North: To the north of the subject site is the River Ridge subdivision of single- family houses constructed in 1994. East: To the east of the subject site is the Falcon Ridge subdivision of single- family houses constructed in 1989 and a parcel of undeveloped land that slopes steeply down to the northeast. South-: A gated, asphalt-paved maintenance road (Southeast Beacon Way) over- West lying the City of Seattle's Cedar River water supply pipeline runs along the . southwestern border of the property. Across this road is Philip Arnold Park, then single-family residences. During our reconnaissance, we did not observe any obvious signs of improper storage or disposal practices of hazardous waste on any of the neighboring sites that would negatively impact the subject property. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 4 3.3 Hazardous Materials 3.3.1 Storage Tanks and Containers At the time of our site visit, we looked for evidence of underground or above-ground storage tanks on the subject parcel. No signs of underground or above-ground storage tanks were observed during our site reconnaissance. 3.3.2 Asbestos-Containing Materials Asbestos gained widespread use in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s for fireproofing, for thermal insulation, and to enhance strength, and has been used in over 3,000 commercial products. In buildings, it is most commonly found in boiler and pipe insulation, in "popcorn" ceiling texture, in vinyl flooring, in plaster and drywall compounds, in mastics and adhesives, in cement board siding, and in roofing. The knowledge that exposure to asbestos fibers can cause harm to humans became widespread between about 1955 and 1975. Diseases linked to asbestos exposure include asbestosis, a scarring of the lung tissue; lung cancer; and mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the chest and abdominal cavity. The EPA banned the use of asbestos in some applications in 1973, and by 1989 had announced a gradual ban on most remaining uses. Building materials imported from Canada or other areas outside the United States may still contain asbestos. No structures are on the site. We did not observe signs of asbestos-containing materials on the property. 3.3.3 Lead-Based Paint Until the 1960's, paint containing 30 to 40 percent lead was commonly used on the interior and exterior surfaces of buildings. Exposure to particles of lead-based paint (LBP), either through inhalation or ingestion, has been found to cause a variety of adverse human health effects. Children are particularly sensitive to these effects, and chronic exposure to lead can cause learning difficulties, mental retardation, and delayed neurological and physical development. In 1977, the Consumer Products Safety Commission banned consumer use of paint products that contain lead in excess of 0.06 percent. The current LBP standard, as defined by the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act and the Department of Housing and Community Development Act, Title 10, is any paint or other surface coating that contains lead in excess of 1.0 milligrams per centimeter squared or 0.5 percent by weight (5,000 parts per million). No structures are on the subject property. We did not observe any signs of lead-based paint on the site. 3.3.4 PCBs Prior to 1979, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were widely used in electrical equipment, such as transformers, capacitors, switches, fluorescent light ballasts, and voltage regulators, owing to their excellent cooling properties. In 1976, the EPA initiated GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 5 the regulation of PCBs through the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). These regulations generally control the use, manufacture, storage, documentation, and disposal of PCBs. The EPA eventually banned PCB use in 1978, and the adoption of amendments to TSCA under Public Law 94-469 in 1979 prohibited any further manufacturing of PCBs in the United States. No buildings are on the property. We did not observe any transformers on the subject property. 3.3.5 Waste Generation and Disposal No solid or hazardous waste is generated at the subject property. 3.4 Other Conditions of Concern 3.4.1 Radon Radon is a naturally occurring, highly mobile, chemically inert, radioactive gas created through the radioactive decay of uranium and thorium. The potential for the occurrence of radon varies widely and depends on: (1) the concentration of radioactive materials in the underlying bedrock, (2) the relative permeability of soils with respect to gases, and (3) the amount of fracturing or faulting in the surficial materials (EPA, 1987). The EPA has established a concentration for radon of 4 pico-Curies per liter (pC/I) of air as a maximum permissible concentration "action level." According to some studies, the average concentration in homes across the United States is on the order of 1.4 pC/I. Typically, the Puget Sound area of Washington is underlain by a consolidated thickness of glacial drift and rocks that do not contain radon-forming minerals. The Washington Department of Health, Division of Radiation Protection, published a study listing the King County average as 0.7 pC/I. Based on this information, it is our opinion that the potential for elevated levels of radon at this site is low. 3.4.2 Coal Mine Hazards Coal has been mined in several areas of King County since the late nineteenth century. Although current production is entirely from surface mines, nearly all the coal produced prior to about 1970 was from underground workings. Abandoned subsurface mine workings leave large underground voids which are hazardous in several ways. Gradual failure of the roof and sides of these voids may result in subsidence of the ground surface over a large area overlying the mines. Noxious gases and "dead air" (lacking oxygen) may also collect in these voids. In addition, animals or people may fall into surface openings, shafts, or tunnels. Unstable mine spoil piles, frequently covered with vegetation and resembling natural hills, pose hazards as well. We reviewed a mine hazard assessment of the property prepared by HartCrowser, Inc. The report stated that the Heritage Arnold property is underlain by three coal seams, two of which have historic mine workings. The shallowest of the workings lies approximately GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 6 250 to 300 feet beneath the surface, while the deeper workings lie 475 to 765 feet beneath the surface. There was no indication of mining on, or adjacent to, the property after the early 1920s. The HartCrowser report identified three potential mine-related hazards: trough-type settlements, sinkholes, and mine gas emissions. They concluded that sinkholes and mine gas emissions were unlikely to be problems at the property and that, although trough-type subsidence could occur, the magnitude of settlement would be unlikely to cause damage to conventionally-constructed structures. 4.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION Sources reviewed for information on site and area development and land use included historic aerial photography and the resources of the King County Assessor's Office and the Puget Sound branch of the Washington State Archives. 4.1 Previous Environmental and Geotechnical Investigations Geotech Consultants, Inc. has not completed geotechnical or environmental engineering studies for the site. We were provided with a copy of an abandoned mine assessment for the site prepared by HartCrowser, Inc. that is summarized in section 3.4.2. 4.2 Historical Maps Sanborn Fire Insurance maps do not cover the vicinity of the subject property. A U.S. Geological Survey map of the Renton Quadrangle, dated 1949, shows the subject site as a mine in an area that is otherwise undeveloped. Revisions made to the map in 1968 and 1973 show areas of residential development to the west and to the southeast. 4.3 Tax Assessor Records The King County Assessor's Office lists the current taxpayer as the Renton School District 403. According to information from the Assessor's Office, the residential subdivision to the north, River Ridge, was developed in 1994 while the subdivision to the south, Falcon Ridge (or Cedar Ridge) was developed in 1989. 4.4 State Archive Records Information on file at the archives indicates that the subject property was once part of a 32.03-acre site owned by the Puget Sound Power and Light Company. A wooden water tank, located on the present site of Philip Arnold Park, was the structure shown on the property. This large parcel was divided in 1964, and the subject site in its present size and shape was created through a second division in 1966. It was acquired at that time by the Renton School District from Puget Properties. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 7 4.5 Renton Directories Renton city directories did not cover the area of the subject property. 4.6 Aerial Photographs We reviewed aerial photographs dated 1936, 1946, 1960, 1968, 1974, 1980, 1985, 1990, and 1995. Development on the subject property and in the surrounding area for each of these years is discussed in the paragraphs that follow. 1936: In this photograph, the subject property is covered by low vegetation. An unpaved road, the City of Seattle's Cedar River Pipeline Road, runs northwest-to southeast along the southwestern border of the property. To the north is a smaller, unnamed road that winds to the southeast before splitting into small trails. Farther north is Maple.Valley. A residential area covering a few blocks lies to the west. The land to the south and the east is undeveloped and covered by low vegetation. 1946: The subject site remains undeveloped and covered by low vegetation. Residential development to the west is denser. A power line right-of-way running east to west has been cleared approximately one-quarter mile to the south. 1960: A small cleared area can be seen at the southeastern corner of the property. A baseball field appears to the west. Several housing developments can be seen to the south. 1968: The northern portion of the property has been cleared of vegetation, and appears to have been excavated. An electrical substation has been constructed approximately one-quarter mile to the south. 1974: The subject site appears unchanged from the 1968 photograph. At Philip Arnold Park to the west, a building and a parking lot have been constructed. 1980: The northern portion of the property is now covered by low vegetation. The vegetation on the remaining portion is much denser. 1985: Residential development in the area has increased greatly. 1990: The Falcon Ridge housing development now appears to the southeast of the subject site. 1995: The River Ridge housing development now appears to the north of the subject site. The site and the surrounding area appear as described in our 1999 site visit. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 8 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.1 Regional Physiographic Conditions The site is located on the Covington Drift Upland, a gently rolling, elevated drift plain in the Puget Sound Lowland geomorphic province. The Puget Sound Lowland is a basin lying between the Cascade Mountains to the east and the Olympic Mountains to the west and is covered mainly by glacially-deposited sediments. The plain was formed during the last period of continental glaciation that ended approximately 13,500 years ago. The site lies near the northwestern corner of the upland plain at an approximate elevation of 400 feet above sea level. 5.2 Soil and Geologic Conditions A published geologic map for the site vicinity suggests that much of the material underlying the subject site is glacial till, a dense, heterogeneous mixture of silt, sand, and gravel. Typically, the till exhibits relatively low vertical hydraulic conductivity, which frequently results in formation of a perched water table along its upper contact. The perched water table (if present) is frequently seasonal and derives recharge primarily from infiltration of precipitation through more permeable overlying soils. Geotech Consultants, Inc. is preparing a geotechnical engineering study of the site that will discuss subsurface conditions in greater detail. 5.3 Hydrogeologic Conditions The geologic unit that we assume characterizes the site is of relatively low permeability, although unmapped deposits of higher permeability sand and gravel may occur within this unit. Based upon local drainage patterns and upon our review of a U.S. Geological Survey map of the area, it is likely that the flow of surface, or shallow-seated subsurface, water across the property would be toward the northwest to the Cedar River. According to a U.S. EPA Ground Water Handbook, shallow water tables typically conform to surface topography. 6.0 RECORDS REVIEW Geotech Consultants, Inc. utilized the services of Vista Information Services, Inc. (VIS) to complete a search of available state and federal government records. VIS reported those sites and businesses that are located within the minimum search distances specified by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation E 1527. Additionally, through observations made during our site reconnaissance, we attempted to identify local topographic conditions that may influence the potential for regulated facilities to adversely impact the subject property. The databases searched by VIS, as well as the search areas applied to each, are summarized in the following sections. A copy of the VIS Site Assessment is included with this report as an appendix. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS INC Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 9 6.1 Federal Records Sources 6.1.1 NPL One site within a one-mile radius of the subject property is found on the National Priority List. That site, Pacific Car and Foundry at 1400 North 4th Street, is located approximately one mile to the north. Based upon its distance from the Heritage Arnold property and its crossgradient hydrologic position, any risk it may pose appears to be very low. 6.1.2 CERCLIS A review of the EPA's CERCLIS listing reveals no active sites within approximately one- half mile of the subject property that have been designated as potentially hazardous or eligible for participation in the Superfund cleanup program. 6.1.3 ERNS The subject property does not appear on the Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) database of spill response activities. 6.1.4 FINDS A review of the Facility Index System (FINDS) listing and the EPA's RCRA Notifiers list, along with our site and area reconnaissance, reveals no RCRA-regulated businesses on the subject property, on adjacent sites, or within a one-eighth mile radius. 6.1.5 TSD A review of the RCRIS-TSD list shows no sites within a one-mile radius of the subject property. 6.2 State Records Sources 6.2.1 WDOE Underground Storage Tanks A review of the WDOE listing of underground storage tanks (USTs) reveals no registered USTs on, or adjacent to, the subject property. 6.2.2 WDOE Leaking Underground Storage Tanks A review of the current Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) list reveals no sites within a half-mile radius of the subject property that have reported releases of petroleum into the environment. 6.2.3 WDOE Hazardous Site Listings A review of the WDOE Confirmed & Suspected Contaminated Sites (C&SCS) report GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 10 shows one site within an approximate one-mile radius of the subject property that has been designated as a confirmed hazardous substance site. This site, Northwest Pipeline at 800 South 21st Street, is situated approximately seven-eighths of a mile to the southwest, in a crossgradient hydrologic position. Based upon the distance separating it from the Heritage Arnold property and upon its relative hydrologic position, it is not considered a source of potential contamination to the subject property. 6.2.4 WDOE Toxics Site Listings A review of the WDOE Toxics site listing shows two sites within a one-half-mile radius of the subject property that have submitted reports to WDOE describing independent cleanup activities. Both sites are approximately one-half mile from the subject site, and are in cross- to downgradient hydrologic positions. Based upon the distances separating them from the Heritage Arnold property and upon their relative hydrologic positions, they are not considered sources of potential contamination to the subject property. 6.3 Local Agency Sources A statewide listing of municipal solid waste facilities does not record any active landfills in this area. A review of the Seattle-King County Health Department records pertaining to current and abandoned landfills within the county suggests that two closed landfills are located within one mile of the subject property. The Mount Olivet Landfill is located three-quarters of a mile to the north- northeast, and the Renton Highlands Landfill is located approximately one mile to the northeast. Both landfills are located across Maple Valley from the subject site. Based upon the distances separating them from the Heritage Arnold property and the intervening valley, they are not considered sources of potential contamination to the subject property. 6.4 Assumptions and Opinion of Contaminant Mobility and Site Vulnerability No sites confirmed to be contaminated by hazardous waste lie within 1,000 feet of the subject property in an upgradient hydraulic position. As such, it is our professional opinion that the potential for the migration of theoretical water-borne contamination onto the subject property is very low. 7.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION We performed a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, consistent with the scope and limitations of ASTM Designation E 1527, for the property at Beacon Way Southeast in Renton, Washington. 7.1 Findings This assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Bennett Corporation JN 9930A September 9, 1999 Page 11 7.2 Conclusions and Recommendations As stated earlier, the northern portion of the property was excavated, then filled with as much as 12 feet of imported material that included construction debris. It may be prudent to include a contingency in development plans, should contaminated material be discovered during future excavation. 7.3 Limitations This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Bennett Corporation, and its representatives, for specific application to this site. This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. Our work is in accordance with our Fee Schedule and General Conditions and our signed proposal, which is dated August 18, 1999. 8.0 REFERENCES Bishop, Greg, Turnberg, Wayne L., and VanDusen, Karen. Abandoned Landfill Study in King County. Seattle-King County Department of Public Health. Seattle, Washington. April 1985. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. Topographic Map of the Renton, Washington Quadrangle. 1983. Division of Radiation Protection, Department of Health, State of Washington. Radiation Fact Sheet. HartCrowser, Inc. Abandoned Mine Assessment, Heritage Arnold Property, Renton, Washington. August 16, 1999. King County, Environmental Division. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. December 1990. Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA. U.S. EPA Ground Water Handbook - Volume 1: Ground Water and Contamination. EPA/625/6-90/016a. September 1990. Waldron, Howard H., Liesch, Bruce A., Mullineaux, Donal R., and Crandeil, Dwight R. Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and Vicinity, Washington. U.S. Geological Survey. 1962. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. JLI !field : •O V �1 \:, rt, -- I �-• enwoodCe '- _ • hi 4 .1 - ....i;---- 11'' 44.4-ipPR, ,,, 7----e--: ,' , i t.-.-1--• -• i .ict,- - 1 t 171�ve, , ra �� rasebatl' \c I, 1 `, Cemr , L11 _ I 91 Park / • \\\o�� IRAs, L; r' PIT 1:� „• j` r 2 fir".0 '" ..•gla I, ...:, k. 5.,7_,(4.41 --1 P. \ ''':-77-7- • .... N`'-,,,"-r--:-.:-..1,.-114--1.7.1- - ;'-'.7,7%.„.;,...'-='*,. ''..,-;„.:--,5 i.-'',,.:ii. ' J. att �,. -,' i iiii it , I.4.,..P. .it MIRAN.F 11 (:E 5 ,._.. -,., ,,V —.• •:t\NL., 'lit. /,,. . - -,.,...4., p.... :• ,,..! ‘ ;' ... � \%it ��` —' •-.,: t. r sn.�,l� ,;:::,:: - oa:';.*:,`,__' ii -11.1---' 1 ..‘‘. 1,Vim t/4 ..,„.._ 1 vl__Ii____$4 tiL„Ai_ sAlt• ...Y1---N-•- •;,2::,-- .,•,•:.„If\-_,7(.\€),/k( ''.. ....i:-.. .,•,. ▪.4:4,, __, 1 • 1— •52_1-111°,1F•T .;-----7-wf -Thr I VII rirt. .__ -- .-.,4'''•'•'Vi:• C_:\ ---1 )) ,:r. '''.-,•:.-:,---_-.-..,--„ .-7.8740: i• , sta , � —J_I.-:-._.-1 ,-. .-- i ' ---,I 7 .g‘ 1 .__1.-,:-.\-!;;;--, �, v �_ ti v - •• . I, mi -4,..-_-_.-- , ,----1 \ -s-,i, --1.....- -- • -- liz-......„-71\, :(-•.).:::4 ei, illivitb. ..4-il')-_,-.----,-4 f - ,su.,: . ,::: 5,,, ,,,, ,.... .,,, .,...„, _________,_ „:,_..▪ .,,, , „..:,..„ ,:., . r , ,41, iv , , !. :7.1 -lirtio‘1141J,11,\k\ , , ..,. _., ...v_.,..z ._.,,.. ...r="-•\-....li\ '.: e yvq,.,1 .41$1.„4-- ( _ • • -___ R zi' ad Ri_ 7 ) \,,,itra ..„ Ifr_.,4,, - ,..\)41\., .., ). 2,, ,,,„,,,,,,,,_‘,,,,:.,,,,,„,,:„.,„, : \ , fie trev/ret r;i4 \., . ...,...„ ,. , ... ..1,,..„, .... .. I to, ..., . 9 \\,:1, '' _____ _I - .. \\ ‘4101ti. r i 0 i....,,,,,,,41 i tr,i4 t \*--)" low -.-. _ ,. • , :0,7 , kvivism: ipiw-,.4-1,,y •74-1_;44,_____?!..i ..___ \0\. ,___.11..r..:1 \,....,,. .., .7..., ._ , ... •. __, .vvii----pori„,,„"ilwair li , _(\ 1 � 14., ., ,i s �..amdi ;a ___ iffli I : . _ , ;ervoir ;I\iffici° 12. 1.0 titiv ::I 1, A o . i , z ; .. N Scale 0 1/2 1 mile tt If. Inferred Direction of Shallow _) Groundwater Flow (Source:U.S.Geologic Survey map of Renton,Washington Quadrangle,1973) VICINITY MAP ' GEOTECH Proposed Heritage Arnold Project . t-- CONSULTANTS,INC. Beacon Way Southeast Renton,Washington I Job Male:99330A Sept.1999 1 a' N Lr, Y` River Ridge residential development . _______ i ♦ ♦•♦ brambles , "'..-.. trees and 1 gate". '..� brush • steep,wooded slope • i approximate area �\ j •�• :; of excavation �` j ° ��♦ I o • i parking �ee`e•♦ ------ - 1 lot e• ♦ j• y�♦ brambles 1 ` 1 rco\ trees and 1 Philip f0 ♦• brush 1 Falcon Arnold °ate♦ 1 •` Ridge Park °�, •♦• 1 residential °°d,, ! development 44.♦ j �A`• i ; baseball fields d�° ♦�.-.'_Si 0% undeveloped land i SITE PLAN AO GEOTECH Proposed Heritage Arnold Project CONSULTANTS,INC. Beacon Way Southeast Renton,Washington 1 f Job No: Data. Plato: 99330A Sept.1999 No Scale 2 4•411 `''S.. •.. ` •• - , .. 4 • r.. 1 • 10 t`-• 1 a•• .•! e.4=•• a a r- .+.` _,-2>,.r ••�, „a t ,:� .^ \ _ • Looking south at northwestern corner of property. 4.Cs at >? { • �m 5.�T -.. yi [ :; Yr�Y Looking north at southwestern side of property. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS GEOTECH Proposed Heritage Arnold Project ~° 44, CONSULTANTS,INC. Beacon Way Southeast Renton,Washington Job Mo: Qat Plate; 99330A Sept.1999 3 1.1. 121111 qr b? -. l it a 4 • ,. ,•- - f 4. jl� �. Looking over northern portion of property. Jete .' �y ;.t • I. • �t •.w :r 1 3 ,.4, K• r, .,,. ... ! y, y4. Y • • ...*$:: _. !, t_.4,....i... IMF;.-. -`, .., .., ,0,4', if '• - � t 1 IN fR.y . [:I. .., . .....:-. .,,,... •'S E ' -. te,i, '� «- �';•�: a (►i•Y is �' - •.. �r$� •y T a .,...tc• - j • 1. 4 - ,{ y.� at,; , • . \ i" • w . f i „� . , j Looking over southern portion of property. r 1:' AlC,^2,1MIT I SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Jr,°'4 GEO'rEC Proposed Heritage Arnold Project ~` � CONSULTANTS,INC. Beacon Way Southeast Renton,Washington Jab No: Dates Plate 99330A Sept.1999 4 1 APPENDIX VIS's Site Assessment GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. This report meets the ASTM standaru E-1527 for standard federal and state government database research in a Phase I environmental site assessment. A (-) indicates a distance not searched because it exceeds these ASTM search parameters. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY Customer proceeds at its own risk in choosing to rely on VISTA services,in whole or in part,prior to proceeding with any transaction. VISTA cannot be an insurer of the accuracy of the information,errors occurring in conversion of data,or for customer's use of data. VISTA and its affiliated companies,officers,agents,employees and independent contractors cannot be held liable for accuracy, storage,delivery,loss or expense suffered by customer resulting directly or indirectly from any information provided by VISTA. NOTES For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 -0403. Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 }'' Version 2.6.1 Page#2 -; - SITE ASSESSMENT R'—_ 'ORT g` j = Map of Sites within 1 Mile 1 •y :Y 1 • 1 1 N- , Ct — �' 1 N 4th St a) `DN o� in —•rio t t ali o' LP= d \� P11 o Ne 3rd St-7' _ Ne 2nd St �► .To St q i`. U _,__. . c_D , .,,„,tD Z J,, ��ii id St ,, \,--, � r 4 • /�. \ L. .-"' AT- Stele H 90 �t:; `` -y . I� -`X.. SfOfe D "� k _ ti ‘�.11 i by f6e ��• -.-- ': isrilrip , _ ..,, ,„ .--- v '6 cr,' i -. j / ~- •71<' c<Do P' CD • /- ; 0 •fi 1 _ Oaek q�\�� S) r 'tzi" t U Q> Q-o CO N P lik 18th ,-- I ,\6� (1) • co o e7� S ::' ipp1".'. d 116..... n aa �� t S � n S`-.5 7 e . ,, u. ,' - 0 0.25 0 S 26t St • �t 1...-... .2i Se 163rd Miles // \� Category: A B C D Subject Site Databases Searched to: 1 mi. 1/2 mi. 1/4 mi. 1/8 mi. Single Sites ® A 0 Multiple Sites • z"Yk \--/\ Highways and Major Roads NPL,SPL, CERCLIS\ UST ERNS, ''-..-----'-, Roads CORRACTS NFRAP, GENERATORS -".-`��`\`y Railroads (TSD) TSD, LUST, • Rivers or Water Bodies SWLF, SCL Utilities For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403 Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report: September 3, 1999 Page#3 s SITE ASSESSMENT R..JORT S • 4 . Sites Represented as, Polygons Q 111 N 4t Mt © . ys.4?,�: N-iav ft �� MP `t r v ,,' a ` i icum ' '� �A7 ... .1 �� fgilt Ne 3rd St W-. end St o 1 To.ASt () •. F ,j L A P. ,. cn cn Fn co z f/ �o i_ S 2-d St - ( •'•z �1 !� °� moo..-1 .A(-2_RBI 900 -,--' -,-----. •S- • sylii ..1>p 1. .Il�ill I -.1pi" 6t SFr"- ti � S- th Si i t S .? 1� L I" GfoO *IQ • V -2 ilik ricie IMIK i ' "mge = k g1,e 1 ¢, , Prigill . . , 1r- . „, ,,,,,,, I , . 0,, .....• k.z, 18th 9COr- o 16k 0cce a) c S 19t • �, 141 -- a Se 'S7 AI --, : -(-1-5 pik - ---------..- • .. > in 4, -FT-7, , . lir --------T.: 1100A 61* S `• -37 e� d -•� e • o 0 0.25 0.5 S2 S26{ St .. t 1. ....1 1 je 163rd Miles These boundaries are approximated from agency records or other sources such as published maps. They may represent property boundaries, impact zones,or study areas. For more information contact the agency referenced by source number in the site listing. .---.....--"\ Highways and Major Roads * �� Roads Subject Site �. Railroads • Rivers or Water Bodies Utilities For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403 Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report: September 3, 1999 Page#4 Y �: v . : SITE ASSESSMENT R__ 'ORT Otr,.:'",,,e4 Street Map • . • jL1ipr i .� 4}trio ,_ ,,E7 i icumNe 3rd St - Ne 2nd St Q\ ► To.' St S rn f ./_•/ • to zNL \ S2,dSt z � �.�°�i State H1111; 11 ��Cd u may`'.S `,,• /, ,,, SfCifP H �\\n ., 0' • 1.y Co0_..119,(-A-_AA , �*, `� S- Sth St _ it . 7tF fii ; r w • Gtod c� I - /JrjO `. '• nJ _ CD k 11; (Q/ 72 cnCr' -o a) Q 18t,.Yir,11111 1 h .- 0 16A CD -o h S 19t St . - > e 57 c ` S 2(it `D r � Se �' r r S •*•dStl �' cn ¢ e 't Se n S -E e ,� e �, 8 Nsa • '. • 1. : t 0 0.25 0.5 a. S 2 S 26t St � � . i \ S 2A..'")-.1. f Se 163rd Miles ---...„..--"\ Highways and Major Roads Subject Site �\ Roads 4"� s '�_,./V- '''� Railroads Rivers or Water Bodies Utilities For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403 Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report: September 3, 1999 Page#5 SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT SITE INVENTORY A: B C D - . PROPERTY-.AND THE:ADJACENT_AREA. S. . a • • • • •MAP within 1/8'mile "' • •• V. y :. N z' z. w. . VISTA ID :J •.. • �• :':':'. J• - •h..(� .. DISTANCE a. O` a. V W .�; 5 O in ix C7: 2: .. . •• . . ..•. •• • DIRECTION Z 0: :0 :0 O. I-- -J .0. f- M .W -u: H No Records Found D `SITES•IN;:THE'SURROUNDING:.AREA'::> - • • "• :MAP' ;'>. '(within 1%8- 1/4 mile)::.':: ' :'• •. G:. U: z N . • z.. • r:;'• .MST:'ID. uce. . N.A O: J.. X `i`:DISTfINCE • Q a •a :U• W h O. H. . . v . O Oe. `:DIRECTION r- f- vs No Records Found B•. •. S TES:IN:THESURR '� NDINcL- `:' ;:;.: : :.. a y.l !STANCE.. . ..O La. . z a. .0 :'DIRECTION. = STONEWAY CONCRETE RENTON 6808683 1 1915 SE MAPLE VALLEY HWY 0.47 NI X • RENTON,WA 98056 PUGET SOUND POWER LIGHT RENTON 342043 2 620 S GRADY WAY 0.48 MI X • RENTON, WA 98055 • D C B A . :SITES IN`THE.SURRO.UNDING':AREA a' Q:: MAP: withiri 1%2:='!:'mile >` e, z z• : �, W W; ::DISTANCE`a O.; a •U W :�:m. .O-5 H �: (9 z. ••:<DIRECTION z U ') :h U:.i-: _r •h :I- = W "I: , : vY NORTHWEST PIPELINE SEATTLE 2883006 3 800 S 21 ST ST 0.87 MI X • SW RENTON, WA 98055 • X=search criteria,. • =tag-along (beyond search criteria). '.;.•,'<•:" -=fir For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403. Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 • Version 2.6.1 Page 16 1 I SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA G a. MAP (within 1/2- 1 mile) ID VISTA ID' :: ce V u. — Vs :O '(7 DISTANCE n A J Z it El) w tn'.n� � OH .t7 �: DIRECTION Z ..0 to to U F- to t-- W tn. PACIFIC CAR FOUNDRY CO 4864595 4 1400 N 4TH ST 0.99 MI X • • RENTON,WA 98055 • • � X=search criteria; • =tog along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403. Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page#7 o a . UNMAPPED SITES C VISTA ID 2' U N .v�: CU :f. N f- M W '9. N No Records Found • 1. X=search criteria; • =tog along (beyond search criteria). ..� For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc.at 1 -800-767-0403. Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page#8 • SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT DETAILS • . • . • ..• .. . •. • ... . . • . . .• . • PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT:AREk(yiricilin:1/8;mile).•:••.:....••• . • • • • • • • • • • • • •.• • . . . . „ .No Records Found . • ::..• :::•: : • : SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA(within 1/9: 1/4 mile) . . . . . . . . . . No Records Found •: .•, . : • • • • • • • • •SITES IN. . . •.. •.. • . . •••• ..• • • • • -•••• . •.•••• . . .. . . . . ... • . . . . . . .. . . . . . . VISTA YISTA I ssOisfa tiedMiteOtiOit. Ad 191:5MAPLEitALLEWHWY:: WA Toxics-Washington Toxics/SRC#5911 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: STONEWAY CONCRETE 1915 SE MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY RENTON,WA 98055 Region: NORTHWEST State Detail Description: NO Contact: NOT REPORTED Description: WASTE:METALS Description: WASTE:PETROLEUM PRODUCT Description: WAS7E:NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS Description: DATE ECOLOGY RECEIVED REPORT:6/27/90 Description: MEDIA:SOIL Description: REPORT TYPE:FINAL Description: ISSUE OF SITE REGISTER:90-07 VISTA :PUGET.S(j.UNID.TOWER:....41GHT VISTA AddresS*;-f-..::•620•SCiADY •:. Dittarite/DireCtitnti: • .:.• Plotted as Point 2 •• . RENTON,WA 98055I WA Toxics-Washington Toxics/SRC#5911 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: PUGET SOUND ENERGY 620 S.GRADY WAY RENTON,WA 98055 Region: NORTHWEST • State Detail Description: NO Contact: NOT REPORTED Description: WASTE:POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS Description: WASTE:POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS .6.11111 *VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403. Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page#9 SITES IN.THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4-1/2 mile) CONT. Description: DATE ECOLOGY RECEIVED REPORT:7/22/98 Description: MEDIA:SOIL Description: MEDIA:SEDIMENTS Description: REPORT TYPE:INTERIM Description: ISSUE OF SITE REGISTER:98-06 Description: WASTE:POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS Description: WASTE:POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS Description: DATE ECOLOGY RECEIVED REPORT:4/30/98 Description: MEDIA:GROUNDWATER Description: MEDIA:SOIL Description: REPORT TYPE:INTERIM Description: ISSUE OF SITE REGISTER:98.07 T SI ES INSURR OUNDING AREA .wi thi n 1/2:'=1 .:.•mile :::: , :; <: ... • • Address*:.'>: Distarice/Direction 0:87 MI'%SVI/' .:: •. . . .. ........ I tte as... Point SPL-State Equivalent Priority List/SRC#5429 Agency ID: 2392 WARM 3 Agency Address: SAME AS ABOVE Status: UNKNOWN Facility Type: NOT AVAILABLE Lead Agency: NOT AVAILABLE State Status: NOT AVAILABLE Pollutant 1: EPA PRIORITY POLLUTANTS-METALS CYANIDE Pollutant 2: PESTICIDE Pollutant 3: UNKNOWN VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 -0403. Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page#10 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA(within 112.- 1 mile) CONT. VISTA PACIFIC CAR :FOUNDRY CO. ._ VISTA ID#: 4864595:` Map ID Address*: 1400 N 4TH ST Distance 0.99 MI : Plotted.as: . : Polygon .:...` ;. 4 RENTON; WA.98055.NPL- National Priority List/SRC#5900 EPA ID: WAD009249210 __ Agency Address: PACIFIC CAR FOUNDRY CO. 1400 N 4TH ST RENTON,WA 98055 EPA Region: 0 Congressional District: 0 Federal Facility: Agency Code() Facility Ownership: NOT AVAILABLE Site Incident Category: unknown Federal Facility Docket: Agency Code() NPL Status: UNKNOWN Incident Type: Unknown Proposed NPL Update#: 0 Final NPL Update#: 0 Financial Management System ID: NOT REPORTED Latitude: 0 Longitude: 0 Lat/Long Source: Agency Code() Lat/Long Accuracy: Unknown Dioxin Tier: Unknown USGS Hydro Unit: 0 RCRA Indicator: Unknown Alias Name: • PACCAR Alias Street: NOT REPORTED Alias City: NOT REPORTED Alias Latitude: 0 Alias Zip: NOT REPORTED Alias Longitude: 0 Alias State: NOT REPORTED Alias Name: PACIFIC CAR FOUNDRY CO Alias Street: NOT REPORTED , Alias City: KING Alias Latitude: 4729200 Alias Zip: NOT REPORTED Alias Longitude: 12211470 Alias State: NOT REPORTED VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. :,•z For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403. Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page 1111 • UNMAPPED SITES No Records Found VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 -0403. • Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page#12 , • SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT DESCRIPTION OF DATABASES SEARCHED A)DATABASES SEARCHED TO 1 MILE NPL VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#:5900 The agency release date for NPL was May, 1999. The National Priorities List(NPL) is the EPA's database of uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for priority remedial actions under the Superfund program.A site must meet or surpass a predetermined hazard ranking system score, be chosen as a state's top priority site,or meet three specific criteria set jointly by the US Dept of Health and Human Services and the US EPA in order to become an NPL site. SpL VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#:5429 The agency release date for Confirmed Contaminated Sites Report was November, 1998. The Washington Confirmed Contaminated Sites Report contains a WARM (Washington Ranking Model) BIN Number of 0-5 which is assigned to'anNPL site designating it as a State Priority Site. CORRACTS VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#:5896 The agency release date for HWDMS/RCRIS was May, 1999. The EPA maintains this database of RCRA facilities which are undergoing "corrective action".A"corrective action order" is issued pursuant to RCRA Section 3008 (h) when there has been a release of hazardous waste or constituents into the environment from a RCRA facility. Corrective actions may be required beyond the facility's boundary and can be required regardless of when the release occurred, even if it predates RCRA. T .BA B DA A SES: EAR HED`T 1% CERCLIS VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. SRC#:5790 The agency release date for CERCLIS was March,1999. The CERCLIS List contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List(NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.The information on each site includes a history of all pre-remedial, remedial, removal and community relations activiies or events at the site,financial funding information for the events, and unrestricted enforcement activities. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 -0403. Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:'September 3, 1999 tom' Version 2.6.1 Page 113 • NFRAP VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. SRC#: 5791 The agency release date for CERCLIS-NFRAP was March, 1999. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. SCL VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. SRC#:5428 The agency release date for Suspected Contaminated Sites Report was November, 1998. The Washington Suspected Contaminated Sites Report is not assigned a WARM (Washington Ranking Model) BIN Number, designating these sites a contaminated site. The Washington Affected Media and Contaminants Report includes sites in the following categories: (1) National Priorities List(NPL) Sites, Federal Lead; (2) National Priorities List(NPL) Sites, State Lead; (3) State Sites, Confirmed Hazardous Substances Sites (sites where the presence of hazardous substances has been confirmed by laboratory or field determinations; (4) Potential Hazardous Substance Sites, these sites have been reported to the Department of Ecology and further investigation including sampling is underway; (5) State Sites Under-going Long-Term Monitoring; and (6) Sites For Which Cleanup is Complete.This report includes some leaking underground storage tank sites. RCRA-TSD VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. SRC#:5896 The agency release date for HWDMS/RCRIS was May, 1999. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal.The RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities which report generation, storage, transportation, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA TSDs are facilities which treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste. SWLF VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. SRC#:5619 The agency release date for Municipal Solid Waste Facilities was September, 1998. This database is provided by the Department of Ecology, Solid Waste Services Program. The agency may be contacted at: 360-407-6133. The Washington Solid Waste Inventory does not provide facility locations. LUST VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. SRC#:5910 The agency release date for Leaking Underground Storage Tank List was May, 1999. This database is provided by the Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program. The agency may be contacted at: 360-4077179 . The Washington Department of Ecology Leaking Underground Storage Tank List contains some of the same sites included on the Regional lists.This list is being used because there are some"new"sites and it includes a site identification number. Because two lists are being used,sites may be reporting twice. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403. +`s; Report ID:99330A111 Date of Report:'September3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page#14 WA Site VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/2 mile of your property. Register The agency release date for Toxic Cleanup Program Site Register was May, 1999. SRC#: 5911 This database is provided by the Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program. The agency may be contacted at: 360-407-7200. The Washington Site Register Toxics Cleanup Program report details activities related to the study and cleanup of hazardous waste sites under the Model Toxics Control Act. Note that the State of Washington cautions that information contained under the Site Description is summarized information from an Independent Report and the • Department of Ecology is not responsible for the accuracy of these reports.This report includes some leaking underground storage tank sites. C).DATABASES:SEARCHED TO 1/4 MILE UST's VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/4 mile of your property. SRC#:5909 The agency release date for Underground Storage Tank Database was May, 1999. This database is provided by the Department of Ecology, Solid Hazardous Waste Program.The agency may be contacted at: 360-407-7179; Caution-Many states do not require registration of heating oil tanks, especially those used for residential purposes. D'D.. DATAB .:.: ASES: EAR S CHEDT `1/O 8 MILE..:' _:<:::'>. :_: : : : . ..:. ; .,.`; ..'.:,..j:�`::<'>:;'::;:':: :;' . .::;'..``: :>.':.-:: ERNS VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile of your property. SRC#:5598 The agency release date for was December, 1998. The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is a national database containing records from October 1986 to the release date above and is used to collect information for reported releases of oil and hazardous substances.The database contains information from spill reports made to federal authorities • including the EPA, the US Coast Guard, the National Response Center and the Department of Transportation. The ERNS hotline number is(202) 260-2342. RCRA-LgGen VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile of your property. SRC#:5896 The agency release date for HWDMS/RCRIS was May, 1999. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities which report generation,storage,transportation,treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Large Generators are facilities which generate at least 1000 kg./month of non-acutely hazardous waste (or 1 kg./month of acutely hazardous waste). RCRA-SmGen VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile of your property. SRC#:5896 The agency release date for HWDMS/RCRIS was May, 1999. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA).Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The • RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities which report generation,storage, transportation, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Small and Very Small generators are facilities which generate less than 1000 kg./month of non-acutely hazardous waste. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 -0403. Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page 115 h For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 -0403. Report ID: 99330A111 Date of Report:September 3, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page 116 4.260 �qy AA�O NiNO 6 cue May 15, 2000 Mrs. Elizabeth Higgins,AICP Principal Planner Development Services Division 1055 So. Grady Way Renton WA 98055 Dear Ms. Higgins, It seems fairly clear that the City of Renton has determined that the development project, "Heritage Philip Arnold,will go through. I would hope that the city of Renton also intends to deal with the impact on the environment,which to many people is not non- significant. For starters,traffic-wise,most people in the area use, or would like to use,the Park and Ride in Renton. At the present, anyone who arrives there after 7 a.m. on a weekday is unlikely to find a parking place. This means parking illegally in one of the area malls, and hoping not to get towed, or cruising the streets in front of private residences within walking distance. Does the City plan to expand the park and Ride to handle the every increasing population in the area? Secondly, although I haven't figured out exactly how access to the new development is planned, all the roads leading up to the area are crowded at peak times. Talbot, Puget and Benson are all two-lane roads. The increased traffic in the past two years is making them dangerous. Some cars have trouble on the hill and go very slowly; other drivers get quite aggressive and pass unsafely. At night,just getting into Renton across Rainier can be a challenge. Are you bypassing these,roads completely or planning to widen the road? This is not even to speak of the wild life living in the wooded areas. The deer population, possum and rabbits are already threatened and found on the road dead or alive. What is being done about this? If Renton continues to fill up every space available with developments,it has the obligation to meet the needs arising from increased density. • Sincerely, . . , , Roseanne Nolan 2048 SE 8th Pl. Renton, WA 98055° , :.::N:,::.,:.::::::::::::::::::::NN::::::::::::::::.::.: : .:.:, Elizabeth Higgins-Comments on the Her " � Development Proposal,,.,.,,.......,,,...,,,:...............f y' ° .....k,.,........,.....,......«..........,,...........,...,,.:.page 1. From: User Name <username@corp.atl.com> To: <ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 5/15/00 7:02PM Subject: Comments on the Heritage Development Proposal Dear Ms. Higgins, Let me introduce myself first. My name is Bentley Oaks. My wife Lynn and myself have lived at 1321 S 7th since December 1993. I am writing this letter to document my concerns over the proposed Heritage Development across from Phillip Arnold Park. Of all of the reasons that might be explored as to why this development should not be approved, traffic flow and law enforcement of traffic, in my view would be the the most important. The traffic up and down 7th avenue reaches rates far in excess of the allowed 25 mph limit. Coupled with this, even with numerous requests for a police emphasis on top of the hill, I have never heard on one occurring during our tenure on the hill. As far as the traffic is concerned, Renton Avenue does not provide enough access if cars are parked on the east side of the hill. I speak from experience as I have been "swiped" myself by someone coming up the hill too fast. Lastly, according to the plot layout, Heritage is suggesting park traffic could access their development from the other side of the gate at the part, by the baseball diamond. This would inherently allow traffic from Puget Drive to access Renton Hill through this development. As history tells us, allowing traffic over the top of the hill develops into total grid lock at the bottom of Renton Hill. I am certain that there are many reasons, like trash in our yards after baseball games, more people, more crime, less police per capita by definition, but I think that the over all safety of the existing population of Renton Hill is the most important. Allowing this development to proceed will most undoubtedly sacrifice our safety. Best Regards, F. Bentley Oaks r VA 00 0 7 ‘7 Philip Arnold Park Field Use March 17—31 9 uses for softball/baseball games April 1 —30 23 uses for softball/baseball games ' May 1 —31 .27 uses for softball/baseball games June 1 —30 24 uses for softball/baseball games July 1 —31 19 uses for softball/baseball games August 1 —31 7 uses for softball/baseball games . 17 uses for football (Weekday use for softball/baseball begins around 5:00pm and ends at around 10:30pm. Weekend use begins at around 10:00am and ends around 7:00pm) Phillip Arnold Picnic Shelter Use Weekend group size for picnic shelter rentals varies from 50 to 250 (depending on the type of rental) with most of the functions beginning in the later morning to early afternoon and ending in the evening. From May 1st through September 30th, 80% or - higher of the weekend dates available are booked. Weekday rentals average 30 to 75 people with most functions beginning in the mid- afternoon to early evening. From May through September 30th, 50% or higher of available weekday dates are booked. crr MAY 1 8 2000 BUILDING DIVISION Traffic Phillip Arnold Park Baseball/softball Month #of players #of players X 2(trips) 24 per game per games minimum per month March 24 216 432 April 24 552 1104 May 24 648 1296 June 24 576 1152 July 24 456 912 August 24 168 336 5232 trips per season 161 days=average per day 33.50 Football played for 17 days in September—total players and cheerleaders 60 Total trips per day 120 Picnic Shelter—Phillip Arnold Park Weekends Weekdays May 5 May 21 June 4 June 22 July 5 July 22 August 4 August 22 September 4 September 22 Total days 44 (2 per) total days 109 Weekend Minimum @ 80%of capacity 44 days X 30 people X 2 trips=3,520 per season Weekday Minimum @ 50%of capacity 109 days X 50 people X.2 trips=3,270 per season Weekend Maximum @ 80% of capacity 44 days x 250 people X 2 trips= 17,600 per season Weekend Maximum @ 50%of capacity 109 days X 75 people X 2 trips= 8,175 per season Weekend per day Minimum 80 trips Weekend per day Maximum 400 trips Weekday per day Minimum 60.56 trips Weekday per day Maximum 151.39 trips TOTAL TRIPS ADDED PER SEASON PER DAY: 171.18 MINIMUM TOTAL TRIPS ADDED PER SEASON PER DAY: 582.11 MAXIMUM OUTLINE-RENTON HILL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 4-7-130 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION-GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ON MINIMUM STANDARDS: A/PURPOSE IT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF VALUABLE, IRREPLACEABLE ENVIRONMENTAL AMENITIES AND TO MAKE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AS COMPATIBLE AS POSSIBLE WITH THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE OF THE AREA. GOALS ARE TO PRESERVE DRAINAGE PATTERENS,PROTECT GROUNDWATER SUPPLY,PREVENT EROSION AND TO PRESERVE TREES AND NATURAL VEGETATION. THIS IS BENEFICIAL TO THE CITY IN LESSENING THE COSTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE CITY AS A WHOLE AND TO THE SUBDIVIDER IN CREATING AN ATTRACTIVE AND HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: CITY OF RENTON,FILE NUMBER R-178-78,AND REZONE June 13. 1978 PAGE FOUR G. TRAFFIC: RENTON HILL IS ESSENTIALLY A LARGE CUL-DE-SAC WITH ONE ACESS,MILL AVENUE SOUTH. THE SEATTLE CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY PROVIDES A SECONDARY ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. THIS FACILITY WAS CLOSED IN 1973 AT THE REQUEST OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE HILL TO ELIMINATE THE THROUGH TRAFFIC THAT CAME TO AND FROM THE CASCADE AREA TO THE SOUTH. THE RESIDENTS OF RENTON HILL CONSIDERED THE THROUGH TRAFFIC INAPPROPRIATE AND DANGEROUS TO THE COMMUNITY. THE STREETS ARE RATHER STEEP AND SERIOUS QUESTIONS CAN BE RAISED CONCERING TRAFFIC SAFETY IF TOO MANY CARS USE THE STREETS. BETWEEN SOUTH 3RD AND 7TH STREETS,RENTON AVENUE AND CEDAR AVENUE AVERAGE 9.2%AND 7.7% SLOPE RESPECTIVELY. RENTON AVENUE HAS A SHORT STRETCH THAT HAS A GRADE IN EXCESS OF 15%BETWEEN THE SAME STREETS. WITH THE GRID IRON STREET PATTERN,A VEHICLE(AND ANYTHING WHICH THE VEHICLE MIGHT HIT)CAN BE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE SHOULD A SERIOUS MECHANICAL PROBLEM OCCUR SUCH AS BRAKE FAILURE. ON JANUARY 22, 1978 TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE CONDUCTED AND FOUND MOVEMENT OF 2.650 VEHICLES DURING A 24 HOUR PERIOD. THIS REPRESENTS 1.350 VEHICLES ENTERING AND LEAVING THE HILL EACH DAY. (In 1972 the pipeline road was open during the Boeing slump. Traffic count taken on S. 3rd east of mill for 24 hours showed 2745 vehicles entering or leaving the hill. In 1973 the pipeline road was closed. At the same location for 24 hours 1547 vehicles entered or left the hill. In 2000 The Bennett traffic study shows 2361 vehicles entering or leaving the hill with a projected figure of 2935 in 2001. Since 1978 a total of 50 new homes have been added to Renton Hill. How can the traffic decrease from 1978 to 1999? It should also be noted that the traffic for Philip Arnold Park was not considered in the Bennett traffic study. See Attachment.) Elizabeth Higgins- Heritage Renton Hill ai • ation Page 1._F Z-lr4 00 - 053 From: User Name <username@corp.atl.com> To: <ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 5/15/00 7:02PM Subject: Heritage Renton Hill application Hello, I am Bentley Oaks. My wife and I live on 7th and Grant on Renton Hill. I have a couple of questions about the Heritage Development. First, does the city have the rite of refusal on the exit from this area. It looks like there is three entrances. One on the east side of the gate, and two on the west side of the gate. If two of the three really dont exist,just the main entrance, is it in the power of Renton to allow a variance to open up the exit? Secondly, are there safe widths of roads for traffic? Does Renton plan on increasing the police force if this housing goes through? What would be the one factor that could disallow this development in your mind, Traffic, Renton Ave width, what? Answers would be appreciated either my email or phone. My phone is 425-487-7116. Best Regards, Bentley 1.W4- ev -053 % DEVELOPM -d PLANNING CITY 0 NTON - MAY 1 7 2000 ikal- M/ Aoa o RECEIVED , 4 40 1:11,01t-, k,O;t- ril_cti e-e -7/-e-e-L-4t ,I saett,36- *1 41 hi - 0 0- 053 PP F- , ) 2b- .e,e-ett- )--1) r 0_74. it)2,e4A4 6_4- sit,44-1 iA.4.4., ol. I) e.e.nAyrt. x ,ek " _,t..,k. ei_ _ __paid' ari1P.11- /el_e_ g„,,,,x, zi.e-et-in_e cc,,d iclit,& 6--- f6/1,6 ti_ e.t In ,o-f ts-t4 „ 1.?4,d, -ete--- ,_ _ 64 /4 'Li- 6L ( ._-“L.& --6o-e4-e-, .A_At- -0,-g-te-dt, _i_v_ titct,t . .14 _e,,,4 ,,,_4,6 ' 'bittl-illiti-, AL- A-0-14/24 APt_c ,,tvie4-€.4- , 6.-I 2_4 -4-il ,14. e7t-el tiLi'd-i- 64 . etd .0 ,i_e) o—Ik_ le_eii.-.6-7t_ ,Yste;ti +2.) a-L e , 6A a 44--e--et- peua- 1 Vo--4A --, - - ./6-4 _,ad— 49A4---74 /"`"1"a- %74-411/ 14- L Is0}Z ,LZA ti , 9/1-0Aft ,64 ,671r 671' e.- W. a JA- j) tt'4 / _( fl . , f'-- -7`- '4.d — 1 -di-t4-74-Le_. 12JL-6-iez-it 4}1 a-- /2A4-tel,t "ii-dited- otAitJ it - - _ 7e . __49c . ...,,4_1_7,v .. . .8/s/ . . . . .. ... ---- . . .fr7„),477 -4 . _. . . „ . . .. . . .. .. ........ 1 .. . 1 ... . ..... _. . . . . . . .... ... _ .. _ ._ ...._ ... . ... . v _ . li ... . . . . ... . a : - ----14-17Y-74-51.... I-454 / i v . • ' 41,4 . 7 • . . • 4..1 4,,,,..0. . - ,,r; ___?.,,v— _ . _ _ . . ,3) .1 7)...z_d.,_7 .7,7 r_ . 7.try,,, ,..yy ,7)_)0;.;,ie_r_ _,_e y i,.,,. .7,„ p.iy.i3,,. ., or. . . .. . . . . r-p.--e-ptio-- - (7/74---o- -- rr?"-errl r-"P")'1,1r-.. I' 1,1 . . /J�//�!/�) - , /,,,,„ ._ . . . _. ,. ^ , • - . .. „ . ' p • • • - -vvr i . ,, ),7-r-t6 . „ ,. . _ . ,, • l,, t..„„:„..y,-- ar ..„_:_ / _ •.,••-• , _ „.._. . , • ,_.. s I,, IIl)tti'111IFSItI1F11UII11tII111'tFIIIIjii'1`IIIttf11111111IIt)' ram, �� •��3 i�.�C.r 1 i I 1 I __s--94 s , " ry-inzir -14--e-ri'-9 r -7So / rie-ervi--71-----Pid r-1-19-7-1_ ele 90iti rirl'i 2.71" 7-Z-1-r4-,zr2 .----®.-- -_-_-. 001J c t 91 _ 03 Wd � p U - 3.11 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING September 24,2000 CITY OF RENTON City of Renton SEP 2;61000 Development Services Division RECEIVE® 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Attention: Ms.Elizabeth Higgins,AICP, Senior Planner Re: Application Name Heritage Renton Hill Land and Use Number LUA-00-053,PP,ECF I am writing you to express my concerns over the Heritage Renton Hill Project. My major concern reflects the increased traffic that will result from this development. I am especially concerned about Renton and Cedar Avenue traffic. My family and I have lived on Renton Hill for the past ten years. When we first moved up here,many of the homeowners were elderly,with only one car per household. In the past few years,more elderly have sold their homes or passed on and younger families are purchasing those homes. As you well know,most families today have at least two vehicles per home and sometimes more. This has caused a great deal more traffic going up and down the hill. Additionally,in the last few years,we have noticed increased traffic with mountain bikers coming up the hill to take advantage of the much-publicized trails (http://w'ww.seattleinsider.com/recreation/cycling/phillip.html& http://www.dirtworld.com/trails/Washington trail242.htm). Renton Avenue is the focus of my concern because it is one of the two main arterioles up the hill. The other arterial is Cedar Avenue. Anything I say that is worrisome for Renton Avenue would be worse on Cedar because it is even narrower with cars parked on both sides of the street. On Renton Avenue cars are allowed to park on the East Side of the street. Even though drivers are supposed to yield to uphill traffic,downhill traffic has to slow as well because there just isn't room for parked cars and two-way traffic. Frequently,due to natural bends and curves in the road,simply slowing down isn't sufficient. In those instances all traffic winds up braking abruptly so as to prevent an accident. The Heritage Renton Hill development is proposing 55 new homes. That will add a minimum of 100 additional vehicles to the already crowded street with a minimum of 200 trips up and down the hill each day (one per car). This does not factor in 3rd family vehicles or visitors or more than one trip up and down the hill per day. I am fearful of a tragedy waiting to happen. A few short years ago,there was a serious accident on this road. With additional cars and traffic worse than ever,I feel certain another one is not far off. When this occurs,it will be too late to fix the problem and people will be looking for someone to blame. I know studies were done monitoring the volume of traffic going up and down the hill. I have not seen the results,but am assuming they were thought to be satisfactory since this project is going forward I urge you in this instance to not look at the numbers in the data. One needs to drive that road on a regular basis, especially in the early morning and late afternoon,when there are a lot of cars parked on the side of the road to really see and understand the impact and concern I am speaking of. I understand new homes and growing neighborhoods are the way of today and an asset to the Renton economy. However,this is an old neighborhood,not equipped with multi-car garages,wide streets,or alleys. If absolutely necessary to build a housing development on the proposed site,I feel it is the city's responsibility to act responsibly and figure out a solution to the already crowded road and not just add to the problem. Some mentioned solutions have been to widen Renton(or Cedar)Avenue or make the entrance to the Heritage Renton Hill development on the other side of the pipeline gate. If neither of these is feasible,it is still a responsibility to come up with a solution so as not to create more of a problem for the already concerned citizens of Renton Hill. K September 24,2000 At the neighborhood/Bennett Homes meetings this past year,it was stated how there was such a huge turn out of concerned citizens that isn't commonly seen at such gatherings. I also have heard that for every voice spoken or letter written there are ten silent who feel the same way. This is a cohesive neighborhood with a strong concern,please don't ignore it for the sake of progress. Sincerely, Kimberly K.Mehlhaff&Family " oo -o�� The Renton Hill Community Association submits the following findings to you regarding the rezone and permit application to the City of Renton by Bennett Homes to develop a property located on Renton Hill. In 1993 when the property in question was rezoned, the Renton Hill Community Association was not informed. The public information meeting regarding rezoning in our area was listed as "SOUTHEAST" and was held at Nelsen Middle School on Oct. 22 1992. (See attachment#1). If the announcement of this meeting had indicated that Renton Hill was involved the zoning question would have been addressed in a timely fashion. The Renton Hill Community Association was formed in 1978 and has been on record with the City of Renton and the Renton Chamber of.Commerce, yet we were not informed of this meeting or that it would include any part of Renton Hill and that this property specifically was involved in a critical rezone. By rezoning this property without notification the City of Renton has place into jeopardy the safety and welfare of all Renton Hill residents. "The legislature fmds that uncoordinated and unplanned growth, together with a lack of common goals expressing the public's interest in the conservation and the wise use of our lands, pose a threat to the environment, sustainable economic development, and the health, safety, and high quality of life enjoyed by residents of this state. It is in the public interest that citizens, communities, local governments, and the private sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning." (RCW 36.70A.010). See attachment # 2. "Each county and city that is required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.140 shall establish and broadly disseminate to the public participation program identifying procedures providing for early and continuous public participation in the development and amendment of comprehensive land use plans and development regulations implementing such plans." (RCW 36.70.140). See attachment# 3. Ct ;In checking the rezone information in a document titled"City of Renton V> N c Interim Land Use Element and Areawide Zoning, Translation of Proposed .W o Land Use Classifications to Zones" the zoning to replace G-1 (as this tt' property was zoned prior to 1993) is listed as LDSF (low density single m- CE family). The "City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Plan" map dated June 17, 1993 shows this property as LDSF. This zoning was changed and no documents could be found that changed this density to the zoning SF 1 .1 (Single Family) which is the present zoning on this property. See attachment #4a and 4b. Around the rezone issue, we are concerned with the data the city has been utilizing. The lack of any updated information, gives standing to the 1978 to the hearing examiners comments included in a previous zoning hearing. "In effect the end result is a long and densely populated cul-de-sac which exceeds the limit of Section 9-2208.k (Subdivision Ordinance). * (Ref. R- 178-78, page 21, see attachment# 5. *This Ordinance is no longer in effect. It has been replaced by City of Renton code 4-6-060F, see attachment# 6. This new version states the Minimum Design Standards for Residential Access Streets: Right-of-way 50 foot, 32 feet paved, yet the proposed development is requesting a variance for access right of way 40 foot streets. Why do we have "Minimum Standards" if we continue to allow less than minimum? The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element— Transportation, Policy T-2.1: Each street in the City should be assigned a functional classification based on factors including: a. traffic volumes; b. type of service provided; c. land use; and d. preservation of existing neighborhoods. (see attachment #9). Renton Ave. So. is the main access to the proposed building site and functions as a collector street. The Minimum Design Standards for Collector Streets require 60" width with 36' paved, parking on both sides. (Renton Ave. So. has a 23-foot driving surface with parking allowed on one side and by defmition should fall under the collector street category, which requires 36 feet paved.) Renton Ave. South is basically a one-way street. The fact that the original Ordinance is no longer in effect does not change the reality that Renton is a densely populated cul-de-sac with excessive traffic with well below minimum access street standards. (It should be noted here that the only transportation available on Renton Hill is by foot or private automobile.) The Bus system will not travel on Renton Hill because of its excessive street grades. Between 1990 and 1993, the City of Renton created a report called a Transportation Area Zone (TAZ) to be used as a tool in the restructure of the comprehensive plan. In this document Renton Hill was divided into three areas. These areas are numbered 46, 47, and 48. Area 46 included all of Renton Hill North of So. 7th Street. Area 47 went South of So. 7th Street, across the Puget Power right of way and included a portion of apartment buildings on the South End of the hill. Area 48 (where the proposed 2 development is located) went East of the Seattle pipeline road, north from the intersection of the pipeline road and Jones Ave. So. and South to Royal Hills Drive. The purpose of this report was to support how many homes could be built within each zone. See attachment#7a and 7b. The question this brings forward is: How can the TAZ for r Renton Hill have any foundation for rezone when you cannot access the proposed building site (section 48) from any portion of the section 48 streets and half of section 47 cannot be accessed from Renton Hill? Without any accurate information or notification the rezone did not follow due process. Renton Hill is not included in the City of Renton 1996 Traffic flow map because our traffic flow is either to or from our homes and while we now have a choice when we reach South 3rd the remainder of our residential streets have not changed. When the Washington State DOT remodeled the "S" curves we lost several neighbors, their homes and property. The bottom of Renton Hill was literally sliced off. Since 1978 we have added 46 single- family residents and 5 Multi-unit apartments and had Major remodels on 18 single-family residents and 3 Multi-unit or duplex residence in a smaller land area. With all of these additions we have also added the burden of traffic generated by adding these new homes. (See attachment#8). Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element III Traffic Flow. Objective T-3.0: Eliminate disruptions which reduce the safety and reasonable functioning of the local transportation system. And policy T-3.1: Maximize traffic flow and accessibility on arterial roads while protecting local/neighborhood roads from increased traffic volumes. (See attachment#9). If the Washington State Department of Transportation has its way and can work around the new requirements for Saving our Salmon it will be back to widen I405 and Renton Hill will once again "be sacrificed for the greater good". Safety for pedestrians is also a big concern in our neighborhood. There are no marked crosswalks on Renton Hill even though our children walk to Phillip Arnold Park to catch the school bus. Please note here the Renton School District will not allow school busses to use Renton Hill streets due to the excessive street grades. There are no traffic controls at any intersection on Grant Ave. S. or High Ave. S. There is one stop sign on Mill Ave. S., one on Cedar Ave. S., four on Renton Ave. So. (three at the corner of So. 7th and 3 Renton Ave. S. due to a 26% grade on So. 7th) and five at the corner of So.7th, Jones Ave. So., 7th Court, Beacon Ave. So. and the "Pipe Line Road" access to Phillip Arnold Park. This is the intersection that the proposed development will funnel all traffic thru. It is important to note that none of the streets or avenues on Renton Hill meets the minimum standards as required in Renton City Code 4-6-060F section b., page 6-17, (see attachment#6). In a prior hearing it was stated regarding Renton Hill ..."G. Traffic: The streets are rather steep and serious questions can be raised concerning traffic safety if too many cars use the streets. Between South 3"I and 7th streets, Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue average 9.2% and 7.7 % slope respectively. Renton Avenue has a short stretch that has a grade in excess of 15 % between the same streets: With the gridiron street pattern, a vehicle (and anything which the vehicle might hit) can be in serious trouble should a serious mechanical problem occur such as brake failure. (See attachment R-178-78 page 4 (see attachment#10) and Renton City Code 4- 6-060F section 5 page 6-17. #6). In addition to this accurate statement it should be added that South 7th Street between Cedar Ave. So. and Renton Ave. So. has a grade of 26% and does not function during snow and/or ice. A section of Renton Ave. So. of great concern is at the crest of the hill in front of 536 Renton Ave. So. This is a limited site distance area. A down hill vehicle (North bound) must move to the center of the street due to parked cars to the right, placing the moving vehicle into the oncoming (up hill portion of the street). The down hill vehicle cannot see oncoming traffic (up hill) until they reach the crest and has limited space in which to move towards parked cars and/or stop. Vehicles coming up the hill (South bound) must often stop to avoid oncoming traffic. If either or both vehicles are exceeding the speed limit there is very little space and very little time to avoid contact. Vehicles coming up the hill have the same visual problem. If either of these vehicles is a truck the sight is quicker but the ability to adjust is lessened. It is an unsafe area and along with two other site distant areas on the Hill causes a great deal of concern. The proposed site for the development is not compatible with many City requirements. This property will be clear cut, bulldozed and leveled. The department of Public Works states in its LAND USE APPLICATION TERMS: Site Plan approval: The purpose of Site Plan Approval is to assure that the site plan of proposed uses is compatible with both the physical characteristics of the site and with the existing and potential uses of the surrounding area. The Site Plan review assures that a development is consistent with City of Renton Plans, Policies and Regulations (Renton 4 # 4. i CITY OF RENTON INTERIM LAND USE ELEMENT AND AREAWIDE ZONING I Translation of Proposed Land Use Classifications to Zones LAND USE ZONING Old Section New Section Number LDSF (Low Density Resource Conservation Replace G-1 4-31-4A I Single Family) (RC) Single-Family Residential I - Low Density (SFL) 4-31-4B SF (Single Family) Single Family (SF) Replace R-1 4-31-5 i . Manufactured Home Park Replace T 4-31-13 SF4 (Single Family to Mixed Residential (MR) Replace R-1-5 4-31-5 4 Units) Manufactured Home Park Replace T 4-31-13 (T) 1 PN Planned Neighborhood Replace R-2 4-31-7 Residential MF (Existing Multi- Existing Multi-Family Replace R-3, R-4 4-31-8 1 Family) (MF) ` MU (Mixed Use - City Mixed Commercial (CM) - Replace B-1 4-31-10A Core) City Center only. COMMC (Community Multi-Family (MF) Replace R-3, R-4 4-31-8 Center) Community Commercial Replace B-1 4-31-1OB (CB) NC (Neighborhood Multi-Family (MF) Replace R-3, R-4 4-31-8 Center) - Neighborhood Commercial Replace B-1 4-31-10C (CN) := ..:.._ _- _-:: _:. ,,a..❖ t �� CITY OF RENTON �!� .IZEN ,',:c -- - - AQUAH� 'h ISS L L EvuE —, , ENSIV - - S � EH - � P R - N _ L 1 C -- R ISLA • r .• ,�_ --- iee:•4.70).••••:%••:•:•.**Xi .•:!:•3r❖•4•.oSo 'mot :ObV1. JJsl �1'tiv ❖•..... :... LAN US E LAND "-- L- .❖.•a..❖.❖.❖ r'.• - y •33� t .r - - a ..♦•►...•.o.. h NS- - ♦♦ SIGNATIO- - DE • - IA- T-- .�• ESIDEN i - R 1v we • 1L- a!i�• mil- -- _... a Fa-- in- S Low sl- Den Y SEATT _ _ -_-__<:saax xrs3t7tDb__3>=-= ---!1�,.<:,�;.•.oyw..�t� 'e:;::%%•ja:�:•33�♦♦♦ II W♦•♦f 2♦ - - - AI Singlef du .❖.s.❖. eni�_ ....❖.• id m - _ oRes / ♦ Fa mily 10 . Q!• •♦••o♦'- - _-- .�, : •:!0:•:_vim;`.�::;:y�:� 4•�a!3:i : ::�l;�!,.'�:, > I c•�•::=Z L : , •: r-..::>:<:r:. <:.: ° to 4 Units Mix m w•%%•'•<• �,v `- ri:.....:•?a.—..;•.!:•:: single Family/Up r i•00^•0.0. °.',.�•."'�y =:_s" :• •?':•C;.f`:-::• �•• :�:'<:❖:•3b::1•! i••.�:♦ •~ ..Ir•Ic•,9 1SPNERr. :� %•'•3:•••�^�i:::i •iii: 'v.1•• 11'YL> �Oi••••••• ♦ }i.}♦ I �•�♦ IIIIA4t,— ♦�,•,•,•,.,.a:p �;,;., ♦ i,/ci�lta Existing Multi—Family Dislricl =? i>:= *y❖:❖3:::d%s'ci.• <}♦� z \ r 'z Planned Neighborhood ;.:or 1 .: 3�"�. rri<•i•:�.♦�.e•� 1 •♦fif:}:�7:;:})�• i❖3i'O �1C:::.t,^!^^•..y.MC 16:•••-:}♦♦� ,� �� r,_k4 �5° 1 : :�- t;<� :•'• r:% 3�♦! I CENTER DESIGNATIONS j ••,Y•••�!.._.O�, l 6e. '• �li'ii,.'ae�Lie • . _�:•'.❖)♦ �: • yam .�^��_ ,. • ••��`:�rA 0e♦� r13i4 err��♦-•�-s ��rz!4:Ie,[v::: i:::>�; •;••:-70•V♦♦♦♦� :•:l:': �:3��:%•a — 1� .o.o..4 {.;{._. — City Core •••;••: „•,•,. . ::. Mixed Use • I ��`�. � �♦°•>i��`"='E,t, .. 3 �!�:�4�•3��♦♦S,U;��':+�3;�;�<s?y•r r.•::•:�::;} } :.lit �j � I Community Center �,. °",'ri.L It LtS.,,•, a aye♦ ♦o❖...:.....ea� {•:.; ti;:;:; l:J I �°!� • - . •••:�♦ �♦�ti,:�b.r.>♦♦r 4•p;•�••p•,• V!S••y• , :nth.,.;:•.; . v ...m� I 4 ��+ ♦♦'� •'-••-J •• I _ N;: ;:i:enuc:ncr ghborhood Center ' 1 / 3,•,•,•,v.•3♦ I�n� ♦ ♦/♦ :•::::r' V�.♦.w (FLAKE MACDONALD! lip le n ••,••r••••�;��:•�f��a;.1�♦•�;�io 4 in );0 1 :.• tle,t,e,�%gip❖%•. 4 •y ♦♦��. I ram. :or:ane�tbl�ry ,e10 tR, 3♦• i ;., °° ,, .%or ,c,ccc, :��♦.•••o�.♦ 7. t Institution Center \• r� �.�°i....l-. "� �j p: :� '+�i� •:•'�'•'••• ::••:••.!:•'y.�♦:•33:❖::.00-♦♦1•♦ ♦♦♦ !'a uAP _��_ I I •. I ' v \\1; 5 I Io ol`-'S i'i °elf •:.❖: •a :♦•. •., • ,.....',. 4 m API(VALLLI RD i, .� °%' �LIL:..o.. !....,,.•.;.•.;.•:..•••;•,••;•:•••:.♦ ♦��'r► ::•:"1: I EMPLOYMENT AREA DESIGNATIONS 11 t ,«g:'- - ° I :•i• ;lY �?iiiii•::•.•iiii•••:•:::iiii••••••••i•••••.♦ •♦♦♦ -J. III ' '.,..1..1• 1 •, 0►•• ♦, r♦♦ �•i•:iiii•••ii�♦•••♦• 0:::::O:iiiire•:••::•'♦♦♦♦♦♦♦' �`� 1 n 'i) •OP•S•::. !�e:•�. .•s i0•:i••••:i•••:ii0::••:i•••::i't•'••y<.::�♦♦�♦:J::.S c ck .,..:.-.•.t..: .::.. s._¢.:..:.:: ;❖:❖: :❖:❖:•:ca:%:%❖33:•:!♦♦�! .,;:�.::./y I 4{ Employment Area Commen,.l •a� _.?.FX-i?:�^:�:�:,�..-i-i•.'•P�•Y-•-v,-•ii!.O�•iiiiii•♦•i•::••,♦, •♦:;•,�•♦ ':7.ti i LC O• SS:• •S S:•,c . 1 _ ..,c le . .a........ •..r .1 t Area ...:::__:��' ;:; I men Its•.• Y L. c �iLO It II 1.� I - •-TL t7 .,... •.�� •Lc. /1 Of ... �- ��<:e:❖.•.;.;:;:3;}..•... .•.<.. ` � XX Employment Area 1 -'•• ♦�:❖3:i•3:::❖3❖33❖333:33:•:❖'❖• S>•'`. SPRING LALd J I"I I"�' ♦♦♦♦r` •.;iiigiiiiiV4i•O•:❖:' ❖:❖:!3:•::❖:yvr::•:'i:❖:❖:1 a}v�❖.'yy�- V t cr' �t��:v'd��•❖.••si•:0:40•.•••♦•:i�0ii0••OS••O;•��•iy��'�u.�+.3 \ �,`/ <•.::'..•:'•'•'•::o:.•.. :.❖.•.,.., ..........,.,.,.•.,.,.,. MISCELLANEOUS DESIGNATIONS i__ k;�o�`►�.;•;••;<.;❖::.•s•.•.0000•.!,.00•:.};.:❖:•33:�:❖:;:❖:•: •'�<❖.•o.A❖:.•• o:. ;o.: ..•,•❖• IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII, Convenience Commercial � !+i �'��•♦ p•3'�i^♦♦� SPHERE OFF Clty Limits ♦f•I.,♦♦♦♦o <.��,3...��,.r.;.9.,.. Sphere of Influence .tY 0 : 1°1"41WSIMAkbuw...,.__ ..: , \ p 5500 11000 ' .1 /+ s ! uailrouxcs O� \ FN1 z �� 1 .66,000 • / 111r J �� ' 17 June, 1993 F1gu1'c ----- Pace 2-3 Municipal Code, Section 4-31-33). This document also states: Preliminary Plat: The purpose of the Preliminary Plat application review is to establish • the layout of the land division and ensure that the proposed division is designed and developed in accordance with the City of Renton's adopted ordinances and standards. The proposal must be consistent with the protection of the public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics and, provide for public services/infrastructure (Renton Municipal Code, Section 9-12-6). See attached#11. The public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics portion of this code is neither addressed nor acknowledged in this project. The quantity of construction traffic alone, to and from this site, with large trucks, heavy machinery, suppliers, construction workers, etc. all coming up and going down Renton Ave. So. is not in the interest public health, safety or welfare. (RCW 47.48.010) States: Whenever the condition of any state highway, county road, or city street, whether newly or previously constructed, altered, repaired or improved, or any part thereof is such for any reason its unrestricted use or continued use by vehicles or by any class of vehicles will greatly damage that state highway, county road, or city street, or will be dangerous to traffic... (See Attachment# 12 for complete text). The city has the right under this code to limit usage of any street. Renton Ave. So. is already posted with a 'Load Limit". Additional comments in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Community Design and Residential are as following: Build neighborhoods: In order to develop the sense of community and neighborhood identity residents would like to see, a concerted effort to "build neighborhoods" rather than a collection of housing developments is • needed. #13. Policy CD-6.5: Existing mature vegetation and distinctive trees should be protected and retained in development. #14 Policy CD-6.6: Heritage trees or other unique individual trees should be retained. #14 (also with this policy please refer to the Discussion at the end of this attached page.). B. Subdivision of Land Objective R-16-3: Residential site plans should preserve sensitive areas, take advantage of significant views, and incorporate natural features. #15 Objective R-17.0: Ensure structures built in residential areas are compatible with the existing or desired character of established neighborhoods and the desired character of new neighborhoods. #15 (1)Preserve and improve existing neighborhoods: 5 • c. Use design controls to ensure that new development fits in existing neighborhoods; #16 d. Develop new programs to upgrade existing neighborhoods by adding street trees, sidewalks, or neighborhood parks where needed. #16 This proposed development does none of the above. On the East side of the property(this development is requesting permits for) there is a raised, old county roadbed. To the West of this roadbed the drop off is between 15 and 25 feet. To the East of the roadbed is a drop off that goes all the way down to Cedar River Level. hi order to develop the property, this roadbed must be leveled. This will remove all trees and plants on the East side (and the rest of the property). The results of this leveling, coupled with the clear cut, will mean a slope that includes 24 to 40 percent grades will be at great risk for erosion. Quite probably some construction encroachment will occur on the East side so the level of erosion will exceed the property line. All of the runoff on the East side will cany down the slope and to the Cedar River. Does this plan comply with the new steep slope requirements? Every Friday the recycle, garbage and yard waste trucks are in our neighborhood for pickup. They are a great group of people who work very hard at doing their job and doing it well. While doing their job, it is inevitable that Cedar Ave. So. and Renton Ave. So. will be blocked for a period of time (by each of three trucks). This is not the workers fault, it is what these two streets allow. They work as quickly as possible but cannot avoid blocking with a truck that size and a street that narrow. This is just one of many things residents of Renton Hill know and adjust to accordingly. We also know that driving up Renton Hill, if you must stay to the right because of traffic, you will drive into three dips in the street where patches do not come to the level of the street. Most of us simply move to the left and end up driving in the center of the street. This is only good if there is no traffic, if you aren't in the limited site distance area and if no one pulls out of their drive way. I mention these small things because they will not be addressed in this process nor will the other quirks of our neighborhood or any other neighborhood. The attention paid to these quirks is how we stay safe in our neighborhood environment. • The City of Renton has failed to meet its own, and the State of Washington rules and standards on the zoning of this property. The failure to inform invalidates every aspect of this proposal. A reality check is well past due on the impacts of this type project in any neighborhood in Renton. What is the impact on the adjoining property, property across the street, property one block away, two blocks away, 4 blocks away, one quarter of a mile away, one half mile away, even one mile away? Will the citizens living within this area be able to access their homes safely? Will responding emergency vehicles be slowed by this project? What will more than one hundred loaded cement trucks do to the only road leading to this project and what will one hundred empty cement trucks do to the same road leading away from this project? Will all of the trucks be in good mechanical working order? Will residents of this neighborhood be able to pull out of their driveways every morning safely with the increase in traffic due to the numbers of people working on this project, each day for several months? Is there a realistic option for residents if even one construction vehicle breaks down going to or from this property? If there is one, what is that option? Who will be responsible if the answer to any of the above questions is no? The ripple effect of this project, on our neighborhood, must be addressed. 4 Oa- 7 Citizens are Encouraged to Participate . a . KENNYDALE . Neighborhood 1® Tuesday, October 13 The CityCouncil invitesyou to participate in theplan review in several Open House 6-7pm P P ways. A series of informal meetings will be held in the neighborhoods to MeetingsDiscussion 7-9pm Kennydale Elementary allow the City Council to listen to you directly. Times and places of . 1700 NE 28th Street . these meetings are listed here. You are also encouraged to submit letters Y3o:G SZ:4E.d:.o;✓,':f;•. N X/.•;%::Gvx:Z2.: "-,•,.,:: • • o ��•• or written comments ----, . �—•`` o .�f at any time. Before r:, •�� the CityCouncil l raaardale� EAST REN'tON • 4 adopts the Interim • N"sb°°'�ood ® Tuesday, October 20 IIII VB 71►!• ®! t a Land Use Element, r"��.. Open House 6-7pm lu i l+ ;, Now; — they will also hold a Discussion 7-9pm • 1.1"t 'I l': �;' �Ow t i 0.. McKnight Middle School I .� ii iltPi?Ow* public hearing to allow f > �a g '1 1))1,11‘) � � `��n` �,!q4' ►��1`, g, citizens to submit Neighborhood . I kogi.',. '<iS:::;;isSi.::;.r.:%i f::'3:::;-..r,G:doWdodAGA d4 I ,�� 1II _o • additional commentsilk 1\,T,�+ '�Iyi �u�� I Neiyhboc600dICI �.IL l��¢,'i`:ill�u'o C a and concerns to them. — Iedit; Ce , -� SOUTHEAST U ®Thursday, October 22 0 1 Southeast Renton vaua Neighborhood Open House 6-7pm • h' Discussion 7-9pm 5 For information on the Comprehensive Plan or schedule, rood - --�^'� Nelsen Middle School 3 • Avenue the Long Range Planning Division, third floor, - ! % .%<..:..:....N.%:::2403 Jones AvenN ue So. Renton City Hall,phone 235-2552. Maps showing Areawide ` -- Zoning designations will be available one week prior to each neighborhood meeting. • VALLEY l ®-Tuesday, October 27 ME I I; Open House 4-5pm r. Discussion 5-7pm Attend your Neighborhood Meeting with the City University t 1107 SW Grady Way i Council or pick up a comment sheet in the .3 f+r✓NN Si%/Y/>%t//.• :i.ii%//; :;:;,: .. ��, Planning Division (3rd floor, Renton. City Hall) CENTRAL/WEST HILL ® Thursday,October 29 a ter October 13th. : Due datefor comments on r f • MI I Open House 6-7pm 1 • Discussion 7-9pm 'October 31 st, 4 1992. Renton High School 1 Areawide Zoning: ::•: :,••,. ..,:-:::... :.-oe•;..,,,...:...,.:.:..-1 •...,.... •:.;�.:.../ O.......,+,r•:.nr....•.-:::.wr.•::.. .;;..,......: ,:.>y/,..,:.m .r,..,.t„<.:<:':Ss:..f . <:f 400 South 2n Street ' 4vAWWWFWV.GAO:UMSPiOfT�:t03.600rAG.GJG1�+.fM.04r0�'N.•SS4C•%FwkG/// �"fdG✓.�ikw.�'ixGhG.C4w�:G�w>{�in3.rYracccw.wxa!fa+7.4.cwGl,95L:Aid//i+:+-rcw.�.c.w.csl.�/.Gasvvc�„iuGc•.wM.,�.+G.�d.ocw�{13o ./.w-.,.�,g � :;,.+'ot5wSiRh�r�:;.;:xa .. ... • • • .: • •' '7,41,11•Zill:',=,,:_?; 36.70.495 e;Z; ,., j; planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall provide to the county (3) Transportation. .Encourage efficient m`• !:,_. :::.:... !, assessor a copy of the county's comprehensive plan and transportation systems that are based on regional' ' _' development regulations in effect on July 1st of that year and coordinated with county, and city comprehensivq , ,,.__ ; • and shall thereafter provide any amendments to the plan and (4) Housing. Encourage the availability of aff i •- _:;_:=` i regulations that were adopted before July 31st of each housing to all economic segments of the population ot. ''-'Rg; following year. [1996 c 254 § 5.] state,promote a variety of residential densities and houi => ! types, and encouragepreservation of existinghousingst I I g w, RCW 36.70.547 General aviation airports—Siting (5) Economic development. Encourage economic: !ITof incompatible uses. Every county, city, and town in development throughout the. state that is consistent with hl which there is located a general aviation airport that is adopted comprehensive plans,promote economic opportunity-= i; operated for the benefit of the general public, whether for all citizens of this state,especially for unemployed and '. publicly owned or privately owned public use, shall, through for disadvantaged persons, and encourage growth in areas ; its comprehensive plan and development regulations, experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to such capacities of the state's natural resources,public services, '` generalairport. plansregulationsmay and public facilities. aviation Such and I, (6)Property rights. Private roe shall not be taken. ,;; only be adopted or amended after formal consultation with: P m' g property rh' (I Airport owners and managers, private'airport operators, for public use without just compensation having been made. ... III' general aviation pilots,ports, and the aviation division of the The property rights of landowners shall be protected from !" arbitraryand discriminatoryactions. !III department of transportation. All proposed and adopted I .plans and regulations shall be filed with the aviation division (7) Permits. Applications for both state.;and local I!i'I. government permits should beprocessed in a timelyand fair ��i� of the department of transportation.within areasonable time . �'ii after release for public consideration and comment. Each manner to ensure predictability. • . ilk county, city, and town may obtain technical assistance from (8) Natural resource industries. Maintain and enhance I!;i; the aviation division of the department of transportation to • natural resource-based industries, including productive II!; develop plans and regulations consistent with this section. timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the Any additions Or amendments to comprehensive plans conservation of productive forest lands and productive ('f or development regulations required by this section may be discourageP !!,, agricultural lands, and incompatible uses. !'; adopted during the normal course of land-use proceedings: (9)Open space and recreation. Encourage the retention This-section applies to every county, city, and town, of open space and development of recreational opportunities, whether operating under chapter 35.63, 35A.63, 36.70, [or] conserve fish and wildlife'habitat,increase access to natural 3 36.70A RCW, or under a charter. [1996 c 239 § 2.] . resource lands and.water, and develop parks. . (10)Environment. Protect the environment and enhance RCW 36.70A.010 Legislative findings. The legisla- the.state's high quality of life, including air and.water • tare finds that uncoordinated and unplanned growth, together quality, and the availability of water. • I (11) Citizen participation and coordination. Encourage i with a lack of common goals expressing the public's interest in the conservation and the wise use of our lands, pose a the involvement of citizens in the planning process andensure coordination between,communities and jurisdictions I - threat to the environment, sustainable economic develop- to reconcile conflicts. ment, and the health,safety, and high quality of life enjoyed • (12) Public facilities and services. Ensure that those by residents of this state. It is in the public interest that •ublic facilities and services necessaryto support develop- -1 citizens, communities, local governments, and the private• ment shall be adequate to serve the delopment at the time • sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in compre- the development is available for occupancy and use without hensive land use planning. Further,the legislature finds that decreasing current'service levels below locally established it is in the public interest that economic development programs be shared with communities experiencing insuffi- minimum standards. • - cient economic growth. [1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 1.] (13) Historic preservation. Identify and encourage the preservation of lands,sites, and structures,that have histori- ,o •RCW 36.70A.020 Planning goals. The following cal or archaeological significance. [1990,1st ex.s.c 17 § 2.] goals are adopted to guide the development and adoption of • RCW 36.70A.030.• Definitions. Unless the context comprehensive plans'and development regulations of those clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section • counties and cities that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040. The following goals-are not listed in, apply throughout this chapter. order of priority and shall be used exclusively for the (1) "Adopt a comprehensive land use plan" means to purpose of guiding the development of comprehensive plans enact a new comprehensive land use.plan or to update an and development regulations: existing comprehensive land use:plan. • • (1) Urban growth. Encourage development in urban (2) "Agricultural land"means land primarily devoted to areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or. the commercial production of horticultural, viticultural, floricultural, dairy, apiary, vegetable, or animal products or can be provided in an efficient manner. (2)Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of berries, grain, hay, straw, turf, seed,•Christmas trees not • of undeveloped land into sprawling,.low-density develop- subject to the excise tax imposed by RCW 84.33.100 ment. through 84:33.140, finfish in upland hatcheries,or livestock, • [page 4] • (1 ) _ 36.70A.131 u RC 36.70A.040 and 36.70A.060. In its review, the county or trails, and 0 connection Identi of lion crofitical areas corridor under de defined i n section city shall take into consideration: • (1)New information made available since the adoption by a county or city shall not restrict the use or management or last review of its designations or development regulations, of lands within the corridor for agricultural or forest purpos- including data available from the department of natural es. Restrictions on the use or management of such lands for resources relating to mineral resource deposits; and agricultural or forest purposes imposed after identification (2)New or modified model development regulations for solely to maintain or enhance the value of such lands as a mineral resource lands prepared by the department of natural corridor may occur only if the county or city acquires resources,the department of community,trade, and econom- sufficient interest to prevent development of the lands or to is development, or the Washington state association of control the resource development of the lands. The require- counties. [1998 c 286 § 7.] ment for acquisition of sufficient interest does not include those corridors regulated by the interstate commerce com- RCW 36.70A.140 Comprehensive plans—Ensure mission, under provisions of 16 U.S.C. Sec. 1247(d), 16 public participation. Each county and city that is required U.S.C. Sec. 1248, or 43 U.S.C. Sec. 912. Nothing in this or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall establish section shall be interpreted to alter the authority of the state, and broadly disseminate to the public a public participation or a county or city, to regulate land use activities. The city or county may acquire by donation or purchase program identifying procedures providing for early and continuous public participation in.the development and the fee simple or lesser interests in these open space corri- dots using funds authorized by RCW 84.34.230 or other amendment of comprehensive land use plans and develop- sources. [1992 c 227 § 1; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 16.] ment regulations implementing such plans. The procedures shall provide for broad dissemination of proposals and alternatives, opportunity for written comments, public RCW 36.70A.165 Property designated as greenbelt meetings after effective notice, provision for open discussion, or open space—Not subject to adverse possession. The communication programs, information services, and consider- . legislature recognizes that the preservation of urban ation of and response to public comments. In enacting greenbelts is an integral part of comprehensive growth legislation in response to the board's decision pursuant to management in Washington. The legislature further recog- RCW 36.70A.300 declaring part or all of a comprehensive nizes that certain greenbelts are subject to adverse possession plan or development regulation invalid, the county or city action which, if carried out, threaten the comprehensive shall.provide for public participation that is appropriate and nature of this chapter. Therefore, a party shall not acquire effective under the circumstances presented by.the board's by adverse possession property that is designated as a plat , order. Errors in exact compliance with the established greenbelt or open space area or that is dedicated as open program and procedures shall not render the comprehensive space to a public agency or to a bona fide homeowner's land use plan or development regulations invalid if the spirit association. [1997 c 429 § 41.] of the program and procedures is observed. [1995 c 347 § Severability-1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201. 107; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 14.] . Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not . RCW 36.70A.170 Natural resource lands and law-1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470. critical areas—Designations. (1) On or before September 1, 1991, each county, and each city, shall designate where RCW 36.70A.150 Identification of lands useful for appropriate: public purposes. Each county and city that is required or (a)Agricultural lands that are not already characterized chooses to prepare a comprehensive land use plan under by urban growth and that have long-term significance for the RCW 36.70A.040 shall identify lands useful for public commercial production of food or other agricultural products; purposes such as utility corridors, transportation corridors, (b) Forest lands that are not already characterized by landfills, sewage treatment facilities, storm water manage- urban growth and that have long-term significance for the ment facilities, recreation, schools, and other public uses. • commercial production of timber; The county shall work with the state and the cities within its (c)Mineral resource lands that are not already character- borders to identify areas of shared need for public facilities. ized by urban growth and that have long-term significance The jurisdictions within the county shall prepare a prioritized for the extraction of minerals; and list of lands necessary for the identified public uses including (d) Critical areas. an estimated date by which the acquisition will be needed. (2)In making the designations required by this section, The respective capital acquisition budgets for each counties and cities shall consider the guidelines established jurisdiction shall reflect the jointly agreed upon priorities and pursuant to RCW 36.70A.050. [1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 17.] time schedule. [1991 c 322 § 23; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 15.].. Findings—Intent-1991 c 322: See notes following RCW 86.12200.. RCW 36.70A.172 Critical areas—Designation and protection—Best available science to be used. (1) In RCW 36.70A.160 Identification of open space designating and protecting critical areas under this chapter, corridors—Purchase authorized. Each county and city counties and cities shall include the best available science in . that is required or chooses to prepare a comprehensive land developing policies and development regulations to protect use plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall identify open space the functions and values of critical areas. In addition, corridors within and between urban growth areas. They counties and cities shall give special consideration to shall include lands useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, [page 13] (1999) ' _•‘'.1,Vi,„',ic•.,,:'t. ii.';, ,74''',,,,,,iO4 ,1,,ii,,;-::,.'%::.',z':f,rirltrllIlrjITlto??.k-* ,-?',": ,•t: - ." ...-..,!inftit : • . k......i.wv. .„.:...,,...,4,,;,.,_.,,i.e.,,....„1./r....84„.........;! k- ..`01; werk,,,,le...1.,,,N.•::.w-,':f.-: • , , ,.. „•; ',...tz,v,:,i,,-",•-•-•:,-4.;,-.1.-,...,,,..;,,27_tt...„‘, , . . ` = '' mar -- � g R-178-78 Page Twenty �Or e +, , r. s x3 V`i If!, c. Inclusion and st sequent exclusion of the extension of Grant `Avenue S from the , " . Six Year Street ?rcgram. +y' ;`s� f `' ` ¢ x ' •a wiF °�Jb> , - xis rf' tr .Y * . ' r d. Opening and clos ing of Beacon Way S. to vehicular traffic �'II -`+ �i �_ e. Increased community awareness of and involvement in land use'-d�e" cisions # , > ' Taken together thes� changes appear to be sufficiently significant to apply to `' t. ;, Section 4-3014. (C) . J s,,... Most significant wa ; the reduction of access to a single intersection of Mill Avenue i S. and S. 3rd Stree _. All of the traffic from Renton Hill moves' through this ;',4` v 's . intersection, except for emergency public safety vehicles which'can use the Seattle Cedar River Pipelir (Beacon Way S.) when the intersection is blocked. Several Ii � '`# times a day trains `>lock the intersection for several minutes at a time,' ` thereby ?,� . ev .. .. lon :',:, ti; stopping all traffi - to and from Renton Hill. In effect, the end resultg ' • • rip.:,.., �i,and `denselypopulated culde-sac which exceeds the limit, o 'Sectio 9- 108 ;K ,;r i,.' , (Subdivision Ordinance) • ,. ., a „ �>. , zrI , iEa Alternative access to the south was explored to help relieveithe .access problem ��.44 .//�� '"3, o. I, . Opening Beacon Way to vehicular traffic produced a heavy through-traffic burden'Af } • . on Renton Hill without alleviating the intersection problem'at S ,..3rd Street=and rk $ . ., Mill Avenue S. Therefore, this access was closed except to emergency public '* '' safet •vehicles. Iinall y y, an extension of Grant Avenue S. was proposed, but was } , , eliminated recently from the Six-Year Street Program. The access problems created . ' • by FAI-405 remain unsolved. ` 0, _rw, '. , Of some help was t..e first LID for improvement of Cedar Avenue S '. While this I improvement helped traffic movement somewhat, the traffic capacity and maneuverability ' of the street is r stricted and impaired by the narrow pavement .i �+^ Y r+ ,-� gyp`. � ,� . • The interest and �- }volvement of the neighborhood in land u •decisions has apparently 41):. increased substantially since the public,hearings concerning rezoning the subject , :> ,• properties in 1963. As a result of neighborhood pressure: the,PlanningCommission ,i > ...�.. and City Council re-evaluated the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. -, The conclusions'" t "5 `` :,t of the City Council were to change the map from Medium Density;Multi-family to , , ' A., .Single Family Residential. , r „i►s t.r>�- 'a., , ' ., Other changes hav, occurred but were not comparatively significant. Exhibit #31 showed that build_ng permit activity has remained relatively steady,and :stable since 1963, not displaying the alleged substantial change in renovation or new ` r i '.`" ►'� homes in the neighborhood. However, testimony clearly indicated'.that the ':••. , ' • __.. ..v..; -$, ,;„oc nra- exhib;iL a'�transitional: '1; :'s '. ,,'*,,': 4-6-060F b. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS 3. Length of Improvements: Such im- FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCESS provements shall extend the full distance of STREETS: such property to be improved upon and sought to be occupied as a building site or RIGHT- parking area for the aforesaid building of plat- — OF-WAY PAVE- SIDE- ting purposes and which may adjoin property WIDTH MENT WALKS OTHER dedicated as a public street. 50' 32'paved 6'sidewalk Combined 4. Special Design Standards for Arterial Parking adjacent to public Streets:Arterial street rights-of-way shall be both sides curb both detention sixty feet(60')to one hundred fifty feet(150') sides• Street in width as may be required by the Adminis- lighting trator or his/her designee. The design stan- dards for arterial streets will be established c. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS on a case-by-case basis by the Administrator FOR COLLECTOR STREETS: or his/her designee in accordance with the major arterials and streets plan. RIGHT 5. Grades: Grades on arterial streets shall OF-WAY PAVE- SIDE- not exceed ten percent(10%), and the grade WIDTH MENT WALKS OTHER on any public street shall not exceed fifteen 60' 36'paved 5' Combined percent (15%), except for within approved ng sidewalks public hillside subdivisions. Parkboth slides and 5' detention planting Street both sides lighting6. Pavement Thickness: New pavement strip on shall be a minimum of four inches (4") of as- phalt over six inches (6") of crushed rock. Pavement thickness for new arterial or collec- ( d. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS tor streets or widening of arterials or collector FOR COMMERCIAL ACCESS streets must be approved by the Department. STREETS: Pavement thickness design shall be based on standard engineering procedures. For the RIGHT- purposes of asphalt pavement design, the OF-WAY PAVE- SIDE- procedures described by the "Asphalt Insti- WIDTH MENT WALKS OTHER tute's Thickness Design Manual" (latest edi- tion) will be accepted by the Department. 60' 40'paved 5' Combined sidewalks public a. Alternate Provisions for Material on the detention Construction and Design:Alternate de- prapyrty Street sign procedures or materials may be line lighting used if approved by the Department through the process listed in RMC • e. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS • 4-9-250E. FOR INDUSTRIAL ACCESS STREETS: 7, Sidewalk Width Minimum and Mea- surement: New sidewalks must provide a RIGHT- PAVE- minimum of four feet (4') of horizontal clear- OF-WAY MENT SIDE- ance from all vertical obstructions. Sidewalk WIDTH WIDTH WALKS OTHER widths listed in the tables include curb width 66' 44'paved 5' Combined for those sidewalks constructed adjacent to sidewalks public the curb. and 5' detention planting 8. Curves: Street strip on lighting both sides a. Horizontal Curves: Where a deflec- tion angle of more than ten degrees(10°) 6 - 17 ;. • 13;,••••,,,./ /.\-.1\ ',........' -,...'-...1_..1..::',)1,*.' ,.... -I :- • i •"4 . . • * • ill I: 9 . • -1 ---I•'1* 7-'----- --— • el,qt /1 "I --170 --... j •1:1•:,...... •:::11.1i,.-. . ..,./ • ' ' .,.•or:•, ' • .....— 77. ,„f 7 _3 k L.- .0--e" IN i /2711/.1 -- L r ! ---1 , 37. I 38 ir - -1-- -- ,. , I 1 -1 • •--1-•-1 I A- — \ . , .--; • I "1-!':- • , •..,-,, •• i ,' --- -- .i• ,-..f. i''. ; •• 26 \• ', • .• 1-, ---, 29 \ 135 N-7.,.... i :'.7 - •i ,.. .. • -•;• • - i 7:17'•' II- 137. 25 , _ . Itb -..., I • --1..,. j-•: 7:. : • • - ••-- 7 .11.! : : • .77 28 , , .. •,. 7 . 7 •\ \ • : 169 • • 4-96. 1 .. 13- • • ' . 7 'i • i i - ' ---_____.-- • . . . . . . • •-, . ,. , • . • . • 7: 7.1.. I,. 161 . . • N., 434- . . • , . • .. . . 7,.. ; . , . - • .. , ...-77. • i ! • • • - • ‘ ...-i' 133 • . 1:•31.• ,i 0--'• : •. I. ! . • . , . ..:...:_ ‘. , - ' • : • - 95 97 _. . . . „ ! . 33 . • 36 •••7 . ..7 • 1 • . • 7 • ipe 0 .. • . '';'.`! • •, • 130 c.) • 32 ,,,,fm • ..-) • t7 , ns 7 •f. • / r•-•35• c7 . .• . 128 129 : f • ?C.; :-,. : • ." li3C0 ; t. : • ., ...i.„: .,.._ ; i 4'-• • - •I. : / : : : I ' •i 1 ! I..1 / . %a' : ...• j ' , ; •... . 94 . lili •;•, . , 7,* • • . -•-•• ••••-•_ . • ' ) i 193.• .... .. _ 172 •!_.---.-.-- ••7 7. ';-... ... ..•.• .•..."_---i77---.k2?.......9'.1.f"t...%. .;1 e:.'*'.4 "•9'9.H.1 1.-8 . 7I IMt 111:2 5' . .,..-. ?!, 1 ir" k 34 ' : • \4 I 9 , 11 114 • •. -•.. '.- • ..: ',..77.i. '71. ...._ .'.-.... A • 7. -71E . . 42 . ! -• i I •,• • ---.-,.....7 86 . --..• • 90 • il k. 1-. . . "1--43 - • 7.. .. ‘.. . ......: , h.l....!..... • . in 112 uxer,-,4 t . * 1 87. - - ;-,-- ,), • _ , . • • . 110 77 : 108 '7.: `.' ----......... - / 85 • fig - •' • ' 100 . • . • 7 • ::• 7.In_ ...-: '•- 10 _..._;.;• --. 7 )-77 7 . : • 106 • ! 4: : !' : r• 45 ,..:.. ' • .48 173 174 • 7 7 7 77 : : : 77•., *•-•,.. 1:7: •....... — •.105. • .4..... 44 •'-'7....\"7--i 1 -, 1 I !••• ; ; .; ' 1 ...77- • ; ; 0 • 7 7 , 7,, i , ': ' i I 1 • . i .• 176 . ID 101 . • i . I • I 175 • 7--.,..:;..----" 103 •7 : ;•• s 7 . •••••, '1 '•-• 159 - - •/ 84 • i 83 .. 0/70102 49 • . ( • \ -.• i 7 • '' . -------- ----- . !--- 10 •7•• • N -7----'''''' •--1 •.. . ,„,...--.---- ' .•- ..1177 .-- •- -- , •..k ....--.Z..•:::•.-, N—IMO•Mlee"M'Nl' . 82 ',-7 - ; 7; . . ._. -- ,- . . . . . • . • - • . • .--,rs'i/- A : : i • : ... . i . : • •. - , . . 50 -- .... . • - • - .7... -, I „ . . ., . . . . . .. 58, '', • • 777,..„ 178 I 51 7; f • . . . ; . • .81: , 7 • • • 57 ( '.. .\ 53 7 7 :. 61 • ..7„. • \ • • . . .71 -• - • .. . . . • •-. -., ., • • • ••,--. , .. .. .1" 78 • .f 59 . 77-7 • • . 144 182 . 195 .331 9*,7 .. , . . . •.. . . . ... - - • •--7 ' •• ...>-: •• ••" : li . • . . . . .. ; s r .._... ...—... ...'.--) • .S. • r\.1 54 7 80 • . . • 7.- , t ...777-77-' , . • • 60; • •\ 62 7 7 7 7 . 55 . . • .... . .- 67 66 it : !•• ' • 63 • /If. • Cd4- •) . • 18:i 77 : AI i , • . E17 • le- 75 7 . , 7 19 .. .: . . 1 I • • , . I 65„ , 1 r:71 . • • ' ""'"' - •• IT ,,—1 •L ' 1 ..,•:,:-..151 a•• Microsoft Excel - Ilnewlu_xls 11. __51/7111V)1- ::.:**17n1:1--niligig_9 _1____11_e_11" a2/ :_,..,. _..-2__ d14a'T.gl7::rrE't'jii'IVI'v''y''PzSr;'3,eTt'r:-'' O;ai1T;;l -Data ,wrdoo Leip :.:: ..' ..' --'.t-799/4. —: -j,''- ol. I 1 ' A ' -':•''' _He .11.:!,),:::..,,,-.--c,,,,,... i,,;,,,,,,,.::14-:_. •,,,, -;= ,,.t,:.....:,,::::,..,..:..,. ., .... .. .. ..- . . .-.. . .-t".„ .i...... ......L. i .. ...,..,,.;.,...,.,._ . .... , , ..;;;:.'s,.•.-. . --;b: 1:::11r4Iri-a-T-47.17 - .''''----.-..,•::74:::7 f7:‘1.•.;,... ..''':' ..s".• •• -,-==_•,,:.,--..=,7- •;:-='=:':,r-fq, .• qoir,•.• 0 1.F:-, 0.. + 0- :',:•7r" =F-' L.L.: '' ''. ' :' '• '=•••''',^ '.''',,,,.;••ri.', ••'‘••• ' '•''''H''''';'';'''" ''''':'''r•'''',,`'..-“, D 193 Lt.11;?.. ';'-;-'',: i =SUM(D108:D128)+SUM(D139:D142) r•-,;',:ce--;.;•,•l:-,,- -ic:-Dj'•:;=-;',12, -.;-•.;. •-cE'-;,,•;',',•. ;;:;'•.(s.-'.'cF-----Ji; ':.;-!--_,CGis-::;•;.-,:-,,.:,,iCR.:-:. C1'.;;•.•'•..--_-.,C'J,.:.•••••1;'.,:-:.;',CK,,,,;•..;-•;-- -;CL • •-•,'J,•.'CM :',.c'1';:,:,,'"•i:ri-'-•,'CN;, CO -,.';'.;,7,CP.--$.-.';;i'..;','-'`- ". ;;;-••Y,f,;-• .: ••••••,.;:,;.;,;•.,.;• r.: ;-.•'7,;%•-..:-. ,.....-,,-,.-,- ,:.:',...,',:.. --:r;i:-,,,• --,-,•-..... : -• .•-- • .- ... .•. . . __. „.. • . ,•:',...i:-F,g cili. i CITY 'CITY CITY CITY 'CITY CITY .CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY 'CITY fi.F.;;Z,•.:I. TAZ I SFUnits I MFUnits• TotUnits SF ,MF HH.HH HH. GQ. TOT R E ; M i 111 1 -•,::: .:'•f-'=;5.',23," NEV ; NEV NEV NEV ! NEW I NEV SIZE I POP ; POP POP NEV NEV : NEW__i_;M: • . _,. I 1 . . .. . . . -- - -" - - — . . . . . „ , -- ( 22 23 3 27 22. 3 25 2 59 59 0 0 0 '-fl'iZS7 23 8! 0 8. 8: 01 8 2 19' 19: 0:: 0 i , 0! 0 :•,:v4:: - --Z. I.:•,,:iU: 24 0 i 0! 0' 0: Oi 0• 2 0' 0 0! 0,1- :i;::::: i.-- :L5,?, (..i 1.7._ r, NM '.! . 25 . . 5' c : 74: 79 5 70 75 2 174 174' 0 0 . :...,•%':.. ,,25 _ 0 i ; 38 i 38, 0; 36; 36 2; 69. . 69- 0 O. •- - 0 i •••:',,J.JR 27 ;0 i 631 63 0 i 60; .. . . .., 60 2 115. . ._.„...... 481 163 221' .01 117 28 0 30! 30 0 28 28 2 54 54. 105 0 56 t 29 13 i 0 i 13 12: 0; 12 2', 25: • 25 0. 6.! . - 30 1 5, 0 i 5 4: 0: 4 2' 9 — 9 0 0, Of lig 31 0 i b 0 i 0, 0_.. .0:_ 0 2, 0 . 0, 0. 0 -1"--ic'•:•:,.).; ----.-- 0: 165;- 01 kw:e i-,..:-;•,i_tii7-—1132 _11_-_-_---__—. 0],l_l__ _____ 0, 0; 0 0 2 i 0. 0• ... ... -ol 6i 0 o! 0: 0. 0 . .. 0: 0 ......... .... . .. 6, ---• •---•---•------;-•me l U 123.;. 34 0 I. --; - ; .,.. 123 18' 5 1126 116 2 222: ... 222 0! 0'. 0 W ........_,...... -----.---m?,..,: .4til.X 35 19 1 551 7370 2 1441 144- . 128' 0 68! ,i.:`,:w -3Ji 153'‘'. 325; i. 478 1451 309 : 454* 2: 1072, -i-,- , 1072 • 652; 0 4o! 37 3 3! 0 I 3 0 3 2', 7 . 7. 21: 01 1 i 011 c...;•:4141 38 69*: 0; 69: 66i 0, 66 2: 155 155 31! 14 21 iggi , : ' i.„._........._. _.3__i„.11 39 151 0! 15 ,, __.14' ... .0' , 14 . .... 2„......... ... 34 34, 51' 0_ -----46- 43 I 1 44, 411 42 2: 98 98, 5 0 01 . - -.1-177. r Id 7: 41 74 I 01 74; 71i - 0! 71, 2- 152: 152: 0; 0 0 421 2861 13! 298 271! 12; 283: 2 9-609' • 60 ... ..., 177, 0 11 I 2.4 4!L. 31 I,- 3 I 34', 30 311 32 2i 69 69 290 0! 010! of ie_L_Ht, . M:- .'„ Wi',7 44 6T- 0 2i, 0 o;. 0, cy o 1 0 .... . ..... . 45 0 ...;._ 0, 0. 0, 1 0 2; ,.- ----- 0. ... _.... .0,.... . _._.O.• _. _ . .._...0..ii________04_IV bZ:5.f 46 2 I 19 21' 2. ...: 20: e: 38 , 38, 0qt.__ :., '‘'.•;:b7J7,: 47 29 L . 01 29: 28' 0• 28: 2 53. 53- 0' 01, 01. ,E1 '.. 5.141 48 57 155 . 211! 54! 147 201: 21 378, • ; 378. _ . 01 0 i ' ,:i... PI 1 _ .........— ..,.,.., 14;",i:.47,.'*7::*I"4-8.1466Re,..'517i66(9.,;:t:;•:$1,i-e"et.61 f‘,.5heeE7i.''ci:51lie'et2::;: :.::, 116'ett(...- . .. , 1 1 1 ,••`•,-;"-- -'':-.,,'-ii.';,-;.','-'•-,-;;.-;•-; '-';•: -•i i ..'. ,!- .*..„ *4;.:1-,Norksa=mczazzig;;;;;;;Lti, . IINEW-- ,.';:i-:!'-z.::=-4-f'-'.;!':-;:-:A.;:.:1:,;::''. '2-..;...' . ; .. i ' ' .,.. ,,,,_,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,_____,,,,,,,77,7,7.,,f„;,:,,7,,;7,77,,,r,,,T2,777-7,77.7.„.„.774-,,,::T,-,.' .,...,,, ,,,--,.;-,.,r,,,.... .,.. 3:.:,,.. . ,...,:.,,,,,,...,..„0..,,,„ A:•,-;;;,::,,,. .•...;•,••. , ,•••'• IIVI. ••,,,„./'--1.• ' • . •,',:.•''''••' ';'•••'; •','.'-'';'•''1':.::''• :``.V.::•-j'''.'':',.`":,?..!•'•';'''Pi•g•-• '•..;'2';',':','': •'•;,..:•';;:::'". .1 1riii:-,-,4:?;,, ,q4;i,,,,,t,,,toi,-6t'dhoett,,i. q.'siiN,,,:'El U:';fw!: :A.t.r..cir, I.,-.;.,,,...:. .t-,,,..a.:--,,,,..,=.7,..r.,.-_-..,L 1-_—_t.•, kw im) .•,., ; '.: .. . -•.:...•,,,,,, ,..?..;:‘,..,;;,..,,,•,.,..,, , ,,......1.,,;:-,,,%-:r.:-,,I.;;.;F,:'x,.>...,:'..:',.,:-,.2c .:. ",i5;;;!??7,:',:i:?•',7;VR:5,2:::;.:,... ....:?',:-..•.:-.;:'‘..: .,...,•;,..'.1 ;s:.a•-,, ,'';';:;.,.,;.,...'....•'..?:. •..:/v,.: ..- • -;:.1;./17.7.77.T'l.,,>,..',. -.. .:,. . .''..,,:,!-,:.,..„,.,,-,.•17.7.7 Frd,,,Nriiry1:.F77;iF?TF;1': 1,..„lizo,acir.. .,,,w,...;,61,,wc,,,,n ,,.: ), ,..,,, ,:,,•, , ,..,; _:i,:. .,. •i-_,. .;'.21,. . . . . :',..:: :.--.'.,,,..:--. .:-.','.:-..;-- 61..,..-- ;:,:''i,L. -,: -- ; :' • .-' •-:A:-;- '--, ''---•-,- -'.,..z.. .7....-.---..,- ',-''.‘ - . ,14,...,i,... . ..-:,- 1 ...i;:":"::,'... ..,..'...:".......,'"\``•'. ''', %? a,: ,4-...!!;,. ...:.. .,,,-,,,; ,..: ,::-,..•.,k,2.s.,:.,:.t...7::,,.: . .. . . . .. f 01:piplijill.:01railsv.::v j.,:,C.;1 =Eq Novell.delive!,edApp lc... By Micro . ... IX Microsoft'Excel - II__''.' (.kJ N: 'M ka.i.'.48'.52-1'):Aty1.-'1'77-- 41;1' 65' ''''' :4 :'' t ; soft Word.-,D act/-' ....... . ....- „..,......„....,.—_,..........„....,.......„ . . Document3\ . . Date of Construction* or Date of Major Remodel Since 1978 Issue Date of New Construction* Issue Date of Major Remodel Permit Permit Mill Avenue South 426 (Home remodeled to Apts) 6-14-88 430 (Multi-Unit Apts) 4-27-79 512 (Multi-Unit Apts) 6-14-94 (on-going) 516 (Multi-Unit Apts) 6-14-94 (on-going) 518 (Home remodeled to Apts) 12-30-94 (considered duplex) 520 (Home remodeled to Apts) 6-10-96 (considered duplex) 530 (Multi-Unit Apts) 9-5-78 538 (Multi-Unit Apts) 10-29-79 Cedar Avenue South 326 (Multi-Unit Apts) 9-9-97 411 1-6-78 420 (Family Room Add) 1981 426 (Major Remodel) 11-29-95 436 4-12-90 444 6-5-80 500 (Major Remodel) date not listed 504 8-17-83 513 (Major Remodel) 7-1-93 / 6-11-99 518 10-3-94 532 (Major Remodel) 3-12-93 611.(Home remodeled to Apts) 3-17-83 617 6-5-85 621 3-19-87 623 10-31-96 629 (Multi-Unit Apts) 10-13-76 714 3-25-82 720 3-22-78 *New Single Family or Multi-Family Residence - 1 Date of New Construction* Date of Major Remodel Permit Permit South 3rd 1111 date not listed South 6th 1512 8-5-94 South 7th 1224 4-6-90 1321 10-5-79 South 7th Court 1706 9-7-93 1707 8-11-93 1712 6-22-94 1718 8-30-94 1719 4-7-94 1724 11-24-93 1729 11-28-94 1730 10-6-93 1800 8-5-94 1801 2-10-94 South 9th 1301 4-30-70 South 10th 1316 9-27-90 Beacon Way South 1255 11-16-99 1318 2-12-96 1502 7-24-98 *New Single Family or Multi-Family Residence Date of New Construction* Date of Major Remodel Permit Permit Grant Avenue South 1005 12-27-93 712 5-4-99 714 10-10-95 716 2-20-92 718 10-4-90 807 (Remodel) 1-15-91 High Avenue South 525 7-29-91 575 10-23-90 627 7-14-87 / 8-21-98 714 3-23-76 810 4-19-91 906 4-13-89 907 7-16-85 915 8-8-78 1006 6-28-85 Renton Avenue South 338 4-26-88 344 8-30-82 350 11-74-92 356 9-25-86 415 (Moved Onto Lot) 3-21-78 428 6-13-78 504 7-20-84 508 4-18-77 527 5-9-90 531 9-26-89 538 4-7-97 621 4-29-96 *New Single Family or Multi-Family Residence • Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element • Transportation • Policy T-2.1: Each street in the City, e. promotes pedestrian safety and should be assigned a functional classifi= mobility. cation based on factors including: Discussion: The City's arterial system will a. • traffic volumes; 0 • be reviewed in detail in.the Transportation b. type of service provided; . Element of the Comprehensive Plan and a c. land use; and new arterial plan will be prepared. As part d. preservation of existing neighbor- of this process, functional classifications hoods. will be assigned to city streets. Functional classifications should include definitions for Policy T-2.2: Street standards should be streets, such as principal, minor, and developed for each functional classification collector arterials, and local streets. These in the Transportation Element of the street standards would be based on factors Comprehensive Plan. These street such as roadway width, sidewalk width, standards should be coordinated with . design speed, and landscape features. policies in the Community Design (Chapter 9) and Open Space and Parks (Chapter 7) The arterial plan will be implemented as chapters. part of a multi year financing plan. Appro- priate portions of the multi year financing Policy T-2.3: A minimum service level plan will serve as,the basis for the six year should be developed for the street system street, road, or transit program for the which City. a. achieves consistency with service Service level criteria for the transportation standards of adjacent jurisdictions; system need to be developed to judge per- b. minimizes conflict with other city formance of the system. These service lev- policies (e.g. aquifer protection); els should be developed in conjunction with !/1( c. maximizes neighborhood preserva- the service levels for other city systems. tion; d. accounts for topographical features which limit intersection improve- ments; and M. Traffic Flow Objective T-3.0: Eliminate disruptions which reduce the safety and reasonable functioning of the local transportation system. ' I\ Policy T-3.1: Maximize traffic flow and Policy T-3.2: Provide a balance between accessibility on arterial roads while protecting neighborhoods from increased protecting local/neighborhood roads from traffic and reducing accessibility for the increased traffic volumes. city-wide road network. Page 10-7. . i • • PL.,;;tll:MI DEPARTMENT /� ` qr i'RELiMINJARY REPORT TO li: IG EXAMINER 1 :PUBLIC HEARING: CITY OF TINTON, FILE NUMBER R-178-78, RE[ut;E ;< .. - J UN E 13, 1976 •. PAGE FOUR ' .' Two short plats (two lots each) and one preliminary Planned Unit Development •. • , applications were received by the City from Renton Hill since 1976. In addition , t a large tentative plat (2.45 acres , 93 lots ) application was received on a parcel -" , - -. south of and contiguous to Renton Hill ; this subdivision does not propose to , , . have access via Renton Hill . • •`, .1 Effective July 1 , 1978 low and moderate home owners will be eligible for - grants up to $2,500 for rehabilitation of their detached single family • .• • . ' • dwellings through the City of Renton Housing Repair Program. Renton hill • • is designated as one of the City' s target neighborhoods. - • G. TRAFFIC:• Renton Hill is essentially a large cul -de-sac with one access , Till Avenue South. The Seattle Cedar River Pipeline right-of-way provides a secondary ' access for emergency. vehicles . This facilitiy was closed in 1973 at the . : . request of the residents of the Hill to eliminate the through traffic that • - came to and from the Cascade area to the south. The residents of Renton Hill considered the through traffic inappropriate and dangerous to the community. '` ( ) The streets are rather steep and serious questions can be raised concerning • traffic safety if too many cars use the streets. Between South 3rd and 7th Streets, Renton Avenue and Cedar ,venue average 9.2% and 7 - 7,, slope respectively. :. ., - • Renton Avenue has a short stretch that has a grade in excess of 15`r between the r r same streets. With the grid iron street pattern, a vehicle (and anything which the vehicle might hit) can be in serious trouble should a serious mechanical - . - ,� problem occur such as brake failure. • ....•- • On January. 22, 1978 traffic counts wc:-e conducted and found movement of 2,650 . • vehicles during a 24-hour period. This represents 1 ,350 vehicles entering and ' • leaving the Hill each day. • . • • . Burlington Northern Railroad i-ias a major east-west track arcross 1•�i l l Avenue South, the sole access to Renton 'Till . During the 16 hours per day that the ,, • Renton railroad station is manned, there is an average of 14 trains that pass through the city. This does not incil:vr the nuir-er-ous shore blockages due to •. . . switching activities. Llocka 01 it Avenue carl be critical should an mmPrnrnry 0r(lir nn Rr�ntnn lii i L,LLL • is .L r'dl ri_ c, r OSSe ii l l :venue. - : .. -- - •.-• -.. ... .. .. .. - dtu.¢s:s.:2_;.:sy.su:..^.t.L•.sxviar::ji.+'.'��YIL.-;rlxu4-r..wnx'�,—o•;S,••--c•..YtT-^-'_••.• , ' Glossary of Land Use Application Tom-'is 1 - Page 1 of 2 W !I :e( Y ,i f 1il1 ti5j! 1 f 711 S t' '' f i i, It .1� fi 1ti t t sir tin ri,: i ';•• � i 1 .. .. .. sir LAND USE APPLICATION TERMS Because language of land use actions often is complicated,we offer the following as definitions for words and phrases commonly used by the Development Planning Department: Environmental Impact Statement(EIS): A document which addresses proposed actions, alternatives, and impacts. State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA): A set of policies established by the state as a standard process for agencies to use in evaluating the possible adverse environmental impacts of a proposal. This process also allows review of possible project alternatives or mitigation measures which will reduce the environmental impact of a project. . Environmental Review(ECF):The purpose of Environmental Review is to evaluate the environmental impacts of a proposal and to identify methods to reduce the impacts. During this review process, environmental values are considered as well as technical and economic considerations. Declaration of Non-Significance(DNS):The written determination issued by the Environmental Review Committee(ERC) meaning that a proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact and will not require an EIS. Declaration of Significance(DS): The written determination issued by the ERC meaning that a proposal is likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact and will require an EIS. Variance:An exemption to the City's Land Use Code, issued to equalize rights and privileges of similar-sized lots in similar zones.Variances often are used in cases of unusual lot shapes, or the configurations of nearby buildings, allowing the same type of usage on same-sized lots. Conditional Use (CU)Permits: The purpose of a conditional use permit is to allow certain prescribed uses in districts from which they are normally prohibited when the proposed uses are deemed consistent with other existing and potential uses in the surrounding area. (Renton Municipal Code, Section 4-31-36). Site Plan Approval (SA): The purpose of Site Plan Approval is to assure that the site plan of proposed uses is compatible with both the physical characteristics of the site and with the existing and potential uses of the 'l� surrounding area. The Site Plan review assures that a development is consistent with City of Renton Plans, Policies and Regulations(Renton Municipal Code, Section 4-3i-33). Preliminary Plat(PP):The purpose of the Preliminary Plat application review is to establish the layout of the land division and to ensure that the proposed division is designed and developed in accordance with the City of Renton's adopted ordinances and standards. The proposal must be consistent with the protection of the public healthy, safety,welfare and aesthetics and, provide for adequate public services/infrastructure (Renton Municipal Code, Section 9-12-6). Lot Line Adjustment(LLA):The lot line adjustment process allows for the minor adjustment of a boundary line to transfer land between adjacent property owners provided this does not result in a new building lot or create a lot which is non-conforming to the requirements of the Subdivision or Zoning Ordinance. All land surveys shall comply with the 1973 Survey recording Act, Chapter 50, RCW 58.09. (Land Use Applications][Public Works] http://www.ci.renton.wa.us/pw/devserv/glossary.htm w"'.''`U6%21/2000 • • REVISED CODE OF WASHINGT--- Page 1 of 1 RCW 47 .48.010 Closure or restriction authorized -- Restriction for urban public transportation system use. Whenever the condition of any state highway, county road, or city street, either newly or previously constructed, altered, repaired, or improved, or any part thereof is such that for any reason its unrestricted use or continued use by vehicles or by any class of c.\ 'i vehicles will greatly damage that state highway, county road, or \Iv city street, or will be dangerous to traffic, or it is being constructed, altered, repaired, improved, or maintained in such a -I manner as to require that use of the state highway, county road, or city street, or any portion thereof be closed or restricted as to all vehicles or any class of vehicles for any period of time, the secretary, if it is a state highway, the county legislative authority, if it is a county road, or the governing body of any city or town, if it is a city street, is authorized to close the state highway, county road, or city street, as the case may be, to travel by all vehicles or by any class of vehicles, or may declare a lower maximum speed for any class of vehicles, for such a definite period as it shall determine. Nothing in the law of this state prevents the secretary, county legislative authority, or governing body of any city or town from classifying vehicles according to gross weight, axle weight, height, width, length, braking area, performance, vehicle combinations, or tire equipment for the purposes of this section, or from restricting the use of any portion of any state highway, county road, or city street, as the case may be, to its use by an urban public. transportation system. [1984 c 7 § 238; 1977 ex.s. c 216 § 1; 1967 c 108 § 9; 1961 c 13 § 47.48.010. Prior: 1937 c 53 § 65; RRS § 6400-65; prior: 1929 c 214 § 1; 1927 c 232 § 1; 1921 c 21 § 1; RRS § 6839. ] NOTES : Severability -- 1984 c 7 : See note following RCW 47 . 01 . 141 . Restrictions on public highways to prevent damage: RCW 46. 44 . 080.Urban public transportation system defined: RCW 47 . 04 . 082. http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/KUW%20%20.../KCW%'20%2O47%2O.%2O4x%2O.010.ht 03/28/2000 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element - 2 Community Design ments such as landscaping, designation and definition of gateways, and pedestrian - - - improvements. Renton's downtown must be able to compete with nearby commercial _ areas to avoid decline or deterioration. * Enhance the urban environment for pedestrians: Development throughout the . City is likely to be auto-oriented in the future, unless efforts are made to modify this current trend. Consequently, the City's commercial, office, and industrial areas will continue to be dominated by large surface parking lots that visually detract from the ---- -- environment. Adequate access and amenities for pedestrians must be provided in order to encourage walking and the use of public transit. * Build neighborhoods: In order to develop the sense of community and neighbor- - hood identity.residents would like to see, a concerted effort to "build neighborhoods" •rather than a collection of housing developments is needed. Similarly, efforts to pre- serve those community features which currently provide some of the qualities heldto be important in a community should be implemented before they are lost. _ Scenarios for the Future The policies in this section recommend the following types of solutions to the problems which have been outlined: * Strengthen the image of the City as a separate and distinctive entity within a metropolitan region: The Growth Management Act of 1990 calls for the designation of urban separator areas such as open space corridors within and between urban growth - - areas. One concept introduced in the community design policies that is consistent with this, is the idea of using community separators. These could include interconnecting natural features, parks, boulevards or utility. easements to provide physical and visual distinctions within Renton and between edges of urban growth areas. The built envi- ronment also provides concentrations of built forms, density of development or popula- tion, building height and open spaces which could be used as neighborhood or community separators. , * Revitalize the downtown through urban design: Urban design improvements can come about through a combination of public and private efforts. Ultimately, the corn- mercial center of Renton could be redeveloped as a multi-use center which acknowl- edges the pedestrian through architectural and urban design. Examples include using appropriate scale and detailing on building facades, or, designing the streetscape to be welcoming to the pedestrian. The edges of the downtown must be reinforced and cues should be given to the motorist and pedestrian to lead them into and through the area. A gateway or focal point is one way to communicate arrival into the area. Another op- portunity exists to improve access or establish a relationship between the Cedar River i Page 9-4 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element k Community Design i i', VI. Vegetation Objective CD-6.0: Preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment. II Policy CD-6.1: City-wide Policy CD-6.7: Maintenance plans comprehensive landscaping standards should be required for landscaped areas should be developed. in development projects. Policy CD-6.2: A standard for the Policy CD-6.8: Landscape plans consistent use and maintenance of should be coordinated with the drainage groundcover in the public rights-of-way plans for individual projects to should be developed. maximize percolation of surface water and minimize runoff from the site. Policy CD-6.3: A vegetation plan for the City including a tree list should be j -D scussion: Natural and ornamental developed. �7' vegetation provides wildlife habitat, screens unsightly views, reduces expo- Policy CD-6.4: The installation of sure to noise and wind, softens the ap- landscaping located within the public pearance of developed areas, provides right-of-way end adjacent to freeways shade, stabilizes soil and assists in the and major highways should be - percolation of surface water runoff, and promoted and encouraged. Plant frames view corridors. Appropriate materials that are adaptable to harsh selection of vegetation is critical in the conditions should be selected for use success of its survival and the within these areas. effectiveness of the intended effect. These policies support the development I Policy CD-6.5: Existing mature of landscape standards and ) vegetation and distinctive trees should maintenance plans, and coordination be protected and retained in between landscape plans and drainage developments. system plans. Landscaping is encouraged along travel corridors and Policy CD-6.6: Heritage trees or other the preservation of significant landscape ,k--unique individual trees should be re- features such as heritage trees is ex- tained. pressed. I I I I Page 9-10 • Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Residential serve as a safety buffer between pedestrians and moving vehicles and to reduce the need Policy R-15.5: Sidewalks should be pro- for on-site parking. vided along both sides of residential streets. Sidewalk width should be ample to safely Policy R-15.3: Intersections should be and comfortably accommodate pedestrian designed to minimize pedestrian crossing traffic. distance. Policy R-15.6: Trees should be planted Policy R-15.4: To visually improve the along residential streets. public streetscape and the safety of perimeter sidewalks and facilitate off street Policy. R-15.7: Parking lots associated parking, construction of alleys. providing with neighborhood commercial . uses, rear access to service entries and garages apartments or other uses should be located should be encouraged. Alleys should be re- behind or adjacent to structures. Parking quired where commercial or small lot lots should not be located between development occurs. structures and street rights-of-way. B. Subdivision of Land Objective R-16.0: Create a neighborhood development pattern consistent with the pattern of development in Renton's older neighborhoods and facilitate development of an interconnected road network. Policy R-16.1: Land should generally be Policy R-16.3: Residential site plans subdivided and blocks sized to minimize should preserve sensitive areas,. take ad- walking distances and provide convenient vantage of significant views, and routes between destination points. incorporate natural features. Policy R-16.2: Land should be arranged in blocks divided into lots with all lots re- quired to front on a public street or a park. C. Architecture Objective R-17.0: Ensure structures built in residential areas are compatible with the kexisting or desired character of established neighborhoods and the desired character of new neighborhoods. Policy R-17.1: Architectural standards ensure the visual compatibility of structures governing the design of structures in with the site and adjacent development. residential areas should be developed. to Page 3-39 T.: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element \kg Residential STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION Strategies The following summarizes major strategies and implementation measures proposed in the plan that would be used to shape Renton's neighborhoods in the future. Summary.of Strategies: 1. Preserve and improve existing neighborhoods: a remove multi-family zoning designations from existing single family neighbor- hoods; b. reduce the scale of new multi-family buildings built in existing multi-family neighborhoods; c. use design controls to ensure that new development fits in existing neighbor- hoods; and d. develop new programs to upgrade existing neighborhoods by adding street trees, sidewalks, or neighborhood parks where needed. 2. Encourage development of more livable new neighborhoods: a. reintroduce development patterns more typical of the pedestrian-oriented small towns of America's past and of the City's older neighborhoods where people can afford to live in neighborhoods that are predominantly single family in character, where streets are safe and pleasant to walk along, and where neigh- borhoods have a "center" formed by parks or small neighborhood business areas located within walking distance of homes. 3. Accommodate future development while preventing urban sprawl and preserv- ing open space: • a. create new high density housing opportunities in Renton's downtown and exist- ing commercial centers; b. allow suitable vacant land in the City to be developed into new neighborhoods at higher densities than have been allowed in conventional developments of the post-war era (change from 6 dwelling units per acre to 10 dwelling units per acre); Page 3-40 • • CITY OF RENTON FEB 21 2000 /7 .2 oa c.) RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE • kami COZz . 211. 1).1 %)te ,&1.4:4±4 ., _ i-1[764-cardJ2.eia / WL-Q- 6.41AD- 2A_tp a/eAd,w 1.Le-01 P PaAk. /2avir :te_ ale I I 4Lim ad hp A-ern6 )/lAaie zetibie,auL 1-uede;6y-ri.-e4e.d 44_ t_o-e-e4,11 61-7t-ei( -A . a lezLzi_ar fro-t • /Za- - 4 -w - -t?yek_4;eeti4,4c_ Get-ef caiL .,* z?124...W/ eicz VLth QkAe4j.,,tiLa,d124L) 0-11e r7L4 ?-z aLe-ILL 6zt-L&L, ,L4t_eAe__ 761 -(-44 -(4/-1;61'La CiAa- 424, r;22-etAL-o- ate-- _;tO -)92Zt-eikt. a _ ((.) - . ' 11111illilt' mf , 14fItilv lolill ,r, t1 ' , ,_ ,J41 ,1i'A ,iw ( 111 ;14,141ii4Tt1141 . 1d ! i6i:1 - Ait.l 'ij.I , 11'4, t A141,-p4, ,p1 tiV -0. 1 . , ,,likilA , Illiqi ' t ( i-illlit-14 ,i Plt4 iiilt-diail,'-!, Aitditt11-,14 ,W4* IrAii NlifieL1111W .1iibtti*T11111111111111i 142:40 4j1 _ 11111 .13 If.411,111. 4t1 Stif.f ' vet) °-frC 1 V r (rV . r-0-9 .4r14 ?-0/ 14'144 muwe' rpw 4 47:rrP4 rr? ?31. -7) 1/72 ary'VD1' r)19/ --7 '91r or Tir -v riTC /-° rrwrp_ow_pra-- ,r301/ )? -vi,vro cfria -ry- -rPer?•- -(1-0 -r-rz _ q-rrrP-R-v 4 riq14 " nia-•( 7-q0 9-rfP• Or9P7-77a7 6-7/17"ar P7c? -7`4V )0 )t-a7 rrn-rr 7nry- -/r• r›.r r7rri--0 7-7-y>LW r7774-- ?".gPrA7-K <2K r4-12-3/g •-6N •-pv-vyy-- 44-nt.4-. r-cr7-+ -17 4 -r -lt°-7c°ra-'45 P2/ 77X-9(L6 hA--° -rric .417 (pv . _ , . 114 -61 Tt -\ .A1 2s1 _ ll ) , 1 ,2141 ; 11 11 • -t0.4 o_ : 1 • • • . • • j • si.3.:nc K• '.' � Mrs.Nancy Liston -°~' tfr R.*• ;* 17703 114th PI.SE P rM �.��_� `" R Renton,WA fl8055-(Sb81 Ir FE3 ..........—--............___„. ,f 411111.0111%. • e"?.. ./t ..A., .,fee„,n j::e_yL_i . 7644't-0-7L- e-i-r, (-6-1-1- 14-'-e--'d--J • . /6 4--- - ?ii-g;&k. z/14,,L,ttit ifr'a,-rt . _ . . . 614±-6-n-, • • stEhc , ,c..1",s. IIIIRIIIIIIIImillliililiallltilI1i31ll:„I1l1l1ltilthilllil . • • IA- • - es-3 ' ems• 61 ,Y.I'TiA_ Eva i I January 18, 2000 JAN 1 2000 BUILDING DIVISION To: Elizabeth Higgins Senior Planner Development Services Division- Development/Planning RE: BENNETT HOMES PRELIMINARY REQUEST FOR A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY ACROSS FROM PHILLIP ARNOLD PARK The City required traffic study (on a new building project) was taken at South 7th Court. This location is absolutely unacceptable. The existing traffic problems on Renton Hill encompass every street on the hill. To accurately compile a traffic study the location of the counter should be Renton Avenue South at South 3rd,just before the Stop sign. This is the key entry and exit for the main traffic flow, and is now used by the more than 200 homes on and east of Renton Avenue South. The traffic study location by Bennett homes applies only to 11 homes. Renton Avenue South is a 23 foot wide asphalt road with parking allowed on the East side. More than five (5)years ago the residents of Renton Hill requested and were granted signs that state "Down Hill Traffic Must Yield". This request came because of traffic congestion and sight distant problems on Renton Avenue South. This street is also the main access for Philip Arnold Park and the traffic it brings with park usage. As the only lighted baseball field other than Liberty Park, in the city, from 4 p.m. until the lights go off at 10:30 p.m. traffic flows with game schedules. Baseball and softball games run every hour and fifteen minutes from April thru mid August. Practice starts March 20d'. Football takes over in August and runs as late as November 10th. All of these games generate a great deal of continual traffic with two teams, parents, family, umpires/referees and friends per game. The park is also a favorite picnic and play area. This traffic must be included in any traffic study to obtain the required accurate count. r Renton Avenue South's traffic is past its maximum now. I request all who have to make the decisions regarding this project drive up Renton Avenue South and picture the more than 120 full cement trucks all trying to scale this street. Now picture (during that time) a fire truck, aid car or police car responding to an emergency on Renton Hill. Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 r CITY __!F RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor November 19, 1999 Mr.Timothy Cogger 609 Grant Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 Re: DEVELOPMENT ON RENTON HILL Dear Mr. Cogger: Thank you for your e-mail of November 11, 1999,regarding a potential development on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the current status of this project. In August 1999,Bennett Development submitted a conceptual site plan to the Development Services Division for a 69 lot single family residential development to be located on a site northeast of Arnold Park and the Seattle Water Department water line easement. The approximately 10-acre property is owned by the Renton School District and has been offered for sale as surplus property. Bennett Development has indicated that they have paid the School District a non-refundable deposit in order to purchase the land. The purpose of the August submittal was to meet Development Services requirements for Preliminary Project Review. Departmental comments on the conceptual plan were given to representatives of Bennett Development and their consultants on September 2, 1999,at a pre-application conference. At this meeting, several issues were discussed with the project proponent, including proposed lot size and configuration, private road configuration,access,use of the water line easement,gates on the easement, and road conditions and traffic in the area. Anticipating community opposition to the project, department staff suggested a public meeting be arranged by the project proponent to discuss their concept. This meeting was organized by Bennett Development and held at the Renton Community Center on November 4, 1999. In addition to the representatives of Bennett Development and their consultants,the meeting was attended by a staff member from the Development Services Division and approximately 120 citizens. Most of the issues discussed with City of Renton staff at the pre-application conference were addressed at this meeting. Since that time,the Development Services Division has fielded questions from both the project proponent and citizens of the community. Our understanding is that Bennett Development intends to submit a revised conceptual plan and schedule a second pre-application conference to discuss this new plan. The earliest this meeting can be scheduled at this time is mid-December. Hopefully,the new plan will be more reflective of the concerns of the community. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 • • Mr. Tim Cogger Renton,Washington 98055 November 19, 1999 Page 2 In closing, I would like to assure you that when an application for a land use action is submitted to the City of Renton for this project,it will be reviewed with diligence and ample notification will be given to the community at several times in the process so that comments on the plan may be made by concerned citizens such as yourself. Again,thank you for expressing your concerns. If you have further questions,please contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at(425) 430-7382. Sincerely, 'Vdeff /,//141i/j/" " Gregg Zimmerman PB/PW Administrator cc: City Clerk/Referral#99060-C Jesse Tanner,Mayor Renton City Council Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON NOV 3 1999 RECEIVED DEvELOPMENT SERVpCES r crry OF RENTO y NOV 1 8 1999 COUNCIL REFERRAL TO ADMINISTRATION TON RECEIVE,, dbLI OF�:6 ADMIN. ijb IG U'1Lil'•i\J r'�DMIN. TO: Gregg Zimmerman DATE: 11/15/99 • FROM: Marilyn Petersen . LOG#:.;99060-C. . On 11/11/99, Council received and referred the following: E-mail from Timothy Cogger, 609 Grant Avenue S.,Renton 98055, expressed concern about traffic and fire access impacts from proposed Bennett Corp.plat development on Renton Hill. • Please respond by: Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor. (After Mayor's approval,Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.) Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor and include attached letter with memo. (After Mayor's approval,Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.) XX Prepare letters)to citizen/agency.with DEPARTMENT HEAD'S signature and submit to Mayor for approval. (After Mayor approves the letter,the Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return to you for mailing.) Schedule matter on Council committee agenda. Call Council secretary ASAP. (Copy of response to City Clerk not required.) _Other: Information(letter attached). PLEASE REFERENCE LOG NUMBER ON ALL LETTERS. Please complete request by November 30, 1999. Thank you. it-f7 Request completed on Staff time to prepare response cc: Mayor, Councilmembers, Jay Covington Referral approved by Council President on 11/16/99. Marilyn Petersen To: Cogger, Timothy W `.Subject: RE: PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON RENTON HILL Dear Mr. Cogger: Thank you for your comments. Copies of your letter will be transmitted to Mayor Tanner, members of the Renton City Council, and staff for review and response within the next few weeks. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Marilyn Petersen City Clerk/Cable Manager 430.6502 From: Cogger, Timothy W To: Marilyn Petersen Subject: PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON RENTON HILL Date: Thursday, November 11, 1999 9:48AM I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE BENNETT CORP. BUILDING 80 NEW HOMES ON RENTON HILL THE TRAFFIC ON RENTON AVE. AND CEDAR AVE. IS ALREADY BAD WITH THE NARROW STREETS FIRE AND AID CARS COULD BE BLOCKED WITH THE NARROW STREETS AND TRAFFIC THE PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT BENIFIT THE ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY THAT. EXISTS ON RENTON HILL, IT WOULD ONLY DEGRADE A VERY OLD AND UNIQUE NEIKGHBORHOOD THANK YOU TIM COGGER HOME OWNER 609 GRANT AVE. S. Page 1 Elizabeth Higgins From: Sue Carlson To: Cogger, Timothy W Cc: Elizabeth Higgins Subject: RE: RENTON HILL PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Date: Monday, November 15, 1999 6:57AM Thank you for your comments on the proposed development on Renton Hill. My department is not directly involved in the processing of the plat, but I am forwarding your comments to Elizabeth Higgins in Development Services. Elizabeth the senior planner assigned to this project for the City. Thank you for taking the time to voice your concerns. I am sure that Elizabeth will be contacting you shortly. Sue Carlson From: Cogger, Timothy W To: Sue Carlson Cc: TIM COGGER Subject: RENTON HILL PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Date: Thursday, November 11, 1999 9:22AM CONCERNS ABOUT THE BENNETT CORPORATION HOUSING DEVELOPMENT 1.) INCREASE IN TRAFFIC ON RENTON AVE. AND CEDAR AVE. THERE ARE ALLREADY MANY NEAR MISSIS WITH CARS NOT YEILDING TO UPHILL TRAFIC 2.) FIRE AND POLICE TRUCKS AND CARS WOULD TAKE LONGER TO RESPOND IF THEY WHERE BLOCKED WITH TRAFIC THAT COULD NOT GET OUT OF THERE WAY 3.) OPENING GATES ON BEACON WAY S. WOULD INCREASE TRAFIC AND CRIME ON RENTON HILL 4.) THE PROPOSED HOUSING DELEVOPMENT WOULD NOT BENIFIT THE ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY THAT EXIST ON RENTON HILL, IT WOULD ONLY DEGRADE A VERY OLD AND UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOOD I WOULD LIKE TO BE NOTIFIED OF ANY PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS ON RENTON HILL AND THE PROGRESS OF THIS PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BY BENNETT CORPORATION. TIM COGGER HOME OWNER 609 GRANT AVE. S. 1—Z9 2-ea Page 1 Lvrtv (' y a Renton School District 403 5c � '' • ; Transportation Department a1 1 � RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT .1220 North 4th Street,Renton,WA 98055 d . Ihr1 _ (425)204-4455 Fax(425)204-4465 TAT • www.renton.wednet.edu 403 May 15, 2000 DEVCITYPMNT OF RENTO�\aL Elizabeth Higgins City of Renton Planning MAY 1 7 2003 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED Dear Elizabeth, We would like to be sure the current turnaround at the gate on Beacon Way SE at Phillip Arnold Park, be maintained for school bus access when this development is being designed, and built. Due to the nature of the neighborhood, this turnaround is a requirement to ensure the safety of the buses, pedestrians, and vehicles. School buses need to have sufficient radius to be able to turn around without backing the vehicle (WAC 392-145). We would ask for a minimum outside radius of 55 feet. If you have any questions, or need for clarification, please contact me at (425) 204-4455. Sincerely, Kevin Oleson Operations Manager Transportation Department ' �, CITY _. IF� RENTON ..li. c I Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator IVlay 4,LUUU KLCEI VED RSD 403 ,}. t°4 Y 0 '00 OFFICE OF nit. Superintendent's Office • SUPERINTENDEN IMAY 10 2000 Renton School District #403 R • 300 SW 7th Street E C E ®J E Renton, WA 98055-2307 CAPITAL PROJECTS Subject: Heritage Philip Arnold Preliminary Plat/LUA-00-053,PP,ECF The City of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a 56-lot, single family residentiai subdivision, located at the intersection of Beacon Way SE, SE 7th Court, and SE 7th Street. In order to process this application, the Development Services Division needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Would you please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this letter to my attention, Development Services Division, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,Washington 98055. Elementary School: Ct.(VC ill 1( Middle School: (lM/M/ High School: Gt' iii 14 h Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the)mpact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes ✓ No Any Comments: Thank you for providing this important information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-7382. Sincerely, • L-1►-tabellr, th9g t v s isS Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner schoo„_/kw . 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 r ' , - \s:‘. . . , . ......... ...... I.TY 0JMNT:O:N< < <>:`>«` < 1111: <`? ':'::>' ' ' > » >':111 >:>.V:. :>r:.::;;:: ;.:E :. :..,: RVIOF$ I IIVJSI` < < ,.'.::::.:'> <>>< r< < <',< > > << < ::>::€>:;...D .. LOFM NT..S.E.. I . . .I ON ......... ... .............. .. ... IST. OSURROU . . O . Tl� . ::: itin 3 feet t�f th ub e t it PROJECT NAME: frIT ?H ILA P i\ L,47 APPLICATION NO: I—UR•OO. O S3 , re", E(k 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 NUMBER OFlc<Op�'F F i ORp 4A3? ��°NN/IVc ?w?000 • (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) _a. (Continued) NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER • • Applicant Certification p� �eaAuassev� I, RYA Fi v-6 , hereby certify that the above list(6)of,lake r?property . (Print Name) ,e onauaoeao, }I t owners and their addresses were obtained from: D City of Renton Technical Services Records 7 vEr Title Company Records' y `' D King County Assessors Records �r a° �, s' �� ° n, o�r aaa V ° � u°"0jo:aaPa°uaoY'.,�•�'oti Signed • 1 Date y /od ;`` `46a6,,2Qa®� ill (Applicant) • .NOTARY ATTESTED: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington, residing at :3eeDi"„Q on the /y day of 4'7- . 040o. Signed 4_, 1 � (Notary Public) :...... ................ . . . • CERTIFICATION OF:MAILING Itf1NlCHEFF ll~1�M • • I;•: :. et .:::.::.,,hereby certify that,notices of:;the:pro.pose• p t 1 �T i ':';;.::::<::; CI Em • a:.;9 :;..:.... ��..�::...-:...:.:....:. � ........ ..._. ............. :._::Date,_.. .�.. <'N OTA AITEST;::<;Subscribed and.sworn:befo�e`:me,a.Notary ubIic in>and for the State of Washington residing onthe `�� day of ::: • listprop.doc REV o7198• fiWARILYNH MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29 13 2 •::::::::::�::::•::•:::•:;;:...:.4v�rrers::::::.::::.: .::::::::::.P..cupwtyAddr�ss:.=;:>:>:�:;:�;::;::::;�;CrtY:;:.:•:•::•:•:r;:::�:.:2i1#:Cada:i:;;:•;;:•::•Mark:Address:;:;;:�;:;�; ::>:P'kai.�rtyl5kate............M �.1JP....r... 1........ CITY OF RENTON 1500 HOUSER WAYS RENTON 98055 200 MILL AVE S RENTON WA 98055 172305-9015-03 2 LAKERIDGE DEVLP INC PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98057 733000-0060-03 3 LAKERIDGE DEVLP INC PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98057 733000-0130-09 4 STEVENS LISA&WERTZ VICTOR K S 7TH CT NE 1706 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0120-01 5 GARFIELD LILY W&RICHARD C 1707 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 PO BOX 1706 RENTON WA 98057 733000-0010-04 6 HEMENWAY DANNY C 1712 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 1712 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0110-03 7 MALESIS LOUIS G&MARY K 1718 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 1718 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0100-05 e LIN JAMES 1719 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 1719 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0020-02 9 MCGATLIN KATHLEEN M 1724 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 1724 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0090-07 10 FULFER MICHAEL R&WENDY L 1729 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 13016 SE 95TH MAY RENTON WA 98056 733000-0030-00 11 BEATTY DIANNE L 1730 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 1730 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0080-09 12 JONES WM WAYNE JR&DEBRA 1800 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98057 733000-0070-01 13 BERGQUIST DOUGLAS J&JOYCE 1801 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 1801 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055 733000-0040-08 14 LAKERIDGE DEVLP INC 1807 SE 7TH CT RENTON 98055 PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98057 733000-0050-05 15 LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT INC PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98057 202305-9058-06 16 CITY OF RENTON 200 MILL AVE S RENTON WA 98055 202305-9059-05 17 PUGET SOUND ENERGYIELEC PO BOX 90868 BELLEVUE WA 98009 202305-9152-01 1e PUGET WESTERN INC SUITE 310 BOTHELL WA 98011 202305-9050-04 19 NORRIS ELSA E 1513 S 7TH ST RENTON 98055 1513 S 7TH ST RENTON WA 98055 329470-0470-05 20 ALLIBHAI HAFIZ K 2070 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2070 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0470-09 21 GRELLA SCOTT A&SHANNON F 2068 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2068 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0480-07 22 ZAPPALO MARK STEVEN 2066 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2066 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0490-05 23 SCHAFER DAVID 2064 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2064 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0500-03 24 LOCKE DEBRA A 2062 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2062 SE 8TH RENTON WA 98055 247520-0510-01 25 EAKINS DAVID M 2060 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2060 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0520-09 _____ 26 YASUDA DEAN D 2058 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2058 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0530-07 27 HANNA MARY F 2056 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2056 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0540-05 2e SOFTLI KATIE M 2054 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2054 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0550-02 29 MILLIKAN IRENE AISE 2052 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2052 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0560-00 30 JUN KUM HO 2050 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2050 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0570-08 31 NOLAN ROSEANNE 2048 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2048 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0580-06 32 BUFFETT MELVYN LIHW 2046 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2046 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0590-04 33 ROGER KENNETH L 2044 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2044 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0600-02 34 KO STEPHANIE RW 2042 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2042 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0610-00 35 HAVLIN JOSEPH L 2040 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2040 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0620-08 36 LOPEZ VIRGILIO T 2038 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2038 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0630-06 37 MC CAULEY KELLY J&LISA K 2036 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2036 SE BTH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0640-04 3e POWELL PATRICIA ANN 2024 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2024 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0650-01 39 ST LAURENT EDNA M 2025 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2025 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0660-09 40 ZAREMBO VLADIMIR&LUDMILA 2035 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2035 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0670-07 41 WEBB ORLEAN ROSETTA 2045 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2045 SE 8TH ST RENTON WA 98055 247520-0680-05 42 SHAVER JOHN H 2055 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2055 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0690-03 43 RAMBO MICHAEL S ETAL 2059 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2059 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055 247520-0700-01 44 MC KNIGHT CLYDE L SR 2078 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2078 SE BTH ST RENTON WA 98055 247520-0950-08 45 JUNG WALTER 2076 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 PO BOX 58493 RENTON WA 98058 247520-0960-06 46 ROBASSE ADRIENNE D 2043 SE 8TH DR RENTON 98055 2043 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0970-04 49 HAWKINS FREDERICK A/HW 2047 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2047 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0980-02 4e MOLANDRO DMNA D ETAL 2049 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2049 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-0990-00 49 RICHLING JOSEPH T 2216 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2051 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-1000-06 50 MORALES LUISIHW 2053 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2053 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-1010-04 51 WAJERCZYK ANDRZEJ/HW 2057 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 2057 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-1020-02 52 CHOW CHUNG P&BECKY 2065 SE BTH PL RENTON 98055 2065 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-1030-00 53 GILMORE MARSHALL 2067 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055 20671 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-1040-08 54 HANSON SARAH L 2069 SE 8TH PL RENTON 98055. 2069 SE 8TH:PL RENTON WA 98055 247520-1050-05 ©1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 1 of 1 Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® HAFIZ K.ALLIBHAI MELVYN L.BUFFETT CHUNG P.&BECKY CHOW 2070 SE 8TH PL 2046 SE 8TH PL 2065 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 DAVID M.EAKINS MARSHALL GILMORE SCOTT A.&SHANNON F.GRELLA 2060 SE 8TH PL 20671 SE 8TH PL 2068 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055-3947 MARY F.HANNA SARAH L.HANSON JOSEPH L. HAVLIN 2056 SE 8TH PL 2069 SE 8TH PL 2040 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 FREDERICKA.HAWKINS KUM HO JUN WALTER JUNG 2047 SE 8TH PL 2050 SE 8TH PL PO BOX 58493 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98058-1493 STEPHANIE RW KO KOREEN DEBRA A. LOCKE 2042 SE 8TH PL 2120 SE 8TH DR 2062 SE 8TH RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3944 RENTON WA 98055 VIRGILIO T.LOPEZ KELLY J.&LISA K. MC CAULEY CLYDE L.MC KNIGHT 2038 SE 8TH DR 2036 SE 8TH DR 2078 SE 8TH ST RENTON WA 98055-3920 RENTON WA 98055-3920 RENTON WA 98055 IRENE A.MILLIKAN DIVINA D.MOLANDRO LUIS MORALES 2052 SE 8TH PL 2049 SE 8TH PL 2053 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 ROSEANNE NOLAN ALFONSO D.&MARILYN S.OCAMPO PATRICIA ANN POWELL 2048 SE 8TH PL 2106 SE 8TH DR 2024 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3944 RENTON WA 98055-3920 MICHAEL S.RAMBO JOSEPH T.RICHLING ADRIENNE D.ROBASSE 2059 SE 8TH DR 2051 SE 8TH PL 2043 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3920 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 KENNETH L.ROGER DAVID SCHAFER JOHN H.SHAVER 2044 SE 8TH PL 2064 SE 8TH PL 2055 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3920 ahVw��wMir. AJJ____ I _L_I_ I ..r..r ClLA® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® KATIE M.SOFTLI EDNA M.ST LAURENT ANDRZEJ WAJERCZYK 2054 SE 8TH PL 2025 SE 8TH DR 2057 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3920 RENTON WA 98055-3947 ORLEAN ROSETTA WEBB DEAN D.YASUDA MARK STEVEN ZAPPALO 2045 SE 8TH ST 2058 SE 8TH PL 2066 SE 8TH PL RENTON WA 98055-3920 RENTON WA 98055-3947 RENTON WA 98055-3947 VLADIMIR &LUDMILAZAREMBO 2035 SE 8TH DR RENTON WA 98055-3920 • ga Dv=RW® Arlrlracc I ahalc I scar cii n® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® CITY OF RENTON ELSA E.NORRIS LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT INC 200 MILL AVE S 1513 S 7TH ST PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98055-2132 RENTON WA 98055-3924 RENTON WA 98057-0146 SOUND ENERGY PUGET PUGET WESTERN INC PO BOX 90868 SUITE 310 BELLEVUE WA 98009-0868 BOTHELL WA 98011 -- -----_ a . . • -- ,..n Smooth•Feed Sheets TM Use template for 5160® DIANNE L.BEATTY DOUGLAS J.&JOYCE M.BERGQUIST MICHAEL R.&WENDY L.FULFER 1730 SE 7TH CT 1801 SE 7TH CT 13016 SE 95TH MAY RENTON WA 98055-3943 RENTON WA 98055-3954 RENTON WA 98056-2405 LILY W.&RICHARD C.GARFIELD DANNY C.HEMENWAY WM WAYNE&DEBRA JONES PO BOX 1706. 1712 SE 7TH CT PO BOX 146 RENTON WA 98057-1706 RENTON WA 98055-3943 RENTON WA 98057-0146 JAMES LIN LOUIS G.&MARY K. MALESIS KATHLEEN M. MCGATLIN 1719 SE 7TH CT 1718 SE 7TH CT 1724 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055-3943 RENTON WA 98055-3943 RENTON WA 98055-3943 LISA &WERTZ VICTOR K.STEVENS 1706 SE 7TH CT RENTON WA 98055-3943 If1•//g7 1 ..L...1. 1 ,cor [l LA® lipri6 WiWashington State Northwest Region Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North Sid Morrison P Bo 330310 Secretary of Transportation SeO.attle,x WA 98133 9710 (206)440-4000 May 9, 2000 Elizabeth Higgins DEVELOPMENT PLANN'NQ City of Renton CITY OF RENTON Development Services Division 1055 S Grady Way MAY 10 2000 Renton, WA 98055-3232 RECEIVED RE: SR 405,vic. MP 3.05, CS 1743 Heritage Philip Arnold (LUA-00-053,PP,ECF) Dear Ms. Higgins: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the Notice of Application for Heritage Philip Arnold,which is located at the intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court and S 7th Street in Renton. We recommend 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, if any, would be required. If you have any questions,please call John Collins at(206) 440-4915. Sincerely, 7- /,z raig J. Stone, P.E. Area Administrator- South King CJS:jc JTC cc: file TY Proposed Mitigation Measures: -, (t O - 1. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee al the rate of$75.00 per each new • * C� + , weekday trip attributable la the project,estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new lot. 2. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Fire Mitigation Fee eta rate of$488.00 per each new single famil v u $ residential lot created by the proposed plat. �'Ng 3. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single h residential lot created by the proposed plat. NOTICE OF APPLICATION 4. Permission for use of the Seattle Public Utilities easement shall be secured by appropriate parties prior to re of the plat. AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Ms.Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Principal Plan Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on May 19,2000.Thi DATE: May 4,2000 is also scheduled for a public hearing on June 27,2000,at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers,Seventh Floor,Renton Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton.If you are interested In attending the hearing,please contact the Develop Services Division,(425)430-7282,to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled.If comments cannot br LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF submitted In writing by the date indicated above,you may still appear at the hearing and present your comment: • proposal before the Hearing Examiner.If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of APPLICATION,NAME: HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD - and receive additional Information by mail,please contact the project manager.Anyone who submits written col will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property,by means of the preliminary plat process, Into 56 lots suitable for single family residential - . development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows CONTACT PERSON: ELIZABETH HIGGINS,AICP(425)430-7382 residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (data).The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a.Lot sizes would I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATIC range from 4,504 to 8,313 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf.The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42'(instead of 501 The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,S 7'"Court,end S 7'"Street =__ =�a��'.��--� OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M):As the Lead Agency,the City of --- "~F---`"�� _-� ` - -ti Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. ---1 "" ----\t r ' •. Therefore,aspermitted under the RCW 43.21C.110,the Cityof Renton is using the Optional DNS Mprocess togive L==-� -- 1._ ' P O __ `_c,{_,i`r___-L notice that a DNS-M Is likely to be Issued.Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are Integrated into 1 - -- , =y - a single comment period.There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of .,r-, r - - ----i;,.�x Non-Significance Mitigated(DNS-M).A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. t 1,3J' .)='r-T r--i--7pp,�L-=_L r%^S,`. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: April28,2000 tJ f�= --±--(1 ' `��;1" 45 4C ;n ! NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 4,2000 • j s ' riPrs, __r-_,r-3,- E_� _-- • :f' i_{ __,--,y„.m;__y^- \jr__,j._r, i'.. Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat approval -ij i L=,L •`+'ter -'- -c=i°=mo w' • • Requested Studies: Geotechnical engineering report,traffic Impact analysis,surface water --- �__.I•_ --- L-�-iJ Li:,a��;,__er,., ��;`e`: • - drainage preliminary technical Information report. -f• -� ---- F=�r it=,r-- • _ Location where application may • I ;,C__� l _ e_ _ RCCCCCG o be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, ti y - r L J L-�! \`�O � . •"', '` ' • Sixth Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 / I 0�-__±--1,-----1 L-(F-r-4I +.Od000Co m ',�^"'� PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing scheduled for June 27,2000,before the Renton Hearing 1r j i ;,,,- �=--j ''9 10(_�i') ,.6171i 1 _ Cf Examiner in Renton Council Chambers.Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th , �.µ L( + 'r i"r_,[_--)r-t-- . ++'QI -1, •..•j�__`�-q ' floor of the Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. _ -_ _ 1 F''y-'y ..,.-..... W.%.-', ''. ,;.:r u„r 1,1`'`� CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: r r ', `nmb - - r--'.--1 `++ Land Use: Vacant land,zoned Residential 8 _- -'--" Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential ' Environmental Documents that Evacuate the Proposed Project: Traffic Impact Analysis,Geotechnical Engineering Report,Drainage Technical Information Report(Preliminary) , Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: State Environmental Policy Act,City of Renton Municipal Code,King County „ •\ Surface Water Design Manual +, NOTICE OF APPLICATION -- + NOTICE OF APPLICATION CERTIFICATION I, Arid re& DQ$ C uw, hereby certify that S copies of the above document were posted by me in S conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on .ill a m L{ , 1_00c, • Signed: apiceiz. £24 ATTEST: Subcribe om before me,a Nortary Public,in and for the State of om. Washington residing in t ¢$.-N , on the 4'\i. day of `)-7A ti-a. 24e° . • diArd{i..... KAMCHEFF tV�TAR®`PUBLIC MARILYN I�AMOHEFF t STATE®F WASHINGTON MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-2 J ComMISSioN EXPIRES ,I._,, .,JUKE-29 2003 nowt wa,Hmoanrwaam vm eoam wn nm•yra wn svu r-� run oc m m a im.-na m.am PPP—SS—TTTT ...m ... t•.AD' '°''""" .n� CITY OF HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD „"A/s/DD • •°` \ AN RENTON NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP ^®k.� =1 Plo,Nnq/BNmieg Puemean4'e works Dept. wow NO. REVISION BY DATE APPfl i�g "'r:• ` Gregg Z; P.E..AEm�e:stratar • Yp • . .\..1...c.1 ? -......,:. . Fl J _ 7- --\ \44 rr r rT \ . rcl�,.rrrrTTTT7 I ! \ L `}I 1 Im I I Inl I I I I 7 I I I I IT I 1 I_ ,.,-�-\ `!--.}-1-Vt4;++ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �� • 1 `l I I 1 IN �Lii,,1 1 1 I f4I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1: =1__I fL_L_Z.11 , y .11J LLLLLL1111J • .1....i s t ..5.. -ik- \\ �__—____ MA/M AVE8 / I/ \\�:-/ M. lR JGA L- \�V// / / __rf L_ % % _'r 1 r—,--y' Nl4 AVE 8 / / I I I I°r-rrr7 T r�r I rr rrrTT7777 / / 111I lol I I I I I I I I I�°I ( I I I I I I I I I� / / III ILI-I I I 7"rrrrrTTT-rr1DII-i-ttt+l4-t-1.(f\ / , / III IIIII I'I I I I I I I I I I;I I I I I I I I I_"!-1. I �^l / r GEOAR AVE8 JL_JJJJ1_J LLLLL1111JJ LLLL1111J_1f y am' ---- B y• / f T-fT-r7-T'-1-I-1 r-1-r--r�-r1-T'ARAVE3 TTT� } / le,- I III 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1:34;:t 1 I 1 1 1 Ti1 1 I 1 I I I II , I 1 I I // 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III 1 I f- I I I I / // / I I--41+-1-4—L-1J--1 I-T'-i�?.?7, I-4-1--1-+--1-+-1--t-1-+-1 i J 0 I I ;?. 1 1 I Y 1 / / I I I I I I I I I (J- y/No°(TI I'P / / I I I I I I I I I I `:•"" I I I I I I I I I I I •/ +'" ' 1 ��'I / �� J L1—L J_1__J—_J L __I_1J-1_L_L_I_11_J—�}13�/L—L1L_ I O RENTON AYE 8 ..[ / / I r (l— RENTON_AYE 8 �-T7-, rn—TT--T-)-71-f� I T�..,.�c�;:.-- I. / / I°I I I I---I I I II I I 1 1 1 1 I I I �7rrr7 rTI--1-' -I--I I I I I - _ c. / / / I I : ,t IIIII I 11�� /T1 I I I I I �� / / ImrJrT f_i L 1 11 1 LJJJ I I L J I 1 I J�1%'/ 1 1 1 1 H I I I / �1 I I ;';i: I I f-- F- 1 I F;'J I I I I J/ q I 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 'r___J L_LL1_J t:,,:*,._1_LuJ_1__J L__LL_L:LLL_I_L� C�\I I I I I I I I I I ^♦ _ __ _ ;j GRANT AYES 1� `\ 1 Iry vI -r I I l a rc.P\(."r-TT-1-1- 1--1 r=77TTTrh-1-7 �\'�\ r LLLJ_LLtl_. I'-L__i _L_I 1 e 1 1`' i3 1 I 1 1 4--I l'C-J I I I 1 1 I I) �'\\�\ >) / I 1 .r7-r=--r---'1_LLL_L1_LLJ_J 1-_d_1LLLIj/ �< \ •\ / r I Imr-r-rr-i-rr- 1 g=TnTrr/ - 1 1 41 1 1 1 I-'I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41---1 I I I I 4\ \\ \ \\/), I L1_1__1_ e __ \\ \\ \ ✓/ \ " ! I1_LNIaHA EaL1_L� L_1LLJ'�� L_N/ON Av a / C. I 1 T-T1-T-1-��``rrFT-1-T-r7-r1 r--ii Poi 1'f- -I-- ♦ II I I I I I I LJ I I I I I I I I I ' I )/�R/! II I \, I 1 L1_1J_1J_J I_I I I I I I I I I /a's'.. L-J I I i 1 I I I I I I I I ri-T I T I--r-r-1 I'A\ '-°,�J- I I I 1 C c— II iiii ! mil ii \ I ,LJ_L_L1J-1_U_LLJONEBAY a. _L i_./,, �$1/\i; -J L_-1.__=: t- J \ .I Ir � ! __- J \ \ I \r---- \ ads, o t\_ / / CE \ / _ . a H t I. 1IrI j• �i / //z \ \\ \ / 4 O 1•°a n A I/ I / • /4�/ \ \\ \ ) A 4 1 / I /a / \, \\ /y/� G2,,y rrn117\ /is`i \ / \IIII III / /, /s/ \ / y �C//>, ,<-c-r n7-7-• C-' / ?/ �/ \t \till( / /is / • \ `,6 \ \-' -\ -_- `':: ; �>-, C,• _ / // / �,LL �y` n yy ' // / ......Ne't,a// • \��,a�'.\,)/�\ ill —. , '' ''';1 3 e / \ '�r',\o I / / ',I,Ci • / e. uIL ;\ . l • \ n // 1\\ -- . ' . // / „ / \� \ t:e' 11 . ._ -- c. 6h • NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED. (DNS-M) DATE: May 4,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICATION NAME: HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 56 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,313 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,S 7th Court,and S 7th Street 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 43.21 C.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. AL - PERMIT , �` APPLICATION DATE: April 28,2000 _ J sk .NleVnu NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 4,2000 0�VULYS Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat approval PIMn��.,J ,7:b1 r Kern au Requested Studies: Geotechnical engineering report,traffic impact analysis,surface water drainage preliminary technical information report. 9o� Location where application may Sailkow be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, Sixth Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing scheduled for June 27,2000, before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Land Use: • Vacant land,zoned Residential 8 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Traffic Impact Analysis,Geotechnical Engineering Report,Drainage Technical Information Report(Preliminary) Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: State Environmental Policy Act,City of Renton Municipal Code,King County Surface Water Design Manual NOTICE OF APPLICATION Proposel Mjtigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project,estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new lot. 2. 'The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$488.00 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 3. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 4. Permission for use of the Seattle Public Utilities easement shall be secured by appropriate parties prior to recording of the plat. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Principal Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on May 19,2000. This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing on June 27,2000,at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers,Seventh Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing,please contact the 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 Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail,please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: ELIZABETH HIGGINS,AICP (425)430-7382 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION r---'Hi - r`F4r-1 i\\n_ _1 L i 1 \\I \ L-__J L_L_J L__Z I \r J -a `i i L__s:x irJ L La;r -T -1�\ c i. r - _"- . 1 e . • r- -4 i ITT--I r--+---t 1 ,\ v, \ . -I� .\ L;-.4. , t 1--4--41---+---rI;L__L- 'ham-: ,,._*LL 55,1 1---11---ly1--I eI ,,- C,--�"�j____--"_i 4{___„__,^r T--'I 1---1 1 �. , _ L-17 I---IL-_`�---4'---lit--_-f -'1 v;,itl _-�_I Ii. L �°-J I- IL_J r_-T--1 I--]T _I P\ v All 1 ' I F a La_JL-J L_-1__-1 r-__I1_J r� ,I I I �s44: I. \,-1E-1 r--t---1 I r ', C r--`_, '1 Yy r--t_. -- \1-r.. i d'i IS I y _'1 L_J--, 1 1 �? �f�-J` r-�--1 I .:�;..:;�-...t'r.I.1" I {-- L_3'�,c- \--,"1 •\\I 1 1 1�_ I n ILT____,-111 L_ L--1 L n:..:.,;;'al n�'° j_-J r-1G=J,..„'c'.,\i „\ %,1., .yl,, _ 1 I 1----,__,L3_'_1--I r-� T I n-r-r+r T-1 1-1\..^we � AI, W,71,`..-tar-- n 1 '°1 I 1 1 1 1---i 1--1 1 1 1 1 1 w \`. I r--7 1 L___-J L__1-_' L_J_L LLL ikJ�__szp.+` \Y� I ir�\ \• ,, 1 . 1 I L_- _._� .� I -�r 7 1 r---T7 rT-r-1 r--ram.; (sm ... s,y© 1 r•-r-\ I I I I r--1 1 I I I IL_J L__L_J\^ \ `' UU' 'IUI E i/ . I r--1 I r--1 L I r "11 I I I I \ � u °° ,\ .L-�•�• r..n. I r--T---1 r--r- -1 L_It----+r--r--1 \ 1:i:.:=111 E 1,/,':.,.),-, - 1 ---J I^L_J 1^L---JL-__1I I C�' ��IIRR�RR11� `' I kI 1 1-.1 I-'--1t1 II lil . .1 ...1, so?O ©:WWW� © _. _._ ' i'I,\`i \1'/. , 1 ,,r Lr----r-'--1 ---1---I.1- II----1.1---I--47, `„a.,,O m �'\,l i I J_,.- / 1, ��.^ el---I--,11---1 ISI 111--1 11—�--1 'i eZIECI u " ,:"","1-1;.\..V ..''''''''':,11:I 1 I 1 l,:5-7 ) f I °, 1---+---1 1---I---1 1-,r,-IL-J I-_-I-_J �'"O " I---y''.111 L1,,\..a,,1!'t 1`1 '-', \"1u_11.1_-�e_, •r t 1 r---I I I I A'1'� ,•rJl I L.__I__J Vi.a CON m r-,t, ` :":' r', <,\, -'._.r_....- / 1 -__L__"I 1..J tr n'Lc -Jr-1 L__I___I 4� I0 J� _! 1 1' (\ \ � I. I L__1-_J L-J--,d":__IL__I L__I-_J \ 1 u [-_I C. ' I I I *m°\_.•r,. ,.. /",`\ • 1/ L e.rxn 1 L_y:- \�'1 1�I_I_1_L °�'1 \ .,:.�=. LT J r1-r--1 r-1I--I r-n---1 m.ci \ 44Ip 1--J^1- ;1.�" F.\\1-\-',_ / / I 1---1---1 r-II 1 r-1---1 KZ;��1 ..v�i'"T 11�\.) - / / `\y 1 {---1 1 11 1 I I I \\Sc" .,1 US V-- / -1 I I II r_1_-1 .. r-F'iP b'j-, r--II--1 1--_I---1 \ \-� -- II 11 c',..4 . I L JI J L_J_-J _______----- \ �________-- - _\ \\ n • ).c \ \ ". - \\\\\\ •\ -' n.n , \SA :~O \\ NOTICE OF APPLICATION " = ~ CITY ,)F RENTON ._ I" Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator wway', zuuu Superintendent's Office Renton.School District #403 300 SW 7th Street Renton, WA 98055-2307 Subject: Heritage Philip Arnold Preliminary Plat/LUA-00-053,PP,ECF The City of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a 56-lot, single family residential subdivision, located at the intersection of Beacon Way SE, SE 7th Court, and SE 7th Street. In order to process this application, the Development Services Division needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Would you please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this letter to my attention, Development Services Division, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. Elementary School: Middle School: High School: Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes No Any Comments: Thank you for providing this important information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-7382. Sincerely, • vixtbe-t\f, iitsgms IsS Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner school/ fkac 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 - ' December 30, 1999 Elizabeth Higgins Planning Department City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Bennett Homes proposed development on Renton Hill Dear Ms. Higgins, We have received a copy of Bennett Homes' latest proposal for their development of the Renton School District Property on Renton Hill. This project abuts the Plat of River Ridge Estates along its entire southern boundary. Needless to say, we are unhappy to see a proposal with such a high density proposed on the Hill. Our greatest concerns are as follows: The latest proposal with access directly to South 7th Court is totally unacceptable and will be fought by all avenues available to us. We contacted an engineer and had him review the proposed access onto South 7th Court and the issues he raised are: 1. The existing South 7th, Jones Avenue, Beacon Way intersection is a non-standard 5-way intersection and the intersection spacing appears to be below the minimum required, thereby the proposed access would require a variance. 2. There are no curb returns shown on the drawings of the proposed intersection. The minimum required is usually 35 feet at the driving lane. Were these requirements adhered to, the intersection could not be built at the proposed location- again a variance would be required. In addition, without the returns, it would be very difficult for large vehicles such as garbage trucks, delivery trucks, fire trucks, etc., to make the corner. 3. This proposal would essentially create one huge intersection, and it would seem imprudent to complicate an existing odd intersection. 4. The section of road connecting the Bennett proposal with South 7th court appears to meet the definition of a neighborhood collector, which would require wider right-of-way and pavement width, sight distance requirements, etc. RED TAD JAN 0 4 2000 BU!LD!NG DMs!o.v 5. The northerly "storm water facility" has 20+ feet of elevation change with the easterly side being 20 feet higher than the proposed intersection. There would be an almost immediate 10-foot cut required at the intersection. It does not appear that with a much lower road on the south, and a higher property to the north, that a detention pond with the required volume and meeting our City standards, could be built at this location. 6. A complete design of this proposed intersection and drainage facility, including downstream capacity, meeting all City standards without variances, should be required prior to it's consideration. It appears that a traffic count was recently done at the intersection of Beacon/Jones/South 7th. We request that special note be made to the fact Phillip Arnold Park is at this intersection, and is heavily used from April to September. Just try scheduling a soccer or soft ball game or picnic spot during this time! During the week, almost all of the activity occurs between 4:00 PM and 9:00 PM. The PM peak hour traffic count at this intersection will be far greater, by a factor of at least 5, during these months as opposed to early December when the traffic study was done. This intersection appears to be a 'lets see what we can get away with" approach. We are curious as to where the proposed development will outfall its storm water. The River Ridge detention pond and bio-swale are privately owned and maintained, and we do not wish any additional water going into them. We cannot speak as "experts" on the traffic issues, however, to those of us driving the Hill every day, it becomes painfully obvious that both Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue are already problem traffic lanes. With the existing 'limited sight" sections of these streets, and downhill traffic already having to yield to uphill traffic on a street that has virtually one lane of safe travel; we see an increased safety risk being developed. We would like to see the amount of traffic added to these streets kept as low as possible. A plat access up Beacon Way to 116th would be a much wiser, safer approach to this development. Still another grave concern is the great difference in density that is proposed. The subdivision as proposed is much denser than Renton Hill on the average and more than twice the density of River Ridge. When River Ridge was platted, the school district parcel was zoned G-1, one house per acre.-We knew that the property had the potential for development. We also believed the city would require lot size consistent with the overall nature ofthe Hill. We understand that The Growth Management Act's goals are to push development closer in to the incorporated areas. However, both Growth Management and City policy urge compatibility or, if that is not possible, require mitigation to offset the impact on the surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed 4500 SF lots in the Bennett proposal will greatly impact the River Ridge and entire Renton Hill neighborhood. It will be impossible to retain any native vegetation on the. proposed site with lots of this size. We would request that all lots adjacent to River Ridge Estates be increased to 115 feet in depth, which would make them 5175 SF, with the back 15 feet of each lot set aside for a vegetative buffer. We would request the buffer be planted with a solid wall of fast growing evergreens such as Leyland Cyprus a minimum of 10 feet tall at time of planting. We would further request that the homeowners association of the proposed plat be held responsible for the maintenance of the vegetative buffer by including the cost of said maintenance, to include irrigation, in it's budget through association dues. And finally, we would request the developer be required to post a bond assuring their responsibility for the maintenance of the landscaping for a minimum of three years. This is an area that will easily support $350,000 and $400,000 homes and for Bennett to submit the attached proposal saddens all of us. We are truly disappointed that Bennett has so little respect for Renton's oldest neighborhood, and would hope the City of Renton feels the same. The elimination of the proposed intersection on South 7th court and the vegetative screening are issues we, as neighbors will not budge on. We are prepared to litigate if necessary to attain these goals. Sincerely, QGQ-- u%)ni3t- Douglas Bergquist, President River Ridge Estates Homeowners Association. Enclosure CITE - J1' RENTON • Mayor Jesse Tanner DEVELOPMENT yOF aEAMONNNG MAY Oi200p May 8 2000 RECEIVED , Ms. Josephine M.Potter 1314 South 7th Street Renton,WA 98055-3065 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Potter: This letter is written in response to your letter of concern to the City Council and directed to my attention. Thank you for conveying these concerns about the potential development of a ten-acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. First, allow me to address your comment regarding the sale of the land. The Renton School District, which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. In early 1997,the District declared the property as surplus. Notice of intent to sell the property was published in the South County Journal in April 1997. In January 1999,the property was listed with a real estate sales company,who then solicited bids. A purchase and sale agreement was negotiated with the highest bidder in March 1999. All of the actions taken by the School Board occurred during open public session. Regarding the traffic situation,the City shares your concern for vehicle/pedestrian safety and circulation on Renton Hill. A traffic study was required of the applicant as part of the project proposal. This is being reviewed by Transportation Services and Engineering Plan Review staff. The Emergency Services providers (Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)will also be involved in review of proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. The Renton Hill property being proposed for new development has been zoned for single family residential homes. 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 Ms. Josephine Potter 1314 South 7tb Street Renton,WA 98055-3065 We do appreciate,your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a "party of record for the project. You should have received a Notice of Application for the proposal . currently being reviewed by the City. Comments on the proposal are being accepted until May 19, 2000. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S• erely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C2 Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Pla n n�J) Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner �\ RECEIVED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF RENTON MAR 1 7 zaao 11 MAR ' 2(Q)UNCIL REFERRAL TO ADMINISTRATION CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN. RECEIVED TO: Gregg Zimmerman DATE: 03/16/00 FROM: Marilyn Petersen LOG#: 20019-C On 3/15/00, Council received and referred the following: Letter from Josephine Potter, 1314 S. 7th Street, Renton, WA 98055, opposes proposed Bennett development on Renton Hill. Please respond by: Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor. (After Mayor's approval, Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.) Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor and include attached letter with memo. (After Mayor's approval,Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.) Prepare letter(s) to citizen/agency with Mayor's signature and submit to Mayor for approval. (After Mayor approves the letter, the Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return to you for mailing.) Schedule matter on Council committee agenda. Call Council secretary ASAP. (Copy of response to City Clerk not required.) XX Other: Please write to parties of record and explain the public input process. Please provide copy to City Clerk. PLEASE REFERENCE L $ER ON ALL LETTERS. Please complete request y 3/20/00. Thank you. Mayor, Councilmembers, Jay C. �� cITY of a>=rvrcuv ;;-th ,k-e"-ef MAR 1 5 2000 RECEIVED ^ / CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Cre ti5esotzee cfel-e-oe/Pee #;e:reeef' C "' �t%tip 62-c-0 ,e' reeeetgr.e/e • ce9-/-"Wec,7zeitew4ee, ;/- wee -re'rez ,get-petil, �1l ceaeecieee- e Lei ecc 010\ 4N4 1 al 1 411 isk , NrI t4 t\ • tj% i % 410 , \V ik0 t 411 k .w,4 ' V�� '7°r and 2 01 �r =3 CITY C-s' RENTON N LL Y` "F. Mayor or ▪ F Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Diane B.Hyatt 720 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Hyatt: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 22,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge those concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional conunents. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a resident of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si. rely, iiv'' , , .. c..7 esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 C'r < CITY C _' RENTON „LL Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF RENTON Barry and Pat Conger MAR 2 2 2000 1301 South 9th Street Renton,WA 98055 RECEIVED Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr. and Mrs. Conger: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 17, 2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. erely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 •. CITY RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Michael and Cynthia Mack 906 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Mack: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 17, 2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si ely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 . . ___. .- . --.-._, ___. :i r{p CITY C 2RENTON .. ;Vft, Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22, 2000 Mr. Bill Collins 420 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr. Collins: This letter is written in response to your letter,which we received on February 21,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers (Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. An aspect of the Growth Management Act is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits, in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization. By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of,the city. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a "party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S. erely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 - - CITY OF RENTON Renton City Council F E B 2 2 2000 City of Renton RECEIVED 1055 South Grady Way CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Renton,WA. 98055 Dear Council Members, We are writing in regards to the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill to the immediate east of Phillip Arnold park. We understand sometime back the zoning for this parcel was up-zoned to allow as many as eight homes to the acre. Clearly this was allowed without a careful review of the impact on the surrounding area as it is totally out of character with any of the neighborhoods around it. If possible,we would like to have a review of the appropriateness of this change. About half that—four homes to the acre—is more appropriate to the situation. As you likely know, access to Renton Hill is over two adjacent overpasses crossing I- 405. Once across the freeway,Renton Avenue South and Cedar Avenue South are the two main streets that serve Renton Hill.Renton Avenue is the wider and steeper of the two with parking on one side and a poor sight-line near the top.It has been widened until the curbs are literally inches from the power poles. Cedar Avenue is quite narrow with parking on both sides and functions more as a quiet dead-end street where kids play. Connecting the two at the top of the hill is South 7`h street, which is so steep it likely would not be allowed to be built under to" day's standards. Crossing the top of Renton Hill for access to the proposed Bennett development is South 76 Street. It has sidewalks on some blocks, deep ditches on some blocks, and several intersections without so much as a Yield or Stop sign. Unless Bennett homes is prepared to underground the overhead wires, regrade and widen Renton Avenue South, and bring South 7`h Avenue up to proper standards with curbs, sidewalks, and signage,there simply is not the street infrastructure to support near the traffic 60 to 80 additional homes would incur. With some improvements and good luck, maybe half the proposed number of houses could be accommodated. We understand Bennett Homes counted the cars crossing the overpasses for a few hours and reported the results to the City of Renton as a Traffic Study. This is totally inadequate and Bennett homes, experienced in building homes for over 18 years, knows this is inadequate. To us,it was Bennett Homes calling the City of Renton employees stupid idiots who could be easily fooled.Needless to say,we are deeply disappointed in Bennett Home' actions. To properly count the cars,two counters concurrently counting the traffic near the north stop signs on Cedar Avenue and Renton Avenue are required. Add 75 or so to the number of cars counted to account for activities that occur at Philip Arnold Park 02/19/00 Dan and Liz Hemenway Page I of 2 throughout the summer months that do not appear in the traffic count during the colder months. Also add the impact of 15-20 homes to account for those currently under construction and the sites that are likely to be developed within the next few years.We then will have an appropriate Traffic Study from which to base more informed opinions. Thank You, 4tWi .q Dan and Liz Hemenwa3 1712 SE 7`b Court Renton, WA 98055-3943 (425) 271-2969 danhemenway@worldnet.att.net 02/19/00 Dan and Liz Hemenway Page 2 of 2 - ram. r - CITY OF RENTON Renton City Council F E B 2 2 2000 City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way RECEIVED Renton,WA. 98055 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Dear, Council Members: I want to express my opposition to the Bennett Homes project that is being proposed for • the Renton School District surplus property located on Renton Hill. My home is on Renton Ave So. I have lived at this location for over 30 years and I believe that a project between 60 to 80 homes would cause traffic chaos on Renton Hill. As you are aware Renton Hill is a no outlet neighborhood. Every car coming up the hill must also go back down the hill. The traffic on Renton Ave So. And Cedar Ave So. Would be increased dramatically(60 homes x 2 cars x 3 trips per day=360 cars)that will use these streets everyday. Renton Ave So. is a narrow street with parking on only one side. It was not designed to handle this increased volume of traffic. Cedar Ave So. which has parking on both sides cannot handle current volumes let alone the proposed increased amount of cars. In closing, I would like to see the Renton School District or the City of Renton find a more suitable use of the property that would benefit the city as a whole and not just a builder or a few homeowners.to the detriment of many. Let's preserve our open spaces. Cordially, Patricia Gilroy • Homeowner 535 Renton Ave So. Renton, WA. 98055 �.v FI o v --(AS March 27, 2000 DEVELOPMENT 'NNING Mayor Jesse Tanner CITY OF c';,t�''N City of Renton APR 0 3 2000 1055 So Grady Way Renton, Wa 98055 RECEIVED Re: Your Letter Dated March 22, 2000 (Development on Renton Hill) Dear Hon Mayor: Thank you for responding to our February 17 letter. Apparently your staff was a little confused when compiling your response. Even though all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the Growth Management Act, it also allowed variances for those properties that were not accessible except through improved road and street systems. The ten acres on top of Renton Hill, and subsequent 56 homes and related traffic, is such an area that can only be accessed by streets that are in excess of five feet narrower than the City's own Plan will allow for new developments. I am sure that the Comprehensive Plan would not allow legal street widths to be narrower than the law allows for new developments. Therefore, the re-zone somewhat conflicts with the City's laws and ordinances for minimum street width access. I doubt very seriously that the developer could afford to widen Renton Avenue for almost its entire length, nor Cedar Avenue, which was already re-built in 1975. Lastly, your letter stated: "By concentrating the growth within the city, the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of, the City." It is highly unlikely that, unless physically relocated by the State Department of Game, the eight deer that inhabit our neighborhood will want to "develop in a habitat" outside the City limits. Since they raise their young in our back yards between Cedar and Jones and between 4th and 10th Streets, any new development in the ten acre natural habitat proposed for development will only force the deer deeper into our neighborhood instead of"outside the City limits." Thank you for your continued concern and I trust that level thinking will prevail. Sincerely, Mr a Mrs Wm Collins 420 Cedar Ave So Renton, WA 98055 cc: City Clerk, Jana Hanson, Jennifer Henning, and Elizabeth Higgins . . ---.. , . I . . :., 0 • . . CITY OF RENTON FEB 21 2000 . • 141 , . ‘.. ts._ __ - . ... . . RECEIVED . . . CITY CLEI9Ka.OFFICE . -•: • • • : 1,--L"Q.- &-c‘&-5\- c--.1-.. ..- C•--',\. xli\.3.-.- --N.., _ ,,),v5- -,!*5..\,..q._ (2--,_,..,,,s,,, _-_ ,• . )\L-._•,.,Ni, ..y.(y)c‘L.... )1-L,...777T Cr...\..C\- .Vcs-NN\Qr\\;1-Vs-sc..5\K5\3\-0\s-&- N-Ln..\_4(2_ CLN&_ . sv.... 13-X4\ - -i1/41-.‘. -. 14 -• %•- (:)--. , .0•xi\ .... <..... ‘...c3. J.I.,..E._. Q.. 1c.ANd .. t -*..1,. .0-. 1`4•- C.... , 0..NNN...e>..W.t..-%-) . . . ,C0-1•4 ..r--t-)‘. ,_ -.-- •-•\W).-- - -%•N•S--e%-C- )---- t -%_K_N.I.S.'. _ .- , N-\ _%.-Q--• 0.-X4`.. 0,-,-.-N.-1 • • \ • C131>XCV\ & ST . . . .--.- ,01- \•.,-. C----V s,.\. vn4L.\._\-•1 :(71L‘_•...‘"-ICI-*.- - .0- . ... . . . -1L). .sl.AVL'N-Ni O ---- /S- ..S51 ._ ' -• ------• - • • . . . - -• .t•-•,--- ...-- -&.C.S.-_ \_.%:.- 1 9C"- . • ./ (.\ • . ,Cov....\11 .•_-\o-r--s, N.-•\.- v.3,- . 16,..;:,...C.a.‘4‘.. :.... . ,,__ ,N.._LztK._ c,. ci;Itc5---, r • AL s- Lio-- C.1 Q\S.,_,\),1,-(t0--‘•:_stel-0-s-‘• A--‘ 4. 0 . \----- Q._,&\6.--t.t\_,A-4,-Z3\.12.-- c.\., 0.- siNN-as &)--‘. k-1/4"-- \.\:1/41"3,r_Ne-- 1/4 •-ri-- . L.N..V._ : 3&\. .S.).-.NN.(-9-__ --b---N-"A\t r\- •S\tv•-0.-\---- <-\\- -- &VAI----- ) . \ N‘A.cw\) .\.K-)C‘\ Ni\4\Pc`c:T) .'\ 0-. \$\e...1e2C)-c-ESIOX:\ C`-'N"\ -,._\..‘ •-kS‘>..1 Q... .•ss\3•NMiN___) 1\\&._‘-v._ C\-1." , 'iNz-N-.2-i&_\-\.;N-e3t, ,&04..$04.- C--‘3•NA. . :k&J Q`Wt0,-'‘.S.-- ••i\-1?,-NIN- -).•- \ ,_>,--‘...A%-ec.".3..rc.c.- . OsJWI___, ,..,...„...A,- ... .,,- ,,,,,,..-..: c,..... .9- --•.-.1r.-.\N C-"Nk- e`-S-\..C ---\SZ--- .3:-‘,,,.. . : -- -NtsiCL\-C\&°-'C4\---- -*. t4Z.-• -•\-!-N C'''‘.\ ArNv-Q.-. k.I.\_ _.11.. :-, .VYVt.1•9--_ C-N--.. V .A.N ._\•s\-\).-..R.S•t.P... .- 63).LN.N.}.._\_. C:c",x....\ __ 1..,.Z_±, , \ ,•:ti .. - : !1/4—. Is._,c•-\2.S,-Q..___ c--:- . . _.C•s\--__ _ .\ &e..cL-k, . s... c, 4_ .<\_) ,evle__ 4- . .\\/._‘-_- e-}se&N.v- % . ' -, 7-144c.\->-c-• .. ...ce.c; - : .5e-c- , .._._ ....... ..C7-.N. CV.Q.)-1\_L.7.1.)6&.:.... _.-s...1,-.. .$) 4. ._.&%-!..a. ....,. ' ... i...•• .. ctS.NKrCiNtl\V "-'(‘\,kV- Nc0.--:"-t.- -iVrc. ---- --- r-..--M6-1- °Nc)-- --ZrKINNIQ , ..3__25vais ...._n,_ s_( -..t,s..i c....-__:,.. .. Z.( • ....3 -.. . '.-1-4\-j-. - 11- ---VCS-i\--'.i.Sci:tIS\-fl. -- t)'-- -- . • __N: ''.0..1-.. --- t-INAcc- AZ - " "--'43r-.1.74VA... • --''\D-Sr41% --'.."1-WO' -- ---. .-....\ -._,---c.c.4.--Dr—\6\---1(r._ :--a/w • - - -i-.-7- 57-6,-R's6v:k-"Nrro-- --'11,-4';,\INN--i40 -- -'' ---x-- --5;-U'- ,,i--Q-.7Nocs '"-**" ---- -- ••-- • • _...0._.. ,c.. - • i-b45\1--k --(%.-.\--w... ----- --5:--- _- -- tr 51- s-•=0 ;N% ,- ----74N1;-- • ... .. .. --Dc. -S-V.-Sa\-•(`‘N\ -N,Ser "."-"Ir-o- \ID- .----zy-m--, \ --is"\c--s,N- Th —AV_ • ,c-- - cwiT ---NVI: 0' -\--1-N-.:%-s'iy. ---' 1D'7"'Ss - V\S-141r - )----%-r\NN --- •Th. --13.T\-4A.7*-S. -C.-7re% ----- 7\NtY Vis-Ar-c•Ccivr :C. --5-NAQ•-•.„- ----J-0,-.1,..„..tcD• . _ ---6,sx_____ . -----f\.::: --b_.-Nrcr\c---R4-4-4-JvA.0.- ---4J%-vw . ,_..--0.\\•.•,(,- __,,_wz.,—>JA-mv...\- _...\--a -----<-•rsAv-2-2_ Ncb.N--o "Nr-, -, -N-c-0- --c-c\__\,_`.4\'`fc)k m -----,A-- ---z-1\...-is-i-c-T. --- --rx - --csiN ---->,-r\s-a-AT\ --vsc•-x-N-Q : _______),,0 - ---2- -o -‘,--n\-;tp--w-v _,1/4--N4N - ---c -- cc --7\V ----s. ....--czy*iN7 7"7"`s•o- -- \VD. ---- --c-N --ls- k-,,--\:,_ "\-‘7-%- ,-o-- -\,-- c --D.1-- -.nz•-cri•C - _C:: : "• . N -~.-Z- \-i \ A -- --- X\-4( --N -s ('% • . -INN •- ZS-Jsc\Sk --1 . -....:*,,w- N-- - • I'\74-int_ c&-AG5' ---<0•C2S -ka --i\W --W5 N.--ok -17-VN AO 4\z-\-e•A----6SW----Yrtit.VCV 2._CY -c7• - • )v.S- 1Aci4 tcs------ -0 --ZI:CcV .--,0 --t31/4.N, _.(2 -,c_9%)• --zk--0.,,c` -76NIN/ ---n-crw4-- -NA-vils \--c,;\-N-N -. ,.\-----c---cc-N ,L-c-4.N.N.,,,-. -,K.- --N-i --'5=N•cy • . -4-vsm-S\ •-iNs"---40 -"s;TN-C .->-• 5L—TA-N-S-- Nq-,-,-,c) •• • ---,4-•\3ND---•c ar N•••N-0•*- -cos•.N_Sr% -14\S'C)N34---:k14-\CNZ .-"cc-:- • . ----ci-v-4 . ---S -. -14- --0 c.,, -)kc,r\rarC\1 . 0 . , . . •. _ ,, ' •• --,,-, . . , _ , , • • • • , 1 ! ' i . . - . 1 }-) 1 )1- • • 1 1 , I , , , 1 pq I _ ) ,z)1 -4ji A j rijpG;7i t li • ._ • j. ! 'NA . III A A j . i 41 A J1 11 - 11 ) 1 • • CA, I , 41 1 1 _ )4(. . 01 9 'd . - 1 I H 1 jo _ AA. dill ' d4 ji* 1 ) I 1 1 ) . . . ! ) -1 1 - 1 1 ' 1 • I . cr4, 4 Ht' j 1 14 JA 41 - - -,i 1 . HI 1 0 i . .0 - i 4J1leet I . I ' ll 1 . .. .. •I1 • . I I l ii • ._ _ 1 I I I I I I . - 1 I • I 1 i 1 , • •• 1i4•• ' USA F ' Cheryl Dana .kA L.E 6y i • .706 Renton,lve.S. ✓ ,o' Renton W,19R0S5_�00R `' �"""`� �- - -"'`� •• 'Er tui; to P bi LD v--�- �— 19 (c e r . -' ,t? . 2QQ� �� MOM. — -- k, / • cfaAAT /‘N C`TL C�L.)V\C \ C_-, \'' ck.c.\••-•( k-k---)C\"-( [0,c-C— c. C' ' Ze.(A-7-tesvk 9 80-_:`==2:732 Ili I lii I1 Il 11 I1 1f Ilii 11 Ili • • 4. .� � l7 � v�y/ - ce.--61r) edipe.e .) - £2' G Lie.7-7-c-e-e /�-� "X-) .Le. .� � � . AN Vkli ti I 44 +1 11 Ni 1 6 4-1 . 1 „ IpH t4 I. I � I rza-/ /r7)-7;7 r-r-Y7r 7,7 ); 9-, �d rx°2 -ak '97 7 (773 1771-7- 9;* 411/4 /Al , 2? • fr-2'1'21 �r (7-7-77,, r i • /5.,x, L E , • • ,Ez •- :1 • .110?t • if 7S7 e • •/06-5" • 1. 1 . . 1, ; , • ., x ,~ CITY (: r RENTON ..AL .t Mayor r Jesse Tanner March 22, 2000 Mr. and Mrs.W.Free 1012 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr. and Mrs.Free: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 27,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers (Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new • growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a "party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S. c rely, sse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 •, CITY C —r RENTON j ' , Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Deone and Christopher Perlatti 1520 South 9th Street Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Perlatti: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 24,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. n erely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 RI This oaoer contains 50%recycled material.20%oost consumer CITY Lsr RENTON .,;:.: Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22, 2000 James E. Baker 524 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill • Dear Mr. Baker: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 25, 2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill, you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth, in 1990, the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA, the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share" of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton, the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993, all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record" so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S' erely, c:70v2) ffe'444. Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -,Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 c. CITY C• ' RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Monica and Mike Bishop 326 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Bishop: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 28,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share" of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S. rely, cg7;/). esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,-Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 CITY C -7 RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Frank Gallacher 719 Jones Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Gallacher: This is written in response to your letter,which we received March 2,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a long-time citizen of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. erely, o.4 esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 apt. . . _ . . . . . CITY (A- i RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 John R. Guiliani 1400 South 7th Street Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.GuiRani: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 28,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sinc , J e Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 Cam] n.:.........................cno,.....,,..i.............;..I nnor........,,..........,.. 4i . ` CITY C-_ ' RENTON :,''' Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Dwight and Janice Potter 2411—SE 8th Place Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Potter: This letter is written in response to your letter of March 1,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on'wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. As to your concerns related to geologic stability in the Renton Hill area,a geotechnical study,report,and recommendations would be a requirement of the project proposal,should one be submitted. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to.contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. cerely, 4 ',Jesse Tanner • Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 •• CITY L_ r RENTON �. .fit p ,,: Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Robert Lux 1410 South 7"'Street Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Lux: We have received your letter regarding the possible development of a residential project on Renton Hill. We would like to clarify that no proposal has been submitted to the City nor has a land use application been received. Should such a proposal be submitted,it will be reviewed with the utmost diligence by the Development Services Department of the City. Just as citizens of our community have a right to oppose development projects,property owners have the right to propose development. Such projects must be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan and zoning regulations of the City. Obviously,property owners also have the right to sell their land to others. When a private property owner applies to develop or redevelop their land,the City is obligated by law to accept and process those applications. If the development is consistent with adopted plans and codes of the City,then it must be approved. It may be approved,however,with conditions that address potential impacts to the environment. We appreciate the comments of our citizens when formulating these conditions. Government,however,cannot intercede in property owners' decisions to develop or to sell their land to developers. Also,like all school districts in the State of Washington,the Renton School District is required to follow certain procedures, set by state law,when disposing of land not needed for school facilities. It is our understanding that these procedures were followed by the school district. The proceeds from such sales are used for other school facilities,equipment,and programs. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si, ely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton,Washington 98055.- (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 •. , . CITY LT,, RENTON _ Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Mr./Mrs./Ms.Hopkins and Chambers PO Box 691 Renton,WA 98057 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr./Mrs./Ms.Hopkins and Chambers: This letter is written in response to your letter,which we received March 3,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of,the City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sin r ly, c7trA.1"404-4."... " esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 ... . . ___. . . . . . ___. 40 I _' ., ._ CITY G-I' RENTON iiiL t, ,_ Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Dina N. Calhoun and Robert E.Davis 433 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms. Calhoun and Mr.Davis: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 25,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si , `- ely, ,. - , ,, .7,..,,,,,, =sse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 ['7r7 n,;................a,,;..,.cno/.,.,..,...i..a...,,,,,..,.i nnoi.....,.,................ r 41 r0' CITY Ls7 RENTON ..LL Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.M.Aim Houser 2331 SE 8th Place Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Houser: This letter is written in response to your letter of March 3,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the City. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sine. :1, C7 Je-Se Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 • fr: .. '�; CITY G.' RENTON MI ' Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms. Agnes Koestl 428 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Koestl: This letter is written in response to your letter of March 2,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be,accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sin ely, se Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way- Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 --- --- CITY (ter RENTON ..u. Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms. Gina Custer 1209 South 7th Street Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms. Custer: We have received your letter regarding the possible development of a residential project on Renton Hill.Thank you for conveying your concerns about issues related to this potential development. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. We would also like to clarify that no proposal has been submitted to the City nor has a land use application been received. Should such a proposal be submitted,it will be reviewed with the utmost diligence by the Development Services Department of the City. Just as citizens of our community have a right to oppose development projects,property owners have the right to propose development. Such projects must be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan and zoning regulations of the City. Obviously,property owners also have the right to sell their land to others. When a private property owner applies to develop or redevelop their land,the City is obligated by law to accept and process those applications. If the development is consistent with adopted plans and codes of the City,then it must be approved. It may be approved,however,with conditions that address potential impacts to the environment. We appreciate the comments of our citizens when formulating these conditions. Government,however,cannot intercede in property owners'decisions to develop or to sell their land to developers. Also,like all school districts in the State of Washington,the Renton School District is required to follow certain procedures,set by state law,when disposing of land not needed for school facilities. It is our understanding that these procedures were followed by the school district. The proceeds from such sales are used for other school facilities,equipment,and programs. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sine," Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Refecral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner _ 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 �,i0 CITY Crs� RENTON 4. _ a� Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Phil and Bonnie Johnson 350 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 • Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs. Johnson: This letter is written in response to your letter of March 8,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use.It is our understanding that these procedures were followed by the school district.Another aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value.The proceeds from such sales are used for other school facilities, equipment,and programs. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sinc y, az=,"ov.-t„rk:,-,sP J 01 sse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 •. { CITY C. RENTON fi Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Lynn and Marian Thrasher 904 Grant Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr. and Mrs.Thrasher: This letter is written in response to your letter of March 5,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as long-time residents of Renton you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. It is our understanding that these procedures were followed by the school district.Another aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value.The proceeds from such sales are used for other school facilities, equipment,and programs. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sin r ly, J sse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 �►_. - -. . . C.) °'et) City of Renton AFR♦ ♦ Development Services Division 41'�,N�o'� 1055 South Grady Way, 6th Fir Renton, WA 98055 Date: March 9, 2000 TO: Dolores Gibbons, Superintendent FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Sr. Planner Renton School District Development Services Div. Development/Planning Phone: (425) 204-2340 Phone: (425) 430-7382 Fax: (425) 204-2456 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 ISUBJECT: Bennett Homes development I Number of pages including cover sheet: 9 REMARKS: ❑ Original to [ Urgent ❑ As ® Please ❑ For your be mailed Requested Comment review We have received similar letters to the ones you and I discussed last week. We are preparing responses. Since several question the process the School District followed, I would like to re- assure them and provide the dates of publication of the notice of sale and public hearing (South County Journal?) and the date of the hearing. Thank you! itairtifrvn Awl IM tA. Ahead of the curve • CITY : '7.‘P„ • !..,••••• : • 7. ‘: Works Department-' Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator . • February 23,2000 • . : • , • - - : • • AirOONG : Bill Collins • . • : - 4:In - • 420 Cedar Ave So RE Renton,WA 98055 C , • . Dear Mr Collins • ``‘, Thank you for your recent letter expressing your concerns with the additional traffic from - potential development on Renton Hill. Your letter outlined the potential traffic problems on Renton Ave S and Cedar Ave S. Any additional traffic'from such a subdivision would use these . two residential streets. The City has not yet received formal application for this subdivision. However, we have had • . , • preliminary discussions with the developer for this project, and we outlined City requirements for . this type of single family development. A traffic study will be required as part of the project submittal, which must address the potential traffic impacts to these two streets, as well as capacity and level:of service analysis, We will be asking the developer to provide written responses 011ie.comments from neighbors, including the concerns raised in your letter. : ,• ,.; • '• A public hearing will be held prior to i'decision being made on the development request You may wish to provide testimony at this hearing, or submit additional written comment during the project's review and comment period. Notice of the hearing date will be provided shortly after an application is made to the City. If you have further questions regarding this project, or the City review,process for the project, please contact Elizabeth Higgins, (425-530-7382)with the Development Services Division. , • Sincerely, • Neil Watts,PE Plan Review Supervisor Development Services Division • cc: Jana Hanson • ElitalietMiggins 1,6e Haro • • • . , • • . _ _ . . _ ) 1055 South Grady Way''L Renton, 98055 .• Lee Haro �+ �� V Transportation Planning City of Renton J FEB 2 Z �4 ,��D 1055 So Grady Way 2000 Renton, WA 98055 Transportation Systems Div. Dear Mr. Haro: • I am writing about a residential development project planned for a ten acre area near the intersections of 7th Place S., Beacon Way South and Jones Avenue South. The developer is planning a little over 56 homes in this tract. These homes, added to the existing homes on Renton Hill, will put an unusual burden of traffic on Renton Avenue South. Renton Ave. So varies in width from 25' - 11" to 26' - 2" wide and has 210 homes that access this street only. I am sure that this width is under-designed for the proposed traffic loading. (Which would be 2.5 vehicle trips per day times the number homes serving directly onto Renton Ave (210), or 665 • daily trips for residences only. This figure does not include the Park). Given this many car-trips per residence per day, plus the seasonal sports- related traffic to Philip Arnold Park for baseball, little league football practice, and softball scheduled for this park, Renton Avenue will become difficult for existing residents.to traverse. At the present time there is parking allowed on only one side of the street, but the street is not wide enough for double passing on the remaining pavement. Thus, the signs at the top that say "Yield To Uphill Traffic." My wife and I are asking your help in questioning the viability of this project when it is submitted to the City for review. Based on this data, I hope you agree with us in making Renton Avenue south safe for our children to cross without dodging more cars. There are no street intersections between South 3rd and South 7th, thus pedestrians may feel free to cross at any point. With parking allowed on .only one side, visitors to the west side must cross to the .east. When Renton • Avenue is slow, people tend to go down Cedar Avenue which has parking on both sides. It should be noted that Cedar Ave South varies in width from 26' - 10" to 27 feet wide. This does not allow for two way traffic except at points where there are no vehicles parked. Thus, adding 56 homes and the related 140 additional vehicles per day is not in the best interests of the existing residents on Renton Hill. The developer does not wish to widen Renton Avenue to the legal width for a collector street. We wish to express our concerns to you at this time. Thank you for your assistance. 0 ‘ 1 ,ao Bill Collins 420 Cedar Ave So Renton 98055 CITY OF RENTON FEB 2 3 2000 Rich and Cindy Yarbrough 338 Renton Ave. S. CITY CLERKS OFFICE Renton,WA 98055 Renton City Council City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton WA 98055 February 21, 2000 Dear Renton City Council, - As you know,the Bennet Homes Developers are trying to purchase and develop the land on Renton Hill just across from Philip Arnold Park. Bennet Homes is planning to build approximately 70 homes. I understand that the land is owned by the Renton School District. The main thoroughfare to get to Renton Hill is the street Renton Ave S. Currently this street is very busy with traffic and is only a one-lane road where there is parking on the east side of the street. Down hill traffic has to continually pull over to let the uphill traffic through. Building 70 more homes at the top of Renton Hill will exponentially cause much more traffic and safety problems. With all the major freeway traffic problems that everyone must contend with every day, it would be nice not to have to contend with additional traffic problems and volumes in our own neighborhood. Also, We think that building more homes instead of more Natural Park like areas is the last thing any city really needs. There is constant development in Renton,where all trees are cut down and apartments, condos, houses and strip malls are being built. Look at SE 128th St. (Cemetery Hill road) in the Renton Highlands in the last year. Currently there is massive development going on there. It is time to really look at what is happening to our city. There must be a better solution to all this development. Yes, there needs to be some development but probably not as much as there is now. We were wondering if there is a better solution to the Renton Hill property project. These are alternatives we have thought of for use of the property: 1. Perhaps the Renton School District could donate the land to the City of Renton and the City could make a nature park or bird sanctuary out of it. This type of solution could benefit so many Renton residents rather than just putting more money into the pockets of a developer. The park area would provide a teaching environment for children, a place for school field trips to be taken, for family nature walks, and would help the environment and beauty of Renton. 2. Consider the residents of Renton Hill purchasing the land and donating it to the City as"open space". Perhaps the City of Renton could create a separate tax district and the Renton Hill residents would have to vote to tax themselves over the next 30 years to pay for the land. 3. Sell the property to 2 or 3 parties that would only build single homes giving them estate sized property. This would increase the value of all Renton Hill. 4. Only allow Bennet Homes or any other builder to build 30 homes on the property giving approximately 1/3 acre lots to each home site. At least this would cut down some on the additional traffic problems and would leave more open space between the homes rather than cramming the houses so close together like some many other new neighborhoods in Renton. Please consider this carefully as you decide whether to grant Bennet Homes a building permit and a go ahead to purchase the property. It is time to put the environment and quality of living in Renton above the buck. Thank you, ti't‘ct2 Lye, Rich and C' dy Yarbrou r CITY OF February 17, 2000 Renton City Council RENTON City of Renton FEB 2 1 2000 1055 So Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Dear Council Members: I am writing to you concerning the development of a 10-acre piece of property in my Renton Hill neighborhood located to the north of Philip Arnold park. It has already attracted the attention of Bennett Homes as a possible sight for fifty plus homes! I maintain this acreage has a much better use than more homes. A major consideration is the stress on our infrastruacture in terms of increased use of our neighborhood streets. These extra cars will add a negative impact- especially during the spring, summer and fall sports seasons when Philip Arnold park is heavily used. Another glut of cars would add to the wear and tear on road surfaces, spew out more air pollutants and noise (the freeway through our neighborhood already adds this aplenty), increase congestion at the two exit points on the hill, and make safety concerns for pedestrians, pets, children, and the growing number of bike riders very real. I don't believe we can underestimate the value of this "jewel" in our midst. If it is allowed to be lost forever under homes and paved surfaces,the number of people who benefit will be limited to only those homeowners living there. But another,higher use could be felt by our entire community for years to come if its potential as a green space is realized and acted upon by forward-thinking officials and citizens. With the grant writing expertise employed both by Renton and Renton School - District personnel, it should be very possible to find monies to underwrite the cost of turning this area into an urban wildlife and nature preserve,bird sanctuary and ecology and environmental study space; all these are areas of science study by Renton students. This plan allows a minimum of intrusion by humans and a maximum of benefit for already stressed wildlife and people. Such an innovative and aware approach to land use would truly mark Renton as a city "ahead of the curve." I respectfully ask you to consider this proposal as the better use of this precious land. Sincerely COWL Carol Collins 420 Cedar Ave So Renton, WA 98055 Jesse Tanner,Mayor Dr.Dolores Gibbons, Sup't City of Renton Renton School District 403. 1055 South Grady Way 300 S.W. 7th Street Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton City Council CITY OF RENTON Renton School Board City of Renton Renton School District 403 1055 South Grady Way FEB 2 1 2000 300 S.W. 7th Street Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 16 Feb 00 Ladies and Gentlemen; . As you near completion of your respective Taj Mahals could you possibly consider giving some attention to the prospect of Bennett Homes' proposal to destroy forever a 10+acre portion of Renton Hill by building some 60+houses thereon? We understand they only have an option on the property and that no formal petition for a building permit, etc.,has yet been presented to the Council. However,knowing how alert our crack city administration is,I am sure you are unofficially well aware of their intent. It is not an exaggeration to declare their initiative a potential disaster for the stalwart denizens who live high atop beautiful, and relatively peaceful,Renton Hill. No one who knows Renton Hill even casually can be unaware of the traffic disaster its two undersized and over-trafficked streets present and what the impact of another 60+ houses and at least an additional 120 vehicles would have on our fragile links to the western world. To permit additional development up here would be tantamount to abandonment of your responsibility to help maintain our quality of life. I would commend to you the following: The City should use whatever means available to urge the School Board to transfer the land in question to the City. The City could then charge the fine Park Department with developing the land into something of value to all. It is possible the City might have to buy the land from the School District. Raising $2.2 million for such a noble purpose should be no challenge for an administration which was able to conjure $20 million+out of whole.cloth for our grand new City Hall, in arrogant disregard of repeated voter disapproval. Finally, shame on the School Board for seriously considering letting those 10+ acres slip from the public domain, probably under the premise that $2.2 million would make a difference in raising the standards of education in our community., As if 3 months from now anyone would remember where the$2.2 million went. To any who may have read this,thank you. To all, please try to do the right thing in this matter. Bert H. Custer • • • • GRY� BertH. Custer � PM � 714 Cedar Ave. So. .• rM; . Renton,WA 98055 16 2" Renton City Council % City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 • sao:, x:z z eis II,I,IL„1,11,,,11,1„I,l„1ll,,,I,1 1111,I,I'I,I„l,1,,,11,1 • • - CITY OF RENTON • February 18,2000 FEB 2 2 2000 RENT Fl ON IL ED A( RECEIVED UV CLERK'S OFFICE oo F"a 22 cOUR T To Whom It May Concern: 2 Recently, it has come to my attention that the "Bennett Homes Construction Company" has plans of trampling up the narrow two-lane road of Renton hill with bulldozers, tractors, cement trucks etc. This company would like to take 10 acres of established forest(the only remaining natural habitat in the City of Renton) which currently supports a variety of wildlife and vegetation and turn it into 60 new homes. Let there be no misunderstanding, I am writing this letter on behalf of my family and the preservation of the integrity of the neighborhood. With special attention to the wildlife. and vegetation,that speak for themselves, but in a language which does not support the bottom line...money. An example, the other day I was driving up the hill and was taken aback by a full-grown deer majestically standing at the top of the hill. Though it would be a hassle I could move my family to another place if the Bennett Homes Construction Company gets their way...it won't be so easy for the deer to relocate. Does Bennett Homes have a contingency plan for the forest and wildlife it is wiping out? My husband and I recently purchased a home on the Renton Hill and will be moving in to this community on April 01,,2000. We have lived in the Queen Anne neighborhood for the last few years and have enjoyed living in the city. During our search for a home we looked at many neighborhoods in Seattle,but decided on Renton Hill because of its charm, nearby forest and park with the additional bonus of an older more tight knit community than a newer development. Unfortunately, adding 60 new homes would not continue to support the aforementioned factors which were the rationale behind our purchase...the traffic up that hill alone will be a nightmare. The reality is...the makeup of the neighborhood celebrates a diverse mix of affluence,, education, passion and most important of all we are united together against this proposition. I am not naive...this is about money, not the protection of wildlife and the natural habitat....our neighborhood will not sit idle, but will fight every step of the way. Reaards. 07. Carolyn Ossorio l'l1►►,I,l„I►I,I,I,,,11„I,I,►►II,►►I,1„Ihl,,,►It,I„l►►I►1! SAL cv,-D v\%-- ) • , o �._:�:._._ ,• a t� - 'i �ry-r- LW' SO deem Du?ss0 �, CITY C, ' RENTON will` Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Mr.Barton Bennett 1807 SE 7th Court Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Bennett: This letter is written in response to your letter,which we received on February 21,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to acconunodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S',``•-rely, f/r' :. esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 AG► CITY RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Mr.Ken Adams 706 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Adams: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. You mentioned the need for a"skateboard park"in the City. You may be interested to know that the Renton Park Department is currently working on plans for just such a facility for the youth of our City. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. • erely, esse Tanner Mayor • cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 .. • CITY RENTON NAL Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22, 2000 Ms. Cheryl Danza 706 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Danza: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. In 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). An aspect of the GMA is that the population growth must remain within city limits, in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development. The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization. By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of,the city. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton, is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a "party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. u cerely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way y - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 4 _ .fia, CITY C:�J' RENTON ha 1. r Mayor =� MJ `:k Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Mr.Mario H.Tonda Mr.Victor J.Tonda 1308 Beacon Way South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Mario Tonda and Mr.Victor Tonda: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as long-time residents of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told hove much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss.this or have further concerns. cerely, I Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 ex- „` - CITY (. RENTON mall Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Ruth Bradley 709 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Bradley: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a long-time resident you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future.. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share”of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.City zoning regulations favor this type of development. The property you have referred to on Renton Hill has been zoned Single Family Residential for many years. We are also aware of the potential location of former mine shafts. A thorough geotechnical engineering study would be a requirement of any application submitted to the city in that area. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. erely, c7;44,61"-s."-----"" Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director • Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 CITY RENTON N LL 111 " . Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms. Carol Collins 420 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms. Collins: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 17,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. You are undoubtedly aware of increased development throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. cerely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 c. CITY (, RENTON ..IL Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Dwayne and Nancy Liston 17703— 114th Place SE Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Liston: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 17,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as long-time residents of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth. In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. City zoning regulations favor this type of development. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. erely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 •� ,__ .�, CITY C� ' RENTON 'NAL0 t Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Mr.Bert H. Custer 714 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Custer: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 16,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. City zoning regulations favor this type of development. The property you have referred to on Renton Hill has been zoned Single Family Residential for many years. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school • district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si ely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 •• CITY (s' RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Patricia Gilroy 535 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Gilroy: This letter is written in response to your letter,which we received on February 22,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a long-time resident of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. h�i rely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 •• CITY C s' RENTON �/ ON, Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Paula Provin 712 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Provin: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of,the city. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell.land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. rely, ` esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 4 CITY C -r RENTON f _ Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Dan and Liz Hemenway 1712 SE 7th Court Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr. and Mrs.Hemenway: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 19,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. iii erely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 l EY)TL.{e......................Cnot...,..,-.I,..1.....•.....J nno .....,•................ 40 CITY RENTON tb NILMayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms. Sharon Herman 711 Jones Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Herman: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. City departments,for park land acquisition and for residential planning,attempt to balance the growth of the City so that our community has both houses and open space. It is a difficult task that is becoming more so. We are committed to maintaining the quality of life for the entire community. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S • rely, . r esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 6 5 This natter contains 50%recycled material.20%post consumer WCITY s' RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms. Janet Slapnick 531 Grant Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Slapnick: This letter is written in response to your letter,which we received February 22,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. ncerely, C7041-1A-411 • Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 .. CITY C sr RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ruth Larson Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mrs.Larson: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 19,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers (Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. We appreciate your continued leadership in the community and assure you that we have carefully reviewed the many letters received to date that express neighborhood concerns about this potential development. We have made the many letter-writers parties of record and will inform them if an application has been submitted. Thank you again for your concern. erely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 l.er 'y /61 . . .- .._ CITY OF RENTON ,; • FEB 2 2 2000 RECEIVED • CITY CLERK'S OFFICE .;lam %- .- f' cLi U ,, / ' p,. ._ ./i (i- . ��14-c-- —f- ...g. - 1--. -i✓ftie_.i-e....2.--0„-.Z-,U . _/Lr.---.5.:±.--- .-.Z4rr i??...c ...z_ - i -!- -- lire- 4 ,G%.. --er r , yrr� /t�iU--L -�•!_i— ur Z[-r�i, e-�..-c'/L•c-� —.. -- -----7 ._/- ' .J % �� t—z— fief 4., " N//"-°"Lv- fr---------.G-1-•-- ��/ iuy-yams, cf /J � -Gov- ' 4r-------- v ' - U.�-*-c , .1,6 .-. -e.c7--,--- ,..."2 / . . . &/_.,�, "^e•-r,�v 1-? , .- `�y=��'..y.— — — -✓I ✓Ci-- — �C .� � . �/`,-ram j�-ry''-�� r�� --l.'—«��/��- .&e-r--47:i ..-e---, #, r G- -. -_ :yr/ !fit_ G' •!/ '.--e-• ZfiL-ti A ✓- Uzi, . . ; .-c ._ (jf�'. c-%G'' ,2 ,. .,. ._ 2 ,� :c. z� v _ / . ' � /L -- �c� _ -' ,.... -�C. h=u :e..: , .- f it • -7 ( / / L - • -- �- -ram -y ,- . 4 ! '' .' , _7 may ' o — - cam- -��-�i ; e . . b771-1°=1 . - -72, • . • yy3d _ O^��c:,Li'/ r ^ /' 'yam 3��y3 ,I/ j :may . • • WEikk CITY RENTON ••u. Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Rich and Cindy Yarbrough 338 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Yarbrough: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 21,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division andPublic Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. We appreciate the creative ideas you put forth in your letter,unfortunately,the School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S. rely, esse Tanner Mayor - cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - R!'�enton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 / G1 S This nanar nnntains 5f1%rervrlwd malarial 2fl%nnst rnnm!mar .. CITY C-2 RENTON 1/4. Mayor 110 Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Barbara Lux 1412 South 9th Street Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Lux: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a long-time resident of the City,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. cerely, - esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral//20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 i'D CITY CZ RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Quentin and Rena Ellis 715 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Ellis: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 21,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes. In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. We are also aware of the potential location of former mine shafts. A thorough geotechnical engineering study would be a requirement of any application submitted to the city in that area. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. y�S'. •r rely, Jesse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 "A - . . ___. . . . ___. �, -a• - CITY L s' RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22, 2000 Ralph and Ann Carter 630 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr. and Mrs. Carter: This letter is written in response to your letter,which we received on February 23,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for wildlife on Renton Hill. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that come with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization. By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. • We assure you that if an application is received for this project we will review it with the utmost thoroughness. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a "party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S' ely, else Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 •• =�.` CITY (" RENTON Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22, 2000 Mr. John P. Burkhalter 901 Jones Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.Burkhalter: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns,apprise you of the current status of the project, and inform you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. It is our understanding that the Renton School District has not,in fact, sold the property in question. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. Additionally, it is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. Regardless,this issue is best addressed to the Renton School District and School Board. As to your other concern,wildlife and natural areas within the city,the City shares your concern for wildlife on Renton Hill.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development. The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization. By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of,the city. We assure you that if an application is received for this project we will review it with the utmost thoroughness. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a "party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. S'-...rely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 ®. 4 91 * CITY C s' RENTON i Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Patricia A.Burkhalter 901 Jones Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Burkhalter: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill. The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Community members of Renton Hill have made us aware of the"deer problem." We feel that the deer will slowly develop new habitats outside of the City where development densities are lower. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si ,-= ely, + J I esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 dP . :. CITY C.° RENTON .1� , Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Douglas and Dena Brandt 610 Renton Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Mr.and Mrs.Brandt: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 19,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill. The City of Renton Engineering Plan Review Division and Public Works Departments have already discussed this issue and will continue to do so. The Emergency Services providers(Police Department and Fire Prevention Bureau)would also be involved in review of any proposed plans submitted to the City. In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as long-time residents of Renton Hill,you are undoubtedly • aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. As to your suggestion that the property remain as it is,the School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Si ely, c:7;fd"0"-g"--,o'" esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 Thic nanar rnntainc F(1%rervrlart material Pr PA,nnct rnncumar " '1 CITY RENTON m N Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Dorlene Bressan 901 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms.Bressan: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 21,2000.Thank you for conveying so eloquently your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge those concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.In addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a resident of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA).As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.hi the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city. We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of, or on the edges of,the city. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. i erely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator • Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 .. CITY C :7 RENTON LL y Ma or Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms.Rosemary Grassi P.O.Box 1188 Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms. Grassi: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 17,2000.Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge those concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. The City shares your concern for traffic circulation and vehicle/pedestrian safety on Renton Hill.hi addition to traffic problems particular to Renton Hill,as a resident of Renton,you are undoubtedly aware of increased traffic volumes throughout the City and region. This is partly the result of an increase in population in the Puget Sound area that exceeds growth during the same period in other parts of the United States. In order to cope with this growth,in 1990,the State of Washington passed the Growth Management Act(GMA). As part of the GMA,the population growth for the Puget Sound area was estimated for twenty years into the future. Each city and county was told how much of that growth they would be expected to accommodate. Each jurisdiction has an obligation to provide housing for their"fair share"of the increased regional population growth.In the City of Renton,the belief is that the quality of life will be better if this new growth can be accommodated in single family homes.In 1993,all properties in the City were rezoned to implement the twenty year Comprehensive Plan under the GMA. Another aspect of the GMA is that the projected population growth must remain within city limits,in order to preserve our forest and agricultural lands that lay beyond the city.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that comes with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. The School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. Sirely, esse Tanner Mayor cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500 /FAX(425)430-6523 a7 This nanar rrnntainc cn%reevclad material pm,nnct rnrici imor 4i X'; - CITY � � RENTON ..fir •A Mayor Jesse Tanner March 22,2000 Ms. Carolyn Ossorio 105 Mercer Street,Apt. 113 Seattle,WA 98109 Re: Development on Renton Hill Dear Ms. Ossorio: This letter is written in response to your letter of February 18,2000. Thank you for conveying your concerns about the potential development of a ten acre property located on Renton Hill.The purpose of this response is to acknowledge your concerns and to apprise you of the opportunities you will have to provide additional comments. As a clarification,the Renton School District,which is a separate entity from the City of Renton,is regulated by state law(Revised Code of Washington 28A.335.120)to follow set procedures to sell land not needed for school use. One aspect of the law is that the land must be sold for at least ninety percent of the market value. It is our understanding that the school district followed required procedures for notification of the sale of this property. Regardless,the City shares your concern for wildlife on Renton Hill.We are aware of the pressure on wildlife that come with increasing development.The reality is that some wildlife adapts more readily to urbanization.By concentrating the growth within the city,the hope is to provide greater opportunities for wildlife to develop habitats outside of,or on the edges of,the city. As a new resident to Renton you may not be aware that there extensive areas that the City is endeavoring to preserve as open space and greenbelts. We hope displaced wildlife will find refuge in these areas. These are most notably along May Creek(the May Creek Greenway),Honey Creek(the Honey Creek Greenway),the Black River Riparian Forest,the Renton Wetlands,the Panther Creek Wetlands,and Cedar River Natural Area. We welcome you to the City of Renton,and assure you that if an application is received for this project we will review it with the utmost thoroughness. We do appreciate your concern for Renton and the residents of Renton Hill. Your letter has made you a"party of record"so you will be notified if an application for this project is submitted to the City. Please feel free to contact Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,at(425)430-7382 should you wish to discuss this or have further concerns. ii S'' •i.•rely, 07 . / Jesse Tanner Mayor • cc: City Clerk/Referral#20019-C Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 �..w:M�..vA..,A�:..,�... ,........�.�x.A..,:,�...,...Pa..e..1.$ r9.9..:::::::::::::::::::....,..,......v....:...............:..., hvN...,.,...K,. ,..N:,,. M.,,..,,,,........v.....,...... ri..,v.mv...,,,:n�xw,....: .v��r .x,,..a ,..1 From: "Michael Mack" <mdmack©gte.net> To: "Elizabeth Higgins" <Ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 2/22/00 11:11AM Subject: Re: Bennett Homes/Renton Hill Original Message From: "Elizabeth Higgins"<Ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> To: <mdmack@gte.net> Cc: "Jennifer Henning" <Jhenning@ci.renton.wa.us>; "Susan Carlson" <Scarlson@ci.renton.wa.us> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 9:18 AM Subject: Bennett Homes/ Renton Hill Thank you for your interest in the above-referenced project. Susan Carlson has forwarded your message to me. I am the planner temporarily assigned to monitor the project. No land use action application has been submitted to the City yet, so there has been no"official"action taken by the City and no permanent planning assignment made. Ms. Carlson and I have been unable to open and read the mail merge letter you attached. Would you please resend it(without the mail merge feature) or fax a hard copy to my attention at 425-430-7300? If your address is on the letter(or you may email it to me) I will add your name to our list of interested parties. Thank you. Elizabeth Higgins,AICP Senior Planner Development/Planning Development Services Division February 22, 2000 Ms Susan Carlson Dept. of Economic Development, Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning City of Renton 1005 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms Susan Carlson: My wife and I have lived on Renton Hill for the past ten years. We have found it to be a very quiet community where people take walks in the street and enjoy Philip Arnold Park. We live just one block from the park and we can hear the children playing. It is a well-used park especially in the spring and fall. There is a wooded area east of the park where a small herd of deer lives that makes occasional forays into the surrounding gardens. Renton Hill is historic; it is built on top of old coalmines. These mines have been long abandoned, but the original miners and their families who lived and worked here set the nature of the community. More recently a score or more large homes have been built on the hill and integrated gradually into the neighborhood. These additions have begun to put a strain on the traffic through the community. I understand that the Renton School Board has sold the woods to the east of Philip Arnold Park to developers-Bennett Homes. The planned development of about 60 new homes on the property across from Philip Arnold Park causes me great concern in several areas. Street Traffic-Access to Renton Hill is limited to two streets,which pass over the 405 freeway. The hill drops sharply to the freeway and the Cedar River. This cuts off access from the north and northeast. Grant Ave S, which appears on maps to give access from the south, is barricaded and does not go through. There is a road that runs by the electrical substation, which gives access to Philip Arnold Park, but it is also barricaded and only opened when snow or ice makes Renton Ave S inaccessible. Renton Ave S is the road most used to get to the top of the hill. Renton Ave S is a narrow, very steep street. Because of the street's narrowness downhill traffic must yield to uphill traffic(parking is restricted to the east side). In winter or during heavy rains the street is slick and treacherous. Large trucks serving the neighborhood have a difficult time making it up the hill and service vehicles, when they must use the west side of the street, pose a hazard. Renton Ave S is used for cross country runners and bicyclists for stamina training because of its steepness. I am concerned that 60 additional families using Renton Ave S and S 7th Street will cause a dangerous hazard because of the increased traffic, especially during the winter. Erosion -The hillside above the Cedar River is very steep and has trees. The trees on the hillside and on top of the hill will be removed, I suppose, to build the houses. I am concerned that the runoff from the new houses • will erode the bank as well as run down S 7th street, causing more problems for the neighborhood. Habitat-The 60 homes development will eliminate ten acres of wooded land. The animals now living in the woods on the top of the hill will loose their habitat. Mountain bike riders will find that another place to enjoy is gone. The woods and the park complement each other. . I feel that the number of new houses planned by Bennett Homes is too large. I would rather see the woods used for other purposes that would enhance the neighborhood rather than reduce the quality of life. Perhaps the woods could be kept as is and used as a bird and animal sanctuary where ecological and environmental studies could be carried out. I would like to see the City of Renton and the Renton School Board take an interest in this matter. Working together with the members of the neighborhood we could come up with an innovative program that would benefit the School District, the City, and the neighborhood. Sincerely, Michael Mack and Cynthia Mack 906 High Ave S Renton, WA 98055 425-226-9262 CC: "Jennifer Henning"<Jhenning@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Susan Carlson" <Scarlson@ci.renton.wa.us> • • 0C1TY OF RENTON • • FEB 2 3 2000 February 19, 2000 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Jesse Tanner, Mayor Renton City Council City of Renton City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA. 98055 Renton, WA. 98055 Over the next few days you will be receiving several letters from Renton Hill residents. We are requesting your help and cooperation with the Renton School District to see if we can fmd a way that the property the District is selling (across from Philip Arnold Park) can be used to enhance rather than destroy one of Renton's oldest neighborhoods. Our roads are now past capacity and the magnitude of the project proposed will gridlock Renton Avenue South and create an insurmountable safety issue. We would have to request a great deal of traffic control items at the Cities expense. (Cross walks at every corner and in areas where there are no corners, yield or stop signs at every corner, speed limit signs, Police patrols for traffic control, traffic light changes as far as length of time per cycle on Mill Ave. So. and So. 4th Ave., left turn must yield for northbound traffic on Mill at Houser Way, more pedestrian controls at the entrance to the former brick yard area and clarification of this properties usage—park/river trail or construction/dredging storage, more yield to up hill traffic signs, three sight distant signs where appropriate and grade signs on Renton Ave. So.) I have explained to the Renton Hill Residents that the City of Renton is not officially on record to address this development. We are looking ahead and if this project is filed want to be on record with all of our concerns. Thank you, - Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association Cc: Dr. Dolores Gibbons, Superintendent Renton School Board Renton School District 403 Renton School District 403 I � V February, 19, 2000 Dr. Dolores Gibbons, Superintendent Renton School Board Renton School District 403 Renton School District 403 300 S.W. 7th Street 300 S.W. 7th Street Renton, Wa. 98055 Renton, Wa. 98055 I am writing in regard to the proposed development of the Renton School District property located adjacent to Phillip Arnold Park, on Renton Hill. Nineteen years ago I was elected as the President of the Renton Hill Community Association. Each time rumors of the sale of this property were made I called the Renton School District and ask if this land was being offered for sale. The District would tell me the property was not for sale and I would ask to be contacted if the property was ever offered and leave my number. I was assured I would be notified. At least thirty calls were made over the last nineteen years and now that property has been sold and because of the lack of communication the neighborhood I have lived in since 1963 is in jeopardy. The proposed usage of this property would add sixty homes to the top of Renton Hill and completely gridlock our neighborhood. The formula now used by The City of Renton is: 9.55 car trips per day for each single-family home. This adds up to 573 trips that will all use Renton Avenue South. There are already 208 plus homes now using this street as well as all traffic using Philip Arnold Park.Renton Avenue South has just twenty-three felt of driving pavement and parking is allowed on the East side of the street. The street is posted "Down Hill Traffic Must Yield"; it has been deemed unsafe for school bus traffic because of grade and has two "site distant" areas. I would like the following questions answered: Why was my request for contact not honored? Why was the neighborhood not considered when this property was offered (recommendations and restrictions can be placed on property for sale)? Where will the money received be spent? Will the taxpayers of the Renton School get their property taxes lowered? Will taxes be lowered with the sale of Henry Ford School and its property? Why did the School District not propose a usage of this property that would benefit the district, the neighborhood and the City of Renton? Proposed usage: Bird and wild life sanctuary. A study area for ecological and environmental impacts of seasonal foliage and wildlife including nature trails. We see a lot of publicity regarding the-salmon studies the district does with its students, why not broaden that study to include our fast declining outdoors. There are very few places left within the Renton School District that have been undisturbed for more than fifty years. (To my knowledge the only usage of this property in the last fifty plus years has been a sometimes dump for the Renton School District.) Both the Renton School District and the City of Renton have excellent Grant writers. With mutual cooperation funding could and would be found for a District/City area used to educate our children in the ways.nature works. I talked to one of my neighbors about this project and when I was done her four year old ask "but where will the deer live?" My reply"I don't know". If this proposal is submitted to the City of Renton for permits, the citizens of Renton Hill will be asking The City of Renton to deny any application that will add to the already overburdened traffic on Renton Avenue South and destroy this natural area. Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association Cc: Jesse Tanner, Mayor Renton City Council City of Renton City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Wa. 98055 Renton, Wa. 98055 • • • • UtN 1. i1/250/0 �..._.. 33USA 7) 14) b 1?61/2/2-2yy OiTy Opodal.q_ 0..JTy 0P ENro/1 • 105-6 JovrN G ,19i tI-)/ sac_,:,;,.s.r-;,-2.7.,,` CITY OF RENTOr:I FEB 2 2 20C1 ECEIVED February 18,2000 L..:iY PERKS OFFICE Renton City Council City of Renton To Whom It May Concern: Property across the street from Phillip Arnold Park I believe the impact of building so many houses up on Old Renton Hill would be a terrible idea. The hill, Renton Ave. S can not handle any more traffic. I am stopped a couple of times a week by vehicles blocking an area of one of the streets by garbage truck or utility truck. People having to yield to right of way of vehicles coming up the hill would grow by over a 100 vehicles.At 4:00 on a weekday now, I might have to pull over 4 times before I get down the hill. It will be rush hour on Renton Hill. I also do not know where the intersection to the Bennett Homes would go. There is already to many intersections (5) going to the Phillip Arnold Park entrance. I see people getting confused at that intersection quite a bit. With spring and summer coming up we will have all the baseball games and private parties at the park. When will a tragedy happen, because people got confused on the intersection,and a little child crosses the street not knowing where to go. The property should be left as a green belt for the children and nature. We already have an over population of deer and many other animals on the hill where will they go. I would like to see us keep this area for the deer in the area and other wildlife.Most of the people on Renton Hill have had family up here for over 50 years there is a lot of history on this hill. Sincerely, Paula Provin 712 Renton Ave.S Renton,WA 98055 \ • Lee Haro ° Transportation Planning City of Renton ' FEE 2 3 2000 1055 So Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Transportation Systems Div. -moo-_ Dear Mr. Haro: I am writing about a residential development project planned for a ten acre area near the intersections of 7th Place S., Beacon Way South and Jones Avenue South. The developer is planning a little over 56 homes in this tract. These homes, added to the existing homes on Renton Hill, will put an unusual burden of traffic on Renton Avenue South. Renton Ave. So varies in width from 25' - 11" to 26' - 2" wide and has 210 homes that access this street only. I am sure that this width is under-designed for the proposed traffic loading. (Which would be 2.5 vehicle trips per day times the number homes serving directly onto Renton Ave (210), or 665 daily trips for residences only. This figure does not include the Park). Given this many car-trips per residence per day, plus the seasonal sports- related traffic to Philip Arnold Park for baseball, little league football practice, and softball- scheduled for this park, Renton Avenue will become difficult for existing residents to traverse. At the present time there is parking allowed on only one side of the street, but the street is not wide enough for double passing on the remaining pavement. Thus, the signs at the top that say "Yield To Uphill Traffic." My wife and I are asking your help in questioning the viability of this project when it is submitted to the City for review. Based on this data, I hope you agree with us in making Renton Avenue south safe for our children to cross without dodging more cars. There are no street intersections between South 3rd and South 7th, thus pedestrians may feel free to cross at any point. With parking allowed on only one side, visitors to the west side must cross to the east. When Renton Avenue is slow, people tend to go down Cedar Avenue which has parking on both sides. It should be noted that Cedar Ave South varies in width from 26' - 10" to 27 feet wide. This does not allow for two way traffic except at points where there are no vehicles parked. Thus, adding 56 homes and the related 140 additional vehicles per day is not in the best interests of the existing residents on Renton Hill. The developer does not wish to widen Renton Avenue to the legal width for a collector street. We wish to express our concerns to you at this time. Thank you for your assistance.. Bill Collins 420 Cedar Ave So . Renton 98055 49 Loraine Nicolay 'Q Cq City of Renton Land Use Actions �,[�Fe ' `� ��v ,4, Renton City Hall Ck• 488 1055 So Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Loraine: I am writing about a residential development project planned for a ten acre area near the intersections of 7th Place S., Beacon Way South and Jones Avenue South. The developer is planning a little over 56 homes in this tract. These homes, added to the existing homes on Renton Hill, will put an unusual burden of traffic on Renton Avenue South. Renton Ave. So varies in width from 25' - 11" to 26' - 2" wide and has 210 homes that access this street only. I am sure that this width is under-designed for the proposed traffic loading. (Which would be 2.5 vehicle trips per day times the number homes serving directly onto Renton Ave (210), or 665 daily trips for residences only. This figure does not include the Park). Given this many car-trips per residence per day, plus the seasonal sports- related traffic to Philip Arnold Park for baseball, little league football practice, and softball scheduled for this park, Renton Avenue will become difficult for existing residents' to traverse. At the present time there is parking allowed on only one side of the street, but the street is not wide enough for double passing on the remaining pavement. Thus, the signs at the top that say "Yield To Uphill Traffic." My wife and I are asking'your help in questioning the viability'of this project when it is submitted to the City for review. Based on this data, I hope you agree with us in making Renton Avenue south safe for our children to cross without dodging more cars. There are no street intersections between South 3rd and South 7th, thus pedestrians'may feel free to cross at any point. With parking allowed on only one side, visitors to the west side must cross to the east. When Renton Avenue is slow, people tend to go down Cedar Avenue which has parking on both sides. It should be noted that Cedar Ave South varies in width from 26' - 10" to 27 feet wide. This does not allow for two way traffic except at points where there are no vehicles parked. The dimensions for both of these streets are well below the City's Code for collector street widths, which are a minimum of 34 feet. Thus, adding 56 homes and the related 140 additional vehicles per day is not in the best interests of the existing residents on Renton Hill. The developer does not wish to widen Renton Avenue to the legal width for a collector street. We wish to express our concerns to you at this time and propose that the land in question be acquired by the City for Parks use -as'a'Wildlife./ natural'conservation"study area and not be developed. Thank you for your assistance. Bill Collins 7'g 420 Cedar Ave'So ' Renton 98055 N:.:.:::::::.:.......:.::.v.,:,::,:::..:::::: v.:: .:.v:.::...........:......,::Page.�, .................. .. From: "Michael Mack"<mdmack c@gte.net> To: <scarlson@ci.renton.wa.us> • Date: 2/18/00 4:17PM Subject: Sale of land near Philip Arnold Park Dear Ms Carlson, • I am concerned about the status of the sale of land near Philip Arnold Park. I have sent letters to the School Board,the Mayor, and the City Council. I found your web site and decided that your department is probably involved. If not it should be. Attached is a copy of the letter that I sent to the Mayor, etc. I would appreciate your attention. Yours truly, Michael D Mack /G'o 709 High Ave. So. Renton, WA 98055 February 18, 2000 CITY OF RENTON 69' /� FEB 2 1 2000 Gd` vt-- 6-J RECEIVED vlaff CITY CLERKS OFFICE As a 45 year resident of Renton .Hill , I am requesting that you do everything in your power to negate the building permit of 60+ homes on the property across from Phillip Arnold Park. If the 60+ homes are approved it would destroy the quality of life as we know it. The traffic problems would cause disastrous. compli Cations, rife with accidents on the only two streets (So. Seventh and Cedar) accessing the neighborhood at the top of the hill . Two- way traffic on these streets, with parking, as now allowed, will seriously hamper and cause bottlenecks for emergency vehicles -- fire engines, police, Medic I, ambulances -- causing loss of property and life. At present there are no marked crosswalks which can cause accidents for pedestrians and_ especially for the many school children who use these streets. These are problems already encountered but will be greatly compounded if additional homes in the proposed development are built. Another serious problem is the maintenance and closure of the street work required due to the sinking of the roadway caused by the innumerable mine shafts throughout the area. This has been an ongoing problem over the years, especially on 7th Ave. and with additional vehicles,will only persist indefinitely. This property should be given first option to public usage for projects such as parks, nature trails, natural vegetation study etc. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: March 3, 2000 TO: Letter Reviewers FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, (425)430-7382 SUBJECT: Response Letters re: Bennett Homes project Attached to this memo are draft copies of letters written in response to citizen concern letters directed to the Mayor(LOG#20019-C). All letters are similar, but each is directly responsive to the concerns raised in the original letter. I felt a form letter would not be appropriate because of the diversity of concerns (approximately 23 issues were raised in the 28 letters), several issues, however, were somewhat universal. The Renton School District has provided a copy of their response letter (attached). Whether they properly followed procedures in the RCW is not our concern at this time. They have assured me that they did. I have tried to keep the letters to one page, and have reduced the point size on the longer letters to do so. I will send the document that has these letters written consecutively with page breaks, as an email attachment, to whomever when directed to do so. Thank you Bennett Homes ltrs.rtf\ + _ SHARON HERMAN 711 JONES AVENUE SOUTH RENTON,WA 98055 February 18,2000 Renton City Council City of Renton CI OF RENTTN 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 FEB 2 2 2000 REcEivE Attn: Renton City Council: CITY C ERK S OFF/CE I'm writing in concern about the 60 homes that are proposed to be built across from Phillip Arnold Park. Other than the concern of the traffic problems that will occur,I would like to speak about the personal side of what this property means and what it has to offer. I have been a resident of Old Renton Hill for 32 years. My children played in the pit area(that's what we have called it for years)while they grew up. They walked the trails,picked wild flowers,hunted for snakes,made forts, and picked wild blackberries. Now,my grandchildren come to visit and I take them to the pit area often. We take bread crumbs for the ants,put carrots at the rabbit holes and throw nuts for the squirrels. We walk the trails and go on treasure hunts. They truly enjoy seeing the deer come out and walk in the park. My father who is 83 years old,comes to visit each summer from California and his greatest joy is to pick wild berries for a homemade pie. Please consider the fact that families being able to make memories together in the quiet space across from the park is priceless. Together,let's work hard to preserve this small portion of land that so many have enjoyed in their • own special way. It's getting harder and harder to find a quiet space to share peaceful times together and do fun things. Let's not let all the future family times and memories that are yet to be made,be taken away. It would be a compliment to the city of Renton to enhance this area for generations to come. At the cliffs edge, people could drive up to see a sweeping view of Renton,the Space Needle and all the surrounding areas. From a high point,it's spectacular. This would be a nice attraction to the City of Renton. I don't know if there is any such attraction in our city. It would be a terrible loss for our neighborhood and the City of Renton to have this taken away for a monetary advancement. Remember,when it's gone, it will be gone forever. Thank-you, • Sharon Herman Renton Hill Resident • • Ms.Sharon Herman ' 'M J 711 Jones Ave.S ` ^• Renton, WA 98055 1K' :? r� ` •'jam. • / 53- >.K4----1-7Wai-1,- -.— ---- - ; 22,7cterva..) ez7 0 se.us s4-6G-ter . . . • . .. • 7 • • . . • .. ,- . . . .--:-.4.. N. Barbara Lux • INWA • 1412 S.9th St. . •, . .. • • ;1.-•:•-•-',,filf.14, Renton,WA 980 .•.--: - .. ° . ' , • . . , . /X .. - , .A-7-6 4-7 /8 Ado . . . , • . ' , • . . • . . . • ' . CITY OF RENTON 4v.9 -.0-6..pice • . FEB 2 3 2,0011 aZ . . RECEIVED . • WY CXERK'S OFFICE • . ,• ... , . . . . .• . • . • . •. . . • e.....„. /, , , , , :_.<__.„(--/-•.,.....,- ,_2 rzz..,-..,,,...:•i.y7.-- ,.....Z."./i.-/:__; ........6..e -,--,' .,...---; •;,‘:___;._,....-:.•',..! - .7 ;7•'' • . L..----/.,/.-- /. 1 ...-- .{....'...e 2 7 ..:!...,.:4:',,-,'//-2-, ._.--Z-77m..2_,..: .v::::..-..t--e.:.,?....- c•-•..' c.. ....:-5-1,7,:e'4 6,, ,::;-1 4;:e./_.../.(5.--1.^-..:-:,--7 .....-0 I •:. ,.. 1 ...,' .7 . .././ i ,;;• /,. ,. t.,-4-z- , //,'/,.../.•/:,-1 .::..e.:-.:;:iz,,--i:.::<_._.- :,•;z: k.:. . / ,e.e_.(-7 , - .-_- --a.--...-m. .,--;:z4,2e.--;14:•'a•-••-•: .• r, .-4.., •'' .... ...- .' L. . 1.....--‘;'. .:(...%-.".. (...,—. " . • • •"/7; - - . - ,L / . ''''''' .1--'' '-'z--• L"--4'-'"-x)-?4. >,:-== -kell- 7;"%' CLe.7 •7--).d... .y../-f.r r.-t:4___ , • , / . • . 1:2,----•• - •-• ----, --/ /1,,-/e....• , 22;:..e ../4„,., . •••::i ..../. • ..,./.< ..--,- , — /,e;i:/// e-;i -7_,C.I.?7-.i ,• - I .../7-). . / ,7 "---7-7,2 14.-- __.. x-----.. ..:.-..• . —14..-.4rfi.'•:e---- ja:-•i_..Z...-___;'7 .• . . .71 - / m......„...,.,-. . • •;r. - -'' ,4 _ . - ,;) .,'--)e;;:...c./•-e.',• ,_1(........„,..-e-„......ff:. .,-534:_.- ..... .;e:,,i.....,•••••./:.1......-- 1:..,.....e.../..„;: , ,f./.......(1-;;.:. ,4 ,,...4:77--- --- , • 1 ...• • .5".....: .• I 1-7 '.--. -' '''.!//,-,- •1 `", Cl..- ,---.;1... .. ---? L.,-.4%; .7 • c'. .'-,--. I. (..,.- ./ :7, .. • 1_11- _;:. --•/,./."( f.'..•: ,- / 4,--- • - v / ..• 7' . .; . - /. , t j/ ." , • / •,-- . i --0 Ag.,-, , • 1_,./.....?, .:_c_.,.. 7 /-7,... (r?•-,-.1:.- - /7,-2/r,s..,...:.t.• \ .• . •/ . --: .4.4 ...,-.• i'L ' - , ; / •/ /1 ci• 4•<...-• /./.(= • 421-(....; )42-eezt6---..7 A2-7 e- , Ci-e 3 ' ''' 1.-- . c''.11 --'. ' •AI -C ' - 7-' r ' i ' el . . • . / . • / / ....... .,-....,..,-/;/-5 .••'-'411''.....r. _ .- _-/-4.%•-',IXP-'—. ... •;(--.'i • -.e.-' . _. (-- .43-ef-k_ - L - ,,I.: • (7-,/-ez. ,4.1._4.!_47,7e.74//.7.,-.• . . . ___ , .._ . .. . ..,.. _ --ix- ....... .. . • „- t4"•‘. ; 671:-:2;'-.1 1 L-1..i..L.-.1.• .0.....) -_ .- ./...- 4.44..f../i/... /1-7,. L--;77/) '''t. e...-ecr.:--- ,• / r ,O , /.) ,. , i. , , i . ....t ...ier.., "..,...„_, . ,.. /7_6_ , , 7', if-L--) _ , ( -itztr . • .1,-- .K-- 4L!-S-.-!T 4(z- • -' /Cc4-119% %L..?/../..7?'.(7"._ - ••' /_,. / ..._. - . 7- .. .• , , rA_,, . .. ... t1i,.;•-i---:.. ....,i-..-.) .._ ---...`41.._ ....--- . -, L-&:- -,etelit-x-, ;67___. ,.-- -. • i . J. ..t. / __._........./..244.. b rc..±.... . ez.-3.L.....___ _W:e-,_ .(?.(1A.../. .."_. __, _.,.-.-.•4e1-4,,,,__ ___... 46!.?1,___I ici'.....,. 4•1:-_-(r...,:-. -.(-...._ ....... daviia.....e de• - ...,... _ .. ....... . . . . .... _. _. . _ ... . . . .. . ._ .6 .:.. . • • 1 i • ..,...1 ,, ,,4 . i, 61 5 r i/1-(-) tte..i: a/ Aetlie/pf2. t-/'‘'.0. -!-) ( -)//i _____.._ . ...... .--1. _..... . .._.__.____.. _ ..... ._.. .... ..\._. . .. , ...);/)i I.') • , ,,,••••• . / , c/ P'Ac(f4-_<-7_ _____-..._404?. -2-02th: ii --A5.V7/ ,12.. ....;, - 4-4-1c-a . _..'4.r-'C.-r a . ,-/1 . ""7":k?!-g _..11-__.(:.:.-el.7? e ,..1.,/ • i e....., . Ate_ •)•- . , , .-1 t Er_. ' ' • , . - •. — .. ,. • . . . .. -4. . , . -I . - 5,) __.,,,, a 4. ..---ii)7L2Z: ,.,//.i. (4‹.: ,_:c7..ee4.1.f.;r#,/...-/ / ....,7'17 (7 / 1 Zj---'• /C4-;--;•...C..— 1,:t./ ,_-0/-7',:., __ r 6.-e- 7'..1 /r. c.../e ..., , / .-, .:(-...,, / / ..--.;....,..,../..-; ,..c.,..../ -(...6 -,..57 .;•72- - '-'.,_2/7,..5 / -: &.. ,--/,''../1 i a 7-- 1_ - .. 42/.. .. t.../ (.- ,•••.......-....,..:4„,.,_ , .-- .......- 1 7/' Z. ,.. ••,/••,t 4......•."-.-‘''.1 / .,•'...-.4'.--7. Of/.4*.-.;.*e.-- .6elir /11...!'17,...I2'-' ....A:-....f..4:-..,/1.1.....-....- /1. . , 4.." 7 2 i 1.-:--.. . •77,=,.) '-- , -=1--2.1.--4-t1--;• /7).!--; 1',2:.; (-1%% '-- /,..-Li-'....) 6 k ir -7 te-e / 7-fi ;.-.1 2// -i / 7*. A..,.*e ei../.,/ .2-,_---.' •//).:4--/.:,c% -;_: :_f,/,/. :. ..,-,e,./' •r ? .a . ..---_,,..L....zi .--_„:„-.., 4,--),e-Y" I C.c.-et -tz.-(.....-• ‘....-e(-1.;I' fl ,•. ...g.7-7, J I./ cr7._-.,-:-----,...-.7 c:(..4..._ ti.)--,-_,- •, - i i' f _,-. • / el. L.-1:••••-,.,...-z-. 7 17 C.-; --k-i-e''' -_- c'i %'1-C, .,' (-- L.-- d-A-a-1A- __• / Ts I/7 t; • / -- a--gl7 ,e..41..C...'i fr"c,—./.-t„./.7' .".,..-- .)-,-/ (:^i„.(2; eAe)? .• '-7. -1. ..7 ;1,-' -. L....:7;Z24 -..:". 24--- ,-----7,..‘:2--;-.".:` 7,-,-,v :.-{ c ?..,-...... t.,.f......„.....?..c_ -7 .0-r.-..--!.-- 7z- / - (-) - .-`'-r •••••!---- -h-%/7....,".. ' -, 41---,),.. 74. -, z • _.._. 4.,/,.t _ )42.-e_. /I.' 4,.• / tc'/' !.,.f..:-.,, 1 • 41 ..,z -/ L /i..z:". )-- x-2...e..e..._-,>4..o_x/2-: -"" --I• .:--1-e."- . c..a..6.4.2_, ..;z2:/:.-__ ...e.2_, .f- 4.(' • ,./1.- ., JJ. .___.4 .‹ . . /2 -./..1 p _ . 4A:1-•6.7-4-L-Y---.. . . ,-- . t....,..... h.-,--- „ale /ze,,....,_ : - (• ...' c. , T. ....1---/__• . . _.. . ."7-,_,(../ r,./ .&......„‘ ...-2, --76-•- ---2-.;•'5 a.e.:-/77-4--- G4...a„•.:,-, /),2 a..,.-...f..--1 :.__ z*.z.' ,:_.„1...._ , ,....,. ,-t2.4.-.2/,',,,.....• r'/._;, - 4'47._:7--r-;r..2 Al / i :-Z-'-j--". • I • ,-,'6-- J a. ...I 6 1, i / / .1 • 7 _ .,•':'•-• , (-'k-- ...Z'Lt.'.:. A-e--f/7 /-',"..y_e 4._e-u-;. _L.:: .j 71 x2,..e ,,,-1-.7., * - * • d _, / 1 p,. . : ,...e71.47--t--- ._ /4-AL.). 0--/?..5:- /7-2/g,...7x..- .e.--r„-- ' ce../...x:_r. c ....5 0_,A7-7.2_.e... AC.2-0 rer:.-c: (-_. -• • A • 7-. / . ,,, iii / ; . f:; c(? ,f,r,!_./4.' . (--?",----„.- 7( ; a.-^1_,,'" ,,1.-1".6--.;.--;-•._. (...ig.e,,s .. q„,..4.,-.,.....1...:(.&, ...;, 1„,•<::..ii__‹.__... /— / . . , 4 -- ,7 • ... ,-, . . ./ •7k. .„5_15. ... f--11-- . c-A-,z,-.' /.? •/(.. , / A .._. . , ..1'...1_,er_1,.e_ tf,_e_,) p.,.<2..17(.01_,C.. ,e!,/ rit-C2 /(--er-L-?r,:2::--\4f--,4_..a-- 6"›, 1 ./, €•-2 7/ 0A eitlf.- -1/ , ,e 7 e-ZeQ-L} ,...t 4:Le., - • . / i z r.- A 34- ..... /_c.:-. &._._6.vt. 6/ a tiu ,,, c c / 6A-z--) •,.. .-e-_--.44.-t-- ._.___.P-__<-_____, a-e_d___7(--_-_fnr.--_______. ,--/ 7- • • . , va-r/..riA-3 : _ 4;.'-v•__ _,--7,:.)._ . .,4'/ „___.a-L4.-rdtro-,---. ..,2-z_--.7.4_,!_c.t. /./...,q_.t,, ... . .4.g?y .. e - ---. - . - ---- -- -1,-& ,a-,4 a b. '1.,---D.a.4. / A.4 z/_/ .. 4-tvi-•!.t...•e_' '',/i:•; •.,-,-;•_.4--(4.....--,/LAS, .."1:7 1112---• • 1 e (2,y-2 I • (..te 1.4 -• .• ---•• • - - _ - . . - - `f 1412 S. 9th St. .�,11.E k •�RenW 98055 EEEE 'i I : ' rya �" .•-•�_. • f-l'ftia.,41_27;LA...___,. la.).. ✓� 7-..i A Lei. Gl/ . • •ry,- ( l • '° � �J ; • • r~ 74"7 — L'Illlli!!)ln1ltllthlli'IIlllillllIIIIIiIlI1i111h1llIIIIlltI . , . . ti e • OI�T�b811^'VlY 11 • VT na.ry .. .. vv......r - I• °°` ° RentonSchool District 403 (I=1) rT 300 Southwest 7th Street,Renton, Washington 98055-2307 403 OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT March 2, 2000 • Michael & Cynthia Mack 906 High Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mack: Thank you for your letter regarding the sale of the Renton School District property on Renton Hill. I understand your desire to have the property remain in the current natural state and your apprehension over additional traffic and infrastructure concerns. As cities grow and mature, questions of preservation, compliance with the Growth Management Act, and . individual citizen preferences sometimes collide. • I thought perhaps a review of the school district's actions would be informative. All school board meetings are open to the public and are posted as to time and date in the local papers. Meetings the Kohlwes Education on the second and fourth Wednesday of the month at Center at 300 SW 7th Street at 7:00 p.m. All of the following board actions were taken in open public session: 1 /22/97 Board declared proposal to sell several parcels of . surplus property 3/26/97 Notice of intent to sell the property was published in the , 4/2/97 South County Journal (twice) • 4/9197 Board held public hearing on the proposal to sell surplus property 5/28/97 Board declared property surplus 1 0/1 /98 Request for proposal for real estate advisor issued 1 /7/99 District entered into exclusive sales listing agreement with Colliers International • Page 1 • Kohlwes Education Center 63- U'-dd 11 ; 0m !(r.IVI'IV ovilvva, aiavai.av • -- ----- — • 1 /27/99 Colliers sent solicitations for bids on property 3/24/99 Purchase and sale agreement negotiated with highest bidder. Feasibility studies are in progress that may i modestly adjust the price depending on density. The school district operates under a complex set of laws, policies, and the . State Constitution regarding property. As you can see from the list above, actions to declare and sell surplus proptthere saletightly of property dictate The that laws regulating the use of proceeds fromP the dollars be placed in the capital projects fund. A section of the Constitution of the State of Washington applies to school district property that prohibits the district from othera " ift" Article VIII, Paragraph 7 states no county, city, town ormunicipal corporation (such as school districts) shall hereafter give any money or property or. loan its money.or credit to or in Additionld of al stateylawsvidual govern the association company, or corporation. conveyance and acquisition of property as well e salethe ofmanagement real property and appraisal of property. Other laws regulate the use of proceeds. I believe we have met the letter and spirit of the laws and the State Constitution. The. District currently has a legal obligation to honor the terms of the Purchase and Sale Agreement with Bennett Development. They are working through their feasibility study. The jurisdiction of the school district does not include questions of environmental impact, density, roads, traffic or compliance with the Growth Management Act. Those functions belong to the City of Renton. It is my understanding representatives of the Renton Hill Community. Association are in regular contact with city officials regarding this property. The Renton School District provides educational services to • 12,500 students. As stewards of precious tax' dollars, it is our responsibility plan and manage resources to the highest benefit for the, children weare serving. Page2 93-63-00 11 : 36 1( NION .7Ci110UL 1J1D11t11.r1 1L-GvfJLVTLTJV • I would be happy to meet with a delegation of the Renton Hills Community Association to discuss details of the school district's actions or any other ideas you wish to share. Sincerely, iditielAti-wfrt-44(A"A"' Dolores J. Gibbons, Ed.D. Superintendent DJG:n • c Board of Directors Mayor Tanner Renton City Council • Page3 February 17,2000 Renton City Council CITY OF RENTON City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way F E B 21 2000 Renton,WA 98055 Dear Councilmembers: RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE My wife and I have lived on Renton Hill for the past ten years. We have found it to be a very quiet community where people take walks in the street and enjoy Philip Arnold Park We live just one block from the park and we can hear the children playing. It is a well-used park especially in the spring and fall. There is a wooded area east of the park where a small herd of deer lives that makes occasional forays into the surrounding gardens. Renton Hill is historic;it is built on top of old coalmines. These mines have been long abandoned,but the original miners and their families who lived and worked here set the nature of the community. More recently a score or more large homes have been built on the hill and integrated gradually into the neighborhood. These additions have begun to put a strain on the traffic through the community. I understand that the Renton School Board has sold the woods to the east of Philip Arnold Park to developers—Bennett Homes. The planned development of about 60 new homes on the property across from Philip Arnold Park causes me great concern in several areas. Street Traffic—Access to Renton Hill is limited to two streets,which pass over the 405 freeway. The hill drops sharply to the freeway and the Cedar River. This cuts off access from the north and northeast. Grant Ave S,which appears on maps to give access from the south,is barricaded and does not go through. There is a road that runs by the electrical substation,which gives access to Philip Arnold Park,but it is also barricaded and only opened when snow or ice makes Renton Ave S inaccessible. Renton Ave S is the road most used to get to the top of the hill. Renton Ave S is a narrow,very steep street. Because of the street's narrowness downhill traffic must yield to uphill traffic(parking is restricted to the east side). In winter or during heavy rains the street is slick and treacherous. Large trucks serving the neighborhood have a difficult time making it up the hill and service vehicles,when they must use the west side of the street,pose a hazard. Renton Ave S is used for cross country runners and bicyclists for stamina training because of its steepness. I am concerned that 60 additional families using Renton Ave S and S 7t Street will cause a dangerous hazard because of the increased traffic.especially during the winter. Erosion—The hillside above the Cedar River is very steep and has trees. The trees on the hillside and on top of the hill will be removed,I suppose,to build the houses. I am concerned that the runoff from the • new houses will erode the bank as well as run down S 7th street,causing more problems for the neighborhood. Habitat—The 60 homes development will eliminate ten acres of wooded land. The animals now living in the woods on the top of the hill will loose their habitat. Mountain bike riders will find that another place to enjoy is gone. The woods and the park complement each other. I feel that the number of new houses planned by Bennett Homes is too large. I would rather see the woods used for other purposes that would enhance the neighborhood rather than reduce the quality of life. Perhaps the woods could be kept as is and used as a bird and animal sanctuary where ecological and environmental studies could be carried out. • —2— February 17,2000 I would like to see the City of Renton and the Renton School Board take an interest in this matter. Working together with the members of the neighborhood we could come up with an innovative program that would benefit the School District,the City,and the neighborhood. Sincerely, WICVCE-eADAla,e'k 4irnw Michael Mack and Cynthia Mack 906 High Ave S Renton,WA 98055 425-226-9262 • Renton City Council City of Renton CITY OF RENTON 1055 So Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 FEB 21 2000 RECEIVED Dear Council Members: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE I am.writing about a residential development project planned for a ten acre area near the intersections of 7th Place S., Beacon Way South and Jones Avenue South. The developer is planning a little over 56 homes in this.tract. These homes, added to the existing homes on Renton Hill, will put an unusual burden of traffic on Renton Avenue South. Renton Ave. So varies in width from 25' - 11" to 26' - 2" , wide and has 210 homes that access this street only. I am sure that this width is under-designed for the proposed traffic loading. (Which would be 2.5 vehicle trips per day times the number homes serving directly onto Renton Ave (210), or 665 daily trips for residences only. This figure does not include the Park). Given this many car-trips per residence per day, plus the seasonal sports- related traffic to Philip Arnold Park for baseball, little league football practice, and softball scheduled for this park, Renton Avenue will become difficult for existing residents to traverse. At the present time there is parking allowed on only one side of the street, but the street is not wide enough for double passing on the remaining pavement: Thus, the signs at the top that say "Yield To Uphill Traffic." • My wife and I are asking your help in questioning the viability of this project when it is submitted to the City for review. Based on this data, I hope you agree with us in making Renton Avenue south safe for our children to cross without dodging more cars. There are no street intersections between South 3rd and South 7th, thus pedestrians may feel free to cross at any point. With parking allowed on only "one side, visitors to the west side must cross to the east. When Renton Avenue is slow, people tend to go down Cedar Avenue which has parking on both sides. It should be noted that Cedar Ave South varies in width from 26' - 10".to 27 feet wide. This does not allow for two way traffic except at points where there are no vehicles parked. The dimensions for both of these'streets are well below the City's Code for collector street widths, which are a minimum of 34 feet. Thus, adding 56 homes and the related 140 additional vehicles per day is not . in the best interests of the existing residents on Renton Hill. The developer does not wish to widen Renton Avenue to the legal width for a collector street. We wish to express our concerns to you at this time and propose that the land in question be • acquired by the City for Parks use - as a wildlife / natural conservation study area and not be developed. Thank you for your assistance. 2/`''ens ill Colli ns s 420 Cedar Ave So . Renton 98055 • . Renton City Council City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way CITY OF RENTON Renton, Wa 98055 FEB 2 1 zoo CrTY CLERK'S OFFICE I am writing in regards to the Bennett housing development next to Philllip Arnold Park on the Renton hill. (Renton's oldest neighborhood) My wife and two kids are proud sixteen year City of Renton residents and have supported and enjoyed many City of Renton activites. We are extremely concerned about the 56 homes that are perposed to be jarred onto the 10 acres of the project. This land currently provides a home to many bird species such as the endangered red tailed hawks, deer coyotes rabbits and other local species. This untouched land should remain, in it's natural preseved state. The city park's system should annex this public land. If the land is to be developed no more than one house per acer should be allowed and the land re-zoned one house per acre. The reason being the very unsafe proposed 6 way intersection at the interence to the project. The unsafe intersection at 7th & Renton Ave South (a four way intersection with a three way stop on a steep hill.) The one way access to the Renton hills existing 208 faimlies on Renton Ave South would be over burden and unsafe. Fire police and ambulance axcess would be restricted due to the increased traffic from the new project. This 56 home project should be rejected by the city and other land uses should be considered. My family will move to a new city after 16 happy years in Renton if this project is allowed to proceed as our trust in city officals,traffic safety& quality of life would be ruined in our Renton hill neighorhood. This . proposed project will cause a great financial loss for both us and our neighbors. Sincerely �AP�oU �Ewl,.c� • • • • • • [ Barton Bennett t RentonSoutheast. 980 5 3ourt 11 1 II 11 1 e -: 3 ..��'^�-��... Renton City Council City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Wa. 98055 • • sa 13s 1111111t11tilttltlllttlllt�111! Itlttllltlllltltlt:llltttlitl CITY OF RENTON February 18, 2000 FEB 2 3 2000 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Renton City Council City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98055 I .am writing this letter to express my concern about the 10 acres of land on Renton Hill across from Phillip Arnold Park that has apparently been sold to Bennett Homes. I feel that since this land was owned by the Renton School District that the public should have been notified that it was going to be sold, especially the people on Renton Hill, since we will be affected the most. I feel that there was no consideration given to the community at all. I think with a shortage of natural land and wildlife areas in our city that it was a very poor choice to sell this land to Bennett Homes for home development. Since this land is right across the street from Phillip Arnold Park, it would be an ideal location for a nature park. It could be used for field trips for our schools and also a refuge for deer, birds, and other animals that need this acreage to survive. It also could be left in a controlled natural state where our native trees, shrubs, and vegetation be preserved and used for a learning aid in our schools. With the future development and restoration of the downtown area of Renton going on, I think that a nature park on Renton Hill would be an asset to the city and would fit in perfectly with the growing process. Thank you. John P. Burkhalter 901 Jones Ave. So. Renton, WA 98055 Renton resident since 1954 February 18, 2000 CITY OF RENTON FEB 242000 Renton City Council RECENED City of Renton CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 I am writing this letter to express my concern over the 10 acres of land on Renton Hill that was formerly owned by the Renton School District. It is my understanding that the property has been purchased by Bennett Homes with the intent of putting 60 homes on that 10 acres. I am very concerned that the addition of 60 homes to the Renton Hill area will cause numerous problems such as: 1) damage to the existing streets by construction trucks; 2) traffic increase on and off the hill and after the construction is finished, the additional traffic of delivery trucks, garbage trucks, etc. ; 3) the problem of safety, such as limited vision at the top of Renton Avenue. It would be my suggestion that an alternative usage be proposed for this 10 acres. I would like to see that area be used for wild life purposes. Renton Hill already has a problem with the deer population (too many, eating too much)_ . Perhaps if this area were left undeveloped the deer in our yards would not be such a problem. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, r . Patricia A. Burkhalter 901 Jones Ave. So. Renton, WA 98055 (425) 226-8843 CITY OF RENTON FEB 2 8 2000 February 22, 2000 RFCEtvS pFFICE IT Jesse Tanner, Mayor Dr. 0 Dolores Gibbons, SuptYCt_ .ERK City of Renton Renton School District #403 1055 South Grady Way 300 S.W. 7th Street Renton, Wa. 98055 Renton, Wa. 98055 Renton City Council `8' Renton School Board City of Renton Renton School District #403 1055 South Grady Way 300 S.W. 7th Street Renton, Wa. 98055 Renton, Wa: 98055 As a property owner on Renton Hill I object to the proposed Bennett Homes Development of at least 60 homes across from Philip Arnold Park. This would mean at least 120 more cars on the hill. The traffic on this hill is now more than we should have to put up with. Nine times out of ten when I drive down my street I have to pull over at least once to allow uphill traffic through. When there are garbage trucks, delivery trucks etc. on the street it becomes ridiculous. The negative impact on traffic, safety and emergency vehicle access would be a detriment to life in this neighborhood. I would hope that the Renton School District and the • City of Renton could come up with an alternate plan that would benefit both and at the same time preserve our hill. Sincerely Diane B. Hyatt 720 Cedar Ave. So. Renton, Wash. 98055 ( 425) 228-1725 ' February 19, 2000 CITY OF RENTON FEB 2 3 2000 To: Renton CityCouncil RECEIVED CRY CLERK'S OFFICE City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Subject: Bennett Homes Project Across From Philip Arnold Park We are writing with concern over the proposed Bennett Homes project across from Philip Arnold Park. As 12-year residents of Renton Hill;we are very opposed to the project, especially the number of homes and the proposed flow of traffic through Renton Hill. Living on Renton Avenue S. we are very concerned about the potential increased traffic from the 70 homes. As a minimum 560 more cars could pass by our home on Renton Ave. S. each day. Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. are essentially one-lane roads due to the street parking allowed and the yielding to uphill traffic. Traffic on 7th St. and Renton Ave. S. is of great concern to us due to the lack of stop signs at the cross streets on 7th, lack of cross walks,the uphill yielding on Renton Ave. and the poor visibility approaching the steep grades. Safety is a huge concern to those living here. We know of one fatality on Renton Ave. due to the telephone poles being so close to the street. Increased traffic will increase the safety risk to all residents in this neighborhood. As for the school children on he hill, they are forced to walk up the hill to catch the school bus at Philip Arnold Park. More traffic could endanger the lives of these children. If this project is approved,the traffic caused by construction vehicles will also increase the risk to our families by limiting the emergency access to current residents, which is unacceptable. We would much rather see this property remain as is, or be improved.by the City of Renton Parks Department. If it must be developed,then the flow of traffic must be • diverted to Puget Drive rather than Renton Hill. In addition, it is essential to our neighborhood that the road remained closed to thru traffic from Puget Drive. We urge you to defeat the development of this land as it is currently proposed. Sin rely, dt Douglas Brandt. Dena Brandt 610 Renton Ave. S. 610 Renton Ave. S. Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 , (425)271-2142 , (425)271-2142 . • . I - CITY OF RENTON - , FEB 2 1 2000. OJ] OD .. 0 • • RECEIVED ••••.•••w*....•••• • niTY CLERK'S OrFICE _ us _ _UV _ 9)eAr_D-Yik \AVY3 -QSA(D-StOrd. (YYV_1 kkk C+' • 1-CUtj)C --ICL2-1&= _1011P4_41§4(__t ; . • • • • • • • . • - \-eCtia, ReAd-i-DyL Aued _DE __O-Le-v - GLAD-A, 4fi tkdo., cpirLiz _ L,Q,UL ,e/C0-ed • ppaaf tiAlekevA2_ 0- ,)-4)0-Yact..e42k,&_1- 0L-- -0-e/Z fkOt d-e/)-IY&Laz.6-)n VIDA ._,J1.0. 4e4 . • • (but- )1, " U_-a4 cf-__ L-ka.„_ • • _tor c1uaa_io ___/1,k3crakiA5 -\ .. • (-1) (A2U-Ce • fu a-4(-04• • -_471_4,17gisr.friJ9.- LL . • " (12) • :611A Iet.C.L.Lj21/ArldLALUICIZIA°1- tA) ‘aU42. CAA'*G1 Ute4,\tht"0.51-. 010EPIVIthCUAC, -jai) “al OC&,00L--4/223 lAel;t2e - ---- 121AA/ Latp C aVt_e.0 iZ20C,ckae__,CLie121, -111k-C470 eet--1/LnD_Lai5e 171646.ir ,caro, Utill/C04/L yja--17A/Lca T2C4 l 0 Tt_ • _ 1LjcfAeLtAAA)-2 -eitork. ajJ AQAt J2Li cc. . _..__._ 11) 1Z V-e • GouCd., , . ./ 1 • 1 /-V17-K/ C2 g () • - • -jo na OW O-D-10 0 III I - e - --rovr)(2}V •- 703-D7;r -)(17r baolryd,), - - • • - - - ° 2 -0-411 . r • -roi-7-o -3-D1'(-(44) °V_Zr . P44)0/ . • .14y (142- c77v-7- 0 - 1- . --PV) --61_1_)1)1?y9.- _ - --47011V- e-yougq-if9Gft- • G&J7, 0101-91r•bni r"vo 71:g4 _4,gicej• n**0-114-00c ( dY1- OX0- •cA --62MWour. • • • • ♦ •. .► -... ... .,--r._�.....: _ T �r'r+.f f�.:. .+.�o►. .--��.....�.+i+..L-t.�t..'�.31F'a_. _ _. t,..'4'•a • • • .0LC ' r ': Cheryl Dania 706 Renton Ave.S. . ' Renton WA 98055-3008 v�i Pf�1 ' 113 FEB .• :.� %'nn3 • C \T\-' . U l/t • C l C-C\-Y 64 \-\ . \0 Y•_, W(: - 5°?)JS • swans/-rerz February 21, 2000 CITY OF RENTON Renton City Council FEB 2 4 2000 1055 South Grady Way RECEIVED Renton,WA 98055 CITY CLERKS OFFICE Dear Council Member: In community after community, rampant growth is swallowing up open spaces and wildlife habitat at an alarming rate. From one acre wetlands to entire eco-systems, the places appreciated for their beauty and recreational benefits are at risk. This puts tremendous pressure on once common wildlife, from deer to a host of migratory birds. The Bennett Home development project near Philip Arnold Park is one such site. Nearly every day a deer,raccoon, opossum, and the occasional coyote, make an appearance in some Renton Hill resident's backyard. Why-because much of their habitat has been destroyed through over development. The last refuge for this precious animals is the Bennett.Homes site. Communities nation wide are realizing the importance of these wildlife habitats and green belts and are taking steps to save fragile habitats in the path of development. Several federally funded programs are available to help cities and small residential communities save some small areas for natural wildlife. Some of these include the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) and the Natural Resources Conservation Foundation's Community Wildlife Habitat program. Each of these programs provides funding, resources and technical assistance to communities interested in preserving wildlife and their habitat. The City of Renton and the Renton School District could join the ranks of other progressive cities and really show they are "ahead of the curve" by taking this tremendous step. Preserving the Bennett Homes site will not only provide a much needed habitat for wildlife but will increase recreational opportunities and educational opportunities city-wide._ Additionally, over development of this site will increase traffic in a neighborhood already plagued with a lack of available parking and poor road structure. The majority of the roads and intersections are uncontrolled with no signage, no crosswalks and limited sight distance. On many of the streets, Renton Avenue for example,residential parking limits street traffic to one way due to the roads being too narrow and obstructed with parked cars and other recreational vehicles. This congestion will only increase with the development of this site. Please consider these issues when making your decision on the outcome of this issue and look beyond the short term financial gain of the City to the long range implications this could have on the surrounding community, its wildlife and the quality of like in the Renton area. Sincerely, Dorlene.Bressan 901 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 February 18 , 2000 CITY OF RENTON Renton City Council City of Renton FEB 2 1 2000 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Wa. 98055 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Subject: Bennett Homes Development Renton Hill Dear Council Members: As homeowners on Renton Hill over 70 years, we are opposed to the development applied for by Bennett Homes for the following reasons: 1 . The addition of 100+ cars from another 50-60 homes in this development would create an overcapacity on Renton Avenue South to handle safely. The road is not very wide, there is. a severe crown in the center oftthe road, and as you go up or down there is a blind spot where you cannot see cars coming for a moment. Together with extra traffic during the summer months from usage of Phillip Arnold Park, would create addition- al hazards. • 2. We feel that this property should be downzoned from 'R-8 in keeping with the recent addition of River Ridge area which is a nice development. 3 . We feel that the School District should turn this property over to the City of Renton for some other use, such as a park area for hiking, or' relaxing, such as the Arboretum area in Seattle, or, kept as a green belt. 4. This property was purchased with taxpayer money, no real estate taxes were paid on it, so we feel it should revert to the City. The schools are supported by taxpayers and their needs will be met without the sale of this property. Yo very_ truly, ^ rCt.o H. Tonda o r J.'fin da�7��C� 1308 Beacon Way So. Renton, Wa 98055 ' ' ,` • CITY OF RENTON - i, Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator • May 4, 2000 • Mr. Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 SUBJECT: Heritage Philip Arnold Project No. LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr. Fike: 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 May 30, 2000. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at (425) 430-7382, if you have any questions. . • Sincerely, Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner cc: Renton School District#403/Owners Parties of Record Acceptance lnrr n___i1_ fl 1 _NV t___ fl_ ._ _ TI T__7_'__ _._ nnnr� :l:iY:;^}::•Y'r ;{:rm} t''r+:i}i'. ...i:Pii:iii:..:::}:;}{.: ....... :........:....::.:::. •r:::.;:?.::: } .. :::::::i}:?:}:Y:r:i;i}ice{• ::�� ... :: •.}' . .:....:..nr n:4:i}::y}:•:�i}�}:4:?.}}}:r:::�l::i};$}:•.;i;}:ii}}ii:i. ..... ..r... :.......::. .. rr...n............... ...................... .r ..:. 4 ::: i i?lfrur.::::x .:3. /. ...5.frf..A;}}}:tr:.};r,??}:::::r.:}}ii}}::•Y;.}v.; .....r... .,,.::.,,..::..?.:...........:�:::,.:::.::. .r..rr}....., .:. E N'Y}iY::::::: :r:rr:rr>.}}•,:< ,::.}:.}.:.::. .:........:.........r....::.:. ......:...::.: :•:::w::v.....Y.J}:::h•.•::r:rr:r::.,}}Y:}::.}}x:.,}........\................................. : ::. :. .. !iiL'•X.YY::gY•:S}}':}:•}iiii::.::.}'r...... • ::... . .:::?.Y::�::.::t.:tY::??.Y:.:}:.:::::::::.Y:?.Y:::::::::::?::i:}}:::::?: .. r.. .... �' I �� '.::.}:.}::Y:...:::::::�::..::::.}}}::}}:.}:}:YY::.:.:}:}:}::::}::Y}Y::}:}}..::::Y:::Y}:.• s ......:...............................:...........:................... }}Y.}Y:.YY:Y : Y : :::: ::: O .:ERTY.O.WNER .S .: .. � ,: :: ::.:.:.............. :..:::.::. ........... :.::. : .NF.O.RMATi.ON.:} :.Y:<.YY>Y . :::::::.:: Note:;:iif theta is iiiore:ahefttbhti'.j..gop OWnetr:,,thaw attach An edditiot OI :nateiiiild MastBr Applidation foc:iriechokf ibe ......:... `: »• PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: (Zen-FDn Schap) D$si-n -l•� 1'403 I-1��i e Phi It p gnu Id PROPERTY/PROJECTCn ADDRESS(S /LOCATION: ADDRESS: In.�-e-ir e 0n D ( ea.�n 1 { ( s coo Su) 1111' S �1 Sfr l- do S Coin-�-, Lij j 0g re,c psi- O Ph,(co A-r�t,ld Pa I/f( CITY: ZIP: KING OUNTY A ES O ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): n n q` a,U GCS-9-1 10 TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING LAND USE(S): 42. -204- 2�[x) n one- >'' < > .E A PUCANT'..(if other..than ;nwner). ' :. ,...:.: PROPOSED LAND USES: NAME: • 1� can 6 Si nic I-e psi y COMPANY(if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: 3enn&•1+ Devil p ern+ ADDRESS: O E�+'�'t�aN PROPOSED COMPREHENSIV �PC6ESIGNATION (if applicable): CITY: ZIP: EXISTING ZONING: grU TELEPHONE NUMBER: 4jS-'Jc9 (060S PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): ....:.�iIT.. . ...... A \ Iv SITE AREA (SQ. FT. OR ACREAGE): NAME: - `, _� ra Same, as 10-' D COMPANY (if epplicab,e,: iA ('I I I I� PROJECT VALUE: 0/ ADDRESS: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? y(5.s. 2-one. 2 CA-Pik2) CITY: ZIP: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY ' SENSITIVE AREA? TELEPHONE NUMBER: 1 ' C"` .i - . l' l , ., . ". . . ... - ; . ' „ .—,.:.•,:km., ,,,,$)-•::•iii,,,,;wei,•'•--eriAt 74•1,,,vem•': ',eUrr;44574:55$107""":i'l.'71.‘- ii10#0,73':'•4)—:00.0-.:..."i7fr-41Fi - --cot - ,-y.. J,L 0, - , ..: , fro*-4-t.''', ‘,/....,:,,;.', 1,.. .... ,..:-, •..-:. 4.,...i..,: ',' - . :: ...- .-..-!-,-,,: .. , ...z:....:,, -...ivi urtscA-07 t::•'...,. ''.,.....'..'f.„..,„:,....xliv''.1:,f.'.;.;,.... ,---7r--,„„..:1-''''',1.3?.....-..."..,11-1,:ii• ." :„viAttioi44,1,"..Airol:...,,,,awanmi.,s,..,==gze.„..Avovitze.:•0-, .;.:,.:4,,,,,7,;„,..T.f...,,,,..A.0/4....„4„,,,A,.,..1.—,:47,-...,-,...,.4..„4.ur.t.031,4:rc.:. r:,::,.4mirrg,c.i.u.„50. ,.. .,er 0„.-.4a,...ter,...,,,..tRa..,w,,:„...z.„,,..i.,,,,,_:.„0,0÷,..A4„.„.:,•70.5. !.,;..vyzvzts.+4:.4xi,„T,T:.i..cz:,.he:ok.igutppgcauon3y.pes•:Abat5upoy-Awrrstiuow,otxketiatuuueaeeAiarxovoi: •.„ ,. • ANNEXATION $ SUBDIVISION: —COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ _ . REZONE $ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ _ SHORT PLAT $ _SPECIAL PERMIT $ _ ' TEMPORARY PERMIT $ • • TENTATIVE PLAT , 8 _ _ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ X PRELIMINARY PLAT $ _ SITE PLAN APPROVAL 9 . _ FINAL PLAT $ - - — GRADE & FILL PERMIT $ • — . (NO. CU. YDS: ) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: 9 _VARIANCE $ (FROM SECTION: ) PRELIMINARY • $ FINAL , • _WAIVER $ — WETLAND PERMIT — • ROUTINE VEGETATION — MOBILE HOME PARKS: $_ MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ _BINDING SITE PLAN $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: • , . _ SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT • S CONDITIONAL USE $ _ • $ .. _VARIANCE . . — — EXEMPTION $No Charoe ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ REVISION $—,..,-- • .... ,. . . , :',V.P4'1W,MX70.410:1z„-V.,an'aeieRM-44 -47-.:.':AfpitiAitiitlypitiWiikktitt:rt'EMNW:#42i.gal:'.t.:WADtgvie4:*;''..?,:t0SK-W ,.,...0.:=z•?4: :•11 ,0.;•=.0n1M--40;Pi',3,!*.::ti,,!.V:i.:;•;,*I.:.'.`k:;.i;v4.--...,...! , ....,:.1.4.'i..,.:1.',... ..4,. ..i• .,,,:-.:.............- -:',UMAt.qb.:M110.44,1ima,:aw).A0T6::avm:,.W.:1AP I, (Print Name)nelfiriftAutuis,t ,declare that I am(please check one)_the owner of the property involved in this application.Ythe authorized representative to act f the property owner(please attach proof of authorization),and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained end the Information herewith submitted ire in all respects true end correct to the beet of my knowledge end belief. 1 .: 44 '--- eini-ev a i Shtt,) "7-1)_ iS,Cio" .03 ATTEST: Subsod ed end sworn to before me. e Notary Putific,in end for the State of /seeking at iee4a. • (Name of Owner/Representative) ,on tho 7.t11ay of_ 1/ 1"3—__. 00 . . dek4 alIPPO / . (S(gnature of Owner/Represe ve) (Signature of g ot Public) ••::!;V'.'4:?::rii'•Fi 'k:'g.,,„L:•':jiW•-.in;V'WaVaiMVg'ZAt'444M:;'ig•PF4.„VL,'g•kga'jilArg:,<.t:i : A;A4U,_Wff,N:W.,.WiP' A'a•z•MU..i----7--"" '-',r:'AtW •••_:;:.:•;:;.;•::.::i";!: •V:ii5..!:',,f;gz,J-,.:V.MAx.:;.:.. .::'•.:z.11",a,.:,:;_.4.;!0.;) T:t..;-%%-.;•i .,k,-.04.,ig...0,1•441,0,a.,*R.k_AAIWA:s„.:1h6N.* :te;eig.,:sj-a.:.r.:4;v4- .:::.•y.p.lcMg.i. ::..:.:::i'4i.gi-ig.z:;?:zi4tF;:T,.W:•Fas;.,gF:k;•*•.•:g4i.:V:'agili4.'kgtl.Ia9.4g..(I.t;I''I.9*9.:.f,k4A1P194.4.4PVPt;tPPTC4.gat•ga:•a.taqNir•V;•:.5,MTVSVR:: - '.p• Afasittr rifogol§grevageut-4mg.-14,06:tiOga t?AtIcAgip:7441i po xstotoxixv og: -IJIVAF.PaN(RNRNI.V.M:Ali.SAAN.ismigtVil4vg§.81i.siimsOfigiiimslietetkigktv.-dg.VVii-0 *1:?.qgoat,*5om:cgaaqqt:4tidtttd#oikdvrisrr5i-gtr,:w15eF-vmmna:,,NNpxKiw. l...4:i;.,.. ::,.,,,-;.;;:::,.:,::%a7,-3.:Risigimu,: ... - ...;:,.:.:,,o!-..=:::t...,:.:72.-:.2na.o.z'zki,.wEtz:.-wwwf: rAASTF_AAP.DOC REVISED 0/97 • CITY OF RENTON February 17, 2000 FEB 2 1 2000 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Dear Renton Council Members, We are writing to express our concerns over the possible new construction of 50-60 new homes on Renton Hill across from Phillip Arnold Park. Renton Ave. would be the only access up the hill to the new homes. Renton Avenue is.a very busy road already and is frequently blocked by different service vehicles - garbage, cable, etc. That many new houses would only add to the congestion, which also brings up safety issues. Renton Avenue is very steep in places and with cars on either side it is very difficult to see as you're driving down it. It would increase the problem with that many more automobiles using the same road. That vacant land is home to many species of birds and animals. It would be better to make it a natural preserve of some kind There is so little land that is close in that has been left untouched. Isn't it possible for the city to purchase the land and put it to better use than another subdivision that will crowd the already overcrowded access roads on this hill? Please don't issue any building permits without carefully considering the effects on the existing residents of the area. And also please consider the other possible uses for the ten acres of land. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, .r%i AA-2 v- CG4 Barry & Pat Conger Opl X ),..„7,-X • --`0-14-pf ""ems..-• GI b • ;'-/�-LG le-e-l6flareer--e-e- , ed te,4'- .- CITY OF RENTON /0 cf, 7_eer�aj FEB 2 3 2000 /L9. `k/ki RECEIVED ��r CITY CLERK'S OFFICE &•, &&efre.e.--c_7- ' 4-elaza7r1 ,42- ce Geee:ete/1--ep-e-i - 7- &- ii --t-&e,// _:e.:C:e' -",r,f -i/-6/- GS--% .-e-e-;e, -- e) -6"662-e-04 e _- -a7-7!4 7i egW p_&--‘-r. ...e ,z_efr.i‘c Azeejo �Geeet_e--6 > /iteee/r! ‘; /-0e./ -ei;e,.a- eeee;e. -dr/:-( -,fceigfv-r Age‘--"Weer fee- er"1-- --/Ze-72. .-.;12/. , f. ,r4e ,-er __p, Li-eg9elle.e-e-5-xf- c---; -7t--:'e:--i<,- -f.ce. ._r-e,-‘,.t>, ‘,e , '- e, 7T, 5,«Ge &,,, ,,cGuee:. \t`7� 7 Ce: .7/Lete-Q.„7„.(k_6„:„._.-e-xoe- e-- -e--- ir j `"e-re-- -ee-- GGC-ice- ieee-e t� % -Z-�e'lt-�;. ' ';e,iZ-/-e:e- -6(-.: .c-x' c..e,>_ 67.4- -- 4e-eirieeyeeop;_‘e.ez , l3- -ma c'zit,; �2T - e- y 1 4 1 4 . L ffe,e1 yge,,Z4Z‘ .fbe4eee r, aCe "'etf ,..,ese .f4e-eree frics)-ee>" -eez-te. fl-ti-1:tefit -hc'f- 112-12,71-e6 --•".& 1' Ct. eelfi;(;/(aa766i.C.et& Xte4 ' • -1eee-- e-eitEetc-eza-,7.a e4,ec-6:e.a.:647, ' ` (--eAce-ex-7-4e-4_ec-enc:i2-i-c-it__A-7,-,/ ee / . 9l e2 -16e)- - :see-jg- 76-:• ,e /-2-e-ceeef-e-yite. ee__-0.c.c. --7 6C2‘62' ‘-e'fCC i biti_i461C;771_ , e>/c-4-e-e- e49 "`ze-e-trrc,e,i,otecteeee,-(--; - -edic-e_--d:2 ,, ‘2 ..,i ki-efaeNt_.0-e-u2-,Ze.._-ag 7.--e-'6V1--eeK J-r-yeeLefee ea.-eceezez, aci;,..e-e- -(--r-e-)1. . ` 7"`) e.2-e- -7-.e- -,-e-P''Aal;e7- ' - ‘0,&--e 19" •tg-T-eiy-eX-e-6ee,-- --,)e...,=-/ .--_ _:_, -ze,4e ---e--e6--e-.:Ca?'c;7eg_e'fri_a_ ,•_ ,-.7 .-er27 ( ---,772e91-freee- )7/? ?•& -_- _re9-‘ -‘e 17,_,,, , ,,,.,_ 1 e. V-1:'AIA c)7 t 1--10 0\4 1/4 1(1 1; 7' `Th'I 1"‘"`q v)9 71Th ---6-,-7vicy\/- a u 46-6_ Ka-->-70 -Th,kt3 Th-)4) t qr I to c>), 07, -16 _agc17, ThT 1? 7 17I_S $ 5-91 • cy) (. )PNA \) 10,72,27.v:3 --N,AJ)-0N a• • ' 1 ,27 P-Z2 t?2,2Y,121--- __ /(r29- -°7V)2T2- .2._221e 11T ,13'r d77,21 • SCHEDULE A2 Order No. 398618-5K DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION, SAID POINT BEING THE'TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89°56'37" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 01°43'38" WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 818.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71°05'12" WEST A DISTANCE OF 109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTH 44°20'15" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 1148.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 01°46'02" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LIMITS A DISTANCE OF 33.14 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Page 3 _ EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Heritage Philip Arnold— 56 lot preliminary plat 2. Name of applicant: Bennett Development 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Mr. Ryan Fike 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, #100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 NN�NG 425-709-6508 oEVEG �� pN 4. Date checklist prepared: 0 1 April 7, 2000 0°745:1 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction anticipated during the spring and summer months of 2001 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, please explain. • No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Geotechnical Report has been prepared Geotech Consultants, Inc. dated September 14, 1999. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by this proposal? If yes, please explain. No official applications have been made. 1 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Preliminary plat approval will be required for this site along with a grading permit, developer's extension agreement and right of way use permit from the City of Renton for installation of the infrastructure and an individual NPDES permit from the State of Washington. Individual building permits will be necessary for the homes. A Forest Practices permit will also be required.• 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask • you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. • The proposed project is ultimately the construction of 56 single family dwelling units on 10.35 acres. At this time a preliminary plat is proposed and construction documents will be prepared after plat approval. 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. The site is located directly east of Philip Arnold Park at the intersection of Jones Avenue S, S 7th Court, S 7th Street and Beacon Way S, more generally Section 20, Township 23, Range 5 E. Please see plans submitted with this application. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH A. General description of the site (circle one): Fla rolling, 'lly, steep slope, mountainous, other . Describe location an' areas on the site that have different topography. B. What is the steepest slope on the site (Approximate percent slope)? Describe location and • areas of different topography. Approximately 40% 2 . EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT ' C. What general type 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. The SCS maps this site as Indianola Loamy Fine Sand (InC). Please refer to the geotechnical report for more detailed information. D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity: If so, describe. No E. Describe the purpose, type, location and approximate quantities of any filling of grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading will occur on approximately 10 acres of the site. This work will provide roadways, utilities and building pads for the new residential structures. Current estimates yield approximately 54,974 cubic yards of excavation and 19,233 cubic yards of embankment. F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Short term erosion is possible while the grading process is underway. The amount of unstabilized exposed soils will be limited to comply with City regulations. An erosion control plan consistent with City of Renton regulations will be prepared for the project. G. About what percent of the site will be covered by impervious surfaces after the project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 45 %. H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: An erosion control plan consistent with City of Renton regulations will be prepared for the project. If the project cannot meet state water quality regulations with its construction period discharge and the City permits, additional erosion control measures may be employed such as chemical flocculation, electrical ionization, etc. I. Does the landfill or excavation involve over 100 'cubic yards throughout the lifetime of the project? Yes. 2. AIR A. What type of emissions to the air would result from the.proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during the construction and when the project is completed? If. any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known: Temporary exhaust emissions from construction equipment can be expected during construction: Construction activity on the site could also stir up exposed soils and generate 3 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT fugitive dust and particulate matter into the local air. The completed project would result in a minor increase in the amount of exhaust related pollutants in the air from traffic. 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 other impacts to the air, if any: NONE 3. WATER A. Surface 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe the type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Provide a sketch if not shown on site plans . There are'no water bodies within the immediate vicinity of the site. 2. .Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described • waters? If yes, please describe and attach plans. Note approximate distance between surface waters and any construction, fill, etc. Not applicable. 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 materials. NONE 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year-flood-plain? If so, note location on the site plan. There is no floodplain mapped by FEMA on this site. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharge of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No 4 • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. Ground • 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities.if known. Infiltration systems for the,control of stormwater runoff will be used on this site. The quantity of water discharged to the ground water will be consistent with existing infiltration rates. 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, transport/conveyance, and disposal, if any (including quantities, if known). Where will this water flow: Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. All developed flows generated by this development will remain on site. On-site storm water generated from the roadways in this development will be collected in a'series of catch basins and routed to a biofiltration swale and infiltration pond, while runoff from the individual lots. will be discharged into infiltration trenches located within each lot. In case of an overflow situation, flow will be directed into the existing storm system within Beacon Way South. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Urban pollutants from automobiles and landscaping activities could enter the proposed storm water drainage facilities and eventually be discharged to ground water or off-site. D. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if - any: The proposed storm water collection and infiltration system for the site would collect and detain the site's storm water runoff. Water quality enhancement will be provided though the use of a biofiltration swale designed to the performance standards outlined in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 5 EVALUATION FOR • AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • 4. PLANTS • A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _x _deciduous tree:C.aide maple, aspen, other: oak, ornamental species x evergreen tree.Lir, cedar pine, other x shrub x grass x pasture, crop, or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other other types of vegetation: salmonberry, willow, hardhack, marsh speedwell and slough sedge. • B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation will be removed from approximately 10 acres of the 10.35 acre site. C. List the threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Landscape tracts and pocket parks have been set aside on this site and will be landscaped accordingly. Formal landscaping (such as lawn, ornamental trees and shrubs) will be installed on the individual lots typical of a single family residential neighborhood. 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: x hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds other: x(deed bear, elk, beaver, other: • Bass, salmon, trout, herring, other: B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. • • C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. None known. • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY p ` TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6.. Energy and Natural Resources A. What kind of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Natural gas will be used for heating the homes. A combination of natural gas and electricity will provide for the balance of the energy needs. B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of the site? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Home plans will meet or exceed the then current Washington State Energy Code. 7. Environmental Health A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk or fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. . No 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental hazards, if any: N/A 7 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. Noise: 1. What type of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise and noise associated with adjacent single family residences. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a. short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other): Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction activity on the site would temporarily increase the peak on-site noise'levels. All construction will be during the City's approved hours. The completed project will result in a slight increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity as generated by single family neighborhoods. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Noise impacts will be minimal, if any, and there are no measures to mitigate noise from additional residential development. C. Describe the potential use of the following: 1. Flammable liquids—Typical uses within residential areas. 2. Combustible liquids—Typical uses within residential areas 3. Flammable gases—Typical uses within residential areas 4. Combustible or flammable fibers—None known 5. Flammable solids—None known 6. Unstable materials—None known 7. Corrosives—None known 8. Oxidizing materials—Typical uses within residential areas 9. Organic peroxides—None known 10. Nitromethane—None known 11. Ammonium nitrate—None known 12. Highly toxic material—None known . 13. Poisonous gas-None known . 14. Smelless powder—None known 15. Black sporting powder—Typical uses within residential areas 16. Ammunition—Typical uses within residential areas 17. Explosives—None known 18. Cryongenics—None known . 19. Medical gas—None known 20. Radioactive material—None known 21. Biological material —None known 22. High piled storage (over 12' in most cases) —Typical uses within residential areas 8 • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 8. Land and Shoreline Use A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Single family residences and park. B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not known. C. Describe any structures on the site. There are no structures on the site. D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No E. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R8 F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Single Family Residential G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation? N/A H. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the complete project? The average household has 2.8 residents, therefore approximately 157 people will reside in the completed project. J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A 9 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project is compatible with the existing and projected land uses. M. What percentage of the building will be used for: 1. Warehousing—N/A 2. Manufacturing—N/A 3. Office—N/A 4. Retail—N/A 5. Service (specify)—N/A 6. Other(specify)—N/A 7. Residential—N/A N.• What is the proposed U.B.C. construction type? N/A O. How many square feet are proposed (gross square footage including all floors, mezzanines, etc.) N/A P. How many square feet are available for future expansion(gross square footage including all floors, mezzanines, etc.) N/A 9. Housing A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Fifty-six new single family homes will be created in the middle-income range. B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, • or low-income housing. NONE • C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • 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? The tallest structure will not exceed 30 feet above average grade. The exterior building materials will include cedar siding, cedar shakes, brick veneer, synthetic stucco and stone. B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views from the surrounding property would be altered due to the nature of the proposal to construct fifty-six new homes. No views would be obstructed. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: • Two onsite "park" areas will be provided with improvements such as benches, etc. Additionally, landscape tracts and vegetative buffers will be provided along the north and east sides of the site. • 11. Light and Glare A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposed project will not produce glare. Lights from windows and headlights may be visible at night. B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not under normal circumstances. C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known. • D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: NONE" • • • 12. Recreation • A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Philip Arnold Park lies directly east of the site and six additional parks are located within one mile of the site. Renton High School and Maplewood Golf Course are both located within one mile east of the site. Onsite "park" areas will be provided with improvements such as benches, etc. • 11 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 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: Onsite "park" areas and the adjacent Philip Arnold Park 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 register 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 known: 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. The property is served by and will access from Beacon Way South and South 7th Street. B. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The site is not served by public transit; however,there is an existing park and ride located between SW 7th Street and S Grady Way SW Avenue SE, approximately 1 mile from the _ site. . C. How many parking spaces would'the completed project.have? How many would the project eliminate? ' Off street parking will be provided in garages and driveway aprons. Proposed homes will have 2 car garages with additional parking on the driveway aprons. Approximately 224 new spaces could be provided in the garages and driveway aprons. No parking spaces will be eliminated. 12 . EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 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). The proposal includes the construction and dedication of a 42' wide public right-of-way. Frontage improvements will be provided at the intersection of Beacon Way South, S 7th Street and Jones Avenue S and include the realignment of S 7th Court. E. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Approximately 560 vehicular trips per day total. Peak volumes will likely occur in the 7- 9AM and 4-6 PM hours. F. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The proponent will pay any necessary transportation'mitigation.fees required by the City. 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. The proposed project will require Fire, Police and Emergency Medical services at a rate typical for a single family neighborhood. In addition, there will be a slight increase in demands for schools, public library, public transportation and recreation services. B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The applicant will pay any mitigation fees currently required by the City. 16. Utilities A. Circle utilities currently available to the site: ectricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, sanitary sewer, telephone .eptic system, other: B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Sanitary Sewer: City of Renton Water: City of Renton Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Telephone: US West Cable TV: AT&T Cable Services . . 13 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT The onsite portions of these systems will be installed during the onsite development. No offsite extensions are anticipated C. SIGNATURE I, THE UNDERSIGNED, STATE THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND COMPLTE. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE LEAD.AGENCY MAY WITHDRAW ANY DECLARATION OF NON- SIGNIFIANCE THAT IT MIGHT ISSUE IN RELIANCE UPON THIS CHECKLIST SHOULD THERE BE ANY WILLFUL MISREPRESENTATION OR WILLFUL LACK OF FULL DISCLOSURE ON MY PART. PROPONENT: NAME PRINTED: /J I DATE: YICO a© • • • 14 J4/1S/21idd 1b:ti3 425-822-721b PETERSON CONSULTING PAGE 01 - _ . <� k�tS : + :.•;i s',.S• •l+..:<sYwn•:n } `: ' +- F•. :" . x+: %. tr v =:;iX k > )kxR ' 4F4 % �F x� � ��• kX: ` pf ..Jr2Y; (; , kF4NX<4.:^rra .� }ce' k + yk.<ve . ' • `7 , ' » ; 2.e4 C!..r} xX:..FS :+ :� i•v `•• :: .:^v,;: rti ,g:F�k7i .)., i �;YY%,. oS:Y <Y t:•3i :xn:.et:. ,,,z.,.� k�.X.< l<r(� . 7�, :i.v«..t:::s :a::n,; J < � tw;', 4R.n> . Fu ` .k < <tY riS rsl!'N: r � i :x ;. i "�•x k u .,vii,;v,e ' r,. d.. Ag:d':1s: :• ��'.p' v�Sxa p x .:! . �l•. ?: a.. x:s xf R.chS>e '1 N .l,t,..,,\ �l:.f:" : :e :t ` fs.a •aia $ < 4 oS`:k?; ?. .�,� . xc if. 10;,.tiC L w X4 v w. : vrg. xy • ' # x sY �; ; a5*7 lt .a i . .g/ r ': wnt 1:vj»«:�:5ly X vT.� „ r Y xY ' *i:. r N r it„ wPKW» Al j % % v% wAlhikNa. ' vx . , Ffiv K* ' n. 111 " G :xA (:¢ r i xMTfrAw .Y4vv Z ' ^ . A::, < ... :`,: .i :, ::.}:A.om^Z p r,0.n»:3wi"i .t; ;: .�!R. o: kt xv' ^l riyh < 4w , [Iw" r na .x :%Cu x.N h: S �i v} .ndra:•:v:nvw.: eYla: R ; 4� vwTNwn' :. kaC w ^ y 4r4 • + �> rw 4R tJ u ;f : :t• i: •iiiiiiimemili • DEVELOPMENT P STATE OF WASHINGTON ) • CITY OF RE�ONNN!NQ COUNTY OF KING ) APR282000 • RECE AIv C ,teng first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the 15 day of A �(-- ,, 20 00 , I installed public information $ign(s) and plastic flyer box on the property located at. "i e.i ce Why & S.`1 'ST. for the following project: . - t .Thic tip i-v r • Project �name ` ` 1 ` • Owner Name 2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X13 to indicate the location of the installed sign. • 3. This/these public information si r.(s)was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code. `°°°°°°°°aea`p.,,o�� AR Y,� o Install Sign ture ?' CIVM'I4AYr.• i. s SUB >'Q�SCRIF� NOnAt n lIsP�®•'"Yeore me this a _ n/�day of . 20 • > o S. frt msNS 10 47`1c ga� ® �� 09 OS ®,r`. `%47'�iene••°0�, ®o°' NOTARY PUR` L�i•n and for the State of Washington, ®'4,,, 8141NG`W,o''' residing at 7 &5JJ a.�a./,. _ oa"elose°°°°p°® / My commission expires on �/// o / • R7®S1ONLDOC MOV. 0310i0 4 nuac awevry4.ozas m PPP-SS-TTTT ...e '''10' '®'""' � A CITY OFA.Dim HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD - "yz/°0 RENTON NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP 1 < 1 '� Pion nmggm0uamn/IA.,c w a DANT —� N0. REVISION BY DATE ADMn•ee En a>v�• ` Gregg Z� marm P.E..M nialralor s 1 1 g \\\ \ \ O� o \ \.*`\ \C rr T•T 1 1 >r TI T TI TI 711 ill `ma y �� 1__I 1 11 1 Ii, `LLf:.l 1 1 1°1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LL._L_2 L, 1.1JJ LLLL1111J_LJ'• / _______ MAIN AVER / 8,g.08 I I r-1--1 M l AVE 8/ / -- �- ii_;LLLL111 lJ J 4l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I:/ / 1 I 1 I¢F-rr T-I-7--1'rrTTTTT7171/ / - / / / v Or A I II I�I In I I I� YTE I l { � _UL--1-1JJJ-_J LLLI111111_1mLLL 111JJ • o/ na // YhY /----- 1 [TT rC- fl�AY-Br�� -rr- r�-ram—r fl— —�rT l �-r --/ o� / I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 IyI I I I I I I I I`--:: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ta „ 1 1-� +-1- - -1 1 11 1 1 1 1)-' i / / I I I I I I I I;r: 11 1 1 1 1 1 111 11 1-_11 1 , 1 / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �'F'" I 11 L1_1J_1—_.J__J L_._1_ .'.....�LJ_LJ-1—L1J_11_J_� 3°�L,J_LL_ / / RENTON AVE 8 ,- r1-1-1-1 1--1-TT--f-1-1171 rT-F fl7",ves 1 I 'i-- I fTTr7-r„--T r r-rrrr/ / J 1 11--I I III I I I I I I I I I I I I`;::_`y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -' iT I I I I I I // / IoL rTT_, I'_I -L_L 11L_1JJ 1 1 1T- �- 1 J- 1 �i 1 .I'1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / J L_111_J " I I I F--I F { i;l I j I y� � I I I I I I ( 1-- _ -£'�.-toNANr_Li a J__J L__LL_L-;.=_LLJ_L� -C�\' I I 11 I I I I I 1 VI.1 T IT I Ia.;� i•`--T-TT-TT-T--1 E—JITTER-17-7 \'\ }LJ/LL11J—LL1L_. 1 1„ L__t _1_LJ m 11 II 4—H¢C—_I I I I I I I I) \\ / �r i-i i--. I-7 1-_f�-T-T-T JI_'_1 P--111T1-1--, y .�<�\�\`��yi r 1 1 L1_1 1_- 161 11 1 1 1 1 1 1;F---I 1 1 1 1 y /C\\\\ J / I II -1-1 L'LL-L IN aH A1ve_L1_LJ L_1LL1-Y�aO/ L-L iL LL % 1 1-7 7 I I I LJ I I I I Ir I_I I -/ °'f" 1 I N��ICE I 1 1 LJ_1J-1J__1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I /gymZS I --1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1-T�—T—I 7—T-I I,k,\ 44V 1 I 1 I I I 11 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 'sue L--I I L__J \\ i `L.1_1J_1J_1_LLLL1_L_1_1-L/J .'�\.e%\_1 1 1 1 1 1r JOME9 AV.S /� �L_J V --" - -- -\\ - -. - \\. i. . I\\ i��1I / / 1 \\ \ I 1 \\ / /,'''_ / / / \ 1 \ / lEm4PN N \ \\ I \ ;�� Ter ' % / \ V 1 „ \\ , / dlNf0 LIFO [7/ i/ / ( i \ \\ \\ 2 4aC®B ar, • r/ 1 i 1 / of �'/,'/ \\ - \ \-- \-J C ----------------- 1'"// / \/ , \ )) �h^are-:: - / ./f- / ' t1 1 1 k_, /' / , / i \ \ \\_-- r ?K& / // \ \<,�� < A.,y' / ,/ l /,,/--,,,____I� �' \ r - \y I/ 31 yd�'/ Y, 7 ? �11 ' :\ _I_E-'-.\'_I I I 1 , \ I I 1 • \ �i' I 'al \ �\ ilr� I xl C I '►ELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBIVII ITAL REQUIREMENTS I-,R LAND USE APPLICATIONS .. ................................................................................................ ...........................................................: > ><:WAIygg.:::»:IVI.OD.I.F.I. : :<: C MET::<:::< „. >:<; ..:.: :: :. :...: ..: :.:........................ ..................:...:...::.: ..:..:::::.:.. ::.::::::::::: . :. : . ..::.:::.:::::::::::::::::..:: >:::<:::::>:<::B:: ^ :>:< :..:...................................> :<:: Calculations, Survey, Pll'a' S:::: ::: ; :':; ::• :>' i'. '` '? :iii.:4::t:::::::` `` '': ' ' ::::' ' : ': :"':::::: ' iss' ' : : ::::::2i�: :. D:raina• i.go istrot.... g.q.;......... ..:... . . .:..:. .... ::...:.. ............................ .:...:..:....:::::.::::::::::.. ..:::.:: . :::::::::::...:::.::::::::..:: . .:.:::::,.:.::::::.::;::::::.:::;.:. Drainage Report 2 Elevations,:�:Arch.....:..i...:....:..A....::.::.......:..:.:......:.......:...... ... ............ ...... . ::. :..: ..::.: :.::<.:.: :.::::::::: ::: Elevations, Grading 2 e �fti �x1 1 ve t :> . •r fit�.g:Co:.::.non ..:.(::.....:. d.....:...... . .................... ............ ..... .................................................................... ................................................................. Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) 4 Flggd;P:lain::lVia...,.:..f.........1 a1e:4fii . .........:::. :N...::::: ........ . . .......... ..:.....:.::.:::.:.:. : Floor Plans 3 AND 4 Gegfechni.caf<Report:...:.:........................................::............::..::::.:. .::. .:::..:::;:::::::.::::::::.:::::::::::::::.::::::::::.:::::.:::.::.�::::::.::::;:::;:::::;:::::::::::::.:::.::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::.::::..::. Grading Plan, Conceptual 2 •.:ailed>`>.'.' '` :': ::::::` ` >>:>::i: `:>>:::€"i:>: :::::::: `[< [<:[ f:i' <: < s::::: i ii:>{i ::: i?:i:><:::;:ii::>:.i<;i'si�<i :':! :':i:::«:i`f:is G:raang:Plan;'� • King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site 4 ::.•:tail ..9: Ceptual4::'`.: ` .. »: :``> >: .... « >:>>'` >>< >'< l:a?dseaping.:P........,::C...n:.:...p.........:.:.. . .. .......::::..:.:: .::..:.::.:::....:..::.::;.:::;:;.::::.. Legal Description 4 opei y Owers: ` is : :. .,::' '" ... .....':> ...... ' :. L st of:°Surrgu.nr:i ng:Fro.p:::rty. uvner ,a . .:.: ..:.: .;:..;.:. .....:.: :... .::.: .::::::.;:.::.;;:.::.;:.,::;:..::..: :::..:::...::.::..::.:..:..: .::.......; .;;::::.;...:.::.:.:...:.. Mailing Labels for Property Owners 4 • Ma::ofEXisfing;Sit._.,..C...o.ndlf1.ons:.. Master Application Form 4 oneonu911:14.. t 'y < ` ': `°' '< `a` '< < : Monumenf:C.ards. n .. e.r..:m. m n Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis 4 PI:ar• edu o � s > ''>>: >>; < > a::>> s : : i<: :'': :;'>» > ...,,, ; iRed...:ct...:ns..:::MT ).:a.... : ::...::.:: :::.: :::....:: :..::.:::.:.:: ::::::.::::..: :..:..:. .::...: ::::..�:::::::.::::::::::::::.:: :. Postage 4 P`ubl c>Works.Wproval:'Letter:t :r :<:' >`:`>` : : <1:::!!'1:::i`'' `: `><'>: ': <:::::'> s z •>f > : <>::>'> <z z<'z » ` > '<<' < s«< < >` Title Report or Plat Certificate a < 51:::>`,a on u ;d : ':`a' li� M c to rs s�::: <� :: :` <>;><� < >r :{< >> < >><> >: <> < > >:> > Traffic Study 2 . TreeC.uttln Ne station::. lear'iri :Plarh. ........ .. ............................................................................................................. ................................... .. ................................................................................................ Utilities Plan, Generalized 2 ` y Wetlands.Del ne.atlon.Ma .a.. Wetlands Planting Plan 4 /I W.etlandStud. a:::;: ;..:..:;:.;:. . : ::::. >:: ::::.:..;::. :•:.. ;.:..:....... ..................f This requirement may be waived by: / fi 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: 4"f, d%( PA/.7 r N�°r✓.�4 2. Public Works Plan Review Section �! 3. Building Section DATE: `�/a OD 4. Development Planning Section h:\division.s\develop.ser\dev.plan.ing\waiver.xls 1 HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD Construction Mitigation Description April 10, 2000 Infrastructure Construction Period: Begin late spring/early summer 2001 Completion late summer/early fall 2001 Construction Hours: Pursuant to City ordinances. Hauling/Transportation Routes: Primary access routes will likely be (reverse if coming to site): Beacon Way to Renton or Cedar Avenues, then west across 405 to Houser Way or Main Avenue. North or eastbound traffic will likely continue northerly on Houser Way to I405 or SR169. South or westbound traffic will continue south on Main Avenue/Grady Way to 1405, SR515, or SR167. Mitigation Measures: Dust, mud and other soil-related impacts will be addressed through a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control plan to be approved and monitored by the City. The Erosion Control plan may contain features such as rock construction entrances, wheel washes, silt fences, sedimentation ponds, interceptor ditches, temporary seeding and mulching and would generally be determined by the season, weather and site/construction conditions. Properly muffled construction equipment together with compliance to the City's adopted working hours will be used to help mitigate construction noise impacts. Specialty Hours: Work will be conducted during the City's allowable working hours only. Traffic Control Plan: A plan is not anticipated due to the location Je site at the end of the street system. /ry�F M.P ON ,ve APR2820 00 B e nn e t t Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A Bellevue WA 98005 • Tel: 425-709-6559 • Fax: 425-709-6553 INA i.. I i 10:,.t ill,.q , e.. -•'-''i 4k1'' O6c f c�p�� olri- 'VT 11411 HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD At'.C� ®®o PROJECT NARRATIVE ®��® April 10, 2000 The Heritage Philip Arnold project is located at the southeasterly corner of Beacon Way SE and S. 7th Court. Based on the onsite vegetation, soils and topography, it appears the 10.35 acre site may have been used as a borrow pit in the past; although it is currently vacant and not used. Recent ownership lies with the Renton School District and the property will be "surplussed" from them to the applicant. There are no remarkable site features other than the relative slope across the site. Although this site is indicated as potentially sensitive on the City's Sensitive Areas maps for landslides and coal mine hazards, geotechnical investigations conducted by the applicant did not corroborate the City's mapping. Many areas of steeper slopes can be found on the site that appear to have been created when onsite soil material was mined from the property. Vegetation generally consists of small diameter evergreen and deciduous trees consistent with the recent mining activities. Current plans indicate the site will be developed into 56 single family lots, a park tract, 2 landscape buffer tracts together with a stormwater management tract. Primary access to the site will be from S. 7th Street, which will include existing street realignment to improve the intersection. Lot areas range from 4,504 square feet to 8,313 square feet with the preponderance of lots in the range of 4,700 square feet to 6,000 square feet, well above the minimum lot size of 4,500 square feet required by code. The proposed density of 6.8 units per acre is midway between the density maximum of 8 units per acre and minimum of 5 units per acre. A sensitive transition between the neighboring properties is accomplished by this mid range density, a fifteen feet landscaping buffer to the homes to the north, a landscape tract and community fence facing Philip Arnold Park, and a lot layout that minimizes the lots backing up to Philip Arnold Park. B e nn e t t Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A Bellevue WA 98005 •. Tel: 425-709-6559 • Fax: 425-709-6553 The proposed internal public street will have a right-of-way width of 42 feet, which is a reduction from the required 50-foot width. This reduction is in compliance with Section 4-6- 060R.3 of the City of Renton Development Standards and is requested to allow the lot depths to range from 90 to 100 feet rather than 80 to 90 feet. If the 50 foot right-of-way were to be used it would result in a loss lots and the reduction and/or elimination of the proposed landscape tracts and vegetative buffers along the north and east edges of the site. For the last nine months the proposed development has had several key events that have molded the project into its current design. These key events were very instrumental in the way the layout, access, traffic, landscaping, and total design is being submitted. Here is a brief summary of the events that transformed this application: 1st Preliminary Application Meeting(Sept. 2, 1999) A few key concerns were discussed at this meeting. The use of the Cedar River Pipeline and the Seattle Public Utilities approval was unknown. Traffic was a major concern and the need for a traffic study was discovered. Density was also a concern for the City. This meeting allowed Bennett Development the ability to design and engineer with the City's concerns in mind. See Exhibit "A" Voluntary Meeting with Renton Hill Residents (Nov. 4, 1999) Bennett Development invited the residents of Renton Hill to a community meeting at the Renton Community Center. Approximately 150 people were in attendance. From the meeting the neighbors addressed crime, traffic, access, and density. The majority of residents expressed opposition of development on the parcel. With this meeting Bennett Development was able to incorporate residents' concerns and to define what was needed for a traffic study. See Exhibit ''B» Meeting with Seattle Public Utilities (Nov. 10, 1999) The meeting with Seattle Public Utilities established that they have a neutral stance on development of the parcel. S.P.U. stated that use of their Pipeline which runs parallel to the parcel could not be granted to private individuals. The use in the Pipeline can only be requested by and permitted to the City of Renton. The current easement the City of Renton has with S.P.U. regarding the Pipeline can encompass the rights that are needed for the proposed project. See Exhibit "C" & "D" 2' Preliminary Application Meeting (Jan. 6, 2000) Concerns from the 1st Pre App were addressed. Information was provided to the City of Renton on the Neighborhood Meeting and the Seattle Public Utilities requirements. See Exhibit "E" River Ridge Homeowners Meeting (Jan. 25, 2000) Bennett Development met with a group of River Ridge homeowners whose property line is shared with the proposed project to present and discuss design. From the meeting, Bennett Development incorporated a design concept to include a buffer between the River Ridge neighbors and the proposed project. The intersection on S. 7th Court was modified for a greater visual transition between River Ridge and the proposed project. Traffic Study Results (Jan. 27, 2000) The traffic study prepared by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc. identified that the project will not cause a significant adverse affect on the neighborhood. Conceptual Plan mailed out to Neighborhood Leaders (Apr. 3, 2000) A new conceptual plan was mailed out to neighborhood leaders incorporating nine months of city and neighborhood input. The mailing gave neighborhood leaders a chance to, see the conceptual plan that will be submitted for application and to give any last minute input. See Exhibit "F" After nine months of input and feedback from City staff, neighbors, and engineers, we believe that the proposed plan achieves the best use and is sensitive to the surrounding homes and park. Please accept this application and we look forward to your comments. I ... 4I,t Ve 1Ai. Ff`A174f G-S(C 0 d. + + CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU • MEMORANDUM DATE: August 19, 1999 TO: Laureen Nicolay, Planner FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marsh 7 SUBJECT: Arnold Preliminary Plat, 800 Bloc Beacon Way SE Fire Department Comments: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. 3. Fire Department access roadways require a minimum 20 Foot paved roadway with an approved fire department turnaround. See attached diagram. The gate on Beacon Way SE should be removed or relocated to accommodate the increased traffic and Fire.Department access. 4. All building addresses shall be visible from the public street Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT . MEMORANDUM DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 TO: LAUREEN NICOLAY FROM: NEIL WATTS SUBJECT: • ARNOLD PRELIMINARY PLAT PREAPPLICATION REVIEW • I have reviewed the project submittal for the above listed project, and have the following comments at this time: ACCESS • • Beacon Way S adjacent to this parcel is not a City right-of-way available for public use. This is a Seattle Water Pipeline Right-of-Way, owned and controlled by the City of Seattle. Any use of Beacon Way S will require written approval from the City of Seattle. • We have concerns with use of Beacon Av S for this subdivision. What assurances will be provided that any approval of use by Seattle will not be revoked in the future? Where will secondary/emergency access be from? Who will be responsible for maintenance of the street • improvements in Beacon Av S? • We also have concerns with the additional traffic on Renton hill through existing residential streets. A traffic study will be required for this project, which will need to address this concern. We recommend examining the option of routing the project access to the south, if possible, to Puget Dr S. • The excessive use of private streets along the easterly portion of the plat will not be supported • by staff. This large of parcel can be platted in such a manner as to provide direct access to all • the new lots directly from a public street, without creating a significant number of landlocked parcels dependent on access from narrower private streets. SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7`h Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new parcel can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main though the proposed subdivision. SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 PAGE 2 • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2%. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be .paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary short plat. WATER • There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7`1' Ct, and a 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from about 40psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at.elevation 360 feet. • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: 1. Installation of an 8" water in Beacon Av S within the City of Seattle Water Pipeline right- of-way along the entire frontage of the plat. This will require a permit from Seattle Public Utilities. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants. 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see plan W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). • Fire hydrants will be required to current City standards within 300 feet of all proposed building sites for the new parcels. • Water System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for • this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary short plat. DRAINAGE . • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan is to include detention and water quality treatment for the fully built out plat, including future houses, driveways and roadway improvements. The runoff from the new houses must be tightlined into the storm drainage system constructed for the preliminary plat. The drainage plan is to be designed per the King County Surface Water Manual. • Surface Water System Development Charges of $385 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. . • SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 PAGE 3 • EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary plat (for both preliminary plat development and future building permits for the individual lots): 5. 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. 6. 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. • 7. 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. 8. 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. . . STREET IMPROVEMENTS • • Beacon Av S must be improved to full 32 foot pavement width, with curbs, gutters, sidewalk and street lighting. This work will require approval from the City of Seattle. (see Access comments). . • The new street interior to the short plat must be developed to City standards, including new pavement, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street lighting. • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the short plat must be undergrounded. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 PAGE 4 • • Traffic mitigation fees of$75 per net new average daily trip ($716.25 per lot) will be required prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. i CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS,AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: August 30, 1999 TO: Laureen Nicolay FROM: Owen Denniso .. SUBJECT: Arnold Preliminary Plat-69 Lots Preapplication(#99-75) (800 Block of Beacon Way SE-NE of Philip Arnold Park) The site is designated Residential Single Family. (RS)in the Comprehensive Plan, and zoned R-8. The proposal appears to be near or above the upper end of the permitted density range for RS parcels over one-half.acre. Even with modifications to reduce the density to 8 units per net acre, the proposed plat would be more dense than the surrounding neighborhoods. The following Residential Single Family designation policies address new plats proposed at higher densities than surrounding areas. Policy LU-40. New plats developed at higher densities within existing neighborhoods should be designed to incorporate street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes which address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Policy LU-40.1. New plats proposed at higher densities than adjacent neighborhood developments may be modified within the allowed density range to reduce conflicts between old and new development patterns. However, strict adherence to older standards is not required. Policy LU-40.2. Site features such as distinctive stands of trees and natural slopes should be retained to enhance neighborhood character and preserve property values .where possible. Retention of unique site features should be balanced with the objective of investing in neighborhoods within the overall context of the Vision Statement of this Comprehensive Plan. The Falcon Ridge development to the east includes on-site open space to buffer adjacent uses. Residential uses to the west are buffered .by Philip Arnold Park. The development to the north, however, is less than half as dense as the proposed plat. Further, lots in this plat appear to be somewhat lower than on the proposed site. The difference in elevation may emphasize the density differential between the developments. With submittal, the proponents should be prepared to show how the proposed plat is sensitive to potential privacy and quality of life concerns of the adjacent property owners to the north. . \\TS_SERVER\SYS2:\COMMON\-H:\EconomicDevelopment\STRATPLN\PLANNING\PREAPP\RS\Amo1dPP.doc\od' - _ F:=1 rtar7. ; I(1111111 - BENNETT. HOMES October 21, 1999 Re: Community Meeting Dear Neighbor, You are invited to attend a meeting to discuss a proposed housing development in your community. The property, which is directly across Beacon Way South from Arnold Park, is approximately 10 acres in size and zoned for 8 homes to the acre. Bennett Homes was recently selected by the Renton School District as the buyer of their property. We have met with the City of Renton on a preliminary basis and now wish to get neighborhood input into the property's development. Here are the details: When: November 4, 1999 7:00 p.m. Where: Renton Community Center 1715 Maple Valley Highway Renton,WA 98055 Directions: See map on reverse We look forward to meeting with you and learning more about your neighborhood,as well as answering any questions you may have. Sincerely, BENNETT CORPORATION "s ' Chris Austin Vice President 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A, Bellevue, WA 98005 (425)646-4022 Fax: (425)646-4024 . . MAP • , S EE/ 6-2(_,). „. ,_ :,:4:{a,„,--;.4,,,ymy. •••,..-, .-..,•,,..,4,','••..,,i,..„,.%.,,,:.,, ,,p,.,,A;- :,.........,•.,, .if;.:•,...;.. , . . .-,,...,,,.. .:;,;:,•;:-,,,•h•-;,. :•,,...e.4•01:i,,,„;:•,,,,,,,,,,,,:i',;',./--.47,.;', ,.,,-.,:/iy,,z,•:.,,,, ..,‘,.).,Ek,;,,,,1 , , , '...... t. . . ./.:,.„ • . f , ;,..4.., ,/ Y;.'..,..,.:.::',..A,m.,.,,,,......•.;.,z. ,....:.;,,,,,,,„.;,,;:.A,,,,!,;.,;.,.„ , t ,,,,, ,,.,„„..„ , ,....„ ,.,,,,,.,...., „.,.,.„ . , .:., . • fik -111111111111111//ElfaillE ,, ,„,1,....v.........,_ .„..,. ..,,,.._ ; , . ,:e. .'1. . •Z .• . 7 . ., 1 N 1,1616. 6TH IRV . . f, wIND's L. R ''• $.' \ c RIVER ›• -.1112"."8.° ‘ :.• ..esfa xy,, 7 1\ '1. TRAIL :• ." if,z, i,:•..: A A ,, \ ,s RENTOff„ < •i3,.,:...,:a s .I, f KEICRIAL 1 t .1 HS STADILH .:4'• Cit..:' ;;4;',/ :•.1„1,„i:. \ 1,;; ,,.,• .• •.„;••• \ t.,‘. .....ii.,„ 1 ;111 s.8 . lit `n < - 1 , ..::,,,,..... •. :4TH • !11 .: - ct. PL N .'' NE lc L . Ilik:'c•k%t BlIcrc2: HE LJJ 4, ,4' .t 1 OS 0' ‘Al.„ i crEDH3ND . . JA ..." IS 1 c g. l• ilimiiiiieFERNDALE ell, 4/". .0 -44- .r,•, . . .$7.:,: ...---- ST 900 , A.. • V/ N NI. '''''..'lor=) yi,,;;;;< 4 noo Elf ..‘ ,r, w 1/4,_ * ••b'f' /P4 1'7. .: ' . ..' •'-"': ft' '441.., - i•.!.:;-irdi; I, /1 :-.--,: - : .' • - I. '.p • in •Ca ..1,4;i F 'Vii..'"--;..• ", .. e ' iii... 4 ..::::yve t AR-,. .. ., v ! .3RD V 444,166-,; ; • - - 'g . ..S. C.' . . ' ".. 4 11 •.:. • .. • rocimmicaq. rzmousisam....... ,,,,,,.... . • . .-... ..,dden P,:••,:•',.-w,' -,.;.•'.•r,..'-.- AIRPPRT .N..., ORT'... wy. . . /.7Y.' 17•• • a- .::::1 iitiF5/7/7.. • -.. s P . 4 /I./ ' ...,;1.,.-4 _, . . . , . • .,.. . , •iioo.. .:., L., . ......'mil:-, .f::, • - ,, ,: reof: ., . ../. /,... iNTER !g • .4013 IN .',..-7 4,fr ......r‘:,..., ,,,I, /./\ .0 ., , . 1.. ti. $ VICTORI! 3°L9- P''''....1" ' '.$<----4,01Pi /".\...e. . , .... si..-:,,,. ._: . . - ..,.7C • 1,1 -In . -'44 %4' . 41/410Z //t. 1..'"\‘?" EEnNG s'',F4 Y.,.442„-" RENTON,:•* 'h..•:;•,1 •-,.'... -•....:.•,.;0....., " ;710iyi„'i,,',,,Ar, ...,.:.,,isa,.\. +=not . . .,,.,.., .---;:j.,L0,::-:,-. -....--;,:-",g 0 et -'--.:"-.. , •--. Wei: ;.Z...,/7 Cf:g ',Y.,;;11)V.11,5V •/ „rig!,V 11.:1;4 : Ss.• .....:.:2Nly ...S.''; i.-.•F',..:40 ,t.i. : .;••••:,.',:-' •,.',....,.....',21te.? ,:di 44.00 i i 4,144,0,0b, 7 .,!,..,te..,'„,.•.. ,4;,....;,./).- ..coETERy„...,..;.., „...„,.. .,......,. . . :. .-:" -, - ,i:„..:-.1,..,,,,,,t,,,-..:-.: ::4 -:::,0-. '' -,,`,-'• '', r-.3V-'i-,2'. 4::;01,0' .,.._:-/ ,".!.;;;/elyit .4 1114f/410,\'',11.4:(,:::-r'f,i.:',.';j4§..:42.!,'..' •jr-;‘,... .''.;.•f*: -,.;; .• ....-•..:... :, .,..,'. ___.-----..,.....______.......:.,.•-• ..._ . . ,c,., ..:f':ii);:-.Y',...!„:;Z' ------ -77-;,--7.-. 900.. L,, • - ,,,,/e.74.tayrvity/,'"4.0W-.<Ae'..''.;7:.P....i--:;:.r:-.."'.,:.' -. -:-:.-;:-.F..:: .,:-..:..-! • •,--.':::.1..':.- •'-'..'...-:•*7'-./.4',!.-;•-7...:!'-.-... ---,. ..-;-:*--;:r!C -:!!--1-1.- - 0.0. 4..*:71 - 2.07#401-1h41Y-:,.,..:?".-•"..=*"::' • - .`,::•-•,..- '. • ,.--:. .RI..ST I ti. . k N i.../._;.:3R:D.'•:.• - • i . •„:,.."1-t ,,,,-..,_,„„agg..,,,. / 4.„„,,, ,,,47,,Fiiiotor.,••:....-.,,,:, :.f.„•:-:. n :.-....,......:' - . . • 1 '- alik\s,• . . .V . .. . k ,...,:::,..„,..„.....;:,..,,,....„,,,__ ...„,... ..____.... _ ....,,, ...,.....7:::./.. .. ..,..„..4441.,77., _, . . .....,..........._ ..........,\ •dp. . • .... :: - :'. i . : , •• • • _.,,,,,,,,,„. 6, . ....,:4-4 -4.4 .....-.-/f cg:;k;.i."7"Ail":.;', 4, A.....i.;,.... . .:'... - : • . ... ....,,4,' ''Arrs•At.' 110,„ •--.:,....: .. ......• • : . , ., . • . . . . , -,-,..:.• . 4 '',T,. ...r. -!',': ... ix AN. ,,,r• "'°: eigV4g ••//i'''' I ',"......i•1".•14,,i '47'f'"-7-1Y, '",•......•..• •:' ': . .• '.'•\•-•••i'lli ..'' On\..- . -ril---0- ' . 8 in- . l.:'••:, '.•4..• • '•••:,1.7:-'7:1": :. ';'''' 4. • .',,4,1-4,0. •.: .., •• , .*‘‘..N.'7// . 1.':•- •••75 1 ......°. '''" , '.;.1 ,.::.'I i -!1"....:;: ..'. ::::;: ,......1. ..: .. ' ...,..t,t4,4: „,„,,, ; ?..,..,. . i .... ;),.. ,c;4 - <(<.1_, RD ..,,J.:,...,,,,,, ,,11% fag „ ,,...„, .:..: : .:.i.:F2- ..,.. ..,, to4.:;...-:,.....•,-.......,....,..; -40,110,1x,-;,. 3t,;... cb,,,,, ....N._,..._____ ---------„r„,„,,„ -.\ • Olditiva) ,-2t ::;; Sni ...•..:': „:.• „ . . ...„.t/: , 4'' -. .. ' . 7•"'''"f'''.'''''i''''''.1'::,flic PPM',. e?..: • ... . .. . . .. -•.., „ 3 ,•• ,•.•4,0,4:: $2..-,i't.i.it•,6,,,,,..'4,',...10,1174,4,. .,,,,,-,.,,,,..:it_•,,,:,... , • - •• • - ;••••• , 4.,. .•;,""-. . .:: ., .A .:V , , _,An ,,,,,,.., •,-..: ..-. •••-:,•4 ,,. ,. . - • .4. 9.7M,01,.-.1•,,,. ,,r'• , • 441 . .f:.:P.1.k:.,•C..) - i:. i ......-.f... . '.›. .41h :,...-f.-c-.-'•:'''-'°44.41,.11,;:,..'' . 'WI/ye.'7,..i 4,''''091, - '''''.•• ', •,.0' .',:,..441.;k'',-;...;.'ti", 16 '' z,111M1112111 ' ...4..;1 .... ' C''' . :;;75 ;...:' .....k.: .'..4 7;::*:.-101i, ',Piyftpkra4,1rfer44„,::•• 77?.::' 0''',,,r,H,t0t r,:.;444'.'i ri.46thalf,Af." .., ..C,i i .S.:;,2:1. ,.1:-...,/: ,.=7.0 '',',.,2:,...:: ;.„''..'',.:-:: ':•. liti,;'/A Al 11/2 PWV,';$,ZW,04.144, •h,;,;-•.,,,,„;,,::f., 'i ..A14,0 0'.4.-.40,' f -' --:.--"„,,,Ii•f, ..:',Pi;::::....„',;:. -1.,........;:A.:-'',;v1::1:.; .;:•:,;.1.,..;.1,:'::;,=•.,.`:"..s...:',.7. :::,..F,•:.,.*t-.:,-1:::a4.,.. .4"Ati;44.1.4..•.,Ai;..... .'es:-,0:.,te,..;‘;04,,,iy.4.0.. ..0...,.,:e.rt ".: - -. -...1,,....s, -.-,,i;.,i':',',,,,.:1 ,..,,f.,,.,5.,,,T.: ',..;• •.:--J.,., ....,.,..',,,...,,,...•, • • . . . . , , ..,....../.: . . : '.---.'-':':..:'-'. N'`,T••••••••• ::-A..y;.4.`"/, II'.7.,` ;',..I(.... C04:41''.14,„, ..:....'' .;,,..;‘,•'......%,1 Site • ..'..'. .. '...'• /.1;:' '...gm'' '., .;..:'f,.....'•..?.,,...',••..%,,'!.'. -\'.:1..1;':::;. .,,, '..:,N:2'' 71, . ''.1;.*I. Ct.:'.'''fie,„?, ,..:,....`:-.,".:;:-.-..:,..':!. site . f.„,...,,4,.. • ..„.„,...,* ,...,,,,,,,,F 1.77,7;4. . it,",.-,;:,:,:,2,:'..;-,..;,• • -----i -- ...,1 - - • ... . . ..,:.; ;,,,,,A ... or. ,t,t?*•./. .•'?'..ciF,40,4.bp,„ •• .:-...,.-...: i..-- ,.., . ,..,,,.,„1...., .. ,.....::::., •—. .:.:,.,,-,: .. .-;:, .,,,tyy.:.•;,."•:,.'e,- •;..,..*.:.. E7!"7,41,1A,Pri.4.707,_.••:,--:.,-1:1•• • ..•''••loct's• • - .. . ••;./...„...,1,,,,.,,....: ... EIN.•,,,, .,,,,v,1 el;jai,.fit);12:1.0,, 49,-...:-'f-.-, .•:..0% .. .' '..-. ir7,17,:' '. ....,,,1,, • ',• titat:VIII.A6E 7:'..I •:.....1%,,.:5.-•::,':',.=4;- EFE•'-:•15 vr,fyrjfilfp14.•.....:,...,-.% . ::-.- :,:46 . , ••,6; . ' ,..'.11%' '''''....i• .,. N.....-J•W . . -,.calit R..,'...'•::. .. •••-••:'" ,-,:::•.:••;.:::t:::-....:,.,- . 1 ::'.•th. -::-..,,c 4,c.,',.'•,•- ,fc,•-.. •- ,.• .,10,-• • . • ' 0*•*'N "1 • •:•4,.,.• • , ,.-.:•:.•;• ••.. •••••••'..,,;.•:.,:::'.••:,...,,... .. .• •• ; •'•:' ' ::.;:.:- ..: •-.--..• •:. • c•E R.I,e ) ,..•."lir -..S •':: ON VILLAGE. PL..1 ,•--:::•:.?..,•:•,..: .,•:•/'i.:.1.,:, .;.:,..:...-........... • • • .•.-.. ,.' -:,;:...-,.. , .. .,.. ..... .. , 6., ., ,,,,,. ,..„. ,...•. .„,,... ...:••• . ., _,....,,,:..,.,„....,... .,.. ., ,,:,..".,:„:".,,.......:....„...,,,:,....„.....:,„:::.„, ,...::„....„.„.„..........,:„.,:. .... v. , . • . .0 --: .,szt-'• ,:,,;•........py,,,.4DA,:.t.,.2.:..;,.:,...:,f:-..fiTx..-•....i.,.„.:.,, --,'-...,.. Fi:.-',. -.7......4,,,,..„.1....1.:?,4,,t,),;,.:::•• ........,.•..:',.:-..,.•.:.:.'•••s:,...,,. - •......7:,.. .N.', •.. - . „. p-- -.. • .,., ,i, 'VikO '• 405 ,i ..:,. =:, •••`,...i....1.,;,•'a,:,;,:,,;,.,44:...,...i,,.; ,7:4.-..,,,..., ,...:............: . . .. d" . ....,.. . . ...1''''.•%; '''''• ' - • -. •' • -..- ••••••••••• ;PI, .'''.4i...4•4','i ,::-.,..:,:.-..::,4,;:.1-, :,f.;:,...,-.... ... .• .. • :."`„,,, % e`.•• ...- ‘.:';:''.:2'' . :. ''...'si '•'" ........i: `• 0.... 7'''.:A.::efc 0.::,:::A:::;'?';;:•8 .:'..r . .: - . ..:. fr ••.".:•'$."..,.. • ',0• ...::•• • ,--' , ". ... ,:•:•'• ..,`'...--:........:,...;5.,. .7:::::.::: :7..'..••••"..?.`:•.:;•' • • • : . ts s" , ni• . :,•-. •-.. -2 j • '• 1 ---. "--, .,,,:......, . :. •‘ I 6 44, Cl „J %••• st •, ck- ! tc.•„, „...k.. '4.. 004,Gs I5TH.,...' ;.• - - •••••-t: ili:: ''.'• . ... • & ' . •'.17.F.Pvi, - 6" • ". joif V . .''''''•'-'.'••' . 8 v' S 16TH ST.'.. "'Ai. .: •'4...';•'1°:'f.::;;”*:;:- •-..- • •. • ' -.. U. .. W .sc)9S‘". 4f e-r#4 1b4 . -.Sf•-.41. •:. N. • ..-.-.. • 4 . ., . . •,,..',, ,o. :.-,;•:‘ •-.;', ..,1r6 .....•;;:" '•:',ik.i.,•:;.:;.....':..•,.,. . ., ,,E-th.ii 3.6.n.Ht.k.....E, -8, - •..,,,.. ..u., ib,i.,g.,,, [9:...iP•-•'.,. ...,',.•.rni :....%* ;,':• S7'.'1".. .:':::J 1 ti.!.•:.:tl '''!. .-'Y'.4Z*;,•::::,"•::.V.W....... ....... "...,%. ..:f...;lin'.,' •MT ; ;SMIZI:.- ' cal • ..E tr) r., . .W ••'. 'lb....,` ,'•-•:- •• .:...• ir.nr,ST.,,.:;,:',i •,.,:,,....-,:.:'..-,1„.'....:,".:.•,..:.if,.'„,p :!....,',.:J.,..,:,,,..-4,... '..,,....:--;:----..-;:‘,4 it.,- - ' .' ;;-. *CT. ...7 ...1,i,..ii-••"•.'" :" . . . ,.„,.. .„-••,... 0:111,0 ,Y,::.. : :.,':i4 .:.i.::,....2, ...',61S,,,,......' -i”. . '; &;;;;I.,• ''. ri 4y.'.;,j, i--1< ,,te. .• 49-i • -.4:::-••;., Ic 7' ttri '-• '... anti4,;:..`' .7 ••••;.. • •.,,;:3.: 3:';,1,::::':,.'.,.0•:.,:%...:ST4...7 .74/.4:.''4.ic SE'cm . iz' '.4.• 4,, . , + • • 4.- 1 ...,...::::.---. -....,.,,, 1::,;: : e . ,40,4. . .-...,,:. •,'-: •-' s, •;,• : __ - -. - '4:!..:,,,,:%":',.-; in.-; '17.--•'M - .. n•C' ;1,,,;:,`.'...:,..%:.; • Tap, .'./...-.;•.•.., •!.._ /. .,......1....,....:4.1...., :,...7, 4 - 4•--:1. ' 1 - SE 157TH ST . .4 . ...,.;1•:S'..;19TH• ST- --..#•'r...,,,Y ) -:,:. -.I .::•;.•••'••,: :'•:. .., ..? • ...•t...70. • .. •.'... '"I''• :.;• '1...I': •• - <4'1. z - .94' ST -el 1 j'e- 4" 1 •• ,- . de .• "- - . . 5..--. tg,-- •! . .!.,..;4* . • 04 ,g • 0. . . ,... . , . 4. - . 2071, - • :. y,in pa L .: • d " • " .. . • ."AIL" PI_• :1:). 'Rr', I On • CD Di tr. :--r ... ...- ..." :4`,.'!.! . .5 Development Planning Section PREAPPLICATION COMMENTS ARNOLD 69-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT 700-100.0 BLOCK "BEACON WAY SE" August 27, 1999 The applicant, Bennett Homes, has proposed a.69-lot preliminary plat of an existing 10-acre vacant parcel across from Philip Arnold Park in order to construct detached single family residences. General: The following comments are based on the pre-application submittals made ,to the City of Renton by the applicant and the Codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that review comments may need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. Also, information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Environmental Review Committee, Hearing Examiner, and City Council). The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the City of Renton Development Regulations. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00, plus tax, from.the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall. Land Use Permits Required: The proposal will require a preliminary plat approval • and environmental review and, as proposed, an administrative approval of a 42-foot reduced public street right of way. A complete Preliminary Plat and Environmental Review application package is attached. In order to request approval of a reduced right of way, you will also need to include this request in your project narrative, along with a statement justifying the request. Total processing time will be approximately 18 weeks, assuming no appeals are filed. Uses and.Density: The subject site is zoned R-8, Residential 8-Units Per Acre. • Since the existing parcel is greater than one half acre in size, this zone permits single family residential development at densities at between 5 and 8 dwelling units per net acre. The overall property size is indicated to be approximately 10 acres in the preapplication inTormation. If the site were found to contain sensitive area (i.e. slopes greater than 40%), these areas would have to be deducted from the total square footage along with the right of way area for the purposes of determining net density. The applicant has calculated the project density at 6.9 units per acre, however, this analysis does not seem to consider the required deduction of dedicated pubic street right of way. The applicant should determine the square footage of land to dedicated for public streets and recalculate total allowable density based upon a starting acreage of less than 10 acres. As proposed, the project will likely result in a density of more than 8 units per acre Page 1 of 4 Access: RMC Section 4-7-170B states: "Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards". The applicant will need to obtain approval of the City of Seattle to use their water pipeline right of way for access. This written approval must be provided to the City prior to the time of formal preliminary plat application. This will allow the City time to review the document and determine whether a variance is needed for the project. Assuming the City of Seattle grants approval to use the "Beacon Way SE" right of way, each lot in the proposed plat will front on and have direct access from either "Beacon Way SE" or a private 26-foot access easement. If this written City of Seattle approval for access is in a format acceptable to the City Public Works Plan Review Division and City Attorney, then no formal variance from the subdivision regulations will be required as the City will consider this the same as a "public street or road". Lots fronting on "Beacon Way SE" will also have access via a proposed 20-foot alley to the rear of each of these lots. The new internal public street proposed by the applicant is only 42 feet in width. The City's street standards permit the Development Services Division to allow construction of a 42-foot wide public street (in lieu of the standard 50-foot wide residential access street) when "the extra area from the reduction is used for the creation of an additional lot(s) which could not be platted without the reduction OR when platting with the required right of way results in the creation of lots with less than 100 feet in depth". The conceptual plan indicates various Jot depths ranging from approximately 80 to 90 feet in depth so it is reasonable to assume that • additional right of way would likely reduce the depths even further. The applicant does not provide a comparative analysis of the number of lots possible between the 50-foot and 42-foot streets. The applicant should note this request and basis for it in his project narrative at the time of formal preliminary plat application. Access to-approximately 20 of the lots will be via private access easement as permitted by Section 4-6-060J states that: "private streets are allowed for access to .• six'(6) or less lots, with no more than four(4) of the lots not abutting a public right-of- way.:Private streets will only be permitted if the proposed private street is not anticipated by the Department to be necessary for existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the subdivision or to serve adjacent property. Such private streets shall consist of a minimum of a twenty six-foot (26') easement with a twenty-foot (20') pavement width. The private street shall provide a turnaround meeting the minimum requirements of this Chapter. NO sidewalks are required for private streets, however, drainage improvements per City Code are required, as well as an approved pavement thickness (minimum of four inches (4") asphalt over six inches (6") crushed rock). The maximum grade for the private street shall not exceed • fifteen percent (15%), except for within approved hillside subdivision?. The applicant's proposal seems to generally comply with these requirements with the exception.of the private access easement serving Lots 51 through 55. This can be modified in order to comply by revising Lot 55 to be a pipestem lot with frontage on the public street. Once done, only 4 of the lots in this area will "not abut" a public street. Page of 4 • • • • Lot Size:. The minimum lot size permitted by the zone is 4,500 square feet. The • applicant states that the proposing lot sizes are all 4,500 or greater. However, the pipestem area (area 20 feet or less in width) may not be counted toward the minimum lot area of any lot. For pipestem lots, the applicant should verity that the square footages listed do not include the pipestem portions. Lot Width—General: The minimum lot width in this zone is 50 feet (60 feet for • corner lots). The lots have irregular widths that must be averaged to determine compliance with the 50-foot minimum lot width standard. For all irregularly shaped lots, the applicant should calculate the lot widths pursuant to Section 4-11-120L "Lot Width". The definition of lot width is as follows: "Width of a lot shall be considered to be the average distance between the side lines connecting front and rear lot lines ." In calculating compliance with the 50-foot minimum lot width, the following formula may be used: Proposed Lot Area divided by Lot Depth = Average Lot Width. Since individual lot square footages and dimensions were not provided by the applicant:I was unable to check compliance with the minimum lot width requirements. The applicant will need to verify compliance for the irregularly shaped lots (#s 19, 21, 29, 30, 50, 56, 57, 60, 61, 62, 64, 68, and 69).prior to formal • submittal. Lot Width—at Street: RMC Section 4-7-170D, City Subdivision Regulations, states: "Widths between the side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e. the points where the side lot lines intersect the with the street right of way line) shall not be less than 80% of the required lot width except in the cases of(1) pipestem lots, which shall have a • minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lot on the turning radius of a cul-de-sac shall be a minimum of 35' for non-pipestem lots." In this case, the required lot width for this zone is 50 feet. Therefore, the typical minimum lot width for the portion fronting on.a street cannot be less.than 40 feet.(80% of 50 feet). Lots 22, 50, 55, 56, 57, 68, 69 have less than 40 feet in width at their street frontage. These are all considered to be "pipestem" lots even though some of them are located on the turning radius of a cul-de-sac. The applicant should keep in mind that the portions of the "pipestem" lots which are narrower than 80% of the zone's minimum lot width (40 feet or less in this case) may not be counted toward the minimum lot area of those lots and that adjacent pipestem lots (e.g. Lots 50, 55 and 56) shall have mandatory shared driveways. . The applicant may opt to increase the width of those lots on the turning radius of a cul-de-sac to 35 feet in order to avoid the shared driveway and/or lot area reduction requirements applicable to pipestem lots. Lot Depth: Minimum lot depth is 65 feet. The proposal clearly provides adequate lot depth (scaling from 80 to 90 feet) for the majority of the lots, however, prior to application, average depths of Lots 29, 61, and 62 should be verified. • • Page 3 of 4 _. Lot Configuration: RMC Section 4-7-170A, Arrangement, states: "In so far as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines . . ." The proposed plat seems to generally comply with this requirement. Setbacks: Proposed Lot#62 may be somewhat difficult to build upon given-its large front yard and shallow depth. • Proposed Tracts: The proposed drainage tract appears to comply with minimum lot width, depth and area requirements. There are two other"parcels" indicated to the south of Lot 20 and to the east of Lot 53 which do not appear to comply with zoning standards. Their proposed use is unclear from the plans. These "parcels" will need. to be revised to comply with zoning requirements or, as an alternative, be created as easements. Sensitive.Areas: Coal Mines and Slopes: The site is indicated as containing 4 or 5 old coal mine shafts and designated as a moderate hazard area on the City's mine map. The site may also contain slopes over 40%. The current City regulations prohibit vegetation/tree removal on portions of the site with slopes over 40% or in areas between 25% and 40% with landslide hazard potential. A geotechnical report, which addresses steep slopes, coal mine hazards, etc., will be required as part of the formal preliminary plat application in order to determine any building issues related to the mine hazard or slope issues. If the steeply sloping areas of the site are small in area,•th '; City has made an administrative,determination, attached, regarding the need for variance that may be relative to this project. Aquifer Protection Zone 2: The site is also located in Aquifer Protection Zone 2 (APA 2). The APA 2 designation should have no impact on the • development since the lots are to be sewered. • Mitigation and Development Related Fees: See attached fee schedule. Comments by: Laureen Nicolay (425) 430-7294 • • • • Page 4 of 4 . ~~%:.t•.. u t .t•:to .,:} •.}{ : t\\�x.r.r..:}.;.t::t}.:::t::::.,:..::.k..v:}k;;r:•."•::{?:f; ;::::;;k}...;r.:it .;.:frk�{r ;p.�, ,..{f.. ...,y.: tr:'tr.{f�;:i"•fY.'•:#t::{$i`.k?� t :).{.,•. rr.,kt?:} tRrki'::fi,}2 t k.. .ir}!fr r:n.;?\•,3cc•}. ..r}:So..yt} ::g•�.�,h' 73'{,.cr{.}.K•'.'•i.'::x:#:P�.:w- >3\:o:::.v.T}ti,r:::.;..,:`.'?t}°�•i�it?•r.,J,.Yc5..5a{:.2}t n'�^•.c.a.•:;:.?:?\ t-:��fi... ....5kw,r.,.{.t; ..ri .::.,-},•�\}N• .}}f,. .,�.: .::v::.;vti.; t...S.}.r•Ytn:} \f....v. .f 4.4 -.�iitit �f:i >'f-.)i;S;%.}Tf�fF•:: .r.+}.�{ :ry,+pf{. .t?2'6iFl,f t\'f..;ii.':,:5::..,:rt{ '{ttit:$ff$<.t.n.::..::.:..:.r�Sr.t} t}tt tt•.r'.i ??CC}}CC+•�.\,.%�.:;•f.,}T:$ti:-:::.:#f.-x$ C::t :rw.:.-%{.;•f•£4t:;$�, .$a;...;..}:• ••k}'\£::::::.,v ..:f{k: 'k\\w:.,t\t•..•..v:,v::.vw:.t:.x\{ :{�t rn kbCv \v?•:n•$ v}� -'�-,-�:.':..•:••:� $:k{t:r'{ t:k. +).• :. ...£.: ..ktit;:t:. .'}:. %SY,....4 n\{:k•..: r.?i... t;.n4.::::•$k.bf::f{f.•/•...k.i\,.::..{.;;xirYr'C�c}'::9}�r{fik.\;::.5}-::::;::i::st+ i�•ttt.:t- ?):T..t`5•.;{..c:::;:::.: .t•::::::.n•n:�/fl.•:t�.t•k:•r:i;:::'r;:;':t.::.ixnttk..xt{{.%,:•rr}r:-::a}:->:{•::r. %r.,.• .:.-'.�•.�tt r../..;.nt•.v..,:n:lt,nttvnt:.....:..t....t..v..::::•::::x.;:i:::: '-: 't$^:•:{i 4:N:k:: [frf.v4�:vvr-.:+ •}to ..:{{.i/. v G, ... .\;C{.:irT% {?,tii:....,F.r:{hrr}rr4 i}%tt{.r?yff: K- :ik..7,$.:......... ..$i.5:tti t•:}}::•::'•.w•.: ::a..+......Y. ,..m:?:,,n.Aa...;..:....::r:f.:•::. S{4.. .of•:i.r•.:{t ::. a}}}.,:..n..+...g;t •:t :r. :.}w:::;.`;::,:r:::.::::~?.}>::.:}}:%r t :?.\.,<w.$$:%?,}:rx.:. :{,ttkV�%i .'..e:}t..,-::>:f-::.�:::::•.kt;*.a:.i��:.� � k .f :: r �»:t•:tr:r::::::::::rt�:.••.�::t.74 r::{.;>.::::::...:.::i}: :i: k;:••t;:{pr, .' ttf:.t;.• •.Y .:•Y}tt}i}-.Twi�•��r+�t :-Trr::-:{'.•} •}•��r�'.`�i---•--:-:k-�-:'.:;;•'a:-.:a n..y;•:.}:::$?}':i rT Y•f::at,+ ifoF.. ...}i: ::::r n :t• fir ?•' r +}ii%3 k. `rf :fff:Y.L:f ir.:. ..%/•+,k ..}:x.{{f.f.r.x.....fi. f... ijtvrkff#ff##:kkk?k.........{{kt#•i :r: f£+;t:;.t'' .ny.:n•:...• '�.. ,...:.. yo5. ;t;:.t ...C,.•y.,: {t: .;.. rv. 4W'f••:in ::':: fiv rnv:nxnv%t"•y'..v-•:J} .. }:'•:i4:i.:::nvh v� ...n.,....:'V.}..:r ::::....v: :f:"::::..%.v}'nrrh}::•:•.:......0......r...f.... f...................}. .......:.::n•::••:•n?r.:.n :.v.T'f rr}'iiY:-r - f }'''}:'-f:J?•:4'+ :;nh... n:vf.• ::%::r vl,�. ..kc;sk}}• ::}:} .../..:,.. vk;Y' {}tf'+. t} .: :a-... or:::rr..:: :k#i::.'•:tu.+:`yy.: t£C•#s.:`.;f:'f:}i. :.:.:fso.f f .k3t•: .....:... :,?ti:-::::::;•?-.!:.T'-.Y.:n:{{•n/.ti:. .r-vft, { � u}f' :}n.t ••$.it•.t:::::ar' ..r.... :Li•.{-ii::ki::�i{4''�t;,,. -T%.i::4\titt ....{ . .....y.n n•,.t .. . .........:::.... .}i:.f✓, .�'i, .. ikf::ir'�.\\fir,:$\r'r''.��.'y(O•i'$�vi:+ ::.;F.w.,.:.}. tr.>.y:{'{}:vtv n #: ::+v'•r:•� M: fnf{y /.r}n.f...:<i?ti::::{:$•:..6}}.:.. .:-.':•: :+ }: - -. �:: :T'.• '~::+f.: xf. i......... :kkfif$F$fc$;::4?fffff$?{p:.:•lt'.:.yy.rc{....... .w.... ..�n.... ..:t.. . ::tt}n:.%:.?:.iirii:•w:-:............t..f..:... ..r t:-:.:t...-:t:n.:::.:.... :.: ...:..:.v:,.::.:..:.t-..:.::::::-:.:.....r.::.:.:.:v.-•.:%iK-r::.::.}r.r:.}:.:. .%:::>{.i•t:..t.....�it?.i;:.ii:.}:.:..::.r':..^{.:{.:.....:....:r.:.v{:.. '.:i-},`4iTTi:?:.{:fv. r v .}tr.:r'i::t.:n.:....x.:.::::.4.n ........ ktt S t :•°: .A7tt•..... ttn;••.r $.+Tfv:f v: t •:}:.,.-::::..:.:.::::•.:i:.r::-:r•.:. t .).cif� :Yf?::........:...{•..Y. CY%rS ... :.:•::'.;;.::.:::r:::.T;r.%;:.}:....r r.:F:#t:t-:-i r::::•::•:::{•:::::,r...f.. r..:}•{�•;•;:•:ttri.••}.•-i•. -n?.fn:{ Y:....C:3AYv+•�}nn}.--•.v-:-::•f.•:- {.tt Y,r vv\AV:.:.�,..t::%.:s•-r•-.::.::: •-fx}::. -�..t,..ax.::.rkt.}.:.::.:::. ..£}Sf$•' :k::';ki.`-' :ff1..£'�:':k_r# .....:%.:f:k;{$t-i':^.:.}i.. :.,..t{.�........Rt• �x..fi..c...........:... }5:..:...}fr. .i; Yt- mx Y»S:`:f.::{{.::.ti:+J.r rr:-Sr$T".:...... .frrif��t' ..$0::::::.. .,tt.'.r:$nttv:r•:•.t.. :.......................... .. .. ?.}n{,nt r...........r.:..:t:::.:-::.-:x:.... :r: r:.•'x:�:.rr-%:::.y: '-•f t.,::•.,v}:.vkq.:4.}r.......... .............t..... .1...::+.•r%•}".:.%t•:f.Y•:.x}r}:•r}}}}}i}y:::nv::::•... ....n...v}:}}F.4i}:•i}%Si}:::{x:::::::::nv.}:::?:•}:: ':•}::•r%•i:•r x::::::::}:}r%{.......r../.... :ffvn .tt:.:•n\+r:i-:?{v:::::::::v$:•.v:- •:i k't:$fiv}.. ::::....... x•,v,..vn:t,..vtt• •:v:::::. .... ,,,-.t:t-::::.tv:•n 'r:.n...',-: -rr.'..t: ....... ::v}-.:{:nw:::n•:n•:n•.v:.}. .....}r:.... f :...r:.nv.:nf.....,vh}tr:::y::-.::;•:iy:}::::•................}••.fr:t•..:.{)$}'f..:a":n"}::..... .tx.,-v::::+.•v:++:n.}}}}}}:??•}%h'•l'::k:f'.t.....n.:...v::.v::::::::::n•n..v:::n:t..t..... n..v..vv:::::nv.rn n..# t...............n......v..x:n:v. t tn.......n::n }r {$r: t t :v •.:4v. MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC Section 4-4-130C) REFERENCE: N/A SUBJECT: Regulation of Tree Cutting and Land Clearing on Slopes Exceeding 40% BACKGROUND: Section 4-4-130:C(Prohibited and Allowable Activities)restricts tree cutting or land clearing "on parcels where the predominant slope or individual slope is in excess of forty percent(40%) except enhancement activities."Enhancement activities are defined as the "removal of noxious or intrusive species,plantings of appropriate native species and/or removal of diseased or decaying trees which pose a clear and imminent treat to life or property. Enhancement activities shall not involve the use of mechanical equipment." The Code Section does not provide clear direction as to when certain minor steep slope areas are exempt from regulation. JUSTIFICATION: According to the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations, slopes 40%or greater may not be cleared,nor trees removed,unless the action is considered to be enhancement. The regulation does not exempt minor steep slopes, or man- made slopes resulting from human action, such as those slopes created as the result of road cuts. The Greenbelt Regulations(Code Section 4-3-070:C.3) define steep slope areas subject to regulation as landform features of a site between significant and identifiable changes in slope. Slope is defined as the average slope of the lot or portion thereof in percent between significant changes in slope, determined by observation on simple slopes, or more precisely by the formula: S=100IL A : . Where"I"is the contour interval in feet but not greater than'ten feet(10'); "L"is the combined length of the contour lines in scale feet;and"A"is the net area between significant changes in slope of the lot in square feet. A significant • change in slope is defined as a bench or plateau at least fifteen feet(15')in width. The same defmition should apply to slopes regulated for the purposes of determining whether a Variance is needed from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations. • DECISION: Tree cutting and land clearing on slopes greater than 40% may be accomplished without a Variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC 4-4-130:C.4)provided that slope"bench" is less than 15 feet in width, and the"drop" or change in elevation is less than 10 feet. City of Seattle F, Paul Schell, Mayor Seattle Public Utilities Diana Gale, Director �' .''.` ' ' 199cr Bob Gambill, Sr. Real Property Agent Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) Real Estate Services -VVTR Dexter Horton Building — 10th Floor Mail Room 710 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104-1714 October 28, 1999 Mr. Ryan Fike Bennett Homes 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 Re: R-O-W Easement Request over Cedar River Pipeline Mr. Fike, This letter is the hard copy of the information I sent you by email of this date. I am not sure how your project first came into the hands of Mario Schmidt, but Mario has handed off your project to me because it falls into the geographic area I am responsible for. I would be happy to meet with you regarding your project. In a nut shell, the following is SPU's current practice with regard to use of its right of ways and your proposed access: 1. SPU does not allow the longitudinal use of its rights of way for utilities or permanent roads. 2. The only way SPU would consider granting a longitudinal Easement for Road (or right angle crossings) is: a. If there were no other reasonable means of access (not just convenience) b. The request came from a government entity for a public road c. There were no objections from any SPU factions having responsibility for the Pipeline Even then: a. Permission would be for street and drainage only, no other utilities would be allowed. b. Any future need of SPU would be paramount to the use as a street. (SPU could close the street if needed, and all costs to restore the street would be born by the government entity having jurisdiction over it) • Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor,710 Second Avenue,Seattle,WA 98104 Tel:(206)684-5851,TTY/TDD:(206)233-7241,Fax:(206)684-4631,Internet Address:http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/utill An equal employment opportunity,affirmative action employer.Accommodations for people with disabilities provided upon request. 0-ccu j�.� c. SPU would require compensation equaling 50% of the right of way's current fair market value. The fair market value would be determined based on the dollar per square foot value of surrounding developable property 3. SPU does issue Revocable Permits for right-angle crossings of its rights of way for utility purposes, but only by an established utility or government entity, and under specific terms and conditions. You can contact me at 206-684-5969. I am not in on Fridays. I will be sending a copy of this letter to Mr. Neil Watts, The City of Renton Planing/Building/ Public Works Department. I will also relate this information to Ms. Ruth Larson, a neighbor in the area that called me about what our practice was for allowing use of the pipeline right of way. I hope this information is helpful. Sincerely, tled &441/11 Bob Gambill Cc: RI /711 November 22, 1999 Mr. Bob Gambill Seattle Public Utilities Real Property Services-WTR Dexter Horton Building- 10th Floor Mail Room 710 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 RE: Right-of-way requirements for Cedar River Pipeline Mr. Gambill, Thank you for taking the time to meet with us on November 10, 1999 to discuss right-of- way issues with the Cedar River Pipeline: Current Status • Ownership of the Pipeline R-O-W varies along Beacon Way South. In some areas to the South of the Renton School District property, Seattle Public Utilities only has easements for the Pipeline and not ownership of the land. • The title is clouded at present time along the area adjacent to the Renton School District property. Seattle Public Utilities is unclear who owns the property dividing the Renton School District property and Phillip Arnold Park. Nonetheless, Seattle Public Utilities would still retain access rights over the property. • There is no evidence that past owner of the school site, Coking Coal Company ever transferred title to Seattle Public Utilities. • Seattle Public Utilities is aware that Falcon Ridge subdivision has emergency fire access off of the Pipeline. A temporary permit for Road Purposes was granted to the City of Renton. • Seattle Public Utilities is aware that the Pipeline is being used for daytime park and school bus access from the South end. A temporary permit for Road Purposes was granted to the City of Renton. • B e nn ett . Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A Bellevue WA 98005 • Tel: 425-709-6559 • Fax: 425-709-6553 • Use of Roadway • Seattle Public Utilities takes a neutral stance with purposed development on the Renton School District property. • Seattle Public Utilities will consider R-O-W easements over the Pipeline if there is no other reasonable access. • A request for an easement must be made by the City of Renton. • If a public road were granted along Beacon Way South,the City of Renton would have to enter into an agreement with Seattle Public Utilities on road repair and maintenance. • If granted a R-O-W easement, it would be for street and drainage only, no other utilities would be allowed. Utility Crossings • Seattle Public Utilities would issue Revocable Permits for right-angle crossings of its rights of way for utility purposes, but only to an established utility or government entity. A permit would be issued along with construction restraints and specifications. • See letter from Bob Gambill dated November 11, 1999 regarding Utility Crossing Permit requirements. If any of the statements appear misrepresented or misunderstood,we apologize and would appreciate clarification. Thank you again for taking the time to meet with us. If you would like to discuss anything further,please contact me at 425-709-6508 or by email at ryan@bennettcorp.com. Sincerely, Bennett Development Ry. ., Lan. • :. sition Coordinator • • • rf OF RENTON• r-'"FF.,.,_RR�ooF 3 • MEMORANDUM DIVISION DATE: ?J" fij - TO: Construction Services, ton, Plan, Review, Project Planner FROM: Jana Hanson, Development Services Division Director ece-�+ti f'r c.SUBJECT: ew Preliminary Applica ion: I-1 2-11— 014244OL C) LOCATION: foe) &1 ll/Ar yr—. . PREAPP NO. rfteVtoUS a 91- 75 B " +k A meeting with the applicant has been scheduled for_�,-p Doi- I , Thursday, a lO Ate , 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 at least twb (2) days before the meeting. Thank you. • . Prrann2 _. - - • ."--;-, • . 1 7) O.SY Obi + liliFt + CITY OF RENTON t�NTo. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM DATE: December 13, 1999 TO: Elizabeth Higgins, Planner FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal SUBJECT: Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat, 8 0 Block Beacon Way SE Fire Department Comments: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000.GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. 3. Fire Department access roadways require a minimum 20 Foot paved roadway with an approved fire department turnaround. See attached diagram. The gate on Beacon Way SE should be removed or relocated to accommodate the increased traffic and Fire Department access. 4. Provide a secondary access from the east dead end cul-de-sac to Beacon Way SE. This can be an emergency access only and can be gated or chained. 5. All building addresses shall be visible from the public street Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: December 29, 1999 TO: Elizabeth Higgens FROM: Arneta Henninger X7298 (,)7\() SUBJECT: ARNOLD PLAT PREAPPLICATION 2 S 7TH CT AND BEACON WAY SE I have reviewed the preapplication submittal for this 60 lot plat located in Section 20, Twp. 23N Rng. 5E, and have the following comments at this time: ACCESS • Beacon Way S adjacent to this parcel is not a City right-of-way available for public use. This is a Seattle Water Pipeline Right-of-Way, owned and controlled by the City of Seattle. Any use of Beacon Way S will require written approval from the City of Seattle. Per the copy of the letter from SPU dated October 28, 1999, SPU does not allow the use of its rights of way for permanent roads. • We also have concerns with the additional traffic on Renton hill through existing residential streets. A traffic study will be required for this project, which will need to address this concern. SANITARY SEWER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7`h Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new parcel can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main though the proposed subdivision. There is also an existing 8"sanitary sewer main in SE 8th Dr. • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2%. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. WATER • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 2 • There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7th Ct, and a 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from about 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: 1. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants. 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see plan W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). • Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as a part of this project to meet this criteria. • Water System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan is-to include detention and water quality treatment for the fully built out plat, including future houses, driveways and roadway improvements. The runoff from the new houses must be tightlined into the storm drainage system constructed for the preliminary plat. The drainage plan is to be designed per the King County Surface Water Manual. • Surface Water System Development Charges of $385 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary 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 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.: _ _ DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 3 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 of 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 for the preliminary plat construction. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Per the copy of the letter from SPU dated October 28, 1999, SPU does not allow the use of its rights of way for permanent roads. • The new street interior to the plat must be developed to City standards which are full 32 foot pavement width, with curbs, gutters, 5' sidewalks and street lighting. • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the plat must be undergrounded. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. • Traffic mitigation fees of$75 per net new average daily trip ($716.25 per lot) will be required prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. cc: , Neil Watts = • • EC $: Y • . _ DEC 6 1999 ECCNowc DEVE_;)-,w:,:nr' 9 NE:CHE!:RH;i"I-I< AND STRATEGIC PLANNING . , MEMORANDUM . DATE: t� I 11 TO: Long Range Planning .• • FROM: ana Hanson, Development Services Division Director •Tct-e,rs7 ?P-i - P SUBJECT: ew Preliminary Application: �p-t T&� -r1aUn LOCATION: - et f Li4- 1✓0-osa-ea WAN 7 Se PREAPP NO. 12PV.V1 oOS U1 q^ 7G 5" 'F-i1-e• • Please review the attached preliminary project plans for consistency with applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies. Please submit your written comments to pt.../z..oceovn-4-- no later than 2.f, ve.c. 'i q . Thank you. We will not be able to include comments received after this date in the presentation/summary we prepare for the applicant. - • Ji-re 13 DC'314,/V/116 ,14-` 1 Dew 114 L S/1Vt L �. P ic, ifv Tv(6- CO Pi SSu r`N%NJ C.. i\ i n I)ee L 1 C,11-N r S 0 F3Ni `i c.r1-Z-C U LY} 1 rorv5 Ara-c Cos�z is UI- , i F-1e,s��, f16767e:7}1-Z. i c. tat 1V a P6 Lt c__ co n!1;Lt'c...75 • • -- 1° - if✓1�,ET-IG • Pu1A.%/vI (\Je • - preapp - - - - . - - - —- - _ • CITY OF RENTON • Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: January 6, 2000 TO: Pre-Application File No. 99-75B FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, (425)430-7382 SUBJECT: Heritage Arnold 60-Lot Preliminary Plat (Revised Plan) Second Preapplication Conference Comments Project proponent: Ryan Fike / Bennett Development Project Name: Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Project Address: 700 to 1000 Blocks of Beacon Way SE, Renton General: We have completed a preliminary review of the preapplication materials for the above-referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the preapplication submittals made to the City of Renton by the project proponent and on the City of Renton Codes in effect on the date of the review. The project proponent is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision makers (Hearing Examiner, Zoning Administrator, Board of Adjustment, Board of Public Works, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the project proponent. The project proponent is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code and the City of Renton Development Regulations. The Renton Municipal Code is available at the City Clerk's office and the Renton Public Library. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00, plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of Renton City Hall. Project Proposal: The 10.36 acre property, located in the southeast portion of the City of Renton adjacent to Philip Arnold Park, is owned by the Renton School District (tax parcel no. 202305 9110). The property lies southeast of the intersection of SE 7th Street, Jones Ave S, SE 7th Court, and Beacon Way SE. Our understanding is that the project proponent has an option to purchase the property. The proposed project would subdivide the property, by means of the Preliminary Plat process, into 60 lots suitable for detached, single family houses • Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 2 • and two tracts for on-site stormwater facilities. Primary access would be from SE 7th Court, a public street that terminates in a cul-de-sac. A secondary access; for emergency use only, would be from the Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) easement (Beacon Way SE) that borders the property on the south. The first preapplication conference was held on September 2, 1999. On November 4, 1999, the project proponent and their consultants met with community members to discuss the project. The project site plan was subsequently revised. Land Use.Permits, Variances, and Modifications Required: For subdivision of land into ten (10) or more lots, RMC 4-7-080 "Subdivision" guidelines apply. The proposed project will require Preliminary Plat and SEPA approval as the first stage followed by Final Plat approval (see Final Plat Approval section below), which requires a separate application. Preliminary Plat proposals are initially reviewed by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department, then considered by the Environmental Review Committee. Following issuance of an Environmental Threshold Determination, the plat request is heard by the Hearing Examiner at a public meeting. The decision and recommendations by the Hearing Examiner"are forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The City Council adopts its own findings, conclusions, and recommendations and either approves or disapproves of the proposed plat. Application fees are $2000 for the Preliminary Plat application and $200 (1/2 of the $400 fee if the improvements are less than $100,000) or$500 (1/2 of the $1,000 fee if the improvements are more than $100,000) for Environmental (SEPA) Review. Processing time for Preliminary Plat is approximately 16 weeks, if no appeals are filed. A complete Preliminary Plat application package is included.herewith. Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations will apply and require submittal of a surveyed tree inventory and Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Plan. If vegetation will be removed from slopes 40% or greater for purposes of grading for roads and/or building lots, a variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations will be required. The fee for an Administrative Variance is $100. The variance must be requested at the time of application submittal. • Administrative approval of a 42-foot wide (reduced from standard 50' width) public street right-of-way will also be required, if the entry drive is proposed as shown on the conceptual plan. Include a request for this modification, with a statement of justification, in the project narrative with the application. Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 3 The proponent has suggested that the City of Renton should, or may, enter into a maintenance agreement with Seattle Public Utilities so that access to the proposed project may be secured via the Seattle Public Utilities water line easement. Renton's Director of Public Works, Mr. Gregg Zimmerman, has determined that it would not be in the city's best interest to enter into such an agreement, therefore, a secondary access will have to be secured elsewhere rather than onto the SPU right-of-way. Current Land Use: The land is currently vacant. Zoning: The property is currently zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8), it is designated as single family residential on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. Density: In the R-8 Zone, the minimum density is 5.0 dwelling units per net acre for lots greater than 0.5 acre in size. The R-8 Zone permits residential development at densities up to 8.0 dwelling units per net acre. Density calculations are based on net parcel size, excluding sensitive areas (such as wetlands and steep slope areas) and public rights-of-way. In order to calculate density, the net area will need to be provided by the project proponent. If the project is not developed to the preferred density range, "shadow platting" may be implemented to demonstrate that future subdivision and development of lots may occur. Staff suggests that the project proponent consider creating fewer, larger lots for this project due to the following: • Severe traffic congestion on local streets, • Potential inability to mitigate traffic congestion due to lack of rights-of- way, and • Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-40.1. "New plats proposed at higher densities than adjacent neighborhood developments may be modified • within the allowed density range to reduce conflicts between old and new development patterns." Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4500 sf It cannot be determined from the information provided by the Project proponent if this standard has been met. Minimum Lot Width and Depth: The minimum lot width in this zone is 50' for interior lots and 60' for corner lots. The minimum allowable lot depth is 65'. Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 4 Although it cannot be determined from the information provided by the project proponent if this standard will be met, it appears, from scaling the drawing, that the lots as shown on the conceptual plan do not meet the required dimensions. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks in the R-8 Zone are: front 15' for houses and 20' for garages on streets created after September 1, 1995, and 20' if fronting on existing streets rear 20' side 5' (interior lots) and 15' (corner lots) It cannot be determined from the information provided by the Project proponent if this standard will be met. Setback lines must be indicated on the site plan submitted for review. Building Height: Building heights in the R-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories and 30'. It cannot be determined from the information provided by the project proponent if this standard will be met. Building Coverage: The maximum building coverage on lots larger than 5,000 sf is 35% of the total lot area. The maximum building coverage for lots 5,000 sf or less is 50%. Building footprints are not indicated on the conceptual plan. For purpose of considering the preliminary plat, building envelopes should be shown on the plat map. Parking: Off street parking must be provided for each lot, at a minimum of 2 . spaces each. • Access: Each lot must have access to a public street. The conceptual plan indicates that access will be from SE 7th Court. Availability of this access point will need to be verified. The City of Renton will not agree to maintain the Seattle Public Utilities easement so that it can be used as a secondary/emergency access for this project. Streets: A traffic analysis, report, and recommendations will be required at the time of application. The scope of this report shall include anticipated traffic volumes and direction of travel. The traffic study must consider the seasonal use of Philip Arnold Park, which experiences significant increases in use from May to October. Stopping sight distance standards to meet 1994 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards must be met (or Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 5 mitigated) at the intersection of SE 7th Street, Jones Ave S, SE 7th Court, and Beacon Way SE. Sensitive Areas: The site is indicated as potentially sensitive on the City's Sensitive Areas maps for landslides and coal mine hazards. Due to these potential conditions, a geotechnical report that includes information and recommendations regarding any former mining activity on or near the property will be required. A topographic plan and slope analysis will be required, as well as a conceptual grading plan. Typical Environmental Mitigation measures placed on Preliminary Plats include a Fire Mitigation Fee ($488/new lot), Parks Mitigation Fee ($530.76/new lot), and Transportation Mitigation Fee (approximately $750/new lot). There are presently no fees charged for school mitigation, unless the site is within the.Issaquah School District. Final Plat Recording: The Final Plat must conform, with only minor modifications, to the Preliminary Plat. The Final Plat cannot be recorded until the required improvements are installed and approved, and a final drawing is prepared and accepted by the City. In addition, any conditions and/or fees must be met and/or paid prior to the recording of the Final Plat as applicable. A separate application packet is required. cc: Ryan Fike Jennifer Henning 1 yy _ April 3, 2000 Ruth Larson President, Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development of Renton School District Property Dear Ms. Larson: On behalf of Bennett Development and the Renton School District,we wish to take this opportunity to bring you up to speed with our development plans for the school property across from Phillip Arnold Park. We would welcome the opportunity to meet you and a small group of citizens to discuss the design aspects of the proposed development. We have enclosed two black line drawings and a colored rendering,which represent our proposed plan for the development.This plan is based on the following goals created based on Citizen and City Staff input. Goals • Support the Neighborhood goal of keeping Beacon Way South closed to through traffic. • Support the City's goal of precluding access to the new development off of Beacon Way South • Support the City's requirement for a fire truck access off of Beacon Way South to the south of the gate. • Address neighborhood concerns about the 5-way road intersection on SE 7th and Beacon Way SE. • Provide a transition between the park and the new development • Provide a transition between the homes in River Ridge with the new development. We believe that the proposed plan achieves these goals and that the Plan is sensitive to the surrounding homes and park. As you review the plan you should be able to see how it accomplishes the following results: 1. The 5-way intersection is reduced to a 4-way intersection 2. A portion of Beacon Way South is closed to traffic and creates additional public open space 3. Access to the new development is at a point most distant from the River Ridge development, allowing the maximum buffer. 4. Access is maintained to the Phillip Arnold Park parking access 5. A significant setback from the Homes in the new development to the existing homes on Renton Hill and the Intersection on SE 7th is created. Ms.Ruth Larson April 3,2000 Page 2 of 2 6. A community fence and landscaping tract along Beacon Way South is created to screen the homes from the park and provide the new neighbors with privacy. This proposed tract includes areas set aside for increased intensity of buffer landscaping to allow for large trees and a varied landscape along the property facing the park. 7. The number of homes, which back up to the park is minimized and their angle to the park allows for a more random and varied for the community as,viewed from the Park. 8. A 15 wide Landscape Buffer is provided along the property line adjacent to the homes in the River Ridge development. Our plan is to submit a formal application to the City of Renton by mid April. If you would like to set up a time to meet with us,or comment on the plans,you can reach me at 425-709-6559. Sincerely, BENNETT DEVELOPMENT Chris Austin Vice President Cc: Elizabeth Higgins Debra Aungst • • 7. T • ..._ \ ' '• . I I • v-:, , ,:, 3,..,./i'-- ..c.:7.e , (,,, , ,I -- ___49,e.„ R, Lr Ridge. .., '-lr.c 1 ';‘i'i;'''',._:Pr:*,/ t;1' ,i'-z.-."..:4:ft7/N .,,/' , -.C.÷-,4-*--'.',:-. 4. ...',A1 , ;4:1-il!"' ' 7_,. ,-..---_..; - ,,, --, -4. ,,,:).44, -- .1.--_ , , ..., . „ .,7 . . _ '.4.'",'' y v- ,N, .--, -.----tv.-.......--,---. .-., 4.„- -...- ,,,,: ,--, -t-,.., ;(. 5::44:,i'le •2,tri'r '<"- .-<, 1 / ----.4 't . A-'''' .'.i•-,-'•-- ' ",',*(•:,,,- 4 %ivy, / ,(',/1/1•:; ' '..*io. , .4.1 ilik ..--• ``t,,„,.', „, 4.,,,,.,,.....-1,....,\:„. . -,.., ,,, ,4,., z_v., ° ''' V...,:,,,,,f,..r.,..,...., ,,,,..t.,,t,....,4,---•\,f, -( - .--..,i,iv. -• ..,•,_eve4- „,, .,,,,1....,,--..... ,,,,, , , ii--,4,,40...„4,.,.,„, 1,4 ,,-,,,,,,,,Av...-4,,,--,:.--,;'-•-.4,, .t.--‘,,..z. •••,[1.14,..\rI\, S 7 TH S T - ,'.._.' •'1('...." ''''.444' .4.'A'a .4''''t= 4--.'-- -i'-.1--'I,-...-7 7/'''''''‘'-........:-.a ..-'.---. ..- ..:'-'41.,..t.-rLt.7.Z../''2'-'-'1,Nii'l,VR .', -- 1,1-•.".'W'. :'.17.7,A,4.7-,7);.441,74e•'",'744a.,7,),'N,„;-1,;.,4 -!1;1.4' .kw,:7, .i..,4‘,,,,-1,. ..v.0,,i,..-„, t,,,,,„„ ,,,, _ _, , ,.,..,,,,,,,,,,..,„' Is•fA•el,-,'? ' ',5,...1-es ' '.. u '' . ' ' ' s *.e...‘••Ie `,5‘ e,-...e 1- \ . 1 .7„,,,...7„,. , _ ,,,,,,..... T.4.,;:).,.. -.7....,;,,,,. . feoca....-,,,,,,is,....pmit,n.,,. 1,,,, „...:„, , ..,.k...,v.,•,. w.• , •,....,..1..,..\,- ..,,kot td.. ' , a, , ,•tas, \,,,t,,k.,,,.., tesi-f„,*clo --7'•--'7-07:g.Nt4-2:r r,11 !,fil -,..., -,,'--,..„.i•i, ,..1,. t,..,...-a-•- ...:" Ck,--41,;•`. 1", r •:›ItS,-V \ .,,,,,5.-:1W,711'.., - ..„,-;-.44,4,-,----;6,' Asv.,; .., , \\,.,..,„,„,,,. ,--, , , V PAP' •••'-- \ ....';'‘. 4 l_, N. ,lAxilk. ,,,k ',,.*" ' .'C,•1\ \\ ...:4L.”'"/-•.‘.?...,V77'I'5".6.1'''',.4.;5 'a,' 4 ;-„..4.'•4 0"--- iik,=--,;----•---1` es•.`:•AP,O. :..,.. , - , , _ .1- -, _ _ , • - . .,..,_ ..4,ii e,ro_.A.07.,.;.,i,.,,i2.,e....4,.. -,,,,,,,,,,„\A‘.,,,,,4•N ,,..,,,,,,xi7,-, 4 yip . '''',,,,,,,-.C.„ ,'%i,4,-irs,,,,,...x) , 147,4,..t.:!:.A, ; 4,1;0`...,:.7.'-',X.7' ,h.riz'al''' ,.;'-'''';`,,,,&,""-A..,.\`'.i.re- - ',.•-• -:;,,:..,..-y VA,,';' ;', ; rit"r4"4114" 7iiirikr s ''n'iriqkl'',,,=;-'%,ilig..4.- , .00 ...1,v-71,k ,pg='-' Ai R:'•••=.(•:, -1'.--AW'•t.t.- "..7-..z-iN,‘ ,I.v...Tr‘v, ,N_----,- .,:.-,1-40N-1.4.--t rgarb_— • I,,,,,t,i f,,ht..-z-, 1;01,1„) 1 -;•4•1•..., v, ...„, .-,,-, , _p:,..i,„.. ,,. -,1.,t -,,, ,-,,,,,;',,,,?,\ c,r,,,,,,,,A.,•,. ,t ...: -4,z,-,..;,,,.... ..,,„„„, p••,.• thivi,t,ii,111,0'0* t #;.—okt:,,,,, , a,1,,,?,,t,-•u ', ,,,,,,„,,,,, ,r_, i ,,1‘, ,rFs.,-s--, ;„-,.- \-4.:-' ';''' 44"..,;', 1 4,1%,- -- ' 7 . '',,,-.71", Z......-APP. ---, ,- taig,011 Nese tp.elleery,4r t•eAt ...‘1,„Ye. .e),6.•• -.) . \ ..;,rtypi .,',..Z• ',• ''.•l , 0'.*'' 435,1,} I -.•.m..4,z0);.' s. 1.`..\V"• . ---k,'"..._. ,,,- 1 It'Ll 14 1, , ,.t,...r-a,-,,, .1 ,,, . ar.,,,,,,31,,,a, , ,,,,,a4 ;.,,,,'eal •!..1 ,,,` x •tI -.4.. ..t. . ....e,1•• .".'•`• • \"., ••,. „K.^... , ..i' Fl . I.'5.- .f ,,,,,,-.7.,- ,1141.7iFiltt,-`,'2,I' 141.1,10 ,..;; ?•:.,,I,i,.itt. -•'''.1- --,A, F4; c•-•••=„ ^-:';--;-'-.: -4=-43! -.:-.z„,. - . ';'.1;41%-al-pfx-11-:1, f'Pitt;iir,tIffrikqr'V 1.40i \ '...41‘ ...-/•h,sx, -,,- •...---4 ''. ,.:• ..0-, r•M'',-..,:••41;‘.."...-' ,4# ' '., '')ilYerr'Ttlif il'i' - 4),sw; '`\;`.°'-•;\s '''' t-'iDA t 4.1•''Tr.,'..-We;''1 ' 5-, :'''',....?_,.) 4'4- hotrzYt",---'-, ,',=R 1\- \d,,U1 74v: 1'.4 1.k.' ' ''.i.".t,A':-.;/:•:1. k`if.z.1: •::•••;;;•,:••,,,, N4,,,,,e,d -• .-,, t-IP- 4 ' ,!IP e'. , 4/11'11:17.1.4.".4i'l'' ;` !IrtriA-L<N -S'''°':'il,),ilryo, \N-,..**i+.4,P.i.-"I 'Pe.',,s' 4$:. rtk.,:,-r- ,„a.:_••.•--..;, _::,\--, ;4;1,, . -f f .-?•-,=•',% fit'14 l' '' ''-,•,,,,,s-44<\,;47 i';.e, 40'iip• -•-".-,...iii-'., ''' 4:-:11-$4;--;4•=',Veej ; 1":;T:47-41 ' .1-';-%)---./"''''s,' h ,litIN,,('7-9,"' .` -V x!.e N-4,1 ..,.., --41,,,,,,,, ..1.,, -,.:.__ - ,----,-,---,..--,..-- .. -,---. 1 se:Az,„ •--ettz-'-...,.. ,.--44'',4";• s 19'114 1 r4t e‘1171's,' $(,,4 skt;,,,- , -,.. ,.1„;„;-,;",,,,,,-..t.e:, -,„ , - _ ___I 0.,;(..t •- .-.4-, .....,Jc:t.--;;A„,,,‘.!:,', ' r <,zitt. \ 4t.-..-.:Vior; .1eluctitzs,...- - - '1111111!4;00. ',.. 'i,i4,4,,,,, '' 01 -' --;--:=.7t, 7-.7 k,-,-Writ,„.---,-7'..z.,,,r --1,2'.. -:t. ',-,-.\-- -2-.:: 1.:,. 'It,•...t.•-*1:-4.3.,,..,.>0,-.0,.;' -6,,,k,-.• -;-- -. P:4, :: ,lit4- kt-.1 t.y.,1"4,--:,..04: ,‘=t•<',„ .,•:;-•,,,... :. / ' -'-n ..,,w,....(,•,-•:;-. '''`ik 4 • 'ts;•1‘:,,":. •,,,..'.Lef-- .•-:,..v z-7-;'-::i-•- v t..' •..W.• •,-Ici:!V-;:,:.-t-:'.""%. f'1,?•.-..-:-*';'4 ' k''''''';' :>'''''' •'Pl•-,r5.-'4.1....1‘14.6y. - Air 'ALUI.1 tk.. .„,-',,c. •‘;(1".11C,''',1 , t'''',.--,7-6.,.,E,*•• ,...;!-.',„.r."1 -.1 '',-,s- ''''...-. j''..-.:,f.it'"'it',i-•„s..-4-nr.-,i, k-).,''-,,--t.,-4-', ., - ;sell,-„t,r •-p•-4*-0;:x4.*/ #4zt4 • \.c$'..k ; ,,,,..,-; -1-,, tpo•-;,',..f,-,4-vr•-,,s ' .,„ ,. "". - „ Z„-ir*--;.,-, .4/-, V," ,•-i Jr.,Lffirkt, `"ilSipt\ ,,,,,"-it't>t,,."-op.:,-,:• :' 0-0;•• ';'.1.<Aly .1.2"' <V-./e1,4‘ :tgii-A,-,< IV it; ' ' %,..M:IPIA,;e440ILS(:•'14*°'' s‘11/6';`''\sllte'r-alt•.,"`..k4C P•VA'# ,,,5,5e.„S,,;/ ,:i'',.'x'•-••• ',7_7'• ', •VZil,„•-,', '45 I li / ' "ZIP 41p:1.4.,51110,44 4,t.'Ithli ,,''S, ,;"-ZZ.IL'11'5.O. -a .'''6fe'>'-'J. ,,;sroi??,,,..•'..41;:r 2F,,i„„R,d„, '. ''1';;?le'1141111414PAtit, 1 `.1/4i-•4 '''''•k<''.:4rer' - ' i '4'':?":\.''-'' e,.4'-P•b7' \f''' / '4. `1.•;47/-40Periffi'101,4 -'‘ "W--'":-.:.e.".4h.t.,,,,f. ",' _< c. ,Itm•al,_ ( .t-tr• i / ' '4,„rsz 1..1-AlWitif,,',,,lic.,41-•>, *sZ--(--4'.."-. ..45,,:,,-...a -... ,r)olkw,..1.,.,iuz,TA.,,, .,,, e 74.,,.-e,,..„, ,,, 4 4,, -•i -..-tr. ','%-«f--'--.- •-AA,,49; i I' 4,„!-*.•!--, - `*-01,-.•-v- ' i. 1-a' e 4' •. -7 ----r - s i ' ,4'.4•ea s ' ,,,,,..44.VN 12.!...01.1V.. . . ;ii-i- 7-*4-g i , ; , ', '' '4-,ti'l''''' '"k--.1",;14....4rAl,'.-73v,vtkr-s-*-e-- -... =•,•--",-" \ c , ) J 1-7-- ,-,,,,.-,rs wz.,A.si-,.a., 7 • ___Ale'. .7.,Pe.- (,,,,s •., _ • ,,,•,,,, ,e, .'e i-,,, ,.t,Z,..,..7. 0.;/.4,--_,,,- . ::,N‘"A ,,, / ) 9.41,1". . ..A.,`,.'.:-••"/. ',.. .....i-' A?"". 'i / ' ' / / ''''1'''n ...xer' ',,,A,," :\14':''.2:)‘..t,',0•:-. ‘,, \, '.it 0 '..,;;1".'"? - -or.,'...;\:‘,\(•": 'I 4, 1 r4 :-, • •,:- ..v.- Ar „; :. ' :,, , -t, -' \ ':', ,* • ,•‘, ' \,,, , Heritage Phillip Arnold Concept Plan ' F - \ ,„,... Bennett .1r l) . , I I i I I r11 il I • " Prbsplipp • ' TY OF RENTON. . 0 3 1999 MEMORANDUM v'�Lf`ar.l Lf' ISIO� DATE: 5 *Oke ' 11 TO:. Construction Services,,Pr n, Plan,, Review, Project Planner •:• FROM: Jana Hanson, Development Services Division Director (‘7t,e-berno(-- �, (T". ,N oc.D SUBJECT: New Preliminary Applica ion: LOCATION: ej00 - > 3'E,isce.o,.1 i PREAPP NO. vtot) a 91- 75 1 B f • A meeting with the applicant has been scheduled for I , Thursday, Q to At-1 ' , 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 44(kR two (2) days before the meeting. Thank you. opno �� o4 A • e___14 ��/�`�7 • • • + , CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU -vivrro MEMORANDUM " DATE: December 13, 1999 TO: Elizabeth Higgins, Planner FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal I SUBJECT: Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat, 8 0 Block Beacon Way SE Fire Department Comments: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds • 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. • 3. Fire Department access roadways require a minimum 20 Foot paved roadway with an approved fire department turnaround. See attached diagram. The gate on Beacon Way SE should be removed or relocated to accommodate the increased traffic and Fire Department access. 4. Provide a secondary access from the east dead end cul-de-sac to Beacon Way SE. This can be an emergency access onl and can be gated or chained. (0-r\ - ,2,n CL C c4..i•,;, a:c-ro55 pci,k- 5. All building addresses shall be visible from the public street Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. . • CITY OF. RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: December 29, 1999 TO: Elizabeth Higgens FROM: Arneta Henninger X7298 jk* SUBJECT: ARNOLD PLAT PREAPPLICATION 2 S 7TH CT AND BEACON WAY SE I have reviewed the preapplication submittal for this 60 lot plat located in Section 20, Twp. 23N Rng. 5E, and have the following comments at this time: ACCESS • Beacon Way S adjacent to this parcel is not a City right-of-way available for public use. This is a Seattle Water Pipeline Right-of-Way, owned and controlled by the City of Seattle. Any use of Beacon Way S will require written approval from the City of Seattle. Per the copy of the letter from SPU dated October 28, 1999, SPU does not allow the use of its rights of way for permanent roads. • We also have concerns with the additional traffic on Renton hill through existing residential streets. A traffic study will be required for this project, which will need to address this concern. SANITARY SEWER • • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7th Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new parcel can be served by extending an 8" sewer.main from this existing main'though the proposed subdivision. There is also an existing 8"sanitary sewer main in SE 8th Dr. • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2%. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. WATER • ' • This site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 2 • There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7th Ct, and a 8" • water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from about 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. • • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: . 1. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants. 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see plan W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). • Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as a part of this project to meet this criteria. • Water System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan is to include detention and water quality treatment for the fully built out plat, including future houses, driveways and roadway improvements. The runoff from the new houses must be tightlined into the storm drainage system constructed for the preliminary plat. The drainage plan is to be designed per the King County Surface Water Manual. • Surface Water System Development Charges of $385 per new single family parcel will be required•for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and, sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary 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 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. DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 3 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 of 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 for the preliminary plat construction. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Per the copy of the letter from SPU dated October 28, 1999, SPU does not allow the use of its rights of way for permanent roads. • The new street interior to the plat must be developed to City standards which are full 32 foot pavement width; with curbs, gutters, 5' sidewalks and street lighting. • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the plat must be undergrounded. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. • Traffic mitigation fees of$75 per net new average daily trip ($716.25 per lot) will be required prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. cc: Neil Watts , . ' • • DEC 61999 E:ONOMIC DE,,E 3Pm.o., NE,raS� � •.FNC, ,C,. r'dD STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM . , . • . . DATE: ' '141 TO: Long Range Planning FROM: ana Hanson, Development Services Division Director SUBJECT: ew Preliminary Applicati6n: F-FLI T -6--E , 4 D1 T LOCATION: • • gvP ¢3L - p—�,4- 1 W A y s� . . • PREAPP NO. VI0Lis 1111-- 7G `' 51% '�Ve......„ • Please review the attached preliminary project plans for consistency with applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies. Please submit your written comments to .i,_IZ P.PTI-1— no later than 2-E, 'be.G ' `t i . Thank you. We will not be able to include comments received after this date in the • presentation/sumi-nary we prepare for the applicant. J1 r c /3 J.)(31SN/<6:77 fR.0 5% lac` N 1 1 n C. Silo,.Lc_ CC-)rv.67'62.-`1-i cr7v s 1 v nLnr� . A ss v r-\\r‘l G. i\'rn I. i ►1 i)rf'e L i (...-/AN S Or c L-C U L.YI 7 (C ry 5 Ail& C-042_2.i e-' , I.}-1,a f)•6'6'li71a2.. Tc� ISe N o ?O Lic.._� cc;iv 'cc •c_.7.5 - . - preapp - - - -. - . - - - - CITY OF RENTON • Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: January 6, 2000 TO: Pre-Application File No. 99-75B FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner; (425)430-7382 SUBJECT: Heritage Arnold 60-Lot Preliminary Plat (Revised Plan) Second Preapplication Conference Comments Project proponent: Ryan Fike / Bennett Development Project Name: Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Project Address: 700 to 1000 Blocks of Beacon Way SE, Renton General: We have completed a preliminary review of the preapplication materials for the above-referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the preapplication submittals made to the City of Renton by the project proponent and on the City of Renton Codes in effect on the date of the review. The project proponent is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision makers (Hearing Examiner, Zoning Administrator, Board of Adjustment, Board of Public Works, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the project proponent. The project proponent is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code and the City of Renton Development Regulations. The Renton Municipal Code is available at the City Clerk's office and the Renton Public Library. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00, plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of Renton City Hall. • Project Proposal: The 10.36 acre property, located in the southeast portion of .the City of Renton adjacent to Philip Arnold Park, is owned by the Renton School District (tax parcel no: 202305 9110). The property lies southeast of the intersection of SE 7th Street, Jones Ave S, SE 7th Court, and Beacon Way SE. Our understanding is that the project proponent has an option to purchase the property. The proposed project would subdivide the property, by means of the Preliminary Plat process, into 60 lots suitable for detached, single family houses Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 2 and two tracts for on-site stormwater facilities. Primary access would be from SE • 7th Court, a public street that terminates in a cul-de-sac. A secondary access, for emergency use only, would be from the Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) easement (Beacon Way SE) that borders the property on the south. The first preapplication conference was held on September 2, 1999. On' November 4, 1999, the project proponent and their consultants met with community members to discuss the project. The project site plan was • subsequently revised. Land Use Permits, Variances, and Modifications Required: For subdivision of land into ten (10) or more lots, RMC 4-7-080 "Subdivision" guidelines apply. The proposed project will require Preliminary Plat and SEPA approval as the first, stagefollowed by Final Plat approval (see Final Plat Approval section below), which requires a separate application. Preliminary Plat proposals are initially reviewed by the Planning/Building/Public. Works Department, then considered by the Environmental Review Committee. Following issuance of an Environmental Threshold Determination, the plat request is heard by the Hearing Examiner at a public meeting. The decision and recommendations by the Hearing Examiner are forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The City Council adopts its own findings, conclusions, and recommendations and either approves or disapproves of the proposed plat. Application fees are $2000 for the Preliminary Plat application and $200 (1/2 of the $400 fee if the improvements are less than $100,000) or $500 (1/2 of the $1,000 fee if the improvements are more than $100,000) for Environmental (SEPA) Review. Processing time for Preliminary Plat is approximately 16 weeks, if no appeals are filed. A complete Preliminary Plat application package is included herewith. Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations will apply and require submittal of a surveyed tree inventory and Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Plan. If vegetation will be removed from slopes 40% or greater for purposes of grading for roads and/or building lots, a variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations will be required. The fee for an Administrative Variance is $100. The variance must be requested at the time of application submittal. Administrative approval of a(42�- oot wide (reduced from standard 50' width) public street right-of-way will also be required, if the entry drive is proposed as shown on the conceptual plan. Include a request for this modification, with a statement of justification, in the project narrative with the application. Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 3 The proponent has suggested that the City of Renton should, or may, enter into a maintenance agreement with Seattle Public Utilities so that access to the proposed project may be secured via the Seattle Public Utilities water line easement. Renton's Director of Public Works, Mr. Gregg Zimmerman, has determined that it would not be in the city's best interest to enter into such an agreement, therefore, a secondary access will have to be secured elsewhere rather than onto the SPU right-of-way. Current Land Use: The land is currently vacant. Zoning: The property is currently zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8), it is designated as single family residential on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. Density: In the R-8 Zone, the minimum density is 5.0 dwelling units per net acre for lots greater than 0.5 acre in size. The R-8 Zone permits residential development at densities up to 8.0 dwelling units per net acre. Density calculations are based on net parcel size, excluding sensitive areas (such as wetlands and steep slope areas) and public rights-of-way. In order to calculate density, the net area will need to be provided by the project proponent. If the project is not developed to the preferred density range, "shadow platting" may be implemented to demonstrate that future subdivision and development of lots may occur. Staff suggests that the project proponent consider creating fewer, larger lots for this project due to the following: • Severe traffic congestion on local streets, • Potential inability to mitigate traffic congestion due to lack of rights-of- way, and • Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-40.1. "New plats proposed at higher densities than adjacent neighborhood developments may be modified within the allowed density range to reduce conflicts between old and new development patterns." Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size in the.R-8 Zone is 4500 sf It cannot be determined from the information provided by the Project proponent if this standard has been met. Minimum Lot Width and Depth: The minimum lot width in this zone is 50' for interior lots and 60' for corner lots. The minimum allowable lot depth is 65'. Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat. Preapplication Comments • January 6, 2000 Page 4 • Although it cannot be determined from the information provided by the project proponent if this standard will be met, it appears, from scaling the drawing, that the lots as shown on the conceptual plan do not meet the required dimensions. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks in the R-8 Zone are: front 15' for houses and 20' for garages on streets created after September 1, 1995, and 20' if fronting on existing streets • rear 20' side 5' (interior lots) and 15' (corner lots) It cannot be determined from the information provided by the Project proponent if this standard will be met. Setback lines must be indicated on the site plan submitted for review. Building Height: Building heights in the R-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories and 30'. It cannot be determined from the information provided by the project proponent if this standard will be met. Building Coverage: The maximum building coverage on lots larger than 5,000 sf is 35% of the total lot area. The maximum building coverage for lots 5,000 sf or less is 50%. Building footprints are not indicated on the conceptual plan. For purpose of considering the preliminary plat, building envelopes should be shown on the plat map. Parking: Off street parking must be provided for each lot, at a minimum of 2 spaces each. Access: Each lot must have`access to a public street. The conceptual plan indicates that access will be from SE 7th Court. Availability of this access point will need to be verified. The City of Renton will not agree to maintain the Seattle Public Utilities easement so that it can be used as a secondary/emergency access for this project. . Streets: A traffic analysis, report, and recommendations will be required at the time of application. The scope of this report shall include anticipated traffic volumes and direction of travel. The traffic study must consider the seasonal use of Philip Arnold Park, which experiences significant increases in use from May to October. Stopping sight distance standards to meet 1994 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards must be met (or . Heritage Arnold Preliminary Plat Preapplication Comments January 6, 2000 Page 5 mitigated) at the intersection of SE 7th Street, Jones Ave S, SE 7th Court, and Beacon Way SE. Sensitive Areas: The site is indicated as potentially sensitive on the City's Sensitive Areas maps for landslides and coal mine hazards. Due to these potential conditions, a geotechnical report that includes information and recommendations regarding any former mining activity on or near the property will be required. A topographic plan and slope analysis will be required, as well as a conceptual grading plan. Typical Environmental Mitigation measures placed on Preliminary Plats include a Fire Mitigation Fee ($488/new lot), Parks Mitigation Fee ($530.76/new lot), and Transportation Mitigation Fee (approximately $750/new lot). There are presently no fees charged for school mitigation, unless the site is within the Issaquah School District. Final Plat Recording: The Final Plat must conform, with only minor modifications, to the. Preliminary Plat. The Final Plat cannot be recorded until the required improvements are installed and approved, and a final drawing is prepared and accepted by the City. In addition, any conditions and/or fees must be met and/or paid prior to the recording of the Final Plat as applicable. A separate application packet is required. cc: Ryan Fike Jennifer Henning 1`SY O + ®. , CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU - MEMORANDUM . DATE: August 19, 1999 TO: Laureen Nicolay, Planner FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marsh 4 SUBJECT: Arnold Preliminary Plat, 800 Bloc Beacon Way SE Fire Department Comments: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$488:00 is required for all new single-family structures. D Ca. 3. Fire Department access roadways require a minimum 20 Foot paved roadway with an approved fire department turnaround. See attached diagram. The gate on Beacon Way SE should be removed or relocated to accommodate the increased traffic and Fire Department access. 4. All building addresses shall be visible from the public street Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. DF�c/71'pOF nP EArro Vey/N0 APR R ?82Oo ee "fie+ • • • CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 TO: LAUREEN NICOLAY FROM: NEIL WATTS SUBJECT: • ARNOLD PRELIMINARY PLAT PREAPPLICATION REVIEW • I have reviewed the project submittal for the above listed project, and have the following comments at this time: ACCESS • • Beacon Way S adjacent to this parcel is not a City right-of-way available for public use. This is a 'Seattle Water Pipeline Right-of-Way, owned and controlled by the City of Seattle. Any use of Beacon Way S will require written approval from the City.of Seattle. • We have concerns with use of Beacon Av S for this subdivision. What assurances will be provided that any approval of use by Seattle will not be revoked in the future? Where will secondary/emergency access be from? Who will be responsible for maintenance of the street • improvements in Beacon Av S? • • We also have concerns with the additional traffic on Renton hill through existing residential . streets. A traffic study will be required for this project, which will need to address this concern. We recommend examining the option of routing the project access to the south, if possible, to Puget Dr S. • The excessive use of private streets along the easterly portion of the plat will not be supported by staff. This large of parcel can be platted in such a manner as to provide direct access to all the new lots directly from a public street, without creating a significant number of landlocked parcels dependent on access from narrower private streets. SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in S 7"' Ct adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new'parcel can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main though the proposed subdivision. , SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 _ PAGE 2 • Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual side sewers). The minimum slope for the side sewers shall be 2%. • Sewer System Development Charges of$585 per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary short plat. WATER • There is an existing 6" water.main in Jones Av S, an 8" water main in S 7`` Ct, and a 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. The site is located in the 490 foot pressure zone. -Static water pressure will range from about 40psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. • The following water main improvements will be required for this project: 1. Installation of an 8" water in Beacon Av S within the City of Seattle Water Pipeline right- of-way along the entire frontage of the plat. This will require a permit from Seattle Public Utilities. 2. Installation of 8" water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants. 3. Connection to the existing 8" stub along the north property line (see.plan W-2038). 4. Connection to the existing 6" water main in Jones Av S (see plan W-1156). • . Fire hydrants will be required to current City standards within 300 feet of all proposed building sites for the new parcels. • Water.System Development Charges of$850 per new single family parcel will be required for • this plat. This fee .must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary short plat. DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan is to include detention and water quality treatment for the fully built out plat, including future houses, driveways and roadway improvements. The runoff from the new houses must be tightlined into the storm drainage system constructed for the preliminary plat. The drainage plan is to be designed per the King County Surface Water Manual. 19(1'0 • • Surface Water System Development Charges off$385,per new single family parcel will be required for this plat. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. C. f{ u6-e- '01,0 0.a-kR o lL �,Gf . o 4 m by konzuwir s SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 PAGE 3 EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • Due to the possible erosion and sedimentation problems from construction activities on the site, we will recommend the following conditions for this preliminary plat (for both preliminary plat development and future building permits for the individual lots): 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 100 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. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Beacon Av S must be improved to full 32 foot pavement width, with curbs, gutters, sidewalk and street lighting. This work will require approval from the City of Seattle. (see Access comments). • The new street interior to the short plat must be developed to City standards, including new pavement, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street lighting. • All new electrical, phone and cable services to the short plat must be undergrounded. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. .SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 PACE 4 • Traffic mitigation fees of$75 per net new average daily trip ($716.25 per lot) will be required prior to recording of the plat. Fire mitigation and Parks mitigation fees must also be paid prior to recording of the plat. 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 construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. l • CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS,AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: • August 30, 1999 • TO: Laureen Nicolay • • FROM: Owen Denniso�'(�. SUBJECT: Arnold Preliminary Plat- 69 Lots Preapplication(#99-75) (800 Block of Beacon Way SE-NE of Philip Arnold Park) The site is designated Residential Single Family (RS)in the Comprehensive Plan, and zoned R-8. • The proposal appears to be near or above the upper end of the permitted density range for RS parcels over one-half acre. Even with modifications to reduce the density to 8 units per net acre, the proposed plat would be more dense than the surrounding neighborhoods. The following Residential Single Family designation policies address new plats proposed at higher densities than surrounding areas. . • Policy LU-40. New plats developed at higher densities within existing neighborhoods should be designed to incorporate street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes which address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. . • Policy LU-40.1. New plats proposed at higher densities than adjacent neighborhood developments may be modified within the allowed density range to reduce conflicts between old and new development patterns. However,strict adherence to older standards is not required. Policy LU-40.2. Site features such as distinctive stands of trees and natural slopes should be retained, to enhance neighborhood character and preserve property values where possible. Retention of unique site features should be balanced with the objective of investing in neighborhoods within the overall context of the Vision Statement of this Comprehensive Plan. The Falcon Ridge development to the east includes on-site open space to buffer adjacent uses. Residential uses to the west are buffered by Philip Arnold Park. The development to the north, • however, is less than half as dense as the proposed plat. Further, lots in this plat appear to be somewhat lower than on the proposed site. The difference in elevation may emphasize the density differential between the developments. With submittal, the proponents should be prepared to show how the proposed plat is sensitive to o entiaLprivacy and quality of life G.oncerns of-the--adjaeertt proper o e north. • • • • \\TS SERVER\SYS2:\COMMON\-H:\EconomicDevelopment\STRATPLN\PLANNING\PREAPP\RS\Arno1dPP.doc\od • Development Planning Section PREAPPLICATION COMMENTS ARNOLD 69-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT 700.1000 BLOCK "BEACON WAY SE" August 27, 1999 • The applicant, Bennett Homes, has proposed a 69-lot preliminaryplat of an existing P p 10-acre vacant parcel across from Philip Arnold Park in order to construct detached single family residences. • General: The following comments are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the Codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that review comments may need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. Also, information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Environmental Review Committee, Hearing Examiner, and City Council). The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the City of Renton Development Regulations. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00, • plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall. Land Use Permits Required: The proposal will require a preliminary plat approval and environmental review and, as proposed, an administrative approval of a 42-foot reduced public street right of way. A complete Preliminary Plat and Environmental • Review application package is attached. In order to request approval of a reduced right of way, you will also need to include this request in your project narrative, along with a statement justifying the request. Total processing time will be approximately . 18 weeks, assuming no appeals are filed. Uses and Density:. The subject site is zoned R-8, Residential 8-Units Per Acre. Since the existing parcel is greater than one half acre in size, this zone permits single family residential development at densities at between 5 and 8 dwelling units per net acre. The overall property size is indicated to be approximately 10 acres in the preapplication information. If the site were found to contain sensitive area (i.e. slopes greater than 40%), these areas would have to be deducted from the total square footage along with the right of way area for the purposes of determining net density. The applicant has calculated the project density at 6.9 units per acre, however, this analysis does not seem to consider the required deduction of dedicated pubic street right of way. The applicant should determine the square footage of land to dedicated for public streets and recalculate total allowable density , • • based upon a starting acreage of less than 10 acres. As proposed, the project will likely result in a density of more than 8 units per acre Page 1 of 4 Access: RMC Section 4-7-170B states: "Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards". The applicant will need to obtain approval of the City of Seattle to use their water pipeline right of way for access. This written approval must be provided to the City prior to the time of formal preliminary plat application. This will allow the City time to review the document and determine whether a variance is needed for the project. Assuming the City of Seattle • grants approval to use the "Beacon Way SE" right of way, each lot in the proposed plat will front on and have direct access from either "Beacon Way SE" or a private 26-foot access easement. If this written City of Seattle approval for access is in a format acceptable to the City Public Works Plan Review Division and City Attorney, then no formal variance from the subdivision regulations will be required as the City will consider this the same as a "public street or road". Lots fronting on "Beacon Way SE" will also have access via a proposed 20-foot alley to the rear of each of these lots. The new internal public street proposed by the applicant is only 42 feet in width. The City's street standards permit the Development Services Division to allow construction of a 42-foot wide public street (in lieu of the standard 50-foot wide residential access street) when "the extra area from the reduction is used for the creation of an additional lot(s) which could not be platted without the reduction OR when platting with the required right of way results in the creation of lots with less than 100 feet in depth". The conceptual plan indicates various Jot depths ranging from approximately 80 to 90 feet in depth so it is reasonable to assume that additional right of way would likely reduce the depths even further. The applicant does not provide a comparative analysis of the number of lots possible between the 50-foot and 42-foot streets. The applicant should note this request and basis for it in his project narrative at the.time of formal preliminary plat application. Access to approximately 20 of the lots will be via private access easement as permitted by Section 4-6-060J states that: "private streets are allowed for access to .• six (6) or less lots, with no more than four (4) of the lots not abutting a public right-of- way. Private streets will only be permitted if the proposed private street is not anticipated by the Department to be necessary for existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the subdivision or to serve adjacent property. Such private streets shall consist of a minimum of a twenty six-foot (26') easement with a twenty-foot (20') pavement width. The private street shall provide a turnaround meeting the minimum requirements of this Chapter. No sidewalks are required for private streets, however, drainage improvements per City Code are required, as well as an approved pavement thickness (minimum of four inches (4") asphalt over six inches (6") crushed rock). The maximum grade for the private street shall not,exceed fifteen percent (15%), except for within approved hillside subdivisions". The applicant's proposal seems to generally comply with these requirements with the exception of the private access easement serving Lots 51 through 55. This can be modified in order to comply by revising Lot 55 to be a pipestem lot with frontage on the public street. Once done, only 4 of the lots in this area will "not abut" a public street. Page 2 of 4 • Lot Size:. The mini um lot size permitted by the zone is 4,500 square feet. The • applicant states that the proposing lot sizes are all 4,500 or greater. However, the pipestem area (area 20 feet or less in width) may not be counted toward the minimum lot area of any lot. For pipestem lots, the applicant should verity that the square footages listed do not include the pipestem portions. Lot Width—General: The minimum lot width in this zone is 50 feet (60 feet for corner lots). The lots have irregular widths that must be averaged to determine compliance with the 50-foot minimum lot width standard. For all irregularly shaped lots, the applicant should calculate the lot widths pursuant to Section 4-11-120L "Lot Width". The definition of lot width is as follows: "Width of a lot shall be considered to be the average distance between the side lines connecting front and rear lot lines ." In calculating compliance with the 50-foot minimum lot width, the following formula may be used: Proposed Lot Area divided by Lot Depth = Average Lot Width. • Since individual lot square footages and dimensions were not provided by the applicant,*I was unable to check compliance with the minimum lot width requirements. The applicant will need to verify compliance for the irregularly shaped • lots (#s 19, 21, 29, 30, 50, 56, 57, 60, 61, 62, 64, 68, and 69) prior to formal submittal. Lot Width—at Street: RMC Section 4-7-170D, City Subdivision Regulations, states: "Widths between the side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e. the points where the side lot lines intersect the with the street right of way line) shall not be less than 80% of the required lot width except in the cases of (1) pipestem lots, which shall have a • minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lot on the turning radius of a cul-de-sac shall be a minimum of 35' for non-pipestem lots." In this case, the required lot width for this zone is 50 feet. Therefore, the typical minimum lot width for the portion fronting on a street cannot be less than 40 feet (80% of 50 feet). Lots 22, 50, 55, 56, 57, 68, 69 have less than 40 feet in width at their street frontage. These are all considered to be "pipestem" lots even though some of them are located on the turning radius of a cul-de-sac. The applicant should keep in mind that the portions of the "pipestem" lots which are narrower than 80% of the zone's minimum lot width (40 feet or less in this case) may not be counted toward the minimum lot area of those lots and that adjacent pipestem lots (e.g. Lots 50, 55 and 56) shall have mandatory shared driveways. The applicant may opt to increase the width of those lots on the turning radius of a cul-de-sac to 35 feet in order to avoid the shared driveway and/or lot area reduction requirements applicable to pipestem lots. Lot Depth: Minimum lot depth is 65 feet. The proposal clearly provides adequate lot depth (scaling from 80 to 90 feet) for the majority of the lots, however, prior to application, average'depths of Lots 29, 61, and 62 should be verified. • Page 3 of 4 • • Lot Configuration: RMC Section 4-7-170A, Arrangement, states: "In so far as • practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines . . ." The proposed plat seems to generally comply with this requirement. Setbacks: Proposed Lot#62 may be somewhat difficult to build upon given-its large front yard and.shallow depth. Proposed Tracts: The proposed drainage tract appears to comply with minimum lot width, depth and area requirements. There are two other "parcels" indicated to the south of Lot 20 and to the east of Lot 53 which do not appear to comply with zoning standards. Their proposed use is unclear from the plans. These "parcels" will need • to be revised to comply with zoning requirements or, as an alternative, be created as easements. . Sensitive Areas: Coal Mines and Slopes: The site is indicated as containing 4 or 5 old coal mine shafts and designated as a moderate.hazard area on the City's mine map. The site may also contain slopes over 40%: The current City regulations prohibit vegetation/tree removal on portions of the site with slopes over 40% or in areas between 25% and 40% with landslide hazard potential. coA geotechnical report, which addresses steep slopes, coal mine hazards, etc., will be required as part of the formal preliminary plat application in order to determine any building issues related to the mine hazard or slope issues. If the steeply sloping areas of the site are small in area, th': City has made an administrative determination, attached, regarding the need for variance that may be relative to this project. Aquifer Protection Zone 2: ,The site is also located in Aquifer Protection Zone 2 (APA 2). The APA 2 designation should have no impact on the development since the lots are to be sewered. Mitigation and Development Related Fees: See attached fee schedule. Comments by: Laureen Nicolay (425) 430-7294 ; ,1. _E t tlY1 4 7 i inn Calit,e-j, a.,00(,--Exra Page 4 of 4 • MISMENENEWEEMBRag ' to.J�:.:i: '•.': '��.N4iiiTiii:}: :::$:!?{ai..:jjy}?:w isiL .::}:mai_mjm?::::'::jji:i}_:Y:}?y vn}. iniiiiiignini:ME :;:;tit:%:':.:•i'isis: :'::<Li:}:i:}:i::i:::: :jj:77 '}$�� :-}''f.4:4:?4}:v;i!{}�:::?:jiv=iiiiiii:i}ii:iii}iii}i}:'::•i$iii:J::iii::ii:-f:i::iii::::v ':n•IJ` •` ATLO .:2 r ':•}D :R'.£.R]R'JI .':.ri::}::}:::'-:}::::jj;::::}'•':'p:-::�:i:�i '}:%r:}?i'�:{C`?••+•?}:- .:...................:............................... •:{.}i;;:tiv:::i::;i:{}:;i::Xi:}:::?iiv}::}i•}:•i:}•:4}'i::::•}i}:isi':i:::ij:Y..i}iy:::::•}iii:}isv::viisii:•isj:isj:'I,.;ii:i>:•ii}:}:::•iiiisisi::}'4'-v::{ii:iJ:4Ftitiii:isY...i..:'y}}}::.}-y-:....:}}j`ti:}i?{:j:::::::::'.i:<i-i}}}}}:•:}}:-}}:4}}}:•iii:- MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC Section 4-4-130C) REFERENCE: N/A SUBJECT: Regulation of Tree Cutting and Land Clearing on Slopes Exceeding 40% BACKGROUND: Section 4-4-130:C (Prohibited and Allowable Activities) restricts tree cutting or land clearing "on parcels where the predominant slope or individual slope is in excess of forty percent(40%) except enhancement activities."Enhancement activities are defined as the "removal of noxious or intrusive species,plantings of appropriate native species and/or removal of diseased or decaying trees which pose a clear and imminent treat to life or property. Enhancement activities shall not involve the use of mechanical equipment." The Code Section does not provide clear direction as to when certain minor steep slope areas are exempt from regulation. JUSTIFICATION: According to the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations, slopes 40%or greater may not be cleated, nor trees removed,unless the action is considered to be enhancement. The regulation does not exempt minor steep slopes, or man- made slopes resulting from human action, such as those slopes created as the result of road cuts. 'The Greenbelt Regulations (Code Section 4-3-070:C.3) define steep slope areas subject to regulation as landform features of a site between significant and identifiable changes in slope. Slope is defined as the . • average slope of the lot or portion thereof in percent between significant changes in slope, determined by observation on simple slopes, or more precisely by the formula: S=100IL A . Where"I"is the contour interval in feet but not greater than ten feet(10'); "L"is the combined length of the contour lines in scale feet; and "A"is the net area between significant changes in slope of the lot in square feet. A significant change in slope is defined as a bench or plateau at least fifteen feet(15') in width. . The same definition should apply to slopes regulated for the purposes of determining whether a Variance is needed from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations. • DECISION: Tree cutting and land clearing on slopes greater than 40% may be accomplished without a Variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC 4-4-130:C.4) provided that slope "bench" is less than 15 • feet in width, and the "drop" or change in elevation is less than 10 feet. A NI f. n 1 F>, • -•1 • n.�( �'l. C�OA of /i/e iO F A an First American Title Insurance Company sc * �Q ® 2101 FOURTH AVENUE, SUITE 800 * SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121-9977 BUILDER/DEVELOPER DIVISION SENIOR TITLE OFFICER: DICK CAYS PHONE: (206) 615-3072 E-MAIL: DCAYS@FIRSTAM.COM FAX NO.: (206) 615-3075 SPECIAL PROJECTS DIVISION SENIOR TITLE OFFICER: LANCE LEWIS PHONE: (206) 615-3257 E-MAIL: LANLEWIS@FIRSTAM.COM FAX NO. :(206) 615-3075 SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE ORDER NO. 508890-9K LIABILITY: $1,000.00 FEE: 200.00 TAX: $17.20 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, HEREIN CALLED THE COMPANY, SUBJECT TO THE LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS SET FORTH BELOW AND IN SCHEDULE A GUARANTEES BENNETT HOMES HEREIN CALLED THE ASSURED, AGAINST ACTUAL LOSS NOT EXCEEDING THE LIABILITY AMOUNT STATED ABOVE WHICH THE ASSURED SHALL SUSTAIN BY REASON OF ANY INCORRECTNESS IN THE ASSURANCES SET FORTH IN SCHEDULE A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. NO GUARANTEE IS GIVEN NOR LIABILITY ASSUMED WITH RESPECT TO THE VALIDITY, LEGAL EFFECT OR PRIORITY OF ANY MA1"I'ER SHOWN HEREIN. 2. THE COMPANY'S LIABILITY HEREUNDER SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF , • ACTUAL LOSS SUSTAINED BY THE ASSURED BECAUSE OF RELIANCE UPON THE ASSURANCE HEREIN SET FORTH, BUT IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COMPANY'S LIABILITY EXCEED THE LIABILITY AMOUNT SET FORTH ABOVE. 3. THIS GUARANTEE IS RESTRICTED TO THE USE OF THE ASSURED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TITLE EVIDENCE AS MAY BE REQUIRED WHEN SUBDIVIDING LAND PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER'58.17, R.C.W., AND THE LOCAL REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SAID STATUTE. IT IS NOT TO BE USED AS A BASIS FOR CLOSING ANY TRANSACTION AFFECTING TITLE TO SAID PROPERTY. Page 1 :�, ' - SUBDIVISION GUARAIN • ORDER NO. 508890-9K SCHEDULE A THE ASSURANCES REFERRED TO ON THE FACE PAGE ARE: A. TITLE IS VESTED IN: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON B. THAT ACCORDING TO THE COMPANY'S TITLE PLANT RECORDS RELATIVE TO THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING THOSE RECORDS MAINTAINED AND INDEXED BY NAME), THERE ARE NO OTHER DOCUMENTS AFFECTING TITLE TO SAID REAL PROPERTY OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN BELOW UNDER RECORD MATTERS. THE FOLLOWING MATTERS ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE COVERAGE OF THIS GUARANTEE: 1. UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS, RESERVATIONS OR EXCEPTIONS IN PATENTS OR IN ACTS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF. 2. WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER. 3. TAX DEEDS TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. 4. DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO MINERAL ESTATES. DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89°56'37" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 01°43'38" WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A • ' DISTANCE OF 818.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71°05'12" WEST A DISTANCE OF 109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTH 44°20'15" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE•OF 1148.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 01°46'02" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LIMITS A DISTANCE OF 33.14 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. RECORD MATTERS: 1. LIABILITY, IF ANY, FOR PRO-RATA PORTION OF 2000 REAL PROPERTY TAXES WHICH ARE CARRIED ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS AS EXEMPT. TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 202305-9110-02 Page 2 • ORDER NO. 508890-9K CONSERVATION CHARGES FOR 2000 IN THE AMOUNT OF $5.00 WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN PAID. 2. LIABILITY FOR ADDITIONAL GENERAL TAXES (ROLLBACK TAXES) AND INTEREST WHICH MAY BE IMPOSED PURSUANT TO RCW 84.36.810 UPON CESSATION OF THE USE FOR WHICH THE EXEMPTION WAS GRANTED. ACCORDING TO RCW 84.36.812, THE COUNTY SHALL NOT ACCEPT AN INSTRUMENT OF CONVEYANCE (FOR RECORDING) UNLESS THE ADDITIONAL TAX HAS BEEN PAID. 3. TITLE TO THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS HELD BY A PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT. THE FORTHCOMING SALE MUST THEREFORE BE MADE IN CONFORMANCE WITH STATUTE, AS SET FORTH IN RCW 28A.335.120. 4. UNRECORDED LEASEHOLDS, IF ANY, RIGHTS OF VENDORS AND SECURITY AGREEMENTS ON PERSONAL PROPERTY, AND RIGHTS OF TENANTS AND SECURED PARTIES TO REMOVE TRADE FIXTURES AT THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERM. 5. EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 AND: CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RECORDED: AUGUST 19, 1991 RECORDING NO.: 9108190683 6. A RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED MARCH 30, 2000 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20000330900003, SAID SURVEY DISCLOSES THE FOLLOWING MATTERS: ENCROACHING AREA FROM LOT 3 OF RIVER RIDGE, APPROXIMATE AREA 3239 SQUARE FEET. DATED: April 6, 2000 AT 8:00 A.M. (;), TITLE OFFICER JB/EJH • Page 3 ' l � ORDER NO. - � 'y-)r , SUBDIVISION t ' 1 l!(( • This Sketch is furnished as a courtesy only by First American RCDG N ./VOL &�i� Title Insurance Company and it is NOT a part of any title N OTR SEC,- C.. • TWNSHP t' RNG'5E commitment or policy of title insurance. This sketch is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in • • �� .,� locating the premises and does not purport to show all highways, •� roads,or easements affecting the property. No reliance should W E be placed upon this sketch for the location or dimensions of the property and no liability is assumed for the correctness thereof. ` I a i� pis.47 1330.25 „oPP N09-J -36W N-Ol/ Y i /5 • t ti ' III� C II ti M• t • II • ff fa 1V .1 s/f.1;4-1w w.,l(I/ -,...\ / ..-a— 0 ! i,s'�' , . ',44 t'. w ft q-P ` 1.6 �. • 601 ' .. tn. !fte •w- 2 = ysM •a .* << 04 00 4 i ' 1 " 103 • '�" t �A� S40M/ "r II ' • .0. r✓ O.,• JM 102 fey e s3 i , .. P`-V n CITY OF REIVTON �` I 11 ARNOLD PARK t 9e 0-9 Vf WO'•• i i •• 1 _. , 14 pia E 7., 1.1,,:?9e)'93.;.4's •+."I '�~'°?i;`:'i r 1.�� F a Ai �` �•r..�AS • ~ aura "�" .` f '‹ v �A� • r.-,S r s3 Irk' v,t , '�+„ , . t 9.z. :-, i—%."'"4 64 . �� r� •� y :21 �,�✓ !ram 7 •I... �.�' `�,r �� •i 70 1, 741 ..pt. vi W. ' Oi �° ° ��° ' ® dA a T RAl 2 - \ • O. I a-.A. • -\ I, — �ETON \ NO. I F F A�. SO° sA .-. i.n - \# D. 0 - F c�pA . 1i® O'F �� -g .)eel -_ . - .., i ^.11':1 i II •• , .••., I 1 '1 M 1 I M .D_ i eC • $ rc AMER , � c \ I - 1 [f: / _ 4 - , NS,.- ;. .-...---- First American Title Insurance Company ),j • COPIES OF DOCUMENTS INN/4)11 1' :r 604 7022 •.....-el „ ,... T�1'w• 1.4I( 1 4 } _ _ • (Oi vliii f IL% 4ES• cH . . •• " i N fay r, ! 4 ,7 s'. ICI r .. l' I _d r T TLL ,� S f.. • IQ ,•• -lit in• IU. if, '• #1 KAARAPtl".' DHBD y ]3• . ��wQ 1p '..; • . • ---.• TEN DOLL.SRS ;hb DOLLAR!• ` /9. THE GRANTOR, PUGET WESTERN, INC., a Washington corporation, for and in :ig _.., consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, conveys and warrants to RENTON ,,.� • :iCii0OL DISTRICT NO. 1.03, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, '',ti,, • •• the following described real estate in King County, Washington. • r' ", ' That portion of the N'd4 of the NW:1 of the NEl of Section 20, i •• � ' • 7 e• : _' ss rt h' Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. described as follows: , s • - F . .'"''. aJ �. Beginning at the northwest corner of said subdivision, said point �� ' �°' • : r being the true point of beginning, thence S 89° 56' 37" E, along the :I" '^'I+s • x ,l" ' northerly limits of said subdivision, a distance of-929.67 feet TIN'DOLLAIS . :. ?• ih • °�' to the northeast corner of said subdivision; thence S 01° 43' 38" W, ,'ii.;' 1 'eeol along the easterly limits of said subdivision, a distance of 818.33 feet Y . TWOALS) thence S 710 05' 12" W a distance of 1(9.48 feet to a point on the •• DOLL northeasterly margin of the City of Seattle's Cedar River Pipeline, .j,: right-of-way; thence N 440 20'15"W along said northeasterly margin, •a distance of 1148.20 feet to a point on the westerly limits of said "' T subdivision; thence N 01° 46' 02"E along said westerly limits, a distance of 33.14 feet to the true point of'beginning. Containing 10.39 acres, more or less. _d • _ Subject t•, existing restrictions, reservations and encumbrances of record. .• , IN WITNESS 'WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this . • l instrument to be executed by its propgr officers its corporate :eel to be hereunto affixed this f7TA day of .-N , lei. •'• T PUGh N :• . r 5- -� • �+ I s :r: ! CL::::::' cr_t5y / Ill 110161110,M .0 Attest: '•Yt,- -"t '�•tie •• : TEN DOLLARS IIEN DOLLARS) Its a I �`�q --01'aWASRINGTON ) • ) ss. y. ; C...d.,try OF KING ,.n this /f'— day of /�fr!, 1966, before me, the undersigned, a Notary -• :vblic in and for the State of veshington, duly commissioned andsworn, personally • appeared ROBERT C. WING and R. E. WILLIAMS , to se known to • I:e the President and Assistant Secretary , respectively, of PUGET WESTERN, INC., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, • and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of ' said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated c� that they were authorized to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. • ' E' .my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first alxiFe yr Ni. 'I..%' 1MM I ML\r1H1' `1MMIM1.lf\III / - • . ;.:(i s. r.V__ ‘.'"1..z' 1.. ...•:.1-'-'s ;:„ ': ..,..... . -. .'. "AO /,"/ , . ''is �.,, ,,,, i..- :'..Notary 1ic in and for the State of t`" `'.` £ •` q%.''•..� •,• `\a -tn_•r 4 '"'Washi n, residing at Bellevue • • OF R�' ••• i' . ... :yy _ °1)LI 1•1un . 11) IV 'ui I - 1: a i:: ,.. - • J< e.: .tiM la Reeol4p '3T 19«• �:f ' , '1ff'.. 3:`*, Request o!TRK41lffS.c.:ERICA TITLE bpi AL - ■ • �s{.... Fosati A.140MS.Comity Amax• ,w -A • • 0 • FILED'FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF P1,-019-90 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK RENTON MUNICIPAL&DG. ?1 05.3 1a 11.0583 C. 200 MILL AVE.SO. REM F 12.00 RENTON,WA 98055 EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECFEE 2.00 CASHSL a:*a:14'.00 16 THIS EASEMENT / AGREEMENT (the "Easement") is made ?, , /: this day of g,�`% , 19 fr/ , by and between Renton School District No. 403 ("Grantor") and the City of Renton, a • ( , municipal corporation of the State of Washington ("Grantee"). • RECITALS j f•," A. Grantor owns certain unimproved real property located in King . County, Washington, as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference :- L (the "Property"). Z!, , B. Grantee desires to acquire an easement for the purposes set 7 ;oi forth herein (the "Easement") , across a portion of the o : . ,u1 . Property, which portion is more particularly described in T fr "' • CC Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this CO reference (the "Easement Area") and Grantor desires to grant S :..7. I, such an Easement, upon the terms and conditions set forth CO ' D , CD herein. li • 0. (7) NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements o f herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt •� and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor and o 4: Grantee agree as follows: i(1 I., AGREEMENT • ie 1. Grant and Purpose of Easement. Grantor hereby grants to I t• Grantee a perpetual, non-exclusive easement over, on, across, • along, upon and under the Easement Area, for purposes of • constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, and ( replacing a public roadway and for utility purposes. • 2. Reservation of Rights. Grantor retains, in its ownership of :.4 the underlying fee, the right to use and occupy, and to grant or deny permission to other grantees to use or occupy the Easement Area for any other purpose, provided that such use ! or occupancy shall not interfere with Grantee's use of the • Easement Area for the roadway and utility purposes herein i granted. EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIRED E -1_ KIng-Co.•Reco s ivlsion • • �,—, .(164. Deputy ' ii"i 0 IIII 3. Duration of Easement. In the event that Grantee, or such 16 other municipal corporation as may become Grantee's successor in interest, ceases to use the Easement Area for roadway and utility purposes as described herein, as evidenced by ) J abandonment, vacation or any other similar action, the - l• .. . Easement granted herein shall terminate. n 4. Construction and Maintenance of Easement. Grantee shall be responsible for the design, construction, maintenance, repair, and safety of any roadway and utilities constructed within the Easement Area, which design, constructed within �F . the Easement Area, which design, construction, maintenance, r LLI and repair shall be at no cost or expense to Grantor. i.. Jo•; • Grantee shall be liable for, and shall pay throughout the O " term of its use, any and all taxes and assessments, if any, -w ,1-% Cr: levied on the Easement Area or any and all improvements [' :0i CO located thereon, any taxes or assessments on any property • interest created by this Easement as deemed by the County •4 CO Assessor or other official of the State of Washington or v 0• . other taxing entity responsible therefor, and Grantee shall . •w p, :ti i . CT) otherwise fulfill all fiscal obligations required by law. f 5. Indemnification. Grantee shall defend, indemnify, protect i"• i o :. and hold harmless Grantor, Grantor's officials, employees, agents and representatives from and against any and all liabilities, causes of action, claims, liens, demands, costs, losses, expenses, harm and damages of any kind or character asserted or arising from, on account of, or in connection %i with this Easement (collectively, the "Liabilities"), including all attorneys' fees, court costs and litigation expenses associated therewith, including without limitation, all Liabilities arising from, on account of, or in connection ' with: (a) Grantee's exercise of the rights, benefits and ;' • privileges granted to Grantee by this Easement or any breach of this Easement by Grantee; -2- 0 (b) The acts or omissions of Grantee (and Grantee's Tofficials, employees, agents, consultants, contractors, representatives, licensees or invitees) in or upon the ' ',f Easement Area; and (c) Any damage to or failure of the roadway or utilities or t other Grantee improvements (whether due to the acts or r omissions of Grantee or from any other cause) resulting a - in any damage or injury to any person or property, or i ▪ 1 any interest of any person or entity whatsoever; provided, however, that nothing herein shall require F. Grantee to so indemnify and hold harmless Grantor to the 11 ;z extent of Grantor's gross negligence or the gross ;�{'; negligence of Grantor's officials, employees, agents, • ' .0 : o : consultants, contractors, representatives or licensees. • i . xf?:= Such indemnification against Liabilities shall include • =L- ( Liabilities asserted or arising from, on account of or in ,,- 1" un connection with any environmental law, including laws relating to )t .:-, the transport or use of any "hazardous substances." "Hazardous �,� •0 00 Substances" shall mean any hazardous, toxic, or dangerous •T; substance, material, waste, pollutant or contaminant which is, or i1 O becomes, regulated under any applicable local, state, or federal !- L,, 'III l law, and any substance which, after release into the environment !. 0 :•.. will, or may be reasonably anticipated to, cause death, disease, behavior abnormalities, cancer and/or genetic abnormalities. i;R 1 ' 6. Enforcement. Grantor and Grantee shall have the right to i; k`. enforce the obligations, covenants, conditions, and rights ' imposed or granted by this Easement. The right to enforce r. • J this Easement shall include, without limitation, the right to maintain a proceeding at law or in equity against any person or persons who have violated or who are attempting to violate • the covenants or conditions of this Easement. 7. Attorneys' Fees. If any action is instituted to interpret or enforce this Easement, the prevailing party in such action, • or in the appeal of such action (or if neither party wholly -3- p F: - . 'o • J 9Ru � I—I • 11111 prevails, the party that substantially prevails), shall be entitled to have and recover all costs, fees and expenses incurred by the prevailing party in connection with such action (including reasonable attorneys' fees) and including without limitation any such fees'', costs and expenses incurred • `; in any and all bankruptcy proceedings, action or claims. • t 8. Notices. All notices, requests, demands and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (a) if personally delivered, on the date of delivery or (b) if mailed, three (3) business days after being deposited in the United States Mail in • z w , certified or registered form, return receipt requested, 7 Iq • • addressed to the other party at such address as a party shall = • designate. o • •. (fin 9. Governing Law. This Declaration shall be governed by, • F construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the < — State of Washington. 0 ' 10. Running Covenant. This Easement and each of the terms, • • 07 provisions, conditions and covenants herein shall run with o . the land and shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of Grantor and Grantee and all persons or entities o . • claiming under them, including their respective successors and assigns. • _4- �.• '4'e.i • ' '1 • ' i IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Easement is executed as of the date 46 and year set forth above. • RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 // 7: .- i By !_ /Pgfr. • -, Its ._, R ' , .i CITY OF RENTON Jz r—' .w (Y Its Mayor (', - s CO '~ '' CO ATTEST: 474-6.41 'o 1 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) erk — ) ss. '•�- CO COUNTY OF KING ) _, r O . 'o Cr) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence r• that ." ? F 1Qi ,f,�,L(,G�L.2. is the person who appeared before me, and o . said per on acknowledged that ; signed this instrument. on . F- , • ; oath stated that ,�r�- was authorized to execute the instrument� a ' 5 and acknowledged it as the aftttrt�,ilr.c1 of_eu.�i�•.•,,Iht�L A.iJ`kez • � ` • i to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. p DATED: )-city .s/ ,19 ?/, Lys // // . (Sea.l or stamp) LiJ1,'l.'j 91 /Ccc'•i&Cc) Notary Publ c in and for the State� � of Washington, residing at �ticI R My appointment expires //-/Stall/ -5- • l • STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. lji ;• COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence t. • that Earl Giyie_r is the person who ap peared before me, and said person acknowledged that he. signed this instrument, on oath • stated that he. was authorized to execute the instrument and I acknowledged it as the Plo,Ar. of C'•11 ccF Kjr pn ,to be • the free and voluntary act of such part for the uses and 5 purposes mentioned in the instrument. W • DATED: A-LiykS'1- ,19`f J U ; O J O : 6`�[J1 (Seal or stamp) • F Notary ie blic in and for the State of o r• Washing on, residing at [' CO My appointment expires f! qq, • o x CD f ti CO o is w r 0 • } • • f: -6- • 0 : i , .:. 'la v I n • • 0 • • EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • 1 . That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 20, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., described as follows: 7 • J 1- W '• Beginning at the northwest corner of said subdivision, said point ;o ; • being the true point of beginning, thence S 89 degrees 56'37" E, O .W▪ '• along the northerly limits of said subdivision, a distance of .1� . l 929.67 feet to the northeast corner of said subdivision, thence r•▪" ' C S 01 degrees 43'38" W, along the easterly limits of said Cl7 subdivision, a distance of 818.33 feet thence S 71 degrees 05'12" -j Q) W a distance of 109.48 feet to a point on the northeasterly CO margin of the City of Seattle's Cedar River Pipeline. • F right-of-way; thence N 44 degrees 20'15" W along said D7 northeasterly margin, a distance of 1148.20 feet to a point on m the westerly limits of said subdivision; thence N 01 degrees 0 46'02" E along said westerly limits, a distance of 33.14 feet.to i . • 1 the true point of beginning. containing 10.39 acres, more or less. Subject to existing restrictions, reservations, and encumbrances of record. • . rr4: :.Q , in 0 1111 EXHIBIT B EASE4ENT AREA That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 20, Township 23 north, range 5 east, W.M., King County, Washington, described as follows: 3 z i• • E ; Beginning at the Northwest corner of said subdivision: thence S u • To 89 degrees 56'37" E, along the north line thereof, a distance of o .; •=t ' 100.10 feet to a point on a curve, the radial center of which ~ bears N 28 degrees 18'04" W, a distance of 125.00 feet; ° 1 . (.- thence southwesterly, along a curve to the right, having a radius • csjCC of 125.00 feet, through a central angle of 28 degrees 21'27", an o '} • cy) arc distance of 61.87 feet to a point of reverse curvature, the • w • co radial center of which bears S 00 degrees 03'23" W, a distance of 9 25.00 feet; thence on a curve to the left, having a radius of '. Cr, 25.00 feet, through a central angle of 134 degrees 23'38", an arc o distance of 58.64 feet to a point on the northeasterly margin of • the City of Seattle's Cedar River pipeline right-of-way; thence N 44 degrees 20'15" W, along said right-of-way, a distance of 34.10 feet to the west line of the hereinbefore described subdivision; li thence N 01 degrees 46'02" E, along said west line, a distance of 33.14 feet to the point of beginning. • Cl .o rn - ' • • N • o a ,p .c . -- Jf�C7�[7330 9000n3 iJC ..1 - • "`°" ""°"' RIVER RIDGE VOL. 163/99-101 /M O CAKO CPC ooa T 2/19 K eo-5 !WC.. ra.O 1/7•Kw.w re.'H/•.T..•.w raP.o•R'.or.w »-])-) \SS' I rc..u.nn7..ea'.or rc•w2.nO15a n.Y a ICJ M>•/.a».6.k 0 nr co.c..o. T M?.WO P•?,UK • P.?.NK .M ICAO 1 1/1-MASS r•n I \ \ • Wr•PRO M1!/Kl \ 1 I 2 I 3 I \ 5 ...... B \ 7 K.a. I MAW 's M arose'.w \ 2e5G.sr S. 7TH ST. �. ).....) I • : . Ct -1110111:_ .,L.. , ..w•_ .- sir .-. _ /\ o RE C.?OAO.S.r 4 V O . Mort 0.0,0.0.0 AKA nor 1 l01 02.OR. .pa O II \ MOM n0.0...•.o WM" Yr.OL MR•.1].]t Sr. N [AIIK.r RC,.0•.0.,•0.A1 Q IZ W 4,y Coy>, + O i 4 >, j \ -0 i �co 4'' :a loo- - a l00 200 200 -- • �o NI MMI• �� \� FALCON RIDGEall • Scale 1"` Cj I g • _ (CEDAR RIDGE) • �� \ ,, VOL. 129/51-57 0gOP \ �_y 0 I ` `!. \ WRIOIAN• CURVF TARIF �.p� l •\ PLAT OF FALCON RIDGE (CEDAR RIDGE) I ,UREA O[Lu .A001 I..0M �'h`.Y • VOL. 129. PC. 51-57 ci 2r71.r 7100 ]Aera WNAd, aa•' 4 PLAT Or FALCON.Oa(C70M••30.- .71 PC)I-ST 1 j INE TART F \ 7. PLO or 1.o4OCI.0o1oa SO-.7.a a I •.M R O OC1o. 0S2A.a - 2115' ,\ •1 PLAT Or 00.1US..CLU Aoan.O.WA O.a 40 • It .Oe.•.r g '3111' 1.2 ,ra'Sp • ;..0 R Or AT 0401 POI;VOI..01.0 T 1.-r L., '.raeir• e010 o000.ln L. • r)r.r• IS.)' PK \ �p► • '',..5 i 1T•i)r• 2102' �1 \ --rp u •n'.Y1.-• NOTFC. 5/ :r17.r 21• 21or dOtOAduENT OETA& • 1. Coww0 T..0®.RY•r CLICMC••C O RO.Sl•1O,••1 k. •S71].T-( .1.. • 0 02 laC rat.A A FIELD.•'SAC SWAP.ACCLA•Cr M(CTS? L1 74•C72•T C "" - MAWS 177-.30-0.0 E�Dw L 1.K..o.r•25o.0T►CRO?I.•1.r KP„f5[.If M K}4Tf • 0 A 11."","'..a00254E 0•R.aC RO•ICW,04rKEO.- ICIOR0 Al POCJ.•o n(coo.,mono.[.Rr•o AT M.r..5. 1 FCAL-LIZZIPTION 1 n•1 r..oas PO MAW.,10 s.O•A.EA:ran o.Erna nor nano.O 1K,41YKs/ou4•R.Cr NC IO11r.Esr arArwro Or 25K•0125KAS,0..MR.0 OCR.20.rc,..9•r 23 KM..A.a 5 CAST.•.r..".•a Ca"A.•As,eo1OL MOM=AS ROOMYCo•t.o.e AI MC.?roICST CO.R0 0 SAO 1 0I?.SW POO r'7471 ~u1LE.Catalt I `10.2 MC mut Poor or aon...0 25S.a TwM Ms.•7r asT STT•[W Ao0 w„o 1T.1.'UR[SS 025K.�Wrm. ALOb 1..[•?R(RC l••R 0 SAC Sveo•'•a.•pr.TAoR V.2...T • dirPar AI 0.0.?.CAST CO,K•Or WO Lpu90,1 n(Q 5yM r Z : 0,'.2'34'K1r ALOTO.K l.SRR'wrs Or Soo 11a01.5.0,• Mr..=0 0.011 RC T; nKOQ Wong r.gtT KSI•011..01 $4 / 0.01.4 rat 13•PO•I?n..?nSHRRT 14•0r Or MI Ore ;y/Ie or WArnri=A.son AWELPK 2?.? 0•ar;M.a MOM u• ••.r.J2Af. 1 7015•KSI 1403 SAO 40S.SRRr r••p,•O1i••CI 0...120 'fCf1A7l�•. RC•PO•Kw.O,MC•ISRRI Ur.0 S.O smo•nr2• nK.a • •.. .O'M'707 CAS.AOC SAIO.[lr[Rr l••rl•001A.a Cr s 13.1 OW 10 n(T1I TO..Or OCOA..,O 04) • NWI/4.NE1/4. SEC. 20. T. 22 N.. R. 5 E. w.U. MC COUNTY.WASHINGTON • SURVEYOR'S QRT01CLTE RECORD OF SURVEY I &i rrt• & .4.a,fr, l\)\ R[CT)flOERS QIITVICATE _--- - Ars r4.•CO.KC1Le A1•K0.y•SUn(T PACE I,K? for PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 1� rg70 r?KC?V n•1 3•L OAr 0 J+i•`20Q.o__Ar WOW•,WRCn?R CO.O•.ALCI"R 25t KOP.[KU 5 P.O.001 III.rra00MVRI.E.•A 10072 (•25)AOe-1752 IN 0 MI 1RKT KOM?C ACT AT 11K KOutlT a' 1i12er •0rna 1.11-a 30esc S•r.•a ate .O,.Er -...1 00••.0r: OA rE: 2 "�"s BENNETT DEVELOPMENT .TAi TAIT. Al MT Kc or rrAW-A¢-y....er.o.:e- EOA }-21-00 99122 asr or i • I -p�__&L .-- a�.1�- �- E0•Aa 0...anw, onto OA: SCALE: .. a• . n•[cans SrEE r: a•,•CAR.O__1t91____- 1 L.•T 0LLE14T? SR 100A 0EU11vE.••lo00s JR I' • 100• I 1 - 1 • ...-T..1 R"J'R .. . r- t .Y.. .pTT0!C(....ff.. ••••n•. • 1 **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R0002241 Amount: 2,517, 82 04/28/00 09 :27 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: HER ARN AS 10017 Init: JEJ Project #: LUA00-053 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Location: BEACON WAY S AND SOUTH 7TH STREET AND SOUTH 7T Total Fees: 2,517. 82 This Payment 2, 517. 82 Total ALL Pmts: 2,517. 82 Balance: . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 .345 . 81. 00 . 0007 Environmental Review 500 . 00 000 .345 . 81. 00 . 0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat 2, 000 . 00 000 . 05 .519 .90 .42 .1 Postage 17. 82 City of Renton Hearing Examiner 1055 So Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 CITY OF RENTON Attn: Fred Kaufman N O V 1 32000 Subject: Project LUA-00-053, ECF, PP Heritage Renton Hill RE'C E V U.) Osrl �L Dear Mr Kaufman: I wish to have the following questions addressed to the developer of this project and the questions and answers made public record: (These questions follow the order of the Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner, Section G, subsection 3., Compliance with ERC Mitigation Measures): 1. What is the emergency plan if the silt fence fails during weekends or holidays or at any other time? 8. Are Geotech Consultants, Inc., aware of the upper Renton coal vein #1 {#1 bed), approx. elevation 250 feet above sea level (shown on "Jones Playfield Survey") previously submitted to the Hearing Examiner? (This vein was worked from 1874 to 1886. The newer, most commonly known mine was opened in 1901 and entered on the west side of Renton Hill near 10th and Cedar. This entrance was later relocated to the base of the west side of Renton Hill. Thus, the 1874 entrance was considerably higher and nearest the surface of Renton Hill) (Reference: The Coal Fields of King County, Washington Geological Survey,by George Watkin Evans, Olympia, Washington, 1912). 12. Which route will be used for removal of and re-introduction of fill and other construction materials? 12. Is the developer willing to remove all pavement and repave South 7th from the project to Renton Ave So, and Renton Avenue So, from South 3rd to South 7th if it is determined that sufficient damage has occurred to warrant such work? (The existing posted weight limit for these streets is 20,000 pounds, empty weight). Have these mitigation measures been addressed or proposed in some other document? 13. Will the emergency entrance / access be closed off during construction at all times and when construction is halted during evenings or weekends? (Ref. Page 9 of the Preliminary Report): Project Compliance with the Environmental Element: Will all new purchasers of the developed homes be required to join the "Homeowners Association" as a condition of sale? If not, who will maintain the downhill storm water control system? Thank you for submitting these concerns. i(r4 Mr&Mrs Wm Collins 420 Cedar Ave So Renton, WA 98055 in. 6 4- CITE OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works • ,. 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 a cF '�p�.,"`•? `" ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 7�p p �i - 101 e /o� F8 I Ile r oflitj.\ tEsaaoi U.3. POSTAGE lap• �•Ste �+ e ' f _� Melanie ✓ elani Thompson l 1307 So. 9th Renton WA A491 .. 98055� THOM3 0 7 9805530 19 0 10 11 11 0 0 THOMAS 5906 )( ORM54 , A 18TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98108-2839 11,1„1„1,,,,1111,,,1„I,,,I,I1,,I,„I I,I,1„11,,,,11,„11„1 'MOWN 0 December 11, 2000 DEC 0 2 2000 IJ Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building lots will fewer homes and have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a 25% increase in size and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations. Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg November 9 2000 D J 0 NOV 1 4 20J0 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman - CI1y OF RENTON _ '>=_=:' NEARING DARNER Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Heritage Renton Hill proposed subdivision by Bennett Development • Dear Mr. Kaufman: I am a resident of Renton Hill, writing in regards to the Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner for the Heritage Renton Hill subdivision proposed by Bennett Development. I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments to certain statements that are included in the aforementioned report. Lot Sizes and Unit Density The average lot size as proposed for the development is 5,350 sq ft, equivalent to almost 7 dwelling units (homes) per acre. This is considerably more dense and inconsistent with neighboring homes on the Renton Hill. Lot sizes in River Ridge, which borders the project to the immediate north, are on the order of 20,000 sq ft. The remainder of the Renton Hill neighborhood adjacent to the project consists of lot sizes on the order of 10,000 sq ft, or about 4 homes per acre. The statement on Page 8 of the Preliminary Report that the proposed project would satisfy Policy H-82 — to relate the size of structures to the size of lots in order to create development which fits into a neighborhood — is therefore untrue. The proposed subdivision is about 4 times as dense as the neighboring River Ridge homes to the north and about 2 times as dense as the remaining Renton Hill neighborhood. Here a distinction needs to be made. The Falcon Ridge subdivision to the east of the proposed Heritage Renton Hill, which is closer in density to the proposed development, is NOT part of the Renton Hill community. The applicant states on Page 10 that "these (proposed)lot sizes are smaller than the eleven lots in the development to the north, River Ridge, but are compatible with other existing lots in the area". The first part of this statement regarding River Ridge is certainly true, but the second part of this statement is not true for the remainder of Renton Dill and can only be true if compared to the Falcon Ridge subdivision. Falcon Ridge is a completely self-contained, isolated, and separate community from the Renton Hill. Unlike the proposed development, access to Falcon Mr. Fred J. Kaufman - 2 - November 9, 2000 Ridge is NOT through the Renton Hill. As indicated by the name of the development, Heritage Renton Hill as proposed IS part of the Renton Hill. On Page 6, the applicant clearly states "the proposed project would be a part of the Renton Hill neighborhood". And it is therefore the Renton Hill, not Falcon Ridge (which will remain a separated community), which would be primarily impacted by the development. As such, it is inappropriate to include and make comparisons with Falcon Ridge, in terms of lot density and as part of the neighboring community. The present R-8 zoning on Renton Hill (a recent rezone which is inconsistent with the actual homes and lot sizes in the neighborhood) stipulates between 5 and 8 homes per acre. In order to comply with Policy H-82 and to create a better fit into the affected neighboring community, it would seem one of the following three things should be done: (1) lower the density of units per acre to at least 5, resulting in about 41 lots instead of 57; (2) redesign access to the proposed development to come from the Falcon Ridge side to the east and/or southeast and not through the Renton Hill; or(3)not develop the project. Traffic.Impacts My other greatest concern about the development, shared with the majority of Renton Hill residents, is the increase in traffic—both during the construction and after. Many of these concerns have already been clearly addressed by the appeal brought forth by the Renton Hill Community Association, particularly in regards to the large amount of truck traffic that would be required for a project of this size. Because the project is on the southeast corner of Renton Hill and access to Renton Hill is at the opposite northwest corner, essentially the entire Renton Hill neighborhood would be impacted due to the increase in traffic. Traffic movement is already restricted on Renton Hill streets, due in large part to steep slopes, poor sight lines (visibility), and narrow rights of way. The applicant himself states on Page 12: "The limited access restricts traffic on streets that date from the earliest days of the City and are more narrow than now allowed by street standards. On-street parking, which is allowed on some streets, although not all of them, further constricts movement across Renton Hill". When this is factored with the additional traffic from 57 homes, estimated to result in an additional 544 weekday trips on average (Page 3 of Advisory Notes attached to the Preliminary Report), the impact is significant. Page 6 of the Preliminary Report indeed states: "Increased traffic volumes could cause conflicts between existing and new residents". It is estimated by the applicant that future increases in traffic on Cedar and Renton Avenues would be approximately 25% from the proposed project (Page 7). The land surface area of the project, however, would only contribute about 10% or less to the developed part of Renton Hill. Thus the project would contribute a disproportionate impact to the traffic on the hill, a result of the disparagingly higher density lots. If the proposed access to the development were from the southeast, as suggested in the previous paragraph, there would be less impact to these streets that are already constricted. Unlike Renton Ave S or Cedar Ave S, Puget Drive is a major road arterial better suited for such an increase in traffic. Mr. Fred J. Kaufman -3 - November 9, 2000 I can appreciate and understand the desire and perceived need to create higher density living that is close in. However, such development should not adversely impact the adjoining neighborhoods and should also not be so disparagingly different from the affected neighborhoods in terms of lot densities. I appreciate the opportunity to share my views with you and thank you for your consideration of these issues. Yours truly, ZaftL- Robert C. Elliot 300 Renton Ave S Renton, WA 98055 ph: 425-227-4491 cc: Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association J C Y CITY OF RENTON 'Are-ITS "' •• , �1� . • Velopment Services Division Pd PM1[TEft 1055 South Grady Way 11S84ot U.S. POSTAGE Renton, Washington 98055 A 4 �Nf,' YL ''''': 4' - ,•,' 'CU REASON CHtII, ---. V Kt RETUAti 1 •� �f� ,��'�') ��- Refused ed_— � � sir Attempted Not Known e, ; i, `(t N sufficient Address `� o Such Str \ No Such Number .en- t No Such Office[n Stafe� P Do not remail in this,)-�- 7 Ol q1C Chit.te kF°eJ O e NjC ��sVfeo.N\ • 14,,,Sje °ry mNo 4chntq k� o"atcc� ��e r \ • 15 18 - o►. f VC,V1U 5 0 U Rey ' • 4 W-� : S ;(TY OF RENTON r - o �ment Services Division `��' � !WV 08'00 {:i...% w i 3 5 South Grady Way �_ - `1 in, Washington 98055 �a NETER ' . — 7158401 U.S. POSTAGE ' �`16 `� � t yam.. r4-.';..'.'-''''1.:"'''':..."I''':'i, :i-:.:'''''::: i:;-1.::1::" IJN�ELI BLEVERA u v '\-° ' , CO ❑WITH RETU :1 I:1 :{ RNED ADDRESSED BOX CLOSED czli T� SEND ND ER. MAIL l W D FO RECEPTACLE WARDING ORDER 0 /lam lV '-�1 - ON FILE _ 1. s.) (C, (231Vt, pp • . • e.. • r, 4 ..ct C°�Atcr1--v-e, 1• a •;:. • Itr 4 r � , •, ", p LI: 4 • F� r y �1 ".w — =- DF RENTON NOV 08'00 9 !t Services Division —`` ' uth Grady Way :r .- 7158401PEI n U.S. POSTAGE lashington 98055 - 17 u a s . i' Ix y t 0.:' a� w J s UNDELIVERABLE i ❑wlrllour ZIP ❑ BOX CLOSED ` 0 V RETURNED AS ADDRESSED ` z �� ' �� y` 7 TO SENDER NO MAIL RECEPTACLE �` �' r ; '7a . ' \, �. NO FORWARDING ORDER ON FILE r � 5,; , ,h ;L : CC — ri� ` ,r • YY1cLIr {1' 1 W V- lJ y, �i 1,5 . ,n ,V Q VO /1� v C. S • a° ~ .rw v KR— a e5055ti R1, Y ,� �r •may V t. fw t � <r9r &r • 0N - , ; ;t rr ...," ar•y!.`,tT rd"s fi '• 0 i;. f._ S A Y"X`_� _ F'FP ,1. •fit ... .� ,t4"i - , - ..�' o e: 1�9Y 0 8'0 0 ��fib � � �• • CITY OF RENTON PB METER 4 retopment Services Division - 715540 i s P O S T A R E ' 1055 South Grady Way tenton,Washington 98055 4.: : r} ;14/,\_._11.-ir-10-1 SON aCHEC ERed 'rmed k1 q ,kd RET4q No U�le1eotInDted N°t Kn° iRi No Such N treeddreSSw� -` h.; DO otcre0f'�e!title,. no gta � �'n th to Nov 0 8'0 0 pl.5 4.8 « , 3 . PB METER CITY OF RENTON . - 1158401 U.S. POSTAGE_ Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 • • G�F9 y y's�G• P r�, y 0- 0, t • J1 „p� `( 0 •i...-.—_r, ;fin twr : .0 r 0t ', ,f• \*/ \ . CD G -� sQ ,m lurk v\k• r� 4 V f. 519 .`.vV V 1 ' 1 I . Fl o L 1 4 _ -k•"YJ z.. x .;�'" }a:• f�„� �.► lam- 18055 pL , , , '' v N '� R ncta, CyEC • �ay . a� AltC ` k > , atriiut+ Mai' }` t' ins niDted \ k: �` _. NptCle NOt :: f cam, a. No Sic nt kno ;� No S�Ch Nor eddressKn \ .`` M*r: xso- `t �+4f;- Op not Offfiber V • 'i• 1't$1.1`�'''a�aY';• t re'a le!n St rs� n - 4_ 1 !. ,•= yi Kt;• 3 r w 4 rl r 1 , Jay •y.-•Sj.... :j - ac"�i e'i .�tl 't ar‘i, CITOF RENTON Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Planning Jesse Tanner,Mayor January 3, 2003 Mr. Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer Transportation Planning &Engineering, Inc. 2223 — 112th Avenue NE, Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98004-2952 Re: Renton Hill Traffic -Peak Hours Dear Mr. Hobbs This letter is sent to confirm our telephone conversation of this date. Based on analysis by your firm, Transportation Planning &Engineering, Inc., the average weekday vehicular"AM Peak Hours" on Renton Hill are 8 am to 10 am. The average weekday vehicular"PM Peak Hours" on Renton Hill are 4 pm to 6 pm. Your analysis is included in a report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat, LUA00- 053, PP, ECF, Arnold Property,Traffic Impact Analysis," dated January 2000, and in "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat, LUA00-053, PP, ECF, Arnold Property, Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2," dated September 2000. Thank you for providing clarification of this issue. Sincerely Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner Cc: Neil Watts Larry Meckling file✓ L e/A. ea — oS 3 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE `P This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer , c � CITY.__3F RENTON ..IL Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Planning D P g Jesse Tanner,Mayor Susan Carlson,Administrator September 6, 2002 Mr. Kevin Oleson, Operations Manager Renton School District 403 Transportation Department 1220 North 4th Street Renton, WA 98055 Re: Renton Hill School Bus Turnaround Dear Mr. Oleson This letter is sent in response to your query regarding the Renton Hill bus turnaround. Your letter of May 15, 2000, was received by the Development Services Department with other comments on the proposed project. As a result of the comments received, a"hold" was placed on the proposed project on May 26, 2000. The applicant submitted revised plans in September 2000. Because the plans were substantially different, we again requested comments on the project and received them between September 15th and 29th You requested that the "turnaround at the gate on Beacon Way SE at Phillip Arnold Park" be maintained. We verified that Beacon Way SE, the gate, and the park entry were not going to be affected by the proposed development. We did not understand, however, that your request also included school district property, which was at that time under option for purchase by Bennett Development. There were many discussions held with Seattle Public Utilities regarding use of the SPU Cedar River Pipeline Easement (Beacon Way SE). SPU representatives reminded us many times that there were no agreements recorded as to use of the 100 foot wide Easement. This includes use of the Easement for residents whose homes front on Beacon Way SE as well as for access to Philip Arnold Park. Because of this situation, there is no public right-of-way that could have been legally "expanded" to include a portion of the development property. The City of Renton, /// including the Park Department, has no control over what happens on Beacon Way SE. It is regrettable that we did not have a full understanding of the issue. If we had understood thatbuses turned around on school district property, we would have recommended that an easement be requested by the school district prior to sale of the property to Bennett Homes. Sincerely Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner It Cc: John Thompson Neil Watts I I 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 i 1\ �r 1 ,�ichele N ann - Re: Renton Hill �_-- _ Pa e 1 { ! PP—DO -D63 From: Michele Neumann To: RUTH LARSON Date: 7/15/02 2:46PM Subject: Re: Renton Hill Dear Ms. Larson: Thank you for your e-mail regarding "oversize load"truck traffic on Renton Hill. Copies are being forwarded to Councilmembers, Mayor Tanner, the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator, and the Police Chief. We sincerely appreciate your comments. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michele Neumann Deputy City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6504 >>> "RUTH LARSON" <randwlarson @ msn.com>07/15/02 11:02AM >>> Mayor Tanner, Renton City Council, Renton On Wed.July 10, 2002, 4:38 pm,two members of my family and I were on our way to downtown Renton. We had to wait for a truck/trailer to go before us. The trailer had written in bold letters "OVERSIZE LOAD" and was carrying a large bulldozer. License# 1161 NI. As we went down Renton Ave. So., three cars were coming up hill. The truck did not yield for any of these cars, forcing two of them to stop. At the stop light at the bottom of the hill I got out of our vehicle and walked to the front of the truck to get his license-#A88177I. I went back to my vehicle and the truck sat- blocking the downhill exit (both lanes) at Mill Ave.So.The driver sat thru two green lights then came back to our vehicle. He wanted to know why I took his license number. I told him there was a restriction of weight- at least during peak traffic. He stated no one had told him of this restriction and he had done nothing wrong. He returned to the truck and sat for 4 more green lights, blocking all traffic waiting to leave the hill. If the only way to enforce the requirements of the construction on the Heritage project is to assign a babysitter, Please do so. Ruthie Larson i19 1-Itgh Ave , , . CC: Derek Todd CC/ CiOAA/A/C:a ( ) CALy ZIi'dl/ih1eA/01"V) PIbIPA/ L�1 i e0(AilkiA4M1 1 PO I I C-e/ • June 3,2002 Renton City Council Minutes Page 206 EDNSP: South Renton An ordinance was read amending Chapters 4-2,4-3, and 4-4 of Title IV Neighborhood Plan, City Code (Development Regulations)of City Code to implement the South Renton Amend Neighborhood Plan. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 6/10/2002. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#4969 An ordinance was read amending Section 4-6-040.C, of Chapter 6, Street and Utility: Sewer Service Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code by Restrictions Outside City revising policies by which the City allows connection to its sanitary sewer Limits, City Code Amend system by property owners outside of the current City limits. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Responding to Councilman Persson's concern regarding the Heritage Renton Development Services: Hill project and the developer's use of an unauthorized roadway, Heritage Renton Hill Project, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman explained Unauthorized Roadway that the contractor was removing trees from the site using a back road, which crosses over the Seattle pipeline,rather than an entrance though Renton Hill. O,dGJ� Stating that the developer was not complying with the City-issued permit for QQ'o construction of the plat which specified that access to the site must be from SE 7th Ct.,Mr. Zimmerman indicated that the developer was told to close down the access to the unauthorized roadway. Mr. Zimmerman expressed his concern that the developer was still not in compliance, and stated that he will follow-up on the matter. Transportation: Renton Ave Councilman Persson requested that additional "yield to uphill traffic" signs be S/Cedar Ave S, Yield to Uphill placed on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. due to construction being Traffic Signs conducted in that area. Development Services: Boat Responding to Councilman Corman's inquiry regarding the boat race Race Banners on Sunset Blvd advertising banner located on Sunset Blvd.,Mr. Zimmerman stated that he will &S 3rd St, Compliance with investigate to see if the banner is in compliance with the City's sign Sign Code requirements. Council President Nelson pointed out that there is another banner displayed on S. 3rd St. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:35 p.m. BONNIE I. WALTON, City Ckrk Recorder: Michele Neumann June 3,2002 Heritage Renton Hill Conditions of Development (Summary) • Mitigation Source of Mit. When Party Notes Measure/ Measure/ Compliance Responsible Condition Condition Required. Silt Fence. Install ERC Mitigation During Applicant& downslope of construction of contractor disturbed areas off-and on-site improvements; and,during bldg construction. Drainage Swales. ERC Mitigation During Applicant& Shallow swales to construction of on- contractor direct surface and off-site water away from improvements; construction area. and,during bldg. construction. Erosion/ ERC Mitigation During Project contractor Sedimentation construction of on- Control Daily and off-site review and improvements; maintenance req'd and,during bldg. construction. TESCP Reports. ERC Mitigation Weekly reports Project engineer Certification of required submits to Public installation, Works Inspector maintenance,& proper removal required prior to recording of the plat. Transportation ERC Mitigation Prior to recording Applicant Mitigation Fee. of plat $75 for each new AWT Fire Mitigation ERC Mitigation Prior to recording Applicant Fee. $488 per of plat each new single family lot Parks Mitigation ERC Mitigation Prior to recording Applicant Fee. $530.76 per of plat each new single family lot Geotechnical ERC Mitigation During site Contractors/ Report Follow development and Builders recommendations building construction Subsidence Note ERC Mitigation Home design, Applicant, on Face of Plat. building permit contractors,sub- Homes must be review contractors, designed in architects,builders consultation with a geotech.Engineer Mitigation Source of Mit. When Party Notes Measure/ Measure/ Compliance Responsible Condition Condition Required. Setback/Clearing ERC Mitigation Note req'd on title Applicant and Refer to revised —Lot 35. for Lot 35 contractors plan dated 8/31/00 Rear setback of (northwest corner minimum 25 feet of the property). require;no clearing within 10 feet of the rear property line. Hazardous ERC Mitigation During Contractor and Material/ construction sub-contractors Construction Debris. Notify City&excavate construction debris and discarded items. Construction ERC Mitigation During Contractors&sub- For this project, Traffic. Vehicles construction contractors the AM Peak is over 26,000 gvw defined as: 7:00 prohibited from am to 8:00 am,and operating on the PM Peak is Renton Hill during defined as 5:00 pm am&pm peak to 6:00 pm— hours however Code hauling hour restrictions below 2ndary ERC Mitigation Not specified Applicant For Cedar River Emergency Pipeline Easement Access. Obtain access permit to use Seattle Public Utilities easement. Number of Lots. HEX Prior to plat Applicant Only 50 allowed. Recommendation approval to Council Comply with ERC HEX As specified As specified Conditions Recommendation to Council Restriction on HEX Prior to recording Applicant Requires approval Face of Plat Recommendation of plat by City Attorney precluding to Council development of recreation/open • space Incorporate HEX Prior to issuance of Applicant Entry landscaping Landscape Tracts Recommendation construction tract,private park, Into Lots. to Council permits and landscape area abutting stormwater tract not included • Mitigation Source of Mit. When Party Notes Measure/ Measure/ Compliance Responsible Condition Condition Required. Enhance Common HEX Submit Landscape Applicant Landscaping to Landscape Tracts Recommendation Plan prior to include mix of to Council recording,Install deciduous and plantings prior to evergreen trees, Occupancy native shrubs& groundcover Hold Harmless HEX Agreement Recommendation to Council - Secure Permission HEX Prior to recording Applicant Written permission to use Seattle Recommendation of plat required Pipeline Road for to Council Emergencies Homeowners to HEX Upon Homeowners Maintain Open Recommendation establishment of Association Space Tracts at to Council Homeowners Entrance and Association Park Haul Routes City Code Prior to Approval Applicant submits, Must include: haul Construction Plan of Construction Development routes,haul hours, Permit Services Reviews construction hours, and traffic control plan Haul Hours. City Code Contractors,sub- Hauling allowed contractors between 8:30 am and 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday. Hours for City Code Contractors,sub- No work on Construction contractors Sunday Activities: 7:00 am to 8:00 pm, Monday through Friday;Saturday 9:00amto8:00 pm. Temporary City Code Through duration Contractor Erosion Control of project Hydroseeding City Code Within 30 days of Contractor Required completion of grading,and when no work will occur within 90 days. Also November 1 through March 31. i D- , CITY 1 i RENTON mil Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 9,2002 • Department of Natural Resources South Puget Sound Region 950 Farman Avenue North Enumclaw,WA 98022-9282 SUBJECT: FOREST PRACTICE PERMIT FOR THE HERITAGE HILL PLAT (FILE NO.Zi'ItTA=00=053;iRB ECF) Dear DNR Staff: - It is the City's understanding that Barghausen Engineers,representing Bennett Development has requested expedited over-the-counterpermit;approva"fromDepartment of Natural Resources (DNR)for the Heritage Hill Plat located in Renton(see attached map. This letter is to verify that the City of Renton agrees to a waiver'of the 14=;day,comment period of the DNR Forest Practices permit for the Heritage Hill Pfat.(LUA-00'=053,PP,ECF).', The SEPA environmental review for • the project was completed at the tune'of.preliminary plat rev.,iew,and approval. Should you have any questions regardingthisletter,;or need additional"information,please contact me at(425)430-7286 Sincerely, Jennifer Toth Henning Principal Planner cc: Ben Eldridge,Barghausen Engineers Ameta Henninger Elizabeth Higgins • Rro�ject�File� . • • H:\UIVISMON.S\UEVbWP.SEK\UEV&PLAN.1NthflHUientage Hill 1)NK letter.docicor RENTON 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50%recyded material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE • --- • \fir r-"( 1 -� %\ , ` • \ \ % U._' xi14. I:.I \ 1 \ i1 ' •/ ♦ / /------1 1 I�`I \ / ` ' ___ _...�. ii- ._. 11 - _ J~_I I \ / `✓ \. I •-, 1 1 • /#:/2 if.-----1,/ I i • "r• 1 1 A,/ i fr 1 1 1 .1 r-ii t % . , se/ .. /......."./ / I . 4 r I `\ \ % \r- . . . , / 1 . 1_, Arks. , I ---- laa6 e‘.......i 4 . , , ,, ,, . : L__I a, nt\A r ; % 3 //I 1/ 1 I f:.VNE„,,:C‘>-.' % /V • • q)1. \ ,,,,,v , \\ / • ..LL'LU11.'\ /( ' \ 1 , /1/ i / I P,g •.Aft. \ \ \ / 1 ■ i I, 111 E711�•t3 En �`�' / \ \ \ -��- ,� Ike kai ® ® \ % \ / ;k.� k 1 1 \ • 'r '- '( -'- - - - \ . I \ \ I I 1 F-- # ,.I r-r-r_ -1-1;-r-rr-I-T-r11 \ • i r 1I 1 v 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I! ( __•, �1_ J 1 I \ _ 1 1 I I-y/ir4#, III f i r ;f+f i 1 i rr r-i-r-r-�j p 1 i 1 �- r-I--J L1_L.J_t_L11JJ L-Li 11-LJ I I i % \% \ 4ITrr-- 'r-1- 1 -i -r-ri I / ♦♦`♦� a r-_r--T-ram I I I � ��y illlh-i�I I I I I' I I l in' • -�J i ♦`� � �� T =Aj '�T""iTT-TT T-1Z�:�.I4-4_ a I I i A ♦1 1 1 1 1+ 1 1 ,3t�f_„ I I 1 1 }I •1 I I I I 1 11 j j j-j T�`' �{ _1111��1 L_L1:_11L_ LJ-L_ __ r I 1 ♦ -r- 11'al--11--1 r--rr' 1 -'i i r- T -1 r--'I I I 1 1 1 1- 1 1 1 1 1 I ^I ' I,r�I 1 Nt-1�1---4 '1---1 1 1 1 1 1 `. I .1 1 1 w / ) 1 1 1 1 I l y �1rf I F j f 1 j L . I-1 '1 rrn��TT� ;-f j 1 i i --11.,1J_L-L 1-�J_L111t �,< .I 11 1 1 1 J 1 1 11 11 r--1 1 i • - Tr�i/ r-rr-i-'"T-r-T-�_ e L1J :LLL •Li.r.cuiw�J' L-L1_LJ I r l 1 ��1 I I I l t l l 1 •1" _ j 1 r-r--r-rrr� r-----y/ i y 1._ 1f I r t i_I 1.al '1 1 '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 % / ��1 1 1 1 j 1 1 I I 1 1 I j j 1 1 1 ¢`�''-{ 1--rF--r-fi +r�i i $ / / -'-__ L._ iyyui t I 1 1 1 1 I I d 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 J _t.1_1�y_,41_, 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I / '/ �rrrrr �mrf'�P'-�' ' Ll-Liiy y��L1J - ti� -ri 11 1 1 1.1 I:I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 t 1 I.r-r .I I - ri f J , �` / �'1-f-4••�4•-F.1��ELLL11111,JJJ 111 11 III / / .0 1.1 ! 1 1 1 J 1 1 rirrrrrrT �t // // LLLL +1 11 I 1 1 1,k i '4 I I a y i.11111J LLL --�--ly.l- ! 1 -_ 1.fJ- --r-�- / / rrrrrTT"f"T�'I rr T-._�:..r--------- / • 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1:I l i � �' 1 I l r --��, • 1 I I.11 1 1 I 1 I ra l 4-+'- -1- • `-� a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 L i1Ll1 _ - • 'e a a� ..-4— —7-. y..f am ra MUCK or . • &XI' TrVL3Q aocam0amocui I N0.i. ,' r I ww0 11'--`.I swat L +�' v»rn w o.o..muoa • Ni*- TCH Hahn 1 •wrotorn, '1O p'_l '� L1//1 '1C2-053 ems' P_}.i", v h Planning/Building/Public Woks D_pa.ri �.� r f f'T`; mir Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator et, CITY OF RENTON MAR i 2002 RECEIVED CITY CLERK;;OFFICE March 13 , 2002 • TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: • - Subject: Please see attached new preliminary plats and short plats that have just been addressed. Please add these addresses to your City directories and maps. Cobblestone Plat Debar Plat Ieritage ent©n H�iilll�Prat Honey Brooke Phase 2 Plat Johnson Loken Plat King County Shops Short Plat Liberty Ridge II Phase 2 & 3 Mapleton Short Plat Maureen Highlands Plat Monterey Place Short Plat Morgan Court Z&II Short Plats . Nason Short PIat Riley Short Plat Saint.Claire Plat Sincerely, • fan Conklin Development Services Representative Development Services Division Telephone: 425-430-7276 #1:platadd 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 15'LSE-' " '"'' '-' "L- 3.Z • TRACT A _ 38 37 0 36 35 34 33 , I .i,7�1 ' o `q l STORM DRAINAGE f q 4y 97-',,y: y' IOC g�� fQ IIII I ------- ---- -- - ------_ —-— ---- -- INTERSECTION ''LIE 1®I� - IV--- ----` --- IV Y----�w ----- --- - — — ---- - - _- - — ---- ---- -_ --- -- 0 m b 'r pit 4+B7.04 ROAD'A' _-____qp.- ........ - -4� uti N n li • 31n STA 20+00.00 ROAD'B' '" /' a p 95' U6 I 20 B-i -{+-. L/ "' flLi W --1 !----'-��\$ ...- `J k� ROAD A X �_ 30 IS Yam/' 11 1 n� /�'� JOv P Ad.20.I1261 U ..l�.b/" ly��\ �Dr1-1. I�/� �eSTA O�0 AFR TRO O �'C ? l I' ,D8' 9i %.. V V r - 0 /10 • 40 m 41 42 `� 45 .� 29 R m 1 9 1 " pp 10'PSDE • g'' ', .� ti ��•' to Do Pr s�,. 1„+00 p�il' �--- 55' 55' 55' 6D' -'89' 60 50. 60' 68' 2 60 ''.4p,'1ti 72 1^I ....95.. .... 3 .>.. ti • O 49 48 47 0. 46 , „V JJ (Y) 10 y9 .n N lb\k- m Q9 0.( N ' 3l NIERSEC27 ,p, `I -_-¢ V'-� 00 STA 11+34.13 ROAD'A, ,1 ^ ,•5 STA 25i057.AOAD B C;z 5 ROAD B 604 '1`� \ 6 ' '50 lc uE i i � 21 i9 2 ' r85 2�rb (h) 7 1, g 9 m 10 11 G0 - '��\. ��" �'3'. m-T-10'PSDE 15'PSO6 .. ... \� r c'' , .6„,,,,,`` \G.� 35' SO' I 50' I 60' 50' 62' ' f0 4 iO v, ( 60'1 60' 73' -)1 ' .' 21' 27' ... 5 g�9', ga.5 ,D'DE pbb2'2 3 A tee' -.--10'PSDE 10'UEY b 95' ro 13' TRACTC! S,1D ,A1 13' v "'95' h"' \K' -26.ACCBS4'.TRACT...., Jn_ CS ON LOTS N. S 31::I N^ L5 14 00 21 _ o o= SOPMEM REGULATIONS 16 :•• - ., .,B7'- •SF D BUILT T.FOR INTERIOR LOTS SEE f.FOR CORNER LOTS ,� //MERG8NCTOSS ONT YAFtRO STREET �•.\ ACCESS �5, Dim gob ESCRIP11ONS \ 17 a s y SIR TO CRY OF RENTON 1 q WAY TO LOT 31 AND 32. \ v q ,--..'D6 T TO LOTS 13,14 AND 15 WRH `\ 6' 126' , — WAY TO LOT 18 AND 19. q - " a' CCESS WITH PUBIC EASEMENT TO A/ 18 ON. .PACE TRACT TO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. \ '- '- - .19966 �� T,qb p�,p° ACT TO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. \ H I r•ITY 1, `1 '•�o'-• Whtita:.`. t `I�a Cori�cex�° -� 1.2 4`_ 1:.. n 2.21"`i :Git'.�:''of...Reriton.,s..,cYiec::k�`J.o�;� 019.9... Eiel osed°, i's::tfie.:,. y . f ` 1'2:OO c; ':This':•checks-_''represents<_a>.refund ;;;;_,:;;f ,.•our A: rovided. n:,the o rxecords;lp'. -...': :of;;an._:,ova>ap,�yrAe'%t `"for.:cop ;es,:,, _ • - ;:' •`matt4.I.:P f:-Reritort,',•H :11-,.09 un tq.:•. - e:` and.: Y::' `.:1arid use':: `.;:`?. ''' >''.. el'e at'.:Bacon Why S & .S, 7th- ..fil cori�errisng:=;thepmt: Stree`C; b; :'R •an`Fikeof'Berm ett Dev..elopmen:t.`: yt. Sie r:.1.e`ric. �•• '.... . i.:..:.-..;:.?':,',-....'.;,,:',:',..':-:;'?‘.:,%'...-'.*..:'.4ri.:::A... ..1'.;...,..,,,'''''.......'!"-7,:. -.,::-:, ,, ,;....„..;.:,..., . .. . .. ... . . . . ... ::.: an mbard;.: `�uz ri. o -Coordinato'r• co:rds-;Irlariagement _ : CITY OF RENTON city of,Renton Finance Depar; it Request for C_. _ins or Treasurer's Check • LUUI RECEIVED Date of Request 11/19/2001 Date Required 11/26/2001 CI CLERK'S OFFICE Requesting.Department. City Clerk Authorized Signature �;� # / REASON FOR CHECK Deposit Refund Name Heritage Arnold Assoc LLC Amount 12.00 • • Finance Receipt No 03-0009676 Receipt Date 11/19/2001 Other Describe Circumstances Requiring Issuance of Check: Production,.•.request - overcharge for copies ef- d:e, tares • CHECK PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS Amount $ 12.00 Charge to Account(s) 000.000000.000.3410.0060.00.000024 Payable To Heritage Arnold Assoc LLC Address Nine Lake Bellevue Dr #108 .. Bellevue WA 98005 0 Mail Check to Payee ft Return to Dept: • Soc Sec or IRS ID No 0 Other: /I* 060 ° CHECK AUTHORIZATION - Finance Department Use Only 1 / Approved / � • � a Date �� 1 p/ RECEIVED n Claims 0 Treasurer's Check No: NOV 2 0 2001 AcCouoif Renton FIN 101 7/87 �Nable CIT OF RENTON NIL Office of the City Attorney Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren • CITY OF RENTON NOV 16 2001 MEMORANDUM RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE To: . Marilyn Petersen, City Clerk From: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date: November 16, 2001 Subject: . Renton Hill Community Association Please find enclosed a check from Heritage Arnold"Assoc. LLC in the amount of$208.20 for their share of the paper record. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact awrence J. arren LJW:tmj cc: Jay Covington into 1901 2001 Post Office Box 626 - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425) 255-8678 / FAX 425-255-5474- O. } 1� C' This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumes • • To,.Whom,`it a` 'Co•H•,y;, ricer - 1'2'/.4/Ol. ;::;Enclosed:is ':the..Cit�.:'of=;Rentont s,=cheek- •�o .:D_ ,9.9223`:in ;X:. ] • ttie 4'.:`:amoun:t:,;of=• 94 i:00'::`':`:;Thisf:c• heck=`re 'resent ,$, 4•. _ g. spa.ref:urio�;:'of- an• ; . -p. 'ent;'�f•or.�;co�ies=:o:f•<::�records`.• ro: . d�edf:-. ri:�the=:�mat�ter`•of." Y�. P .:P .v.. Renton..Hill�;:Communit. :°Asso.o :'.aid`: the.:aaE. vus.e. fi l :••thedevelo ,ment=.at:':Beacon`:�Wa ::$'•:Wand--.S. .,..•th::St P.. �; _7 need°;fib Ryan��'ike: +: of ;Be nett'.:'De•-'e to 1, pment: Snc'erel Y Eizan . ...... ... ecords Mana`" ,R. eitierit:;Cbordiiet�orj - CITY OF RENTON Pit A anCity of Renton Finance Depa__—ent Request for (:,_,: 'ms or TreasureP� d c Ol RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Date of Request 11/19/2001 Date Required 11/26/2001 / _ Requesting.Department City Clerk Authorized Signature 0 ' .. J #71 1 'REASON FOR CHECK Deposit Refund Name Bricklin & Gendler 4P Amount 94:00 •• 1 Finance Receipt No 03-0009676 Receipt Date 1 1 11/19/2001 1 Other Describe Circumstances Requi 1I ing Issuance of Check: Production request overcharge for copies of audio tapes 1 1 I 1 CHECK PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS I Amount $ Charge to Accounts) 000.000000.000.3410.0060.00.000024 i Payable To Bricklin & Gendler LLP .f Address 142.4 Fourth Avenue #1015 Seattle WA 98101 ! 0 Mail Check to Payee 1 16°\ Return to Dept: Soc Sec or IRS ID No l Other: 1 i1 �tvED U° 1 REC • enton 1 city T R�yable N CHECK AUTHORIZATION - Finance Department Use Only ,V�O 1 l 40-e— RelApproved i ,� /� Date (// o/ 2 0 200`"Yi / `,Q� ton fl Claims 0 Treasurer's Check No: Porn° 1 FIN 101 7/87 I CIT' OF RENTON sal Office of the City Attorney ' Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren CITY OF RENTON NOV 1 2001' MEMORANDUM CITY C ERK S OFFICE To: Marilyn Petersen, City Clerk From: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date: November 15, 2001 Subject Costs of Copying of Paper Record of the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat" .0. 5s.7. 41 a Please find enclosed a check from the Renton Hill Community Association's attorneys in the amount of$646.40 to cover two copies.of.the paper record and one copy of the tapes. You may , anticipate another,check for one copy of the paper record coming from the attorneys-for the owners of the preliminary plat. "I have also asked that a copy be provided to this office for our use in defending this appeal::" Thank you for your cooperation in agreeing to delay production of the record until I could get the money and then responding so rapidly once the money am Lawrence J. arren LJW:tmj cc: Jay Covington" T10.32:33 " a V c JT o i ° Q ( ' 0 gent° 1901 2001 Post Office Box 626 - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425) 255-8678 / FAX 425-255-5474 • post enteti ' :.� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30% consumer - • i I November 16, 2001 STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) CERTIFICATION I,MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk for the City of Renton,Washington,being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter, do hereby certify that the enclosed 16 audio tape recordings are true and correct copies of proceedings held by the Hearing Examiner and Renton City Council regarding City of Renton land use file: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT,LUA-00-053,PP, ECF. ' 4," Marilyn retet n, City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 16t'day of November, 2001. 111(1C/kat iltit4,/"A"\- r r• NEV/LJ1101 Notary Public in and for the S teof I ` s►oNFto.2III Washington,residing in �f°rl� :o`�t,�TARY m• i :0 �. i PUBLIC 5 11'`��rw ,_ November 16, 2001 STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) CERTIFICATION I,MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk for the City of Renton, Washington,being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter, do hereby certify that the enclosed file is a true and correct copy of City of Renton land use file: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT,LUA-00- 053,PP,ECF. • Marilyn et r en, City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 16th day of November, 2001. NEVM`11t sgioiv''�?� "Air/ke/k TUtfin-er/11/Yli 11; Notary Public in and for the tateof o NET — :• • Washington,residing in i� PUBUG N _ %\ OFWAS • November 16, 2001 STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) CERTIFICATION I, MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk for the City of Renton, Washington, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter, do hereby certify that the enclosed file is a true and correct copy of City of Renton land use file: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT,LUA-00- 053, PP,ECF. Marilyn etei , City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 16th day of November, 2001. `ss�onit;9y1� Y �,,n n� co NOTARY13:, . PUBLIC Notary Public in and for the tate f Washington,residing in � ... h‘,OFWAS November 16, 2001 STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) CERTIFICATION I,MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk for the City of Renton,Washington,being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter, do hereby certify that the enclosed file is a true and correct copy of City of Renton land use file: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT,LUA-00- 053,PP,ECF. Marilyn ete s , City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 16th day of November, 2001. ��,E NEU ®o� Olf;)4s. 1°A;Z•esAi Th ,wi ' ft ? $':Miktie �/ Notary Public in and for the Stateof = PUBLIC ' Washington,residing in P-Vi' '' ��11 9 g_05: November 16, 2001 STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) CERTIFICATION I, MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk for the City of Renton, Washington, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter, do hereby certify that the enclosed file is a true and correct copy of City of Renton land use file: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT,LUA-00- 053,PP,ECF. 01) Marilyn eter , City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 16th day of November, 2001. 4,(. sioiv�'•;' 'vjtett uuzwavi vr I 'i �o��10TARy�1%1' I Il Notary Public in and for the Stateo i = PUBLIC Washington,residing in �,%� • ''9 19-0�.: c • �0P' '1 �' °��\aeWAS CITY OF RENTON SEP 2 5 2001 V ,;(— September 25, 2001 CITY CRECEIVED LERK'S OFFICE To: City of Renton Subject: Letter of September 19, 2001, Motion of Reconsideration Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association The letter listed above was filed under Administrative Law Rules to be addressed by the quasi-judicial body and was filed within the ten (10) day requirement. The errors of fact, omission, and irregular voting procedures on September 10th 2001, should have been routed to the Committee of the Whole acting as a quasi-judicial body as they need legal clarification. This quasi-judicial body had the responsibility of writing a report to the non quasi-judicial Committee of the Whole with the conclusions of that body. At that point the report sent would be read to the City Council to be voted on. The first vote taken September 10th, 2001, should have been the quasi- judicial vote, of that acting body, asking acceptance of the recommendation. At that point, however, there was no agreed upon recommendation. The vote that followed the discussion to make the recommendation was a tie vote. The Mayor then voted to break the tie. The Mayor should not have voted, as he is not a member of the quasi- judicial body. The Mayors vote being accepted nullifies the quasi-judicial aspect of the recommendation. This vote then, is not a legal vote, as it became a vote of the Committee of the Whole without a committee conclusion required by the quasi-judicial procedure. The last vote taken, as a quasi-judicial body, would have been on September 6th, 2001. The Motion of Reconsideration was submitted so that any member of the quasi-judicial committee who wanted to make the motion could address the incorrect Resolution generated by this process as well as the legality of the Procedure. I apologize for the misdirection of this request. The request is valid under Administrative Law Rules as it was written and should proceed. Ruth Larson, Representative 9- a0',ol ! // CITY 8I' RENTON • ...u. ' Planning/Building/Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor _ October 12,2001 • Mr.Bob Gambill Seattle Public Utilities • Real Property Services—WTR • •. Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor Mail Room 710 Second Avenue • Seattle,WA 98104 - •Re: Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement • . Dear Mr.Gambill: . This letter is sent to request consideration by Seattle Public Utilities(SPU)of a need by the citizens of the .• • . • City of Renton,and particularly those residing in the Renton Hill neighborhood of the City. . . • . As you are aware,surplus Renton School District property is proposed to be developed for construction of single family homes. The City of Renton has approved'this proposed project,but continues to have • • concerns regarding the impact the construction of this project would.have on the immediate community: . Our concern is based on the configuration of streets on Renton Hill,particularly street width and grade. For public safety reasons,as well as inconvenience,the City believes it is essential that an alternate route . • be provided for construction vehicles. . For these reasons,the City of Renton is herein requesting that"Special Term"number 4 of the draft City of Seattle—Seattle Public Utilities Permit and Agreement be modified to read as follows: . 4. No construction vehicles shall be allowedon any portion of SPU's CRPL R/W,without specific approval of the'Operations and Engir.neering Department of SPU. In addition,the City of Renton is also requesting that SPU allow use of the portion of the CRPL R/W from . - . the proposed Heritage Renton Hill emeigency access,south to its intersection with Puget Drive SE,an •• approximate distance of 2,600 feet,for Heritage Renton Hill site and building construction. The start date for construction is January:15,2002. The work would-be completed in a single phase,with • the completion the site construction set for June.:15t1, Building construction would be initiated on about July 15a`with completion by July 15,2003. It is estimated that the number of trips per day throughout the • construction period would be fifteen. The trucks used for the site construction would have legal loads of . • 100,000 lbs.and those for house construction,40,000 lbs: . • As previously mentioned,the City of Renton considers this request as necessary and appreciates the • . • consideration this serious matter will be given by Seattle Public Utilities. If you have any questions,you - : .• 'may contact Elizabeth Higgins,Planner,at 425-430-7382. Thank you. Since ely, . • . e* 1#1 �tVie . • Gregg Ztmm man Administrator PlanningBuilding/Public Works - . • cc: . Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer • , Neil Watts,Development Services Director. Sue Carlson,EDNSP Adniinistrator Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner . isItr. . . . 9o1 200 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 `,. . `-'� `' :... ` . This paper contains 50%recycled material;30%post consumer I.P September 24,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 332 Citizen Comment: Wiemann— Correspondence was read from W.F.Wiemann, 2116 Edmonds Ave.NE Fireworks Ban Renton, 98056,endorsing a ban on fireworks in Renton due to noise and fire hazards from illegal fireworks. Citizen Comment: Browne— Correspondence was read from Kim Browne,President of the Kennydale Kennydale Neighborhood Neighborhood Association, 1211 N. 28th Pl.,Renton, 98056, thanking the city Picnic for making their neighborhood picnic possible in August through the Neighborhood Program Picnic Fund. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE FIREWORKS-RELATED CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Larson— Correspondence was read from Ruth Larson,representative of the Renton Hill Heritage Hill Renton Plat Community Association,714 High Ave. S.,Renton,98055,requesting Reconsideration Request reconsideration of Council's action on 9/10/2001 approving the Heritage S��_ -�,, Renton Hill preliminary plat. Also read was a letter written by City Clerk Marilyn Petersen to Ms.Larson clarifying the fact that,according to parliamentary procedure, filing of a motion to reconsider would have been required by 9/17/2001 by a member who voted with the prevailing side. Citizen Comment: Derham— Correspondence was read from Richard A. Derham, Redistricting Commission, Redistricting Commission 524 W. Comstock, Seattle, 98119, stating his intention to adopt Mayor Plans Tanner's proposal of limiting Renton to three Washington State legislative districts,the 11t,41S`&47t. Mr. Derham's letter also stated that the Commission will hold a public hearing at North Seattle Community College on October 5th at 7:00 p.m.,plus they will be receiving public comment on the four proposed redistricting plans through the end of October. OLD BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval of Finance Committee Claim Vouchers 196572— 197020, and one wire transfer totaling Finance: Vouchers $1,796,078.00; and 539 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 33999—34271, and one wire transfer, totaling$1,624,650.06. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution#3529 A resolution was read appointing the City Clerk and Deputy City Clerk as Legal: City Clerk&Deputy agents to receive claims for damages made under Chapter 4.96 RCW. MOVED City Clerk as Agents for BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL Receiving Claims For ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Damages NEW BUSINESS Council President Clawson reported that the Washington State Department of WSDOT: I-405 Corridor Transportation(WSDOT)has announced that the public comment period for Program&Draft EIS the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) on the I-405 Corridor Program has been extended from 10/9/2001 to 10/24/2001. Mr. Clawson encouraged the public to review the DEIS at public libraries or on the web page, www.wsdot.wa.gov/I-405, and to make comments and suggestions for improving mobility and reducing traffic congestion in the Renton/I-405 corridor. Additionally, Mr. Clawson stated that, along with the I-405/SR 167 Flyover Ramp Ceremony on 9/27/2001 at 9:30 a.m. at the Holiday Inn Select, there will be an open forum on the I-405 Corridor Program and the public is invited to attend. 4: LI7p. m. CITY OF RENTON SEP 19 2001 September 19, 2001 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE:; To: City of Renton Subject: Motion of Reconsideration Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Case: Heritage Renton Hill Plat Resolution: #3526 WHEREAS, the City Council agreed that the Renton Ave. So. and So. 7th Ave. Intersection should be addressed regarding safety issues but did not make a definitive Motion to do so: and WHEREAS, the City Council determined sidewalks and other features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school and they are not, nor were sidewalks addressed in the hearing Examiners file; and WHEREAS, the vote was to be made based solely on the hearing Records, and the tying vote was made by the Mayor without a statement Indicating thorough knowledge of the file. The Renton Hill Community Association files this Motion of Reconsideration. uth Larson, Representative .� .�.._ CIT1 ---3F RENTON NIL City Clerk Jesse Tanner,Mayor Marilyn J.Petersen September 20,2001 Ruth Larson,Representative Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue S. Renton,WA 98055 • ,Re: Letter requesting reconsideration of Council decision on Heritage Renton Hill Plat;PP-00-053 •Dear Ms. Larson: I am responding to the referenced letter,received by the City Clerk Division on September 19, 2001, at the request of Jay Covington, CAO. The letter requests reconsideration of the Council's action on September 10,2001,to approve the HeritagelRetttdn`H ll,pieliminary plat by a tie vote with the Mayor casting the deciding vote. In accordancd wi tlf Council policies;=Renton City Council meetings are governed by Robert's Rules of Or*on parliamentary procedure. According to Roberts New Rules of Order, 10th edition,reconsideration enables a majority.in'an.assembly,within a limited time and without notice, to bring back for,'further consideration a motion which has already been voted on. The. purpose of reconsidering a vote is•to perimt.correqtioi;yofr .asty,`ill-advised,or erroneous action,or to take into account added information or a changed kituation'that has developed since the taking of the vote. "' -i ',. 5 • The motion to reconsider has the following':unique characteristics: The motion can be made only by a member who voted with the prevailing side. Secondly,the motion to;reconsider is subject to time - limits, and, in the case of City Council meetings,must be made either during the same meeting at which the original motion was made'or at the next succeeding meeting. Since'the Council's action on the motion to approve the plat took place on September'10, 2001, a motion to reconsider would have been required at the next regular meeting;or September 17, 2001,by a member who voted with the prevailing side. Copies of your letter have been forwarded to Mayor Tanner and members of the City Council for review. If I can provide additional clarification of this matter,please feel free to contact me at 430- 6502. • Sincerely, Marilyn ' . ' -rsen City Clerk • cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Members,Renton City Council Larry Warren, City Attorney cAt 6 �'r • Jay Covington, CAO O Ol 91T 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6510/FAX (425) 430-6516 • • - . . . . . - - I3� gn1.. 41.), kv#1H. P From: Marilyn Petersen To: George Nelson Subject: Re: Renton Hill Development Dear Mr. Nelson, Thank you for your e-mail which will be forwarded to members of the City Council. I would appreciate receiving your mailing address for our records. Sincerely, Marilyn Petersen 1 � ` City Clerk 714 e---- >>> "George Nelson" <gknelsonl @home.com>09/10/01 09:24PM >>> Well as I sat here tonight watching 2 of the City Council Members on TV change their minds on the Renton Hill vote, it was a total shock to me. After listening to you two preach so avidly to vote against the plat, you turn right around and change your minds. So ????Who was it that took you aside (wink) and changed your minds???? If you know what I mean???This is totally ridiculous. I guess it doesn't matter how dangerous it's going to be going up and down the very steep Renton Ave. during peak hours trying to maneuver around 3 or 4 dump trucks coming up the hill at the same time. I guess it doesn't matter that trying to get down the hill is already a chore in its self at times. This is a very unique situation.This isn't like adding new developments in Kennydale or the Highlands.WE LIVE ON A HILL THAT HAS DRIVEWAYS ENTERING AND EXITING ON TO AN ALREADY DIFFICULT AVENUE TO GET UP AND DOWN FROM THE HILL. I guess that thought really doesn't matter though. DOES IT99299 Have any of you (that voted against it) ever driven up or down our hill during peak traffic periods???? If you had, you would know what all of us are talking about. I usually do not get too involved in our Council Elections. But I promise you, I will do my part to make sure that ALL THE PEOPLE ON RENTON HILL are aware of the two seats that are up for re-election this fall that backed out of their previous vote. George Nelson CIT OF RENTON ;di City Clerk Jesse Tanner,Mayor Marilyn J.Petersen September 11, 2001 Ryan Fike Bennett.Development 9 Lake Bellevue, Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Appeal;File No. PP-00-053 Dear Mr.Fike: At the regular Council meeting of September-11, 2001,the Renton City Council approved the referenced preliminary plat as recommended by the hearing examiner. The Committee of the Whole report which recommended,denial of the plat was voted on and not approved by the Council. A copy of the resolution adopted by the City Council is . enclosed for your records. Pursuant to RCW, a final plat meeting all requirements of State law and Renton Municipal Code shall be submitted to the City for approval within-five years of the date of preliminary plat approval. If I can provide additional information or assistance,please feel'free to call. • Sincerely, i 41, «.� Maril ersen City Cler able Manager cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Council President Dan Clawson Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services Division Fred Kaufman,Hearing Examiner 901.. 2001 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6510/FAX (425) 430-6516 This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer "'~ nten0 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 3526 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT (HERITAGE RENTON HILLS, FILE NO. LUA-00-053PP,ECF, AND LUA-00-149,AAD). WHEREAS, an application for approval of a preliminary plat for a subdivision of a certain tract of land located within the City of Renton, has heretofore been duly recommended for approval by the Renton Hearing Examiner; and WHEREAS, that recommendation for approval of the preliminary plat was appealed to the Renton City Council, as was the environmental determinations of the Environmental Review Committee; and WHEREAS, the City Council at its regular meeting of August 6th, 2001, affirmed the Examiner's decisions concerning the environmental issues and referred certain road and safety issues to the Committee of the Whole; and WHEREAS, the Committee of the Whole, by report dated September 10, 2001, recommended denial of the plat, but that recommendation failed to achieve a majority vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by motion on September 10, 2001, voted to approve the preliminary plat, with the Council splitting 3-3 on that proposition, with the Mayor casting the deciding vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the preliminary plat, as proposed, provides appropriate provisions for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets, or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, portable water supplies, sanitary waste, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds 1 RESOLUTION NO. 3526 , including sidewalks and other features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The preliminary plat heretofore submitted and recommended for approval by the Hearing Examiner, be and the same is hereby approved as such preliminary plat, subject to the laws and ordinances of the City of Renton and subject to the findings, conclusions and decision of the Hearing Examiner dated January 25, 2001. SECTION III. If the preliminary plat improvements are installed as approved by this Resolution, and in accordance with the laws and ordinances of the City of Renton, the Council shall then and thereafter adopt a resolution approving the final plat. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 10th day of September , 2001. rr✓ Marilyn J. et rs n, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 10th •day of September , 2001. 4 Je : " anner, Mayor 2 mirmemorimmimisi SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. ETERSON • L I EP F! A5E • .G $ N1.' t, RE N T:Li.Of1 I"i I L L. ARPORr WAY 4030 Lake Washingtoi 33 • -• 11 ih s 8 Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 1/2„. 1. T. I. Kirkland,WA 98033 S Ind sr 1.-r...4. Tel(425)827-5874 • �- S� Fax(425)822-7216 11 1 �`-- ��,� ADY"A J/\:_ • S. 7TH BIT. %. •:iN,,,, _ 9 I' � aD:.,. sg -1r-{t-1 c• �v1. SiIL J7 IARN J� I1 � t�:i`� .�� I sw�bls � � s � D 200' I--f-f--i \\'°.4 '4 rio0 o! E28 7 3 .7 \ VICINITY MAP: SCALE r'.200' h� \' NOT TO SCALE W I I---1---1 -res .\1rab ©py'.�._1] GENERAL NOTES: Cl) ' 1• L I I \ ��, I® I _ I I�_ MINER: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT r W J L NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH I'VG MAGI _;, j 1J C-�i `- J00 111W'WABINCTLW Y60.S7 Z CI 1J4 8'40" 25.00' 58.68' c .,„Al _ I • 1 r CI T 287i'12" 125.00' 62.08' I \\\i '© �_� , � D° �KEMIME M£Nr H • I I I__ I STATE,DDA 0 �/ MUM,WASHINGTOV 06003 I- I Vs'"AGr � v4 /i1\( • (CONT C RYAN'0 FOIL' Z B g II I--� 14 /�'� ��g6J ENGINEER: PETERSON CONS LTING ENGINEERS 0 A. r� �T \\�(. 4E00 LAKE WASHLOIOTON BLLD ME II I 1-- l�� _ \ . SUITE KIR LAND WASHWOTON 980JJ 7 - --� /// \\ \ ��- (CONE CO82 35.aJNOER AMA P.E VI KEY MAP SUR1ETCR: MEAD IOW OX9 t ASSOCIATES NJ SCALE I.200' W00DNNLLC WASHINGTON 98072 b (423)486-1232 Q CONTACT.EOWARO ANDERSOAL MLA BENCHMARKS/DATUM: TOTAL AREA(4/-) IAJs ACRES(CROSS) o k BENCHMARKS CITY OF REMO.,/II6-NI/4 COP.SEC 20-2J W.-S TOTAL AREA&O 104 ACRES CASED 1:EN CONC MON IHM 11/2'BRASS DISC a'X,60t E Cr 24<a a a a a I a THE MIX OF S 7TH Sr,&JONES AVE S. NET AREA CUT ACRES ELEVATION.JI1.J4' Crr OF RENTON#418 TOTAL LOIS 57 RE90LNIIAC LOTS - .L SRTO USED CYNC MON WM 1/I'BRASS PIN,Ira S Or DIE PM OF HAX ALLOWABLE corm 6100 00/ACRE ISILG'TMANAGfC - 3.7R1 ST..a RENM AM DESIGNER a ME I ELEVAROR.J0360' PROPOSED DENS TE• 8.86 DU/ACNE can &DEA, ' OANM.• NATO 55(CITY Or PEYTON) ma* R-8,URBAN RESDENILIL =LEA .0 STEM DATG PROPOSED USD SINDE-FAML MEN r DETACHED EB I/10/00 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXISTNGUSD SINGLE-FAML.DEIA„EO FO `"'THE ' ilIl MAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST WARIER OF THE NOPNK£ST OUARIEF OF THE NOPINEAST BOUNOARM HELD SURIETED BY MEAD GILMAN a ASSOCIATES WARIER OF SECRDIr 24 TOWNSHIP 2J NORM,RANGE 3 EAST,W.M.IN KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON. • • DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TOPOGRAPHY! FIELD SALVED BY MEAD GIWAN a ASSOCIATES CYNMENCNO AT ME NORMWESr CORNER OF SAID SUMMON,SAID POINT BONG THE roe POINT OA Or BEGNNNC. THENCE SOUTH 5096'J7'EAST ALONG ME NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBOIIS,ON UTILITIES/PURVEYORS: • z> ' m� A DISTANCE OF 829.67 FEET TO ME NORTHEAST CORNER Or SAID SUMMON; THENCE SOWN 0143;16'NEST ALONG ME EASTERLY UNIIS O•SATO SUBDIMSON A DISTANCE OR 616.JJ FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71175'12'NEST A DISTANCE OF 109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON ME NORTHEASTERLY SEIER/WA1ETC Cry Or RENTOV • „�, �`�6 1 MARGIN OR THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RICHT Or WAD THENCE NORTH II' ! 20'13'WEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE O.111020 FEET 10 A PONE LN ME STORM DRAINAGE: arr Lr RENTER WESTERLY EMITS OF SLID SUBDINSON,•THENCE NORM 01V6Y0'EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY MIS IX ,C• ,, A DISTANCE OR JJ.14 FEET TO ME TRUE PONT OF BEGINNING. CAS/POR R: PUCET SOUND a ENERGY �'rFONAL ,7 LOT AREA'S Nslm N SNARE FEET) Tf1EPNavE US WEST I I. 3,990 1.7, 3,452 25. 4,730 J7. 5.527 ID. 4.750 • CABLE: ATlf ( MIRES:ROM (I 2. &JSJ II. 4,963' 26. 4,730 JA 5,500 30. I,719 FIRE DISTRICT: CITY OF RENTON STAMP NOT VALID .1 4,873 13. 4,730 27. 4.750 J9. 3500 31. A523 I. 4.623 16. 4.730 22 6730 ID 3.300 52. 5.86.7 UNLESS SIGNED AND DATED 3. 6304 17. CM 29. 4,730 II. 3,300 3J. 4.730 SCHOOL DISTRICT: REN7M!SCHOOL DISTRICT/10) IMMINIIMINMWMUMIBM 6 3.537 IQ 4564 JA 4.730 42. 5,500 31. 6730 7. 3.799 IA 7.519 Jr. 675E 4x 5.300 53. 4,730 . 10BNUIaLR A 5,443 20 4Ji6 J2. 6016 44. A300 36. 4,751 HER 0. I,7J0 21. A000 3.11 6,121 45. 4,730 37. A660 to 4,750 22. 3.000 J4. 5,540 46. 4,750 + II. 4,7502.0 1,651 JS 4503 47. 4.750 NUMBER L•'!OE 4 12. 3.625 26 6730 J6. 7.106 IS 4,750 RESOLUTION NO. 3 5 2 6 _ Approved as form: cempait4e5OVAPAOL, Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.870:9/6/01:ma 3 4 ___ —hi - ..., 0 -- - E.SOLUTION :. 526 u. il-4• 11 igl .• :-° • .lvr...r. ----____' - .: ::: CUR. : • *16, . R--- -le ... . .p7 ••74 EN- : __. .. - P / ..z:-5.6, ,._ I _co_ .„.. RC• . • . • _.--------,__. . (2/4 - •.is ,P*RC w -. . • • L=.-. -.-.-.1—. _- • : - •-• N-N. . tp: CD CD -7.1 • r--(Y11 • „•-1 • . . ..21__ can .\_._. : • - -=-: .. ... a) I • . % I:a-7— • RC-..:- • .--. : • . . . CD(155 • •tr. -co- -co--,---) \c•:).1 . . . .---. • fi . CDR . . . r ... ,\ . • ... ... , ___, • .. . ... . , • . ..... p r(p) . i ; ,44 '111 • :ff_ CrO.:: V. . .. C13, . • .:. . I , . • $ - )I' -7 7 -1-g- :±711 \ . • '......6 . - C.0 ( a‘ n • ,.. ____ ____ ..c4_, , . ---m-_,_\ ,, \.. -•\ , , - •. ...4 , .. . . . . . . , RC .• • 7' it- T----- ----- T -1,-t . - i I • R---8. - - - • ,...;• • • . . . ___aivaiais 0 _ . . . i ...re.... . . i.• i • -=3„, 1_co. - R— . 8tiriu , • •ic....+•.; . i __im , _ s4_, : . . .. , N-8 c . • }-5 --I-6- --1--0 --v.-) • -Lua .% h. • -I -.1-- > --—> I r_T:. .-_)1 -li _8 'AN . ---••i -- I, •c,.. ---,4 _,.._.-gt .,..,-. 7 i,(1 00 1.1'- t _ •— -:.-.c. 0 - •-..-) \„*.41\-. -.1:1 „sk5,C,:( 1 I g -L H._ ael ---n--7,, , ,_:::. „.„,,• \\,: :,, . ____.-- OA / ---•-.., -,..141- "--8 ' . --Rt-8- ::-.- I . ., •N...., -, \y-->...,---- -._ : -..• \, -. ; I‘ ',Z.,- --- RC s.\-4)----- .. ----„, ; • ,\.---?.:*-- >--'\`---='" ----.- _ •,-,..s... ----I. Li .- •-... . ------- ..----- „- --------- -----,_ ------_____— \ R 7 8 . \_. . • \ I i C/4ail ..„...---- • . • \ .1 .. . -/---' • i -- - \ \ 1 -4a) II • . • i CN 'V ' 1 _.--------- . RM=I ___R8_____._. .. ........._. .I,._______________ _. . . 4) , ... .-- -\•. \)// - 3 f i c irtirn-,1:: 4 6,/ ILI Tr:-.1." •-• .?...- I I: 1 i",i . ri . . Z 0 1 i' .1 C.,--- MA? . ..... +'-p' Ara, CITY OF HERITAGE RENTON HALL �.4/2/00 ... `ro` RENTO•.. NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP ,nr oncw.n . -�ru' - MD. NC+M190M FrE Appqn. w ., Gpp Z P2.AOd 1 RESOLUTION NO. 3526 , \\\`\\ it - \..�\ 11...-_ II \\ `- 1, ,'T1 A r rrn-TTTZ-1 i I.I I I I I I I I I I I — \ 1 1 1 1 11` 1 I _\ L 1 :11 1III I ;�� -_1__LLL_L_..15 , 4- 11JLLLL1111J1J� �\ / %________ NAI/AYEI \` / 1 / M yI `,..2/ M IM L_ / / ��-...._ _ / / ___ /-______rrL_ Y4l AYFI // // J 1 I _I 1 _ ri 1 1 1 1 11111,rrrTTTT?1'f1 / / / / I I I I I I I ,'rrrrTTTT-rn� ► t-tti tt }-} -1! IN I I I I I I I I 11`1 1 1 1 I I I I I--l_4 -`, �_- r �,A,+A�I 14L_JJJJ1_J LLLM� JJJ'LLL11111JJf / a / ---'1 r r rT—r-T—r11--1 r—rr--r-T—rl—r-l—T1ZTTTZ / ft / I I I I I I I. ' Hit 1 1 fa I l I l l l l l I l l I Ir1� r1-r-I • / to / E 11.-jr-i+-I--II-i-I-I--� I Ii ▪ 1 I I I I I I I I I I III I I I I I / / I I I I I I I I, 1 1 lio I I I I I -I I I1 I I1-f-1 I 1�,fr . / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I i•2 I I I I I I I I I l l �i+'" I J L_L_1_LJ__J__J LJ— `-•' f ► .( 1 1 l / �-7 =.^.LJ_1J_111�11_J_� �<1111_ AYIITGy AY£ / / I r--r1-1 rTTT--r-r1111' [T, Y�-�-+-11TTt�"-1 r„--r -ram-rrrr- / / Cl�I I I F- 1 1 1 1 I I IIII I I I f I �y IIIII 1 1 I�� .- ��I I I I I / % I�JTT�-1 I t-11f 11L IJJ III 1 f r =� 1 Wr�-I J*If�� ,_11 I I H I I I ( / rl _1i1_J r r I I 1 I I---1, 1---1 I I'�,I I I 1 1 J' .cC i I l II 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( r-- >1_LIJ_J__J L__LL_L_LL_L.1./ ,C \ I I 11 I I I I I I 1 1 r-- o MANTAYlI ,{\ }13L7LL.LLJ_LL11.__ T---T-r1 ram' T-TT TT-T_1 r- 1-7 1 1:1.1 I I I L I l x' I I I I 4--I ..l 1 1 1 1 11 1 '�\\`� I II 7=T T-1=1'kLL1 11_LLJ_Ji L-311LU), C�\�� >• i r 1 I p I I l l� -r�-T-r7-r7 f =9nrrr \ \\ Y l I I L1_l__1__J 1 I I I .1 11 1 1 n1---1I I I I/ •\\ \ \ i 11 LJ_LJ K�L1_LJ: L_1Llly ►, t_LiLLl�// I I I r7-T1-TT7 rrrr-rT-r-r-r1 r- -j 1 �iiP''`7.7J�Arr. - 11 1 I I I I LJ IIII I I I I I I , e'', II I .I II LJ_l_L1J_J I I 1 I I I I! I *.� 1_J I I I I L 1 u 11-rrlI-T•1--r—r1 1N',e.-.4,r 11 1 I \ I III till I IIII I IIIII J!i_', L -1 1 L—_J \ 1 LJ_1_L1J s�v;LL1_1J_1_L✓,✓r�fii \�L_J L__1-_j \ I It _ I � ,, Opp)Jl - / j �__� / \ \\ I \ € FA f' � QOA© E� Cyr—/ / \\ \ 1 ' \ 43� Ella . + / a / / / \ V ` r. / 4IAD MINN E1/ // / / / _ / \ \ \ \\ '/w�8A IILlE1 Ea /I / j /oo+ / 1 /...., \ \ / VIE A0©tI=ei09� d© / j, \ \ ,1 \IIIIII , / 1\ / t /+/ \ is i .i., Jy1JJp _4/i� j- 1 / '/ • i' \ . \��r�� Y-1 L-,+- J-- ...cam.. y o/% i X \ \ .'�� 1-�\ �r y ' 1\ -- <' /% i/ 11 \nx0 �� i i-- - -- '\� \ c 1--, / i\i �� \ \ , I \ \ \ '>•< `ry / // / f¢' \ \ \ - /Y!`:r / / ifi/ / -_. // \ \ 1\``� r�_� / I/ lC__ - �� / / /�\ 1 \ \\lie, j $ I / j I `T-'' •• / +/ \ \ \ \\ .l 1--- I / / 7'-//rAtry \ \ \ -a r-� r / / / / /a / /' \\ \ \ �\;.A-� ► 1 I // i / / *1 i/ \ \ \ u I •A��\ I I I I L.__ / • \ \ \ \ 1 T1� r _ // \ % >/� \\ \ \ I 1>= 1 t-----a/ / \\\�- \ \ _ I l>a \ r / .�\\ �� \ \ \ I . \ \ r / ___ -- -2"\\Yy C"` e\ \ I N " -A I I _ _�Tk -t -- , September 10,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 306 • The reviewing official shall determine the level of visual and acoustical screening for these facilities. • An administrative conditional use permit be required. In conclusion,Ms. Lind said that the recommendation is to amend several sections of the City Code relating to storage,development standards and definitions. Audience comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. (See page 311 for ordinance.) APPEAL Council President Clawson presented a report regarding the Heritage Renton Committee of the Whole Hill preliminary plat appeal(PP-00-053 &AAD-00-149). The Committee of Appeal: Heritage Renton Hill, the Whole recommended that the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat be Renton Hill Community Assoc denied. Although several Councilmembers expressed personal knowledge (PP-00-053 &AAD-00-149) concerning the traffic situation on Renton Hill, that testimony cannot,by rule, be considered. Therefore, the Council Committee has limited its recommendation to the record before the Hearing Examiner. In support of its recommendation,the Committee of the Whole recommended that the full Council adopt the following changes to the Hearing Examiner's report and recommendation dated January 25,2001. The last sentence of conclusion number one should be modified to read "reducing the density of this plat to fifty lots will not adequately reduce the untoward impacts on the existing residents." The Committee of the Whole recommended that Council make the following additional conclusions: • FINDING NUMBER 15—The plat as proposed would not further public safety. The narrow streets combined with permitted on street parking reduce several of the streets on Renton Hill to one-way streets. Adding twenty-five percent more traffic to this already unacceptable situation will create a safety hazard. • FINDING NUMBER 16—The intersection of S. 7th St. and Renton Ave. S. already presents a dangerous situation. Visibility at that intersection is poor and in some instances nonexistent. Adding an additional twenty-five percent of traffic to that intersection creates an unwarranted safety problem. • FINDING NUMBER 17—The exit from this plat is unusual. The plat exit is only 110 feet from the intersection of S. 7th Ct. with Beacon Way SE. Normally, 150 feet of distance is necessary. Even though the Transportation Division found this intersection adequate,the fact that the intersection is now a five-way intersection that would, with the addition of the exit road from this plat, become, in essence, a six-way intersection creates an unacceptably dangerous intersection. The Committee of the Whole recommended that the Hearing Examiner's conclusion number 15 be renumbered 17 and be modified to read "in conclusion the proposed preliminary plat should be denied by the City Council." The Committee of the Whole recommended that the recommendation be changed to read "the City Council should deny the preliminary plat." September 10,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 307 MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Councilman Parker stated that he is against the committee report and upholds the recommendation of the hearing examiner for the following reasons: • The transportation engineer and the City's transportation staff have determined that there is adequate street capacity with the development in place. • He can find no error in judgment with the hearing examiner's recommendations. • If the plat is denied, the City will be put in a position to be sued in Superior Court; the City cannot prevail, and will be liable for damages. Mr. Parker said that although he is sympathetic with the Renton Hill residents, he is equally sympathetic with citizens who live in other areas of Renton and are also affected by traffic problems. Council President Clawson agreed with Councilman Parker and stated that he is against denying the preliminary plat. He expressed concern about defending the denial of the plat in Superior Court, and emphasized that he represents all Renton residents,not just a single neighborhood, and cannot subject the City to a lawsuit that may cost well over$100,000 in attorney's fees. Councilman Corman also expressed his concerns regarding the committee report, saying that he spent many hours looking through the record trying to find an error that would allow the City to deny the plat. He stated that the City is not in a position to stop this, and denying the plat would only delay the process; therefore,he upholds the decision of the hearing examiner. *MOTION FAILED. (Mayor Tanner voted "no" to break the tie vote.) MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL DENY THE APPEAL OF THE HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT AND ADOPT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER.* Councilman Corman asked if there was any procedural way to have a safety study performed on intersections that will be affected by this development, even if the City cannot require the developer to make outside improvements. Councilman Parker added that it would be appropriate to look into this issue to see what could be done in the normal course of business. Council President Clawson and Councilman Corman discussed the possibility of amending the motion to require the developer to conduct a study of the traffic issues. Mayor Tanner pointed out that the Council can always address the improvements to the intersection in the future. Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler stated for the record that all neighborhoods in the City are not exactly the same. They have unique characteristics, some more than others. In this instance, the Renton Hill neighborhood is on a very steep hill and has some constraints due to the topography and the location of the houses which are very close to the street. Pointing out that improvements to the neighborhood have been considered and conducted in the past, Ms. Keolker- Wheeler said that more than likely those improvements have already be done. September 10,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 308 For the record, Council President Clawson acknowledged that there are visibility problems at the intersection of S. 7th St. and Renton Ave. S. and recommended that City funds be expended to fix the problem. *MOTION CARRIED TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION AND APPROVE THE HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT. (Mayor Tanner voted "aye" to break the tie vote.) MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT.* Resolution#3526 A resolution was read approving the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat Appeal: Heritage Renton Hill, located southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way S. with SE 7th Ct.,Jones Renton Hill Community Assoc Ave. S.,and S. 7th St on Renton Hill. File No. PP-00-053 and AAD-00-149. (PP-00-053 &AAD-00-149) *MOTION CARRIED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION. (Mayor Tanner voted"aye" to break the tie vote.) ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2001 and beyond. Items noted included: * WSDOT awarded the construction contract for the I-405/SR-167 flyover ramp project to Max J. Kuney from Spokane and construction began on September 4th. * A ribbon cutting ceremony to celebrate the completion of the downtown transit center located north of S. 3rd St., between Burnett Ave. S. and Logan Ave. S., will be held on Saturday, September 15th at 10:00 a.m. * The Renton Senior Activity Center will be closed September 10th through 14th for annual maintenance and repairs. AUDIENCE COMMENT David Chesnes, 1105 N. 29th St.,Renton, 98056,reported that he received a Citizen Comment: Chesnes— parking ticket in June for parking in the wrong direction on his street. A Directional Parking Violations Renton resident for 23 years,Mr. Chesnes commented that never before has this violation been enforced in his area. He said he knows that there is a reason for the law and understands its application to arterials and busy streets, but not to residential streets. Mr. Chesnes recommended that the law be amended. On another subject,Mr. Chesnes expressed his concerns regarding the lack of parking at Gene Coulon Park. Citizen Comment: Buss— Christopher Buss, 362 Earlington Ave. SW,Renton, 98055,commented on Directional Parking Violations directional parking violations, saying that the issue entails not only the directional parking law but the traffic controller's enforcement of the law. Mr. Buss stated that,compared to surrounding areas,Renton's issuance of parking infraction citations is high. He questioned the City's inconsistent and unfriendly enforcement of the violations and asked Council to amend the law. Citizen Comment: Pillo— Ben Pillo, 860 Chelan Ave. NE,Renton, 98059, spoke in support of the Johnson Annexation,Jericho Johnson Annexation and relayed problems he has had with King County Ave NE,NE 6th&NE 9th Sts relating to storm water drainage issues. Citizen Comment: Shelton— Ida Shelton,2020 Grant Ave. S.,A-103,Renton, 98055,complained about Neighbor Noise Disturbances vibrating noises emanating from a neighbor's apartment which has been occurring since 1991. Ms. Shelton said she is unable to sleep and experiences Ey/sE-n • APPROVCD BY CITY COUNCIL Date 9,/° -o / t5,Meat/el) COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE COMMITTEE REPORT (September 10, 2001) Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Appeal (File LUA-004)53, PP, ECF and LUA-00-149, AAD) (Referred by Council to Planning and Development Committee on February 12,2001. Referred in Partto Committee of the Whole on August 6, 2001) The Committee of the Whole recommends to the full Council that the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat be denied. • Although several Councilmembers,expressed personal knowledge concerning the traffic situation on Renton Hill, that testimony cannot,by rule,be considered. Therefore, the Council Committee has limited`its recommendation:,to,the record before the Hearing Examiner. :- In support of its recommendation,the%Comm ttee o'fthe Whole recommends that the full Council adopt the following,,ch'anges;to the' IeariniExammer's report and recommendation dated January 25,,2001' 31 The last sentence;of conclusion number one-shouldbemodified to read"reducing the density of this;plat;toTfifty lots will not adecquately reduce the untoward impacts on the existing residen ". . ...,�,, - ' " The Committee of the Whole would,recominend the Council make the following additional conclusions: FINDING NUMBER 15. The plat as proposed would not further public safety. The narrow streets combined with permitted on street parking reduce several of • the streets on Renton Hill to one-way streets. Adding twenty-five percent more traffic to this already unacceptable situation will create a safety.hazard. FINDING NUMBER 16. The intersection of South 7th and Renton Avenue South already presents a dangerous situation. Visibility at that intersection is poor and in some instances.nonexistent. Adding an additional twenty-five percent of traffic to that intersection creates an unwarranted safety problem. FINDING NUMBER 17. The exit from this plat is unusual. The plat exit is only 110 feet from the intersection of South 7`h Court with Beacon Way Southeast. Normally, 150 feet of distance is necessary. Even though the Transportation Committee of the Whole Committee Report Page 2 Division found this intersection adequate, the fact that the intersection is now a five-way intersection that would,with the addition of the exit road from this plat, become, in essence, a six-way intersection creates an unacceptably dangerous intersection. The Committee of the Whole recommends that the Hearing Examiner's conclusion number 15 be renumbered 17 and be modified to read"in conclusion the proposed preliminary plat should be denied by the City Council". The Committee of the Whole recommends that the recommendation be changed to read "the City Council should deny the preliminary plat". Dan Clawson,Council President, <r. \, C: Larry Warren ;z i fet • 1:: y��, ":�f August 13,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 275 The granting of these permanent easements will require the same public liability and property damage insurance,and annual payment of fees as are now required for temporary use of the right-of-way. The City Attorney shall be directed to prepare an ordinance adopting these amendments to the City Code for excess right-of-way use. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page for ordinance.) ORDINANCES AND The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the RESOLUTIONS meeting of 8/20/2001 for second and final reading: Rezone: Springbrook An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 52.31 acres Watershed,P-1 to RC, Talbot located at 5750 Talbot Rd. S. from P-1 (Public Use)to RC (Resource Rd S (R-01-061) Conservation)with a P-suffix designation(Springbrook Watershed Rezone; File No.R-01-061). MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 8/20/2001. CARRIED. Planning: Right-of-Way Use An ordinance was read amending Section 9-2-1 through 9-2-5 and Section 9-2-7 Amendments of Chapter 2, Excess Right-of-Way Use, of Title IX(Public Ways and Property) of City Code by authorizing temporary and permanent use of portions of a right-of-way that are below grade or involve air rights. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 8/20/2001. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#4909 An ordinance was read adopting the 2001 amendments to the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan: 2001 Comprehensive Plan,maps and data in conjunction therewith. MOVED BY Amendments KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#4910 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 7.41 acres located Rezone: Boeing CPA#00-M-I, at N. 8th St., Park Ave.N. and Garden Ave.N. from CO (Commercial Office) N 8th St, CO to IH(R-99-175) to IH(Industrial-Heavy); Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, CPA 00-M-1; File No. R-99-175. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS At the request of Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler, City Attorney Larry Warren Appeal: Heritage Renton Hill, explained that Council cannot accept new evidence or testimony when Renton Hill Community discussing the Heritage Renton Hill site plan review at the next Monday's Association(PP-00-053 & Committee of the Whole meeting. The Council is acting as a quasi-judicial AAD-00-149) body, and is limited to reviewing material already on record. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:36 p.m. MARIL J. TERSEN, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann August 13,2001 August 6,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 263 MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE An electronic letter was read from Brian Swenson,225 Lind Ave. SW,Renton, Citizen Comment: Swenson— 98055,regarding the enforcement of directional parking violations in the City. Directional Parking Violation MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL REFER Enforcement THIS LETTER TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Thompson Letters were read from Helen Thompson, 3517 NE 10th St.,Renton, 98056; O'Halloran&DeMastus— Mike O'Halloran,4420 SE 4th St.,Renton,98059; and Sandel DeMastus, 1137 Fireworks Ban Harrington Ave.NE,Renton,98056,requesting that the City ban the use of fireworks. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THESE LETTERS TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Rogers— Correspondence was read from Nancy Bainbridge Rogers with Cairncross& Heritage Renton Hill Plat Hempelmann,P.S., 524 2nd Ave., Suite 500, Seattle, 98104,requesting that the Appeal(PP-00-053) Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat(PP-00-053)and SEPA appeal resolution be reviewed by Council on August 13,2001. Council President Clawson reported that Committee of the Whole will discuss the matter on August 20,2001. OLD BUSINESS Public Safety Committee Chair Corman presented a report recommending Public Safety Committee approval of an agreement with Yakima County for jail services to house Renton Police: Yakima County inmates. This agreement becomes effective immediately upon the authorized Contract for Jail Services signatures of both Yakima and Renton. The Committee further recommended that the resolution regarding this matter be presented for adoption. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page for resolution.) Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval of Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 194932- 195395, and three wire transfers totaling $2,608,641.99; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 32678 -33350 and 1102 direct deposits and two wire transfers totaling$3,456,881.16. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution#3521 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Police: Yakima County agreement between Yakima County,Washington,and the City of Renton for Contract for Jail Services the housing of inmates in the Yakima County Jail. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Resolution#3522 A resolution was read authorizing the temporary street closures at Houser Way Public Works: Eastside S.and Morris Ave. S.,Houser Way S. and Burnett Ave. S., and Morris Ave. S. Interceptor Project, Street at S. 7th St. for the installation of 72-inch diameter pipe for the King County Closures Eastside Interceptor Restoration Project. Replaces Resolution#3508 adopted on 6/11/2001 by correcting the length of the street closures from eight to nine months. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the meeting of 8/13/2001 for second and final reading: eA,e 6A(t A/ S- G- 6/ . Y Cairncross &Hempelmann, P.S. CITY OF RENTON AUG 0 2 2001 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE August 1, 2001 City Councilmembers City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way . Renton, WA 98055 Mayor Jesse Tanner City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 • Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat and SEPA Appeal City File Nos. LUA-00053,PP,ECF and LUA-00-140, AAD Dear Councilmembers and Mayor Tanner: We write to request your assistance. This-fmn represents Bill Sherman and Todd Bennett and their companies, Sherman Homes ("Sherman") and Bennett Homes ("Bennett"). Mr. Sherman is the current applicant for the above-referenced preliminary plat. Mr. Sherman was not the original applicant;but acquired a fifty percent interest in the property and permit applications in February,2001. At that time, Mr. Sherman expected to be installing plat improvements this summer and building homes for Renton citizens in 2001. Unfortunately, the project has continued to be plagued by delays in City processing. . We understand that, on July 23, 2001, an announcement was made by Councilmember and Committee Chair Koelker-Wheeler that the Planning and Development Committee would provide its report on these matters on August 6, 2001. Accordingly,we expect that on August 6, the Council will be able to set this matter for Monday August 13, 2001 for decision on the preliminary plat and resolution of the SEPA Appeal. We urge the Council to review this matter on August 13, 2001. Law Offices 524 Second Avenue,Suite 500 nrogers@cairncross.com Seattle,Washington 98104-2323 direct:(206)254-4417 Phone:206-587-0700.Fax:206-587-2308 www.cairncross.com 0 ' v City Councilmembers Mayor Jesse Tanner August 1, 2001 Page 2 The delays imposed on this application are inconsistent with Renton's usual model implementation of regulatory reform requirements for land use application processing. For your information, a summary timeline of this application's processing delays follows: • During the autumn of 1999 through the spring of 2000, the applicant held several community meetings, and met with the City to fine-tune its application. • In May of 2000, the application was deemed complete for processing. • The original hearing date scheduled for June 27, 2000 was postponed about four and one-half months to November 14, and subsequently extended to November 16 and December 12,2000. • The Hearing Examiner's decision on both the preliminary plat and a neighborhood State Environmental Policy Act("SEPA") appeal was issued on January 25, 2001. That decision affirmed the Environmental Review Committee's issuance of an MDNS and recommended that the Preliminary Plat be approved by the City Council. • The Renton Hill Community Association("Association") filed a request for reconsideration with the Hearing Examiner on February 7, 2001. The Hearing Examiner considered the request and provided a substantive response on February 12,2001,upholding his original decision. • The Association appealed the Hearing Examiner Decision to the City Council in February, 2001. • On February 26, 2001, the City Council agreed to send the appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision to the Planning and Development Committee for recommendation. • The Council Planning and Development Committee held a hearing on April 26, 2001. • •On'June 18, 2001 the Planning and Development Committee sent a memorandum. requesting more information from staff. • On June 21, 2001 staff responded to that request, and in favor of all previous decisions. • On July 23, 2001, the Council Planning and Development Committee chair announced that the Committee report would be provided on August 6, 2001. These delays are well beyond the normal processing timeframes. To date,Mr. Sherman has patiently waited for these delays to be resolved and a decision to be rendered on his application. Again,we urge you to avoid further delay and to set these issues for review at your meeting on August 13, 2001. • City Councilmembers Mayor Jesse Tanner August 1, 2001 Page 3 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, .Lg Nancy B 'nbridge Rogers NBR:kmo cc: Larry Warren Gregg Zimmerman William A. Sherman, Jr. Todd Bennett Ryan Fike {00086540.DOC;1} • •• - • CITi_ _ i)F RFNTON 11. ''‘s„ City Clerk Jesse Tanner,Mayor Marilyn J.Petersen • • • August 7,2001 Nancy Bainbridge Rogers • Cairncross&Hempelmann,P.S. • 524 Second Avenue, Suite 500 . • Seattle,WA 98104-2323 • Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat and SEPA Appeal;File No. LUA-00-053, PP,ECF and LUA-00-140, AAD • . Dear Ms. Bainbridge: . . At the regular Council meeting of August 6, 2001, the Renton City Council adopted the • recommendation of the Planning and Development Committee to refer to the Committee of the Whole the following issues related to the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat appeal: 1).the safety and design of the intersection of 7th and Renton Avenue S.; 2)the • • impact of the increased traffic on what amounts to one-way streets on the Hill because of the need for on-street parking; and 3).the.:safety and adequacy of the entrance to the plat. • To provide the other four Councilmembers who are not members of the Planning and Development Committee:the opportunity to review the files on this matter, the topic has been scheduled at the Committee:of the Whole meeting on August 20, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. . in the 7th floor Council Chambers Of Renton City Hall: There is a possibility that the time of the meeting may change; if this occurs,'you will be notified. A copy of the Planning and Development Committee report is enclosed for your information. If I can provide additional information or assistance,please feel free to • contact me. • • Sincerely, • • • • • Marilyn . tersen • • City Clerk/Cable Manager cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Council President Dan Clawson Elizabeth Higgins, Development Services Department • 19Oi,20O1 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6510/FAX (425) 430-6516 `. 'wx'� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer - 1t : l "� { • August 6,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 258 instead of R-8 in order to preserve the rural atmosphere of the existing neighborhood,especially since the area abuts a natural wetland area. Les Piele, 14309 SE 125th St., Renton, 98059, stated that John McTighe's property is located south of his property,has already been annexed to the City, and has been sold to a developer. He indicated that Mr.McTighe has attempted to prevent him from annexing his property to the City. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE 60%PETITION TO ANNEX FOR THE PIELE ANNEXATION AND AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATION TO PREPARE A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX PACKAGE FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE KING COUNTY BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD. CARRIED. Responding to Council inquiry regarding the proposed zoning,Mr.Dennison explained that the maximum density under R-8 is very close to the maximum density of King County's R-4 zoning. APPEALS Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Planning&Development report regarding the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat appeal(PP-00-053 & Committee AAD-00-149). The appeal consists of two issues. The first is an environmental Appeal: Heritage Renton Hill, appeal from the mitigated determination of non-significance for this project. Renton Hill Community The second issue deals with the appropriateness of the proposed preliminary Association(PP-00-053 & plat. AAD-00-149) With respect to the environmental appeal,the Committee finds no substantial error in fact or law and recommended that the Council affirm the Hearing Examiner's decision. With respect to the to the plat, the Committee focused on three issues all related to transportation and traffic safety on Renton Hill. These issues were addressed in the Planning and Development Committee Report of June 18,2001,and in a letter asking for additional explanations from the City's Transportation Division. Based upon the record before the Committee on these transportation issues,the Committee noted that the applicant's transportation engineer found the questioned areas safe,as did the City's Transportation Division. However,the Committee also heard, from the record, substantial testimony from Renton Hill residents about transportation safety. The Committee believes that the record is contradictory about public safety and adequate roads, and the Committee makes no recommendations on these issues. Rather,the Planning&Development Committee recommended that the Committee of the Whole make the decision concerning 1)the safety and design of the intersection at S. 7th St. and Renton Ave. S.,2)the impact of the increased traffic on what amounts to one-way streets on Renton Hill because of the need for on-street parking, and 3)the safety and adequacy of the entrance to this plat. Since the record is substantial,the Committee recommended that Councilmembers who are not members of the Planning and Development Committee be given at least two weeks in which to review the record prior to the Committee of the Whole meeting. It should be noted that the Committee considered recommending that the Council commission an independent transportation engineering report to consider the three transportation issues August 6,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 259 previously noted and that is still an option if the full Council wishes to have additional information on which to base its decision. This appeal once again highlights the difficult role that the City Council plays when sitting as a quasi-judicial body handling land use appeals since the changes made in State law on regulatory reform. The Council normally listens to its constituents, often on a one-on-one basis in order to fulfill their jobs as Councilmembers. However, when handling quasi-judicial appeals,no such contact is permitted. In fact,the Councilmembers are limited to the testimony already in the record and cannot consider new evidence, even if they believe that there areas that have been inadequately explored or new issues that were not explored at all. The Committee therefore recommended that the topic of the Council's appellate role in quasi-judicial matters be referred to the Committee of the Whole for review and recommendation. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE ' COMMITTEE REPORT.* Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler stated for the record that there is a substantial amount of material to review regarding this matter. If the report is approved, Ms.Keolker-Wheeler said that the full Council would sit as the appellate body which means that the Council cannot discuss the appeal with the public or receive further testimony. She expressed her frustration with the land use appeal process,commenting that if Council did not hear appeals and the process was handled outside of Renton, Councilmembers could assist citizens with the appeal process. Council discussion ensued regarding the issue of handling appeals within the City of Renton or having the Superior Court hear appeals. Councilman Corman also expressed his frustration with the inability of Council to talk to citizens about issues because of an appeal. Councilman Parker and Council President Clawson indicated their support for having the appeal process remain within the responsibility of the City. *MOTION CARRIED. Appeal: Service Linen Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Expansion, Service Linen report regarding the Service Linen expansion appeal(SA-00-131). The Supply(SA-00-131) Committee convened to consider the appeal of the decision of the Hearing Examiner dated March 26, 2001, and reconsidered on April 26,2001. The subject property is located at 903 S.4th St. The applicant seeks a site plan approval for a 33,000 square foot expansion of the existing Service Linen facility. The applicant appealed four conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner. The four conditions concerned: 1)not increasing the number of shifts or the hours of those shifts; 2)the hours of operation of the boilers; 3) the installation of best technology to reduce noise created by the operation; and 4)the installation of best technology to reduce odors created by the operation. The Committee found that the Hearing Examiner has committed a substantial error of law related to conditions 9 and 10 in that he imposed conditions that went beyond the hours and number of shifts for the existing operation. The Committee concluded that the language proposed by the applicant for conditions 9 and 10 is appropriate and should be adopted. The Committee also concluded that the Hearing Examiner did not have the authority to impose condition 11,insofar as it affects hours of operation. • APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Date, ff-L ' ° COMMITTEE REPORT (August 6, 2001) Her�ta a Rentoni11-Prelimma >Ptat A.:.:- eal- (File LUUA,-00 05 3 PP ECF and LUA-00 149'rAA:D).s' (Referred-February 12, 2001) This appeal consists of two issues. The first is an environmental appeal from the mitigated determination of non significance for this project. The second issue deals with the appropriateness of the proposed preliminary plat. With respect to the environmental appeal,.the,Planning and Development Committee finds no substantial`:error n fact or Taw_and recommends that the Council affirm the Hearing;:-Examiner's decision:' ; With respect to the plat, the Planning and Development;Committee focused on three issues all related to transportation and traffic safety on Renton Hill. These issues were addressed inthe Planning`.`and Development Committee Report of June 18, 200'1''arid in a:letter:asking for additional explanations from the Transportation Division o_f the City'., Based upon the record before the Planning and Development Committee on these:transportation issues, the Committee notes that the,applicant's transportations engineer found the questioned areas safe, as did`the City'srtransportation division. However, the Committee also heard;hom=the record, substantial testimony from Renton Hill residents about transportation safety. The Committee believes that the record is contradictory about public safety and adequate roads and the Committee makes no recommendation on these issues. Rather, the Planning and Development Committee recommends that the Committee of the Whole make the decision concerning 1) the safety and design of the intersection of 7th and Renton Avenue S., 2) the impact of the increased traffic on what amounts to one-way streets on the Hill because of the need for on-street parking, and 3) the safety and adequacy of the entrance to this plat. Since the record is substantial, the Committee recommends that the Council members who are not members of the Planning and Development -Page 1 -Heritage Renton Hill Appeal Committee Report • Committee be given at least two weeks in which to review the record prior to the Committee of the Whole meeting. It should be noted that the Committee considered recommending that the Council commission an independent Transportation Engineering Report to consider the three transportation issues noted above and that is still an option if the full Council wishes to have additional information on which to base its decision This appeal once again highlights the difficult role that the City Council plays when sitting as a quasi-judicial body handling land use appeals since the changes made in state law on regulatory reform. The Council normally listens to its constituents, often on a one-on-one basis in order to fulfill their jobs as Councilmembers. However, when handling quasi-judicial appeals, no such contact is permitted. In fact, the Councilmembers are limited to the testimony already in the record and cannot consider new evidence, even if they believe that there are areas that-haye,been inadequately explored or new rLian.r,� .E.,q.. issues that were not explored;.at;?all:-n;The Planriing and Development Committee therefore reco �rimends that the topic-of the subject of the Council's appellate role>in quasi-judicial-matters be referred to the Committee of the Whole for review and reconiinendat on. eltlicdtI y Y . Kathy eolker-Wheeler7 Clair;._�� i) " �;�;n �f • erri Bri re, Vice Chair • R dy Corman, Member -Page 2-Heritage Renton Hill Appeal Committee Report July 23,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 247 Negotiating Team, to participate with other affected cities in negotiations with King County for a new jail contract. Council concur. (See page 248 for resolution.) MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO REMOVE ITEM 8.e.FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Separate Consideration Citing a conflict of interest with item 8.e., Councilwoman Briere excused Item 8.e. herself from the meeting. Time: 8:13 p.m. Plat: Briere Creek Division 2, Development Services Division recommended approval,with conditions,of the Vicinity of NE 19th St& Briere Creek Division 2 final plat; 18 single-family lots on 3.68 acres located in Duvall Ave NE(FP-01-092) the vicinity of NE 19th St. and Duvall Ave.NE(FP-01-092). Council concur. (See below for resolution.) MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 8.e.AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO THE RELATED RESOLUTION(ITEM ll.c.). CARRIED. Resolution#3515 A resolution was read approving the Briere Creek Division 2 final plat; 3.68 Plat: Briere Creek Division 2, acres located in the vicinity of NE 19th St. and Duvall Ave.NE(FP-01-092). Vicinity of NE 19th St& MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL ADOPT Duvall Ave NE(FP-01-092) THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Councilwoman Briere returned to the meeting. Time: 8:15 p.m. OLD BUSINESS Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler announced that the Planning and Appeal: Heritage Renton Hill, Development Committee report regarding the Heritage Renton Hill appeal will Renton Hill Community Assoc be presented at the August 6th Council meeting. (PP-00-053 &AAD-00-149) Community Services: "The Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler stated that the performers in the teen musical Wiz" Teen Musical "The Wiz" are excellent and encouraged everyone to attend the show. Transportation(Aviation) Transportation(Aviation) Committee Chair Persson presented a report Committee regarding WorldWind Helicopters,Inc. operating permit. The Committee Airport: WorldWind recommended that: Helicopters Operating Permit 1. The City Council authorize AeroDyne Aviation to sublease hangar and &Sublease office space to WorldWind Helicopters,Inc. at 300 Airport Way,and 2. The City Council approve the operating permit between the City of Renton and WorldWind Helicopters,Inc., and that the Mayor and City Clerk execute the operating permit. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler stated for the record that the WorldWind Helicopters operating permit was one of the exceptions to the moratorium on the approval of leases, subleases and operating permits at the Renton Airport. Community Services Community Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a report regarding the Committee logo for the Neighborhood Grant Program. The Committee met on July 17, EDNSP:Neighborhood Grant 2001, to review staffs recommendations for the design and implementation of a Program Logo logo for the Neighborhood Grant Program. The logo is modeled on the current '-lr RECEIVED 9, 5 2001 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPI�ENTONCfTYCOUNCtL MEMORANDUM DATE: June 21,2001 TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Chair Members of the Planning and Development Committee FROM: Gregg Zimmerman 6 STAFF CONTACT: Gregg Zimmerman(x-7311) SUBJECT: Transportation Safety Issues Associated with Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat This memo is prepared in response to the June 18, 2001 Committee Report and the request for information made by the Planning and Development Committee. The staff response is in italics. 1. The entrance/exit from the plat is a very unusual design which brings three roads together in a very odd intersection. The developer originally proposed an entrance/exit from the Seattle Public Utility Cedar River Pipeline easement. This is not a public right of way however, so was not a viable proposal(City Code 4-7-080.B.2 requires access to be established to a public road for each segregated parcel). Seattle exercises full control over access onto their pipeline right-of-way and also maintenance of the pipeline road. It is not desirable to allow the primary access to a subdivision from a private road that neither the City nor the future residents will exercise any control over(note that during the City of Renton's negotiations with Seattle over the water franchise, Seattle made it clear that they control access to the pipeline road, and can make decisions independent ofRenton's or the residents'wishes regarding public access, conditions associated with public access, and pavement maintenance). The only portion of the School District property that fronts on a public right-of-way is where the entrance is now proposed to be located This is the city's preferred location, the only feasible location, and the entrance was moved to this place on the property at the city's request. Staff feels this will be a safe intersection, as addressed below. 2. The intersection of 7th and Renton Ave.South is a four-way intersection,with three of the four legs of the intersection having stop signs. The fourth leg,which is a very steep uphill leg,does not have a stop sign. The traffic from the plat would have to go through this intersection. The distance from the stop line for vehicles exiting from the plat to the stop line of vehicles waiting to travel westbound from the intersection of S 7th Court and Beacon Way S. exceeds the minimum based on AASHTO A policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Signs and channelization will conform with the requirements of the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). Staff believes this will be a safe intersection. C:\My DocumentsTheritage hills.doc\cor J , • Page 2. Staff concurs with the traffic report for this project, which indicates that the additional traffic generated by the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat will have negligible impact on the safety of the intersection at 7`h and Renton Avenue South. The Stop signs conform to MUTCD standards. 3. The rights-of-way are very narrow on Renton Hill,particularly on Cedar Avenue South and Renton Avenue South. Houses on the hill have been developed without adequate garage space,resulting in a large amount of street parking. The effect is that these two streets are reduced,in many places,to one-lane roads in addition to being very steep. These cited conditions are very.common in Renton, Seattle, and elsewhere,particularly in the older neighborhoods that were built with narrow street standards and smaller sized lots. Many streets in Renton will not easily accommodate two-way traffic when cars are parked on both sides of the streets. Since these streets are neighborhood streets not subject to heavy traffic loads, motorists commonly and safely negotiate these situations by proceeding single file. The situation will not differ much from current conditions on Renton Hill, except that there will be marginally more traffic after the development is built. It should be noted that there has not been an accident problem on Renton Ave. South nor on Cedar Ave. South in the past and one is not anticipated because of the development. For the reasons stated above,staff does not feel that there will be a public safety hazard introduced by this development as designed. The Committee has asked what existing City Codes,Rules or Regulations,whether original City Ordinances,or Codes adopted by reference would apply to these areas. It is assumed that this request pertains to street standards. Section 4-6-060 of the City Code establishes street standards. These standards apply to new streets and half-street improvements. New streets associated with the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat comply with these standards. The standards do not apply to existing streets. This project also complies with the adopted City-wide traffic concurrency standards(City Code 4-6-070)pursuant to the Growth Management Act. The project will be required to pay a transportation mitigation fee in compliance with 4-1-190 of City Code. The City has also adopted by reference(Code 9-7-1)the Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction published by the Washington State Department of Transportation,and amendments(Code 9-7-2). Consistent with this document,the City implements national standards established by AASHTO and MUTCD(see above references)and also ITE. Staff feels that the transportation features of the proposed Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat are in substantial compliance with these standards. The Committee has asked whether the Growth Management Act or any other state code mandates approval of development in areas like this where there is concern about public safety and no reasonable means for the city to address the concern or require the developer to mitigate the concern. To our knowledge neither the Growth Management Act nor any other state code mandates approval of development that creates safety hazards. Staff feels that while there may be safety concerns among the project appellants and others,there are no safety hazards associated with this project. Likewise,staff is not aware of any state code that addresses"safety concerns". cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Sandra Meyer Neil Watts Jay Covington Sue Carlson Elizabeth Higgins Larry Warren Karl Hamilton C:\My Documentslheritage hiils.doc\cor ., ` ' . APPROVED BY 1 . CITY COUNCIL Date/� o/ - PLANNING &DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT • June 18, 2001 . .,_:_._::.-::. . . __�.::.r.:_.;::_::F,:.:._::.�'.I-Te�nta .e�Renton:Hil1:P�elrm�ffa :.:P_la�.=A ea - - - - - - -_ -_- ._ ,.:__.-:..._._.._._..:.:._._:_.._ .._....:,�._ . _._ �. u_�`=j�-ter_- -- _-- _ --=_.4::v_ ... z'r;^-�4�e'-. *C• -ia._..£rYT.Y=#=z<ih'_:�.n� �v�:i' - -_.--�E...6 f._.._:f._�•-- . - x0-i_i:-:--.#!:I�:_-e- - ,..v'z.:��:.az.�- �:_�$.9'::.a _ _ r.}._z'.._.-._ _ .... .. .. r_._..,............... ._..... G..: , :± ."t - ';�'"i;�-'`fix;_a"`_.•.,,-�,.;.,.::---_r�;`;_-,�'- v., _..:_.::. __.,:: _._...._._._.._..._ :._•, �_.._ � =z_.: .:�e�erreel_Le�b= .,�2.��;.pI The record is quite voluminous for this appeal,with numerous audiotapes and an extensive . written record. The Planning and Development Committee has narrowed its inquiry to traffic . safety issues and plans to author a letter to the Transportation Division.concerning applicable City Codes which can be(perhaps were) applied to the staff transportation analysis of this _ - . . project and its impacts on the Renton Hill community. Specifically the Planning and Development Committee is concerned about>the:safety of the intersection of 7th and Renton . - Avenue South, increased traffic on what_amounts to one=way streets on the hill because of the need for on street parking, and}the entrance to this plat•,fps•-- •. ,ram; • ;s'' ; . $ . The Planning and Development Committee recommendsse:the ssues be addressed now : because the Platting statute regnires'the,City; Council to make a-.finding that the plat makes . appropriate provisions for public safety:-and streets -0{; c, o . 41.:ifj'T:t7:7::;::7 ... Y-' ' r' ,?T is„� ' :r Kathy K-•lker-Wheeler,Chair::`' • .- -:,, r =T = '`'- ,i: . .. . , . . s .:- . , .. fl' . ' . •Terri Briere,V ce Chair . - • • Randy Corman,Member : _ : _ - . T10.30:55 • :- RECEIVED - . . _ • JUN 1:9 toot . t - ..� CITY OF.RENTON. _ PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN. _ - J CITA OF RENTON voLL Renton City Council Jesse Tanner,Mayor MEMORANDUM To: Gregg Zimmerman,Administrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department From: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Chair ea Planning&Development Committee of the Renton City Council Date: June 18, 2001 • Subject: Transportation Safety Issues Associated with Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat The Planning and Development Committee has spent substantial time in hearing an appeal to the Hearing Examiner's decisions and recommendation on the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat. The Committee has several concerns, which can be primarily reduced to three transportation and safety issues. 1. The entrance and exit from this plat is a very unusual design which brings three roads together in a very odd intersection. 2. The intersection of 7th and Renton Avenue South is a four-way intersection, with three of the four legs of the intersection having stop signs. The fourth leg, which is a very steep uphill leg does not have a stop sign. The traffic from the plat would have to go through this intersection. 3. The rights-of-way are very narrow on Renton Hill, particularly on Cedar Avenue South and Renton Avenue South. Houses on the hill have been developed without adequate. - garage space, resulting in a large amount.of street parking. The effect is that these two streets are reduced, in many places, to one lane roads in addition to being very steep. These three transportation concerns raise public safety issues. The Committee would like to know what existing City Codes, Rules or Regulations, whether original City Ordinances, or Codes adopted by reference,would apply to these areas. The Committee would also like to know whether or not these various Codes, Rules and Regulations have been applied to this plat and its transportation impacts. • In addition the Committee would like to know whether the Growth Management Act or any other state code mandates approval of development in areas like this where there is concern about public safety and no reasonable means for the city to address the concern or require the developer to mitigate the concern. • We ask that you respond to this request as quickly as possible since the appeal has been pending for some time. :.' 012001 • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6501 ... .. CIT` )F"RENTON' t: Renton City Council • Jesse Tanner,Mayor CITY OF RENTON' JUNO" 52002 ' March. 16, 2001 . CITYC RK s oFFIr✓ : APPEAL FILED BY: Renton Hill Community Association • Represented by Ruth Larson • RE Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision1/25/200-1 on_Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,Fite No:_Leo UA-00053,PP,:ECF-and-LUA-00-140,A.AD: • To Interested Parties The Renton City Council's Planning.&Development Committee will meet to review the • above-referenced item on the following dates` • 'Thursday,April 26 2001 8:30AM 7`Y Floor/Council-Chambers :City`of,Renton • 1055:S:outh;Grady Way Renton,Washington This is not a public hearing,'but a,working session of the.Planing&Development Committee. As all Council:Committee meetings:are open to the public, you are welcome to, attend. If you have questions regarding these meetings,please phone Julia Medzegian, Council • - Liaison, at 425-430-6501: Sincerely, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Chair , - ".Planning&Development Committee Renton City.Council 1901, 2001. : 1055 South Grady Way =Renton,Washington 98055 - (425) 430=6501.: nThis paper contains 50%recycled material 30/post consumer hti en %o ' CIT' )F RENTON ••IL Office of the City Attorney Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren MEMORANDUM DATE: February 26, 2001 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON TO: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner FEB 2 7 2000" FROM: Zanetta Fontes, Assistant City Attorney RECEIVED RE: Heritage Renton Hill Hold Harmless Agreement Elizabeth: I have had an opportunity to consider the suggestions'made by Ann Gygi. Her suggestion was that we eliminate the first three lines of Larry's proposed language. The provision then would read, "The developers and owners of lots and/or residences within the Heritage Renton Hill site do hereby hold hainiless the City of Renton from any damages caused by any subsidence that may occur due to previous mining activities and not actually contributed to by the City of Renton." This language is acceptable. • Zanetta L. Fontes ZLF:ma cc: Jay Covington into 1901 2001 ' Post Office Box 626 - 100 S 2nd Street Renton, Washington 98057 - (425) 255-8678 etiThis paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer e`l L June'18,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 192 Citizen Comment: Bean—St. Paula Bean,334 Morris Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, questioned the age of the Anthony Church Vacation, traffic study she was sent related to the proposed St.Anthony Church vacation, Whitworth Ave S between S and suggested that a new study be conducted. Ms. Bean also expressed her 4th St&Parallel Alley(VAC- desire for the church to create a site plan prior to vacating Whitworth Ave. S. 00-003) CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Minutes of June 11, Approval of Council minutes of June 11,2001. Council concur. 2001 Appointment: Planning Mayor Tanner reappointed Natalie Dohrn,3815 Monterey P1.NE,Renton, Commission 98056; Eugene Ledbury, 511 Stevens Ct.NW,Renton, 98055; and Rosemary Quesenberry,3609 SE 18th Ct.,Renton, 98059; to the Planning Commission for three-year terms expiring on 6/30/2004. Council concur. CAG: 01-066,2001 Street City Clerk reported bid opening on 6/11/2001 for CAG-01-066,2001 Street Overlay,ICON Materials Overlay; six bids;project estimate$691,826.56; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder,ICON Materials,Inc., in the amount of$628,300.92. Council concur. Development Services: One Development Services Division recommended removal of the restrictive Valley Place Rezone,Removal covenants associated with the 1981 One Valley Place Properties Rezone(R-81- of Restrictive Covenants(R- 047)which state that future development of the site be subject to the Planned 81-047) Unit Development(PUD)process. Refer to Planning&Development Committee. Executive: Sister City Executive Department requested authorization to establish a sister city Establishment with Cuautla, relationship with Cuautla,Jalisco,Mexico in order to improve understanding Jalisco,Mexico through cultural, educational and business exchanges with Cuautla residents. Refer to Community Services Committee. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. COUNCIL CONCUR. OLD BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval of Finance Committee Claim Vouchers 193584- 194002 and two wire transfers totaling Finance: Vouchers $2,935,208.82; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 32004- 32020 totaling $11,142.33. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning&Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Committee report on the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat appeal(PP-00-053 &AAD- Appeal:Heritage Renton Hill, 00-149). The record is quite voluminous for this appeal,with numerous Renton Hill Community audiotapes and an extensive written record. The Planning and Development Association(PP-00-053 & Committee has narrowed its inquiry to traffic safety issues and plans to author a AAD-00-149) letter to the Transportation Division concerning applicable City Codes which can be or were applied to the staff transportation analysis of this project and its impacts on the Renton Hill community. Specifically,the Committee is concerned about the safety of the intersection of S. 7th St. and Renton Ave. S., increased traffic on what amounts to one-way streets on the hill because of the need for on street parking,and the entrance to this plat. The Committee recommended these issues be addressed now because the platting statute requires the City Council to make a finding that the plat makes appropriate provisions for public safety and streets. June'18,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 193 Responding to Mayor Tanner's inquiry regarding the appropriateness of asking for staff study since this item is still under appeal,City Attorney Larry Warren explained that the letter to the Transportation Division as drafted does not ask for new information but asks for what codes are applicable and which ones were analyzed on the staff report. He emphasized that the Committee is asking_ for factual information only. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* In response to Councilman Parker's inquiry regarding the length of time needed for staff to respond to the letter,Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman responded that it will take approximately one week. *MOTION CARRIED. Community Services:Pavilion Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler asked for the cost of earthquake repairs to the Building Earthquake Damage Pavilion building,and inquired about the status of the retail brokerage services Repairs Cost Request contract for marketing the building. Mayor Tanner stated that he believed the retail brokerage services contract had expired; and said that he would provide her with information regarding the cost of repairs. ORDINANCES AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution#3511 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Public Works: Eastside Memorandum of Agreement by and between the City of Renton and King Interceptor Project,Memo of County for the Eastside Interceptor(ESI) Section 1 Capacity Restoration Agreement with King County Agreement,in order to establish the criterion by which the County's supplemental pipeline construction project will meet its overall objectives. MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED BY PARKER,COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED., Citizen Comment:Petersen— Councilman Persson reported receipt of a letter from Inez Petersen, 3306 Lake N 33rd P1 Condominium, Washington Blvd.N. #2,Renton,98056, stating that the owner of a Potential Parking Violations condominium located at 805/807 N. 33rd Pl.has enlarged the parking arrangement on her property without City approval. Ms.Petersen requested that,the property owner be required to comply with pertinent parking,loading and driveway regulations to legally establish new parking on her premises; and if approval cannot be granted,require the property owner to discontinue use of the non-compliant parking spaces. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Community Services: Public Councilman Persson commented on the poor sound quality of the public Address Systems Improvement address systems used at the ribbon cutting ceremony at the new Senior Center Request Rotary Sun Room and other venues at which City presentations are made. He asked that staff investigate improving the portable public address systems. AUDIENCE COMMENT Chris Clifford,2721 Talbot Rd. S.,Renton,98055, expressed his displeasure Citizen Comment: Clifford— with the City's handling of the closure of the Lande Feed Building and Lande Feed Building Closure, questioned why the building was not closed until Friday,when the City Declared Dangerous Building conducted its inspection on Wednesday. He stated that the inspection process was unfair and asked that Craig Lande be allowed to operate his store out of the front part of the building. . . . . APPROVED BY ' • •' .•• CITY COUNCIL Date 6.--/f" 6/ - .. : - PLANNING &DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT • • • • June 18, 2001 - - :: • . .:..:,::..._.: ... .:::...Herifa.::.e:RentouHill:Prelina" .P:lat=A -�eal .=': �_`: '_= ':; ': :::::°;:.:: :: `; ;;; _ :' : .- : ; :ileLUA-00.-05:3=DPP ECF=and LUA 00-149`'. .;`. !: .i , ,..: _... . ...... :,.:.. - : eferred:Febrt ::.`�12=Z00;�-� ; �. �' `�� ,,,; '_-�:-�: `: :;.��;:,-: = �: The record is quite voluminous for this appeal,with numerous audiotapes and an extensive . written record. The Planning and Development Committee has narrowed its inquiry to traffic . safety issues and plans to author a letter to the Transportation Division.conceming applicable - . . City Codes which can be (perhaps were) applied to the staff transportation analysis of this _ _ _ . _ _. project and its impacts on the Renton Hill community.-Specifically the Planning and • - - . Development Committee is concerned about the safety of the intersection of 7th and Renton - . -Avenue South, increased traffic on,wha't amounts to one-way streets on n the hill because of the - need for on street,parking; and the entrance to�this plat...:.; - _ The Planning and Development Committee recommends:these•issues be addressed now - • ,because the Platting statute requires:the;City Council to make a finding that the plat makes - appropriate provisions for public.safety;and streets::';,°,: :_ • . . . . - . ll''7. 11j. . • Kath r K lker=Wheeler,chair--- '` • •Tern Briere,V ce Chair . _ .• . - - . • Randy Corm n,Member ; : .VC%' Renton City Council Jesse Tanner,Mayor MEMORANDUM To: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department From: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Chair ea Planning &Development Committee of the Renton City Council Date: June 18, 2001 Subject: Transportation Safety Issues Associated with Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat The Planning and Development Committee has spent substantial time in hearing an appeal to the Hearing Examiner's decisions and recommendation on the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat. The Committee has several concerns, which can be primarily reduced to three transportation and safety issues. 1. The entrance and exit from this plat is a very unusual design which brings three roads together in a very odd intersection. 2. The intersection of 7th and Renton Avenue South is a four-way intersection, with three of the four legs of the intersection having stop signs. The fourth leg, which is a very steep uphill leg does not have a stop sign. The traffic from the plat would have to go through this intersection. 3. The rights-of-way are very narrow on Renton Hill, particularly on Cedar Avenue South and Renton Avenue South. Houses on the hill have been developed without adequate garage space, resulting in a large amount of street parking. The effect is that these two streets are reduced, in many places, to one lane roads in addition to being very steep. These three transportation concerns raise public safety issues. The Committee would like to know what existing City Codes, Rules or Regulations, whether original City Ordinances, or Codes adopted by reference, would apply to these areas. The Committee would also like to know whether or not these various Codes, Rules and Regulations have been applied to this plat and its transportation impacts. In addition the Committee would like to know whether the Growth Management Act or any other state code mandates approval of development in areas like this where there is concern about public safety and no reasonable means for the city to address the concern or require the developer to mitigate the concern. We ask.that you respond to this request as quickly as possible since the appeal has been pending for some time. 111, 901...2001 • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6501 ,ak . co, This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer ia?ebruary 26,2001 - - Renton City Council Minutes Page 55 that the City will do everything necessary to make sure that the use of the fan does not have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood. Mr.Dineen stated that it is difficult for the general public to research the City Code and development plans in order to field concerns about potential impacts from proposed neighborhood developments; and he suggested that the Development Services Department develop a checklist to assist lay people in their research of impacts such as fumes,noise,and traffic. Planning/Building/Public Works Department Administrator Gregg Zimmerman explained that projects that are reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee rarely are developed to the extent that the location of mechanical items is already known. Those additions are developed during the design phase and are reviewed upon submission of building plans and application for mechanical and electrical permits. Mr.Zimmerman explained that the exhaust fan would activate when the carbon monoxide level in the garage reaches a certain point. He detailed the acceptable and unacceptable levels of carbon monoxide and its effect on humans. Mr.Zimmerman said that the City is considering hiring a private consultant to assist in thoroughly reviewing the facts and to help in the testing of the carbon monoxide levels. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Appeal: Heritage Renton Hill, City Clerk Division submitted appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision Renton Hill Community regarding Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat(PP-00-053 &AAD-00-149); Association, (PP-00-053, & 57 single-family lots on 10.35 acres located in the vicinity of Beacon Way S., AAD-00-149) SE 7th Ct.,Jones Ave. S., and S. 7th St. Appeal filed by Renton Hill Community Association, accompanied by the required fee. Refer to Planning &Development Committee. CAG: 01-008, South City Clerk Division reported bid opening on 02/13/2001 for CAG-01-008, Downtown Water Main& South Downtown Water Main&Storm Sewer,Phase I; 16 bids;project Storm Sewer,Katspan estimate$1,079,726.98; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder,Katspan,Inc., in the amount of$915,166.77. Council concur. ' CAG: 01-002,Trailer City Clerk Division reported bid opening on 02/13/2001 for CAG-01-002, Mounted 500 KW Engine Trailer Mounted 500 KW Engine Generator Set; 3 bids;project estimate Generator Set, Simpson Power $108,328.50; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the Products low bidder, Simpson Power Products,Ltd.,in the amount of$105,157.38. Council concur. CAG: 99-082,City Hall Community Services Department submitted CAG-99-082, City Hall Parking Parking Garage Access Ramp, Garage Access Ramp; and recommended approval of the project, authorization Gary Merlino Const Co for final pay estimate in the amount of$18,222.29,commencement of 60-day lien period,and release of retained amount of$85,592.40 to Gary Merlino Construction Company,Inc.,contractor,if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Development Services: Development Services Division requested approval to hire a contract employee, Plumbing/Mechanical at a cost of$32,000,to provide building inspection and plan review services for Inspector Contract Employee four months while a Plumbing/Mechanical Inspector is on medical leave. Refer Temporary Hire to Finance Committee. • • t., CITY C RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA DILL AI#: 4. ct. SUBMITTING DATA: FOR AGENDA OF: 02/26/2001 Dept/DivBoard....City Clerk Staff Contact Marilyn Petersen AGENDA STATUS: Consent XX SUBJECT: Public Hearing Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision: Ordinance Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Resolution File No.PP-00-053 and AAD-00-149 Old Business EXHIBITS: New Business A. City Clerk's letter Study Session B. Appeal(02/08/01) Other C. Request for Reconsideration&Response(02/12/01) D. Hearing Examiner's Report&Decision(01/25/01) RECOMMENDED ACTION: I APPROVALS: Refer to Planning and Development Committee I Legal Dept Finance Dept Other FISCAL IMPACT: N/A Expenditure Required Transfer/Amendment.... Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated SUMMARY OF ACTION: Appeal filed on 2/8/01 by Renton Hill Community Association,represented by Ruth Larson,accompanied by required fee. Ij 44i t .� CITY OF RENTON L ` City Clerk Jesse Tanner,Mayor Marilyn J.Petersen February 15, 2001 APPEAL FILED BY: Renton Hill Community Association represented by Ruth Larson RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision 1/25/2001 on Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat, File No. LUA-00-053, PP, ECF and LUA-00-149, AAD. To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Heritage Renton Hill request for preliminary plat has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F., within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeals.and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 19, 2001 in the 7th floor conference room of the Renton Municipal Building, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,98055. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Attached is a copy of the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held. by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. Copies of the appeal are available in the City Clerk office. For additional information or assistance,please feel free to call. Sincerely, Marily . tersen City Cler Cable Manager Attachment cc: Parties of Record (156) Neil Watts, Development Services Elizabeth Higgins, Development Services Fred Kaufman, Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)235-2501 /FAX(425)235-2513 60 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer City of Renton Municipal Code:•l itle IV,Chapter 8, Section 110 - Appeals 4-8-110C3 Any appeal shall be filed in writing. The written notice of appeal shall fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law which exist in the record of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief. (Ord. 4353, 6-1-92) 4-8-110C4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110E8 Unless an ordinance providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Clerk upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen(14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council-Procedures: 1. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 2. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 3. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report,the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required,the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the appellant. In the absence of any entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25- 93) 5. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report,the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 6. Findings and Conclusions Required: If,upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to Section RMC 4-1-050F1 and after examination of the record,the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record,it may remand the preceding to Examiner for reconsideration,or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 7. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to Section RMC 4-1-050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record,the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 8. Decision Documentation: In any event,the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 9. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Mr.Ken Adams Mr.James Baker Mr.&Mrs.Thomas Barr 706 Renton Avenue So. 524 Mill Avenue So. 802 High Street - -- Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Ms.Dianne Beatty Mr.&Mrs.Brian Beckman Mr.Pat Bellport 1730 SE 7th Court 435 Cedar Avenue So. 411 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Barton Bennett Mr.Douglas Bergquist Mr. &Mrs.Mike Bishop 1807 SE 7th Court River Ridge Estates Homeowners Assoc. 326 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 1801 SE 7`h Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Dino Boscolo Mr. &Mrs. Claude Bouchard Ms.Ruth Bradley, 915 High Avenue So. 1506 Beacon Way South 709 High Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Douglas Brandt Ms.Darlene Bressan Mr.&Mrs.John Burkhalter 610 Renton Avenue So. 901 High Avenue So. 901 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Margaret Burkhalter Ms.Dana Calhoun Ms.Eleanor Cantrell 715 Jones Avenue So. Mr.Robert Davis 1416 South 7th Renton WA 98055 433 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Ralph Carter Mr.Timothy Cogger Mr.&Mrs.Barry Conger 630 High Avenue South 609 Grant Avenue South 1301 South 9th Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bert Custer Ms.Gina Custer Ms.Cheryl Danza 714 Cedar Avenue So. 1209 South 7th Street 706 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Robert Elliot Mr. &Mrs.Quentin Ellis Mr.Dale Fountaine _ 300 Renton Avenue So. 715 High Avenue South 617 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Don Faull Sheri Frank/Grant Anderson Mr. &Mrs.W.Free 804 Renton Avenue So. 426 Cedar Avenue South 1012 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 /,`a n\t=in-wr=` Aril-It-nee- I -1'rrnl- ` Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Mr.Frank Gallacher Mr.Bob Gambill Ms.Lily Garfield • 719 Jones Avenue South Seattle Public Utilities, 10th Floor 265 Maiden Lane East Renton WA 98055 710 Second Avenue Seattle WA 98112 Seattle WA 98104-1714 Ms.Patricia Gilroy Ms.Rosemary Grassi Ms. Kathy Griffin 535 Renton Avenue So. PO Box 1188(422 Cedar Av. S) 1425 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Ann Grinolds Mr.Manly Grinolds Mr.Roger Grinolds 324 Cedar Ave. So. 1223 South 3`d Street 330 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.John Guiliani Ms.Bambi Gunderson Mr. Russ Haag 1400 South 7th Street 1107 South 4th Street 704 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Cynthia Halse Mr.Frederick Hartley Mr. &Mrs.Dan Hemenway 15404— 167th Place SE 701 High Avenue South 1712 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98058 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Sharon Herman/Chuck Lyden Ms.Pat Hodgson Hopkins and Chombers 711 Jones Avenue South 620 Renton Avenue South PO Box 691 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Margaret Houser Diane Hyatt/Terry Stange Mr. &Mrs.W.Jaeckel 2331 SE 8th Place 720 Cedar Avenue South Falcon Ridge Newsletter Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 2342 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bill Johnson Mr.&Mrs.Phil Johnson Mr.Wayne Jones,Jr. 1425 Beacon Way South 350 Renton Avenue South Lakeridge Development Inc. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 PO Box 146 Renton WA 98057 Ms. Agnes Koestl Mr. &Mrs.Ken Kraght Ms. Ruth Larson 428 Renton Avenue South 527 Renton Avenue South Renton Hill Community Associar:-2-. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 714 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Randy Lamke Ms.Elizabeth Lewis Mr. &Mrs.Dwayne Liston 415 Cedar Avenue South 1525'South 6th Street 17703— 114th Place SE Renton WA 98055' Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 , 1'/I\ dsNI TT 3: Address Lahelc ; + 4 Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Ms.Barbara Lux Mr.Robert Lux Mr. Carl Maas • 1412 South 9th Street - 1410 South 7th Street Ms.Kathy McGatlin Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 1724 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Mr.Louis Malesis Ms.Mary MacDonald Mr.&Mrs.Michael Mack 1718 SE 7th Court 802 Cedar Avenue South 906 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Keith Moberg Mr. Eric Mastor Mr.&Mrs.Don Miles 627 High Avenue South 808 Renton Avenue South 532 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Roseanne Nolan Mr. &Mrs.Clint Morse Marianne Nicol/Mark Johnson 2048 SE 8th Place 525 High Avenue South 316 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Cathy O'Neill Ms.Elsa Norris Mr.Bentley Oaks 575 High Avenue South 1513 South 7th Street 1321 South 7`h Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Paul Ossorio Mr. &Mrs.Deone Perlatti Mr. Gino Petralia 708 Renton Avenue South 1520 South 9th Street 813 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Janice Potter/Mr.Dwight Potter Ms.Josephine Potter Ms.Paula Provin Falcon Ridge Association 1314 South 7th Street 712 Renton Avenue South 2411 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055-3065 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Dana Reiman Mr.Wayne Rossman Mr. George Salurmini 1410 Beacon Way South 533 Grant Avenue South 519 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Slapnick Mr. &Mrs.Louis Sutter Mr.Rick Thibodeau 531 Grant Avenue South 721 High Street 1000 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs. Lynn Thrasher Mr.Mario Tonda Joe Vanderpool/Elsa Norris 904 Grant Avenue South Mr.Victor Tonda 1513 South 7th Street Renton WA 98055 1308 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 7 ` A.VE1=Y Address LahA(k La= Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Mr.Jack Wardell Mr.&Mrs.Larry Welch Mr.James Wilhoit 523 Renton Avenue South - -- 310 Renton Avenue South - 910 Grant Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Rich Yarbrough Mr.Dean Yasuda Mr.Dick Zugschwerdt 338 Renton Avenue South 2058 SE 8th Place 802 Grand Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Bill Collins Mr.Kevin Oleson Mr. &Mrs.Mark DeWitt 420 Cedar Avenue South Renton School District#403 501 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Transportation Department Renton,WA 98058 1220 North 4th Street Renton WA 98055 Mark&Kimberly K.Mehlhaff David&Victoria Miles Rod Kunnanz 532 Grant Avenue South 1510 South 6th Place 810 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Marty L.Zander Dan O'Rourk Debra Jones 806 High Avenue South 501 Cedar Avenue South 1800 SE 7th Court Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 PO Box 146 Renton WA 98057 A.F.and Nancy Alexander Steve Johnson Robert Mountjoy 1518 Cedar Avenue South 1514 Beacon Way South 810 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Debra Goltiani Darlene Moore Jason Donahue 811 Jones Ave.South 1511.So.9th St. 419 Cedar Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Newell/McSherry Elizabeth Prescott Mr.&Mrs. Gerald Hanger 815 Renton Ave.So. 435 Cedar Ave.So. 905 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ruth Helsey Rachel Johnson/Mykel Papke Resident Marvin Wright 620 Grant Ave.So. 707 Renton Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Camron Smith Grant Anderson Roger Knutson 2140 SE 8`h Place 426 Cedar Ave. So. 805 Jones Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 .��'� £\J T-4V Arlrlracc I ahcic I acar t Smooth Feed Sheets"' Use template for 5160® Mr.&Mrs.Richard Weitz Mr.&Mrs.Johnson Hugo Chaves 718 Renton Ave.So. 1333 Beacon Way So. 326 Cedar Ave.So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Gilroy Paul Lammer Jack Holt 1316 So. 10th Street 15234 SE 176t P1. 1517 So. 6th St. Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98055 Resident Residents Mr. &Mrs.Mike Fulfer 300 Renton Ave.So. 316 Renton Ave.So. 1729 SE 7`h Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Egan Mary Breda Jeff Fettinger/Martin Cibis 810 Grant Ave. So. 900 Grant Ave.So. 604 Grant Ave.So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Steve Briggs Tomac Patricia Gilroy 600 Grant Ave. So.‘ 912 Grant Ave.So. 535 Renton Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Melanie Thompson Resident Resident 1307 So.9th 626 Renton Ave.So. 1724 SE 7`h Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Resident Betsy Munson Norman Perry 801 Jones Ave.So. 623 Cedar Avenue So. 1224 South 7th Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Nancy Liston 1518 Beacon Way So. Renton WA 98055 • �r'7/1\^Tl A%1Y"T3111 ArlArnrr I onnl.- I ccor =7 1 C.(" Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Ann'M.Gygi r;mifer Steig Hillis Clark Martin&Peterson Peterson Consulting Engineering 500 Galland Building 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, 1221 Second Avenue Suite 200 Seattle,WA 98101-2925 Kirkland, WA 98033 Ryan Fike Dana Calhoun Bennett Development 433 Cedar Avenue S 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Ste. 100-A Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue,WA 98004 Larry Hobbs Transportation Planning& Bill Collins Engineering,Inc. 420 Cedar Avenue S 2223 112`h Avenue NE, Ste. 101 Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue,WA 98004 Mark McGinnis Jeff Schultek Geotech Consultants 613 Grant Avenue S 13256 NE 20th St., #16 Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue,WA 98005 Linda McManus 530 Renton Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 John Nelson Peterson Consulting Engineering 4030 Lake Washington Blvd. NE, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Mark Mehlhaff 532 Grand Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Wendy Fulfer 1729 SE 7th Ct. Renton,WA 98055 Mike Fulfer 1729 SE 7th Ct. Renton, WA 98055 • Mark Johnson 316 Renton Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 AAVERY Address Labels Laser : _ • APPEAL HEARING EXAMINER '1 CITY OF RENTON WRITTEN APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION TO RENTON CITY �j G v,40Qi ive° 60-c FEB/0 FILE NO. L , a��UNCIL GC/9 QQ- /�� A,�p A 3 � RECEIVED APPLICATION NAME: /"�L�/yrow ///LG Cr Oti( slit ON/T y HS�Sr7�,R is jY (, ERK'S OFFICE The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated f�/�), ,25 20 D/ . 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: REPRESENTATIVE (IF ANY): Name: /S9 k-9-- Name: 7P0 ry G A/2 Sl24) Address: 7/// Address: /I,/ 5.0 Q -Few j c .) 4r2i4 9 iV T D,L.) Lt. • Telephone No. 42 5 z 729O Telephone No. 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based: FINDING OF FACT: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's report) No. Error: / i% 12 /4) 79-// / irg C%Pe5-22 ePo u /firs• J /Correction: CONCLUSIONS: No. Error: A5 L/7 'U iti 7w/ 477-R�,i. ff-.n tic Ur i R-A177s CGLLYY� /4---';,-,<2L/'/ �/117' 'LC.Gr�I Correction: OTHER: No. Error: /6r6-6 I iJ Th'E ,7-7-49c/I .z2 PoCu l /orr 1'S CL:J �!Y/4LCCY'w.GCC�1sscv Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief: Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: ADDRESS AND RECOMMEND SOLUTION T._, - Other THE CONVERGENT SIGHT DISTANCE PROBLEM IN THE 500 BLOCKOF RENTON AVEN J SOUTH,OR DENY PLAT REQUEST UNTIL THIS AND TRAFFIC PROBLEM IS RESOLVED. O App ant/Repr sa nt"ti�e�nab V�e Z D�J I NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, of the Renton Municipal Code, and Section 4-5-110F, for specific procedures. • • CIT ,.)F RENTON , . { ‘ Hearing Examiner • Jesse Tanner,Mayor • Fred J.Kaufman February 12;2001 • • • • Ruth Larson,President • • • •• Renton Hill Community Association • • 714 High Avenue S - • :Renton,WA 98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration,Renton Heritage Hill • . • Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings . • • • - . LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF • • Dear Ms:Larson: . This office received a request for reconSideration regarding this matter and the response follows. •• • . First,this office does not discOnathat there Will be impacts on the community,both short-lived • impacts and.long-term impactS. TheshortZlived(which'itSelfa a relative term) impacts will be. the concrete impacts of development,-including construction traffic and noise. The long-term . . impacts will be increased traffic and noise fmt,*liew...residentS;:,That doeS not mean that those impacts will create an overall untoward iiiipaa,4Ailiied for a SEPA determination of • signifiCance. - • • • •; - . • ....•This office will.generally:address the concern*in ilie:tnanner used by the request. • • • ; Page 8,#21: The issue was the proposed reduction in hatilingtruClaripS due to a change in • grading plans. 'The applicant proposed to more closely balance the cut and fill: The change in grading plans is now COnSideredpart'of the application and cannot be altered without submitting a • new,applicatiOn. The party that ultimately develops the site is not relevant to the permit as reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would be bound by the application as it was reviewed and approved. Stafford Crest as well aS a liumber of large apartment complexes have : • all resulted in construction traffic similar to if not larger than the construction traffic anticipated. It is not so significant as to require the preparation of an environmental impact Statement • • • . • Page 8,#22:The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the documents and bolstered by the testimony There will be additional traffic,and there will he a fraction of a second delay at the Signalcontrolledintersection which will not be noticeable:-:The LOS•for.the Various intersections,which is currently excellent,will not be changed other than that •fractional delay. There is no question that the hill and its various routes are quite steep,but the • • entire record demonstrates that traffic can negotiate ifsatisfaetorilY. Page 9,#24:.Again,the record demonstrates that the hill is-noyv negotiated by current residents and can be similarly negotiated by residents.' Staff supported the applicant's studies that the sight distance is acceptable..The record is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearing or hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this point • • • 1901-2001 . . 1055 South Grady Way-Renton;Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6515 . • , • J . . • • Ruth Larson Page 2 Page 10,#34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Page 10,#38: As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need,and if the roadway deteriorates, it will be scheduled for repair whatever the`surface or subsurface conditions. Page 12;#9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with,the other issues presented.on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants • in this decision. • • Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes and the summarized testimony. This office will not - comment on testimony. Page 24,#18: The construction of the oycerpassds=iiieans.tbat access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains as-it had been;iir the pas ' It may be inconvenient to reach or. leave the hill,but no more so than for otlrerresidents of South.Renton when trains run through town. Page 24,#25: The City has?a;`set of adopted policies on how`tr'ac,i4 4be evaluated. Those policies were utilized,andthere°is e`a act ta=atel'ihe traffc. As a matter of poliCY review, - this office attempted to reduce traffic impacfs o some,.extent by reducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to.the.Council w it.1 ej ni+d neretechnical issuesvand dealt with the more personal impacts of the traffic on those residents atong the commute roue. This recommendation also went against stated City Council pol ey„jfi.`at density.reduction by the Hearing Examiner.was •not generally appropriate.`It seemed tl at in`tliese circumstances;the balancing of impacts • - demanded a reduction even°if that reduction was modest: <A k • Page 25;#26: There will be more traffic.•`Tji tis ,clea lystated„Tl e way.LOS is calculated shows that there is capacity for more cars,an that`LO05*Hip suffer. Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notiee4he changer.Tha,again, is not refuted. There is no, : doubt that residents will notice more traffic. There will be even less traffic with the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the:proposal . • and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. . . Page 25,.#28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in• terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills and those near Group Health have steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads: The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting . terrain features: The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8.to allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to- allow a 50 lot.plat. If the City Council chooses, it May modify its adopted policies and/or:change the Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed developmentit:this: • time. - Ruth Larson Page'3 ' In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported problems. Butthe record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton Hill residents demonstrates that this - development can be accommodated,although it will affect,but not adversely.(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill. As this office noted at the public hearing, there is no doubt that if some future development were proposed,these new residents will be right - alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now living on Renton Hill...That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannot be accommodated: The record reflects that it can be accommodated. • In closing,there is no reason to alter or reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal Of the Recommendation to the City Council to:approve the plat. • • Since this office is aware that an appeal,has<alreadr been fled with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original"decision,there.is no.reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any;additional assistance,.pleaseifeel free'to write. Sincerely, • Fred J.Kaufman '' , Hearing Examiner • ' ' ` . FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner si.. , p> Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer • • Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development ServicesV ' Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services . City Clerk Parties of Record ' :• CITY OF RENTON Itoa a,fyi FEB 0 8 200i RECEIVED CITY CLERKS S OFFICE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill efort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was.---.--. done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be, noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum to DCH2O, including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. "Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated‘that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. = Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are-= 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr. Nelson stated that as a result of his analysis and actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony of those who deal with the convergence zone on a daily basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than. twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25, #25: Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was - reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic — NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes sure Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some accountability to the tax paying residents who are forced to "adjust"to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building -. moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ..-.. (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So. Renton Wa. 98055 6 4 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with _ them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. _ The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency_ these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I,realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres'was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. - My solution would be to rezone to larger building lots with fewer homes and have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a 25% increase in size and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations. Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic systems. All were old and extremely high maintenance. River • Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System. That also allowed four new homes to be built and three or four more are in the planning stages to be built on the North side of the pipeline. Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an "oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider on the titles of each property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light and air; to facilitate adequate provision for water, sewerage, parks and recreation areas, sites for schools and schoolgrounds and other public requirements; to provide for proper ingress and egress; to provide for the expeditious review and approval, of proposed subdivisions which conform to zoning standards and local plans and policies; to adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note: Throughout this chapter, the phrase "this_act" has been changed to "this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex.s. c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58. 08. 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- 1981 c ,293: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected. " [1981 c 293 § 16. ] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 2 RCW 58.17.110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. _ (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82. 02 . 050 through 82 . 02. 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82.02. 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 2 of 2 NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17: See RCW 36.70A. 900 and 36.70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 • FEB 0 8 200i ?E cEIVED ;LERK'S COFF;C Request to add as addendum to Exhibit EXH2O Or given Exhibit status and Numbered Accordingly This request is made because Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete but weight has been given to it in the Findings and Conclusions of the Hearing Examiners Report, Dated January 25, 2001. Submitted by: Renton Hill Community Association February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Heritage Renton Hill Stopping sight distance exhibit Renton Hearing examiners EXH 20 Request for adding the following information as an addendum to EXH2O (or assigning a new exhibit number to this information). Reason for request: This exhibit was not available for review until the hearing and could not be addressed adequately without a reasonable amount of time to study it. This exhibit is incomplete, as it does not include convergence information or measurements. A great deal of weight was given to this exhibit in the determination of the feasibility of this project, we are requesting a review of exhibit EXH 20 and the admission of the enclosed documents to the project file as an addendum. EXH 20 has one vehicle heading North on Renton Ave. S. There is no need for this driver to stop, as there are no cars shown going South on Renton Ave. S. The convergence point of two cars is the critical piece of information missing in EXH 20.The sight distance problem is not great by the time you reach the crest of Renton Ave. S. (where the vehicle in this exhibit is located), it is prior to the crest for drivers coming both up and going down the hill at this location at the same time. On Saturday February 3, 2001, at 2pm, the following people measured sight distance on Renton Ave. S. Bill Collins, Keith Moberg, Bill Larson and Ruth Larson. Starting at the North property line of 531 Renton Ave. S. we marked, with chalk every 10 feet both North and South. The camera was placed on the end of a length of wood 3.50' long and with the wood placed on the roadbed; pictures were taken at 3' 6" height (the eye height used on exhibit EXH 20 plus one inch from the base of the camera to the lens). Keith Moberg held a 14' board marked in one-foot increments. Bill Larson was the photographer, Bill Collins checked location on the down hill side and Ruth Larson checked location on the up hill side. The first picture was taken 20' apart, 10 feet up the hill and 10 feet down the hill. Every 20 feet (10 up - and 10 down) a picture was taken. The last picture was at taken at 300 feet apart. Bill Larson at the 3'7"height (with the camera) could not see Keith Moberg at all by 280 feet apart. Keith Moberg is 5' 9" tall. A car at the Keith Moberg location and a car at the Bill Larson location would not see each other. If each were traveling 25 miles per hour per hour, according to exhibit 18, it would take 145 feet each to stop. That is 10 feet each more than available. This is the convergence point. While appreciating the fact that Mr. Nelson is a Civil Engineer and much weight must be given to his statements, if his exhibit is not complete then it should not be considered to contain all of the information needed to make a decision on the sight distance/convergence problem on Renton Ave. So. Please place into the file the photographs presented. We are also submitting two overlays of Exhibit EXH 20. Our position is further clarified by placing an overlay at the 300-foot mark on the far right side of this exhibit, lining up the vehicle on the road line (to the right of the 3% mark). This alters the line of sight a great deal and more clearly shows the problem. You can take this further by placing the second overlay, reversed, on the road line at either the 145' mark and/or the 170' line, using a ruler to indicate line of sight from the drivers perspective . This demonstrates the problem with two vehicles converging. The overlay was not altered in any way, nor was the exhibit. Please place into the file the overlays and copy of EXH 20. Requested by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So. Renton Wa, 98055 •tf'"7--•-:—.....7":"4-1 — I-.. .... .).,........,..• . ..•'' ill ;11111.111.1".•:.:::• !.:..,g....t t1/4sttl•t.-T.4. , .7,:..... I il -- ill ' ' • lir - - , •4 1.1%, , ••••.•:• 1 ,. Aft• . .. . —: . o. ...--" --••• . 1 .... • .--- . . . . "' AP;' • .• . .11.. • I.,. • . • . " ' s .-. '• ... .. _,, • it,.. 4. ; .'.4 *. .Iii..., . , ' • 11.. . I .,••• ..,,, ',. ••,...•.4. V„,'.t''• I 0 1°1'41 C• • . • . . . •. . II % •. • 1 ... •... I . N . . . 'T ir • . ... .,. . ---- --: .. . - :.. • .,• --, . . - . . . . --...... . . . . ) . . • . • . .." - • "it-. . . e . . .• , . . . , . . 4•"::.i. . . . . . . . , ,•. _. . / Oa • & d-Q / 991g , :. .t,,,• ..4.it,,.! ..",.. .1. ,........ - ...) • '' . •A.' '. ‘...',s• �. _1. .. • :. ♦• P 1 It 0 6:17 . . . :•. . .... •,:,:., , ,_. . . . , ,... ,. :- - •,•-•!.. et's-'; -• -_ • . • - 4 ' ' .....', • , • .- • !..4 ': . ..........•;i. ''',..,,-.. ,„ ,•r•-.2.i...,-,•- - - -- *,-,-s- '---- • ,,...., ____,‘„,.., . . .s., ...,-- ' i -." ', --7,•• -.. ,it i - 4 _ 1*-••••:..12., ' dr'ft -,/ .. e ., -- i V•%.1-0". -," • ... •r... .,...4.-....-„;.... .._. , . . : . . ......... _...... . ;- • , ,.. - : 1... , tti. 0 I- ....4. • • .r - • . . . . • . • . - • . __• -. _ - • --..• • . -• , - . . . . .. _ . - • . .• - • •.‘- . ---. . ,.. . . • . . .• - . . -,.... • •'s- 4L"...,-1. .;•;:•nr.:?,--if:•-•,-**,•:.,-4t-. - ' , -..,: - . -.4!.._.1i•••=-,-,4...,.... . i't••• .r. •%, , -. - • • '' — -•••4446g,•• - '--44.1.4-...,4.,;..::::........ . ..• - -- - • •• 1.111' I—,- - - • , -- - - s c. -. •2 . •''• t . • i ,., . •• -,.....r.r.„ '''' /1-.. j I.. ...,,a g .of,•‘.-•,.„: or - , •Z3.11 ,7,.1 i if-••• : •' .--.."" . ' N • • ' • : • •.: ;:`,7:•••• ..,.•-;,...: Ar_ •.‘ • •..•- ' r ..• . .. r • , - 4- 4111P. • • • I . . • ... 4. ‘ t• .• .. . . ..,, ••• • . ... .... .. . 1-... • .• 4 . . e 00 / •: .-,..q:. ..,... ..:.1.•`Vs.! . , • • . , r 1 . -.. • ! , - • • . • . • . • • ., . - ._ 11;e7 Par I • • ; 111 ( • • 1,‘"'• (IS t4k.:•; PCIld N..v. ... , ...: po9G. , 4. eff 2 ...... 1,.., . ..,....• 4,41'V 1 V:'% .. . • t • ,....41 J...4: .,c . 410111r / . - . i k ... a.. / . - , - . ., • • •• • ...-.4, %III .- - --•• . _ . .• _ , :•••. .. ..,-,.••. . „ .... . • . . . . . •• .•.. . .. • . . .. • •. • - - ‘ . - \ • . . .. . . _ . . . . ... •. -... . . • . • .... . —...... . .._. . . • . ....... ,_. . .:......_ . .. .... - • .. .. .. .........•• • . c. . . — J ....- . ... ' , . .m. ...s. ....i r. . ... - • .,'"' . ., ... . -• .... .1 .... .I' '•' . . . lli . 1 •°°t• : . TN/5 ,7,49kKed-D C#9k' . . _, t ThGE lv mf c • • • - - • r t f- • ` 3 .A•MS. ••,� . P460 7o f 8 • Z40' 11. f • s . (_ 0 1 4 • • C illI • i III l • Please remove EXH 20 and two overlays from the envelope. Place one overlay on EXH 20 with the vehicle placed beneath the bold 300 at the right of the exhibit, lining up the broken line (that indicates the road level) to the right of the —3%. Using a ruler at the e e lev the vehicle, note the site line. Place the second overlay (revers rev el of the vehicle is going up hill) at the 145' mark, again lining up the ed so broken line. Check the site line with a ruler. This visual is representative of the convergent area sight distance problem. I I \ .—*- 0 A •.g ,�. gig Zvi 4k - - S �' ,I' le 1 t1� — III I ' illiffirlititiiefiffilMitilik suarrremesmatemater Sentagia molt. ti is • • January 25 ,2001 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPELLANT: Ruth Larson Appeal of ERC's Determination re Heritage Renton Hill File No.: LUA00-149,AAD LOCATION: Renton Hill, southeast of intersection of Beacon Way S with SE 7th Ct,Jones Ave S,and South 7th Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Subdivide an approximately 450,846 square feet(10.35 acre) property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family homes SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appeal of SEPA determination PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Appellant's written request for a hearing and examining the available information on file,the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the November 14,2000 appeal hearing. The official record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday,November 14,2000,at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the appeal, Exhibit No.2: Yellow land use file, LUA00- the Examiner's letter setting the hearing date,a map, 053,PP,ECF,containing the original application,proof photographs,and other documentation pertinent to the of posting,proof of publication and other appeal. documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Vicinity Map Exhibit No.4: Photo of Renton Ave S Exhibit No.5: Photo of telephone pole 6" from curb Exhibit No. 6: Photo of telephone pole 12-1/2" from curb Exhibit No.7: Photo of curb and gutters Exhibit No. 8: Photo of garbage truck on street Exhibit No.9: Photo of garbage truck on street Exhibit No. 10: Photo of dip in street Exhibit No. 11: Photo of fire hydrant Exhibit No. 12: Ruth Larson's testimony Exhibit No. 13: Aerial photo from City Archives Exhibit No. 14: Plat map Exhibit No. 15: Phase I Environmental Site Exhibit No. 16: Jennifer Steig letter to Bennett Assessment Development Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 2 Parties present: Appellant: Ruth Larson Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Representing applicant: Ann M. Gygi,Attorney Hillis Clark Martin & Peterson 500 Galland Building 1221 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98101-2925 Applicant: Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 Representing City of Renton: Zanetta Fontes,City Attorney Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Ms. Larson, appellant herein, reviewed each item contained in her written appeal of the ERC's Staff Report dated October 17,2000, and explained the reasons for her objections in each case. Particular emphasis was given to Renton Avenue South. Ms. Larson used photos to show the close proximity of telephone poles to the curbs,the narrowness of the street,the dips in the street and the tendency of garbage trucks to drive toward the center of the street. She explained her concerns regarding safety issues when large trucks are using the street considering the narrowness of the street,the steep grade, and the limited sight distances. Becky Lamke, 415 Cedar Ave S, Renton, WA 98055 expressed concern that the number of trips per day per single family household has been underestimated, based on informal surveys of her neighbors. Ms. Lamke questioned exactly what the landscaping would consist of in the 15-foot buffer along the north property boundary. She concluded by stating that the construction vehicles should be required to come onto the site off of Puget Drive. It is not considered safe for busses to come up the hill, so it should not be safe for large trucks to do so. Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 gave an overview of the nature of the project, its current status, and its progress through the ERC. Regarding the reason for the setbacks on Lot#35, Ms. Higgins stated the geotechnical engineer's report commented that the slopes at the rear of this lot are excessive. They recommended that the setback at the rear of Lot#35 be increased from . Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 3 20 to 25 feet in order to further to protect the slope. Using a photograph from the City Archives, she clarified why an exemption to the requirement in the Critical Areas Ordinance that slopes above a certain grade be protected was granted to the project. Ms. Higgins also addressed the issues of groundwater, responsibility for landscaping, regulation of fences, and parks constructed on the property. Ms. Higgins discussed the issue of Metro service on Renton Hill. She also explained the State of Washington Growth Management Act requirements and how the City is required to plan for housing. The City Council has committed to provide as much single family housing as possible and not meet their target with apartments. Regarding the requirement that a note be placed on the face of the plat about former mining activities, Ms. Higgins stated this is the City's way of insuring that a property owner is made aware of a potentially hazardous situation. Mining activity took place throughout the city, and there are very rudimentary maps of where these mine shafts might be.The note on the plat alerts the potential home owner to seek the consultation of a structural engineer and choose the construction method most appropriate for the site. The appeal hearing was adjourned at 12:30 pm.,to be continued on Thursday,November 16 at 9:00 a.m. ******************************** The continued appeal hearing opened on Thursday,November 16 at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Kayren Kittrick, Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 explained her role regarding Land Use Applications and how these applications are reviewed by her office. Ms. Kittrick stated that the Street Maintenance Plan requires that all arterials be evaluated annually and all other streets, which would include Renton Avenue S, be evaluated every two years. Ms. Kittrick explained traffic mitigation fees and how they are reviewed and collected, resources available for street repair, and hauling times as allowed by code. Ms. Kittrick reviewed intersection distances,how they are measured, and under what circumstances intersections should be 110 feet apart vs. 150 feet apart. She also discussed the transportation study provided by the applicant, including levels of service at S 7th Ct and access to Renton Hill overall. Regarding the foundation of Renton Avenue S.,Ms. Kittrick stated that recent borings show four inches of asphalt over crushed rock. On cross examination, Ms. Kittrick responded to questions raised by Ms. Larson in her appeal letter. Ann M. Gygi, attorney representing applicant, Hillis Clark Martin & Peterson, 1221 Second Ave, Seattle,WA 98101-2925 opened by reiterating that in a SEPA appeal it is appellant's burden to establish that the SEPA determination is clearly erroneous. This is a plat application that is based on an adopted comprehensive plan and zoning that slated this property for development at an urban scale. This parcel is among those that the City of Renton legislated to accommodate a certain amount of urban growth under the Growth Management Act. The general impacts associated with the conversion are impacts of the legislative decision. The specific and unique impacts of the plat proposal are what should be the subject of the SEPA consideration at this stage. Mark McGinnis, Geotech Consultants, 13256 NE 20th St. #16, Bellevue, WA 98005 reviewed his education, training and experience as a geotechnical engineer. He summarized what is contained in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by his firm regarding coal mines under the site, including risk of excessive settlement, localized subsidence, and mine gas emissions. Mr. McGinnis discussed the mitigation measures recommended in the Geotechnical Report to address the two worked coal mine seams under the property. He stated that it is his professional opinion that the recommended measures will adequately mitigate Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 4 any potential risks associated with the two worked coal seams. Mr. McGinnis described the steep slope associated with Lot#35 in the northeast corner of the site. His firm investigated the slope, looked for slope problems, and did a test pit for exploration in the area to assess soil conditions near the top of the slope. Based on these observations, a 25 foot building setback from the crest of the slope is recommended. In addition to the 25 foot setback, it is recommended that there be no clearing and grading within 10 feet of the top of slope. Larry Hobbs, Transportation Planning and Engineering, Inc.,2223 112th Ave NE, Suite 101, Bellevue, WA 98004 reviewed his background, education and training as a traffic engineer. Mr. Hobbs stated that safety issues were considered as part of the traffic study that was prepared for the project. The city provided the last three years worth of accident data in the area, and it was found that there were no accidents recorded on Renton Hill itself for this period of time. In checking the data for the last five years, it was found that there were three traffic accidents throughout all of Renton Hill. Two of these accidents involved one vehicle backing into another, and the third was a vehicle striking a parked vehicle. There were no injuries or fatalities in any of the reported accidents. The record of reported traffic incidents is one of the main indicators of safety on a street system. Mr. Hobbs stated that it is his opinion that there will not be any increase in traffic accidents in the Renton Hill area as a result of the proposed development. Residents of the area would most likely be aware of anything that may be deficient and would drive accordingly to compensate for that. New residents moving into the area would rapidly gain familiarity with the street system. Jennifer Steig, Peterson Consulting Engineers,4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Suite 200, Kirkland, WA 98033 gave a summary of her training, education and experience as a civil engineer. Ms. Steig described the conceptual grading plan her firm prepared for the site. Once grades are set, computer programs to come up with cut and fill volume. Based on the conceptual grading plan, there would be approximately 55,000 cubic yards of cut material and 19,000 cubic yards of fill. The applicant requested that we develop a plan with a closer balance so that all the cut and fill would be used on the site--there would not be any material hauled off the site as a result of grading. The conceptual plan was sent to a company used industry wide that has a computer program which can look at the site as it is graded in the conceptual plan and raise or lower the site in small increments to determine when a balance is reached. This information is used to develop a final grading plan for construction. In doing this, it was found that if the site is raised one foot from the conceptual grading plan,there would be a balance of the cut and fill material on the site. Based on further geotechnical studies, if the unsuitable fill were screened on site, the amount of fill that would need to be hauled off site could be reduced by approximately half. Ms. Steig discussed the number of truck trips that would be required to haul fill off the property based on the number of cubic yards of fill remaining. She explained under what conditions material must be worked so that it will be suitable for use in construction. In closing, Ms. Larson discussed the issues of preservation of vegetation and wildlife,compatibility of the new homes with the neighborhood, and the two crested vertical curves on Renton Ave S that do not meet city, county or state requirements for vertical curve design. Ms. Fontes, in closing, addressed issues raised by the appellant in the course of the hearing and discussed what the evidence has shown and what the process has been in each instance. Ms. Fontes reiterated that despite all the questions raised by the appellant, she has not shown evidence of significant adverse environmental impacts in any of these instances. Therefore,the decision made by the ERC must stand. . Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF - January 25,2001 Page 5 Ms. Larson responded that every question she asked was stated in the ERC's report. She responded to the questions because she felt there was clarification needed. Some of the issues have been clarified,others have not. In closing, Ms. Gygi stated that the applicant concurs with the City's closing arguments. She reviewed some of the issues raised by the appellant. Ms. Gygi summarized by stating that any project will alter the surrounding area. It is unrealistic to expect that there would be no effect from development. The law does not require that all adverse impacts be eliminated. If it did,no change in land use would ever be possible. Ms. Gygi reiterated. that the burden is upon the appellant to prove adverse environmental impacts,which has not been done in this case. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The appeal hearing closed at 11:30 a.m. SEPA APPEAL FINDINGS,CONCLUSION&DECISION FINDINGS: 1. The appellant,The Renton Hill Community Association,represented by Ruth Larson,filed an appeal of a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated(DNS-M) issued for a proposed Preliminary Plat that would divide approximately 10.35 acres of R-8 (Residential: 8 units per acre)zoned property into 57 lots. The appeal was filed in a timely manner. 2. In processing the preliminary plat application the City subjected the application to is ordinary SEPA review process. The City, in the course of and as a result of its SEPA review, issued a Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated for the project. The Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M)was conditioned by the City. 3. The subject site is located near the intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court and S 7th Street. The property is located immediately across from Philip Arnold Park. 4. The subject site a triangular parcel approximately 1.114 feet by 818 feet by 829 feet. 5. The subject site is approximately 10.35 acres or 450,846 square feet in area. 6. The subject site has rolling and descending terrain with some steeper slopes that were determined to be manmade as part of past mining or quarrying activity. An exemption from steep slope regulations was issued administratively since the steeper slopes are not natural. 7. The ERC imposed five conditions related to erosion control,three conditions imposing mitigation fees for fire, parks and roads,three conditions related to geotechnical issues for building construction/foundation work, subsidence notice due to potential coal mines and setbacks from steep slopes, one condition dealing with the potential discovery of hazardous materials, one dealing with traffic control for construction vehicles and finally, a condition for access across the Seattle Pipeline for emergency, secondary access. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 6 8. During the course of the public hearing staff noted that the gloss vehicle weight of 26,000 was not intended to vary from that posted on the road signs and should have matched that posted along the road. 9. The appellants objected to the determination. The appellants objected to or raised concerns about: a. Modification of street standards to allow narrower roads in the plat. b. Protection for abutting Falcon Ridge and River Ridge properties. c. Weight limit on Renton Avenue differing from posted standard (that was an error not intended to vary from posted limits). d. Width and emergency access relating to the Pipeline road. e. The steepness and width of Renton Avenue South. f. Exception to Critical Areas Ordinance that permitted grading on previously disturbed slopes. g. The amount of grading and number of heavy truck trips were not fully evaluated for impacts on the community. (the applicant altered the plans to balance the cut and fill and substantially reduce material movements) h. Impacts on River Ridge. i. Air quality impacts of vegetation removal. j. The alteration of the base elevation and its impacts on water. k. The removal of 92%of the trees and retention of 32 trees, if possible. 1. The maintenance of installed landscaping strips and islands. m. Impacts on the deer population that frequents the subject site. n. The manner in which the rezone was adopted. o. The character of the homes. p. The consistency of fencing. q. The impacts of new light on the community. r. The impact of internal pocket parks. s. The impact on the Renton Hill community by this plat. • Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings - File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 7 t. Traffic impacts of new residents and construction vehicles on the existing road surfaces and the community. u. The use of mitigation funding. v. The development does not follow the policies of the City of Renton. 10. The subject site is located near the northeast corner of Renton Hill just where it begins its drop down to Maple Valley and the Cedar River. 11. The majority of property in the vicinity of the subject site is zoned R-8 (Residential; 8 dwelling units per acre). It has been developed with single family homes. The slopes north of and below the subject site are Resource Conservation. 12. Immediately north of the subject site is the River Ridge development that contains 11 lots. The proposed development would share an access roadway that now serves only River Ridge. East of the subject site is Falcon Ridge,and it contains 80 lots. Falcon Ridge is accessed from the east by a private roadway. 13. The subject site is covered by what is probably second or third growth trees and shrubs. As noted,the site has been disturbed by some form of extraction or quarrying in the past. 14. The applicant did an historical survey of the subject site using aerial photographs as well reviewing the permit history of the site. There also were reviews of the mining data for the subject site and vicinity. There were also borings to determine the nature of the soils and to expose potential dumping of hazardous or other materials. The US Geological Survey maps for the area show a mine symbol, although it does not specify the type of mine but it appears it was used as a gravel quarry. 15. An evaluation was made of potential mine hazards. Both the more shallow and deeper mines are located 200 feet to 600 feet deep. It is anticipated that most linear shafts would have subsided over time. Any collapse events in "horizontal"mines would be distributed over those 200 to 600 feet, causing little surface subsidence. The greater potential for dangerous collapses are old airshafts or vertical access shafts. Some of these were filled with jumbled lumber or other debris till it"caught" on the sides of the shaft and then filled. The"caught" materials can decay over time and lead to collapses. In most cases these latter actions cannot be predicted. The geotechnical information and studies have instructions on dealing with these if they are discovered during construction. In addition,there are governmental agencies that deal with such openings,although obviously,an opening occurring can still take parties by surprise. The geotechnical report also has construction methods to make sure homes constructed in this development follow certain prescribed foundation techniques. 16. The applicant and City emphasized stability in dealing with lots near the edge of slope areas. The:only lot affected by steeper slopes is Lot 35 in the northeast corner of the subject site. Lot 35 will have a 25 foot setback for building and a 10 foot setback buffer that will remain undisturbed. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8 17. The Geotechnical information shows that areas that have 15%to 30%slopes are limited and most of the terrain is moderate and the underlying soils are suitable for construction. The ERC imposed conditions to deal with erosion. The professional analysis is that the measures suggested in the geotechnical report and the measures imposed by the ERC should prevent any problems. 18. There are approximately 250 to 300 acres of open space along the Cedar River and the slopes above the river in City ownership or open space. Although a large amount of this property is very steep slopes, there are a developed trail and park located along the river, and there are other level or more gentle areas. To accommodate roads and building pads,most of the vegetation will be removed from the subject site. It would appear that similar clearing probably has occurred for most development on the hill in the past with ornamentals replacing native trees. 19. There will be a loss of over 300 trees of six inches or greater in diameter. This loss of trees and habitat is an unfortunate but foreseeable result of development. Trees and vegetation may be maintained where possible. Open space tracts and ornamental landscaping generally occur as plats are developed and mature. 20. The project was reviewed for compliance with the Critical Areas Ordinance and the land clearing regulations. The exception approved for working on the man-made or altered slopes is not unusual and is a remedy available by code. Natural slopes will not be altered or would require special approvals. 21. The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort. This would have entailed a large number of dump trucks moving the materials to and from the subject site. The applicant further refined their grading plans and found that generally raising the elevation of the subject site by approximately one (1)foot would significantly reduce the needed trips. This would mean utilizing local materials on site in what is termed a "balanced cut and fill." There would still be export of unsuitable materials or debris that has been dumped on the subject site. It is not anticipated that raising the site by approximately one foot would create any problems with erosion or stability. The number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips. The trucks would meet load limit requirements of the City. While this is not a small number of trips, it is also not unusual where development is occurring, including in residential areas and the City urges that this is generally not a SEPA impact. 22. The existing public roads serving the subject site do not meet current standards. Similar undersized or steep roads serve other older or hilly areas of the City including roads serving areas west of Rainier. At the same time,these older roads serve their neighborhoods or communities. Renton Avenue seems to serve the existing population, and as new residents have moved to Renton Hill they have adjusted to the constraints and limitations. This does not discount the experiences of current residents and that fact that extra care seems necessary to negotiate the roadways and deal with events like snow and ice.-.-The fact is,transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours. It appears that there may be an' approximately 0.2 second delay in wait time at traffic lights. • Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF - January 25, 2001 Page 9 23. The proposed intersection at SE 7th Court and the subject proposal's entry road will meet City standards for sight distance and angles. Anytime a new intersection is created residents have to accommodate the changes in traffic flow. 24. Renton Avenue South is approximately 26 feet wide and has an approximately 23 foot 2 inch driving surface. There is a 5 inch drop to the gutter. Both telephone poles and hydrants are located close to the right-of-way and driving surface. There are some dips in the road and the crest apparently creates difficult sight problems with traffic driving up and down the hill according the residents. The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position,the view is not significantly impaired. 25. A study of accident history showed no reported accidents during the last three years and three(3) accidents throughout Renton Hill during the last five years. They appeared to be minor accidents resulting in limited property damage but no personal injuries. Anecdotal evidence suggests that there have been a number of"near-miss" and minor accidents but that residents may not have reported some accidents. The assumption then would have to be that they were not major accidents if they remained unreported. 26. The evidence does suggest that curbs, gutters and sidewalks improve safety but there are areas along what would be the commute route where this is not possible. Limiting speed and driver caution serve to control conflicts. SEPA does not ask an applicant to rectify existing problems, whether traffic or storm water problems, but requires that impacts be appropriately disclosed. 27. The appellant challenged the traffic generation numbers used by the applicant. Those numbers estimate that each single family home generates approximately 9.55 trips. The 57 homes would generate 544.35 trips per day. The estimates also predict that approximately ten percent(10%)of the total trips would occur during each of the peak commuting times or approximately 55 trips. No basis for the challenge was provided. 28. The development, if approved in full, would add 57 homes to an existing inventory of approximately 200 homes, or an approximately 25% increase. There has been some infilling in the last few years,also adding to the inventory. At the same time,some homes were lost to the last expansion and .. straightening of I-405. The traffic report and City analysis demonstrate that while the roads are not standard,they have sufficient capacity to handle the additional traffic. There will be impacts,but they are not considered untoward. The LOS for the intersections on the hill will not change as a result of the development. 29. Intersection spacing was found to be able to meet standards for the new intersection,which will be controlled by a stop sign. 30. LOS of A and B exist for the critical intersections and those will not be changed by the development of the subject site, although as indicated, wait times may increase by a fraction of a second. 31.. Street maintenance is accomplished as needed. No specific improvements outside the boundaries of the plat will occur other than some possible modification to the intersection at Beacon and 7th. , Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 10 32. The City works with applicants to develop a construction management plan to deal with traffic,routes and times in order to control access by heavy trucks. This would be done in this case as well. 33. There is an approximately 30 foot wide strip of land between the proposed development and River Ridge,the residential site adjacent to the subject site. Fences are not generally an environmental issue. Setbacks between newer single family and existing single family uses is also not considered a SEPA issue. The project will be providing the required setbacks, and in some instances it intends to provide larger than required setbacks. Larger setbacks than code provides are not required(minimum impacts that would occur with any development and not untoward in any fashion). The additional light and glare created by the new homes is not expected to be out of the ordinary for single family communities. It is not particularly reviewed for single family development. 34. While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. 35. The proposed density of 6.78 is in the midrange permitted in the R-8 Zone. The R-8 Zone permits a density of between 5 and 8 single family units per acre. 36. There is an approximately 30 foot wide strip of land between the proposed development and Falcon Ridge,the other residential site adjacent to the subject site. 37. Mitigation fees for transportation are distributed after the City Council determines needs in its six year cycle. Maintenance is done as needed. 38. Construction activity and hauling is governed by code provisions limiting the impact on rush hour traffic and limiting it, generally,to daylight hours. In addition,there is the construction management plan. Trucks doing hauling are monitored and "weight tickets" and reports are required. Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock. The City found it acceptable for heavy loads. It currently serves large garbage trucks and fire trucks. 39. The proposed reduction in street width from 50 feet to 42 feet for new roads within the plat boundaries is a code compliance issue and should not generally affect SEPA compliance. 40. The question of who builds the homes and what would be their quality is not a SEPA issue. The City does not control design of single family development nor who may develop such homes if they meet code standards. 41. The applicant and City, in response to the appeal, both noted that asking a series of questions, particularly if the answers are contained in existing studies or covered by existing regulations does not provide a sufficient basis for overturning a SEPA decision. 42. All of the Findings and Conclusions of the companion Plat Report are incorporated into this report by reference. • Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 11 CONCLUSIONS: 1. The decision of the governmental agency acting as the responsible official is entitled to substantial weight. Therefore, the determination of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC),the city's responsible official, is entitled to be maintained unless the appellant clearly demonstrates that the determination was in error. 2. The Determination of Non-Significance in this case is entitled to substantial weight and will not be reversed or modified unless it can be found that the decision is "clearly erroneous." (Hayden v. Port Townsend, 93 Wn 2nd 870, 880; 1980). The court in citing Norway Hill Preservation and Protection Association v. King County Council, 87 Wn 2d 267,274; 1976, stated: "A finding is'clearly erroneous' when, although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Therefore,the determination of the ERC will not be modified or reversed if it can meet the above test. For reasons enumerated below,the decision of the ERC is affirmed. 3. The clearly erroneous test has generally been applied when an action results in a DNS,since the test is less demanding on the appellant. The reason is that SEPA requires a thorough examination of the environmental consequences of an action. The courts have,therefore, made it easier to reverse a DNS. A second test,the "arbitrary and capricious" test is generally applied when a determination of significance(DS) is issued.In this second test an appellant would have to show that the decision clearly flies in the face of reason since a DS is more protective of the environment since it results in the preparation of a full disclosure document, an Environmental Impact Statement. 4. An action is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the quality of the environment if more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment is a reasonable probability.(Norway, at 278). Since the Court spoke in Norway, WAC 197-11-794 has been adopted, it defines "significant"as follows: a: Significant. (1) "Significant" as used in SEPA means a reasonable likelihood of more than a moderate adverse impact on environmental quality. b. (2) Significance involves context and intensity...Intensity depends on the magnitude and duration of an impact....The severity of the impact should be weighed along with the likelihood of its occurrence. An impact may be significant if its chance of occurrence is not great, but the resulting environmental impact would be severe if it occurred. Also redefined since the Norway decision was the term "probable." c. Probable. "Probable"means likely or reasonably likely to occur, ... Probable is used to distinguish likely impacts from those that merely have a possibility of occurring,but are remote or speculative. (WAC 197-11-782). 5. . Impacts also include reasonably related and foreseeable direct and indirect impacts including short- term and long-term effects. (WAC 197-11-060(4)(c)). Impacts include those effects resulting from growth caused by a proposal,as well as the likelihood that the present proposal will serve as precedent , • Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 12 for future actions. (WAC 197-11-060(4)(d)). 6. Environmental impact is also related to the location. A development,whether an office building or a single family development, may or may not create impact depending on the existing surroundings. 7. There is no question that there will be changes in the neighborhood and there may definitely be inconvenience, particularly during construction. There will be clear changes to the subject site. But these changes do not necessarily rise to the level of impact mandated by SEPA to require the preparation of an EIS. The development will not significantly alter the character of the community. It will be single family in character,just like the surrounding development. Adding additional single family homes to.the existing single family community is not dramatic. It will not trigger changes to other undeveloped or low density sites and will not create any precedents generating calls for changes to the residential zoning already governing the area. Both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designated the area for urban densities. In addition,while additional traffic will flow through the main commute route into downtown Renton,the proposed community is located on the edge of the community, not in the midst of the existing community,and its overall impacts will not be very significant. 8. Traffic seems to be a key issue presented by the appellant,and traffic's associated issues such as narrow and steep roads,heavy construction traffic and stopping distance and sight distance on the hill and at the new intersection. These are legitimate concerns, but the evidence does not provide a basis for altering the ERC's decision. They will not have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. The development will permanently add more traffic of a kind that traffic analysis shows the streets currently handle without appreciably increasing commute times,overloading roads or increasing conflicts significantly in terms of SEPA impacts that would require more detailed information than has been prepared in the various technical studies reviewed by the ERC. It will not have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. The development will generate impacts similar to those that now exist. 9. There definitely will be more traffic. That occurs anytime new development occurs. The streets leaving the hill are definitely steep and narrow. The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated. 10. The most pronounced change will be the removal of the forest cover on the ten acres. This acreage has been cleared in the past and the site topography altered by what appears to have been quarrying activity. But clearing of trees alone is not sufficient to trigger the preparation of an EIS. Nothing in record suggests that this alone will create such a significant impact on the quality of the environment that additional information is needed. This acreage needs to be looked at in the context of the adjacent 200 to 300 acres of forest and habitat. It also needs to be looked at in terms of surrounding uses. The areas around the site are mostly urban and developed with single family homes such as proposed,for the subject site. There is already a park located immediately across from the site. While animals will probably be displaced, there appears to be sufficient open space immediately adjacent to the site to provide habitat. Nothing in the record demonstrates the any large species or threatened species-: permanently inhabit the subject site. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings - File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 13 11. Construction impacts will be irritating to those who live near the subject site and construction traffic will have impacts on the community as a whole,but they are not the type of impacts which have more than a short-lived impact and they are not the types of impacts that would throw the ERC's decision into doubt. In addition,code provides for construction management plans, and there remains the possibility that the pipeline road could serve some construction uses. In addition,the applicant has substantially reduced the amount of materials that would.need to be transported either to or from the subject site. This will substantially reduce the originally anticipated truck traffic. 12. While there will be a series of impacts as there are in any development,they do not add up in a quantifiable manner to the type of impacts or long term precedents that result in more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Issues such as quality or character of development, fencing, setback standards in excess of those required,code permitted exceptions to slope clearing or roadway width are not appropriately SEPA issues. Access to the site across the pipeline road is,a condition of development,and if it were not granted,that would have a profound affect on the proposal and is not a SEPA issue. The creation of internal parks and open space and maintenance are not SEPA issues. The manner of adoption of the reclassification of the site is not a SEPA issue. 13. The reviewing body should not substitute its judgment for that of the original body with expertise in the matter, unless the reviewing body has the firm conviction that a mistake has been made. This office was not left with a firm conviction that the ERC made a mistake. There was a thorough review of geotechnical information that showed the site could be developed. There were two traffic reports, including slope analysis of sight distance issues,that demonstrated the current roads, while not meeting current standards have capacity for the additional traffic anticipated. - 14. The appealing party has a burden that was not met in the instant case. The decision of the ERC must be affirmed. DECISION: The decision of the ERC is affirmed. MINUTES: PRELIMINARY PLAT The following minutes are a summary of the November 16 and December 12,2000 preliminary plat hearing. The legal record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Thursday,November 16 at 11:35 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh"floor of the Renton City Hall. Because of time constraints,Mr. Mehlhaff,Ms. Liston, Mr. Giuliani, Mr.Ellis,Ms. Fulfer, Ms. Herman, Ms. Lamke, and Mr. Fulfer testified regarding the preliminary plat during the appeal portion of the hearing. Their comments appear later in the minutes. The following exhibits were entered into the record for the preliminary plat hearing: Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 14 Exhibit No. 1: Yellow land use file,LUA00- Exhibit No.2: Overall plat plan 053,PP,ECF, containing the original application, proof of posting,proof of publication an other documentation pertinent to this request Exhibit No.3: Sheet 2 of 4, larger scale drawing of Exhibit No.4: Sheet 3 of 4, larger scale drawing of plat plan plat plan Exhibit No. 5: Sheet 4 of 4, preliminary plat plan Exhibit No.6: Topographic survey Exhibit No. 7: Tree cutting and land clearing plan Exhibit No.8: Drainage control plan Exhibit No. 9: Generalized utilities plan Exhibit No. 10: Detailed grading plan Exhibit No: 11: Neighborhood detail map Exhibit No. 12: Zoning map Exhibit No. 13: Plat map of lots along north border Exhibit No. 14: Timeline of project showing buffer Exhibit No. 15: Wildlife Report Exhibit No. 16: Original plat map of River Ridge _ Exhibit No. 17: Stopping sight distances drawing Exhibit No. 18: Stopping sight distances chart Exhibit No.19: Stopping sight distances chart and Exhibit No.20: Renton Ave. S.stopping sight topographic distances Exhibit No.21: Traffic Count Charts(6 sheets) Exhibit No.22: Aerial photograph of River Ridge Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055 presented the staff report. Bennett Development has proposed subdivision of an approximately 450,846 square feet(10.35 acre)property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family houses. The triangular-shaped property is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way S with SE 7th Ct, Jones Ave S,and South 7th St. Although Renton Hill is a well established neighborhood, land abutting the proposed project to the north has been developed fairly recently into River Ridge, an eleven lot subdivision. Falcon Ridge,a large(80 lot)subdivision, lies to the southeast. Philip Arnold Park is adjacent to the southwest. The Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline, which is used occasionally for overflow parking from the park,separates the park from the proposed development property. The zoning designation for the property is R-8. Most of Renton Hill is zoned R-8 except for a strip of land on the west side above I-405 which is zoned R-10. Access would be from a new public street that would intersect with SE 7th Ct. The new street would terminate in a cul-de-sac. An emergency-only access would connect the cul-de-sac with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline. A modification from street standards has been requested to reduce the width of the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet. This modification has been approved by the director of the Development Services Department. It would not reduce the pavement width,only the right-of-way width,and would not affect the ability to have sidewalks in the development. Ms Higgins continued by stating that the Environmental Review Committee(ERC) issued a Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated on October 17,200. One appeal was filed prior to the close of the appeal period. The ERC placed several mitigating measures on the project. The first four relate to erosion control on the project and are best management practices as required by the City. The applicant shall pay applicable Transportation, Fire and Parks mitigation fees. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the Geotechnical engineers as they pertain to site development and building construction. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat prior to recording stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in therarea and-that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech report. The rear setback at the lot located in the northeast corner of the property, Lot#35, shall be increased to 25 feet from 20 feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within 25 feet of the of the rear property boundary and prohibit land clearing Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 15 within 10 feet of the rear property line. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction is ceased immediately,followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during the removal. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that the construction vehicles in excess of 20,000 gvw associated with the project would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during a.m.and p.m.peak traffic hours as identified in the traffic report. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement for a secondary, emergency only access. The permit shall be obtained prior to building permits. Ms.Higgins described the property and discussed how the proposal meets the various requirements of the Preliminary Plat Criteria. The proposed project meets the first objective of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element by providing new housing in what up to now has been underutilized land. It also provides a greater use of urban services and infrastructure. The proposed project would meet the policy of meeting net density levels by providing density of 6.86 dwelling units per acre. The lots are proposed at an average size of 5,350 square feet. The range of lot sizes is 4,504 to 8,318 square feet. Both the Development Standards and the Comprehensive Plan polices limit the height of building to two stories in the R-8 zone. The question of transportation and pedestrian connections between neighborhoods is difficult on Renton Hill due to its situation of being isolated from the rest of the city and having limited access. There will be pedestrian connections throughout the neighborhood from new sidewalks that are going to be added and the Cedar River Pipeline. Three areas in the proposed site plan in the proximity of the entryway are going to be set aside as commonly held open spaces. It is not anticipated that the vegetation will be retained,but they will be landscaped. Staff recommends that a landscape plan be submitted to Development Services for review prior to building permits. The Comprehensive Plan included a forecast of Renton's traffic increase for a twenty year period. In the plan, it was estimated that there would be a 52% increase in traffic in Renton between 1990 and 2010. The estimated traffic increase on Cedar and Renton Avenues on Renton Hill would be approximately 25%from the proposed project. This appears to be consistent with projected city-wide traffic volume increases. Ms.Higgins discussed how the project meets the Housing Mandates in the Comprehensive Plan. The Growth Management Act requires the City to plan how it will accommodate its share of the projected population growth. The projected population growth for a 20 year period is determined by the Puget Sound Regional Council,and it was distributed to all cities and counties in the Puget Sound region. The Comprehensive Plan has to address how the City will provide housing for all economic segments of the City's population,and delineates the strategies for doing that. Ms Higgins reviewed some of the policies of the Housing Element and explained how they are met by the proposal. Ms.Higgins continued by reviewing how the proposal meets the Environmental Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Some of the policies that staff felt were met by the proposed project are: minimizing erosion and sedimentation by requiring appropriate construction techniques; implementing surface water management systems which protect natural features; promoting the return of precipitation to the soil at natural rates near__ where it falls through the use of detention ponds,grassy swales, and infiltration; promoting development.design which minimizes impermeable surface coverage; and managing the cumulative effects of storm water through a combination of engineering and preservation of natural systems. Slopes on the property were probably created by surface mining activity, and are therefore exempt from the Critical Areas Ordinance. The stormwater control system would provide adequate protection of the City's water resource. The applicant has estimated that approximately 389 trees sized 6 inches in diameter and greater Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 16 and of various types would be removed from the property for construction. The applicant must adhere to the requirements of the Forest Practices Act. There are several areas in the project that are going to be preserved as "landscape tracts." The proposed project would meet all of the underlying zoning standards for the R-8 zone. The front, rear, and side setback lines indicated on the Preliminary Plat plan meet the minimum setback requirements for the R-8 zone. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 zone is 50% of lots 5,000 square feet or smaller and 35% of, or 2,500 square feet on, lots larger than 5,000 square feet. Compliance with the building coverage regulations would be a requirement of the building permit process. Ms. Higgins next reviewed the proposal's compliance with the subdivision regulations. All lots created by the subdivision would result in legal building lots according to the regulations for the R-8 zone. All parcels must have access established to a public road,which would occur by either directly off the public roads that would be built or from the two private roads or driveway that would be placed on the property. Side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines--they would be in this project. All lot corners at intersections would have a radius of a minimum of 15 feet. Police and Fire have indicated they have sufficient resources to furnish services. The Parks and Recreation Department has also concurred that they could provide service. Renton School District has stated that new students, estimated to be approximately 25,could be accommodated in Talbot Hill Elementary School, Dimmitt Middle School, and Renton Senior High School. The School District further requested that the existing school busses be allowed to continue their route through the area,which would be allowed. The conceptual stormwater plan has been accepted by the Plan Review Division,as have the conceptual water and sanitary sewer plan. Staff recommends approval of the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: (1)that the applicant comply with the ERC Mitigation Measures as they have been amended, (2)that all landscape tract areas,with the exception of the 5,402 square foot tract located at the entry,the private"park", and the landscape area adjacent to the storm pond be incorporated into lots already proposed, and(3) commonly held open space areas shall be enhanced prior to occupancy with landscaping including mixed deciduous and evergreen trees and plantings of native shrubs and groundcover,and the applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Development Services Department for approval. An additional condition would be that a homeowners'association be established and that one of the requirements be that they would be responsible for maintaining the private stormwater system and the commonly held landscape area, including the 15 foot buffers. The Examiner stated that he will schedule an evening hearing to conclude this matter in order to accommodate those who have to leave due to prior commitments. The various parties will be notified of the date and time of the evening hearing. The hearing closed at 12:40 p.m. ********************************** The hearing opened on Tuesday, December 12, 2000, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Ms. Higgins gave a brief review of the project based on the Staff Report,which was presented at the hearing on December 16. Ms.Higgins stated that staff has added a recommendation which was not presented at the last hearing,that a Hold Harmless Agreement shall be recorded that indemnifies the City of Renton from any damage resulting from subsidence that may occur due to previous subsurface mining activities. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 17 Mr. Fike presented a timeline explaining how the design for the project developed. In March of 1999 Renton School District selected Bennett Development as the purchasers. In September 1999 the mandatory pre- application meeting was held with the City. At that time plans for a 69-lot subdivision were submitted, designed around access from Beacon Way S. It was subsequently determined that Beacon Way S could not be accessed off of, since it is an easement owned by the City of Seattle and they do not want it used as a public right-of-way. In January of 2000,another pre-application meeting was held with the City of Renton and a new design for the project was submitted,based on input from community groups and the Cities of Renton and Seattle. This new design eliminated the Beacon Way access and showed access off of S 7th Ct. A stub road that would cross over the pipeline and go into Philip Arnold Park was included. The City of Renton determined that the stub road was not needed. A design was subsequently developed showing a buffer setback along the north border of the property In April of 2000 the developer sent a submittal package to Renton Hill community leaders showing them what was going to be submitted to the City of Renton. This showed a 56-lot subdivision. In May,the City of Renton deemed the application complete, but asked that the access road across the pipeline be removed. With the removal of the access road,the project went from 56 lots to 57. The City also asked the developer to do additional traffic counts. A three-week traffic study was done during the summer which took into consideration increased traffic from sports activities held in the area. Mr. Fike submitted a study which was done by a wildlife biologist in the period since the last hearing. The report shows that there are deer on the property;however,there were no signs of deer nesting there. An eagle that nests on the south tip of Mercer Island uses the Cedar River as a fishing ground. This may be the eagle that is seen over the Cedar River and approaching the property. There are no signs of an eagle nesting on the property. The wildlife report shows that the project has minimal, if any,wildlife assessments. Regarding the pipeline easement,Mr. Fike explained that the City of Seattle views pipeline usage as a privilege. In order to be good neighbors with the City of Renton, Seattle overlooks things such as possibly driving trucks over the pipeline rather than through the neighborhood, and school buses using the pipeline. The City of Seattle will only issue Conditional Use Permits for the pipeline. The developer has a verbal agreement with Seattle that they will be able to have emergency vehicle access on the pipeline. Ms Higgins entered an original plat map which shows the entry to River Ridge as it was proposed,crossing the School District property,then intersecting the pipeline. A letter in the files from the City of Renton's Utilities Systems Manager at the time to the Real Property Division of the Seattle Water Department explains why the entryway to River Ridge was moved into the present position, and shows further evidence that the Seattle Public Utilities does not want the pipeline to be used for general traffic. John Nelson, Peterson Consulting Engineering,4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Suite 200,Kirkland, WA 98033 explained what sight distance is and what kinds there are, using a sight distances drawing. Using charts and a topographic map, he explained stopping sight distance and how it is determined for different types of vehicles and several actual road slopes in the Renton Hill Area. Mr.Nelson stated that as a result of his __ analysis and actually driving the roads in question,he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Larry Hobbs, Transportation Planning and Engineering,Inc.,2223 112th Avenue NE, Suite 101, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that typically intersections are made with three or four legs; however,five-legged intersections do exist. All of the legs of the intersection are stop controlled. There are no records of any accidents at the - intersection over the past five years. There is no reason to believe this intersection does not operate safely.and . .p .. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 18 adequately. There is enough capacity in the intersection to handle the traffic that is there now, and the future development. The intersection itself is relatively flat. Sight distance criteria does not come into effect at the intersection, since all vehicles must stop. Ms. Higgins clarified the Zoning Code as it relates to the project. In the R-8 Zone,the City requests that a developer try to have at least five units per net acre,with a maximum of eight units per net acre. If for some reason a developer chooses not to develop to the maximum density, or if they are trying to develop below the minimum density,the City requests that the developer demonstrate that future lots could be developed on the property. The City asks for a technique called shadow platting which would create hypothetical lots that would have the proper setbacks and be conforming lots given the requirement of that zone so that in the future those lots could be developed. Mark Mehlhaff, 532 Grant Ave S, Renton, WA 98055 addressed the issue of road safety on Renton Avenue S. Many drivers tend to use excessive speed going up the hill because of the steepness of the grade. This, combined.with limited sight distances and cars parked on the side of the street,creates a dangerous situation. Mr.Mehlhaff asked why Puget Drive and the pipeline cannot be opened up for use of construction vehicles and general traffic to alleviate the congested conditions on Renton Avenue S and Cedar Avenue. Nancy Liston, 1518 Beacon Way S,Renton,WA 98055 spoke to the issues of tranquility and quality of life on Renton Hill. Ms. Liston expressed concern that the tranquility of the area would be greatly impacted by the increased traffic, noise,dirt and dust generated by the large trucks and construction equipment . She stated that the streets and parks on the hill were never intended for the increased number of vehicles and people who will be occupying 57 homes. Ms. Liston also discussed the issue of intersection safety. She has witnessed people not obeying the stop signs,and has seen many near-misses. Ms. Liston also expressed concern about deer crossing the street,particularly at night,and the safety of bicyclists on the streets. John Giuliani, 1400 South 7th Street, Renton, WA stated that the new exit off of Renton Hill has no bearing on the traffic on Renton Avenue, since it is necessary to travel on Renton Avenue to get to the new exit. Mr. Giuliani further stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. Quentin Ellis,715 High Ave S., Renton, WA 98055 stated that there have been a lot of sophisticated studies made by the City and others regarding this project,but it all boils down to one word--infrastructure. The infrastructure that has to be maintained is not there. He cited a newspaper article regarding the Habitat program's plan to build low income housing on a ten acre parcel in Snoqualmie Ridge. They are only proposing to build 50 houses on those ten acres. This proposed project plans to build 57 homes in an area with only one street that is only 23.6 feet wide, as opposed to the normal 40 to 50 foot width. He expressed concern about the mine shafts in the area and the possibility of sink holes developing with the increased traffic on- Renton Avenue S. Mr. Ellis challenged Bennett Development's traffic engineer to substantiate his statement that there would not be an increase in the number of accidents on Renton Hill. He questioned how, considering the 25% increase in traffic anticipated, the engineer could make that statement. Wendy Fulfer, 1729 SE 7th Ct, Renton, WA 98055 stated she lives in River Ridge. The intersection where she comes out of her development is already a five-way intersection. Adding another street would only add to the difficult situation at the intersection. Ms. Fulfer added that she personally makes eight to ten trips off the hill • Tillo ninary Plat Hearings 0-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Kpressed concern about the deer and other wildlife in the area, including nesting eagles, if the )ped. mines. they are 711 Jones Ave S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that the contractor of River Ridge had the to make iId 23 homes. He elected to build only 12 homes out of respect to the neighborhood and the 3 plan for 3n Hill. Ms. Herman further stated that she feels the property value of her home will drop traffic and the smaller homes that will not fit in with the rest of Renton Hill. to 5 Cedar Ave S,Renton,WA 98055 stated that she feels the massive size of the project is an nces and :he current residents of the Hill. The number of cars and speed of the vehicles on Cedar Ave is ly and the for the number of homes that are there. The project should be forced to have their entrance I Renton get Drive. The increased traffic and safety issues due to the slope of the streets all lead to the best alternative. Ms. Lamke asked why Renton School District is still listed as the cioned whether the property been sold,or if that is contingent on whether the project is issue of amke stated that a clear cutting of this ten acres of mature forest could be detrimental to the rea that is to salmon recovery. e giving :or into 9 SE 7th Ct,Renton, WA 98055 asked why the buffer on the north edge of the project was at they Aback of the homes and not separate from the lots. He asked who is responsible for providing he drove :he vegetation in the buffer. He expressed concern about the increased number of trips per day Df the new homes. He further stated that the project will be out of place because of the density of the ;collapse :hange the character of the neighborhood and quality of life of the residents. Mr.Fulfer patching ig distances of vehicles and expressed concern that the stopping distances involved are right on ditions i. Being on the edge of safety should only be allowed in a controlled environment such as a d since Renton Hill. uld have 21 S 7th,Renton,WA 98055 addressed the sight distances issue. Most people drive in excess Renton Ave. S. Considering the reaction time required,and trying to find a place to stop ns J cars along the street, it can be a dangerous situation. It is important that the human factor be ;it meets •than just using an engineering study. tandards the I Renton Ave. S, Renton,WA 98055 asked if Mr.Nelson made specific measurements on the in the :ist on Renton Ave. S.or if he relied only on charts for his analysis. unount of 16 Renton Ave. S., Renton, WA 98055 questioned the 6%grade, which is an average. The infiltrate. :n 3% and 9% is sudden,so that close to the end of the 3%grade, it is effectively a 9% grade, I receive F a 6% grade. That would make a dramatic difference in the calculations. He expressed ems in are moving in both directions,the road is narrow, cars and trucks are parked on the side,and to go. Regarding speeds on the bridges,Mr.Johnson stated that speed limits are not observed. ing more cars is not something the road can handle safely. :ount of raffle 33 Cedar Ave. S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that she feels the sidewalks, particularly on Renton •)elow :quate. The intersection at 7th and Beacon Way is very busy,especially during softball games. .enton 3swalks, and sometimes no sidewalks. Bicycling on the streets is dangerous. Ms. Calhoun said hould :r driveway because she does not want to have to back onto the street considering the Ind speed :ions that exist. r )n Hill .liminary Plat Hearings A00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF 01 ated that the air shafts from the underground mines are made of wood timbers and are sion of 14 to 15 feet in diameter. He expressed his concern that the wood timbers will rot over time. :cars Cady been three incidents of cave-ins. One took place across the street from his home. The air :blocked off from the mines below,they were filled and blocked off 50 or 75 feet from the top. 'time makes the situation more dangerous,not less so. s provided ;how that stioned exactly where Mr.Nelson made the sight distance measurements on Renton Hill. around the Mr. 'lied that graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way ; is n Avenue S and Cedar,then all the way down Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the re graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground field work was done all the Avenue S. t Ave. S. 513 Grant Avenue S, Renton, WA 98055 stated that sometime between 1980 and 1982,a garage The n through a sink hole at 820 Renton Avenue S. Mr. Ed Gouch owned the property at that time. pole. She xpressed his concern about safety issues on Renton Hill, particularly in regard to emergency I many ton Hill expressed her concern that the Geotechnical Report has a disclaimer on it. Ms.McManus stated inkhole on the side of her property. Her neighbor,Marie Overman,has had to have coal mining 15 foot n in from Montana because her driveway caved in. V of the 5- ts from I that Bennett Development does not object to the idea of a Hold Harmless agreement that would ip,which igainst the land itself. Bennett Development does object to the idea of a bond being placed that for the the developer liable into the future. in his called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The at 9:00 p.m. oppose sere not EtY PLAT FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS &RECOMMENDATION move the .oncerns. ed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: avenue S, :e City has plicant,Ryan Fike,Bennett Development filed a request for approval of a 57-lot Preliminary to ;ether with Tracts for open space. ;will be mthe -- flow file containing the staff report,the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)documentation instruction ler pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1. slice F stationery vironmental Review Committee(ERC),the City's responsible official, issued a Declaration of feral gnificance-Mitigated(DNS-M)for the subject proposal. An appeal of that determination was e opened i the Renton Hill Community Association. A hearing on that appeal was consolidated with the 's have on this plat. t. • 4'Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings • File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 23 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located near the intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court and S 7th Street. The property is located immediately across from Philip Arnold Park. 6. The subject site a triangular parcel approximately 1.114 feet by 818 feet by 829 feet. 7. The subject site is approximately 10.35 acres or 450,846 square feet in area. 8. The subject site has rolling terrain but has steeper slopes along the northeast corner of the site. There are also some steeper slopes on the interior of the subject site that were determined to be manmade as part of past mining or quarrying activity. An exemption from steep slope regulations was issued administratively since the steeper slopes are not natural. 9. Although the slopes are not regulated by the Land Clearing and other development regulations,the ERC imposed a series of conditions to control erosion and deal with geotechnical issues. The subject site is located within Aquifer Protection Area 2. 10. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1861 enacted in February 1961. 11. The subject site is currently zoned R-8 (Single Family-8 dwelling units/acre). It received this designation in June 1993. 12. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of single family uses. 13. The subject site is vacant. It currently is owned by the Renton School District but the applicant has an option to purchase the property. 14. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 57 single family lots. There would also be tracts for storm water detention and open space. Staff has recommended that most of these tracts be incorporated into adjacent lots to minimize potential maintenance issues. 15. The development of the subject site would require tree removal. Approximately 389 trees of 6 inches or greater diameter would be removed to allow for the construction of roads, building pads and storm drainage systems. A Class IV permit will be required to convert forest land to residential purposes. The applicant has indicated an intention to save some trees near the detention pond and property,;. entrance if grading work permits. 16. The lots range in size from 4,504 square feet to approximately 8,318 square feet. Staff estimates that the average lot size would be approximately 5,350 square feet. The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 zone is 4,500 square feet. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 24 17. The Beacon Way Seattle Pipeline Road runs in a southeast to northwest diagonal along the southwest angle of the subject site. It connects to Puget Drive SE and Royal Hills Drive SE on the east. The roadway is not a public roadway and has a gated barricade to prevent through traffic. Philip Arnold Park is located on the southwest side of that roadway. The road does provide access to Philip Arnold Park from the east. School buses also use this road approaching from the east, and a school bus stop is located east of the barricade. School buses do not negotiate the steep hills from the I-405 side of Renton Hill. 18. Apparently, the pipeline road was open as a through-street in the past but was closed to reduce traffic passing across Renton Hill and down the steep roadways east of I-405. This also coincided with the then limitation of only one crossing of I-405 that also crossed railroad tracks that could totally block access to the hill. Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings are elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. 19. The proposed layout would create a looped roadway in the interior of the plat with a cul-de-sac road providing access to the southeast corner of the subject site. A gated, emergency access connection would be installed between the dead end cul-de-sac and the Seattle Pipeline roadway, with Seattle's permission. 20. The proposed roadways would be 42 feet wide instead of the standard 50 feet, since the applicant requested an administrative modification to reduce width,which was approved. Road dimensions are determined by the Director administratively. 21. The lots would be located along the perimeter of the triangular shaped parcel as well as in the interior of the loop. The interior block would contain 13 single family lots as well as a"park"tract. 22. Eight lots would be served by either pipe stem or private roadways. Proposed Lots 14, 15, 16 and 17 would be served by private access easement or roads. Similarly,Proposed Lots 20, 21 and 22 would be served by private access roadway. Proposed Lot 35 would be located on a pipe stem driveway. 23. In order to prepare the site for the building pads and the new roads,the applicant will clear most of the vegetation from the site. Some trees may be preserved near the detention system. The slopes adjacent to Proposed Lot 35 would remain undisturbed,since there are steeper slopes that will be protected. 24. The applicant proposes open space and the storm water detention pond at the entrance to the plat. The road will pass through this open space. As the roadway splits to form the loop roadway,a small park will be located on the inside of the "Y" in the road. The applicant has proposed three triangular landscaped areas along the pipeline road to fill in between rectangular lots. Since the pipeline road runs at an angle,creating rectangular lots required these open space areas. As noted, staff recommended that these areas be incorporated into the adjacent lots to avoid maintenance problems. 25.. Development of 57 single family homes will generate approximately 545 vehicle trips per day(based on approximately 9.55 trips per dwelling). It is anticipated that approximately 10% of the traffic trips will occur at each of the morning and evening peak hours. Staff has also estimated that the 57 homes will increase traffic on Renton Hill by approximately 25 percent. This is based on the fact that there • 4` Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 25 are approximately 200 homes on the hill currently. The ERC imposed mitigation measures for fee generation. Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent,and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. 26. The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site,Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill,Cedar and S 3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. The LOS for the first two intersections will remain at B,while the latter two intersections would remain at LOS A. 27. An analysis of historical traffic accidents showed only three minor accidents and no accidents resulting in injuries. Residents report that there have been a number of"near-misses" and residents living along Renton and Cedar must exercise diligence in using the driveways. 28. The width and slopes of Renton Avenue and Cedar and the other roads serving the subject site from downtown Renton,the only open access to the hill, do not meet current development standards. At the same time, staff reports that these roads have capacity to handle additional traffic and that these roads can also safely handle the additional traffic. Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. 29. The development of the subject site will generate approximately 25 school age children. These students would be spread among the different grades of the Renton School District. 30. The City will provide sanitary sewer service and domestic water. 31. The ERC imposed additional storm water detention requirements due to the topography and location of the subject site. The proposal will have to comply with the newest King County requirements. Staff reports that the conceptual drainage plan appears to adequately serve the subject site. Staff recommended a homeowners association be required to maintain the detention system. 32. While traffic and transportation issues were a main concern of the neighbors,the Transportation Division did not appear at the public hearing. Questions were handled by other planning and development staff. 33. In addition to the steep slopes along the northeast margins of the subject site,the subject site is located over old, abandoned coal mine tunnels and other workings. Old records and maps were also reviewed. The property was surveyed and inspected and did not show any evidence of mines or shafts. It does appear that the site was a quarry at one time. There are disturbed soils and slopes. A geotechnical analysis provides methods for preventing foundations from being affected if there should be ------ subsidence. The studies also had other suggestions for dealing with the subject site, but indicated that there should not be any problems evident at the surface. Apparently,there have been incidents on the hill of subsidence in the past. The geotechnical information shows that the soils can bear development. The City did recommend that the applicant execute a "hold harmless" agreement regarding the coal mines in case some problems were to arise. • Heritage Renton Hill a Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 26 34. In order to develop the subject site, the applicant will be excavating and filling the subject site. Originally,the applicant was going to export and import materials to level the site. The applicant proposes to alter those plans and do a balanced cut and fill. This will reduce the amount of materials that need to be transported to or from the subject site, reducing the number of truck trips substantially. • 35. Development of the subject site will not change the single family character of the area but will generate additional population and traffic as well as other attendant changes more people bring to an area. 36. The homeowners would be required to maintain the open space tracts at the entrance and the park area. 37. All of the Findings and Conclusions of the companion SEPA Appeal Report are incorporated into this report by reference. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The public interest in approving a preliminary plat depends on balancing a variety of interests. The City is bound by the Growth Management Act and has determined the appropriate density under that act for R-8 Districts is between 5 and 8 dwelling units per acre. For this parcel with a net site area of 8.31 acres,the 57 homes yields a density of 6.86 dwelling units per acre. At the same time,the increase in traffic projected for this project is approximately 25 percent over current traffic. This is not an issue that merely equates to LOS and technical issues. This means approximately 550 additional trips will be traveling up and down very steep,narrow roads. Staff noted that the Comprehensive-Plan forecast a growth of 52 percent, but those projections would clearly have a lot of that traffic directed efficiently to arterial streets and not narrow streets with single family homes located on very steep streets. These narrow roads serve as collector arterials, but are in no way equal in width or slope to roads that would generally serve that purpose. Renton and Cedar and the streets nearest the subject site are local residential access streets. In fact,they are substandard streets in both width and slope angle. Five hundred additional trips per day is a substantial impact on the homes along the route from the subject site to the downtown area. The public interest sought to be served by approving a plat is not solely served by providing additional housing that meets density standards and growth management standards that do not consider the neighborhood characteristics, and particularly the street characteristics. The public interest is served when one balances density with the impacts of development on other homes and their residents. Engineering design standards to not measure or balance these impacts. They clinically decide that a certain pavement width is adequate to accommodate any additional 500 trips per day,without weighing the affects on adjacent residents. The number of trips will balloon from approximately 2,000 trips per day to 2,500 on Renton and Cedar. Similarly, engineering values on sight distance over the crest of a hill cannot discount the neighbors evidence of"near-miss" accidents as vehicles attempt to avoid each other when negotiating the steep, narrow streets. The engineering numbers do not necessarily account for slowed reaction time of elderly drivers or the impatience of teenage drivers. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings- File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF --- January 25,2001 Page 27 Therefore, it seems that balancing the demands of growth management with the impacts on the residents along the commute route requires reducing the scale or scope of the project and the density of that project. The Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan both provide a range. While it has been generally the case that the density should be as great as possible to meet the housing demands,there may be appropriate times when that density should be reduced modestly to effectuate a balancing of interests. While any reduction will be modest, it still would help to ameliorate the impacts on the existing community. Scaling the plat back to 50 homes would provide a density of 6.02 dwelling units per acre. This falls within the permissible range of 5 to 8 found in the regulations but reduces the impacts. There would be approximately 50 less vehicle trips and while,not a substantial amount, it would go to lessen the impacts on the residential homes along the route and reduce the potential for vehicle conflicts somewhat. Reducing the density of this plat will reduce the untoward impacts on the existing residents. 2. The applicant will probably be heard to argue that the SEPA review did not warrant this reduction and that no significant impacts having more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment were found. "Significance" in terms of SEPA and whether it amounts to EIS threshold "significance" is entirely different than the localized but very consequential impacts of 500 to 600 additional vehicle trips on a local,residential street. Just because an issue is not so large or significant to trigger the need for EIS preparation does not mean it does have an impact which should not be mitigated when determining whether a plat serves the public use and interest. In this case,the additional traffic vis a vis the streets that would serve this traffic demand a density reduction. 3. The applicant could choose to implement such a reduction by either maintaining the general lot size and increasing the open space and secondarily preserving additional trees or by modestly increasing the lot sizes of the remaining 50 lots. Rather then specify the method,the recommendation would be to allow the applicant flexibility in this redesign. 4. In general,with the proposed density reduction,the proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. It does provide additional housing choices in an area that can be adequately served by water and sewer and to a lesser extent,the steep narrow roads of Renton Hill. The plat is somewhat isolated from surrounding development and buffers between the subject site and adjacent properties have been provided. 5. The plans show that site can deal with its storm water runoff. As noted, it can be served by City water and sewer. 6. It would appear that there is a remote potential for instability due to the underlying coal workings. There remains the potential to discover overgrown or ineffectively sealed off shafts. The applicant will be required to follow the procedures outlined in the geotechnical reports to develop the site and home foundations. The recommendation of staff for a hold harmless agreement seems reasonable in the event a unforeseen settlement occurs in the future. Potential residents should be given adequate notice that their is some potential for a coal mine subsidence to occur. 7. - The proposed layout appears reasonable. In most cases where "interior" lots would be accessed by easement or private roads or pipe stems,these lots are not sandwiched into compounds surrounded on . Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings • File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 28 four side by other homes. A number of these lots are located-on the pipeline or at the open space edges of this site. 8. The ERC imposed conditions to avoid exacerbating drainage problems down stream and to avoid erosion. Storm water will be contained and diverted to avoid excessive flows. The development to R-8 density standards and the need to create building pads and streets means that most of the vegetation will be removed from the subject site. 9. The proposed plat will provide additional housing choices in an area in which urban services are provided or can reasonably be provided. 10. Development of the site will introduce additional noise and population. 11. The plat provides reasonably rectangular lots and lots that meet the dimensional requirements of code. The open space between lots along the pipeline road does appear to be a potential maintenance problem, particularly with access to the pipeline road roundabout or circuitous from the main plat. These open space parcels should be absorbed into the adjacent lots. 12. The other open space parcels should be restricted by language on the face of the plat that preserve s their open space characteristics and precludes selling them off for development in the future. 13. The plat will have its main access to a street which appears capable of providing a safe controlled intersection with appropriate sight and stopping distances. There will be a need to provide assurance that the Seattle pipeline road can be used for emergency access. 14. As a final recommendation,this office would recommend to the City Council that it explore providing the primary access to this plat from the pipeline road with a gated access to the remainder of Renton Hill. If such access could be granted,the narrow and steep streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density. This office was not fully permitted to explore whether this was at all possible. This office only has anecdotal evidence that Seattle, at one time,permitted unobstructed access to Renton Hill from the east. This office does not suggest a full opening but again,recommends that primary access to this plat might be from the east with a gated emergency access at SE 7th Court to prevent through traffic movements. 15. In conclusion,the proposed preliminary plat should be approved by the City Council subject to the conditions noted below. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat should be reduced from 57 to 50 single family lots with a density of 6.02 dwelling units per acre. This falls within the permissible range of 5 to 8 dwelling units per acre. 2. • The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. 2 +, Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings • File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 29 3. The plat shall contain language acceptable to the City Attorney regarding the recreational and open space respectively and precluding development of them. 4. All landscape tract areas, with the exception of the 5,402 sf tract located at the development entry,the 3,042 sf private"park", and the landscape area abutting the stormwater tract, shall be incorporated into lots already proposed within the plat. No additional building lots are to be created. A revised plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division prior to receiving construction permits. 5. Commonly held open space areas shall be enhanced,prior to occupancy, with landscaping including mixed deciduous and evergreen trees and plantings of native shrubs and groundcover. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Development Services Department for approval. 6. A Hold Harmless Agreement shall be recorded that indemnifies the City of Renton from any damage resulting from subsidence that may occur due to previous subsurface mining activities. 7. The applicant will have to secure in writing permission to use the Seattle pipeline road for emergency access. 8. The homeowners would be required to maintain the open space tracts at the entrance and the park area. ORDERED THIS 25th day of January, 2001. FRED J. KA AN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 25th day of January, 2001 to the parties of record: Zanetta Fontes Jennifer Steig Sharon Herman 1055 S. Grady Way Peterson Consulting Engineering 711 Jones Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Renton, WA 98055 Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Elizabeth Higgins John Nelson Mike Fulfer 1055 S Grady Way Peterson Consulting Engineering 1729 SE 7th Ct. _ Renton,WA 98055 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Renton, WA 98055 Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Kayren Kittrick Becky Lamke Bently Oaks 1055 S Grady Way 415 Cedar Avenue S 1321 S 7th Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 S Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 30 Ruth Larson Mark Mehlhaff Doug Brandt 714 High Avenue S 532 Grand Avenue S 610 Renton Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Ann M. Gygi Nancy Liston Mark Johnson Hillis CIark Martin&Peterson 1518 Beacon Way S 316 Renton Avenue S 500 Galland Building Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 1221 Second Avenue Ryan Fike John Giuliani Dana Calhoun Bennett Development 1400 S 7th Street 433 Cedar Avenue S 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98005 Larry Hobbs Quentin Ellis Bill Collins Transportation Planning& 715 High Avenue S 420 Cedar Avenue S Engineering,Inc. Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 2223 112th Avenue NE, Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98004 Mark McGinnis Wendy Fulfer Rosemary Grassi Geotech Consultants 1729 SE 7th Ct. 422 Cedar Avenue S 13256 NE 20th St.,#16 Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98005 Linda McManus Bart Bennett Jeff Schultek 530 Renton Avenue S 1800 SE 7th Ct. 613 Grant Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 This report was mailed to other Parties of Record. A complete list of the Parties of Record is available in the Hearing Examiner's office. TRANSMITTED THIS 25th day of January, 2001 to the following: Mayor Jesse Tanner Gregg Zimmerman,Plan/Bldg/PW Admin. Members,Renton Planning Commission - - -Neil Watts,Development Services Director Larry Rude,Fire Marshal Lawrence J. Warren,City Attorney Transportation Systems Division Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Utilities System Division Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Sue Carlson, Econ. Dev.Administrator Betty Nokes,Economic Development Director South County Journal Larry Meckling,Building Official - - • J y ' Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00_t49,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 31 Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100G of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,February 8,2001. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure,errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant,and the Examiner may, after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 110,which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk,accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department,first floor of City Hall. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. Ir -"- -_ "I HERITAGE RENION HILL 1ym, — _'+'-'a -- w CITY OF � ^ss'—1 ".a` RENTON ' ror on oana ..� a"� J * :..-TIN T NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP • i sloe I .r1 d, Ra �WN .�rq �' ;� Ma .lV'Wa. M "VC,.►WI .�i.. ram. G�99Z PL Mwwa'� .1� 1 .4 . •1 \ A-1_� \`F„._ rrr--T. I II y \ i 1 1 1 It}}r�"rrrrrrT111171. + `f -#'-i i I 1 1 I 1 1 1 \ �� I I I LLy I I I.I I l l r l l / __ =1__1„_i -i1b, 11J'ILL/11. 11_1J• MAN AV(I / � / a.,, 1 / III.er L. .Z�� YRL AYr• / / _ i I`-f—1--1 / / 1 I I I t,r—rrrTT�� rJ-rrrTTT��-1 / / e r _—1 r�— 1 I I I I III III"I I r I 1 I I 1 1 1 I" /! III I I I I I -�sL_LL1111JJJ• A LI-1 rT rTTT�l��i F-f I F Ft t F_f 1• / �1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I•I 1 1 III 1 1 1 I J a: ��• --__ r emA�.vrr 1JL_JJJJ1_J LLLtJ;J1JJ�LLLL111111J` 5 -1 rT7T-r'T-r-IT1 r-g I 1 I I I I 1 I' I I I I I Ti-‘F --rI-r-I-rl-T�-*TTT-r ! d ! I l l l l t l l l l l 1 1 r1�-r�-r-� / it / 1 1-�11-i !! -1-L I ! !r+= I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I 111 1 1 1 1 li �^ T n I--I-I--I--I--1--I--11-F-I-1-I J ! ! 11 I I I I I 1, I 1 1ioI I I I I I I I II rl_11 I Y� 1 / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 I III ' .in_I I I I I I I I II I / 4T(I / �� J L1_1 AKSJ__-I L1_I -LJ_1J_1_L1 ...---r 1 1 1 / / I r �, AFi 11-J_� i6Z LJ1L_ I r1-r 7- 1 rTTT— —r-i171' rT1= ;= -1Zrrr r- r-i-rrrr- i % 1 1 I h III1 I I I 1 I I I I I -r—r-n __ J 1 1 I j-1lr 11L IJJ II L- (Tl-*S. LP-U J{I )'�/41 11 I I I I I rr�_, ..ram: f IIIIIIII ! n_i t i I r= I I II 1---1, 1---I I fro I I�i �' "I 1 I ( r-- 1_L1J_1__J L__LL_Lr_LL�L/ �c�\III I 1 1 c GMN1'AYrr I I III 1 I. 1-I r--i--T-r, �I,.r—TT—rr-r—,. r- .�C r--4•.•L1J_Li1l_, I` I I 1.1 I e II II 4--r'"C_-I I I I Iirn)' 'N\\\� i I -L__1_-1_LJ•LLLL_Ll_LLJ_J•L- J.j �\\\ / I 1 1irT--r--T I:I-,-r-r-T-rT-F- 1I3P--4 -r Trr7 4 \ \\ / I 1 �1 I I I III! 1 I I •I I I I I.I---limy `` ` \ ' r 1 1 L1_1_-1 J LJ_LJ_1_L1_LJ: L_1LLLJ I Z41. -) 1\- j 1 I r r-T1-TT'I rrrrpa",�r. r•`� I 1-T-r�-ram r-Ti.�'�`-,�"'°"-;,� - I I 11 1 1 LJ IIII 1 II I I I; I /a,*/i II I I LJ_1J_1J_J I I I I --II I I I_I I'I fi*.S 1_J I I I I I I I I I I III I I-I I I 11i a/��'sN` AL_ 1 1 I I `\\ I LJ_1_L1J_1_LLLL1_LJ_1_L/J✓ \,+r' 1 I I I I\ I +aura AV,a y�� J \ \ I \ z i / i / I ) 1 \` \\\ " Al OO�tm Ea .-1ffi5 r / / ! - a ij / / a 'I ;r\- ' W. /I / .,\ \ (Irma i I /\\ ' ./3��0 ENV /'\ r {% / I / \ \i 4\e"), �\ L11L1 1 1/^ 1 y i / / ti� \ / / \ _ • 1 • / / i i \ ''i r-\rTh\ r l —------------- /y/fi \ \- '<'� s-r[Ar�cr care.--- —/// 6A/ iX' \ g \��/7,�� I'� ��r---J--------------------y i i \ \ lye \ �---� = <// / / --� j i \ \ ` rens 1�— c p `G'C�v--, ' / / - -�/ !/ /\ I. ; \� , A y\/.\ y / •// /i / \ .�03 /\ <\ Y I // \ / / ,./........ .1; , / / ' \\ \\ �\ 1 I-_ 1 r ! /-''/-�';r �/ "s \ + \ \r' cad i i 1 r it I /r / / � i \ \ �1 I 4/3\ ! I I I I rs��J r/ / / / \ \ \ u I Ar—\ I I I r t___ y —� / \ , - - - rI 1— — i r — — — \\, ...�� , \\ \\ I: ? I = i// / `� I IPe \ \----// / ;T 1 N. ; \ \ I I ; \\ ---- ----- L \ I _--•�--- \ - 1 \\`,,,tv� �� a m4 1 w.VI sME re c—.)21/ 7 I 1 \\\ `\\\ \\ \`�\ \ _ � 01 n N. et" a 0 / ., / I I mar moor \\ \\\ \ \\\\ Ali r,y�.�. �1 ',,.......,..._.:1,,.. .,1: '" ` rMN 1 I I 1 Tlw \\ \, b K �\ e *y9' ,,.... � !ii mil '------ __1 �1_- \- � /\ ..m rrro a. mac �iJR I [ ,� -.>. /, _ - I �- w/ Z S TH ST,T� ` �I 1�i-; t�i' y'��_tJ _�. .-..„I I -V- m Q �`,* p. I i p s`,, 15 I q �� I6 ls) I I .' ,s 1 • /r ,, , . Q p I p • I , s z J 1 ,17 `e, . . ,u��y.*. A 1�.0, (l, , I 1d , t ��• / � I I I S�ORMWAT£R--'', ��•�� `� �? ``�I�_ �r 9 J8 V 6 \ \ Ij i o 1 ,'%FJ YAv% t,,, ,. 9'll 1 i i .',rACY--_..' `\\�D� q •41- i�Q.� O - ! Irl \ :1 w NUMBER oLLrA I f R ,yr.7 \4.e ``\� .�a ..0 L' ' '-\ ��;':,,- `-' ,P� ,Q sb,0 , O` \ o u • cr IJ�7B�o" , ti -. :.. s' , - �d I ` A a O ce F 2 7B77I7 I IIi �,,�`.\�� f�J gip' -—--,--I -_�_ `\ \` 1e_F./!4 0,.J C <� r��+�'\r :4 w Q w 1 p 1 r IQ Q i �.........�.2 o :`\�.....`a'' �: - ��_OAD D O �J,�` - Ge _ chi 1 /� ( �Y\ �, Grp .\ h��.�w_�'� I O, ,,C i•: y, 117 d�'Nro\t' \�4 •\VQ- i V .n I ' 1 1��A ;• , I' `' �\ • i F OI Q 1 "ail A ; .. '0 1 11 {T,t q 44 `�� I �" ;\ TRACI.. .( . j �5 /16 y, ,,( IB 19 !O f/Vitt.\ , /- :::,..z.q \\. / I, '4111,4 t:i, rir / ;gel - �/ q • t , is qi)::0,91 I;•'-:C,:f.'•:-.14;:1?)44‘7 / 4111 ' ''4'.;‘,"."1"414.11mr 35) i -.-7.-.. -/- I v.n ) I `s\ \\. I �___J1 .,\.., `- 57_v/,�,. (� I, `��^ r�'' G`91 ,4 il' it. O ,0 ., Ill •�p� ` J 1 u —_%y4 ;l�$' S5 iS1.:i� SJ 'r1N p it', to 01 II (� �� wu:r.ro• 1 , N�1• \ �_- \ c'`,'i0 _ • 8 11 1 44, `, I J.4 �'^' `�\ 1 �A i I 4' +"`� O.' O __ D e7'.: 14 D / \ 1 Al _.--- 1 iT ' • ,. 4. •_ • _ w-_ 1 s �O D O V 0 .,.. ' / \ 1 <71 g5 h 1 , �t `'. _ q�Oa.�r, i,'�= f_;�fi'' If/.fit' ��$ / /\ N• �� ♦,:il 1 / /. ,%�� h 4 ij� \ \ ;I A. _ J W parr or MOON \ ��`r.,. , +L - _ ,; 0 - MP 1 ; /�� oI ] � '� . • I:J 'Cro �; ? o q 3_, / \\ )/ I , '4 tl -C` l CO 18. _, F�-, ` \/ / ~: PI r 1 • °>� ��y��,RaCf ° '�s=;'.;- ;, r0 a "n. ' ze��\.,4 `` '`/ / • 0 O''- �1'' '' 0 1 L_ J,inlllt /!• 1 • \\ -.� ', ' I f1�10 a i!S Q1 °' ' `. GI'N 1641 / /�\ 1 '•1 �;�\� tl/ ,o'p 0 , 'O0 C �` ? �1� `I I Ji�fil wH0 I i \. I- NOTE: \\1 , * • /, ` 0 0 Ali'. �_' fi .`-7 I g gg gg —I I LWRRE sat,0 BE CLEARED. `\ \ r`` 1. 1+ O I 1 O I ' B 1 6 6 I NOTE: .C `�1 w;.,^ ^ „A':it.' 1.:".'_ ��14 1 ;w� i'hl `1J^,I `\,I 1 i __ I I'Ir I'I� APPLICANT RETAINS JNE RICH T r- ` l' .89.Z'./I �I 1 1 L. -1 TO SAVE ADancwAt JRt2S �� ' , a +,s i �� (' -1 et 1- IT srr£CORRIDORS PERuaa. c-' -' L .N.,u °• ,' %r n 1 I O I 3 y I _ -_rRr it ',.la I ;.I3:111F .� ° O I I ` I ----- a L -1 I �� I ___ Q/,j//�\to\Q_ I i °p I a TREE LEGEND \, t. O'` O --- '•..:,_mod. �''^ ,, \ I I Ili I 0 �— , -I J I a Par . . •.�• \`, - - -'q'‘ °-' 1,1 i I I CPWCR AS NORR ,_ �5�'N. .� • __- i t •`�` f F 1 R'-I]'NRO D[C.OII01/S \ 16'. �. I 2J• �!_ I I O NuuwAl ma on ausuo �� \\ g�(2J/��,_/� L 1 1 / I (• 71•R IARUR N#C 0[001/OtR r,..�� • t/+ ` '' ' ! -; \\ r01. - 0 Q 1 -----,\ i Ii4 \\\ \\\ \`\ /\\ ,, // rA • • • 4 • � , t- 0,5 II� \ '\yl �s { ffri"L'-I SS f..B / G // I 1 \ 1 C\ ��,` \\ rn r.,+y..fK.s+l♦ 7 �rauo.ar orc.p��[�� '�' `r \ \ \ -� \ li•iii�:iv: I .a'r'fUTT I I 111 N. \\ \ ,, Weir I ��gil �• / N••/.e.rsI olt.n.mrcn•r \ \ ,s4111 ~ .` )•()roa pp' / e N I I 1� h : \\ \ �,y1� s�i►• aN `7. +. g�wtfr 'Iqr ..,... ,.:• .v,. ..: £71F'f.'H H.1.�L \�� !K'•-. AWA• ..2VG �• ;;.t.. .et! 10L.16].99-Id1� \ \ 9 . jr� • .oM I fa�ouo \ \ �� _ „ •,4 _ . c/i� �.�.� , _ ea.u. ;wer _ae.r.,ar� I.I _ \ rwna.r \ s ` Y . r w , ► „ 'a1cL� '4'°• t �- -... ,- -=" ---�---- it,. \'c9 '-r __ I ' 1 \*0;``_.._.._.._.._..ST. �'` „r\�� 1 If7 'Gi pay:w�yr�j� �,a e. ��P�t`�'ih -'��lt ��/ `��i 07(Ff iV!,S WA'a: :r: RADIUS di h ,•*.�� `I.�• ��,�;:...,.. ........._...• 7,22. a l - -. .r , / „'��,', ♦\\I 1 • ` J) \ `\\ <� CI rJ•7evo �soo ®® ♦{.1 \'G�r\�tC , _ _ _{ r If- . i� i./ , t,1 ♦\1 \ i, Z • CI 7A7YI7'" r15A0' ^ .► • \` �( —,,Or—'— _ Ir... ;"+ T arr •a''—1 1 _P°Ill J • ''• Y :1 i.'�a: ♦♦ ,/ !'y.e `- =`♦1, 1 tf 11y\��‘c/1 ,'i - . 1 \ce 1 % / I ` k.,AA i1RACT \. r / 1111 ' ;is."' i ♦`♦♦ 1 �4q�;\; 1.. 4 -` , /43 / iI6 �I�Illdl '/Ir�-♦ 48. =60 Si - y11/4.__ 1 J i/ ♦♦ ♦�� I' / --~ i l 11//Itty. ` - • - .I111 1 �.'I I �� ' `1, a, C WI../ I 11 1 1\ 4.Z {{• 1 ♦ \ ��\ \• 1 ',Mid . !• '/,"I -/, ,, / 1ilQS7l,'' ` // P ' IT - se e w I ♦♦ _w11��`;1` s\ 1 (--...n `` ` 11 1 i7.il4 yi '-'1 / , 1 s,1It II,/ (I k ua[' •r.w1 \ \ J ` » 56 GR7 .34 1 T 1 �• 1 1 f I and -• \. . F cd I .\', 44p.\ • `♦ 1 ♦��,` •• _'din .. L*•,11110.'.ittiy:.• 7.„:--- I \\:-Itit.i.124 , C, . %11.1 1 s•-• • / --- 1 'll,..--. '� /, / \ \ ♦ ' i • \0 , ` - b \ - • ' 1 I �1 / \ \\\ \ /i 1I O I V` 6 :- .20, -iWI f�' �IY_ ♦ =- _, . . 1 • `- / \ ` ._ i % - • Y II:i�i f I \'`,� ♦�j�y �S.a,T14A�7TQ 1 ..ao� %',' '% I ---�6 t `- InOY �� % ALL LOIS TO HAVE INTWOUAL ��♦ I I / '• INFILTRATION SYSTEMS FOR ♦ \C /�` ','/G'- ,1S • 'I !J ,- L 1 i. \-L 1 pLGOp r 1)041 / f .. I ROOF&ORIITWAY RUNOFF. ` ,'.4�'`\ '.1- I 1' q I ravvRe an... • 1 'r— icf I) aIA / - '\ 11n r`.,,` "1 i 1 / 1�---- I�{ or.q.?Nlp ,/ 1 I l`'+^I',ms -/ 6 R 6 6 \``.\,O`��♦, •', ' r' I ;- , . `r ; I---___. q ~ <� ��►�♦,. . Ct' '' 1I( '\:v - I c 1-1 ------ ✓; k. L CITY OP RENTON '1 ��. s'a , _�3J.'�' `/-L ,� Jr:, I------ a w.+Llr AH7arH.a PARx ` ♦\! \ ♦I ` i i • �L, iI 1 I ��., _ I 21' I r I � * I l (� \ \1 I I +♦vw `� 10 •♦ - ♦ I. • \ �� \ ' / ,S♦ � .� i\< i• /A \• \I � t /4 � \ \�'* �kd TIC° \ ` • G • � \• \\�. /�` .....\ rp % \ \ CIT'! t T F •REN ON :: . - Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman.. February 12;2001 Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill Community Association • 714 High Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration,Renton Heritage Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings . LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dear Ms:Larson: This office received a request for reconsideration regarding this matter'and the response follows.. First,this office does-not discount that there wilt be, impacts on the community, both short-lived impacts and long-term impacts. The short-lived(which`itself is a relative term)impacts will be the concrete impacts of development;:including.construction traffic and noise. The long-term ' impacts will be increased traffic and noise from;.new:residents:. That does not mean that those impacts will create an overall untoward;impact>as'required for a SEPA determination of significance. This office will generally address the concerns"in the manner used by the request. Page 8,#21: The issue was.the proposed reduction in hauling truck trips due to a change in • grading.plans. The applicant proposed pi-more closely balance the cut and fill. The change in grading plan§is now considered part of the application and cannot be altered without submitting a new application. The party that ultimately develops the site is not relevant to the permit as reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would be bound by the application as it was reviewed and approved. Stafford Crest as well as a number of large apartment complexes have all resulted in construction traffic similar to if not.larger than the construction traffic anticipated. It is not so significant as to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. ` Page 8,#22: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the documents and bolstered by the-testimony: There will be additional traffic, and there will be a fraction of,a second delay at the signal-controlled intersection which will not be noticeable. The LOS for the various intersections,which is currently excellent,will not be changed other than that fractional delay: There is no question that the hill and its various routes are quite steep,but the , entire record:demonstrates that traffic can negotiate it satisfactorily.. Page 9,#24:Again;the record demonstrates that the hill is`now negotiated by current residents and can be similarly negotiated by new residents...Staff supported the applicant's studies that the sight distance is acceptable. The record is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearing or hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this point. 1901a.:.2001 1055 South Grady'Way -.Renton,`_Washington 98055 -(42 )..430-6515 �jcl. • .., . • . , '. .:: This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer . • Ruth Larson Page 2` Page 10, #34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. . Page 10,#38: As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need,and if the roadway deteriorates, it will be scheduled for repair whatever the'surface or subsurface conditions. Page 12,#9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with,the other issues presented on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants in this decision. Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes arid the summarized testimony. This office will not comment on testimony. Page 24, #18: The construction of the overpasses'means-that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains as at had been:in the past At,may be inconvenient to reach or leave the hill,but no more so than for other residents of South Renton when trains run through town. Page 24, #25: The City has a set of adopted policies on how traffic,is",to be evaluated. Those policies were utilized, and there is.capacity torhandle the-traffic. As a matter of policy review, this office attempted to reduce traffic impacts'tolsome.extent byreducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to the.Council;went.beyondneretechnical issues;and dealt with the more • personal impacts of the traffic on those residents along the commute route. This recommendation also went against stated City Council policy density reduction by the Hearing Examiner was not generally appropriate.':It seemed that in these circumstances,pe balancing of impacts " demanded a reduction even if that reduction was modest: Page 25,#26: There will be moretraffc.,That is clearly stated: The way LOS is calculated shows that there is capacity for more,cars, and.thatLOS wilLnot"suffer. Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notice:the change::That,again, is not refuted. :There is no doubt that residents will notice more traffrc.FrvTliere will be even less traffic with the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. Page 25,#28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills arid those near Group Health have steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features. The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8 to allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to" allow a 50 lot plat. If the City Council chooses, it may modify its adopted policies and/or change the.Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this: time. Ruth Larson Page 3 . In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will-resolve the purported problems. Butthe record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated,although it will affect, but not adversely(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live.on Renton Hill. As this office noted at the public hearing, there is no doubt that if sortie future development were proposed;these new residents will be right alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now living on Renton Hill.-That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannotbe accommodated. The record reflects that it can be accommodated. In closing,there is no reason to alter or reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal or the Recommendation to the City Council to approve the plat. ' Since this office is aware that an appeal has:already been filed with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original decision:•theresis no.reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any additional assistance,please`feel,free to write. Sincerely, Fred J.-Kaufman' Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer='::; • Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services --- Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services . City.Clerk Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON rtoa q,,i FEB 0 8 2001 RECEIVED CITY CLEWS OFFICt REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum to EXH2O, including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. "Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr. Nelson stated that as a result of his analysis and actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony of those who deal with the convergence zone on a daily basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25, #25: Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic — NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes sure Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some accountability to the tax paying residents who are forced to "adjust" to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So. Renton Wa. 98055 6 • LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufinan Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building lots with fewer homes and have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a 25% increase in size and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations. Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic systems. All were old and extremely high maintenance. River • Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System. That also allowed four new homes to be built and three or four more are in the planning stages to be built on the North side of the pipeline. Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an"oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider on the titles of each property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 RCW 58 .17.010 Purpose. The legislature finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this. chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light and air; to facilitate adequate provision for water, sewerage, parks and recreation areas, sites for schools and schoolgrounds and other public requirements; to provide for proper ingress and egress; to provide for the expeditious review and approval of proposed subdivisions which conform to zoning standards and local plans and policies; to adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note: Throughout this chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed to "this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex. s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- 1981 c 293: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected. " [1981 c 293 § 16. ] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rage 1 of RCW 58 .17.110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 DEVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rage h ui • NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ei;.s. c 17 : See RCW 36. 70A. 900 and 36 .70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 - c, CITY �F RENTON ti ` :> Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator December 13, 2000 Mr. Ryan A. Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat, LUA00-053, PP, ECF Hold Harmless Covenant Dear Ryan Mr. Warren,the City Attorney,has provided the suggested wording of the Hold Harmless Covenant that is included herewith. Also, I contacted the Department of Natural Resources this morning to discuss their willingness to take responsibility for repairing surface damage caused by subsidence from abandoned coal mines in the City of Renton. I will inform you of any useful information they may provide. If you have any questions,please call me at 425-430-7382. Sincerely D 0 U l5 711 t/t/ • Elizabeth Higgins,AICP ` I _j Senior Planner CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER Cc: file 1055 South` Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 Rl am,/ One%nnef nnne•mne r - 4$1 = CITY ►F-`RENTON ,.. `. Office of the City:Attorney Jesse Tanner,Mayor,° Lawrence J.Warren QLOpMEM; • !N.oF REnRoNN1NG MEMORANDUM DEC �_:� ZOp RF�EI To:.. Elizabeth Higgins,AICP/ASLA Senior Planner From:: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date: - December 12, 2000 Subject. Heritage Renton Hill LUA00-053 I have slightly redrafted the covenant. I.wouldrsuggest we have it included on the face of the plat • or filed as'a separate restrictive covenant: My suggested language is as follows: "While geotechnical studies, including test pits and research of historical mining activity - in the immediate area,and the,construction of utilities and roadways performed on the site found no evidence of past subsurface mining;activities within the Heritage Renton - :'Hill residential subdivision,the developers and owners of lots and/or residences within the Heritage Renton Hill site do hereby hold;larmless the City of Renton from any • damages caused by any subsidence that:may`occur due to previous mining activities • and not actually contributed to by the City of Renton. . ' • Lawrence'J. VG arren LJW:jm • . cc: Jay Covington — "; Post Office Box 626.- 100 S. 2nd Street -'Renton, Washington 98057 - (425)255-8678- AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. County of King ) �2 Goo^ being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the c?",_5 day of -� ,�2-6b/, affiant deposited in the mail of the United States a seal d- nvelo e(s) coYainin a decision on or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: vYf SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ' day of _ , 2001. 001W i'I ��....`�� .�err eli 4 ; �� °��'s of Public in and for the State of Washington, = a Residing at..,1©„, ,therein. NNVi- Application, Petition, or Case No.: Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. 4" HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT January 25 ,2001 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPELLANT: Ruth Larson Appeal of ERC's Determination re Heritage Renton Hill File No.: LUA00-149,AAD LOCATION: Renton Hill, southeast of intersection of Beacon Way S with SE 7th Ct, Jones Ave S, and South 7th Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Subdivide an approximately 450,846 square feet(10.35 acre) property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family homes SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appeal of SEPA determination PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Appellant's written request for a hearing and examining the available information on file,the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the November 14,2000 appeal hearing. The official record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday,November 14,2000, at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the appeal, Exhibit No.2: Yellow land use file,LUA00- the Examiner's letter setting the hearing date, a map, 053,PP,ECF,containing the original application,proof photographs, and other documentation pertinent to the of posting,proof of publication and other appeal. documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Vicinity Map Exhibit No.4: Photo of Renton Ave S Exhibit No. 5: Photo of telephone pole 6" from curb Exhibit No. 6: Photo of telephone pole 12-1/2" from curb Exhibit No.7: Photo of curb and gutters Exhibit No. 8: Photo of garbage truck on street Exhibit No. 9: Photo of garbage truck on street Exhibit No. 10: Photo of dip in street Exhibit No. 11: Photo of fire hydrant Exhibit No. 12: Ruth Larson's testimony Exhibit No. 13: Aerial photo from City Archives Exhibit No. 14: Plat map Exhibit No. 15: Phase I Environmental Site Exhibit No. 16: Jennifer Steig letter to Bennett Assessment Development Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 2 Parties present: Appellant: Ruth Larson Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Representing applicant: Ann M. Gygi,Attorney Hillis Clark Martin&Peterson 500 Galland Building 1221 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98101-2925 Applicant: Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 Representing City of Renton: Zanetta Fontes,City Attorney Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Ms. Larson, appellant herein,reviewed each item contained in her written appeal of the ERC's Staff Report dated October 17,2000, and explained the reasons for her objections in each case. Particular emphasis was given to Renton Avenue South. Ms. Larson used photos to show the close proximity of telephone poles to the curbs,the narrowness of the street,the dips in the street and the tendency of garbage trucks to drive toward the center of the street. She explained her concerns regarding safety issues when large trucks are using the street considering the narrowness of the street,the steep grade, and the limited sight distances. Becky Lamke, 415 Cedar Ave S,Renton, WA 98055 expressed concern that the number of trips per day per single family household has been underestimated,based on informal surveys of her neighbors. Ms.Lamke questioned exactly what the landscaping would consist of in the 15-foot buffer along the north property boundary. She concluded by stating that the construction vehicles should be required to come onto the site off of Puget Drive. It is not considered safe for busses to come up the hill, so it should not be safe for large trucks to do so. Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way,Renton, WA 98055 gave an overview of the nature of the project, its current status, and its progress through the ERC. Regarding the reason for the setbacks on Lot#35,Ms. Higgins stated the geotechnical engineer's report commented that the slopes at the rear of this lot are excessive. They recommended that the setback at the rear of Lot#35 be increased from Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 3 20 to 25 feet in order to further to protect the slope. Using a photograph from the City Archives, she clarified why an exemption to the requirement in the Critical Areas Ordinance that slopes above a certain grade be protected was granted to the project. Ms. Higgins also addressed the issues of groundwater, responsibility for landscaping, regulation of fences, and parks constructed on the property. Ms.Higgins discussed the issue of Metro service on Renton Hill. She also explained the State of Washington Growth Management Act requirements and how the City is required to plan for housing. The City Council has committed to provide as much single family housing as possible and not meet their target with apartments. Regarding the requirement that a note be placed on the face of the plat about former mining activities,Ms.Higgins stated this is the City's way of insuring that a property owner is made aware of a potentially hazardous situation. Mining activity took place throughout the city, and there are very rudimentary maps of where these mine shafts might be. The note on the plat alerts the potential home owner to seek the consultation of a structural engineer and choose the construction method most appropriate for the site. The appeal hearing was adjourned at 12:30 pm.,to be continued on Thursday,November 16 at 9:00 a.m. ******************************** The continued appeal hearing opened on Thursday,November 16 at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Kayren Kittrick,Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way,Renton, WA 98055 explained her role regarding Land Use Applications and how these applications are reviewed by her office. Ms. Kittrick stated that the Street Maintenance Plan requires that all arterials be evaluated annually and all other streets,which would include Renton Avenue S, be evaluated every two years. Ms. Kittrick explained traffic mitigation fees and how they are reviewed and collected,resources available for street repair, and hauling times as allowed by code. Ms.Kittrick reviewed intersection distances,how they are measured, and under what circumstances intersections should be 110 feet apart vs. 150 feet apart. She also discussed the transportation study provided by the applicant, including levels of service at S 7th Ct and access to Renton Hill overall.Regarding the foundation of Renton Avenue S.,Ms.Kittrick stated that recent borings show four inches of asphalt over crushed rock. On cross examination,Ms. Kittrick responded to questions raised by Ms. Larson in her appeal letter. Ann M. Gygi, attorney representing applicant,Hillis Clark Martin&Peterson, 1221 Second Ave, Seattle, WA 98101-2925 opened by reiterating that in a SEPA appeal it is appellant's burden to establish that the SEPA determination is clearly erroneous. This is a plat application that is based on an adopted comprehensive plan and zoning that slated this property for development at an urban scale. This parcel is among those that the City of Renton legislated to accommodate a certain amount of urban growth under the Growth Management Act. The general impacts associated with the conversion are impacts of the legislative decision. The specific and unique impacts of the plat proposal are what should be the subject of the SEPA consideration at this stage. Mark McGinnis, Geotech Consultants, 13256 NE 20th St. #16,Bellevue, WA 98005 reviewed his education, training and experience as a geotechnical engineer. He summarized what is contained in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by his firm regarding coal mines under the site, including risk of excessive settlement, localized subsidence, and mine gas emissions.Mr.McGinnis discussed the mitigation measures recommended in the Geotechnical Report to address the two worked coal mine seams under the property. He stated that it is his professional opinion that the recommended measures will adequately mitigate Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 4 any potential risks associated with the two worked coal seams. Mr.McGinnis described the steep slope associated with Lot#35 in the northeast corner of the site. His firm investigated the slope, looked for slope problems, and did a test pit for exploration in the area to assess soil conditions near the top of the slope. Based on these observations, a 25 foot building setback from the crest of the slope is recommended. In addition to the 25 foot setback, it is recommended that there be no clearing and grading within 10 feet of the top of slope. Larry Hobbs,Transportation Planning and Engineering,Inc., 2223 112th Ave NE, Suite 101, Bellevue, WA 98004 reviewed his background, education and training as a traffic engineer. Mr. Hobbs stated that safety issues were considered as part of the traffic study that was prepared for the project. The city provided the last three years worth of accident data in the area, and it was found that there were no accidents recorded on Renton Hill itself for this period of time. In checking the data for the last five years, it was found that there were three traffic accidents throughout all of Renton Hill. Two of these accidents involved one vehicle backing into another, and the third was a vehicle striking a parked vehicle. There were no injuries or fatalities in any of the reported accidents. The record of reported traffic incidents is one of the main indicators of safety on a street system. Mr. Hobbs stated that it is his opinion that there will not be any increase in traffic accidents in the Renton Hill area as a result of the proposed development. Residents of the area would most likely be aware of anything that may be deficient and would drive accordingly to compensate for that. New residents moving into the area would rapidly gain familiarity with the street system. Jennifer Steig, Peterson Consulting Engineers, 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Suite 200,Kirkland, WA 98033 gave a summary of her training, education and experience as a civil engineer. Ms. Steig described the conceptual grading plan her firm prepared for the site. Once grades are set, computer programs to come up with cut and fill volume. Based on the conceptual grading plan,there would be approximately 55,000 cubic yards of cut material and 19,000 cubic yards of fill. The applicant requested that we develop a plan with a closer balance so that all the cut and fill would be used on the site--there would not be any material hauled off the site as a result of grading. The conceptual plan was sent to a company used industry wide that has a computer program which can look at the site as it is graded in the conceptual plan and raise or lower the site in small increments to determine when a balance is reached. This information is used to develop a final grading plan for construction. In doing this, it was found that if the site is raised one foot from the conceptual grading plan,there would be a balance of the cut and fill material on the site. Based on further geotechnical studies, if the unsuitable fill were screened on site,the amount of fill that would need to be hauled off site could be reduced by approximately half. Ms. Steig discussed the number of truck trips that would be required to haul fill off the property based on the number of cubic yards of fill remaining. She explained under what conditions material must be worked so that it will be suitable for use in construction. In closing,Ms. Larson discussed the issues of preservation of vegetation and wildlife, compatibility of the new homes with the neighborhood, and the two crested vertical curves on Renton Ave S that do not meet city, county or state requirements for vertical curve design. Ms.Fontes, in closing, addressed issues raised by the appellant in the course of the hearing and discussed what the evidence has shown and what the process has been in each instance. Ms.Fontes reiterated that despite all the questions raised by the appellant, she has not shown evidence of significant adverse environmental impacts in any of these instances. Therefore,the decision made by the ERC must stand. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 5 Ms. Larson responded that every question she asked was stated in the ERC's report. She responded to the questions because she felt there was clarification needed. Some of the issues have been clarified, others have not. In closing,Ms. Gygi stated that the applicant concurs with the City's closing arguments. She reviewed some of the issues raised by the appellant. Ms. Gygi summarized by stating that any project will alter the surrounding area. It is unrealistic to expect that there would be no effect from development. The law does not require that all adverse impacts be eliminated. If it did,no change in land use would ever be possible. Ms. Gygi reiterated that the burden is upon the appellant to prove adverse environmental impacts,which has not been done in this case. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The appeal hearing closed at 11:30 a.m. SEPA APPEAL FINDINGS,CONCLUSION&DECISION FINDINGS: 1. The appellant,The Renton Hill Community Association, represented by Ruth Larson, filed an appeal of a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated(DNS-M) issued for a proposed Preliminary Plat that would divide approximately 10.35 acres of R-8 (Residential: 8 units per acre)zoned property into 57 lots. The appeal was filed in a timely manner. 2. In processing the preliminary plat application the City subjected the application to is ordinary SEPA review process. The City, in the course of and as a result of its SEPA review, issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated for the project. The Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M)was conditioned by the City. 3. The subject site is located near the intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court and S 7th Street. The property is located immediately across from Philip Arnold Park. 4. The subject site a triangular parcel approximately 1.114 feet by 818 feet by 829 feet. 5. The subject site is approximately 10.35 acres or 450,846 square feet in area. 6. The subject site has rolling and descending terrain with some steeper slopes that were determined to be manmade as part of past mining or quarrying activity. An exemption from steep slope regulations was issued administratively since the steeper slopes are not natural. 7. The ERC imposed five conditions related to erosion control,three conditions imposing mitigation fees for fire,parks and roads,three conditions related to geotechnical issues for building construction/foundation work, subsidence notice due to potential coal mines and setbacks from steep slopes, one condition dealing with the potential discovery of hazardous materials, one dealing with traffic control for construction vehicles and finally, a condition for access across the Seattle Pipeline for emergency, secondary access. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 6 8. During the course of the public hearing staff noted that the gross vehicle weight of 26,000 was not intended to vary from that posted on the road signs and should have matched that posted along the road. 9. The appellants objected to the determination. The appellants objected to or raised concerns about: a. Modification of street standards to allow narrower roads in the,plat. b. Protection for abutting Falcon Ridge and River Ridge properties. c. Weight limit on Renton Avenue differing from posted standard(that was an error not intended to vary from posted limits). d. Width and emergency access relating to the Pipeline road. e. The steepness and width of Renton Avenue South. f. Exception to Critical Areas Ordinance that permitted grading on previously disturbed slopes. g. The amount of grading and number of heavy truck trips were not fully evaluated for impacts on the community. (the applicant altered the plans to balance the cut and fill and substantially reduce material movements) h. Impacts on River Ridge. i. Air quality impacts of vegetation removal. j. The alteration of the base elevation and its impacts on water. k. The removal of 92%of the trees and retention of 32 trees, if possible. 1. The maintenance of installed landscaping strips and islands. m. Impacts on the deer population that frequents the subject site. n. The manner in which the rezone was adopted. o. The character of the homes. P. The consistency of fencing. q. The impacts of new light on the community. r. The impact of internal pocket parks. s. The impact on the Renton Hill community by this plat. Heritage Renton Hill - Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 7 t. Traffic impacts of new residents and construction vehicles on the existing road surfaces and the community. u. The use of mitigation funding. v. The development does not follow the policies of the City of Renton. 10. The subject site is located near the northeast corner of Renton Hill just where it begins its drop down to Maple Valley and the Cedar River. 11. The majority of property in the vicinity of the subject site is zoned R-8 (Residential; 8 dwelling units per acre). It has been developed with single family homes. The slopes north of and below the subject site are Resource Conservation. 12. Immediately north of the subject site is the River Ridge development that contains 11 lots. The proposed development would share an access roadway that now serves only River Ridge. East of the subject site is Falcon Ridge, and it contains 80 lots. Falcon Ridge is accessed from the east by a private roadway. 13. The subject site is covered by what is probably second or third growth trees and shrubs. As noted,the site has been disturbed by some form of extraction or quarrying in the past. 14. The applicant did an historical survey of the subject site using aerial photographs as well reviewing the permit history of the site. There also were reviews of the mining data for the subject site and vicinity. There were also borings to determine the nature of the soils and to expose potential dumping of hazardous or other materials. The US Geological Survey maps for the area show a mine symbol, although it does not specify the type of mine but it appears it was used as a gravel quarry. 15. An evaluation was made of potential mine hazards. Both the more shallow and deeper mines are located 200 feet to 600 feet deep. It is anticipated that most linear shafts would have subsided over time. Any collapse events in "horizontal"mines would be distributed over those 200 to 600 feet, causing little surface subsidence. The greater potential for dangerous collapses are old airshafts or vertical access shafts. Some of these were filled with jumbled lumber or other debris till it"caught" on the sides of the shaft and then filled. The "caught" materials can decay over time and lead to collapses. In most cases these latter actions cannot be predicted. The geotechnical information and studies have instructions on dealing with these if they are discovered during construction. In addition,there are governmental agencies that deal with such openings, although obviously, an opening occurring can still take parties by surprise. The geotechnical report also has construction methods to make sure homes constructed in this development follow certain prescribed foundation techniques. 16. The applicant and City emphasized stability in dealing with lots near the edge of slope areas. The only lot affected by steeper slopes is Lot 35 in the northeast corner of the subject site. Lot 35 will have a 25 foot setback for building and a 10 foot setback buffer that will remain undisturbed. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 8 17. The Geotechnical information shows that areas that have 15%to 30% slopes are limited and most of the terrain is moderate and the underlying soils are suitable for construction. The ERC imposed conditions to deal with erosion. The professional analysis is that the measures suggested in the geotechnical report and the measures imposed by the ERC should prevent any problems. 18. There are approximately 250 to 300 acres of open space along the Cedar River and the slopes above the river in City ownership or open space. Although a large amount of this property is very steep slopes, there are a developed trail and park located along the river, and there are other level or more gentle areas. To accommodate roads and building pads,most of the vegetation will be removed from the subject site. It would appear that similar clearing probably has occurred for most development on the hill in the past with ornamentals replacing native trees. 19. There will be a loss of over 300 trees of six inches or greater in diameter. This loss of trees and habitat is an unfortunate but foreseeable result of development. Trees and vegetation may be maintained where possible. Open space tracts and ornamental landscaping generally occur as plats are developed and mature. 20. The project was reviewed for compliance with the Critical Areas Ordinance and the land clearing regulations. The exception approved for working on the man-made or altered slopes is not unusual and is a remedy available by code. Natural slopes will not be altered or would require special approvals. 21. The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort. This would have entailed a large number of dump trucks moving the materials to and from the subject site. The applicant further refined their grading plans and found that generally raising the elevation of the subject site by approximately one(1)foot would significantly reduce the needed trips. This would mean utilizing local materials on site in what is termed a"balanced cut and fill." There would still be export of unsuitable materials or debris that has been dumped on the subject site. It is not anticipated that raising the site by approximately one foot would create any problems with erosion or stability. The number of truck trips would probably be,reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips. The trucks would meet load limit requirements of the City. While this is not a small number of trips, it is also not unusual where development is occurring, including in residential areas and the City urges that this is generally not a SEPA impact. 22. The existing public roads serving the subject site do not meet current standards. Similar undersized or steep roads serve other older or hilly areas of the City including roads serving areas west of Rainier. At the same time,these older roads serve their neighborhoods or communities. Renton Avenue seems to serve the existing population, and as new residents have moved to Renton Hill they have adjusted to the constraints and limitations. This does not discount the experiences of current residents and that fact that extra care seems necessary to negotiate the roadways and deal with events like snow and ice. The fact is,transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the,additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours. It appears that there may be an approximately 0.2 second delay in wait time at traffic lights. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 9 23. The proposed intersection at SE 7th Court and the subject proposal's entry road will meet City standards for sight distance and angles. Anytime a new intersection is created residents have to accommodate the changes in traffic flow. 24. Renton Avenue South is approximately 26 feet wide and has an approximately 23 foot 2 inch driving surface. There is a 5 inch drop to the gutter. Both telephone poles and hydrants are located close to the right-of-way and driving surface. There are some dips in the road and the crest apparently creates difficult sight problems with traffic driving up and down the hill according the residents. The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position,the view is not significantly impaired. 25. A study of accident history showed no reported accidents during the last three years and three(3) accidents throughout Renton Hill during the last five years. They appeared to be minor accidents resulting in limited property damage but no personal injuries. Anecdotal evidence suggests that there have been a number of"near-miss"and minor accidents but that residents may not have reported some accidents. The assumption then would have to be that they were not major accidents if they remained unreported. 26. The evidence does suggest that curbs, gutters and sidewalks improve safety but there are areas along what would be the commute route where this is not possible. Limiting speed and driver caution serve to control conflicts. SEPA does not ask an applicant to rectify existing problems,whether traffic or storm water problems, but requires that impacts be appropriately disclosed. 27. The appellant challenged the traffic generation numbers used by the applicant. Those numbers estimate that each single family home generates approximately 9.55 trips. The 57 homes would generate 544.35 trips per day. The estimates also predict that approximately ten percent(10%) of the total trips would occur during each of the peak commuting times or approximately 55 trips. No basis for the challenge was provided. 28. The development, if approved in full,would add 57 homes to an existing inventory of approximately 200 homes, or an approximately 25% increase. There has been some infilling in the last few years, also adding to the inventory. At the same time, some homes were lost to the last expansion and straightening of I-405. The traffic report and City analysis demonstrate that while the roads are not standard,they have sufficient capacity to handle the additional traffic. There will be impacts,but they are not considered untoward. The LOS for the intersections on the hill will not change as a result of the development. 29. Intersection spacing was found to be able to meet standards for the new intersection, which will be controlled by a stop sign. 30. LOS of A and B exist for the critical intersections and those will not be changed by the development of the subject site, although as indicated, wait times may increase by a fraction of a second. 31. Street maintenance is accomplished as needed. No specific improvements outside the boundaries of the plat will occur other than some possible modification to the intersection at Beacon and 7th. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 10 32. The City works with applicants to develop a construction management plan to deal with traffic,routes and times in order to control access by heavy trucks. This would be done in this case as well. 33. There is an approximately 30 foot wide strip of land between the proposed development and River Ridge,the residential site adjacent to the subject site. Fences are not generally an environmental issue. Setbacks between newer single family and existing single family uses is also not considered a SEPA issue. The project will be providing the required setbacks, and in some instances it intends to provide larger than required setbacks. Larger setbacks than code provides are not required(minimum impacts that would occur with any development and not untoward in any fashion). The additional light and glare created by the new homes is not expected to be out of the ordinary for single family communities. It is not particularly reviewed for single family development. 34. While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for • vans. 35. The proposed density of 6.78 is in the midrange permitted in the R-8 Zone. The R-8 Zone permits a density of between 5 and 8 single family units per acre. 36. There is an approximately 30 foot wide strip of land between the proposed development and Falcon Ridge,the other residential site adjacent to the subject site. 37. Mitigation fees for transportation are distributed after the City Council determines needs in its six year cycle. Maintenance is done as needed. 38. Construction activity and hauling is governed by code provisions limiting the impact on rush hour traffic and limiting it, generally,to daylight hours. In addition,there is the construction management plan. Trucks doing hauling are monitored and "weight tickets" and reports are required. Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock. The City found it acceptable for heavy loads. It currently serves large garbage trucks and fire trucks. 39. The proposed reduction in street width from 50 feet to 42 feet for new roads within the plat boundaries is a code compliance issue and should not generally affect SEPA compliance. 40. The question of who builds the homes and what would be their quality is not a SEPA issue. The City does not control design of single family development nor who may develop such homes if they meet code standards. 41. The applicant and City, in response to the appeal,both noted that asking a series of questions, particularly if the answers are contained in existing studies or covered by existing regulations, does not provide a sufficient basis for overturning a SEPA decision. 42. All of the Findings and Conclusions of the companion Plat Report are incorporated into this report by reference. Heritage Renton Hill - Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 11 CONCLUSIONS: 1. The decision of the governmental agency acting as the responsible official is entitled to substantial weight. Therefore,the determination of the Environmental Review Committee(ERC),the city's responsible official, is entitled to be maintained unless the appellant clearly demonstrates that the determination was in error. 2. The Determination of Non-Significance in this case is entitled to substantial weight and will not be reversed or modified unless it can be found that the decision is "clearly erroneous." (Hayden v. Port Townsend, 93 Wn 2nd 870, 880; 1980). The court in citing Norway Hill Preservation and Protection Association v. King County Council, 87 Wn 2d 267,274; 1976, stated: "A finding is'clearly erroneous' when, although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Therefore,the determination of the ERC will not be modified or reversed if it can meet the above test. For reasons enumerated below,the decision of the ERC is affirmed. 3. The clearly erroneous test has generally been applied when an action results in a DNS, since the test is less demanding on the appellant. The reason is that SEPA requires a thorough examination of the environmental consequences of an action. The courts have,therefore,made it easier to reverse a DNS. A second test,the "arbitrary and capricious"test is generally applied when a determination of significance(DS) is issued. In this second test an appellant would have to show that the decision clearly flies in the face of reason since a DS is more protective of the environment since it results in the preparation of a full disclosure document, an Environmental Impact Statement. 4. An action is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the quality of the environment if more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment is a reasonable probability. (Norway, at 278). Since the Court spoke in Norway, WAC 197-11-794 has been adopted, it defines "significant" as follows: a. Significant. (1) "Significant" as used in SEPA means a reasonable likelihood of more than a moderate adverse impact on environmental quality. b. (2) Significance involves context and intensity ...Intensity depends on the magnitude and duration of an impact....The severity of the impact should be weighed along with the likelihood of its occurrence. An impact may be significant if its chance of occurrence is not great,but the resulting environmental impact would be severe if it occurred. Also redefined since the Norway decision was the term "probable." c. Probable. "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur, ... Probable is used to distinguish likely impacts from those that merely have a possibility of occurring,but are remote or speculative. (WAC 197-11-782). 5. Impacts also include reasonably related and foreseeable direct and indirect impacts including short- term and long-term effects. (WAC 197-11-060(4)(c)). Impacts include those effects resulting from growth caused by a proposal, as well as the likelihood that the present proposal will serve as precedent Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF • January 25, 2001 Page 12 for future actions. (WAC 197-11-060(4)(d)). 6. Environmental impact is also related to the location. A development,whether an office building or a single family development, may or may not create impact depending on the existing surroundings. 7. There is no question that there will be changes in the neighborhood and there may definitely be inconvenience, particularly during construction. There will be clear changes to the subject site. But these changes do not necessarily rise to the level of impact mandated by SEPA to require the preparation of an EIS. The development will not significantly alter the character of the community. It will be single family in character,just like the surrounding development. Adding additional single family homes to the existing single family community is not dramatic. It will not trigger changes to other undeveloped or low density sites and will not create any precedents generating calls for changes to the residential zoning already governing the area. Both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designated the area for urban densities. In addition,while additional traffic will flow through the main commute route into downtown Renton,the proposed community is located on the edge of the community, not in the midst of the existing community, and its overall impacts will not be very significant. 8. Traffic seems to be a key issue presented by the appellant, and traffic's associated issues such as narrow and steep roads, heavy construction traffic and stopping distance and sight distance on the hill and at the new intersection. These are legitimate concerns,but the evidence does not provide a basis for altering the ERC's decision. They will not have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. The development will permanently add more traffic of a kind that traffic analysis shows the streets currently handle without appreciably increasing commute times, overloading roads or increasing conflicts significantly in terms of SEPA impacts that would require more detailed information than has been prepared in the various technical studies reviewed by the ERC. It will not have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. The development will generate impacts similar to those that now exist. 9. There definitely will be more traffic. That occurs anytime new development occurs. The streets leaving the hill are definitely steep and narrow. The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway,but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated. 10. The most pronounced change will be the removal of the forest cover on the ten acres. This acreage has been cleared in the past and the site topography altered by what appears to have been quarrying activity. But clearing of trees alone is not sufficient to trigger the preparation of an EIS. Nothing in • record suggests that this alone will create such a significant impact on the quality of the environment that additional information is needed. This acreage needs to be looked at in the context of the adjacent 200 to 300 acres of forest and habitat. It also needs to be looked at in terms of surrounding uses. The areas around the site are mostly urban and developed with single family homes such as proposed for the subject site. There is already a park located immediately across from the site. While animals will probably be displaced,there appears to be sufficient open space immediately adjacent to the site to provide habitat. Nothing in the record demonstrates the any large species or threatened species permanently inhabit the subject site. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 13 11. Construction impacts will be irritating to those who live near the subject site and construction traffic will have impacts on the community as a whole, but they are not the type of impacts which have more than a short-lived impact and they are not the types of impacts that would throw the ERC's decision into doubt. In addition, code provides for construction management plans, and there remains the possibility that the pipeline road could serve some construction uses. In addition,the applicant has substantially reduced the amount of materials that would need to be transported either to or from the subject site. This will substantially reduce the originally anticipated truck traffic. 12. While there will be a series of impacts as there are in any development,they do not add up in a quantifiable manner to the type of impacts or long term precedents that result in more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Issues such as quality or character of development, fencing, setback standards in excess of those required, code permitted exceptions to slope clearing or roadway width are not appropriately SEPA issues. Access to the site across the pipeline road is a condition of development, and if it were not granted,that would have a profound affect on the proposal and is not a SEPA issue. The creation of internal parks and open space and maintenance are not SEPA issues. The manner of adoption of the reclassification of the site is not a SEPA issue. 13. The reviewing body should not substitute its judgment for that of the original body with expertise in the matter, unless the reviewing body has the firm conviction that a mistake has been made. This office was not left with a firm conviction that the ERC made a mistake. There was a thorough review of geotechnical information that showed the site could be developed. There were two traffic reports, including slope analysis of sight distance issues,that demonstrated the current roads,while not meeting current standards have capacity for the additional traffic anticipated. 14. The appealing party has a burden that was not met in the instant case. The decision of the ERC must be affirmed. DECISION: The decision of the ERC is affirmed. • MINUTES: PRELIMINARY PLAT The following minutes are a summary of the November 16 and December 12, 2000 preliminary plat hearing. The legal record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Thursday,November 16 at 11:35 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Because of time constraints,Mr. Mehlhaff,Ms. Liston,Mr. Giuliani,Mr. Ellis,Ms. Fulfer,Ms. Herman, Ms. Lamke, and Mr. Fulfer testified regarding the preliminary plat during the appeal portion of the hearing. Their comments appear later in the minutes. The following exhibits were entered into the record for the preliminary plat hearing: Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF • January 25, 2001 Page 14 Exhibit No. 1: Yellow land use file, LUA00- Exhibit No.2: Overall plat plan 053,PP,ECF, containing the original application, proof of posting, proof of publication an other documentation pertinent to this request Exhibit No.3: Sheet 2 of 4, larger scale drawing of Exhibit No.4: Sheet 3 of 4, larger scale drawing of plat plan plat plan Exhibit No. 5: Sheet 4 of 4,preliminary plat plan Exhibit No. 6: Topographic survey • Exhibit No. 7: Tree cutting and land clearing plan Exhibit No. 8: Drainage control plan Exhibit No. 9: Generalized utilities plan Exhibit No. 10: Detailed grading plan Exhibit No. 11: Neighborhood detail map Exhibit No. 12: Zoning map Exhibit No. 13: Plat map of lots along north border Exhibit No. 14: Timeline of project showing buffer Exhibit No. 15: Wildlife Report Exhibit No. 16: Original plat map of River Ridge Exhibit No. 17: Stopping sight distances drawing Exhibit No. 18: Stopping sight distances chart Exhibit No. 19: Stopping sight distances chart and Exhibit No.20: Renton Ave. S. stopping sight topographic distances Exhibit No.21: Traffic Count Charts(6 sheets) Exhibit No.22: Aerial photograph of River Ridge Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way,Renton, WA 98055 presented the staff report. Bennett Development has proposed subdivision of an approximately 450,846 square feet(10.35 acre)property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family houses. The triangular-shaped property is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way S with SE 7th Ct,Jones Ave S, and South • 7th St. Although Renton Hill is a well established neighborhood, land abutting the proposed project to the north has been developed fairly recently into River Ridge,an eleven lot subdivision. Falcon Ridge, a large(80 lot)subdivision, lies to the southeast. Philip Arnold Park is adjacent to the southwest. The Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline,which is used occasionally for overflow parking from the park, separates the park from the proposed development property. The zoning designation for the property is R-8. Most of Renton Hill is zoned R-8 except for a strip of land on the west side above I-405 which is zoned R-10. Access would be from a new public street that would intersect with SE 7th Ct. The new street would terminate in a cul-de-sac. An emergency-only access would connect the cul-de-sac with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline. A modification from street standards has been requested to reduce the width of the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet. This modification has been approved by the director of the Development Services Department. It would not reduce the pavement width, only the right-of-way width, and would not affect the ability to have sidewalks in the development. Ms Higgins continued by stating that the Environmental Review Committee(ERC) issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated on October 17,200. One appeal was filed prior to the close of the appeal period. The ERC placed several mitigating measures on the project. The first four relate to erosion control on the project and are best management practices as required by the City. The applicant shall pay applicable Transportation, Fire and Parks mitigation fees. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the Geotechnical engineers as they pertain to site development and building construction. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat prior to recording stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech report. The rear setback at the lot located in the northeast corner of the property, Lot#35, shall be increased to 25 feet from 20 feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within 25 feet of the of the rear property boundary and prohibit land clearing Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 15 within 10 feet of the rear property line. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction is ceased immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during the removal. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that the construction vehicles in excess of 20,000 gvw associated with the project would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during a.m. and p.m. peak traffic hours as identified in the traffic report. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement for a secondary, emergency only access. The permit shall be obtained prior to building permits. Ms. Higgins described the property and discussed how the proposal meets the various requirements of the Preliminary Plat Criteria. The proposed project meets the first objective of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element by providing new housing in what up to now has been underutilized land. It also provides a greater use of urban services and infrastructure. The proposed project would meet the policy of meeting net density levels by providing density of 6.86 dwelling units per acre. The lots are proposed at an average size of 5,350 square feet. The range of lot sizes is 4,504 to 8,318 square feet. Both the Development Standards and the Comprehensive Plan polices limit the height of building to two stories in the R-8 zone. The question of transportation and pedestrian connections between neighborhoods is difficult on Renton Hill due to its situation of being isolated from the rest of the city and having limited access. There will be pedestrian connections throughout the neighborhood from new sidewalks that are going to be added and the Cedar River Pipeline. Three areas in the proposed site plan in the proximity of the entryway are going to be set aside as commonly held open spaces. It is not anticipated that the vegetation will be retained, but they will be landscaped. Staff recommends that a landscape plan be submitted to Development Services for review prior to building pennits. The Comprehensive Plan included a forecast of Renton's traffic increase for a twenty year period. In the plan, it was estimated that there would be a 52% increase in traffic in Renton between 1990 and 2010. The estimated traffic increase on Cedar and Renton Avenues on Renton Hill would be approximately 25%from the proposed project. This appears to be consistent with projected city-wide traffic volume increases. Ms. Higgins discussed how the project meets the Housing Mandates in the Comprehensive Plan. The Growth Management Act requires the City to plan how it will accommodate its share of the projected population growth. The projected population growth for a 20 year period is determined by the Puget Sound Regional Council, and it was distributed to all cities and counties in the Puget Sound region. The Comprehensive Plan has to address how the City will provide housing for all economic segments of the City's population, and delineates the strategies for doing that. Ms Higgins reviewed some of the policies of the Housing Element and explained how they are met by the proposal. Ms. Higgins continued by reviewing how the proposal meets the Environmental Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Some of the policies that staff felt were met by the proposed project are: minimizing erosion and sedimentation by requiring appropriate construction techniques; implementing surface water management systems which protect natural features; promoting the return of precipitation to the soil at natural rates near where it falls through the use of detention ponds, grassy swales, and infiltration; promoting development design which minimizes impermeable surface coverage; and managing the cumulative effects of storm water through a combination of engineering and preservation of natural systems. Slopes on the property were probably created by surface mining activity, and are therefore exempt from the Critical Areas Ordinance. The stormwater control system would provide adequate protection of the City's water resource. The applicant has estimated that approximately 389 trees sized 6 inches in diameter and greater Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 16 and of various types would be removed from the property for construction. The applicant must adhere to the requirements of the Forest Practices Act. There are several areas in the project that are going to be preserved as "landscape tracts." The proposed project would meet all of the underlying zoning standards for the R-8 zone. The front,rear, and side setback lines indicated on the Preliminary Plat plan meet the minimum setback requirements for the R-8 zone. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 zone is 50% of lots 5,000 square feet or smaller and 35% of, or 2,500 square feet on, lots larger than 5,000 square feet. Compliance with the building coverage regulations would be a requirement of the building permit process. Ms. Higgins next reviewed the proposal's compliance with the subdivision regulations. All lots created by the subdivision would result in legal building lots according to the regulations for the R-8 zone. All parcels must have access established to a public road,which would occur by either directly off the public roads that would be built or from the two private roads or driveway that would be placed on the property. Side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines--they would be in this project. All lot corners at intersections would have a radius of a minimum of 15 feet. Police and Fire have indicated they have sufficient resources to furnish services. The Parks and Recreation Department has also concurred that they could provide service. Renton School District has stated that new students, estimated to be approximately 25, could be accommodated in Talbot Hill Elementary School,Dimmitt Middle School, and Renton Senior High School. The School District further requested that the existing school busses be allowed to continue their route through the area,which would be allowed. The conceptual stormwater plan has been accepted by the Plan Review Division, as have the conceptual water and sanitary sewer plan. Staff recommends approval of the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: (1)that the applicant comply with the ERC Mitigation Measures as they have been amended, (2)that all landscape tract areas,with the exception of the 5,402 square foot tract located at the entry,the private "park", and the landscape area adjacent to the storm pond be incorporated into lots already proposed, and(3) commonly held open space areas shall be enhanced prior to occupancy with landscaping including mixed deciduous and evergreen trees and plantings of native shrubs and groundcover, and the applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Development Services Department for approval. An additional condition would be that a homeowners' association be established and that one of the requirements be that they would be responsible for maintaining the private stormwater system and the commonly held landscape area, including the 15 foot buffers. The Examiner stated that he will schedule an evening hearing to conclude this matter in order to accommodate those who have to leave due to prior commitments. The various parties will be notified of the date and time of the evening hearing. The hearing closed at 12:40 p.m. ********************************** • The hearing opened on Tuesday,December 12, 2000, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Ms. Higgins gave a brief review of the project based on the Staff Report,which was presented at the hearing on December 16. Ms. Higgins stated that staff has added a recommendation which was not presented at the last hearing,that a Hold Harmless Agreement shall be recorded that indemnifies the City of Renton from any damage resulting from subsidence that may occur due to previous subsurface mining activities. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 17 Mr. Fike presented a timeline explaining how the design for the project developed. In March of 1999 Renton School District selected Bennett Development as the purchasers. In September 1999 the mandatory pre- application meeting was held with the City. At that time plans for a 69-lot subdivision were submitted, designed around access from Beacon Way S. ,It was subsequently determined that Beacon Way S could not be accessed off of, since it is an easement owned by the City of Seattle and they do not want it used as a public right-of-way. In January of 2000, another pre-application meeting was held with the City of Renton and a new design for the project was submitted, based on input from community groups and the Cities of Renton and Seattle. This new design eliminated the Beacon Way access and showed access off of S 7th Ct. A stub road that would cross over the pipeline and go into Philip Arnold Park was included. The City of Renton determined • • that the stub road was not needed. A design was subsequently developed showing a buffer setback along the north border of the property In April of 2000 the developer sent a submittal package to Renton Hill community leaders showing them what was going to be submitted to the City of Renton. This showed a 56-lot subdivision. In May,the City of Renton deemed the application complete,but asked that the access road across the pipeline be removed. With the removal of the access road,the project went from 56 lots to 57. The City also asked the developer to do additional traffic counts. A three-week traffic study was done during the summer which took into consideration increased traffic from sports activities held in the area. Mr. Fike submitted a study which was done by a wildlife biologist in the period since the last hearing. The report shows that there are deer on the property; however,there were no signs of deer nesting there. An eagle that nests on the south tip of Mercer Island uses the Cedar.River as a fishing ground. This may be the eagle that is seen over the Cedar River and approaching the property. There are no signs of an eagle nesting on the property. The wildlife report shows that the project has minimal, if any,wildlife assessments. Regarding the pipeline easement,Mr. Fike explained that the City of Seattle views pipeline usage as a privilege. In order to be good neighbors with the City of Renton, Seattle overlooks things such as possibly driving trucks over the pipeline rather than through the neighborhood, and school buses using the pipeline. The City of Seattle will only issue Conditional Use Permits for the pipeline. The developer has a verbal agreement with Seattle that they will be able to have emergency vehicle access on the pipeline. Ms Higgins entered an original plat map which shows the entry to River Ridge as it was proposed, crossing the School District property,then intersecting the pipeline. A letter in the files from the City of Renton's Utilities Systems Manager at the time to the Real Property Division of the Seattle Water Department explains why the entryway to River Ridge was moved into the present position, and shows further evidence that the Seattle Public Utilities does not want the pipeline to be used for general traffic. John Nelson, Peterson Consulting Engineering, 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Suite 200,Kirkland, WA 98033 explained what sight distance is and what kinds there are, using a sight distances drawing. Using charts and a topographic map,he explained stopping sight distance and how it is determined for different types of vehicles and several actual road slopes in the Renton Hill Area. Mr.Nelson stated that as a result of his analysis and actually driving the roads in question,he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Larry Hobbs,Transportation Planning and Engineering,Inc.,2223 112th Avenue NE, Suite 101,Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that typically intersections are made with three or four legs; however,five-legged intersections do exist. All of the legs of the intersection are stop controlled. There are no records of any accidents at the intersection over the past five years. There is no reason to believe this intersection does not operate safely and Heritage Renton Hill • Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 18 adequately. There is enough capacity in the intersection to handle the traffic that is there now, and the future development. The intersection itself is relatively flat. Sight distance criteria does not come into effect at the intersection, since all vehicles must stop. Ms. Higgins clarified the Zoning Code as it relates to the project. In the R-8 Zone,the City requests that a developer try to have at least five units per net acre,with a maximum of eight units per net acre. If for some reason a developer chooses not to develop to the maximum density, or if they are trying to develop below the minimum density,the City requests that the developer demonstrate that future lots could be developed on the property. The City asks for a technique called shadow platting which would create hypothetical lots that would have the proper setbacks and be conforming lots given the requirement of that zone so that in the future those lots could be developed. Mark Mehlhaff, 532 Grant Ave S,Renton, WA 98055 addressed the issue of road safety on Renton Avenue S. Many drivers tend to use excessive speed going up the hill because of the steepness of the grade. This, combined with limited sight distances and cars parked on the side of the street, creates a dangerous situation. Mr. Mehlhaff asked why Puget Drive and the pipeline cannot be opened up for use of construction vehicles and general traffic to alleviate the congested conditions on Renton Avenue S and Cedar Avenue. Nancy Liston, 1518 Beacon Way S,Renton, WA 98055 spoke to the issues of tranquility and quality of life on Renton Hill. Ms.Liston expressed concern that the tranquility of the area would be greatly impacted by the increased traffic,noise, dirt and dust generated by the large trucks and construction equipment . She stated that the streets and parks on the hill were never intended for the increased number of vehicles and people who will be occupying 57 homes. Ms. Liston also discussed the issue of intersection safety. She has witnessed people not obeying the stop signs, and has seen many near-misses. Ms. Liston also expressed concern about deer crossing the street,particularly at night, and the safety of bicyclists on the streets. John Giuliani, 1400 South 7th Street,Renton, WA stated that the new exit off of Renton Hill has no bearing on the traffic on Renton Avenue, since it is necessary to travel on Renton Avenue to get to the new exit. Mr. Giuliani further stated that when Renton Ave was repaved,he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. Quentin Ellis, 715 High Ave S., Renton, WA 98055 stated that there have been a lot of sophisticated studies made by the City and others regarding this project,but it all boils down to one word--infrastructure. The infrastructure that has to be maintained is not there. He cited a newspaper article regarding the Habitat program's plan to build low income housing on a ten acre parcel in Snoqualmie Ridge. They are only proposing to build 50 houses on those ten acres. This proposed project plans to build 57 homes in an area with only one street that is only 23.6 feet wide, as opposed to the normal 40 to 50 foot width. He expressed concern about the mine shafts in the area and the possibility of sink holes developing with the increased traffic on Renton Avenue S. Mr. Ellis challenged Bennett Development's traffic engineer to substantiate his statement that there would not be an increase in the number of accidents on Renton Hill. He questioned how, considering the 25% increase in traffic anticipated,the engineer could make that statement. Wendy Fulfer, 1729 SE 7th Ct,Renton, WA 98055 stated she lives in River Ridge. The intersection where she comes out of her development is already a five-way intersection. Adding another street would only add to the difficult situation at the intersection. Ms. Fulfer added that she personally makes eight to ten trips off the hill Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 19 every day. She expressed concern about the deer and other wildlife in the area, including nesting eagles, if the property is developed. Sharon Herman, 711 Jones Ave S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that the contractor of River Ridge had the opportunity to build 23 homes. He elected to build only 12 homes out of respect to the neighborhood and the • residents of Renton Hill. Ms. Herman further stated that she feels the property value of her home will drop because of all the traffic and the smaller homes that will not fit in with the rest of Renton Hill. Becky Lamke, 415 Cedar Ave S, Renton, WA 98055 stated that she feels the massive size of the project is an undue burden to the current residents of the Hill. The number of cars and speed of the vehicles on Cedar Ave is already excessive for the number of homes that are there. The project should be forced to have their entrance and exit off of Puget Drive. The increased traffic and safety issues due to the slope of the streets all lead to Puget Drive being the best alternative. Ms. Lamke asked why Renton School District is still listed as the owner. She questioned whether the property been sold, or if that is contingent on whether the project is approved. Ms. Lamke stated that a clear cutting of this ten acres of mature forest could be detrimental to the Cedar River and to salmon recovery. Mike Fulfer, 1729 SE 7th Ct,Renton, WA 98055 asked why the buffer on the north edge of the project was included in the setback of the homes and not separate from the lots. He asked who is responsible for providing and maintaining the vegetation in the buffer. He expressed concern about the increased number of trips per day as a result of the new homes. He further stated that the project will be out of place because of the density of the homes, and will change the character of the neighborhood and quality of life of the residents. Mr. Fulfer discussed stopping distances of vehicles and expressed concern that the stopping distances involved are right on the limit of safety. Being on the edge of safety should only be allowed in a controlled environment such as a race track,not on Renton Hill. Bentley Oaks, 1321 S 7th, Renton, WA 98055 addressed the sight distances issue. Most people drive in excess of 30-35 mph on Renton Ave. S. Considering the reaction time required, and trying to find a place to stop because of parked cars along the street, it can be a dangerous situation. It is important that the human factor be considered rather than just using an engineering study. Doug Brandt 610 Renton Ave. S,Renton, WA 98055 asked if Mr.Nelson made specific measurements on the two crests that exist on Renton Ave. S. or if he relied only on charts for his analysis. Mark Johnson, 316 Renton Ave. S.,Renton, WA 98055 questioned the 6% grade, which is an average. The transition between 3% and 9% is sudden, so that close to the end of the 3% grade, it is effectively a 9%grade, not an average of a 6% grade. That would make a dramatic difference in the calculations. He expressed concern that cars are moving in both directions,the road is narrow, cars and trucks are parked on the side, and there is nowhere to go. Regarding speeds on the bridges,Mr. Johnson stated that speed limits are not observed. He feels that adding more cars is not something the road can handle safely. Dana Calhoun,433 Cedar Ave. S,Renton,WA 98055 stated that she feels the sidewalks, particularly on Renton Ave. S, are inadequate. The intersection at 7th and Beacon Way is very busy, especially during softball games. There are no crosswalks, and sometimes no sidewalks. Bicycling on the streets is dangerous. Ms. Calhoun said she backs into her driveway because she does not want to have to back onto the street considering the dangerous conditions that exist. Heritage Renton Hill - - Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 20 Bill Collins, 420 Cedar Ave. S.,Renton WA 98055 entered traffic count charts that are a graphic version of traffic issues on Renton Hill. Using these charts,Mr. Collins explained how the increased number of cars would impact traffic conditions on various roads at various times of the day in the Renton Hill area. Rosemary Grassi, 422 Cedar Ave. S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that this traffic count information was provided by Mr.Mar from the City. It is the City's latest official count of traffic on Renton Hill. The counts show that there would be 813 passes of vehicles on Cedar Avenue per day. On Renton Avenue S,there will be around 1,100 passes per day. There is also a problem of enforcement regarding stop signs. Ms. Grassi stated the Mr. Potter,who is president of the Falcon Ridge Homeowners Association,has signed a statement that he is opposed to this development. She also expressed concern that their appears to be an effort to"dump" affordable housing and apartments from other cities into Renton. Linda McManus, 530 Renton Ave. S.,Renton, WA 98055 addressed the issue of accidents on Renton Ave. S. Ms.McManus stated that she was personally involved in an accident last summer on Renton Ave. S. The person coming down the hill failed to yield, and Ms. McManus' vehicle was forced into a telephone pole. She does not know why this accident wasn't recorded. Ms. McManus stated she has personally witnessed many near-accidents on Renton Hill S. She expressed her concern about safety issues in general in the Renton Hill area. Bart Bennett, 1800 SE 7t11 Ct.,Renton, WA 98055 expressed concern that Lot#35 does not have the 15 foot • greenbelt that the other lots in the development have. He also expressed concern about the possibility of the S- way intersection being changed into a 7-way intersection. 'He questioned the distances of the stop signs from the intersection. Mr.Bennett also stated that the intersection of Renton Ave. S and 7th is a 3-way stop,which is also extremely dangerous because of the steepness of the hill. He feels that his project is too large for the street system to handle. Mr.Bennett stated that he lives on Lot#5 in River Ridge. He has a sink hole in his back yard which he has dumped about 50 bags of sand into, and it is still fairly deep. Ruth Larson, 714 High Avenue S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that the residents of Renton Hill did not oppose River Ridge because it brought sewer service to those people living above Renton Avenue S. They were not opposed to Falcon Ridge. The only problem with Falcon Ridge was that their original plan was to remove the gate and use the pipeline for access. The residents did not want the gate removed because of traffic concerns. Falcon Ridge put in their own access road instead. Ms. Larson reviewed the safety issue on Renton Avenue S, and stated emphatically that this issue must be addressed before approval. Kayren Kittrick stated that there is an enforcement issue regarding traffic in the Renton Hill area. The City has programs in place for monitoring these things, and the Police Department should be made aware of the problem. If the City does improvements on Renton Avenue South, it means the streets and sidewalks will be widened,which will take away from front yards along the street and actually increase traffic speeds on the street will increase. The blocking off of the lane on Mill Avenue by Metro is temporary during the construction of the Transit Center. Regarding reports of accidents on Renton Hill,these were done by checking Police reports. The Police Department reported three accidents in five years. All of them involved hitting of stationery objects. Ms. Kittrick stated that pipeline is allowed to be used for emergency access only,not for general access. The pipeline is gated at the request of the local citizens in order to decrease traffic,and can be opened only for emergency access. Regarding sink holes,Ms.Kittrick stated that the City maintenance crews have been monitoring the sink hole on Renton Avenue S. She has no other reports of sink holes in the area. Heritage Renton Hill - Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 21 Ms. Higgins stated that the Geotechnical Report indicates there is no surface evidence of former coal mines. The area is very inadequately mapped, so no one really knows if there are mines in the area or where they are located. Residents of the area have had problems with sink holes. That is the reason the City wanted to make sure that new residents would at least receive a warning that this could be a problem so that they could plan for it by having a structural engineer design the foundations of their house. Mr.Nelson discussed the enforcement issue on Renton Hill. The developer cannot and should not try to accommodate people who do not follow the law. Mr.Nelson discussed reaction times and sight distances and stopping times of trucks. He also described the locations where measurements were made for the study and the relationship of road grades and sight distances. Mr.Nelson described how the intersections at 7th and Renton Avenue and 7th and Cedar Avenue are controlled with stop signs. Mark McGinnis Geotech Consultants, 13256 NE 20th Street#16,Bellevue, WA 98005 addressed the issue of coal mines and the question of a sink hole at Lot#5 in River Ridge. There is a deep mine under this area that is over 500 feet below ground surface. The shallower mine workings,which are the ones that seem to be giving the most problems on Renton Hill, do not extend that far to the east into the River Ridge development or into the proposed project's property. There are shallow mines under the western portion of Renton Hill,but they would not be under Lot#5. Regarding the subsidence on Renton Avenue S,Mr. McGinnis stated that he drove the street again and noticed many patches in the road, indicating some repaving and filling. The size of the patches is relatively small. Subsidence associated with a coal mine,related either to an air shaft or the collapse of the tunnel itself,would be several thousand square feet in size. The small areas of subsidence and patching on Renton Avenue S appear to be related to utilities, improper compaction, or soft road sub-grade conditions that have been dealt with over time. Considering the depths of the mines, and the time that has elapsed since the last known workings under the property(at least 75 years) if large subsidence were to occur, it would have occurred already. Ms. Higgins discussed the issue of the increased setback on Lot#35 and the reasons for it. Ms. Higgins explained that we encourage quality development by looking at the layout of the plan and making sure it meets the requirements of the development standards that are set forth in the Code. Those are the minimal standards the City Council has felt should be applied in each neighborhood. Other factors that are looked at are the context of the project, development that has taken place in the past, and how the City plans to develop in the future. The City has housing goals that have been set by the Puget Sound Regional Council as to the amount of population that Renton, as well as other cities that are within the Growth Management Act,must meet. Regarding the question of stormwater drainage,Ms. Higgins stated that roof drains will be allowed to infiltrate. Stormwater from the driveways and streets would be collected in the stormwater pond,where it would receive treatment prior to release. It would be a controlled release, as there have been some stormwater problems in that area. Mr. Hobbs stated that the January 2000 Traffic Study was done based on the then current lot number count of 60 lots. This would mean a net reduction of 3 p.m. peak hour trips, and roughly 30 daily trips. The Traffic Report shows that there will be less than 1,500 trips per day on Renton Avenue S,which will be well below capacity for a one-way section. Mr. Hobbs stated that there would be an increased traffic volume on Renton Hill from this project. Regarding safety on Renton Hill,Mr. Hobbs said his statement that accidents should increased was based on accidents of record. The enforcement issue of people not obeying stop signs and speed limits is a consideration. Heritage Renton Hill - I Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 22 Mr. Giuliani stated that the air shafts from the underground mines are made of wood timbers and are approximately 14 to 15 feet in diameter. He expressed his concern that the wood timbers will rot over time. There have already been three incidents of cave-ins. One took place across the street from his home. The air shafts were not blocked off from the mines below,they were filled and blocked off 50 or 75 feet from the top. The passage of time makes the situation more dangerous,not less so. Mr.Brandt questioned exactly where Mr.Nelson made the sight distance measurements on Renton Hill. Mr.Nelson replied that graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar,then all the way down Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground field work was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. Jeff Schultek, 613 Grant Avenue S,Renton,WA 98055 stated that sometime between 1980 and 1982, a garage was taken down through a sink hole at 820 Renton Avenue S. Mr. Ed Gouch owned the property at that time. Mr. Schultek expressed his concern about safety issues on Renton Hill, particularly in regard to emergency vehicle access. Ms. McManus expressed her concern that the Geotechnical Report has a disclaimer on it. Ms. McManus stated that she has a sinkhole on the side of her property. Her neighbor,Marie Overman, has had to have coal mining engineers flown in from Montana because her driveway caved in. Ms. Gygi stated that Bennett Development does not object to the idea of a Hold Harmless agreement that would be a covenant against the land itself. Bennett Development does object to the idea of a bond being placed that would the hold the developer liable into the future. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The hearing closed at 9:00 p.m. • PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS &RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant,Ryan Fike,Bennett Development filed a request for approval of a 57-lot Preliminary Plat together with Tracts for open space. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report,the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee(ERC),the City's responsible official, issued a Declaration of Non-Significance-Mitigated(DNS-M)for the subject proposal. An appeal of that determination was filed by the Renton Hill Community Association. A hearing on that appeal was consolidated with the hearing on this plat. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 23 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located near the intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court and S 7th Street. The property is located immediately across from Philip Arnold Park. 6. The subject site a triangular parcel approximately 1.114 feet by 818 feet by 829 feet. 7. The subject site is approximately 10.35 acres or 450,846 square feet in area. 8. The subject site has rolling terrain but has steeper slopes along the northeast corner of the site. There are also some steeper slopes on the interior of the subject site that were determined to be manmade as part of past mining or quarrying activity. An exemption from steep slope regulations was issued administratively since the steeper slopes are not natural. 9. Although the slopes are not regulated by the Land Clearing and other development regulations,the ERC imposed a series of conditions to control erosion and deal with geotechnical issues. The subject site is located within Aquifer Protection Area 2. 10. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1861 enacted in February 1961. 11. The subject site is currently zoned R-8 (Single Family- 8 dwelling units/acre). It received this designation in June 1993. 12. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of single family uses. 13. The subject site is vacant. It currently is owned by the Renton School District but the applicant has an option to purchase the property. 14. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 57 single family lots. There would also be tracts for storm water detention and open space. Staff has recommended that most of these tracts be incorporated into adjacent lots to minimize potential maintenance issues. 15. The development of the subject site would require tree removal. Approximately 389 trees of 6 inches or greater diameter would be removed to allow for the construction of roads,building pads and storm drainage systems. A Class IV permit will be required to convert forest land to residential purposes. The applicant has indicated an intention to save some trees near the detention pond and property entrance if grading work permits. 16. The lots range in size from 4,504 square feet to approximately 8,318 square feet. Staff estimates that the average lot size would be approximately 5,350 square feet. The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 zone is 4,500 square feet. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 24 17. The Beacon Way Seattle Pipeline Road runs in a southeast to northwest diagonal along the southwest angle of the subject site. It connects to Puget Drive SE and Royal Hills Drive SE on the east. The roadway is not a public roadway and has a gated barricade to prevent through traffic. Philip Arnold Park is located on the southwest side of that roadway. The road does provide access to Philip Arnold Park from the east. School buses also use this road approaching from the east, and a school bus stop is located east of the barricade. School buses do not negotiate the steep hills from the I-405 side of Renton Hill. 18. Apparently,the pipeline road was open as a through-street in the past but was closed to reduce traffic passing across Renton Hill and down the steep roadways east of I-405. This also coincided with the then limitation of only one crossing of I-405 that also crossed railroad tracks that could totally block access to the hill. Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings are elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. 19. The proposed layout would create a looped roadway in the interior of the plat with a cul-de-sac road providing access to the southeast corner of the subject site. A gated, emergency access connection would be installed between the dead end cul-de-sac and the Seattle Pipeline roadway,with Seattle's permission. 20. The proposed roadways would be 42 feet wide instead of the standard 50 feet, since the applicant requested an administrative modification to reduce width,which was approved. Road dimensions are determined by the Director administratively. 21. The lots would be located along the perimeter of the triangular shaped parcel as well as in the interior of the loop. The interior block would contain 13 single family lots as well as a"park"tract. 22. Eight lots would be served by either pipe stem or private roadways. Proposed Lots 14, 15, 16 and 17 would be served by private access easement or roads. Similarly,Proposed Lots 20, 21 and 22 would be served by private access roadway. Proposed Lot 35 would be located on a pipe stem driveway. 23. In order to prepare the site for the building pads and the new roads,the applicant will clear most of the vegetation from the site. Some trees may be preserved near the detention system. The slopes adjacent to Proposed Lot 35 would remain undisturbed, since there are steeper slopes that will be protected. 24. The applicant proposes open space and the storm water detention pond at the entrance to the plat. The road will pass through this open space. As the roadway splits to form the loop roadway, a small park will be located on the inside of the "Y" in the road. The applicant has proposed three triangular landscaped areas along the pipeline road to fill in between rectangular lots. Since the pipeline road runs at an angle, creating rectangular lots required these open space areas. As noted, staff recommended that these areas be incorporated into the adjacent lots to avoid maintenance problems. 25. Development of 57 single family homes will generate approximately 545 vehicle trips per day(based on approximately 9.55 trips per dwelling). It is anticipated that approximately 10% of the traffic trips will occur at each of the morning and evening peak hours. Staff has also estimated that the 57 homes will increase traffic on Renton Hill by approximately 25 percent. This is based on the fact that there Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 25 are approximately 200 homes on the hill currently. The ERC imposed mitigation measures for fee generation. Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. 26. The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site,Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S 3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. The LOS for the first two intersections will remain at B,while the latter two intersections would remain at LOS A. 27. An analysis of historical traffic accidents showed only three minor accidents and no accidents resulting in injuries. Residents report that there have been a number of"near-misses"and residents living along Renton and Cedar must exercise diligence in using the driveways. 28. The width and slopes of Renton Avenue and Cedar and the other roads serving the subject site from downtown Renton,the only open access to the hill, do not meet current development standards. At the same time, staff reports that these roads have capacity to handle additional traffic and that these roads can also safely handle the additional traffic. Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. 29. The development of the subject site will generate approximately 25 school age children. These students would be spread among the different grades of the Renton School District. 30. The City will provide sanitary sewer service and domestic water. 31. The ERC imposed additional storm water detention requirements due to the topography and location of the subject site. The proposal will have to comply with the newest King County requirements. Staff reports that the conceptual drainage plan appears to adequately serve the subject site. Staff recommended a homeowners association be required to maintain the detention system: 32. While traffic and transportation issues were a main concern of the neighbors,the Transportation Division did not appear at the public hearing. Questions were handled by other planning and development staff. 33. In addition to the steep slopes along the northeast margins of the subject site,the subject site is located over old, abandoned coal mine tunnels and other workings. Old records and maps were also reviewed. The property was surveyed and inspected and did not show any evidence of mines or shafts. It does appear that the site was a quarry at one time. There are disturbed soils and slopes. A geotechnical analysis provides methods for preventing foundations from being affected if there should be subsidence. The studies also had other suggestions for dealing with the subject site,but indicated that there should not be any problems evident at the surface. Apparently,there have been incidents on the hill of subsidence in the past. The geotechnical information shows that the soils can bear development. The City did recommend that the applicant execute a"hold harmless" agreement regarding the coal mines in case some problems were to arise. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 26 34. In order to develop the subject site,the applicant will be excavating and filling the subject site. Originally,the applicant was going to export and import materials to level the site. The applicant proposes to alter those plans and do a balanced cut and fill. This will reduce the amount of materials that need to be transported to or from the subject site,reducing the number of truck trips substantially. 35. Development of the subject site will not change the single family character of the area but will generate additional population and traffic as well as other attendant changes more people bring to an area. 36. The homeowners would be required to maintain the open space tracts at the entrance and the park area. 37. All of the Findings and Conclusions of the companion SEPA Appeal Report are incorporated into this report by reference. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The public interest in approving a preliminary plat depends on balancing a variety of interests. The City is bound by the Growth Management Act and has determined the appropriate density under that act for R-8 Districts is between 5 and 8 dwelling units per acre. For this parcel with a net site area of 8.31 acres,the 57 homes yields a density of 6.86 dwelling units per acre. At the same time,the increase in traffic projected for this project is approximately 25 percent over current traffic. This is not an issue that merely equates to LOS and technical issues. This means approximately 550 additional trips will be traveling up and down very steep,narrow roads. Staff noted that the Comprehensive Plan forecast a growth of 52 percent, but those projections would clearly have a lot of that traffic directed efficiently to arterial streets and not narrow streets with single family homes located on very steep streets. These narrow roads serve as collector arterials,but are in no way equal in width or slope to roads that would generally serve that purpose. Renton and Cedar and the streets nearest the subject site are local residential access streets. In fact,they are substandard streets in both width and slope angle. Five hundred additional trips per day is a substantial impact on the homes along the route from the subject site to the downtown area. The public interest sought to be served by approving a plat is not solely served by providing additional housing that meets density standards and growth management standards that do not consider the neighborhood characteristics, and particularly the street characteristics. The public interest is served when one balances density with the impacts of development on other homes and their residents. Engineering design standards to not measure or balance these impacts. They clinically decide that a certain pavement width is adequate to accommodate any additional 500 trips per day,without weighing the affects on adjacent residents. The number of trips will balloon from approximately 2,000 trips per day to 2,500 on Renton and Cedar. Similarly, engineering values on sight distance over the crest of a hill cannot discount the neighbors evidence of"near-miss" accidents as vehicles attempt to avoid each other when negotiating the steep,narrow streets. The engineering numbers do not necessarily account for slowed reaction time of elderly drivers or the impatience of teenage drivers. Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 27 Therefore, it seems that balancing the demands of growth management with the impacts on the residents along the commute route requires reducing the scale or scope of the project and the density of that project. The Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan both provide a range. While it has been generally the case that the density should be as great as possible to meet the housing demands,there may be appropriate times when that density should be reduced modestly to effectuate a balancing of interests. While any reduction will be modest, it still would help to ameliorate the impacts on the existing community. Scaling the plat back to 50 homes would provide a density of 6.02 dwelling units per acre. This falls within the permissible range of 5 to 8 found in the regulations but reduces the impacts. There would be approximately 50 less vehicle trips and while,not a substantial amount, it would go to lessen the impacts on the residential homes along the route and reduce the potential for vehicle conflicts somewhat. Reducing the density of this plat will reduce the untoward impacts on the existing residents. 2. The applicant will probably be heard to argue that the SEPA review did not warrant this reduction and that no significant impacts having more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment were found. "Significance" in terms of SEPA and whether it amounts to EIS threshold "significance" is entirely different than the localized but very consequential impacts of 500 to 600 additional vehicle trips on a local,residential street. Just because an issue is not so large or significant to trigger the need for EIS preparation does not mean it does have an impact which should not be mitigated when determining whether a plat serves the public use and interest. In this case,the additional traffic vis a vis the streets that would serve this traffic demand a density reduction. 3. The applicant could choose to implement such a reduction by either maintaining the general lot size and increasing the open space and secondarily preserving additional trees or by modestly increasing the lot sizes of the remaining 50 lots. Rather then specify the method,the recommendation would be to allow the applicant flexibility in this redesign. 4. In general,with the proposed density reduction,the proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. It does provide additional housing choices in an area that can be adequately served by water and sewer and to a lesser extent,the steep narrow roads of Renton Hill. The plat is somewhat isolated from surrounding development and buffers between the subject site and adjacent properties have been provided. 5. The plans show that site can deal with its storm water runoff. As noted, it can be served by City water and sewer. 6. It would appear that there is a remote potential for instability due to the underlying coal workings. There remains the potential to discover overgrown or ineffectively sealed off shafts. The applicant will be required to follow the procedures outlined in the geotechnical reports to develop the site and home foundations. The recommendation of staff for a hold harmless agreement seems reasonable in the event a unforeseen settlement occurs in the future. Potential residents should be given adequate notice that their is some potential for a coal mine subsidence to occur. 7. The proposed layout appears reasonable. In most cases where "interior" lots would be accessed by easement or private roads or pipe stems,these lots are not sandwiched into compounds surrounded on Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 28 four side by other homes. A number of these lots are located on the pipeline or at the open space edges of this site. 8. The ERC imposed conditions to avoid exacerbating drainage problems down stream and to avoid erosion. Storm water will be contained and diverted to avoid excessive flows. The development to R-8 density standards and the need to create building pads and streets means that most of the vegetation will be removed from the subject site. 9. The proposed plat will provide additional housing choices in an area in which urban services are provided or can reasonably be provided. 10. Development of the site will introduce additional noise and population. 11. The plat provides reasonably rectangular lots and lots that meet the dimensional requirements of code. The open space between lots along the pipeline road does appear to be a potential maintenance problem,particularly with access to the pipeline road roundabout or circuitous from the main plat. These open space parcels should be absorbed into the adjacent lots. 12. The other open space parcels should be restricted by language on the face of the plat that preserves their open space characteristics and precludes selling them off for development in the future. 13. The plat will have its main access to a street which appears capable of providing a safe controlled intersection with appropriate sight and stopping distances. There will be a need to provide assurance that the Seattle pipeline road can be used for emergency access. 14. As a final recommendation,this office would recommend to the City Council that it explore providing the primary access to this plat from the pipeline road with a gated access to the remainder of Renton Hill. If such access could be granted,the narrow and steep streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density. This office was not fully permitted to explore whether this was at all possible. This office only has anecdotal evidence that Seattle, at one time,permitted unobstructed access to Renton Hill from the east. This office does not suggest a full opening but again,recommends that primary access to this plat might be from the east with a gated emergency access at SE 7th Court to prevent through traffic movements. 15. In conclusion,the proposed preliminary plat should be approved by the City Council subject to the conditions noted below. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat should be reduced from 57 to 50 single family lots with a density of 6.02 dwelling units per acre. This falls within the permissible range of 5 to 8 dwelling units per acre. 2. The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. Heritage Renton Hill - Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 29 3. The plat shall contain language acceptable to the City Attorney regarding the recreational and open space respectively and precluding development of them. 4. All landscape tract areas,with the exception of the 5,402 sf tract located at the development entry,the 3,042 sf private"park", and the landscape area abutting the stormwater tract, shall be incorporated into lots already proposed within the plat. No additional building lots are to be created. A revised plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division prior to receiving construction permits. 5. Commonly held open space areas shall be enhanced,prior to occupancy,with landscaping including mixed deciduous and evergreen trees and plantings of native shrubs and groundcover. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Development Services Department for approval. 6. A Hold Harmless Agreement shall be recorded that indemnifies the City of Renton from any damage resulting from subsidence that may occur due to previous subsurface mining activities. 7. The applicant will have to secure in writing permission to use the Seattle pipeline road for emergency access. 8. The homeowners would be required to maintain the open space tracts at the entrance and the park area. ORDERED THIS 25th day of January, 2001. FRED J.KA F AN ricL--- HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 25th day of January,2001 to the parties of record: Zanetta Fontes Jennifer Steig Sharon Herman 1055 S. Grady Way Peterson Consulting Engineering 711 Jones Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Renton, WA 98055 Suite 200 Kirkland,WA 98033 Elizabeth Higgins John Nelson Mike Fulfer 1055 S Grady Way Peterson Consulting Engineering 1729 SE 7th Ct. Renton, WA 98055 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Renton, WA 98055 Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Kayren Kittrick Becky Lamke Bently Oaks 1055 S Grady Way 415 Cedar Avenue S 1321 S 7th Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Heritage Renton Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25,2001 Page 30 Ruth Larson Mark Mehlhaff Doug Brandt 714 High Avenue S 532 Grand Avenue S 610 Renton Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Ann M. Gygi Nancy Liston Mark Johnson Hillis Clark Martin&Peterson 1518 Beacon Way S 316 Renton Avenue S 500 Galland Building Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 1221 Second Avenue Ryan Fike John Giuliani Dana Calhoun Bennett Development 1400 S 7th Street 433 Cedar Avenue S 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98005 Larry Hobbs Quentin Ellis Bill Collins Transportation Planning& 715 High Avenue S 420 Cedar Avenue S Engineering,Inc. Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 2223 112th Avenue NE, Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98004 Mark McGinnis Wendy Fulfer Rosemary Grassi Geotech Consultants 1729 SE 7th Ct. 422 Cedar Avenue S 13256 NE 20th St.,#16 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98005 Linda McManus Bart Bennett Jeff Schultek 530 Renton Avenue S 1800 SE 7th Ct. 613 Grant Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 This report was mailed to other Parties of Record. A complete list of the Parties of Record is available in the Hearing Examiner's office. TRANSMITTED THIS 25th day of January,2001 to the following: Mayor Jesse Tanner Gregg Zimmerman,Plan/Bldg/PW Admin. Members,Renton Planning Commission Neil Watts,Development Services Director Larry Rude,Fire Marshal Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Transportation Systems Division Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Utilities System Division Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Sue Carlson,Econ. Dev. Administrator Betty Nokes,Economic Development Director South County Journal Larry Meckling,Building Official Heritage Renton Hill • Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 31 Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100G of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,February 8,2001. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 110,which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. ETERSON I' 1 I CONSULTINC I' jI I.-,' 1TP►�1__- I. N (, INI- LIt 4030 Lake Washingtor RE N TO N HILL. AIRPORT WAY Sob 434,44. Blvd.N.E.•Suite 200 p Kirkland,WA 98033 S 2A6 sT �y Tel(425)827-5874 • m `-L��-� \ I 1 - \ 5s sti S Jro sr 11 Fax(425)822-7216 • .J iMiiiiMMIIIIIIIMMINI \ / CY` >'< I \\l ` ' I \„� • �,5, SIN Sf I \'�A /\ 1 \\ y� SITE �„ 1 C2 9' ; is I r . ��, \ � .71 �, �`"DN 8. 7TH 8T. % - _L S89S6'.' -829.J4' �, \ I�� t/;[7 N rc aARNI~`R 1 -\ ./. �, �: 4f��J7 JQ© ,�y PARK J 7 I- 1- ��, l STORMWAIDT O TRACT SW f61^ I Sr •i . L_.�1 - 131 1� •\•"LO �� ,©1:©©©� mO--�.-. /6 ut SPI/OEf OR / 200• HI I -tl--i�ill \ '��O •GAO a• 0� < 1\ VICINITY MAP: ....1.5_ W SCALE I'.'200'' ,Ole S Est• ;',O / '"2/00 �_-11`•LFFj--` \ Cam®m 77 ; �\ NOT TO SCALE a, , • L. - - '' '�=8.1 �� ®o GENERAL NOTES: 0 Vol • i L_ I I \\ ® I _j L DINNER R£NILW SCHOOL DISTRICT •J L NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH I y5 TRA6T J00 SW.71A CT IJ48'40•' 25.00• $8.68• I " I RENTON.WASHINGTON 98055 l r C2 1 2827'T2" 725.00' 62.08' \'"_�``'._. 22imi I---I - DE�fl.DPOR, 9 u1�DEVELOPMENT \"'-. I rI J I__ I CTELLEWE • EEL�w WASNINGTOY 9600.5 • I I " .0' *' (425)709-6508 15 i \"".� 'ro66� CONTACT:RYAN FIE ic m --H-� �\,- / -\ qq •. \/ ENGINEER: PETERSON CONSULING ENGINEERS I IrI � 4030 LAKE WA9RNGTON BLVD N.0 I I -�---1 `\a1 . SUITE 200 //� '•� ` /\ \� KIRKLAND, WASIINGON 9803J -�I / \ �, (425)827-5874 B --� / \ \ �� CONTACT:.ENNIFER STOG P.L KEY MAP SURVEYOR: MEAD GILMAN.ASSOCIATES z SCALE 1'.100' P.O.BOX 189 b t WDOOINVILLE WASHINGTLN 98071 y EK (425)486-1132 L�. c BENCHMARKS/DATUM: CONTACT:EDWARD ANDER50/P.LS TOTAL AREA:(4/-) ram ACRES(CROSS) c k BENCHMARKS CITY OF RENTON/415-NI/4 CDR.SEC.20-2J-3 TOTAL AREA R.O.W. 2.04 ACRES J 1NOAS NTXX4'CONE NOV WM OF R✓ONE AYE BRASS DISC k'.Y;803 E.OFga a as a a aaaa' ELEVATION..J41.J4' NET AREA AM ACRES MMINIMMIMMINOMM - CITY a,-RENTON pileTOTAL LOTS: 57 RESIDENTIAL LOTS .L STETG • CASED CONE MON WITH fieBRASS PIN•113.1 OF ME INTX.OF 1SR016C1 MANAGES: S 7TH SE B RENTON AYES MAX.ALLOWABLE DENSIR` fl00 DU/ACRE DESIGNED. .L STEM ELEVATION.305.90' PROPOSED DENSITY: 6.86 DU/ACRE CAM a DEWEY DATUN, NA PO 88(CITY OP RENTON) TONING. R-8,URBAN RESIDENTIAL GIEOIEIR .L S1U9 • DATE, 4/10/00 PROPOSED USE: SINGLE-FAMILY.DETACHED FILE NAME FPIH£A25 LEGAL DESCRIPTION £XISITNG USE: SINGLE-FAMILY;DETACHED MAT PORTION O THE NLYRMWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF PIT NORTHEAST BOUNDARY: FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD OILMAN&ASSOCIATES QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 2J NORTH,RANGE 5 EAST. W.M.•IN KING COUNTY,WASNINGTON, .. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TOPOGRAPHY: FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD GILMAN R ASSOCIATES • COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION.SAID POINT BETNC ME TRUE PONT SR O'BEGINNNI, THENCE SOUTH 893637'EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION UTILITIES/PURVEYORS: ..� s A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER O"SAND SUBDIVISION: THENCE SOUTH Y� ti/' .A 011J'J8-WEST ALONG ME EASTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE O.818.13 FEET•• ` -1 THENCE SOUTH 71U5'12-WEST A DISTANCE O'109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY SEWER/WATER: CITY OF RENTON • ti ��`�• MARCH O'THE CITY O'SEATTLES CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORM 44• 20'15'WEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE O'/148.20 FEET TO A POINT OR THE STORM DRAINAGE: CITY O'RENTON WESTERLY UMIIS O"SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 011670'EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY UNITS A DISTANCE O'J.I.I4 FEETT+TO ME TRUE PONT O'BEGINNING GAS/POWER: PUGET SOUND&ENERGY s,,i` LOT AREA'S (LISTED IN SQUARE FEET) TELEPHONE: US WEST BFL RAL �� f. 5.990 f1 5.482 25. 4,750 J7. 5.527 49. 4,750 CABLE: AT&T ( MIRES: 9/9/00 • 1. $153 M. 4.965• 26. 4,750 .Ifl 5.500 30. 4.749 FIRE DISTRICT: CITY'OF RfNTON J. 4.875 15. 4.7.50 27. 4.750 J9. 5,500 51. 5.825 VAMP N9TNDDA 4. 4.625 f6. 4.750 28. ti750 40. 5500 52. 3.B6J SCHOOL DISTRICT: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 0J MIES SIGNED AND DATED 5. 4.504 17. 6.090 19. 4,750 41. 5.500 31 4.750liONM H 6. 5.557 18. 7.584 30. 4,750 42. 5.500 54. 4.750 7. 5799 20. 7,319 Jf. 4.754 4. 500 56. 4,750 "N ERHERM:002; 9. 5.44J 20. 7,3I8 J2. 4.946 44. 1 . 5.300 56. 4,7J1 9. 4.750 21. 5.000 15 6.121 45. 4.750 5Z 6.660 10. 4.750 22. 3.000 14. 5.549 46. 4.750 11. 1.730 12. 3,675 11 4,851 J5. 6,903 24. 4,730 16. 7.i06 47. 1,750 _ - - - SHEET NUMBER-- 4 48. 4.750 .Mr . • — • L) . ___ - .-M . _ - II - • . :- ...tre --I_ - ,• * •N•:.\\, ...1 CDR .- • • R- z. • *.c? 4,6i6, W 474 1E7* . •• - -- ''''-fr _______ ii_ . vP::::. . 1 • - RC . • , •__,--r__-_- :-..--.1-.:- ... .4., . 4.p,. CD CD • ".. .N. • •••-. / --:-..-.:.-- • 'CIrn '11 . '\.__, : . • __...._L a, I .. . ua-- —,_ . •-•• CD(155 .• •--_ti. ..03_ _6_,___Kk i • RC...*: : '• -,.. -,• . • . . . • -oi k Ca •• • .,_, • \ -.7.....__ t L,r • —. 7_, , CUR _. • _Ls__ _N ----I • . . - - . ' . . —, --, .1,--.- • -_ . ill Cd \ .S • ----\! .. . —-J . . • • . C) .1, IS.I. _T. .., _ ry‘`IT:)t 4.,,.. •• . co- . ...::.. RC(P) ' .:;• -.4. Li_ kis/ ' . • - i •-- = C 0 . .. ( Er- -- 1:.-.-9- ___.::if ___. --- -a9.---- -. T-Q-\ • •• . .. . • . --- -—1 • -clie 10\ •e' ':. \ i 1 '. •- -1- -. ce---4:::•.--.._:._ _.:. • . . . . 4 i 1 • -1?----8. . , . • • . .--th....--.4.. .7.-.:• • 8t147-7 ,,„ • i++•:• • . . 1---.1-..H'cr; ---1-111-"L'- L-3-1-'1:° 9. •-.. --sli sr-r-4 .- ' ! /7- :+.1!":-:: ' t. -_ •C/Q • .Lm -Id —1-6: --C1?-1--g - -14- • L-E- • . • /-----1--/-t .03-- 7 : .,... -- . ----...i-54. u..__ . =63 Q;-• \ nil I / -1-- ----› ., •,,, . perlio _ • : :-_-_-...!:..g -- h -ix- --fc —, v-= q-5 • ....-, . ;r:zr 9 .a<c-Ot4 ;0 * • ..: I 1 g -i- II_ .C .-car., 1 „....tok.,1-,.. •:---:;-,q•ANes‘ , . i - '--- R ---8 ' • -Ro- --1- .- -11- -P I •••\:-,.. I., \ WI I J...... \,/ ->•"- .----------------- -- 10th - - - -- --g i__ ...--- -..... ---\ .... ; 1 t \_.,•-• RC \ ,,:••. --1.-1-4,---- ,- • .._•.----- ....., ..„ , -..._ ...2. ....-- . • ..,.........„....• . -.... ..-- ....-• ....-• _ ....-• T' ..- • •J'i---- -_,,-,.[_ _ ___,__ - -.-- _______.._._. ...---,,-- •_ ... ---........:.. .,.. ---_. ....„---- _ _ •____ .... .... ....._ -,-- N__ ......---. . ... \ ,-•__, . --,....... ___ ____ ____ --' \ • __........... . ..... R78 ._.. \ , \ _ • . \ 1 i ciO3. . , , •. • , , . .. ....„ ____ -- .. __. ...... •••• •___ , \ - , 1 - , . CN -1 - ..V• 1 •--------7- _RM—I .. e., ,---Ik•-- „...------- ... • go ---C I __ - -... _. .....-• ,L"\e•t- \ / • f \SF-0.161:411-171-TT T --.- Fr4. •" \ •c4ce viv / / _cf-- 7-7 P-37rv-ITv; ... , . lit s - ., \ • -1 [u /• , • • - ' ZOt•1 1 ,4 e."-- MA? - • . . . 1" .� �"""' CITY no- HERITAGE RENTON HILL -`'a/2/°p ----—A melk d.` RENTI NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP a f r.� lEzzii am Cdr4NR b�J P06 gq/Pu11eon0/Pelf w.. —_ NO. PM90N eve. ` m Wen Zunermen P.L Ae. K \ S_ --1 \��`\rrl-r rT r1rrvvFTTTT771 \ I 1 \ 1 I 1 =- I I I.I I I I I I I I I I I �\ I _ „-�_\ �<I- 4. -+�- -i 1'I I I I I I I I 'I I I �� I I I I I� \LLy�1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I.y �/ � MAIN_1__i Abe_iL0 -LJJ LLLL1111J1J / eN0e/ \\��/ aA aoe I / / J ------rrL_ ��APE e / / 11 r-1---1 / / I I II I INP TTTTT 1-11 f r TTTTTT171 / / -rrn�- LI I I I I I I I I IQI 1 ITT:I I 1 I 1 11" / / �yL_LL11111JJ• / ,, / III IIIII 1,rrrrTTTT��31-i-ttttt t t�-1 I'I I I I I I I I I I I:I I III I I I Lea. / ,., / r OEDMAPEe -I- r." ----I--IJ-,-I-1-J LLLL111J6JJJ LLLL1111JJ'J" / ,r, ----1 rr'TT-r7—r-11—'1 r—r _ _T-1 APE r ,x I I I I I 1 1' 1 I I 1 I RI I I I I I I I III 1 1 Ir1� T-� -i% / ''D / a 1 1--1, I+ I4-I -1-1 -1 I-1. 1 I ::tL- 11 I I I I I 11 111 II I I 11 I.j/ az / 1L L T ,E I-4-4---1--1--1-+-1 + -I )/ ' / 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1, I I I•s-= 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I- / / I I I I I ! I I I I 1 ''"•n1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I )/+� j11 /�-, J L1_1 J_J.--J--J L L.--I—L_7-1—L_1—L_11_J-� •.r _ aErron APE a ''" wwroN APE a —LJ1L_ r-f f 1-TT-7-r1171' rT111x`.ti 11T7-I---r�--I--, -r--r-rrrr- j %= 1I1- 11 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11`-'4 1 1 1 1 I I I L� 1- / // // f� J1 IIjo TTI I r,`I Ill I IL II--�-I' I-1 i I ":4*A1 � � 177 �/I I I I H I I I J L_I11_J I 1 1 ,) .e‹, I I I I I I I I I ( r-- .. _l_L1J_J__J L__LL_L:=_LLJ_J_� -C \ I I I _ GRANT APE8 \ L1L?LLILJ_L111_. Ir r--1-.--i r--1 e T'"1'T TT-TT'T-1, r=7�TTrm7; -\\s> / I 1�1_L 1__J_L1! ^1 1 ,4 I I II -rQC_ I \ > / 4- -IIIIIII ) \ I f�rT—T---r-- 1o1-1LT-ZIT—T-ZJT'71�r=�T1lTrr�y '<<�\\\ ' r 1 1 41 I 1 _1__�Hi 1 I I .1 I I I I:L-- I I I I y ��\\� \� Y 1 I L.1_lIIOHAVE_aL1_LJ; L_1LLLy0°/ CL iL LL�// I I I I I I I LJ I I I I I I Ir I I I; I ,///4 I I_NiG IrFa 1, I 1 LJ_l_J_1J_J I I I I I I I I Ir I *.c I _-J I I I I I I I 1 I I I I rrrr�-T-I 7-r, h`004'- � 1 I I I III 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I )i i'/ 0,4 L--I I L__J \\ i 1 L1_1_L1J_1_LLLL1_1J_1_L/✓�R\,l 1 I I I I \ I r JONES AP.a /1 ..y�_,L_J L—_-L_—J I , _ /" _ \ ��--\ \ \ _ i�} r7\ \ \ 'z c\ i /0°aQ 4 L 5\ \ / s r /\ \ \ i /\ \ \ /\ \ � S h/ / 4\ V / ' \ a T /..,r', /I\ \ \ a sk / I / 00i/1\ \ \ IA ' q. / / ) / ,/\ \ \ / r\ \ \ / /®®o \ t • rr-TT\ ./ 2r / I 1/\ er I / �/ -(\IIIIIII / ,\ /\// � \\ • . , ,\ \\(x__I/�m`1J1 �\\-a / l j / \ \ -1��l r- r )/a, \r/i \\ - \\--- r` 7 ] 1-r=1 C-1 /Y oa°/ / .C/ \ om \�/ <<„›\ 1 1 /�T-_--i--------_- [F Cv£.'P, // / _ E FA ';' \\ - \ _ \\ 1 C_ `=`_K<c�/ \ / / ' \\ \\ \ '‘ ^A''y/\/\\\\\yy 1 / // i i 1 \\ \;�C \�/��J i /fie//- j / // \\ \\ \\ AV -1 / l i i iT �T,o / // \\ \\ \ \\,�� I 1 i Il / /- / +v/ \\ \\ \�- \\ \ I j I /I / / / . / �mI I l 11�--r1 / / .% \ : \ \\ \ � � I I // / \\\ /%' \\ I I r e ----/i / �/ \ \ \ V Ig \ \ c/ / \\\��`` • \ \ \ 1 I'> \ \ I / ^\c -\ ,Y\ \\ \\ \\L — — --- I—�C\\�G\\ 1 --��------ C \� +\ \Y y i-^,e\ \. \\ I Nis Hy as t��rs awl as'J j ---�Ti1!�r�'� \ \ --- i y___ \\�\ \ • s ! \`!•��3 `�' a sabr I "V.inH uW XL O) '.,o'_yn/ / I I \\ \�\ \\ \\�� \\ . �� I a o _' I I r",["r moor. \\\ �\ \\ • IDAtG .'S l''VI'y' '','N-Lcd Q"-yq'�v `LC -1/ COSMIC LAWN) I I )iiow"' \ \\\ Io 0C \\\\� \ � `A.�fmJ .7.111: 111.• t S„�.e I \ y ,.� r `tea \ \ ��I►. lift• CIL' ' 1 "��L •"''l i- --- its Y :__ ' I \' Z S. TH ST.T�Y \ �Ctin y �it _ _ 4`�r, j 1- -�- tm; p •f \ ':yO, jI t 10' „\`� o I \`7 m 4%, \,�7. �;\+0!_1/p/ i,' /--, ,/ i'.• C• .� l i °• Q° I d�:`%� ,I�. \ ` ` �• I\\�• z �. , 6R ♦ \ `` 14 F4p6 / a, / 1 I I S�ORMWAT£R--'�, \ 44-„ ,4� 42 ``4I`- r1 �J9� J8V YN6 \ 1 Il I ' T .,.—_ I�• y 1 I, i I ACr'___ ��`:: ., 1� ••O ,IC1 ! \� g NUMBLR Da r •L'347\� • �O�l\'`� \airy, _A , / /-• � \;•• :\I '-."✓ ' b \ , a z • Cr I3478'40- \ �C. \ N\ok -,7-4' , - I v, �,\\ r.: �,-IP I "� ,`v 1, P O`00. ' pIR /,, C2 287772° ��"MrEr i "`'��\ i 1`,5% \' -- -- - -— 1�Jj,�` ie_p •'•BRA- C e! N.' 4 w`�`. w re V- 1* re:' \,l\ � ( , /� • 'OAD- •Q° 0�\ \` +.` -- 1 se _ :\.:, �� \` �y [�Ooo�., wip .• , r°�,\`\Gj� /'O e/ gill li\\ ^�..\ ©•- , / L. J. �,PM1 ' / `. 1 ��\ c ` `V - 0I`'•i \I \\I%( we,' 11 O \ OR�;.. itp, i ~ ' I� �, PRACr�- -, ( % ! 45 r /46° (,, 48 /•i'49 r �*5IO °fl�,' ,p�° ( ' / x I •�j'\ 1��' • 40 s� I` '/ =..'C-- iipy.,^yy ` 6�� - �p�_,�S�O(�\ t\} O. 557_'i /(� ' O ,,y w o 00. 1 I ,f" \' \ 1 Q - `I' ;�\ 1 l 1 t /l�/.%r(/� i •r f. ( 'r �,,`r il. ° :i I1 I v� \\ - ��41. \ J o,` `_ �iqj,.;`z% 55 .54;;y 53 • ''nn�Y• p°- ►j �'I 0 Ilbl _---1 e. sc,t[ I 40,1,' °— I , _/,IOI --�. - \ _ U 10 4 1► °L1� 1 .0), , -ti /C_ 1 y Gn'or R[xroH ,�\•_-_ _ D,�/,le �� '/C, ( S� @••. / �/1 / \ \ ..,- \ 1!., 1— .J 2 n,Irr or IN PARK -•�� . \ \ / �� I 1 ,�-'�;7,- - 3°8- `r',•'9 ;11 r9,``Q n.i- ir_ le ,s \ . q _I / \\ �. s I19 f I Q�\ . �Q`ac7• +"11 - .e=:�'•'' ' % ' O al j -00 ze�\ } ````��i % 1 7! ' w!'� .- I ti i L mill: / i os f�o O A T t• nab' -/ I• \ i , , QI` `.,�'d / Q yry+ ', �,1 f i l l IvFi•o un,. I I \. q 1- I ENTIRE S TE TO BE CLEARED. \ \\\ _ ,\\ r'-. t; 1 II 0'O,wi) ° `.25"./ I` '\.1 ' I I $ NOTE• [Pj.LI/ /^ / /�•/e''� 1 1 0 a.fry `1 1 ` \`.I �_—```_ p a d L I APPLICANT RETAINS THE RICNr �~ /./ • 'ems 1 ! r r r --1 TO SALE ADOIRONAL TREES \ / i I .ti A,- / 1t I, 'z4•/ `r J t I- I IF SITE CONDITIONS PERMIT. [' L/•5.\tie' /'• `\\• --L11° ``- ' I I I i ,'� TRACr� + C1 •:.t . r'1 j11`I, • a. -1O I I k L I �\ '/ !8-/ ' - iV> 4/$.Q\,'-`9 \/1II -I : I a TREE LEGEND \ \ p+• I ,x . • r�`�` , \ F I HC COCK ' \ L -'-22 r lu i ` I I I I . LON?(R AS HOICO �/ \\ q.., Ie i \ II MADRONA 1 I �' I 1 o wa auuKra°te a°uc usrrR I' / . \` \\ I 21, I r 'l I]--).'MIRO OCGOUOUS ," \ \ O I I _--�—� \ / 1 1 0 W;,-g,[r"r(OR c[usr(R \ \ !ail lI, 1 \ % / J , O ]I'A[ARLCR”"X gg'eUS - `\. \\_,`` `20 Q ! — --i \\ / / / WdNUUAt RICC OR L[USrCR .� C/S \ / 1 rAcT r� Y g •\\ ��„ I '" KKK' �' a' I I \\ r �a oea.„e.rrs. t• �4. � caw mar CS. / I I \ \ \ \\ f t1I $„ \ `PI hz;;:rru;� sr" I I III \ .. \\ \\\ i . ,� vs ,r.,,,.a..Ps, o,s.nor ,ncn.r I I \ \ _--___ma rFA,y� •r..\ I,• .;'v. `• 4_J •as MG' :._�... .�.,,.�• I ..• _ I .`ili?iii ah`l'=e N\ \ \ \\ Y , - '• p • 'rs..tronCvrt .fuss m-r' 4 OL 733000 \ \\ \\ \ \ �•�_ •� '�'�.,�,,.' //. sw ea...r.^;w•sr I aor..,. I 1 1 \ waumc \ \ \ \\ 3 S.I'TH ST. '�. .tit �'k A. -_- 1 r-- / \ \ ZaJ I x :r [ v1',V�4. ` 0,'O:>�T,/ aS1tWMWA7fR• ..�% \•�`\ ' // , .I , _�`-- I 1 \\ t\ \ tr t\. O O I ::r„$,rM, , .1j'h: { • ♦ , �/ r . N. i t 4s�_'` 1 42 `4r-• 40, ,..IY I JO �I�17._ t t t t `, \\\1, I- 1 •r.u,..rw ►fRl1•`t\► 'or `\ :� -1' 7S :) \ s\\I , f \ \1( w NUMBER DELTA RADIUS I ,`�'�+ `\�`� '. �`� ,it .'•1 IF 1`�.♦ . ./',</ , \ \ t • \\ \JI \ ¢ Cl 1J428.40" 25.00' S8.68' \I \ �Z • C2 2827'12" 125.00' i �\ .•~.jam %-\� .-�I--i-1-:, ..- _r UN' ,�� \\ `\ \ ` , 0 FA- `\ I .��V �. t I.. _ 1— 1 45 / /46 7ttiili,,44-. ;so,�--60- SI-'e• `y` `\\ ,- ,i / , I "T' / �g��\\.,, ,I� / r• plyN/r,/ \. ' I ^t 11 i!1� !) r 1 1 t .+• �,I \I \ . /• •' [ - I,il Ill./ ' .' rl : I\`-- \\ !\ \1\ .11 '1I. \\\ l,� , t MrL i�i ', iiii/i4r i r /''� Minh- \ , 1 1 w' sa• I \\ '.�\ (.7 , ,i, __ 87-'/.�i(". / i.' i , 1""• I �\ I� II rA oW sc.m x� i *��' �\ �,� \, \=-�q��,a 56 55 .34 1 SU r l�'�'_ I .,- �0%I I I I I al , I, ;46. \ 4 / \ • --<:-:2...2 '" s-,.. <I' PI -\ • /"C-- y1 I Oi I �7 \`\��We's� ,�, l,. � t��i" —,• F. ., M / t _ </r; r r /‹ \ 1 • • I _ <,'i,/. ,---- = t 1 '/ 4 \ �' li �� I•1 Z I h,.\``� ` .,eo9 =`ri 8 I, '10,/, ''fl''-- _ _r: _'u 1 \ '\\.. 1f17 / \ \\/J f ,#• • n r' 4/ F - i•. r I ALL LOTS TO HAVE IN0/NOUAL \ +�S�_ 9 '/ `1 '° i .ir I 26 .`i 1 FtID`+`• — / • INFIL IRA DON SYSTEMS FOR \\ .e�\• -�1 7 t6--,15,, '14 13 , I�tI I i,�1 \�.�--F�pLG`'i IIII)"'1 / /-\ 1 I ROOF&DRIVEWAY RUNOFF. ,� w'\\' •• r (to." f r ' I -_ ' rpmavr's" �`l' \ (14'a F 1/1�!—� 1 \\ \� I� �.►�. \ '�' , I 1 1Ik aa,a�' , 1 1 1� vasasm \\ I— —I I• `•\'\ • `1\F`-% , I t�1�g , li .\`7 1 1� dal .,-\•"11411'.... • ' ,r, ._ f ‘. .... . r I 1 • N:\ :1441,—.\\ :),:3(- 1 V... -1-' - --- ' --. .0 I I .s. I r �,; ,o. : , , .,I F. I L----- \11 Q''dq\ C�� \ 110 ,/ i„ \ \ iii \\ \`\—. • • HERITAGE RENTON HILL TIMELINE March 24, 1999 Renton School District selects Bennett Development as the purchaser of the Renton Hill site. See Exhibit"A" September 2, 1999 Bennett Development has a mandatory Pre-application meeting with the City of Renton regarding a proposed Sixty-nine (69) lot subdivision on Renton Hill. See Exhibit"B" November 4, 1999 Bennett Development hosts a voluntary community meeting for the Renton Hill,River Ridge and Falcon Ridge communities at the Renton Community Center. Over One. Hundred residents showed up to discuss the proposed development. See Exhibit"C", "D", "E" January 6,2000 Bennett Development has a voluntary 2nd Pre-application meeting with the City of Renton.regarding a proposed Sixty(60) lot subdivision on Renton Hill. The new proposal incorporates the City of Renton,the community, and the Seattle Public Utilities contributions and ideas. See Exhibit"F" January 25,2000 Bennett Development has a voluntary community meeting with the River Ridge Homeowners Association and the President of the Renton Hill Association. The meeting allowed the Associations to review and comment on the revised proposed subdivision before submitting to the City of Renton. April 3,2000 Bennett Development sends out a letter and a proposed subdivision map to the Renton Hill community leaders: Dwight Potter(Falcon Ridge Homeowners Assoc.), Douglas Bergquist(River Ridge Homeowners Assoc.), and Ruth Larson(Renton Hill Community Assoc.) for a last review before submitting a subdivision application to the City of Renton. See Exhibit"G" May 4,2000 Application is deemed complete by the City of Renton for a Fifty-six(56) lot subdivision. May 26,2000 Hearing date of June 27, 2000 is postponed for further traffic counts and plat revisions. Plat revisions were revised to a Fifty-seven(57) lot subdivision. The City also required an additional week of traffic counts during the softball/baseball season at Phillip Arnold Park. Bennett Development responded with three weeks of additional traffic counts. See Exhibit"H" j • KLi CAOOL -� Renton School District 403 ICI dtTti 300 Southwest 7th Street,Renton, Washington 98055-2307 403 BUSINESS OFFICE March 25, 1999 • Mr. Arvin Vander Veen, SIOR Colliers International 601 Union Street, Suite 5300 Seattle, WA 98101-4045 _ Dear Arvin: Attached is a signed copy of the purchase and sale agreement between Bennett Homes and Renton School District for the purchase of the "Renton Hill" site. The agreement was approved at the March 24, 1999 board meeting. We are excited about this transaction and look forward to working with them over the next year. Thanks for all of your help, Arvin. • Sin erely, o;Uitgd— Debra Aungst . Assistant Superintendent: Business JI attachment . c: Judy Bigelow, PGE Kohlwes Education Center �v . : i . •44/4a QUI7J 1•/+/A -1-1-44,/ • ,. .,.1 ' ring • 11-1-40dd cfloNW - G4w4-1• ..1..W1414 . • • . • . bl • . \ . . . . • . . ' -V . •.,•.. - . • 9) ) • . , • • • •... • • _ 4 4 .(wity1-12 69 —Ai ---- . . 14......0004.2 04462120.4 V. . - ift Geticf)-bwi-lazy - . *p.\ :: • • , i.o # 44. ' ill' • •- crismos,9 4.•‘42*/..1.0241402549 ,d, ,/.-1,7•41411V _.• 1. i N ov s 41 • . k. . . s . , . . . • ' • 4K ' 14 bs. I' 0 4/..,,b4 *I -iptiv Jrn • 11 : h -7."11-.174w/km-rri igioldAPP dth, • 1_. -, - 1 • ' fl n : • . • 4s $1) rk : . 41 • .rir < s•nr#NhoweivavitionM1c . • Jo tonbmilavt st-bump 47/141 Jed • LI .<4.• - lie a • •. - • . 's : b •mk-zo WY .121/9 Z/B2)100 . . •a 41 • r . . • . t ‘.V . . ,---. - '. 4 • 41;i4aper aim,,,Ix • !Aeolis. =I.VANd — '.— EI —I-----' 44. . #I. .4 ar ' . . . i • s4 - • \ I•33.. I ' . '• Is 1 .1 ; I+ '. ' • ". ' . # , :' . • . \-% ja r - • --46 . )0 •• q5 .'21.0 iv • $ . • • • . r • . ": I ".9 v ki, 1 . OttiwZibt \e/l% 1344 . - 40 1 I • { '45 1 'ra I . • ...:'Ll-"t,fft/mVt-1 ,_.-ladi 01--• 9.' • 0 . -----.--, • \ . . - 1 , • . . , • I�ii11�1 BENNETT HOMES October 21, 1999 Re: Community Meeting Dear Neighbor, You are invited to attend a meeting to discuss a proposed housing development in your community. The property, which is directly across Beacon Way South from Arnold Park, is approximately 10 acres in size and zoned for 8 homes to the acre. Bennett Homes was recently selected by the Renton School District as the buyer of their property. We have met with the City of Renton on a preliminary basis and now wish to get neighborhood input into the property's development. Here are the details: When: November 4, 1999 7:00 p.m. • Where: Renton Community Center 1715 Maple Valley Highway Renton,WA 98055 Directions: See map on reverse • We look forward to meeting with you and learning more about your neighborhood, as well as answering any questions you may have. Sincerely, • BENNETT CORPORATION C__Likcg...Ls• ' Chris Austin Vice President 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite I 00-A, Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 646-4022 Fax: (425) 646-4024 SEE 6n11v,1 MAP ''✓'a'lpt;ri,'A;; .:Z,.r.: ;•lir"•>.,'rS, „lryl"/.%,•':d,;l' ^H,5 .'4•', /',,. 4:fl1•P l''n 1.;. ;.t•,r'. r•4:.," L V! Sao-,, ''I' /, 4. •/ ;•y; 9'r.% ::i`% i:a.n "'!i,r •; H, ,q.'•;!,'.r,:,i:Y,:� l,, ', l, df, r.4 rl:;.4. ,,/x, j, •,y. 1. '.4. 4. . • r.r5 !rbt. l 4, '';f:�/�;,y,. sf, �"�vl,, ,', „i�r , ':,q' J.. .( ,n . r .,./ �`9rlr;l'4: /;: ./'r'•'r /, r ,:i/;<y':,,4' .i.,.,�, .,a/s. /, ,yi :i :;L.n 4^ '''?71, , '• .LS ,:rn^>, ,,h'i,m't %•.4; a r t:,; "•'�"' r�h„_. ,�.,•.,,z r..y:r�•,•,,,,,,; .!,,x4.4,L" ..,,4,y,,,,•.',:E//,." , :'.•n,,.ih, ,!$. ..yray4,,,�. .}. ,,r,.4x,.rr, .4:1„4. '3f,.(- ;'„ 9ri: • ,'''��' i > 1. :;'.:„{:(r .,rn S',. r 1�4� ,.,. �'i•. r•7bn"ia. ..,/ ' ,tH,(•., amagmtlimmimusimmII : ;;:. , NE 4...„. N ;!1AI 11„,,:,,„. WIND 6' ' •Q�t`+.' n: 'i ,, CEDAR RIVER ¢ lli } .' .r PL NSIP � a 1 .:/,, Trutt RO'S NE i), 1, :y :!�;,, NE w i t; yyg / 4!yS RENTON / ,�x i {,'i,C.v, L I f M1h4 ,!'�� '\:k '7.,.. :Iq Q 4 I. , ', r404 '�` { r x, Id FRNDAIE,�, //: 2500 L,•`•`:•I'CN"",. - t/crv, I:'_r•, & QUOrnt «mil.%irl4iUi '.GJ:, MII1 ]E& ,7 ; ;m RENTON '- e. O r, ;,;{" rdIRPURTt , = • .. `r�i — // • ma•x, ,s' � 'I S, 1100° yof -•w.• SI 300:: > ' ::�;, r— � �� • c' •ERty.,. of • V CTORI.. Q v2,Z. I,w -''r;NI ,7 9:/� ' /^, 4414-. • • ..•::.,, , ,:$T,',..7,i.'• ..,- - .....;•'..?„..- : -5,.:,1'..,.'. .(11 ..',;:,All:.-'..,.P: ; ',•';',14,FI•V" .,/, '.1,7:44 ,1 . EETII\IG • (1 • ::1i:,�t //..�� •q'ry�"r ..�, fir, ,,:,i, /J� .▪4 a. fit,•pLL J� y ,ry �'" rr il4 L f/� :ti• y ry �:r 1, yy" xi! ,•y5 -�l � qq rf�a'Y,�� l� .F - kti. 'x v J. !it - „x�t/ „r.taa.r ',l ,'...Ell,i.':.:.:.:..-:.f:''...:::::::::;,'-i.';:.1',..'.:.... ..,f`rV, ,7,•--i d'',a i_ N w'P' R _ (( u S�f ,3,r�4 r. 4y, 4,r.,,,N r p „y:,l;j -CV - '� ./y�, 3,. r� . z, .'� S' 'V,x.. y',I uy%, S `+ .?� N sr. • /. 16. .R �S- aLL ENTbNu T. �{ r •t,:e M E 'N ,.....:,:,..,„,....,„,„,,,i,MILUV invirruiii.;;;;--...-...;_..- -_-_-_-_-_-- U, - ,nJ' ,,,,;_ y. s: � eti s q F ?5��.s.-...*--........CC .4. • *IP .fi,..,0,,ma�y!! '" 'iAr' - ,V,•, '3a :R, ,A' Re/"It • • J n 5' 4'J S +�i-� P �1. ti ,r I 4 �' Y. tid �'1 it. R D� ;3 $: t d�`'s.. fF y�4,� /,5/;�. +,fir ,` �3�5 F �� • tei • 1 A 5TH ;ST of ,�`. ;',''' ,,., , r,;;r: ,:4 J ... /': �• :STN `� �.tl"t �'/r,,, x,,;; .�'.. ;O ,tom, 1 iilL, Via,;.. I t• y ti:' ,f: 'n h 4. Y � -5 ,ryrtrt,� v [ r, •704-44 ! 'r� �',�`'.� .%'1e r • ,� ��: r..;/F � 5�y, " *T%f�"�,J:I� t� . .. :.R yr, a, _ .,,�/, � ,Y1! •.yG .,1. :S';;,{{�, ,'��, .> ^"R. �t .l cal .\ ,!� :;t , ,� nrlY{,�.(' ,of 4� "^ „mil v4 Y" _, : �67'f� ad 3L_ ., A: ,, n, • -"' rY f , ryx �S„ as �P l ° y4 is • :i2 '/ � �:S;i'r �'Q 5•".,�' - ;i9 y, �r4 p4'�` �t4 �.�Ci '�s /r i;e�a' S•�r �Y '!s� ; E,',}i,.', �,,.t r��i 1y�x ,:� .:w,.,t� �n j �i�!'� �,', }. r < �;r'":. ; %',4S ,r . ,_ .44 ---;5:'',-. a .5�'77,.T Y'!'(4, �'. j'-��,yy'IP,O tr � �• r..+ M to Fb� !,a ,,�/r,, ,*.z'�:,,. • • *1 i� B ?~;/ �ca�;/v P. • r 5 N !,44(Cs. .s yl/ 'rR`a if..7';��Cn��....vv;� 'iny'yy�w;v4 ay a?k",-fix�t Z�.�� ,iy�:9 ',�•'r' y',._ '•y !$.:'- , , Si? „ .,.•;�,v^,^,.. , ':l _ i. 2 !C`.✓. „ / !;•/;A rA•-1. - R T'ti,.. F.1 t'r.:: Of a'S,� 1. .- Vl 4�"f•' i9 t y,x `i� Y" 'y`. "d A� 'r, :+4i M �:ys,�;i�'; 9., t 1^a=� Site Fr.� e i '..,.5 �% .'r•,^4.is % may'+a, y j r 7' r1[ (� ,r,:y, ��I,t' d �,,5,. „ '^515 ''�7- �• j y. __ • r...,,: — - ct� xc'1/,'{.^ ell ltEineif E�.�itAdi VV}/,A7 �'; c'•r•, d ��z+.r. hlP�:ri ,'Yitsia.;.�,, :. z' hs .I G ,�l r$ y, r 't { yy�LL,,�1 • yM n y,= ,y • w ;rrr. .r i�.70-: I ,^CE E r a• t �y KT Ri;-,` t- h• YS" �:n V' A'R• ON,'VIkIAGE'•:PL'i'! •;;,�.`: ,,.i:: • I.1.. 1415' ',h,.v .i.' !t �^ C• 'r:=,ter: ,. .. ,l/JpnA,r .J• x.(' /::' '+ -/ ..,,rr��nNy,�7(i:''',9'.':L., li',., `J'. F.. �..� ✓,/�.(y'x�"/.�+►VA ,{. .:Jx;� y M �fi 9/I"'L'�'n��..�!� 1 .. y':/'!4pid%,: % • •/ ''.,.�' ''l rl,.'rv..4,'i,:'ti:�%.::1—i ;',L',;% i!{l.. . `ice: ;yx 7.1/ i �•;;":,,;J,.+r1r'"ttl nt,• '•♦ 'y%- 7,0001 N" p ;� N• ♦ _r .'V wi 'S 16TH.•.ST. ?et _,•• ... r..Q,•',• 7; 4 �i• .� O� (_ A. i p L) .' 5. •...;N 5iQ '! S', _ ,,'I;.F .• N4':: ,/,:N'1.'14.": l`'Y-� •.'y,.! C,x ml "•7 �./.':. /;wr .... _ ,+'L'';; {.,'"., :�YH' tnn '!+"'"„i l r,i•j"4iQ y ,,, �,.. ',I'. .r ''k .1, ✓.4▪'4•rt L, y Ly I V ';. •i.,r ''lii4' — c ':'t "i`•:J.1.' • ray. s ,,.`7„•,r!ti'4, • Igi S:,18 II Pt, Si :,:n •.,•.r_. ;':,,}iq"4s .,,,%> ,/ ,.t 191 O 4r Q • 4a • �,�",urQ 4; � S!� �'.;,ru't5• k C 'i; ',?"`_ Q ,r '!t, r '.� /r�•.., V � . y 1 ,. (C' '✓.t ,5krl• •,!i.;I • .i : ;+ '' I.i,%,:.'%.4, • '54;: :,• Q '1T' .l.('.. I,' rZ,3 'Ye G. p $'_.:-19� ''$7�,'{ . ,. �•• 'y{. �Cf � •-. lg •;,; SE 157TH ST F J ZU1p��• P( ly. 'J .l r.►. ;;'m RALC.N' • • �}�y�1ie I19 Q Ae>, • ,TH A 11 _ on Di inr-r ,!+ 1 _ Sf•215T .,, ._ „,, . 1110 (ED 1 ' Renton Hill Neighborhood Meeting 10 acres SE Beacon Way Name Address ' -1-.).1/1 - ,jf/ 1 4 -7odi //iA Auc S. vss” . i Acrg , , (R.D0—, Rc_.,-_ s ,, . G.Z C . - _r -/. . 9'.�4--'7 -4." defi g-e(, ////- 80 /i. 9fS . 707 , gk,f)f.frx&i, I- 17.c-f. , e =. 1-)37 �., 'tPss ,Iz IAAi M e9/t! 35 Ceaf o ;'Ioos y— - . . J /� s�"..-ii;/- ,,,x) 5d, ff, s37 . . 1 #J ((t(-6 00 sL� `I'c 6 stir St •9 S o r"5- /P ly IF'AS o"( - Gt6' -� n S pL-y �- 09Wi� � / 13 7 G S ..� r1 � _ 4, 9) d s- ?'2Va/4(1 1' ( 3 . 5 7 / 41 1-1/4-z' s Ge&LA-1-1- . , oS. IR tgagC- .4 k) .6, s-•L9 41.14.j_,, iojeic i/,w 4'2o C a- - . - , ...___Z a-e. e >" /V402 ,5 t - 5-7' V-7a 5 5/— Qkke t 2 Se t- C L 4.._ /,%fir �� - - eP tie/ /c 4lv eon / £At /11i 5 7, i ' L��w�' /57,6 e e-e=e cvn 1A4e7 50 e-,� 7'6f-A6'S .—1. i - 1 , (cri,j__. /3 1 .5 -:7-1___7:L_ZWIfl' . b 627 t-1 i b t . A �� S iee-i- L1 „, . _ .. _ Renton Hill Neighborhood Meeting 10 acres SE Beacon Way Name Address • dU6L&5 A/4 ,\A-r- .. (cs REiTô,J A . 51, b ic-k Zi- st.t WC----*O I- 8U� K,1 r"tee A-o s. ;4; - =�,2/FFi,J //zs ,0 WA y• -V)C‘ ----3-p‘Ak.stk-- , ici?‹- - 2Ck-C.0`"•• k../ .1j\'. • S '6- --i :. ' . /7-/-% /t ,,,W.J. /72-• ..5- -- 7d . a .0--,,iprt . .. : -,,,-,. .. 1 &az ft,41 ,4-32-) 4-7* . de6 , • 4/-iri.9 r. - - :1' - . . boAI tildes 5s3 A,...ril Aviv 1.” V.:I/via- • . ' Melb 1 3,56 coN ,;;� )-‘5] ' ' ' -T.-( IA.(0k4-,- ikii- Thci - .2-vc\-&-Acr:- - i - 1 - -: INA u+o1n.) , 433 Cedar ve . S &vd - . OI vi c 413 3 rArig.ir Ave_ S. J /iukth - �, .1 rani 'p/ i,,y . zi, . ' . a"- - -el L ulN, • !LOG, 6.54caJ kJ/9-1 S 2 lev/ Sac 1 v-e S. `1Zen'tn wA 9fe) Sc. i- --e yfrtit /v'o i e(O 6-, /1-vE c NrcJL' - osc- 1 %oAit_ WA* .--2_3 ( -,,,-oN Ao L S, .M•,s W ti 6SS kQ_ Cu.r\- 1 h N . • G l-4. C r f v S $ I.C1 gr14k kE I s c.p.--6L0d- 6,11 pi-A-- c--f I I gel.-or : • - ) (3\i'l( v Sirl LI' 'V Cej);V . . , ( D Renton Hill Neighborhood Meeting 10 acres SE Beacon Way Name Address . V'e Z et,,, Lv 4/ S C7 M `5-a 7 . tiY 0bu TE-,vx_1r Igo 7 S iA61 vAtJ.D1212. 1 ) 1 I0-7 s .-4TH Sr - T "S. i6x261e/g00._S 33d - V. to '• _ . (9411/aidS 1v7 o,ciyifi - '1frA;Oitie/ift,A/--c- MUL ��jj� (Ql LD5 1�14J S T If2D 19 i / ' G�/� ��DS .: I1 A G a'9. 1 s�,9,4 Da�Ji5 4133 c � .Av _ .S - Ra-a0.1, :6Jf4 9 - C // y33 c„�� ve 7. P s eat . r,Jp geo n�,. o�A MA n n W itce c.31/4 e 6te. .TZ'003"- - yl t Q kii 3/0 ah -1 JP S .R /a'r �?/�/1 3/0 7 Ake S Nos's— Ria< ibodeau • Iobo 4kx',91n 1— S. °IgOSS N�A� � Sob Zoo S . Heritage Arnold Public Meeting 11/04/99 Public comments made during meeting: 1. Renton Hill community leader-Ruth Larson 2. Traffic access, most streets have one lane on Renton Hill 3. Traffic study 4. 1970's gates were open for 8 months,traffic doubled, one cop had to direct traffic during rush hour. Closed gates 5. 1980's Falcon Ridge development increased crime rate 6. Gate is open in morning by Falcon Ridge for school bus access = - 7. Cedar Ave has very limited access 8. Renton Ave has very limited access - - 1 9. If development is approved, increase construction traffic will notleave room for . -• _ emergency access 10. City of Seattle controls pipeline and roadway improvements 11.Renton tax payers will pay for Seattle to tear up road for repairs on pipeline - . 12. Were will the access point be on School property? 13.Neighbors will try to stop access to School property 14.Very low crime due to limited access ' 15.Renton Hill community want more studies done on development 16.Renton Hill community wants more info from City of Renton ! 17.Renton Hill community to address concerns with City of Renton 18.Renton Hill community has open forum at Hearing 19.R8 zoning at top of range,R5-8 per net acres . 20. Can Comp Plan be changed to lower density? 21. Only multi-family allowed is duplex&townhomes 72. Is park space required? 23. City of Seattle will not grant access,unless City of Renton requested 24. Will City of Renton require curb/sidewalk on Seattle pipeline 25. What if no access is granted by Seattle? 26. Size of lots? 27. Another meeting w/more specific input, better info? 28. Are there stop lights, signs in proposal? • •29. How many new school children will live there? 30. City of Renton Fire Dept./Police Dept. against opening gates. 31.Not one Falcon Ridge representative showed. 32. Traffic&open gate biggest concern . _ .. _ . 33. Renton Hill community wants no development 34. If traffic was lowered development might be accepted __ 35. SEPA concerns, wildlife 1 • . ' . . .. • - I . , •. , .. . ,•• • . - • • -.., . . . , • . . /.: • "; ' ... • . . ,- . • . ' . tcra, • / : . .. . ... , N%—.....„____,...---",e.. v., . • ', , ... ,-7---1 1 1 '1 • • . . •. ...Spf1•0/40N• • N• t**rt • ., ,42 -r1 51 91: erl sg154-1o71 oz..1 9( : 9, i 1,7 S. ‘. ,,, . ti,.. ,, ' [ el 1 el LIM .. . 6.1301$07 . :' ''%ft- . ' l' - " • 1).; _ ____ g (-7.-.; ‘, 1 .: - r,--'s • 11. \ 7 , e%,-. -*I tu. 4 4.40 1 .. .110 11 ....___,____, . . %di' • 't .,, „—, 44 op . —„-7.—,..____. .• g-- . _ . :: li. 4f S * \St. • . 1 V .1 u % ° .1 8 _ R I to 1 ' 2! ) • > i':?. • . • . • . • . 41 . • . tc . 11'442/NAP '11.(deft,'a s lc • ..... 4A its • s ,,,F.,..iifigyrtielw4fghaq 04471.17401.9"44 4 14- stif.-4../ • --...., (r15` <5641.4 rl b 4cir 64104 \ 1) -4 /'.. .6.4004. St pt /ote". /0-V-OF ja4e.,4abs, elka.k doq, 4 lb -.< lb . •E..)o pi.•co-sme 6...a.Aft') Z., •' \ • _ Nerdtr-•••••96.- a+A•-- ii P o firr t•ro travirra, * : ei47• /%6_fed• - lzkrs . : erto.It Er•••• - 6741*. \ 1,1 IR • • . 1 • e)r.44h6lt te5let, ' Mbl-f, nroffikrf • itzgpr4 • ro-erl • 41411--1- W•11. Fgart. fttiolti •12•?-010, • , . . - . . • IVO April 3, 2000 Dwight Potter Falcon Ridge Homeowners Association • 2100 SE Eighth Renton,W A98055 Re: Development of Renton School District Property Dear Mr. Potter: On behalf of Bennett Development and the Renton School District,we wish to take this opportunity to bring you up to speed with our development plans for the school property across - from Phillip Arnold Park.We would welcome the opportunity to meet you and a small group_of- ' citizens to discuss the design aspects of the proposed development. . We have enclosed two black line drawings and a colored rendering,which represent-our proposed plan for the development.This plan is based.on-the-following goals.createi based on Citizen and City Staff input. - �, _ • Goals • Support the Neighborhood goal of keeping Beacon Way South closed to through traffic. • Support the City's goal of precluding access to the newrdevelopment off of Beacon Way South • Support the City's requirement for a fire truck access off of Beacon Way South to the south of the gate. • Address neighborhood concerns about the 5-way road intersection on SE 7th and Beacon Way SE. • Provide a transition between the park and the new development • Provide a transition between the homes in River Ridge with the new development. We believe that the proposed plan achieves these goals and that the Plan is sensitive to the surrounding homes and park. As you review the plan you should be able to see how it accomplishes the following results: 1. The 5-way intersection is reduced to a 4-way intersection 2. A portion of Beacon Way South is closed to traffic and creates additional public open space 3. Access to the new development is at a point most distant from the River Ridge development, allowing the maximum buffer. 4. Access is maintained to the Phillip Arnold Park parking access 5. A significant setback from the Homes in the new development to the existing homes on Renton Hill and the Intersection on SE 7th is created. B ennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A'.Bellevue WA 98005 • Tel: 426-709-6669 • Fax: 426-709-6563 I . Mr.'Dwight Potter April 3,20004:q1101 Page 2of2 6. A community fence and landscaping tract along Beacon Way South is created to screen the homes from the park and provide the new neighbors with privacy. This proposed tract includes areas set aside for increased intensity of buffer landscaping to alto*for large trees and a varied landscape along the property facing the park. 7. The number of homes,which back up to the park is minimized and their angle to the park allows for a more random and varied for the community as, viewed from the Park. 8. A 15 wide Landscape Buffer is provided along the property line adjacent to the homes in the River Ridge development. Our plan is to submit a formal application to the City of Renton by mid April. If you would like to set up a time to meet with us,or comment on the plans,"you:can.reach me at 425-709-6559. Sincerely, BENNETT DEVELOPMENT - • Chris Austin Vice President • Cc: Elizabeth Higgins . Debra Aungst - • 01 12101 April 3, 2000 • Douglas Bergquist ' River Ridge Homeowners Association 1801 SE Seventh Renton, WA 98055-3954 Re: Development of Renton School District Property • Dear Mr.Bergquist: • On behalf of Bennett Development and the Renton School District,we wish to take this opportunity to bring you up to speed with our development plans for the school property across • from Phillip Arnold Park. We would welcome the opportunity to meet you and a small group of _ -:- •. citizens to discuss the design aspects of the proposed development. • We have enclosed two black line drawings and a colored rendering,which represent our proposed plan for the development.This plan is based on the following goals createdibased on Citizen and City Staff input. Goals . 4s • Support the Neighborhood goal of keeping Beacon Way South closed to through traffic. • Support the City's goal of precluding access to the new development off of Beacon Way • South • • Support the City's requirement for a fire truck access off of Beacon Way South to the south of the gate. • Address neighborhood concerns about the 5-way road intersection on SE 7t and Beacon Way SE. + Provide a transition between the park and the new development p , • Provide a transition between the homes in River Ridge with the new development. We believe that the proposed plan achieves these goals and that the Plan is sensitive to the surrounding homes and park. As you review the plan you should be able to see how it accomplishes the following results: 1. The 5-way intersection is reduced to a 4-way intersection 2. A portion of Beacon Way South is closed to traffic and creates additional public open space 3. Access to the new development is at a point most distant from the River Ridge development, • allowing the maximum buffer. . 4. Access is maintained to the Phillip Arnold Park parking access 5. A significant setback from the Homes in the new development to the existing homes on Renton Hill and the Intersection on SE 76 is created. B ennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A Bellevue WA 98006 • Tel: 426-709-6669 • Fax: 426-709-6663 • Mr.Douglas Bergquist April 3,2000 Q100 Page 2 of 2 6. A community fence and landscaping tract along Beacon Way South is creat6d to screen the homes from the park and provide the new neighbors with privacy. This proposed tract includes areas set aside for increased intensity of buffer landscaping to allow for large trees and a varied landscape along the property facing the park. 7. The number of homes,which back up to the park is minimized and their angle to the park allows for a more random and varied for the community as, viewed from the Park.:, 8. A 15 wide Landscape Buffer is provided along the property line adjacent to the homes in the River Ridge development. Our plan is to submit a formal application to the City of Renton by mid April. If you would like to set up a time to meet with us,or comment on the plans,you can react me at 425-709-6559. ,. } Sincerely, BENNETT DEVELOP I NT _ QC CP—s -qPIP C1-11-.1-1°14 Chris Austin - Vice President Cc: Elizabeth Higgins Debra Aungst ' 120 • April 3, 2000 , Ruth Larson President, Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Development of Renton School District Property Dear Ms. Larson: "- On behalf of Bennett Development and the Renton School District,we wish to take this - - opportunity to bring you up to speed with our development plans for the school property across. • - from Phillip Arnold Park. We would welcome the opportunity to meet you and a small group of ' citizens to discuss the design aspects of the proposed development. We have enclosed two black line drawings and a colored rendering,which represent our proposed plan for the development.This plan is based on the following goals created-based on Citizen and City Staff input. - Goals • Support the Neighborhood goal of keeping Beacon Way South closed to through traffic. ♦ Support the City's goal of precluding access to the.new,„development off of Beacon Way South . • Support the City's requirement for a fire truck access off of Beacon Way South to the south of the gate. • Address neighborhood concerns about the 5-way road intersection on SE 7th and Beacon Way SE. - ♦ Provide a transition between the park and the new development • • Provide a transition between the homes in River-Ridge with the new development. We believe that the proposed plan achieves these goals and that the Plan is sensitive to the surrounding homes and park. As you review the plan you should be able to see how it -- - accomplishes the following results: • 1. The 5-way intersection is reduced to a 4-way intersection 2. A portion of Beacon Way South is closed to traffic and creates additional public open space 3. Access to the new development is at a point most distant from the River Ridge development, allowing the maximum buffer. 4. Access is maintained to the Phillip Arnold Park parking access 5. A significant setback from the Homes in the new development to the existing homes on Renton Hill and the Intersection on SE 7th is created. B e nn e tt Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A Bellevue WA 98006 • Tel: 425-709-6669 • Fax: 426-709-6663.- " . - - I - Ms. Ruth Larson April 3,2000 Page 2 of 2 6. A community fence and landscaping tract along Beacon Way South is created to screen the homes from the park and provide the new neighbors with privacy. This proposed tract includes areas set aside for increased intensity of buffer landscaping to allow for large trees and a varied landscape along the property facing the park. 7. The number of homes,which back up to the park is minimized and their angle to the park allows for a more random and varied for the community as,viewed from the Park. 8. A 15 wide Landscape Buffer is provided along the property line adjacent to the homes in the River Ridge development. Our plan is to submit a formal application to the City of Renton by mid April. If you would like to set up a time to meet with us,or comment on the plans,you can reach me at 425-709-6559. Sincerely, BENNETT DEVELOPMENT • 0+..14" Chris Austin Vice President • . Cc: Elizabeth Higgins Debra Aungst - a p • • • 1'0711 Gb-GUUU 1V G.7 l..l I I Uf fiCl1I UI1 -, '-/JV i...iVV 1 VGA V.... CITY f 7 .RENTON ..� Planning/Buildingprublic Works Department • Jesse Mono;Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 26,2000 Mr.Ryan A. Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053,PP,ECF Hold Letter Dear Mr.Fike As you are aware,the•comment period for the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary.Plat closed_May 19, 2000. This.week those comments have been considered by the appropriate departMtnts of the: City that are reviewing the land use action submittal,In particular,the project/park access.as :. _ - proposed was discussed in a meeting of members of the Development Services,Public Works -• (Transportation),and Community Service(Parks)Departments of the City of Renton,: _ In addition to the design of the entry to the proposed preliminary plat and Philip Arnold Park, general transportation issues in the Renton Hill area were discussed.: As you are aware,this project was scheduled for review`at the May 30,2000,Environmental - Review Committee(ERC)so thatthey couid:make a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) . Threshold Determination. At this time;additional information will be fequired prior the ERC: : meeting. Therefore,the ERC meeting;and subsequently,the public hearing previously scheduled for June 27,2000,will be rescheduled. • Until additional information,as outlined in this letter,is received and accepted as adequate,the project is on hold.as of the date of this letter. • • • As mentioned, a primary concern is related to transportation issues on Renton Hill. For this reason,please ask the-transportation engineers to-supply the following: Traffic Count • Provide traffic counts for a period of twenty-four hours per day for one week for the • following streets(not intersections): 1. S 742 Street between Grant Avenue S and Renton Avenue S 2. Cedar Avenue$ between S 4th Street and S 5th Street 3. Renton Avenue S in the 300 block Park Traffic - • • Discuss additional traffic to parks for ball field use,group picnics;and general park use and . .. how traffic generated by the park location relates to capacity of the proposed development.. • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 ®Tire paperconlains so%►ecpaed mal®nel.20%post consumer / I Ir11-GQ-41.-U lt.l 1!J•Lil .l 1 I Vf' RGI I VI/ _ ��./ -r.V I....VV I • Mr.Ryan A.Fdce Bellevue, WA 98005 Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053,PP,ECF May 26,2000 Page3 Accident Records • Provide accident incident reports for the past five years for intersections and streets in the Renton Hill area.Characterize these by nature,location,number of incidents. This area includes streets bounded by Interstate 405 on the west and north,the Shuffieton Right of Way to the south,and the Cedar River greenway to the east.The Falcon Ridge development may be excluded. Intersection Reconfiguration • Design • • The intersection reconfiguration proposed is not acceptable to the Transportation Division or -the Parks Department The existing access along Beacon Way S to the park must remain as it is now. Access to the plat should be evaluated directly from SE 7a'Court east of the Beacon Avenue ROW. This new intersection would include a stop sign for the new street at SE•7`h Court.The existing interchange would remain unchanged. •This configuration would require vehicles exiting the plat to stop at SE 7"Court,turn left onto SE 7'h Court;and stop again at the existing top sign at SE 7te Court's intersection with the Seattle Pubic Utilities'ROW, Beacon Way S.,S 7th Street,and Jones Avenue.S. Analysis • A traffic analysis of this intersection must be submitted that demonstrates that it would operate effectively given the ainoiuiY.of increased traffic generated by the proposed development and the unusual number of streets that intersect. • If you have any questions,please call me at 425-430-7382. You or the transportation engineer may also contact Neil Watts,Director of Development Engineering Plan Review at 425-430- 7278. Sincerely • • ce . Elizabeth Higgins,AiCP Senior Planner . Cc: Karl Hamilton,Transportation Planning Leslie Betlach,Parks Department Jennifer Henning,Development Services Neil Watts,Development Services Parties of Record file • • • • TOTAL P.03 CITY OF RENTON DEC 1 2 MO TMIIS11ISSI011 RECEIVED E-+i Y CLERK'S OFFICE To: ?Fced-Kaufman.Hearingryjxan Fi for City fof Renton,425-430-6515 From: Louis Malesis, Fax Number Date and Time Tuesday, December 12,2000 at 2:53PM Number of Pages I, including this cover page. If you have any problems or questions regarding this transmission, please call Please enter this letter into the record for the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat NMNOWN DEC f 4 2000 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RIVER RIDGE ESTATES HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION December 12th, 2000 City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Hearing Examiners Office Attn: Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. Kaufman; During the two previous days of public testimony much has been said and many valid issues have been raised about traffic and other problems on Renton Hill that will be compounded by the proposed development. So as not to be redundant, we simply say that we agree wholly with the other residents of Renton Hill. We would like to express our very great concern reguarding two issues which affect the River Ridge home owners much more than Renton Hill in general, they are the location of the entrance and the landscape buffer. These concerns were expressed in our letter of 12/30/99 and not adequately addressed in the proposed plat conditions. While we feel the project should be denied the following issues MUST be addressed. It appears that the entrance to the subdivision is some sort of compromise between Bennett and the City about the concerns over the Cedar River Pipeline ROW, which is owned by the City of Seattle. We urge you to require that Bennett and the City of Renton and the City of Seattle to work out a compromise entrance that would be less hazardous and more conventional. We do not believe that all possibilities have been explored. A landscape buffer is shown on the proposed plat with the exception of proposed lots 35 and 36. We ask that, should this plat be approved, the buffer be extended across lots 35 and 36. There is no mention of how this buffer is to planted or who will be RIVER RIDGE ESTATES HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION responsible for maintaining it. Since there is no native vegetation in the proposed 15 feet the entire area will need to be planted. We request that the buffer strip be closely planted with fast growing evergreen trees (leyland cypress or the like) 7 or 8 feet high and 7 or 8 feet on center. Provisions for watering and maintaining the viability of the trees should be made and strict wording should be placed in the CC&R's and on the face of the plat to assure that the buffer remains a buffer and not an extension of the homeowners back yard. A landscape bond should be posted by the developer to assure the landscaping will live. Our requests are fully in line with policy LU-40 which states" address privacy and quality of life for existing residents." Sincerely; gC 1 Louis Malesis Vice President River Ridge Estates H.O.A. A. IMAIISMISS1011. To: Elizabeth Higgins Planner for City fof Renton,425-430-723 I From: Louis Malesis, Fax Number Date and Time Tuesday, December 12, 2000 at 2:53PM Number of Pages I, including this cover page. • If you have any problems or questions regarding this transmission, please call 4. Please enter this letter into the record for the Heritage Renton Hill preliminary plat COOFRift!'ON RECEIVE® , DEC 12 2000 BUILDING lVt6ION ' RIVER RIDGE ESTATES' HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION December 12th, 2000 City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Hearing Examiners Office Attn: Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. Kaufman; During the two previous days of public testimony much has been said and many valid issues have been raised about traffic and other problems on Renton Hill that will be compounded by the proposed development. So as not to be redundant, we simply say that we agree wholly with the other residents of Renton Hill. We would like to express our very great concern reguarding two issues which affect the River Ridge home owners much more than Renton Hill in general, they are the location of the entrance and the landscape buffer. These concerns were expressed in our letter of 12/30/99 and not adequately addressed in the proposed plat conditions. While we feel the project should be denied the following issues MUST be addressed. It appears that the entrance to the subdivision is some sort of compromise between Bennett and the City about the concerns over the Cedar River Pipeline ROW, which is owned by the City of Seattle. We urge you to require that Bennett and the City of Renton and the City of Seattle to work out a compromise entrance that would be less hazardous and more conventional. We do not believe that all possibilities have been explored. A landscape buffer is shown on the proposed plat with the exception of proposed lots 35 and 36. We ask that, should this plat be approved, the buffer be extended across lots 35 and 36. There is no mention of how this buffer is to planted or who will be CITY 0#FIS f'ON RECEIVED DEC 12 2000 BUILDING DIVI6 ON ", ` ' RIVER RIDGE ESTATES HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION responsible for maintaining it. Since there is no native vegetation in the proposed 15 feet the entire area will need to be planted. We request that the buffer strip be closely planted with fast growing evergreen trees (leyland cypress or the like) 7 or 8 feet high and 7 or 8 feet on center. Provisions for watering and maintaining the viability of the trees should be made and strict wording should be placed in the CC&R's and on the face of the plat to assure that the buffer remains a buffer and not an extension of the homeowners back yard. A landscape bond should be posted by the developer to assure the landscaping will live. Our requests are fully in line with policy LU-40 which states" address privacy and quality of life for existing residents." Sincerely; 0./ALALouis alesis Vice President River Ridge Estates H.O.A. I1It 7 Giver" 'dti l ' CITY OfR NtON RECEIVED DEC 12 2000 BUILDING DIVt61ON m , • LU19 00 -' 53„I i'yJ GEOTECH September 14, 1999 CONSULTANTS, INC_ 13256 NE 20th Street,Suite 16 JN 99330 Bellevue,WA 98005 (425)747-5618 FAX(425)747-8561 • The Bennett Corporation 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 204 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Attention: Ryan Fike DEVELo OF Subject: Transmittal Letter— Geotechnical Engineering Study C!� FIN-8NNiNG Proposed Heritage Arnold Project South 7th Street and Beacon Way Southeast AIR 4 8 2OO Renton, WashingtonRECEIVED Reference: Hart Crowser, Inc.; Abandoned Mine Assessment, Heritage Arnold Properly, Renton, Washington; August 16, 1999. Dear Mr. Fike: We are pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report for the proposed residential subdivision to be constructed at the Heritage Arnold property in Renton. The scope of our work consisted of exploring site surface and subsurface conditions, and then developing this report to provide recommendations for general earthwork, design criteria for foundations, retaining walls, and pavements and mitigation of potential coal mine subsidence hazards. This work was authorized by your acceptance of our proposal, P-5004, dated August 16, 1999. The subsurface conditions of the proposed building site were explored with fourteen test pits that encountered native topsoil and weathered, gravelly sand overlying dense to very dense, gravelly sand. Loose fill with concrete rubble, construction debris, and household garbage was encountered as deep as 13 feet below existing grade on the western portion of the site. It appears that the small rise in this area consists of fill. Single-family residences may be supported on conventional foundations bearing directly on native, medium-dense to dense, gravelly sands. Depending on the final site grades and on the locations of the residences, some overexcavation may be required to expose competent bearing soils. The fill soils are not suitable for supporting the loads associated with the proposed development; foundations in these areas either will need to be overexcavated, or be pile- or pier-supported. The site is underlain by three deep coal seams, which were mined until the early 1 920s. Hart Crowser, Inc. developed a report detailing mine activity and potential subsidence issues at the subject site. Applicable recommendations from their study have been incorporated into this report. The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Transmittal Letter—Page 2 The attached report contains a discussion of the study and our recommendations. Please contact us if there are any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further assistance during the design and construction phases of this project. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Marc R. McGinnis, P.E. Associate EMT/MRM: alt _ GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Proposed Heritage Arnold Project South 7th Street and Beacon Way Southeast Renton, Washington This report presents the findings and recommendations of our geotechnical engineering study for the site of the proposed subdivision in Renton. We were provided with a topographic map. Mead Gilman &Associates developed this plan, which is dated July 28, 1999. Development of the property is in the planning stage, and detailed plans were not made available to us. Based on conversations with Ryan Fike, we understand that the site will be developed with a number of single-family residences. We anticipate that access to the residences will be via paved common streets and private driveways. We were also provided with the Abandoned Mine Assessment, prepared by Hart Crowser, Inc. This report, which is dated August 16, 1999, discusses historical coal mining activity at the subject site and provides recommendations to protect the development from significant hazards presented by potential ground subsidence. . SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE CONDITIONS The Vicinity Map, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site. The triangular, approximately 10.4-acre site is located near the intersection of South 7th Street and Beacon Way Southeast. The property is bordered on its southern, angled side by the Cedar River Pipeline easement, and on its northern and eastern sides by single-family residences and undeveloped woodlands, respectively. 1 The northeastern property corner.is located at the top of a steep, undeveloped slope. This slope has an estimated height of 30 feet and an inclination of 50 to 60 percent. The terrain on the site is generally rolling, with small rises and hollows located throughout the parcel. It appears that some grading has been done on the property, resulting in a steep, U-shaped cut slope located near the center of the site. An abandoned gravel road winds through the southeastern side of the site and ends at the steep cut slope. The flat area at the base of the cut slope may have been a gravel pit at some time during the past. The small rise located on the western side of this flat area consists of fill; some pea gravel is visible on the surface. The westernmost portion of the site is strewn with large amounts of household garbage and construction debris, and appears to have been used as a dump. The eastern portion of the site is densely wooded with tall evergreen and deciduous trees. The ground is covered with ferns, blueberry and blackberry bushes, and other low-growth vegetation. No obvious signs of slope instability were observed during our site visit. Additionally, no visible indications of air shafts, trenches, or ground subsidence were observed on the portions of the site that we traversed. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC: • The Bennett Corporation - JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The subsurface conditions were explored by excavating fourteen test pits at the approximate locations shown on the Site Exploration Plan, Plate 2. The field exploration program was based upon the proposed construction and required design criteria, the site topography and access, the subsurface conditions revealed during excavation, and the scope of work outlined in our proposal. The test pits were excavated on August 26, 1999 with a trackhoe. 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 backhoe bucket. The Test Pit Logs are attached to this report as Plates 3 through 9. The test pits encountered native topsoil overlying loose, gravelly sand that became medium-dense to dense with depth. This native sand contained occasional boulders. The test pits on the westernmost corner of the site encountered loose fill that contained construction debris and concrete and asphalt rubble to depths of 10 to 13 feet. Native sand was encountered underlying the fill, except in Test Pit 3, which revealed fill to the maximum 12-foot depth that was possible. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs. 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 No groundwater seepage or wet soil was observed during excavation. It should be noted that groundwater levels vary seasonally with rainfall and other factors; the absence of groundwater in our explorations does not eliminate the possibility that groundwater could be encountered during future excavations. However, due to the granular nature of the site soils, encountering significant near-surface groundwater is unlikely. We anticipate that groundwater could be found between the near-surface weathered soil and the underlying denser soil. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on our explorations at the subject site, it is our opinion that construction of the proposed single-family residences is feasible from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. The proposed residences may be supported on conventional foundations bearing directly on medium-dense to dense, native soil. Depending on final site grading, some overexcavation may be required to expose competent sand. The loose fill encountered on the western corner of.the site is not suitable GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 3 to support the loads associated with the proposed development. The fill should be removed from building areas, or deep foundations should extend to the underlying, native, gravelly sand. We can provide recommendations and design criteria for driven piles or drilled piers, if requested. The steep slope near the northeast corner of the property may experience shallow slope movement in the future. To protect against structural damage, houses and other occupied buildings should be set back at least 25 feet from this slope. No clearing or grading should occur within 10 feet of the slope's crest. Water from drains and impervious surfaces should not be directed toward the steep slope. The site is underlain by three deep coal seams which,were mined until the early 1920s. Hart Crowser, Inc. completed an assessment of the historical mine use and potential hazards associated with development over abandoned mines. Their study concludes that there is a risk of noticeable differential foundation settlement due to ground subsidence. However, the maximum calculated ground strain would result in a differential settlement of approximately 3 inches in a distance of 50 feet. Because of the approximately 80 years that have elapsed since the last documented mining, it is likely that most subsidence has already occurred. Therefore, the risk of significant area-wide subsidence is low. We highlight the following recommendations as applicable to the proposed development: • All footings should be continuous, with increased steel reinforcement, to span potential isolated subsidence areas and reduce differential settlement. • Post-and-beam construction should be considered to allow for relatively easy releveling in the event of settlement. • Concrete slabs-on-grade should be avoided in favor of floors on joists. • All new construction should include vapor barriers and well-ventilated crawl spaces to mitigate mine gas emissions. • Rigid structural materials, such as concrete and masonry, should be avoided where possible in favor of more flexible materials like steel and timber. • Avoid siding, weather stripping materials, and interior floor and wall coverings that are settlement-sensitive. • Plan regular maintenance for weather stripping, utilities, and mechanical systems which may be affected by building movement. At the time of earthwork, any areas of fill in structural areas should be thoroughly investigated to verify that they are not underlain by old air shafts or mine openings. Ground subsidence could result in distress or damage to pavements and utilities. Periodic maintenance and repair of these elements should be expected. Where the existing fill is not removed, on-grade elements such as pavements and slabs would experience noticeable long-term settlement. Pavements over existing fill should be underlain by at least 18 inches of gravelly structural fill to reduce, but not eliminate, differential settlement. Final slopes in developed portions of the site should be graded to an inclination of no steeper than 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). The erosion control measures needed during the site development will depend heavily on the weather conditions that are encountered. We anticipate that a silt fence will be needed around the GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 4 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 single-family residences can be supported on conventional continuous footings bearing on undisturbed, native, gravelly sand, or on structural fill placed above this competent, native 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 footings have minimum widths of 12 and 16 inches, respectively. The foundations should be reinforced to span a minimum distance of 10 feet without soil support, similar to grade beams. They should be bottomed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish ground surface. Footing subgrades must be cleaned of 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 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is appropriate for footings supported on medium-dense to dense gravelly sand. For footings supported on structural fill, an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf is appropriate. A one-third increase in these design bearing pressures may be used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. 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 0.45 • Passive Earth Pressure 350 pcf GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation ` ` JN 99330 September 14, 1999 • Page 5 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 to 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 within 100 feet of the ground surface is best represented by Soil Profile Type Sc (Very Dense Soil). The site soils are not subject to seismic liquefaction because of their dense, nature and because of the absence of near-surface groundwater. 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 350 pcf Coefficient of Friction 0.45 Soil Unit Weight 135 pcf Where:(i)pcf is pounds per cubic foot,sand(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 only. 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 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 6 to be given the wall dimensions and the slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate 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 and Waterproofing 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. If the native sand is used as backfill, a drainage composite similar to Miradrain 6000 should be placed against the backfilled retaining walls. The drainage composites should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. For increased protection, drainage composites should be placed along cut slope faces, and the walls should be backfilled with pervious soil. 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 above recommendations are not intended to waterproof below-grade walls. The performance of any subsurface drainage system will degrade over time. Also, groundwater drainage patterns can change, even if seepage is not evident in the temporary excavation. Therefore, if future moist conditions or 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. 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, utilities, and existing structures, if there are no indications of slope instability. Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 7 the native sand at the subject site would generally 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. 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 fora relatively short duration to allow for the construction of foundations, retaining walls, or utilities. Temporary cut slopes should be protected with plastic sheeting during wet weather. The cut slopes should also be backfilled or retained as soon as possible to reduce the potential for instability. Please note that sand can cave suddenly and without warning. Utility 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, all 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. Any disturbance to the existing steep slope beyond the northeastern corner of the site may reduce the stability of the slope. Damage to the existing vegetation and ground should be minimized, and • any disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. Soil from the excavations should not be placed on, or near; the slope. - DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS Foundation drains are required where crawl spaces or basements will be below a structure, or the outside grade does not slope downward from a building. Drains should also be placed at the base of all earth-retaining 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 they become necessary, during excavation and foundation construction. 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 10. For the best long-term performance, perforated PVC pipe is recommended for all subsurface drains. No groundwater was observed during our field work. 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. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 8 The excavations and site should be graded so that surface water is directed 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 the buildings should slope away at least 2 percent, except where the area is paved. Water from roof, storm water, and foundation drains should not be discharged onto slopes; it should be tightlined to a suitable outfall located away from any slopes. PAVEMENT AREAS The pavement sections may be supported on competent, native soil or on structural fill compacted to a 95 percent density. We recommend that the pavement subgrade must be in a stable, non- yielding condition at the time of paving. 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 asphalt 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 4 inches of ATB. Heavily-loaded areas are typically main driveways, dumpster sites, or areas with 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. We can provide • recommendations based on expected traffic loads and California Bearing Ratio tests, if requested. As with any pavements, 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. 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. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 9 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 or 95% 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 1557-91 (Modified Proctor). Use of On-Site Soil If grading activities take place during wet weather, or when the site soils are wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of delays due to rain and the potential need to dry the site soils. The moisture content of the on-site soil must be at, or near, the optimum moisture content, as the soil cannot be consistently compacted to the required density when the moisture content is significantly greater than optimum. The on-site, non-organic sand could be used as structural fill, if grading operations are conducted during hot, dry weather, when drying the wetter soil by aeration is possible. During excessively dry weather, however, it may be necessary to add water to achieve the optimum moisture content. LIMITATIONS The analyses, 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. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • The Bennett Corporation JN 99330 September 14, 1999 Page 10 • This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Bennett Corporation, and its representatives, for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on observed site materials, and selective 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. This report, and the study by Hart Crowser, should be provided to any future property owners to inform them of our findings and recommendations. Additionally, this report should be provided in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor. 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. We conducted an environmental assessment for this site which is presented in a separate report. The following plates are attached to complete this report: Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Site Exploration Plan Plates 3 - 9 Test Pit Logs Plate 10 Typical Footing Drain GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. The Bennett Corporation — JN 99330 September 14, 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. afklAd Erin M. Toland Geotechnical Engineer G g. Airco OF W AS4r.1 a • A' 67 •• if' „ uZ 27845 w� ().4 .r4G 1ST ER �`}{v , `s1ONAL Elk— �V9 EXPIRES 10/25i?Y Marc R. McGinnis, P.E. Associate EMT/MRM: alt GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1 N =,•6..Q o I - f .. o W� AUK. FERNONLt' NE.• C a ictor s ''ckhEL \ `I N``1 4TH < = 900 z Ate cr '` NE ■ COLL '. J m ti oI vo� P 3R0 �� 405 0. J: O RENTON —��MI 1_e7ini■IF•.iw t/. F AIRPORT I •" N AIR'111O1RT WYIF4,1\ it��El,/ NE 3i0 I NE_ $•2ND. �1,,,iiii■ _ S ILIAC d�ST S— J--z�:.=g 7/ ,-.aw` TOBIN STum 11007�� - .Nr, , „,�h 3400 .,,,, ,,i. S 3 VICTOR!, 300 < 11> eQ4 7 T. .0 • 4 18 RENTON =", p, <' a":1411 A e 1 w�i¢ _ ems S N 2 ND HS 4:': ', y 7 ablietB1ETER 16 ‘,„,,,,,.._,I,,.„,,,.._ o S vl ' ` >=S!,.ER� $ :T CEMETERY PARK a itcrolitA� aloe S.-3 RD �� :D,/' %' '.• ul.a 169 RENT V raerr // o C' ' SUI4 4 ?; G � s ��d i- © a'Q-WgragEg ` N p, 4 rp6. ti��`/ �� RD SE 5TH .TM s aexrtw 4 41 •.�,,i�� = ST, Six , -'. o•vb Fy j00ose 6n'a}�E AvSfO a�4°. p!- k'11 �� isir• o ! irs7Tu: ROADSIDE %atp ,\ v3i 11111110rARK . _ PARK .4.7 .St H a ci os 515 I d� _OE�+ .'''' . �• .. , I �1� 'WON VILLAGE '� w r ' ZH _- 5T sw oy wv Ln CENTER si x �:'t ': ✓ .,5.s ��+ C ,RMAP LEW00D TH 7 G� S R: ON VILLAGE PL°p S 11TH ST <ERIO1 SS HOLIDAY J .��. �� Sx sF e.-v4e" $ SM z 13tH> ' 16,_ INN C_` 405 � ' " ( F II..L/� 4 2 C M , p �� y �n �� _ 20 SSE AN 21 � 1;‘15TifH S 5 I sr SW t� c, O ,c ,,, Aoo 16TH ST - s 16TN ST ,4- • c o�SE�s ��y 16�Q`' w t ¢ \\ 0)45F L ® li 40� SE tl16TNe P .<''' S �` �S 'Pt ,- S•T' 5rsw 1 �^ - S y 1. .4�� cae� m. :/A. t.'._ s `` • W k t. "gir o :'may $' S 18TH ' ST - J.4 405, , `,.. �A'"s.i� Cy `+�� St �'SW 19TH ST '''Nmcki 0 Lr. ST TM O SuPY "" sfv°~ : __. :, v �ti., tact up Nr iy o ed c1 ' x` ® lye . 3Jlfnid I . S �-A? w ( -' SE•. . . S 19TH : STS 4. ,44,39T o N a PL 4 0 sr ''s4 , _ :�� al lLl 9 2D1N ` -.A ? S N�R.,1NG t66 8 Fi o��i� 1!' r ! Nw yE PL ARK. c7 d' R CZC r �"P oo PUGET 0. ,Oar 4- 7 sc-;; ups N 4*, ,c,E j G L7 2ryN ,SE Z151 2 a. dC A tg air t`---'• �' ' .F,J'a7PL ''�^t 9E ND PL , SF sT 'kU:•_,,,,�., ° 1— r" SW 23RD ST S -23RD � IST s l•W $ ! sT 'i t• a E iiz: r� MID v a�� <�1' � " �61H SE tx161 ?:, ":1PAmuF,;: S H w - c C .. C S _ - 62ND i >s STY '^161 ;a;'��i se •s .fUM of R , N' i '.,% < , 1 6 . L SE 163RD ST _ N 6� _ 5 SE rl tiQ. 1 • TH8 m- 49. 277H ' 9 C 3 ST iM1s a' S > $ 27TH ST;, �.+ 10900 lllOD SE' 164TH I ST t ' PE I''S ST S 5 try still N CT ,.I -;' H N SE MTH °�rl� 117005 165TH ST yW SE SE 165 f1 P 25 H 1J` 'Let ¢' 1[ SE _ ll' .. —_ < ti'S. 1.� ST! N W 29TH ST a j c Jy S pt, PL n • W ST !E 16715 ST E 1661x pi. ` lz j p 4'S,'zit 1 30 -� yea M OTH CT .=.. c",..5. _ Q �e„SE 16711 ST - ,r 167 iW ST ♦ SE"315Tu ST 3ur ET 2,1 Q '¢ 74 27 •• ;'r,W '"_ .E �� N4168TH 'n �. ST PI , .32ND PL H -- y $y SE 169TH L ,�., SE 169TH �` J> 1., < N y NNE 169T w 167 I S A1v / AV <> a, .E rr170TH ST 170p TiW ST I \.., o� ,-, > a ° VICINITY MAP ' -,_.....tit GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington _ ` Job No: Date: Plate: 99330 Sept. 1999 1 . r c\ ua • O- ° • ii 41 \ ' / ��\ • J • ° , \ J00'Ja.p ` ?° •0 \ c6/ • ./.. ../4-1 .)4,s f.,\*JJ L-- it ., • • n � \ 4ea- / fr 0 ° !. /r°, OD •1t % . - -- - O..,,1/ N. ' �. • v� \. 0 • • .1 / • e 734e f � O 6 4J 7 � I 1 )fr474.4' \ e`ith •�� \r ...• ............ SJ 6 . , 0ai'' .\ ' •' p \r / . ar ,4 w'J a 1 t. . 0 ' G( 44 p4 111 4' I \ ' r} .,, ......... , \ , o v ,.., \ . 1 1 —I N? , 4,I es• ri ____,,,,, „. ......\_____A,,,, ..,., \ \\.._ .. . - - . • . / •s 'r• '/�,. • .n 4' Pr-'.. �...+ 1, ,J• / • 9j°''•'f `11` [,7�T `;S,O ///i ,• �. �N .J+Q` 'e♦\`]yam.\ 0 i ...\ . ft' ,"...;.----------; \-..?„7"..S.41_________, . i'i I 07— 4-w . _,----7_--=---- I• , -0 • yib. Ait „,/. -... , . --1,.., ,. • \\a` T L \ f ®� \• L��, •r, A „�%� am /• ° ? ^ '� • , O� ,w J c } % ' -Rtra O� �7 T , •'44J� s, 1. • O� - •?'t (, 0 � • ,f .p ^ \/ •f , , . /'\ (0 \ k P•e° I° ,`\ " ` .V - f;;} (�> . ()GI �-J 1'6 1. • .. ,: . ? . fr iit • • , :,.... ..„ Ii•-- ----"•••••!,..... 1'\ \ \ p • • ° v 1a \\ var r� �e.�p '� 1J * ,rmo4 ,,,.,, , -_---Q,\ , ; • � _. v • \ , J f �� \• C � J \ �arV� � �� • A/ \ J Yj O .° I\ JJ . °O•J \ v+Nq fy .aJ it, 'Jo • , . ..4k; . . c 1.9 ..•J c.,•":., 914 .4i4 .' • ck mtt, ..___ _ ..._...„\ VAR ' -p ��y�,+ si , j4k l y --, 4; t. --I 0 t.,., _______ -..0-, ___ -r ___ ---- c.....4Z N`�.&rJ }}}"Wiittteep` qJ • )0 j ' C' ' (,csk. • ,.. . ____„....„ _ • , .. • .• `V \\ )9i:b • .---"5:C‘aQ.7 ----- 11. ..14.4-1.4 CA . y • tvvvv. J \\\•,�, Jai 1 k :• R� e rJ -4. O \JV 'J i" O Ja,,' 4J •bs _ 'TJ Y,q Yi, Ca 0 vt, 4 '\ k?ko ' V::.--- ' ...' C---(.4) ,, e ''' Q� JJ c,.,$..? el. )...1 1 e \ ...4, \ ,..4 Y O ,T,, (co Z Y Sa J'4 ..„.....___ 4Woi,,,4 . 6'.'1.. '1, 9, t' (0( **•?, % j 't•*? ar:4). a, it al 0 1 .) 5 ..... -. -.1 po'.,-15,-, , • . , CO '.3,, L -r)/ \ . v +v • //�,� u V C• � 5= ^ J •JO O co 5O110 lO 'J- '°+ tO /.!,/ N =a< N>if \L',I.,'-. �J�r,/gyp �° SD ev „604aro0 G� TEST PIT 1 ti 9n ° �a 45 Description FILL Concrete rubble with old building materials, loose (FILL) SP Dark brown, silty SAND, moist, loose (Topsoil) over tan, slightly silty SAND, dry to slightly moist, loose 5 — * Test Pit was terminated at 4 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * Caving was observed to bottom during excavation. 10 — 15� „co \ TEST PIT 2 Description Topsoil 'Red-brown SAND, dry to slightly moist, loose (TOPSOIL) Brown, slightly gravelly SAND, medium-grained, dry, loose - becomes more gravelly, slightly moist, medium-dense 5 „ SP' - becomes moist, medium-to coarse-grained, less gravelly, dense 10 * Test Pit was terminated at 11 feet on August 26, 1999. * .No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * Caving was observed to 8 feet during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GE O TE CH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington IJ0b1bo:99330 I Sept. 1999 IL0 'Plate: 3 • "ce.cTEST PIT 3 �'4ye" o" a�ti� �G5 c G 4 Description Dark brown, silty SAND, with concrete rubble, moist, loose (FILL) - piece of old carpet 5 — FILL - asphalt chunks 8-12" in size - becomes gray-black, silty, gravelly SAND 10 - - - large tree stump * Test Pit was terminated at 12 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. 15-- Caving was observed to 12 feet during excavation. TEST PIT 4 c G 4 Description Red-brown, silty SAND, with roots, concrete rubble, and metal debris, dry to slightly moist, loose (FILL) - large asphalt chunk (6 feet across and 6 inches thick) 5 - some glass, household debris FILL - becomes gray-black, silty, gravelly sand, with asphalt chunks and household debris 10 — — " Red-brown, slightly silty, gravelly SAND, medium-to coarse-grained, moist, medium-dense to dense 15— becomes brown at 13.5 feet, dense * Test Pit was terminated at 14.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * Caving was observed to 13 feet during excavation. TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: • — 99330 Sept. 1999 EMT 4 ee ,c�< TEST PIT 5 ceR Goy Description Red-brown, silty, gravelly SAND, with cobbles, brick debris, and household garbage, loose (FILL) - large tree stump and root ball 5 FILL - becomes gray, slightly silty, gravelly SAND, moist 10 — Red-brown,weathered, slightly silty SAND, fine-to medium-grained, moist, medium-dense �:: -becomes brown, dense * Test Pit was terminated at 11.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. 15-- * Caving was observed to 10 feet during excavation. TEST PIT 6 �4o ��2� aa�ti� �G) 9 c0 4 Description FILL Red-brown, silty SAND, with abundant roots, dry to slightly moist, loose (FILL) 6 inches of dark brown TOPSOIL over Red-brown, gravelly SAND, fine-to medium-grained, moist, loose 5 _ SP.,,, - becomes medium-dense to dense - becomes less gravelly, dense 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 8.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation.. 15— • TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. a � Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: 99330 Sept. 1999 . EMT 5 ��{ TEST PIT 7 • Qi "Go ,sa Description Brown, slightly silty SAND, with abundant roots, dry, loose (TOPSOIL) Red-brown SAND, with occasional boulders up to 1 foot diameter, fine-grained, dry to slightly moist, medium-dense sp - becomes brown, with gravel and cobbles, moist, dense 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 8.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * Some caving in upper 4 feet was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT 8 �4o n �G5 G 4 Description Dark brown, slightly silty SAND, with occasional gravel, with abundant roots, dry \to slightly moist (TOPSOIL) Red-brown, silty, gravelly SAND, fine-to medium-grained, moist, medium-dense sM to dense - becomes brown, very dense 5 — * Test Pit was terminated at 6.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. 10 — * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: 99330 Sept. 1999 • EMT . 6 TEST PIT 9 9 wcizir Description \Dark brown, silty SAND, loose (TOPSOIL) Red-brown, silty, gravelly SAND, with abundant roots, fine-grained, moist, SM medium-dense - becomes brown, dense to very dense 5 — Test Pit was terminated at 5.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 10 — 15— \ � `a°��< TEST PIT 10 � , o & -wcf� °p �5 Description Topsoil Red-brown TOPSOIL, loose Brown, silty, gravelly SAND, with abundant roots, fine-to medium-grained, moist, SM medium-dense to dense 5 _ - becomes dense to very dense * Test Pit was terminated at 5.5 feet on August 26, 1999. _ No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 10 — 15— TEST PIT LOG • GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: 99330 -Sept.-1999 • EMT 7 e{ TEST PIT 11 cp (sp Description Dark brown, silty SAND, with abundant roots, moist, loose (TOPSOIL) Red-brown SAND, medium-grained, moist, medium-dense SP - becomes dense, brown 5 — * Test Pit was terminated at 7 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. 10 — * Some caving of upper 4 feet was observed during excavation. 15 KQ' � TEST PIT 12 't+° ��4a,Oti� ce,• G° ,co, Description Dark brown, slightly silty SAND, with abundant roots, dry to slightly moist(TOPSOIL) sp ' Reddish-brown SAND,with some gravel and sandstone chunks, medium-grained, moist, medium-dense to dense `.':., °rt -becomes brown, very dense * Test Pit was terminated at 6 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was_observed during excavation. 10 - 15— TEST PIT LOG c.„ GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast • CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: 99330. Sept. 1999 EMT - 8 TEST PIT 13 G° �a 4`� Description Dark brown, silty SAND,with abundant roots, dry to slightly moist, loose (TOPSOIL) SP Red-brown SAND with gravel, medium-grained, moist, medium-dense • - becomes brown, dense to very dense 5 — * Test Pit was terminated at 5.5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 10 — • 15 {el�� TEST PIT 14 G° (0 45 Description, Red-brown, slightly silty _ eis �sr:7' g y SAND,with abundant roots, fine-grained, dry to slightly moist, loose Fig -becomes medium-dense -becomes moist, dense to very dense 5 — * Test Pit was terminated at 5 feet on August 26, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 10 — 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: 99330 Sept. 1999 EMT 9 . Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. The following information is provided to help you manage your risks. Geotechnical Services Are Performed for • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the spe- • project ownership, cific needs of their clients.A geotechnical engineering study con- ducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a construc- As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer tion contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geot- of project changes—even minor ones—and request an echnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engi- assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot neering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report because their reports do not consider developments of which without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who pre- they were not informed. pared it. And no one—not even you—should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Subsurface Conditions Can Change A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on A geotechnical engineering report is based on'conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors geotechnical engineering report whose adequacy may have Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-spe- been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, cific factors when establishing the scope of a study.Typical factors such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural include:the client's goals, objectives, and risk management pref- events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- erences;the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before apply- configuration;the location of the structure on the site; and other ing the report to determine if it is still reliable.A minor amount planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates other- Most Geotechnical Findings Are wise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: Professional Opinions • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those • not prepared for the specific site explored, or points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are • completed before important project changes were made. taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sub- geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: surface conditions may differ—sometimes significantly from • the function of the proposed structure, as when those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engi- it's changed from a parking garage to an office neer who developed your report to provide construction obser- • building, or from a light industrial plant to a vation is the most effective method of managing the risks asso- refrigerated warehouse, ciated with unanticipated conditions. • A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee , in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recom conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have suffi- mendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions clent time to perform additional study.Only then might you be in • revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who a position to give contractors the best information available to developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for you,while requiring them to at least share some of the financial the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. construction observation. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely A Geotechnical Engineeri•ng Report Is Subject Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than To Misinterpretation other engineering disciplines..This lack of understanding has Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappoint- engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower ments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce such risks, geot- that risk by having your geotechnical.engineer confer with echnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory appropriate members of the design team after submitting the provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations", report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engi- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. neers responsibilities begin and end,to help others recognize - • Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by respond fully and frankly. providing construction observation. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perlor'rn a Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs geoenvironmental study differ significantly from those used to based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmen- geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for tal findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photo- likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regu- graphic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize lated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoenvironmental information, ask your geotechnical Give Contractors a Complete consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on an Report and Guidance environmental report prepared for someone else. Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface condi• - on Your Geotechnical Engineer for tions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help Additional Assistance prevent costly problems,give contractors the complete geotech- Membership in ASFE exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide nical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written let- array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine ben- ter of transmittal. In that letter,advise contractors that the report efit for everyone involved with a construction project.Confer with was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the your ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information. ASFE PROFESSIONAL FIRMS PRACTICING IN THE GEOSCIENCES 8811 Colesville Road Suite G106 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301-565-2733 Facsimile: 301-589-2017 • email: info@asfe:org www.asfe.org Copyright 1998 by ASFE,Inc.Unless ASFE grants written permission to do so;duplication of this document by any means whatsoever is expressly prohibited. Re-use of the wording in this document;in whole or in part,also is expressly prohibited,and may be done only with the express permission of ASFE or for purposes of review or scholarly research. IIGER06983.5M A Slope bockfill away from foundation. ✓� TIGHTL/NE ROOF DRA/N /. Do not connect to footing drain. • BACKFILL e textfor I tr VAPOR BARR/ER requirements. reqq uireemennts. SLAB WASHED ROCK °.'.:o.A: ^ N! �. I 6 m 1 1 d �� in. . %'' FREE-DRA/N/NG NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE SAND/GRAVEL FILTER FABRIC 4"PERFORATED HARD PVC.PIPE Invert at /east as low as footing and/or crawl space. Slope to drain. Place weepho/es downward. TYPICAL FOOTING DRAIN GE O TE CH South 7th Street & Beacon Way Southeast CONSULTANTS,INC. Renton, Washington Job No: Date: Plate: 99330 Sept. 1999 10 Dec-11-00 08: 35A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P . 02 • BENNETT DEVELOPMENT WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT 6 -e--. • Y LUy o� -- 0 5 3 / f/ 4-06-0 Prepared for: vim- Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A ---744 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Prepared by: Biota Pacific Environmental Sciences, Inc. 10516 East Riverside Drive Bothell, Washington 98011 December 2000 Project 045 Dec-11-00 08:35A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P_03 BENNETT DEVELOPMENT WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT Prepared for: Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Seattle, Washington 98005 Prepared by: Biota Pacific Environmental Sciences, Inc. 10516 East Riverside Drive Bothell, Washington 98011 December 2000 Project 045 Dec-11-00 08:36A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P . 04 _ Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment • INTRODUCTION • Bennett Development has submitted an 'application with the City of Renton to develop a 10-acre parcel of land opposite Phillip Arnold Park in Renton. Bennett development contracted Biota • Pacific Environmental Sciences, Inc. (Biota Pacific) to provide an assessment of impacts to wildlife that may be using the project site. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located in a 10-acre triangle in the middle of the northern boundary of Section 20 of Township 23 North, Range 05 East, Willamette Meridian (Figure 1). The project site is bounded to the north by the River Ridge subdivision, to the west by Phillip Arnold Park, and to the east by the Falcon Ridge subdivision. A steep forested ravine that drains north to the Cedar River forms the boundary at the northeast corner of the project site. The current development plan will result in the establishment of 57 .homes within the subdivision. Plans also include a stormwater detention pond and park. METHODS The wildlife assessment consisted of three primary elements. First, Biota Pacific conducted a visit to the project site to assess the value to wildlife of the on-site habitat, and to search for evidence of the presence wildlife, especially priority wildlife species or raptor nests. Priority wildlife species are those listed or are candidates to be listed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) as Endangered,.Threatened, or Sensitive. . . . Second, based on the findings of the field visit, Biota Pacific evaluated the potential of the site to support any priority wildlife species that may occur in the vicinity of the project area (Appendix). Third, Biota Pacific requested that the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species Program (PHS) conducted a search of their database for the occurrence of any priority habitats or species in the vicinity of the project area. 7 December 2000 Page 1 Dec- 11-00 08:36A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P. 05 • .— rw — .v ...X .'....'. s = LED CITY 0� ,cR1r.c( •CN(DN MU .v. t —'--..:,, ti RENTON TREE Cu rI �c ct Rµ ~"— L 1JI II' j • I I I 1 1' I f•----F 1 t I I 5. /, & 7.4 tilk;L'a ->4',),. to! _ ,_ 1-•—....—."—•-••'..1•-•—• J.... —L—L— L _, i -..- .. Iiii,10‘atze,, JONES AY. S. —--�- 4. ; -I-_ -1 . 7-U0Pr Ili ‘ \ it!. s.,.-/ :20,1,_ . _ _ . ,7,- „Iv. ,,„.,... alit-„, ..�� , oo %o \\‘. ' •Ia,i BI lazl:N Ti- Air„ltil,„e xZ„1 3 ‘41,(4,, 0 0 0 /4 .•, / fir ,/�'b • • r,:I1„ . ig ; ,�,•, pry. ; - • [[[ y .' • C h/ ay,' 3, -az., .1/ 1 i i I 71 ....* • --7,. --,-,,, - . . . . . )0, ., v / '- • ', ;( •- ---a...... . t % ...- i - eta / •,;,.. /0 All li vx-, r . ,..• ..,.:, ,. .. , .,., it - • \--- . . : .,- 44 I ,' • '. ; • • 1;Y ,..,..,a-r 14 ir,''„if\ ; .'-----W\ • :I 30 •/' S%&'‘ Ith ..k it 4.14j/ile:r: '.:''''.2.C'-.64: ! • ' • e ., ( O•• ,\ I S 1 i � \;I � �� .1,1 11 .\1, ♦`° f0' .Fo �Qom.(►:t_ j r. . �� / \ wJl M1 \ G:i7iZY Il n • . % 1 10 -•P- 4.7.6.'46. ..,,iNt t3 ".-,-..1%s: 1 1' - .-Arc V5 :, •• * cr .. -,, >0 :,/, d.:.\ A:%6 1.„`ss, ',0_ 0.,1 l/PMON 4;09 gilk‘IS- Go :, miktampi .., .. ‘,,, , I, . . S \ ./.... it A /..., 4 - %.,.... E. M11%, , • ,... i an 4%, , • 1 -.It l„..s. ,,, _.. I, . / , , ttAr'N . , .„z„... /% - , .. ,‘,1.1, Q It, i. ,,,r..e.",1 4 ..s: .1 '.- 4_6 / c s , . 1, .. , D. _ e `d .9+0 i 1 0 •r , to''' r :1, •o ' i,.' 4, c.�, v w , ._. i// \t % `,<D' Z.' a o 'o ,6_ A i q► �i :-.er :�a,°-/•b.or 40, , O �*�_a-' `1+-/ / mot_ �r0C. in42! Q \ n .` (�0�. 'IF • / � , , V� G ham..__.,_ I�'J , , \ ..�.-�� 0 / 1.'II_- , 1 ".xr!17r R�; -0- -,f - - • ''J 1 k ,''''‘‘ \I Fly 1_,.. 16)1j I t 1'41616-NN \\ y� SE Ith DR -.t ' ,/ \ / \v/ / a I / ��' 1 1 1 -7--, v /. 1 ) t 1 / // r-� \\ \ I i / a \t -I Figure 1. Project area map. Dec-11-00 08: 37A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P . 06 Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment RESULTS Site Visit Biota,Pacific.visited the project site on 1 December. 2000. The 10-acre project site consists of two level tiers with the northwest corner of the site approximately 15 to 20 feet lower than the remaining area to the east. This lower tier is characterized by a sparse canopy of black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) and red alder (Alnus rubra). The understory, which has been partially cleared, consists primarily of a matrix of grasses and Himalayan blackberry (Holodiscus discolor). The upper tier of the project area is characterized by closed-canopy hardwood forest that is dominated by black cottonwood, red alder, and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) with diameters generally ranging from approximately 10 to 14 inches. A few conifer species, including western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) and western redcedar (Thuja plicate) are widely scattered throughout this portion of the project area. The understory on the upper tier is dominated by sword fern (Polystichum munitum), salal (Gaultheria shal/on), Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa), and common .snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus). There are no snags and very little coarse woody debris within the project. During the site visit direct observations were made of the following species: California quail (Callipepla califomica) northern flicker (Colaptes auratus) American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus) song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis) eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinehsis) In addition, evidence of black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) presence was observed. Database Search Discussion pending return of database information 7 December 2000 Page 3 Dec-11-00 08:37A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P . 0/ Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment CONCLUSIONS No evidence of use of the site by priority species was observed during the field visit, and it is unlikely that the property currently provides habitat for any priority wildlife species, including bald eagles. There are no potential bald eagle nest trees on the project site, and King County is unaware of any bald eagle nests in the vicinity (Stenberg, pers. comm., 1 Dec 00). Because of the lack of potential — nest trees and the location of the project site, which is located more than 250 feet from the Cedar River, it is unlikely the site would be used by bald eagles for nesting. The nearest known bald eagle nest is located on the southern end of Mercer Island. Bald eagles that have been seen in the area of the project site are likely foraging upstream on the Cedar River (Stenberg, pers. comm., 1 Dec 00). The development should not have a significant long-term impact on wildlife in the area. The amount of wildlife habitat that will be lost as a result of the development is insignificant when compared to the amount of forested habitat adjacent to and above the Cedar River that will not be developed in the future. The project site is too small to support the habitat needs of a single deer. Deer currently using the project site require additional habitat and will continue to use the undeveloped along the Cedar River habitat as they do now. 7 December 2000 Page 4 Dec-11-00 08: 37A Bennett Corp 4257096553 - uz5 Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment REFERENCES Stenberg, Kate, King County Wildlife Program Manager. Personal communication, e-mail to Jon Nelson,.1 December 2000. 7 December 2000 Page 5 Dec-11-00 08: 38A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P .09 APPENDIX s I ; : O Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment. • Appendix. Terrestrial wildlife species with special state or federal status that occur in Region 4. . . Chance of O Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Occurrence Habitat Notes 0 Status1 Status) On Project O Site DJ INVERTEBRATES ,1 CO Beller's ground beetle Agonum belledFSC SC None Bogs Lack bog habitat D Long-horned leaf beetle Donacia idola -- SC None Bogs Lack bog habitat CO ID Hatch's click beetle Eanus hatchii FSC SC None Bogs Lack bog habitat n Johnson's hairstreak Mitoura johnsoni -- SC . None Coniferous forest containing Lack of western hemlocks with rD I western hemlock with mistletoe mistletoe infections AMPHIBIANS • 0 0 Larch mountain salamander Plethodon tarsal FSC SS None Moist talus slopes No talus accumulations on site, which is at extreme northern boundary of known range Tailed frog Ascaphus truer FSC SM None Cold, rocky streams;mature No high gradient streams on site mixed forest Cascades frog Rana cascadae FSC --- None Ponds adjacent to streams No perennial water body on site Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa FC SE None Perennial water bodies No perennial water body on site Western toad Bufo boreas -- SC Low Most common near ponds Most likely to occur in damp habitat . and small lakes downhill from project site REPTILES N3 N Ul Northwestern pond turtle Clemmys marmorata FSC SE None Ponds, lakes,wetlands No ponds on site mamiorata . 0 tD at 1Status Codes: • to in FT-Federal Threatened SE-State Endangered LJ FE-Federal Endangered ST-State Threatened . FP-Federal Proposed SS-State Sensitive FC-Federal Candidate Stale Candidate(for Endangered,Threatened or Sensitive) ' FSC-Federal Species of Concern SM-State Monitor • P-Species not listed, but breeding areas are protected under state regulation 7 December 2000 Page A-1 0 • • 0 to . C) Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment ~ Appendix. Continued 0 0 Chance of 0 Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Occurrence Habitat Notes CO Statusl Status' on Project • W Site CO BIRDS - D Great blue heron Ardea herodias --- P None Riparian-wetland, mature- No nest colonies or foraging habitat ((p forest edge on site n Black-crowned night heron Nycticorax nycticorax --- P None Marshes, shores, mature- No winter colonies on site ID forest edge Bald eagle Haliaeetus FT ST Present Riparian mature forest No potential nesting, roosting, or n leucocephalus (flying over foraging habitat on site; however, 0 site) birds foraging on the Cedar River fly 'S over the site Northern goshawk Accipitergentilis FSC SC None Mature and old-growth forest No potential nesting or foraging habitat on site Golden eagle Aquila clirysaetos -- SC None Cliff-talus,tundra, open No nests or potential nest sites forest, grass observed on site • Merlin Falco columbarius --- SC Low Open woods, cliffs, adjacent Rare breeder in Washington,no to grasslands nests observed on site Peregrine falcon Falco poregrinus -- SE None Open country,cliffs No potential nesting or foraging habitat on site 41 Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis -- SE None Prairies,fields Lack of foraging habitat N to Marbled murrelet Brachyramphus FT ST • None Large diameter conifers with No potential nest platforms on site v marmoratus nest platforms tO 01 1Status Codes: to " in t4 FT-Federal Threatened SE=State Endangered . FE-Federal Endangered ST-State Threatened • FP-Federal Proposed SS-State Sensitive FC-Federal Candidate SC-State Candidate(for Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive) FSC-Federal Species of Concern SM-State Monitor P-Species not listed,but breeding areas are protected under state regulation • 7 December 2000 Page A-2 T. H H I I i 1 . . G fD 0 1 Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment `, Appendix. Continued c Chance of Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Occurrence Habitat Notes a Status1 Status1 on Project Site L` BIRDS(continued) Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus -- SC Very Low Riverine woodlands Very rare and thought to be N extirpated as breeder in Washington - n n Northern spotted owl Strix occidentalis FT SE None Mature and old-growth forest Lack of forest habitat al caurfna. rl Vaux's swift Chaetura vauxi — SC Low Riparian,young and old- Lack of potential nest or roost trees C growth forest on site 0 Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus --- SC Low Mature and old-growth forest Lack of snags for foraging and/or II nesting • Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus cooperi FSC -- Low Conifer forest Lack of conifer forest on site Willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii FSC -- Low Willow thickets Known to occur in areas of low density development Purple martin Progne sribis -- SC Low Open or semi-open country No large open water bodies near water Oregon vesper sparrow Pooeceles gramineus FSC SC None Remnant prairies Lack of prairie habitat • affinis 4 1 Status Codes: N FT-Federal Threatened SE-State Endangered C tt FE-Federal Endangered ST-State Threatened 0 FP-Federal Proposed SS-State Sensitive U FC-Federal Candidate SC-State Candidate (for Endangered,Threatened or Sensitive) G FSC-Federal Species of Concern SM-State Monitor P-Species not listed, but breeding areas are protected under state regulation . 7 December 2000 Page A-3 1 • I- n •' O ID 0 H Bennett Development Wildlife Assessment Appendix. Continued o Chance of O Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Occurrence Habitat Notes 03 • Status1 Status1 on Project W Site to MAMMALS )7, Townsend's big-eared bat Plecotus townsendii FSC SC Low Caves, open young forest Lack of potential roosting habitat N Long-eared myotis Myotis evotis FSC --- Low Snags,caves and cliffs in Lack of old forest habitat, snags n riparian old-growth forest 'r Long-legged myotis Myotis volans FSC -- Low Snags,caves and cliffs in Lack of old forest habitat, snags r+ mature and old-growth n riparian forest 0 I Gray wolf Canis lupus FE SE None Wilderness areas,open Extremely rare in Washington,does 17 tundra,forest not occur in urban environment Grizzly bear Ursus ari tos FT SE None Wilderness areas, alpine Require large areas of unroaded meadows, subalpine forest wilderness Pacific fisher Mattes pennant! FSC SE None Mature and old-growth Lack of mature forest habitat pacifica coniferous forest California wolverine Gulo gulo luteus FSC SC None Wilderness areas, Lack of wilderness and conifer forest coniferous forest habitat North American lynx Fells lynx canadensis FP ST None Early successional forest for Does not occur at low elevation foraging,late-successional •ti for denning N • v 1 Status Codes: 0 . la a1 FT-Federal Threatened SE-State Endangered to FE-Federal Endangered ST-State Threatened FP-Federal Proposed SS-State Sensitive W FC-Federal Candidate SC-State Candidate(for Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive) . FSC-Federal Species of Concern SM-State Monitor P-Species not listed,but breeding areas are protected under state regulation • 7 December 2000 Page A-4 71 • 14 Dec-11-00 08:39A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P . 14 BIOTA PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES,INC. . 10516 E.RIVERSIDE DRIVE BomELL,WA 98011 PHONE:425.402.6887 Fax:425.415.6506 WAYNE F. BUCK Wildlife Biologist EDUCATION B.S., 1990, University of Washington, Forest Resource Management EXPERIENCE BIOTA PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Current. Wildlife Biologist • Project Manager, Quality Rock Gravel Pit Expansion, Little Rock, Washington. Prepared wildlife review and assessed potential impacts to local wildlife in reference to the proposed Quality Rock gravel pit expansion. • Task Leader. Crown Pacific Canyon Creek Road-use Permit Biological Assessment, Whatcom County, Washington. Prepared Biological Assessment that assessed potential impacts to local wildlife in reference to the granting of a road-use permit by the U.S. Forest Service to the Crown Pacific Corporation. • Task Leader, Crown Pacific East Lake Shannon Road-use Easement Biological Assessment, Whatcom County and Skagit Counties, Washington. Prepared Biological Assessment that assessed potential impacts to local wildlife in reference to the granting of a road-use permit by the U.S. Forest Service to the Crown Pacific Corporation. BEAK CONSULTANTS INCORPORATED 1991 to 1999. Wildlife Biologist. Mr. Buck was involved with all aspects of spotted owl and marbled murrelet surveys, including planning, report writing, and database management. In addition, he managed projects requiring the preparation of Biological Assessments and served as an expert witness. • Task Leader, Crown Pacific Hamilton Tree Farm Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared air quality section. • Team Member, Crown Pacific Hamilton Tree Farm Habitat Conservation Plan. In his capacity as a wildlife biologist, helped prepare species accounts and impacts. • Team Member, Murray Pacific Corporation Cowlitz and Nisqually River Basins Watershed Analyses. Lewis County, Washington. Conducted the Level 1 aerial photograph interpretations for the Riparian Function Module assessment of the East Fork Tilton Watershed Analysis. • Team Member, Weyerhaeuser Chehalis and Willapa Watershed Analyses, western Washington. Conducted Level 1 aerial photograph interpretations for the Riparian Function Module of the Willapa and Chehalis River Watershed Analyses. Dec-11 -00 08:40A Bennett Corp 4en/ud553 r . 1� BIOTA PACIFIC Buck, Wayne F. Page 2 • Task Leader, Winney. Construction Spotted ..Owl Survey, Olympic Peninsula, Washington. . Supervised and conducted three years of spotted owl surveys around a Department of Natural Resources timber sale. The surveys resulted in a status 3 owl site being changed to historic status. • Task Leader, ITT Rayonier SEPA Timber Harvest Environmental Impact Statement, western Washington. Conducted marbled murrelet surveys in support of a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a proposed timber harvest. • Task Leader, Rayonier Timberlands Operating Company Habitat Conservation Plan, Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Supervised and conducted spotted owl site monitoring surveys in support of timber operations and the development of a Habitat Conservation Plan. • Field Biologist, U.S. Forest Service/Weyerhaeuser Company Land Exchange Project, western Washington. Trained for and conducted wolf howling surveys in support of a Biological Evaluation for a proposed land exchange. • Field Biologist, Hydro West Group, Inc. Hydroelectric Projects in the Nooksack, Skagit and Snoqualmie River Basins, Washington. Assisted in conducting surveys for the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet in support of proposed small hydroelectric projects. • Task Leader, Weyerhaeuser Company Spotted Owl Survey Project, Washington, 1991 to 1992. Supervised field crews conducting spotted owl surveys in support of commercial forest management. • Task Leader, Rayonier Timberlands Operating Company Project III, Forks, Washington. Supervised the delineation of spotted owl habitat on the Clallam Working Area and ground-truthing effort. • Task Leader, Weyerhaeuser Company Spotted Owl Survey Project, Washington, 1993 to 1996. Provided technical support, agency coordination, and database management for the spotted owl survey program conducted in support of commercial forest management. • Field Biologist, Quadrant Corporation/Taiyo-American Corporation Beay.erdam Country Club and Residential Development SEPA Environmental Impact Statement; Issaquah, Washington. Assisted in on-site water quality monitoring and periodic storm event water quality sampling to develop pre-construction baseline conditions. • Field Biologist, Weyerhaeuser Company Timberland Wetland and Wildlife Habitat Survey, western Washington. Assisted in delineation of forested wetlands and collection of data to assess impacts of various forested wetlands management proposals. • Project Manager, Pleasant Harbor Marina Expansion, Brinnon, Washington. Prepared Biological Assessment for the potential impacts to bald eagles resulting from the expansion of a marina. Additionally, prepared management plans for osprey and bald eagles in reference to the same project. Dec-11-00 08:40A Bennett Corp 4257096553 P. 16 BIOTA PACIFIC Buck, Wayne F. • Page 3 • Task Leader, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, Lyle, Washington. Prepared terrestrial species portion of Biological Assessment for potential impacts to bald eagles and peregrine falcons that may result from construction of railroad siding in the Columbia Gorge, Washington. • Project Manager, Quinault Casino Wildlife Review, Ocean Shores, Washington. Prepared wildlife review and assessed potential impacts to local wildlife in reference for the proposed Quinault Gambling Casino. • Project Manager, Landmark, Inc., Fir Glen Wildlife Study, Redmond, Washington. Conducted wildlife study on 13-acre development site. Provided expert testimony during public hearing. • Biologist, Murray Pacific Corporation Cowlitz and Nisqually River Basins Watershed Analyses, Lewis County, Washington. Prepared SEPA checklist for the Connelly,,Mineral, and North Fork Mineral, and West Fork Tilton Watershed Analyses. • Task Leader, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Weyerhaeuser Company NEPA Environmental Assessment, Willamette Timberlands, Oregon. Prepared sections on land use and social and economic conditions for environmental consequences section of environmental assessment being prepared for a.habitat conservation plan. WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 1989 to 1992. Volunteer. Conducted research regarding the assessment of civil fines by district court judges for conviction of deer and elk poachers in Washington state. Results presented to the Northwest Section of the Wildlife Society, April 1991. USDA FOREST SERVICE 1990. Biological Technician. Monitored for presence of the northern spotted owl within Spotted Owl Habitat Areas and Randomly Selected Areas within the Mount Baker- Snoqualmie National Forest. Conducted daytime follow-up visits to determine reproductive status. ;4):1 CIT: DF RENTON Mayor • �,��, Jesse Tanner OF Oel December 8, 2000 15' e$`io Mr.Norman Perry 1224 South 7th Street Renton,WA 98055-3067 Subject: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat; LUA00-053 Dear Mr. Perry: Thank you for your letter of November 27,2000,in which you express concerns about traffic on Renton Hill and the potential impacts of additional traffic from the above-referenced proposed project. The Heritage Renton Hill project is currently in the process of being reviewed by the City of Renton Hearing Examiner. The public hearing of November 16, 2000, was continued to 6:00 p.m. on December 12, 2000. The hearingwill be held in the City of Renton Council Chambers on the 7th floor of City Hall. You are welcome to attend. Also, we have made you a "Party of Record" for the Heritage Renton Hill project. By this means,you will also receive information about it through the mail. As to the traffic issue, the City is aware of the situation with streets and vehicles on Renton Hill, and we share your concerns. The applicant for the project was required to retain a traffic engineering consultant to analyze street conditions,measure existing traffic volumes, anticipate future volumes both with and without the proposed project, study accident reports, and make recommendations regarding the project. These factors have been taken into consideration during the review of the project. The addition of traffic from the proposed project would be expected to increase volumes on Renton Hill by approximately twenty-five percent. This would probably increase the amount of inconvenience to residents of the neighborhood. An increase in accidents would not be expected, however. The problems with traffic flow on Renton Hill are largely due to the narrowness of the streets, lack of off-street parking opportunities, and street grades. These are all conditions that have been in place for a long time. While added traffic volumes will tend to add to the delay in maneuvering on the streets, there is no mechanism to require the developer of the proposed project, or other citizens of Renton, to "fix"these problems. You may be interested to know that Beacon Way South is neither a public street,nor a public right-of-way. The land underlying Beacon Way is owned outright by Seattle Public Utilities (SPU). It is the location of the Cedar River Pipeline, a major water transmission facility for the City of Seattle. When recently asked, a representative of SPU expressed no interest in upgrading their Pipeline property in the Renton Hill area. 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6500/ FAX(425)430-6523 R1 Thla rum.,rrvJoina SIM rarvrlorl maloriol armN nnN rnnerimgr Norman Perry December 8,2000 Page 2 Thank you,again,for your interest in the City of Renton. I encourage you to attend the meeting on December 12t'. If you have questions or additional comments,,you may call Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, at 425-430-7382. Si ely, esse Tanner Mayor Referral"#40-2000 cc: Renton City Council Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer;,- Gregg Zimmerman,Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator' _ , Neil Watts,Development;Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner: Elizabeth Higgins,Senior Planner= • 1171r.W v WA+ „ . NOV 2 8 2000 MAYORSOFFICE.. z7 ,444 .7.,A.f5i-eD . DEVELOPMENT SERVIC€S CITY OF RENTON RECEIVF0 i CL cr_ -(. 0-4-,L,—t--er--• . NOV 3 0 2000 NO 2 9 2JUJ RECEIVED crry OF RENTC.)N PUBLIC WORKS AWL . ... _400 tLi,t, Tavv4-11L, tkiewe- t> cs pro-peeri. 4-1- 4-t-As2- c_pyil-R-r. in-7.. iLic,ch,c1-lei C'kvte-g.tiCa3 7'.' IUSree__ Lt oe_ kg-re_ 5 4,t.l.c,e..— tC110 _......____ . ' ... aktiA_ Luip'G irk_ unix Urn t.A.A tien2-1+4,15.---0?-t4:tb-tek. LCL.. 47. .'14-it eivel2ArnS 4.0--Avi-- klut, c-l-rik-C-Pic.. gmkt3keilAy-- rlett±.6evtiC3-c.rk ot-te„ 14.,&-vi fLt)-1-0 Li()E. /IL) A-No-t+9-tvitcp--D--ek to-I-1-11. yucrke--C.-CAA 5 - -A: , . Citf.,S p442.1(ekat -ite, SI-me:FS fritv_c_ric,4_1.itii iiikeei 4, Loll. 1-- -ten/ -l*A-e;j11-1L--- :•40Viit-3,111/4-4-AeU (/..emCcve..-- it,-,..._ co-v.... ___. ) Lel-LAJ-42-e-v...1)c,:z.-r-s , '4- u-kci •,?--- t.k..LA_st-- A---..3 iiinakvicw-e.)... tadr.tt;k4. --t Lo)14 ct.)-GCL eAct-44.e__, -.... J .. I, ,,j.) cu-rlait-etbitil th-r- lit.Q...) t_4e4-tc-t_t_q_ lrz,„„ . ._ . 1,0-714.1.4:&41-, 1,i-- pEi-e6,vLe.:„ iF_Agavit ... (A-9'.1---)(Seld21-1/4.) IletuclAt, Yfi 114tti2. 6 CE. --1-ba-R044, cutA.e___ SA4.--tty ,-1-kru_s tithl&lakeitittlit.trtti(/ lk- (61-- 11-frioALC., ovt4-6.6 4ttefi l'ikilLet iitte,41) 1 (1-RAcoy‘_ 11)61-4,r -xfA' . _. , tolvtvemtpit-ra ic. covtkevvvu 0.4,0 !U.41,---- w.e.. lev....ek ig• (P-e_s 11,-ke._ -A-2--) Pk-12-APOD N-11--ta40.-L-- -rA- -i ale .. _ ____ NOgin-fi----t4 Pg / .. ...- .. /ftr4-.1-6- - vacs"- 3-ai --- .-'-4/-V-E--\ c s>( °r: • CIT1 • JP RENTON, ,„AL n y • Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.-Kaufman November 20,2000 Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive,Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill • LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr.Fike: • As you may be aware,a public hearing was begun on November 14,2000. That hearing dealt mainly with an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC)State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat(LUA-00-053). In order to accommodate those persons who.could not testify at a later time or date,some testimony regarding-the Preliminary Plat was taken. There was insufficient time to complete the:hearing on November;14,and the hearing was therefore continued to November 16,2000. It was during the Course of that continued hearing that it became clear that providing only two days notice(November 14 to November16)of the continuance did not allow persons who might have,alreadyhad prior commitments to'attend,the:second hearing. This office, therefore,determined that the hearing should be continued with additional lead time. The continued hearing will begin at 6:00 p.m y on-Tuesday•.December 12,2000. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers on the 7th Floor:of,the Renton.City Hall: „ The matters relating to the appeal have been concluded;_ he only issues to be discussed at this hearing will be regarding the Preliminary,:Plat. • The only testimony and evidence that will accepted will have to be relevant and non-repetitious. This office will not entertain redundant testitiiony,as that adds nothing factual to the record and does not aid in the writing of the necessary findings and,conclusions required by City:andState law. • If this office can be of further assistance,please feel free to write. • Sincerely; Fred J..Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner. Jay Covington;.ChiefAdministrative Officer - Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Zanetta'Fontes . Ann M: Gygi Parties of Record 1055 South Grady Way=.Renton, Washington..98,055 -'(425)430-6515 . 'This oaoer contains-50%'recycled material 20%nost consumer' - - . • - AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION - Charlotte Ann Kassens, first duly sworn on oath states that he/she Is the Legal Clerk of the SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 a daily newspaper published seven (7) times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six . monthsprior to the date ofpublication, referred to, printed andpublished in the NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION English language continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Washington. The South CountyJournal has been approved as a legal RENTON,WASHINGTON g pp g The Environmental Review Committee newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King > has issued a Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated for the following;County. I project under the authority of the Renton The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South Municipal Code. County Journal (and not in supplemental form) which was regularly distributed to HERITAGE RENTON HILL the subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a LUA-on ental ,ECF Environmental review for proposed division of property into 57 lots suitable for Heritage Renton Hill single family homes.Location: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, So. 7th Court and So. 7th Street. as published on: 10/23/00 Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. $51.75, charged to Acct. No. 8051067. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee . with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Legal Number8321 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal / i Code Section 4-8-110. Additional 4 7 information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office (425)-430-6510. A Public egal Clerk, South ounty Journal Hearing will be held in the Council Chambers on November 14, 2000 at 9:00 AM to consider the preliminary plat. If the Subscribed and sworn before me on this > ' 'r4da of f 2000 Environmental Determination is appealed, y the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Interested parties a,e invited to attend the public hearing. Published in the South County Journa, ��II1111111//// . 0. ,.&...,6 October 23,2000.8321 p co *�Ssili'rii Epp oy%� ��v�1 � ., T A 79e. • v %% Ry Notary Public of the State of Washington —.— = residing in Renton• s •:0 '°(Jel.‘c, = King County, Washington lilt► '''• i•ii•i• ii''iiiiii:'iiiii:i ii::::i:iii iiiiiiiii:iiii:i:::iiiii::is iii:ii i ii::i`...........:... ...:..•. ...:......:............•............•....::.• !:is iii:i:::::::is ii:iiiiiii:i::::ii:::i:iii::iiiiiiiii:iii:iii:i:ii:i>iJi:':ii:iiiiii:ii:i: ....... : ;::.:;>::>::::.>::»:::::>:::::»:.: ::::::: :: :::: »>::>:;:::»>:>::> : ::: ::::.:::::.::::::;: :: .... ... .G. .RR.N .......N. ...tgl[VISI.QN........................................................................................ .. > < >:.<» :> >:> ::: :::,::::: ::�4FFIit3;AVIT.r3....5��.�G�:.BY.,,ILIALG... ..................................................................::::.:.......:.... 111(3 On the � ' day of 1\lo\-)ew\102--- , 2000, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Re-Ravi- 0 t-I-eaV1 ln'll v.Udocuments. This information was sent to: Name Representing. "R (cu ke. Bet \v,-t_it DeUdor y el • 1Re.,1A `0l/\ ScAnoo ulS��/l Ct PCL h e s ac_ Recos-vd (a-t c. (Signature of Sender) S '°- , STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I.know or have satisfactory evidence that -,,c 'L,) ,C. o�,,t.� signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/thei Sq r free and voluntary act for tie uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: `11.O • 2, `l d O �77 . /l�irvt �C� • Notary Public�Tn and of r the State of W ingt MARILYNI�AP�OI-�EhF on NOTARY PUBLIC Notary (Print) MAAAILYN KAMCHFFF STATE OF WASHINGTON My appointment e( ikePOIM'MENT FxPJRFs•waO3 COMMISSION"EXPIRES JUNE 29, 2003 Project Name: fie ^ 2.en l l Project Number: LU I� - cc • O 5-3 PP NOTARY2.DOC .7111Uuui reea aneets— Use template for 5160® > • Mr.Ken Adams ', Mr.James Baker Mr.&Mrs.Thomas Barr 706 Renton Avenue So. 524 Mill Avenue So. 802 High•Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 • Ms.Dianne Beatty. Mr. &Mrs.Brian Beckman Mr.Pat Bellport 1730 SE 7th Court 435 Cedar Avenue So. 411 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Barton Bennett Mr.Douglas Bergquist Mr. &Mrs.Mike Bishop 1807 SE 7th Court River Ridge Estates Homeowners Assoc. 326 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 1801 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Dino Boscolo Mr. &Mrs. Claude Bouchard Ms.Ruth Bradley • 915 High Avenue So. 1506 Beacon Way South 709 High Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Douglas Brandt Ms.Darlene Bressan Mr. &Mrs.John Burkhalter 610 Renton Avenue So. 901 High Avenue So. 901 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Margaret Burkhalter Ms.Dina Calhoun Ms.Eleanor Cantrell 715 Jones Avenue So. Mr.Robert Davis 1416 South 7th Renton WA 98055 433 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Ralph Carter Mr.Timothy Cogger Mr. &Mrs.Barry Conger 630 High Avenue South 609 Grant Avenue South 1301 South 9th Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bert Custer - _. Ms. Gina Custer Ms.Cheryl Danza 714 Cedar Avenue So. 1209 South 7th Street 706 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Robert Elliot Mr.&Mrs.Quentin Ellis Mr.Dale Fountaine 300 Renton Avenue So. 715 High Avenue South 617 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Don Faull Sheri Frank/Grant Anderson Mr. &Mrs.W.Free 804 Renton Avenue So. 426 Cedar Avenue South 1012 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 ® AVERY® Address Labels LU./ -00—/) 5 /k•11�S ©i La‘ell Scun® Smooth Feed SheetsTM --- Use template for 5160® Mr.Frank Gallacher Mr.Bob Gambill 'MS.Lily Garfield 719 Jones Avenue South Seattle Public Utilities, 10th Floor 265 Maiden.Lane East Renton WA 98055 710 Second Avenue Seattle WA 98112 Seattle WA 98104-1714 Ms.Patricia Gilroy Ms.Rosemary Grassi Ms.Kathy Griffin 535 Renton Avenue So. PO Box 1188(422 Cedar Av.S) 1425 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Ann Grinolds Mr.Manly Grinolds Mr.Roger Grinolds 324 Cedar Ave.So. 1223 South 3`d Street 330 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.John Guiliani Ms.Bambi Gunderson Mr.Russ Haag 1400 South 7th Street 1107 South 4th Street 704 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 - Renton WA 98055 Ms. Cynthia Halse Mr.Frederick Hartley Mr. &Mrs.Dan Hemenway 15404— 167th Place SE 701 High Avenue South 1712 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98058 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Sharon Herman/Chuck Lyden Ms.Pat Hodgsen Hopkins and Chombers 711 Jones Avenue South 620 Renton Avenue South PO Box 691 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Margaret Houser Diane Hyatt/Terry Stange Mr.&Mrs.W.Jaeckel 2331 SE 8th Place 720 Cedar Avenue South Falcon Ridge Newsletter Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 2342 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bill Johnson Mr.&Mrs.Phil Johnson Mr.Wayne Jones,Jr. 1425 Beacon Way South 350 Renton Avenue South Lakeridge Development Inc. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 PO Box 146 Renton WA 98057 Ms.Agnes Koestl Mr.&Mrs.Ken Kraght Ms.Ruth Larson 428 Renton Avenue South 527 Renton Avenue South Renton Hill Community Association Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 714 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Randy Lemke Ms.Elizabeth Lewis Mr.&Mrs.Dwayne Liston 415 Cedar Avenue South 1525 South 6th Street 17703—114th Place SE Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 IraAVERV® Address Lahels Lager ;1f,(1® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Ms.Barbara Lux Mr.Robert Lux ivir. Carl Maas 1412 South 9th Street 1410 South 7th Street Ms.Kathy McGatlin Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 1724 SE 7th Court • Renton WA 98055 • Ms.Mary MacDonald Mr.&Mrs.Michael Mack Mr.Louis Malesis 802 Cedar Avenue South 906 High Avenue South 1718 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Eric Mastor Mr. &Mrs.Don Miles Mr.Keith Moberg 808 Renton Avenue South 532 Renton Avenue South 627 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Clint Morse Marianne Nicol/Mark Johnson Ms.Roseanne Nolan 525 High Avenue South 316 Renton Avenue South 2048 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Elsa Norris Mr.Bentley Oaks Ms.Cathy O'Neill 1513 South 7th Street 1321 South 7th Street 575 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Paul Ossorio Mr.&Mrs.Deone Perlatti Mr. Gino Petralia 708 Renton Avenue South 1520 South 961 Street 813 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Janice Potter/Mr.Dwight Potter Ms.Josephine Potter Ms.Paula Provin Falcon Ridge Association 1314 South 7th Street 712 Renton Avenue South 2411 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055-3065 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Dana Reiman - Mr.Wayne Rossman Mr. George Salurmini 1410 Beacon Way South 533 Grant Avenue South 519 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs. Slapnick Mr.&Mrs.Louis Sutter Mr.Rick Thibodeau 531 Grant Avenue South 721 High Street 1000 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Lynn Thrasher Mr.Mario Tonda , Joe Vanderpool/Elsa Norris 904 Grant Avenue South Mr.Victor Tonda 1513 South 7th Street Renton WA 98055 1308 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 • nAVERY® Address Labels Laser 5.160® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Mr.Jack Wardell Mr.&Mrs.Larry Welch ivir.James Wilhoit 523 Renton Avenue South 310 Renton Avenue South 910 Grant Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Rich Yarbrough Mr.Dean Yasuda Mr.Dick Zugschwerdt 338 Renton Avenue South 2058 SE 8th Place 802 Grand Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Bill Collins Mr.Kevin Oleson Mr.&Mrs.Mark DeWitt 420 Cedar Avenue South Renton School District#403 501 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Transportation Department Renton,WA 98058 1220 North 4th Street Renton WA 98055 Mark&Kimberly K.Mehlhaff David&Victoria Miles Rod Kunnanz 532 Grant Avenue South 1510 South 6th Place 810 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Marty L.Zander Dan O'Rourk 806 High Avenue South 501 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 A.F.and Nancy Alexander Steve Johnson Robert Mountjoy 1518 Cedar Avenue South 1514 Beacon Way South 810 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Debra Goltiani Darlene Moore Jason Donahue 811 Jones Ave. South 1511 So.9th St. 419 Cedar Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Newell/McSherry - Elizabeth Prescott Mr.&Mrs. Gerald Hanger 815 Renton Ave.So. 435 Cedar Ave. So. 905 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ruth Helsey Rachel Johnson/Mykel Papke Resident Marvin Wright 620 Grant Ave.So. 707 Renton Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave.So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Camron Smith Grant Anderson Roger Knutson 2140 SE 8th Place 426 Cedar Ave.So. 805 Jones Ave.So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 w AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® Mr.&Mrs.Richard Weitz -Mr. &Mrs.Johnson riugo Chaves 718 Renton Ave. So. 1333 Beacon Way So. 326 Cedar Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Gilroy Paul Lammer Jack Holt 1316 So. 10th Street 15234 SE 176t Pl. 1517 So. 6th St. Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98055 Resident Residents Residents 300 Renton Ave. So. 316 Renton Ave.So. 1729 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Egan Mary Breda Jeff Fettinger/Martin Cibis 810 Grant Ave. So. 900 Grant Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Steve Briggs Tomac Patricia Gilroy 600 Grant Ave.So. 912 Grant Ave.So. 535 Renton Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Melanie Thompson Resident Resident 1307 So.9th 626 Renton Ave.So. 1724 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Resident 801 Jones Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 • etAVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® ! , • CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 14, 2000 AGENDA. •COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH.FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. a PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Bennett Development has proposed subdivision of an approximately 450,846 sf(10.35 acre)property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family houses. The property is located on Renton Hill, between Beacon Way South (Seattle Public Utilities property) and SE 7th Court. Philip Arnold Park is adjacent to the southwest. The property is in a Residential 8 (R-8)Zone.Access would be from SE 7th Court, a public street. A modification from street standards has been requested to reduce the width of the streets within the development from 50 feet to 42 feet. An emergency-only access would connect the proposed project with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement located in Beacon Way. The project requires Environmental Review, Preliminary Plat approval by the Hearing Examiner, and administrative approval of a reduced public street right-of-way(from 50 to 42 feet wide). Location: The project is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way South with SE 7th Court,Jones Avenue South, and South 7th Street. hexagenda T. City of Renton PUBLIC Department of Planning/Building/Public Works HEARING PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: November 14, 2000 Project Name: Heritage Renton Hill Applicant/Address: Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A • Bellevue, WA 98005 Owner/Address: Renton School District No. 403 300 SW 7t Renton, WA 98055 File Number: LUA-00-053, ECF, PP Project Manager: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Project Summary: Bennett Development has proposed subdivision of an approximately 450,846 sf (10.35 acre) property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family houses. The property is located on Renton Hill, between Beacon Way South (Seattle Public Utilities property) and SE 7th Court. Philip Arnold Park is adjacent to the southwest. The property is in a Residential 8 (R-8) Zone. Access would be from SE 7th Court, a public street.A modification from street standards has been requested to reduce the width of the streets within the development from 50 feet to 42 feet. An emergency-only access would connect the proposed project with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement located in Beacon Way. The project requires Environmental Review, Preliminary Plat approvalby the Hearing Examiner, and administrative approval of a reduced public street right-of-way(from 50 to 42 feet wide). Project Location: The project is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way South with SE 7th Court,Jones Avenue South, and South 7th Street. B. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1. Project File ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. Exhibit 2. Sheet 1 of 4, Overall Plat Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 3. Sheet 2 of 4, Preliminary Plat Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 4. Sheet 3 of 4, Preliminary Plat Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) City of Renton P/B/PW Department -,-reliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . L UA-00-053, ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 2 of 12 Exhibit 5. Sheet 4 of 4, Preliminary Plat Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 6. Topographic Survey(7/28/99) Exhibit 7. Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 8. Drainage Control Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 9. Generalized Utilities Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 10. Detailed Grading Plan (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 11. Neighborhood Detail Map (Rev. 8/31/00) Exhibit 12. Zoning Map (12/20/99) C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: Renton School District No. 403 2. Zoning Designation: Residential 8 (R-8) 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Single Family 4. Existing Site Use: Vacant land 5. Neighborhood characteristics: North: Zoned R-8, developed single family residential East: Zoned R-8, vacant land, single family residential South: Philip Arnold Park West: Philip Arnold Park 6. Access: SE 7th Court 7. Site Area: 10.35 acres D. HISTORICAUBACKGROUND: Action Ordinance No. Date Annexation 1861 02/28/61 Comprehensive Plan 4498 02/20/95 Zoning 4404 06/07/93 E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Residential 8 du/ac (R-8) Zone Standards, Development Regulations 4-2-110A 2. Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations, Development Regulations 4-4-060 • hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department - - ;=reliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . L UA-00-053,.ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 3 of 12 3. Street Standards, Development Regulations 4-6-060 4. Subdivision Standards, Development Regulations 4-7 5. Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations, Development Regulations 4-4-130 F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element—Residential Single Family 2. Transportation Element 3. Housing Element 4. Environmental Element • G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND Bennett Development has proposed subdivision of an approximately 450,846 sf (10.35 acre) property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family houses. Lots would range in size from 4,504 sf to 8,318 sf. The average lot size would be approximately 5,350 sf. The triangular-shaped property is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way South with SE 7th Court,Jones Avenue South, and South 7th Street. Although Renton Hill is a well established neighborhood, land abutting the proposed project to the north has been developed fairly recently into the"River Ridge," eleven-lot, subdivision. "Falcon Ridge,"a large (80 lots) subdivision, lies to the southeast. Philip Arnold Park, a developed park in the City of Renton park system, is adjacent to the southwest. The Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement,which is used occasionally for overflow parking from the park, separates the park from the proposed development property. The property is in a Residential 8 (R-8) Zone, which requires/allows between 5.0 and-8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). Approximately 88,862.4 sf (2.04 acre) of the site would be public right-of- ways and therefore is deducted from the gross square footage of the site for density calculations. The net site area is approximately 361,983.6 sf (8.31 acre),therefore the density would be 6.86 du/a. Access would be from a new public street that would intersect with SE 7th Court, in the River Ridge development.The new street would terminate in a cul-de-sac. An emergency-only access would connect the cul-de-sac with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement. A modification from street standards has been requested to reduce the width of the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet. There are no existing structures on the site. Approximately 54,974 cubic yards of topsoil would be cut on the site, with approximately 19,233 cubic yards of fill material being replaced following excavation. The project requires Environmental Review, Preliminary Plat approval by the Hearing Examiner, and administrative approval of a reduced public street right-of-way(from 50 to 42 feet wide). hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department - ;`'reliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 4 of 12 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA(RCW 43.21 C, 1971 as amended), on October 17,2000,the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated. One appeal was filed prior to the close of the appeal period on November 6, 2000. The appeal hearing will be combined with the Preliminary Plat hearing. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposed project, the following mitigation measures were issued for the Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated. 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 the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). This will be'required during the construction of both off- site and on-site improvements was 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 of drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in the most recent KCSWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. These measures 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. 5. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot.The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$488.00 per each new single family lot created by the proposed plat. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 7. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 9. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department - - reliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 5 of 12 10. The rear setback at the lot located in the northeast corner of the property(Lot 35 as shown on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet and clearing within ten feet of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the applicant and dated 8/31/00. 11. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated ' from the site and construction is ceased immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. 12. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project,would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2," by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000. 13. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline Easement"for a secondary, emergency only access. • 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address site plan issues from the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of the report. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT CRITERIA: Approval of a plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat criteria have been established to assist decision makers in the review of the plat: (a) Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element - The proposal should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of the property as Residential Single Family. The Objective and Policies of the Single Family Residential land use designation are as follows: Objective LU-J: Protect and enhance the Residential Single Family areas, encourage reinvestment and rehabilitation resulting in quality neighborhoods, improve opportunities for better public transportation, and make more efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. The proposed project meets this objective by investing in under-utilized land to create a new neighborhood and provide a greater use of urban services and infrastructure. Policy LU-34: Net development densities should fall within a range of 5.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre in Residential Single Family Neighborhoods. The proposed project would meet this policy by having a development density of 6.86 dwelling units per net acre. hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department - 'reliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 6 of 12 Policy LU-35: A minimum lot size of 4,500 square feet should be allowed in single family residential neighborhoods except when flexible development standards are used for project review. Lots are proposed at 4,504 sf to 8,318 sf. The average lot size would be approximately 5,350 sf. Policy LU-37: Maximum height of structures should generally not exceed 2 stories in single family residential neighborhoods. Development standards require that the maximum building height in the R-8 Zone be two stories or 30 feet. The developer has indicated that he intends to build houses on the platted lots that comply with this standard. Policy LU-38: Development standards for single family neighborhoods (e.g. lot size, width, building height, setbacks, lot coverage)should encourage quality development in neighborhoods. The project, as proposed,would meet current development standards that are designed to encourage quality development. Policy LU-39: Development standards for single family neighborhoods should address transportation and pedestrian connections between neighborhoods and compatible boundaries between neighborhoods. The proposed project would be a part of the Renton Hill neighborhood. Renton Hill is somewhat "disconnected"from adjacent neighborhoods. It is isolated from the downtown because of the proximity of Interstate 405 and from residential areas to the south and east due to topographic change and the fact that the Seattle Public Utility Cedar River Pipeline Easement is closed to through traffic. These situations would not be altered by development of the proposed project. The proposed project would have pedestrian connections to the Seattle Public Utility Cedar River Pipeline Easement. Although the Easement is on Seattle Public Utility property, it is used by the public to access Philip Arnold Park, a developed City of Renton park. Policy LU-40: New plats developed at higher densities within existing neighborhoods should be designed to incorporate street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes which address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Design features would be incorporated into the site plan that take into consideration existing neighboring homes that were developed at lower overall densities. The entry area would be landscaped and have open space areas to buffer the proposed development from the existing River Ridge development. The applicant has expressed the intention of creating a fifteen foot (15')wide lineal landscaped area along the north property boundary, creating a buffer between the new development and existing houses. Policy LU-40.1: New plats proposed at higher densities than adjacent neighborhood developments may be modified within the allowed density range to reduce conflicts between old and new development patterns. However, strict adherence to older standards is not required. Increased traffic volumes could cause conflicts between existing and new residents. A stop sign at the new entrance road to the proposed project would provide traffic control however. Existing residents in the River Ridge subdivision, located on a dead end cul-de-sac, would be inconvenienced to a greater extent than they are now, but traffic volumes are expected to be typical for an urban street. Policy LU-40.2: Site features such as distinctive stands of trees and natural slopes should be retained to enhance neighborhood character and preserve property values where possible. Retention of unique site features should be balanced with the objective of investing in neighborhoods within the overall context of the Vision Statement of(the]Comprehensive Plan. hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department - .aliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 7 of 12 Three areas on the proposed site plan in the proximity of the entry way have been set aside for preservation as commonly held open space. The trees in one of these areas, adjacent to the stormwater pond,would be retained, if possible. The private"Park"area does not appear to have significant trees on it at the present time. The other area would require grading, so existing trees would not be retained. Staff recommends that these areas be enhanced, prior to occupancy, with landscaping including mixed deciduous and evergreen trees and plantings of native shrubs and groundcover. Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element The Growth Management Act required that the Comprehensive Plan address transportation planning based on land use assumptions,travel estimations, facilities and services needs, Demand Management Strategies, and finance. The Comprehensive Plan included a forecast of Renton's traffic increase for a twenty year period. In the plan, it was estimated that there would be a 52% increase in traffic in Renton between 1990 and 2010. The estimated traffic increase on Cedar and Renton Avenues on Renton Hill would be approximately 25%from the proposed project. This appears to be consistent with projected city-wide traffic volume increases. A critical transportation issue with all development proposed in Renton is the concurrency of the City's transportation system with development. Policy T-3 states that, 'Transportation plans should be phased concurrently with growth." The measure of concurrency is Level of Service (LOS). The City of Renton uses the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 1985) definition of Level of Service. This LOS concept quantifies a motorist's degree of comfort as they travel through an intersection or along a segment of roadway. The degree of comfort includes travel time, amount of stopped delay at intersections, impedance caused by other vehicles, and safety. Levels are A through F,with A being the best level of service and F the worst. The applicant submitted a traffic study by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., "Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis,"dated January 27, 2000, and"Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis,Addendum No. 2,"dated September 11, 2000. These reports indicate that Levels of Service in the vicinity of the proposed project, at key intersections, would not be lowered by traffic generation from the project. This can be seen in the following PM Peak Hour Levels of Service table, where Level of Service is measured by the amount of delay per vehicle at each intersection: PM PEAK HOUR* LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Projected 2005 Projected 2005 Existing Without Project With Project - Intersection LOS Delay** LOS Delay** LOS- - Delay** Main Ave/S.4th St B 16.9 B 16.3*** B 16.4 Houser Way S/MiII Ave S B 11.1 B 11.6 B 11.8 Cedar Ave S/S 3`d St/Mill Ave S South approach A 7.4 A 7.4 A 7.5 Overall A 7.3 A 7.3 A 7.4 Renton Ave S/S 7th St South approach A 7.5 A 7.5 A 7.6 Overall A 7.2 A 7.2 A 7.4 * PM Peak hours are typically considered the most critical time of day for traffic generation purposes ** Average seconds of delay per vehicle ***Assumes the planned traffic signal modifications are in place hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department _ _eliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 8 of 12 The previous table indicates that the intersections included in the study,which are the key intersections in the circulation pattern on Renton Hill,would continue to operate at LOS A and/or LOS B in the PM peak hour with the project.This indicates availability of adequate capacity at the intersections studied to accommodate the addition of project-generated traffic. Comprehensive Plan - Housing Element Housing Mandates: The Growth Management Act requires the City to plan how it will accommodate its share of the projected population growth (as determined by the Puget Sound Regional Council) and how it will provide housing for all economic segments of the City's population. The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan delineates these strategies. Plan Background: The preliminary housing strategies were reviewed by a citizens' Housing Task Force in 1993. The draft Housing Element was reviewed by the City Planning Commission and preliminary plan concepts were reviewed by the development community, real estate community, and service providers and the community as a whole in a focus group meeting. The City Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Interim Plan alid made its recommendation to the City Council in the winter of 1994. The City Council held a series of workshops and public hearings during the.winter and spring of 1994 prior to adoption. There was a recognized need, in the Comprehensive Plan,to ensure that an adequate amount of land would be available for residential development by providing appropriate zoning. The Plan further recognized that almost all the needed housing would be developed by private parties, not the municipal government. Therefore,the Plan endorsed policies and programs that would support that development. Project Compliance with Housing Element By adding 57 homes,the proposed project would increase the City's housing supply,thereby furthering objectives of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan.The following would particularly be met by the proposed project: Policy H-4: Encourage infill development as a means to increase capacity. Policy H-7: Promote high quality residential living environments in all types of neighborhoods. Policy H10: Encourage small lot single family development. Policy H-11: Favor single family land use designations for large vacant parcels outside of Centers and in predominantly residential areas to increase the single family capacity within the city. Policy H-17: Minimum density requirements should ensure that average net density of residential development within a project can eventually ensure adequate capacity for growth and prevent inefficient use of urban infrastructure. Policy H-82: Relate the size of structures to the size of lots in order to create development which fits into a neighborhood. Comprehensive Environmental Element The purpose of the Environmental Element of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide policies that form the basis for environmental actions by the City as it attempts to balance urbanization, economic development, and natural area protection. The City must also regulate land uses in areas where development could create hazards to life, property, or environmental quality. Although there are no streams or wetlands on the property,there are areas of the natural environment that may be impacted by development of the proposed project. They are surface water, steep slopes, hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department eliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT • LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 9 of 12 and wildlife habitats. Also,the property in its undeveloped state is heavily covered by trees of approximately 30 years in age.The following policies of the Environmental Element would be applicable to the proposed project: Policy EN-3: Minimize erosion and sedimentation by requiring appropriate construction techniques and farming practices. Policy EN-27: Control quantity and quality of stormwater run-off from all new development to be consistent with or improved over existing conditions. Policy EN-28: Minimize on-site erosion and sedimentation during and after construction. Policy EN-29: Route stormwater runoff from new development to avoid gully erosion or landslides in ravines and steep hillsides. Policy EN-31: Implement surface water management systems which protect natural features whenever feasible. Policy EN-36: Promote the return of precipitation to the soil at.natural rates near where it falls through the use of detention ponds, grassy swales, and infiltration where feasible. Policy EN-37: Promote development design which minimizes impermeable surface coverage by limiting site coverage and maximizing the exposure of natural surfaces. Policy EN-38: Manage the cumulative effects of storm water through a combination of engineering and preservation of natural systems. Policy EN-58: Designate setbacks around environmentally sensitive areas to protect both the areas and the users. Project Compliance with the Environmental Element The applicant has proposed a private surface water control system that would collect, detain, treat for pollutants, and provide a controlled release of stormwater. The system would be maintained by a Homeowners'Association. Erosion control measures that would be put in place prior to the start of construction were made conditions of the Environmental Determination. Slopes on the property, that are in excess of grades that would otherwise cause them to be regulated under the Critical Areas Ordinance,were probably created by mining activity on the site (gravel extraction). Therefore, the applicant has requested an exemption from the Critical Areas Ordinance. This exemption has been approved administratively, based on the geotechnical engineering report. The property is located in the City of Renton's Aquifer Protection Area 2. The before-mentioned stormwater control system and connection to the sanitary sewer system would provide adequate protection of the City's water resource from the proposed development. The applicant has estimated that approximately 389 trees sized 6 inches in diameter and greater and of various types would be removed from the property.The applicant must adhere to the requirements of the Forest Practices Act, a state regulation. A Class IV permit for conversion of forested land to another use and removal of more than 5000 board feet of timber(for sale, not personal use)would be required. The individual lots would be landscaped following house construction. The applicant has proposed certain areas, as indicated on the Preliminary Plat plan (dated 8/31/00), be designated as"landscape tracts." Staff has concerns that some of these areas, due to their small size and isolated location from other lots within the development, may not receive the maintenance and care necessary to prevent them from becoming unsightly or unsafe. Therefore, staff recommends that all landscape tract areas,with the exception of the 5,402 sf tract located at the hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department rreliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 10 of 12 development entry, the 3,042 sf private"Park", and the landscape area abutting the stormwater tract, be incorporated into lots already proposed within the plat. No additional building lots are to be created. A revised plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division prior to receiving construction permits. Special setback requirements from steep slopes were made conditions of the Environmental Determination, as were conditions relating to potential hazard from former subsurface mining activity. (b) Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation The proposal site is designated Residential 8(R-8) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The R-8 Zone has a minimum density requirement of 5.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a) and a maximum density of 8.0 du/a. The proposed development would allow for future construction of up to 57 new dwelling units. Each lot would be allowed to have one residential dwelling, therefore the density of the development would be 6.86 du/a. The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. • The proposed plat would provide 57 lots ranging in size from 4,504 sf to 8,318 sf. The average lot size would be approximately 5,350 sf. These lot sizes are smaller than the eleven lots in the development to the north, River Ridge, but are compatible with other existing lots in this area. The minimum lot dimensions in the R-8 Zone are 50 feet wide for interior lots, 60 feet wide for corner lots, and 65 feet deep. All rectangular lots meet or exceed the minimum lot width and depth requirements or 50 or 60 feet wide and 65 feet deep. Fifteen lots that are irregularly shaped meet the requirements for minimum lot width and depth through width averaging.An additional lot is a pipestem lot, which also meets the minimum requirements for lot width and depth and width of pipestem. On streets developed since September 1, 1995, the minimum setbacks in the R-8 Zone are 15 feet for primary structures and 20 feet for attached garages that access from the front yard street,20 feet for the rear yard, 5 feet for interior side yards, and 15 feet for side yards on corner lots. The front, rear, and side setback lines indicated on the Preliminary Plat plan meet the minimum setback requirements for the R-8 Zone. The maximum building height in the R-8 Zone is two stories or 30 feet. Compliance with the building height regulations would be a requirement of the building permit process. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 Zone is 50% of lots 5,000 square feet or smaller and 35% of, or 2500 sf on, lots larger than 5,000 sf. Compliance with the building coverage regulations would be a requirement of the building permit process. (c) Compliance with Subdivision Regulations (RMC 4-7) Lots: The proposed plat must create legal building sites that comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code. All lots created by the subdivision would result in legal building lots according to the regulations for the Residential 8 Zone. hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department ,,'eliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . L UA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 11 of 12 Access: All parcels must have access established to a public road. The Preliminary Plat fronts on and would receive primary access from a public street, SE 7th Court. Most of the proposed lots within the development would front directly onto new public roads. One lot (Lot 35)would access a public road by means of a pipestem to the lot. Lots 20, 21, and 22 would be accessed by a private, 26'wide road. Lots 14, 15, 16, and 17 would be accessed by another private, 26'wide road. Physical Characteristics: The plat must have suitable physical characteristics. The Proposed Plat has suitable physical characteristics, as conditioned by the SEPA Determination and Mitigating Conditions (included herein). Drainage: The Preliminary Plat must make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, and sanitary wastes. The conceptual plans for the proposed Preliminary Plat have been approved by City staff as providing adequately for drainage ways, streets and other public ways,water supplies, and sanitary wastes. Residential lot arrangement: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. The Preliminary Plat plan indicates side lot lines are at right angles and/or radial to streets. Property corners at intersections: All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet(159. All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public right-of-ways will be designed with a minimum radius of fifteen feet (15'). (d) Availability and Impact on Public Services (Timeliness) Police and Fire Police and Fire Prevention Bureau staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development, subject to the condition that the applicant provide Code required improvements and fees. Recreation It is anticipated that new residents to the project would use City park and recreation facilities and programs. The City of Renton Park and Recreation Department has indicated the ability to provide services to new residents, subject to the condition that the applicant participate in the Park Mitigation Fee program. Schools Renton School District No. 403 has indicated that the increased student enrollment that may result from the development of the proposed project, estimated at 25 students, can be accommodated in Talbot Hill Elementary School, Dimmitt Middle School, and Renton Senior High School. The School District has further requested that the existing school bus turnaround, located at the intersection of Beacon Way S and SE 7th Court be maintained. The conceptual plan for the proposed project would not impact this turnaround area. hexrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department `— iwaliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . LUA-00-053,ECF,PP PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 14,2000 Page 12 of 12 Storm water The conceptual stormwater plan has been accepted by the Plan Review Division. Final stormwater plans will be required as part of the Final Plat process.The City as indicated sufficient capacity to provide stormwater control service for the proposed development. Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities The conceptual water and sanitary sewer utilities plans have been accepted by the Plan Review Division. Final plans will be required as part of the Final Plat process. The City as indicated sufficient capacity to provide service to the proposed development. Street Improvements The vehicular circulation system on Renton Hill is influenced by several factors. As mentioned previously,the area is somewhat isolated due to topography. Steep slopes that run north to east above the Cedar River are preserved as natural areas and do not have roads. The east side is inaccessible due to the proximity of Interstate 405. The south side of Renton Hill has numerous utility easements and is also free of roads that might access Renton Hill,with the exception of the Seattle Public Utility Cedar River Pipeline Easement. This easement is known as Beacon Way S as it crosses Renton Hill. Travel on Beacon Way S is restricted due to its closure, at the request of the residents of Renton Hill. Although the road was open at one time, it was subsequently closed in order to increase security in the neighborhood. Traffic from Renton Hill,that might otherwise utilize this route, must enter and exit the neighborhood at the north. The limited access restricts traffic on streets that date from the earliest days of the City and are more narrow than now allowed by street standards. On-street parking, which is allowed on some streets, although not all of them, further constricts movement across Renton Hill. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT, Project File No. LUA-00-053, ECF, PP, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with ERC Mitigation Measures: The applicant is required to comply with the Mitigation Measures which were required by the Environmental Review Committee Threshold Determination prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. All landscape tract areas,with the exception of the 5,402 sf tract located at the development entry,the 3,042 sf private"Park", and the landscape area abutting the stormwater tract, shall be incorporated into lots already proposed within the plat. No additional building lots are to be created: A revised plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division prior to receiving construction permits 3. Commonly held open space areas shall be enhanced, prior to occupancy,with landscaping including mixed deciduous and evergreen trees and plantings of native shrubs and groundcover. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Development Services Department for approval. EXPIRATION PERIODS: Preliminary Plats(PP): Five(5)years from final approval(signature)date. hexrpt.doc CITY OF RENTON . DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for singe family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot.size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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 the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements was 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 of drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in the most recent KCSWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. These measures 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. 5. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of $75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $488.00 per each new single family lot created by the proposed plat. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Mitigation Measures (continued) Page 2 of 2 7. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of $530.76 per each new single family residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 9. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendation§ of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. 10. The rear setback at the lot located in the northwest corner of the property (Lot 35 as shown on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet and clearing within ten feet of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the applicant and dated 8/31/00. 11. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction is ceased immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. 12. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project, would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2," by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000. 13. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline Easement"for a secondary, emergency only access. RAITIIACAC CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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. Plan Review—Sanitary Sewer 1. There is an existing 8" sewer main in SE 7th Court, adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new project can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main through the proposed subdivision. 2. The conceptual sanitary sewer main shown on the drawing submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. 3. A sewer cleanout will need to be located five feet out from buildings. _ 4. Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual sewers). Side sewer lines must have a 2 percent slope. 5. All utility plans must comply with the City of Renton Drafting Standards. 6. Show finished floor elevations on the sewer construction plan sheet. 7. The vertical profile of the sewer main will be required. 8. The project is located in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. 9. Any new.sewer mains are to be separated from water lines by a minimum of 10 feet. There is a 7.5 foot minimum separation from other utilities. Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Advisory Notes(continued) Page2of2 10. Sewer Development Charges of$585.00 per single family residence will be required for this plat. The fee for this project would be $16,380.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Avenue S, an 8" water main in SE 7th Court, and an 8" • . water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. 2. The proposed project is located in the 490 foot water pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from approximately 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. 3. Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of.1,000 GPM fire flow and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measure along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as part of this prdlect to meet this criteria. 4. The water-main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. .The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S. 5. Installation of 8"water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants are required. 6. Connection to the 8"stub along the north property line is required (see plan W-2038). 7. 'Connection to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S is required (see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan shall be revised to show this connection. 8. Water System Development charges of$850.00 per new single family lot will be required for this. The charge for this plan would be $48,450.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Stormwater Drainage 1. A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. 2. Drawings submitted to the City of Renton are to be on 22 inch x 34 inch sheets. The information pertaining to the City of Renton should be removed from the title block of the sheets submitted. 3. Before any construction or development activity occurs, a pre-construction meeting must be held with the City of Renton Development Services Division, Construction Services (425-277-5570). - 4. The City of Renton retains the right to restrict the timing of land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions may be necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare, or for the protection of the environment. 5. Surface Water System Development charges of$385 per new single family lot will be required for this plat. The fee for this project would be $21,945.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Transportation and Street Improvements 1. All electrical and communication facilities to be underground behind the sidewalk. If right-of-way space is not available,then in a utility easement. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. 2. Streets over 700 feet in length are required to have two means of access. • Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Advisory Notes(continued) Page 3 of 3 • 3. Street lighting is required to meet City standards. Minimum lighting level is 6:1 uniformity ratio and 0.2 foot candle level. The street lighting conduit to be located under the sidewalk. 4. The minimum right-of-way width is 42 feet(modified from street standard width of 50 feet). 5. The cul-de-sac is required to have a minimum pavement radius of 45 feet and right-of-way radius of 55 feet. 6. A 5 foot sidewalk at the curb is required 7. Payment of a Transportation Mitigation fee of$75 per new average weekday trip, estimated at 9.55 new trips per single family lot,will be required prior to recording of the plat. It has been estimated that this 57 lot plat would result in approximately 544.35 additional average (weekday)trips. The Transportation Mitigation Fee would be $40,826.25. Plan Review—General ••_ 1. 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. 2. The construction permit application(s) must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 3. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5 percent of the first$100,000 of the estimated construction costs;4 percent of anything over$100,000, but less than $200,000, and 3 percent of anything over$200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. 4. An easement that meets City standards for ingress, egress, and utilities shall be provided by the applicant to the property abutting the east property boundary at a point within 200 feet of the northeast property corner of the proposed plat. Parks Department Review 1. Payment of a Parks Mitigation fee of$530.76 for each new single family lot will be required prior to recording of the plat. The Parks fee will be$30,253.32. Building Department Review 1. Demolition permits will be required. Fire Prevention Department Review _ 1. 'A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. Provide a 20 foot paved secondary emergency access from the cul-de-sac within the development to the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement (Beacon Way SE). This would be an emergency access only and can be gated or chained. 3. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. 4. A Fire Mitigation fee of $488 is required for all new single family lots. Payment is required prior to recording of the plat. The Fire Mitigation fee for the proposed project would be$27,816.00. Property Services Department Review 1. Comments will be provided under separate cover. Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Advisory Notes(continued) Page 4 of 4 Development Services Department Review 1. The site is designated Residential Single Family in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8). 3. Densities allowed in the R-8 Zone are 5.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a) minimum and 8.0 du/a • maximum. 4. Minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4500 sf, with minimum width of 50 for interior lots and 60 for corner lots. The minimum permitted lot depth is 65 feet. Lot dimensions must be shown on the final site plan demonstrating that all lots meet these minimums. 5. Heights of buildings in the R-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories, or.. 0 feet. 6. Required, setbacks in the R-8 Zone are 15 feet for houses and 20 feet for attached garages which access from the front when houses front streets created after September 1, 1995, 20 foot rear yard setbacks; 5 foot side yard setbacks for interior lots and 15 feet sideyard setbacks for corner lots. All setbacks are minimums. Setback dimensions should be shown on the construction drawings, but setback lines must be removed prior to recording the final plat. 7. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 Zone is 35 percent for lots over 5,000 sf or 50 percent for lots 5,000 sf or less. 8. Dead end streets cannot exceed 700 feet in length, measured from the edge of the connecting street to the end of the cul-de-sac. 9. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 10. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction of retaining walls onor near property lines. These agreements must include protection measures for (or permission to potentially damage or remove) trees located on abutting properties within 20 feet of the property line. 11. The applicant shall draft and record a maintenance agreement or establish a Homeowners' Association for the maintenance of all common improvements (access and utility easements, rights- of-way, and stormwater facilities). A draft of the document shall be submitted to the City of Renton for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to the recording of the preliminary plat. 12. Performance Standards for Land Development Permits (RMC 4-4-130K), including "Protection Measures-During Construction" (RMC 4-4-130K7) relating to trees, shall be followed by the-applicant. The applicant shall adhere to the definition of"tree" a found in RMC 4-11-200, "drip line" as found in RMC 4-11-040, and the measurement of trees as found in RMC 4-11-030. 13. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources may require a Forest Practices Permit for the conversion of timber land to another use. 14. The applicant should contact Paul Alexander of The King County Department of Transportation, Metro Transportation, Metro Transit Route Facilities at 206-684-1599, regarding Metro's requirements for potential transit service in the area (no service is currently available to Renton Hill). • .—,,nr.n,.v l-rrO Nimimiiminsmmi SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. D ETERSON �i T� - I ICONSULTINC • -- --_ I. N (. I N I. I. It 1 m. RENTON HILL A/RPQRr WAY 4 Lake Washington Blvd. s Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 Kirkland,WA 98033 S 2qd ST 4y Tel(425)827-5874 •\ �\F�-.-�-L--'IJ \ i„ �N,S S Jed sr l Fax(425)822-7216 • • frc4y' >'</I \ l \ I ��\ • s� z s rinsr SITE 2 a v v \ . ...;....,..4 1 I I Goo WAN .1 2 J L--- C2 7g' I "r \ \ o • a a A 15. Z Z 9. 7TH 8TT. % : _L S8956'•7 E_B29.34' �� \ �� z a PINUP ,�, I- 'fi1 `^'�I l SRWMOPA A1ER �:u 4 :::J7 J6© I Sr �� ... `i ._JI..T {I.._ tl- - \\ J J' I 5w 167n a , III II I-� OJ L✓S TRA\ \ ©�1©©©® ©. 6 yii. / J •--1 LIQ -i-I I�I 77 i '1 �y _ SPUGETDRLiii 200' 0 zo0• I I - I--1? \ �© O m � VICINITY MAP: Q W 2 ROAD�' \ 28 �3 \ NOT TO SCALE 0 ;� �� -� - - room®®® �� W -I �- L� 1_I_ _ _ �l: _�i 27 • I --I--J \=--- �� ® -D GENERAL NOTES: J 1 NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH I LA TRAL7 ^-� II® =-1 Ic- °E'ER.' SCHOOL ammo' Q CI 13478'40 25.00' 58.68' \ �\ / ., 1 l- --I RENTON300 WASHINGTON 98055144 �. C2 287772" 125.00' 62.08' I \\%-- u -� - DEVELOPER: BENNETT DEVELOPMENT i I I \%.MO I--� - 9 LAKE BELLEWE V SUITE 100 A `C/ BELLEVIUE, WASHINGTON 98003 I r��--7 I L/5 TTRAcr :,.v4,W�/� \L (425)709-6508 t5 1 J \---- •p6' ,\ `/ \ CONTACT:RYAN AKE y I I-- -T- /A 5�_,ng,5, \, � ENGINEER: PETERSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS m 11 I I - I_ 4` \` \` �J 4030E 2A OE WASHINGTLW DCVO N.E. - �/// \ /\ \\ KIRKLAND. WASHINGTON 98033 { 1_--I--, I _ \ ` (425)827-587+ / \ \ \ i CONTACT:.ENNIFER STL7G P.E. KEY MAP SURVEYOR: MEAD GILMAN&ASSOCIATES SCALE 1'..200' P.O.BOX 289 NOODINVILLE;WASHINGTON 98072 (425)486-1252 BENCHMARKS/DATUM: CONTACT•EDWARD ANOERSON,P.LS TOTAL AREA:(4/-) 10.35 ACRES(GROSS) o Fi BENCHMARKS CITY OF RENTON 1475-NI/4 CON.SEC.20-23-3 TOTAL AREA R.O.W. 2.04 ACRES aJ a a a a a a a a a a CASED 14.4'CONC MON 7/4 1 I/2'BRASS DISC tr'XI BOY.E.OF THE MIX OF S 7711 SE&JONES AYES z ELEVATION 347.34' NET AREA SJ/ACRES IIMIMMEMEMEMINM CITY OF RENTON/4I8 TOTAL LOTS 57 RESIDENTIAL LOTS .7 STE7C CASED CONC MON{NTH 1/4'BRASS PIN.Il'3 S.OF THE'NIX OF PRQIECI MANAGER S.7774 ST.&RENTON AYES MAX ALLOWABLE DENSITY. B00 DU/ACRE DESIGNED. ,L STEW ELEVATION-J05.80' PROPOSED DENSITY: 6.86 DU/ACRE CADD a DDINEY DATUM: NAM 88(CITY OF RENTON) ZONING R-B,URBAN RESIDENTIAL OBIXm 1 MUG • DATE 4/10/00 PROPOSED USE: SINGLE-FAMILY,DETACHED FEE NAME PPIHER23 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXISTING USE: ANGLE-FAY/LY,DETACHED THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST WARIER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST BOUNOARYI FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD GILMAN&ASSOCIATES WARIER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH,RANG 5 EASE W.M.,IN KING COUNTY.WASHINGTON. • • DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TOPOGRAPHY: FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD GILMAN&ASSOCIATES COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION.SAID POINT BONG THE TRUE POINT gR OFBEGINNING THENCE SOUTH8936 J7 EAST ALONG TINE NORTHERLY LIMITSOFSAID SUBDIVISION • f cp A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER ON SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH UTILITIES/PURVEYORS: '. „ 014.P.T8'NEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LIMITS O'SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 816.33 FEET: ``.Y THENCE SOUTH 71'05'72'NEST A DISTANCE OP 709.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY SEWER/WATER: CITY OF RENTON m .%40 4 a MARGIN OF THE CITY OF SEATTLES CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY• THENCE NORTH 44. y ' 20'15'NEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE O'1146.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE STORM DRAINAGE: CITY O'RENTON WESTERLY UMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 0/I620'EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LIMITS `It r A DISTANCE OF 3E14 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. GAS/POKER: PUGET SOUND&ENERGY .... r ,R�v 'i-t.1 LOT AREAS(LISTED IN SQUARE FEET) TELEPHONE US NEST �i•YNLR7AL�" �f I. 3990 IS 5,482 25. 4,750 J7, 3,527 49. 4,750 CABLE' AT&T 1 EXPIRES:9/9/00 Z 5,353 14. 4,965• 26. 4.750 38. 3500 50. 4,749 FIRE O15TR/CT.• CITY O'RENTON J. 4,875 1S 4.750 27. 4.750 J9. 5300 51. 5,825 STAMP NOT VALID 4. 4.625 16. 4,750 28. 4,730 40. 5500 52. 3,863 SCHOOL DISTRICT.: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 1403' UNIZSSGNED AND DATED 5. 4.504 IZ 3090 29. 4.750 41. 5,500 53 4.750 6. 5,557 W. 7,584 30. 4,750 42. 5500 54. 4,750 7. 5,799 19. 7.319 Jl. 4,754 44.. 5,300 55.4 Q4.750Jai NU61BETT HERM-0025 8. 4+J 20. axe J2. 4.946 44. 5.500 56. 4,7J1 9. 4,750 21. 5,000 J4.. 6.121 45. 4,750 57. 6.660 IS 4,750 22. 5,000 J4. 5549 46. 4.750 II. 4,730 OF IS. 5,623 23. 4,851 J5. 6.90.5 4, +.750 9DE1•NDM6IX + 4 3 24. 4,750 J6. 7,406 48. 4,750 I MEINEM • iimmonii SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. ❑ETERSON CONSULTING \ \ \\ /• EX. SS�yIH I NI/4 CUR.SER 20-2J-5 `\� / // I \ RIM JJ6.p FOUND CASED COVC YDN. / \ ��•��' C,R. .16. J29.7(NW,sw) \y �s•t/ 1 \\ �� \� I •I EX�Je..mE,, r� �,• \� 1 _i'' 4030 Lake Washington \ /�,t►_ \f ¶ JJ4. (SW) 11 • COULD NDr OPEN / III�� T Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 \ P \<• /E JJ4.7(SW) £X. CB Trn l / ,X. SSMH�� • rpp /E JJr.a(sE/ I Ton J4Js � '� � ,� Kirkland,WA 98033 II7'IE JJI.6(NW) • 12-/E J40.4(S) / I Tel(425)827-5874 aM JJz7 \ \ '\ 12-IC J405(Fl21 I :IR.CHNL.J26.9`4410) \ • I I cs cnTv I 1 Fax(425)822-7216 / • 1 11 INIIMMIMINE=. - Q' /�c �► - ,Q,, ,_•all=- _ —_ Aso w Ray 16.6 / — _'�I- I5.4£CETAME_ I O a' 6. �-n �( l ig_NhrJ4O../(N&sw) % _BUFFER--- \ 1---- �1 2 /L36 37•E -�29.T4 -� •� _I '�! , \ ---_ass;.- ';, 6' "t 2 Z i ry / 1 . --— 99C0 FENCE 50' ( SO' S0 QVI n� rr —I- -----,--,l v~�$711;10): 00, ��,� �/ r.-i 35Q AISLM / /%�f�i—.76t�_� �/ I� �.YF--Y"-1 r----� -rt-. 4 k EX. CBrwEn ��XC ;�� /apJ4 f / / / / / I \ \1\_-y 1 1 I r—s�— �I d �� e��'� r" ��"� y' �\� /E 0.9(N)�// I I (/� STORMWAIER_ / 64 \ ya V\ GFLL 4 • B'/E JJ6.! MA (SEI , If PV\�� \\� , \ .�,`a -7/I �1 I I 1 /// TRAET / I♦♦ \�t-i \t' I 1G ��7;�� I i `�SOd af. 3.3Q.s• ) 4500 at II� ♦T I< `�'�\��\1 ;*�" C / \ i 1 1 I / //2x9atxt- I 11 \ \� Q 7/ I \\ / \� 'I .'1\\ '/ \ I '1 11 I /////// //�I 9 L-`_-1 L-` ` 1 ? ' O X x\.� �, % 1L----J L---_a1 —cs. Q „ /I \\I / \\I ,��:;\^\ \ �'p`Q} link .� % // r9,• /tee`\ so , 50• 1\\ \t W !� W • NM. 411 ��I I / \-. - ,. \A , I --0---v---- -f—ROAD A•—�. Z >. I/` 'n I k; " �rf/w • ` I I 16' 50• •({Sb'' () • 1 I \\ I \ ` : \\�\ . I TRACT �- \or PARK 1 / I 1• 1 '.:II NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH \ 1 ••�� \ \�\m• I 5.402 ai ›° / \\ . '�012`i\, 1/ 45 /� Cl 13478'40" 25.00' 58.68' \\ I \ieier \b. \,\\\I Ir`/// 1—'--/ 1 ��N_ Y 4.750 at I' 14,7 ar. II U II C2 2877'12" 125.00' 62.08' \\\ I \ �� \\ I / %y at / O y• `G• 1 /I I l r i \ �__ J L! red I \\ I. \�S\ I\•.. /Nat :ig // Pam/ Zi:r - -- z _ Jo' I \\\ •\� \v�1110‘, . // sI/2iar. '(��,''•, ,i\. .� N s�/f'� 50 /' Q�� g . • ' i �\ \ \ / / ) d� zaaaaaaaaaaa minsiemiimi 1 \ \ \ : -I A / \ 1 - _ 4smc .yam \ 4.875 a� / \ $- --��— \ s� \ I\\ \ / \�1 9Q _Sic• MAU MANAWL y-•�� \>\ �\ + \ o. C /{`// .I� •• % Z ' •UDD a DfNAEY -:, \ ;\\��, \N, �•+S 4 /\� . - /4t-,1* ` CHECKED l sroc —I ,\ \ \, 4,625 at / / \\ \ 1 / •/` DATE yo/D0 :\,\\�L I \\ \\�•\\'��\\ /sVy/ 11111 I ( ( • FDE NAME RP2HER25 40' c 40' I \Tmo I \```..\,U. \v/ /\-----\� . \ SCALE 1•-40' • .. C.V.' ..... .- ':ti\\ \• \\�-p. \ ♦\\\\ \ 4.504 aI. (/G/ ,/. .... ::\ \ \\1' - \ , \.'7/ --;W-O. 'J \t \ \ \ \ /\ \ //i1 • / ter 414,,,i,st,•,..,.• • `�#trip.\�•\ ��s Zat \� / `1 • 1 ••• \ ♦(. `. 4�a�- /ORAL ' \\ '�,. y♦O. `v —C_—----_— I EXPIRES:9/9/00 I in \\ �� \��\ �••� _��` STAMP Nar VALID \ 09 \ \ \ b, J•� UNLESSSIGNED AND DATED INIMIIMEMIIMI \\\\\ �\ \1j' ,,Q, ACT r. ; "e"D"�"`HERM-0025 `NUMB°` 2 Dr 4 SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. P ETERSON ��\ L -\ ,� CONSULTING �1..��'\\ \\ \ �� 4030 Lake Washington r it \ �� \ �� Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 N . \ �� Kirkland,WA 98033 Tel(425)827-5874 I I I \\\ \\�� \\ I I Fax(425)822-7216 40' q '40• I 1 I N \ SCALE:1� 40' I \\ \�� \ 2 _I esec I ��I ___ 70 \ _ 1s'\ECErAmr —_ \ \ F. ..- —•— � J=—t S8956 37 E 829.`34 -�\�eu_rEe —e W�Qco rtucE _=—__—— ——— \ \ ` 2 I 50' / �' S0'..— �` ��50' 1 50' i 50• 31' N60' - 1 1Li� .1. — . . — . . — . . — 2 T _ _ - �-I / /\ — 11 1 \ \-1 \ Q ter\---) -1 r----�a -1--1 r----1 r— r-4 -1 r�--'i� --.-- '� —— 111 LI / \ 1 I \\� n.J 3' —1\\ I /I i I I I I / / I ` I / .rb ? 1 \ � ,1 I24 135�i'7 \1\` \� I'/--I. \ I /' I I-L, I IQ'q } I IIQr �e1'� --� 1e IA 6�ossll ,1} r 1\; Q 1� / 1 - I\ 4\\`I J I 42 p 1 41" t 1 *NA,k I I 3� � ►-��I I �36 •i� 70.LV+ . �, : \ \ 11 N. 111 \s50dsr. s . s5oo.r. ssoo" S. ao€ s3oo.c a .� f ( �a. , t I \\ -f 1 \\\ `l I I I�(""1�� ° I I/- I: J I 1 ° \ w`� �' -of \I I a d• I I I �::.1,14x -�'I-�, I`�1 / 1� ,- I l/ �� \I ki11 ' 1 `�� Q I 1-`r--- `1. 1 -{I I bra, I ,0_ I' I _ 71 6__ \ 1 j d \\\ Z �WR x L___1 L--._,.4! 1 J yylr ._ .. J i 4; L WS� J / \ 1 `� AP I L�`g \\ Z, V O To �. .. 50'., ``':., \, l ..// ��.,f. 50' / 4t,':� 1 ii\\4 4W \\ 0 `Is..'..`' W \ W 11. CC IC �. �._--6TTI ..; = ii.•�s °'! �; r0 :'_ •S. eo , , 1 \ 6�°,4' ,I,K� \w --u) 12. 4) O - .ti v -� -ROAD A c.r"r gL 4 \ ---- 1\' I • • • • i• •L ry �'Cj�•vav vi ♦ /f \ \\\ `a\"�.1 I _� ) ( () n p n I 15 50' 50' \ j 5 0 J 411i4. L * C= n C T1A-Jet/ er\-_tom- \mil o ,r I E- —— f \ , bV, ��. -:r,— / f PARK I i' I I/ / I\ \111 1�/ q o • I J4%/ I I,! '\ w,M4 Es ^\ (\ is � /ara2.,. 1/' q\5 ' 11 l46 I 11� ) // h, I 1 $ f1�%/1. -----. ' � I �.�•s I �► �. 1 0 / 10 I / ( I ; I I I:I III 1/( ( J 1 jili '� I- 1 )"4i ,SL_ /-JL _ .Jlit* L _JLe LL_JI /11- - 1\ \5. •11 n 1$�- \ • V1J Il� v\o_ / \ //1�1,/ \\ / / _ ,3sa �`�f' I I °�- 1 I T 1—r W k .es7 P/� •\ {v •` \fir ,�, 4 l I yi� I , I ! o Will CD \ e i 1I // i g44d4444444a ` �' 6,660 / IP ,.. '. I f, I / \,. V� — �.— -:/ /'. I\ 5s , ' T,` '1 5$_-, . 1 • go vi !ID 1 0 I I I I r /, // `\`Y( % a _-/?/// A90 I r i r I. i �.7sc I ;11 I 6° ;!Tr _ ;1�opt .P 00•OIy t-..s.q I1, I \,-- MUMMA MANACLE: / / \X a. v, ��(() 4I I ° I `I \{' I`�y 1 i r ea% \ 'WA/1 1 - DEsawFn .c 5/EX / / ' S '� `J C-—-7 C — Ir,i $ �}' ' 1 i \ CADD a OENNEY I 4 / ,� f �, �i# —- —— - ter` -bI\�- ilk fl ;> O 7 \ _` amatEa d SIM 662s sL of// 1 ! air-1 z d`` -; I I ;' ///" \ /WOO \\ l I � .•r � �%� � 50' \� ! • "..//�� •�, DATE I O \\ / 4 \� M - "— Hsu.-�e��_ r�nw�_ s� '4 0 \1 _ $ I I , // ,1 / 53 \ \—_ /' FILE NAME:orwEnss `� / -- / R \ t,�- ��/ �sro� �� A R.'�3'* OP.,l;41►�--13 ./.4 11) i I. /• /i l \ \ b , ' • aysrrlrAr rea�lrsrrsh. i s°rr• d ),_,6 \ `♦\b. `�%///' /i11 ��.` 25 /i 7.si / s�' 50' \ v2• "11 Q-�f I I/4 I //' ,/,y07/' • // rkti.IS 02, \ `��\ \ f464 51z`�\J�P` —1 �_--��/1 '//,//HD lq /• al —' ,}1/ 1 ;1 u--i °-i /r 1 1 /� \\\ `�� (t \ 4..♦ �` `o i_-`�7--I•--_0,8/:�0 I ' 10�• 1L/ I 12�� ,R5.' �� \� \ voi.\ p/ _j \ 61o240 \ 3r. 9 1 77 ac1 4.950 f, dI •s0,v'r r 5.6 ,,r. _P _ .� 1 1 / \ 3i \ y.9. v `.� --�_ —-I- I. \I I CY /j -i-1 T i-O. -! I $' T`I\ }'/'4� / EMMEs �\\\\ \ \- _\vs: — L —JL--- ±. / d J �.J- L 0 . _- ( srAhiPNOrvvm 1 .,\�t� � � � mil. fir �,, lif•• _ 1 ��/ �� \\ ''s •w�\ \ Lrs zF eJ\� � s .///,// s i50. n_; -fli — ` / �_\` UNIE6SICNED AND DATED 4`�\ `\ ,� Ac i \9 = *► // - -CS �� t'. M. 1• s-4.750 �-;z,. - I '°D NUMBER HERM-0025 SEE SHEET 4 SHEET NUMBER 3 0,4 SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. D ETERSON SEE SHEET 3 'CONSULTING 1,,, -L,r I I'' _ o I __ \ICI— • \1' I`.,\ 1 �� t • :�,c-\— (i 1 4 // -�� 1 -7 C--- C iT, - r 18 11! n wr�hr i \#rzz•• ,.- _ hI I / `"m'`°��'sQ" �.a..aa�. � �` I I J� / q /b 1 - /i � —/ s+off 6+00 . �� 3I[ , 1 Tel(425)827-5874 , r stic �r _TL n s -,...,5,,,,,,,,.-_-,, em., '+^ _ 4 -/ 1 < Fax(425)822-7216 -..... '��\ 4,412 ' ///_ ..,; / • �, Y �� ice 11 y'`.,\ \ N� fr'� �ir . ',iiliy -rK4.�. r--i / 1,:,,,,---,....- / \♦\`Jb. \.i//�- /60O J '' 25' Oillir Allegm:'. .� y fa 50`\ vz•N- 1 4Si III' q 4, 1 // 14/iy - // \\\ ,, , , J } 4./ _ _ //, /(tm) , \ %, 1 I L1_40. 11 , 0iik /1 / \I / \ Z y` a \ �� `'il-,��',-�L_3e08 - }.•x,./ III l0 1 1L/f I 12� /��j I i��n- ��' , 1 / \\ `I 3 ` '� f 0 1 1.750 E . 5a,s,r.'r r~ A6 rr )j' _ r \1 I �:____-_-_,_11,7e::: 10 l 1^ J / \ 4 2 �S' lie_ �•� ya9- ,,.. �\=-,-_, t y \I r /�/ �I i� I r„. T I, / IO jnik \�+�\� ��( \�, '�9�/, r ��`� r-3e' �i�� rr;� r --� �, I�'r .�56.,. `lN�"°r. �,� 2 W Z \ \� , ,;e� \ , �II H 1 f• • 50 aLC I 1Q;1'1IPtii „ `= o J \ M :,1 �` \r �‘ ;1 /1 //0 I/ I 1 i I I 14b c 11 I I �,25 / IVY \ W O \ \-:•. es:. C \.......,,, C� r 7 —=7 -i__4i L 1 I I +.0sa r/ I \ Z �. \\;\fit,V. ( ��y1 < �1 JJ % T� fli SJ y / ! i� —F /J1 \ — U P \�i ;y`v ' ,�, _`` / 11c Oki O' 'lit n 1 — n \ r \ -'^':� /�\ �, rire-f � xss�sr._ � = / .ii I IV (}�/.\J� 111 D \ ,..•,,,,---‘.1‘* \\ / i1.�r r '"' ,/ tz '(J�' Aso Ate`ll "• r-- mg \ : \►y. /\\/TRACT_ / 1 '' I t \\ z x' di u- 95 o �:s- ' \ xsaz ter.yl / I 0 II R-55• .' 1a , n 7�r'� ` , 0 1 1 I 0 p r,^ -1 ITil \I\C:, ' I\ / 5 7,58< /. 7� 7_ 4,6GL,tr.r. - 1 4 t SCALE I•••40' \\ •:♦ �.I \\ 0 /� `•` r ..: �— `�— 1 I I .1.I:11AO tile • • Ns I ,41 -\ ,Q, / .� �JI L i eE ' \\' /Nr�1 •q�,\� \, A/•tea_ _ 1 1 h\1 1 I-1 244444444444 \� MENIMIIIIIIIIII / •�'�oa \ \' /—� —� y'^ ✓ �,�, •`� I I 1 I ,L SIM / I \C (/ 1 \O"I 7-7 V\= I PROJECT MAxAZLR \� O �y, \ �is� 1 � )I y I I �;I�1 i DESIGNER GDR a soar / �♦ \ \ \ I I I/ 21O i 1 n I ❑D CI(EA a smc •, ,... ....... \\\ �� \e\_ \I 1 I 1 5.000 , i I I 1 I DATE 4/io/ra0 \^ ` —1* ` ?6• .-1— 1 —_— FILE NAME:PPIHER2S 1 �� \ J6� 1 I a<q { 1 . r \--- ^^t� .,haw?; / /1 4, - FeZ- .. 55 \ �' 56' / \ F j WAS •� ��\;\\,—:o" ;°�' / // \�,�: • _�\ h�4gi+1' I ,S/1 v // \ \\ / -tom...-` ale, o„\80 \'I \\``- -< \ \ / EXPIRES 9/9/00 \ \\\ ---/-// \ \ � I //00 VAUD \; ——) II\ \` \ \ \ UN=SIGNED AND DATED /� \\ / \ \ \ \ \ \�\``_/�I \\\ \\ \�/ / \\ / ,DDNDI�FRHERM-0025 •/ SIIEETNUMBER 4.4 • I \. .'0 • _ P 1 140 /,' \ G FR Scale 1" 50' "NW'44o Mice 1RM�N• PCPs pr29.r,tLCON PIDGC(CEDAR 00CC) (\ \ " r .-q At: �i{lyl N.Vp BB(C�lv OfRCNION) • _Y— � ` �l • '� 'rl:. r'--�,„ ...'� -'�• cj10 .—\•—..o CONTOUR wiFAVAI-2' ( --▪\ ....• -.- .'..c 6 .-• ---- ____,,rs,,,,!,.(.. °:14 \\ 1\.'" 4'04,1'14 1•••St•.4•411 Mot 1 • /g, titIl,,‘,,,•s,,\‘1.,,, \`, c‘+. err / -,: Cam: 1�•. N,s"...•c—%'..-'\,,,\-0V•--,ai;c i‘')g' x• '-i'p.'-"„3,-N-7.g-i, �• b• .f' ./ �Jt •,i. n - G. 'e•,�••. HRFRFu24 :r•'."••.CeRs" ,)3,"„:.'N: \. •• )ti .A` ,f.1-`�7.1'' O p m. •I a,•�,'. �, �, 'v'`/"\\ .,.;{i •'•O O Vo P'. '\ ) J' _ • 7.---1•76)2s0 ? 4.40••• °A.-'' * °' ' , ....,0,.4.".1...11 113 ft•9••• Eum • • 't 'I / 1i1� li COI .a.wa..n,w :v,n ` ow"(�" �J ,• ,tits,, ••(�h./ rdlSr. g'j•" wwv.%oc.w. . wo,w ..-., C>,), S\S.‘ : 's• .‘•'''\s,., _..,-- '.1"" C0C-:-•". ..-;.*• :' • i :,A.• ... /:. 01 > 6\ /ram J �10,.. �S,Q fer 4'''r•.1)‘4C'ini 642. n> V"' ,a'."„' �^,K:.�° F 4 .\; *L-f. \%plc" . —.�\ .. ;7.` Pri1ul.eF.e,VPF '' ` //•/ \L '�� .C� i�• unun LFnFxo �m •1..... II TOPA is i••• `�Te• \„ Y0i ,[ ,• .i,•TUMMY : ..n• �F \Sig / � *its' /� .,,,w�towb� F t�, ., 33,. �'Fo\ . ;��'` . .. •. .(c Jai . . C10• �4„I'7�.." • "„ -. 0-0 : . ,,rre.aql`^ 'M R%04,66'::;Ail' 9 R, / r�/Y%. /•+1�i` " n .: ..a COLLO WI Mid ....•• olSk. 1,Etvtri•. _1. is in'6 `\ s1: ` ` •�•4 • r7 myN� - o ........ • '1'F. @,• . N. • �• • w,l.�.pw aa•Nm • O u„n, Nn,.o M.an,.n,m..,u c'`%S `s /• C t 7` 1:---- I•-• _— -- -- rtu.•,P,.:".n... ,uMm•w'�'.'°� V f�'m10.i amao n iauo"ia'•'� !lam '\ ��y}�j 12 m..F 1.a r • % in<4.a u we>umi,xN9 7;n.�• � ` ` ` "• 'K,'" I _ _a.�. M tww.owc �s ; .R,,.aP.n., - � �' 2..i) v �Fw. Wv �.�,.,._. 1p, V�pq�'M.P,MIY,N.,P v>.n PPONfAN nNa1 sa- ,•4 '�n.4V nM1404,u.n,F Yef,beo+. 1 I f m.,, N, m sA,a,.MnR>dM n>1r,Cn.P,,.,4 `�`J� •h.IO..,W M,oM/�rrt,l..r.N.V M Cn Lj'• 1, ©'�. r n„wn a ue a,van,. P•9•,19ir4.• Ter' 1 , . — �� , Azad `✓&imam. & .)dam •'• •.• Ir>z4^�;•., .,` •' `, 1 —.re., ... Po.eDPROOFv.ESSSiON,IvAi,LAND WA 9B0,2 SURVEYORSs ec-.is7 • 2 ' �. u,t[ 7-28-99 1 NERnAGC ARNOLD I,LN�A 4`• • 1 ` ,,,• 6ENNETT CORPORATION ,6•1yyy• 9 LAVE BCIICW[ @CLLCWC.NASHMGiON q@I)p5 ``� TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 99172 •• '• ' J Y' ' NWI/4,NE1/4• SEC. 20,T. 23 N.,R. 5 E..W.Y. g 1 - f i f l 4 \\teams a m6 I ./.co sc,D,y/ �� `I ( \�\ \�\ \\ \\\ -� moo GS D cow \ \♦ 3I'��` ®I �'a rr a® I I FL�rFR RmnEI \\ �� \ �� Li ` �.•'•;,t �-- �� g I'/ onrom Lwow I II II, moon \� \ \�� --" ��'7 ��' 41 I Y y w' ---a ----=1 C--1 rs ---f' 856• r - - �' - w_ :l.: — — r iTr_ �� ' LY� . a.000/oa, i., I 1'4' \. 1 FII z4 S. TH ST. `•\�\.+il \( 1 p- i' 6 iI' -. - ` /`T GYM I (� - c l S 7 {a t 13 0 ,"I‘ 1 1. I !l \ �I r♦l _ .�: r[11G1 I ,' , i( ♦� ( QI•O I I 5 irr `'p' \ \ ♦ i\ \1• Z w I `l" 'OIL b`n �• wN1'17',N L p1 / I I 'I 570RMWATER- 44•♦��4� 42 `47�-'' 4.ti �J9 JH V 1J6 a \ 11 zo • I �Av►♦ yf1 l I 1 1 ' ,';RACY'_ i \, _= III O • 'CJ �/ O ri4 �rIg NUMBER DELTA RADIUS ® ♦�0� ♦�� itI`• r' / — l •N�\r `_.4J". , °" ./,'�a \• • ♦A.•N' ` .-ti U 12 CI IJ4R8'4o"- Y O � r • ♦ , ,ram, '� �,,.� a \•1 tt a 1 e, -' w_ .•.� A`.. ,♦ r ° ° 1 ♦.-.' • _'• '_DAD.p 0° ♦ sE �� iE'��` I ��wi �, 'r,:.. ,fir 11f 4 �j ♦‘ I ♦ Q'- it ,Vr,I J. Rn I '1 . ' ♦tea°1 i �.�,\" (• ,'�°Q:�. '7♦'1 \ i- 0 0 ,•p' ,Q ``�'c: 1) fo' dleloir 4, / .I r XA''' L J r I iv*. IL/5 ' r0 , R`►'. .` 110� 1 r i `�i O J ' I �g.``�7RACT'.. I. ,_�(`'• _ _ f 45 48_ JJ49 • �R SlO Of/��i�e; i/J� • \ ro 4111 -_ I • �� ;O 121 N. <A♦ \ ,,J/;, 1 ,,Ii" T• CI• 3� p lik:'1-1,`":f,c,..P.I.o,-"‘7- 1/ -Er, sq sc y t 1 0__- li �ti. 11�_57�. Ji jj� �4i •�� iibf�{1 QnQ'iirll r Z as m' • �� ♦` O, \.__••;71-=-F-. ,JJ• 2 53'�• 12 roll) ►. 10G4 I `\ 1 111P? T /4 1 0 ri�w�-d1 0 ' o • _J � ''�• a 3%. 'p` _ �I `1 mE I h I A`� 'L-.i .y":/.•a1 �:._Q:- S.. . .�! _O�\_Q � .9,',// *Z. j �� 1� �I `� I y I • 'ewe,`' 1��P®,,j _ i''' ��-/D/l4_EJ'_ ,.1 Q:A..? .0A �'':W1 i' /�fT ^i-0,,,_ ,/�\ \\ 1 - I 1 fir \ ., ;a - •bJ"�, .. c•r___- - �Q 1. 1 ., ♦`• „4.01,._ ♦`1♦ ..);:s6 1 Lo ;da'.J J/•, 'e-1, (-F 1`♦, )I I I, 2' , ', /4, \\ \ -J ! I 1� .r ail . /;,;xi.. r �" \ \ \ y car R OLD PA ♦ . --n . /1 I A 1 / !' IT.I W CITE ARNOLD RARA. r`': ip Si R 'I / \ j �I z I .o, ti/= �°8; 91 11 lHs ;kQ ;z �� ;r. Wig _. s sp@ I- -I I mo' ��yrSQ.rRac�� q�.{ nit, �;' O I q_i��yz�e - .+I \`\``-- �/I'a 14� ' 'eI_ ,1�Y a ,Is 74l3° (7J o.. ' <J ;, , 11` -- ,I',o c1 / r�'�' I 1 �7 \,♦ dl l7'1d`u,�rp ,d �'' ,-_,-.L. • _ i" 11 I C"'WII-,00° 1 ,, I- NOTE \v �`r / ` 1 0 o ilI 25 1`� I 1 Oil ENTIRE SHE TO BE CLEARED. `�\♦1 ,��V ♦ - . O ,e1' o 1 i T .,I -i i11- NOEL, LrJ'.'L'/`� w`\ �/ v� ,'�"\��' ' �/�� .'r! 1 1 `♦♦ i I ----- I I'i'1! L APPLICANT RETAINS THE RIGHT y Cr /J' A' � 24 I I I y TO SAW ADDITIONAL TREES �� O �'� ,, ' ` I rI- Ir SITE CONDITIONS PERMIT. < _ t,1✓L/s. I I /' `I.• O '34D I I I y I TRACT ' ♦`` .,��#t •. '_,_°,O I I t I Is L _- i r 'r.r18 i ''O' 00 '•-.Q ' II -1 3 TREE LEGEND I. Q J ==11 I,r ° 1~'• .. 11W I- iBC11 I\/ , \-- 01 _ 1 1'---2�L\srK.*;1 P PINE .-� fie{ e acLRo"A \ \‘♦ ._ Q-��I `(I-I�_�� :0`� M.',+.`�I' I IL I I I 3( COWER AS NOICO �!_ ' " `\\ • +`f ` 9 /'♦IO`-v1♦•l 'r I 1 -- I �1 NDINDUA REE OR SICI ,'S _ 11 V I 21' I I A I-' IT'-N-M/1!EO OCC/OUq/S • r ,♦♦```` ` O I 1 - /r II O INDLNDUAL rREC OR CLUSTER �I !_;y 0 --�� j / I,'tr LARGER YIMO OCCIDUd/5 `ry) / I a -J O INOINOUAI NEC oR uuslra - •' L/5- '20 7 ` �� \ ,/ 1 I I �`�tiYR•cr / r I n♦�q •.v rye j1 di: /i\\ \\ ....- \ \\ 8 q + [x sswr \ I I cao rw.e Yoa )' •D I I I '< \ �\ ``� • \ t. 1 C�i ur, \ (;i; e(;I �rp ;'SOr `t ] I I 1 II \ `� \\ �`� ----.cY1��,xr„ ; •u_.. T,.dae re err r. p""` I RIVER Rb•.r- \ �� i .•viu ,r-- \ �- d .1• YCL.II].•99.IJ7� \� \ 7 T � .6 -' �(r .flr•-• un'eTrir'^n'saX;,- 1 A 1 I 733000 ,. \ �� \ \`� Z - ' YT .-A' I'�+Y ,/ Y'i.r..__ .� I r' —o--— — _�< —_—_ , I 4 d S. (TH ST. \•,ra\ , ma -/� v \ Z ..a I Wig' ,/ `c' ,6n.#4 k\liftkr..1'., 494,41,5 ORMWA,a• `i .'� \-\`;� ( i , i �i II � ",,1 t t� t 1 �\ �.-\\_,s‘i, • , 0 0 I vra,'T M�, .,„ t r r/ G. __-, \44,,.:,..•{�T,\ 42 4r-'' 40, 39 �1i 3R,_ yol \ t I �' t 1, ,,, ,---,-, .. „, ...... .,\\ , m NUMBER DELTA RADIUS II. r� 'O4�\ vZ,c." �0,,,?,a ..:• -_I -�r , __ /,' /'% - , t , t • `� ` I. G CI 13428'40" 25.D0' 58.68' ' \I \7�\\\ • 14' .r:7S\ *\ f �� `r ` ¢ z C2_ _-2827.12" _J2s.00 �� ' , �� 'V'�1 .T, ,.` Y ` X VP I' < mot ' , ,.� t n.., . , , '.n /I �`• 1 i+y�b:�` , i� --- \\'l � PARK /'i \\ '1‘\u' ' . r` ` tt� \\� \•ry, \� r j:Li/ i �^� g,�aw I r ::�(,= --.� j d5 ' :46. ‘��,i,,n1B�\ ,,49� `-60- 5i -'! y'\ \ `_J� , �\`. 4- -c , rplryv�/y! . _' I - 'I \' Ir1 i II • • �1�,t \ 1 i -_�`�-�,.; ,, Ighlnlrr !' r _ IIIIaI \ 7:\ ` IIJ 1i„r X\\I 1 1,00 p 2:E 1 � \� I, , 11 t �:,,, ; . I ,.i,,.r�U, -' i - '1 11�57i �' `t ' 'r sy_ pr I `I`s, c-_��'n: R , ✓,/�'i , i ., i , / t-. I i r F z =6 war: ac�ao \\ ��'�: \ `, J , z $7-/%, ., , j I; ,1 56 55 ,34 r 9J r 1 i 10' --1,-� U W �\ \a�'1�� __`��/; - ` _r� \fir„� t,, r I I 'r I • /'C�' 1 I 71 s 1 h I �\r\\",lak � �, ` _ a - f T` r s _F .^ '�' ' r ice- %<\ \\\ \1 �I' 2 I L7 - 'IL`. _;�=-y--=�,eoe�'_-';9 I Tor'.,'fj' --12;_ t , '-1.. /g�'; \�\ \/ I 3 I 'I r --I I ' . 5p_ ---_.x• , / , 1 `-- 6 \ } ';iis -,I /tt ,a ALL LOTS TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL `�� -- ' I \ I\ 1 L. +w1 I F-1 / / INFILTRATION SYSTEMS FOR • \ 1�' 1)I' 16— /15 , ,1f 1J , I v.arnzoa''�` ,_-/ — A�r,t.. IiIt1"' / /�� 3 ROOF&DRIVEWAY RUNOFF. C` ` \. \ I ; \ '� f'^j7�1p1�9.af / �\ N. F- I •\�\ N.! \r\ /�\%/ i 117"°"1-23-, I` \t-1 I I \ 1111 I .\'��• E • I o 1 • \ '\��T •� 1 ` \ I 1 W I I \\ o�% \'• 49 lII \`\ `\ ' F I kT7 • I / -J , i \\__=\�..\ 20 -'/: ` �� \ \\ // 1 ate\\� -. \ r \yr \ \ y l g I > \•pp , \\ \\ ��\ i • s . �. \\ i 1 ",a,� ;>K'-' >' a' / i \ cg_ i I fX.SyvH \9 -_ls, {' r'u'a:: I X �/ G L -' I.,a:"' ° i n• - / 1 It ., a r.e. _ . . I \ F! 1 R/ 0.�, � ♦ ` - - - �� . \ M 7:RiD-,0, \ \\ .,\\\ �1F il•$�', wi '< e - Isar-, _ 111 _ \ �\ "�2� � • arc.. ' i.e.rras. _ --_ _ - .1- ._mr --------'\-__--. \ -1 - 'R • • � �� ' ��rar� r •LAC:. -7---:.---- 6 ' - --Ix- - ) it• \�--0.r— r� --= ` i �f �r1 \I %`� S.�{TH ST. 5 . `oa��R�i' �-;,,A;',a%r '_.. : _ ` I , I-_-, , i�7 ' Z�!-1 `�: i Itu , �1, Z 1 ifa fl ,7p��+��1►�,rt�Q�y y` �C. `�O p i7�� .,M 7ER `• �.((�♦♦ \ 7 i i �� 11 l , 1 1 1 `♦ { �'. o '- •I N.41.,(NO Olt t11:♦ \/ 1r /:Lt 1 \ •` =-";,• J II 12 4! _' 4Or - J9 i jJi._ \Vail \ ` 1 ♦ \\4 11.1 Ill NUAlB£R DELTA RADIUS LfNORI r ♦1 1 Y �($�►, •sw f '1 6�„` -adi i"rw.l' 5� '♦\\ \\a Ni Cl 13478'40" 25.00' 58.68' ♦I \♦ *\\� -, "}y, �= \\ S. _ . C2 2B7YI2" 125.00' 6208' i♦ '♦�AA�`O \ y"' ,ant 7:• 7\ �� 1 •� .._ ♦, 1 " an �(. i �� ♦4»!I i'L/5 \ %- \' a �11I / i . \1 ;,I \ ti.��j 17RACT --- \j- , ' , \ 11\pl{ ;5T- �� \ �6., '\ rriI i I t�"�1\a\� rT' :1;1.4. . 4 4vjir I -I - �`1\ r�� r -•• l ,f rj/46.1 pfgnr, 1 - / i ` I l 1 eg x. o- oe y ,. I I `.•\ `♦;‘`�'a1\ i2- \., ,1'i�i'I "'/ !, `� ' i ,- i '' ' - !Mir ♦J)`\I\ I r 1 o I • Y \ vrr' \�• 7 id scrn a W. \ ; `I \ 7 -= /rr' ♦56 .55 .34 i S7_I T52 , -- �p i ,` '?\ •.`,,,••i ' /: ,' ' i. i-' 2¢'' o' - \\ \ I r ;, i,'. ,$.:‘-`‘‘, %1 �) ' / \ \ \ -_ i3 ,I 1— —i W \ :tip• \ ,9�. --,/ ' --- % 1 / N. \ 1 \::e9 �I1 0 I L \.,:,*(!'.'„,,,,,..,: - ---i 9 :\` -1pi',-flj-;�,72,._ ;♦ ��• 1:r 1 / \\\\ \>// . til - r —, I 3 \��m♦ I_r)k,. '\ 16- /95 , '1/{ j `• • •1.,. tiln,.,,,,,__ „,,.......( 1 7 r1drt� L --1 • 1ff• ►. , • E - r- <14 I `I J 1 CC I— II s �j\ ♦ t �#.r \ I .e I PiilL II:ARNOW PARK IL \/•�'.:Jk \ •`1 • -21 1 r, I -I r I I I \♦may+ \`. .V9 1ji \\ •\ 1 III F I � ----- I I `i�r�\ ♦ " ` 1 2i' � I r J I \\-,�� • ` I I -----1 1 j r 1 • 0 \ \ / / • `-�._,.�♦ \\\, \\� �% \\�//' S s \\ v\�tn'` I I /'• Vie/' \ i JA • �\� `\ —� li - f+1f \ \pub 0• \`11• I I s,wnm�c°.an'a._,p-m-ye/ xZr____ ' I 11 \\ ,. \\ �\ \\\ _---- ---- K.' )�3"�9�. I �� 2_� /'-/. I 1 .Ro.66 n,000�oce \\\r. \\� \ \\ MING .� •`-tr .T at' i I/� _wa«n�_1 _ I AI \\ �\ h%)ro ROOM ,�\\ 4� ' 'i�-r / / ' ,'' .oaor �_—.} SE93a'J7T — ,AnK —_� �_� \ _ mmitoor _, a — — S. TH ST. I INUYaER47AS LEWIN Ott /s1. ,\.4�4 t`' C`\VVV9. �—=��.%/ k,` \ i 'i�.' _ \ 1`1 J� o w CI r 7e•a' zs.ts• seas' ' .I \.'S , ``1 �.. .�� •.�i�• `. - _�.��• \� \ `\-41 ,. 5# I-- —..7,. C2 242712" r2S00' note / ... ,`.5 A. _-5, 5/ I `— l ♦'. \.\ .p /,\♦/ - , ,1 �\ \ . __ tki ti QQI //` I�`I"�l(►�.�\ �' '1� •_ 5t �i � .- '_ '.-AD `%\ . \� _ ♦ 56 I U • T�I ,�I' �7•�.,�\�� Zvi �...7 .\\\\ -i ru.. • / „d \\ \` \\J\• `1' `.• I.:? ;LDS --- I /l L\ \II11\` '' :- •` a\ , , , ''1h..,;w�1`�`' VRACT� //�,/��,�;__1 45 46 �4 yj��/./'48- a 49, �'-50_�` 1 J / / ��‘ \I� r i •,�� I /', i _ ''!1p!a, I ros:r 1 _ \ ;I r g 12: • i 4 I \ 1 ,F Ii: e0• 00a r�jsv •sum .ss l IilF. 1 • • 440� .'. �ew` -° 4 r ry ,- \•°., -P-- . •� 1` - aso�29i .a 'm-Y- / \ 1 1 .....,,..., \ i :".--- ,, Y i I�7 T3'4/ % \\ \\ ., ,. ii. ,_ i 2 , •4",,,, . ,,..._ 1g ��, pZ • � 4`¢`.,` ;,.a s J r i ,rz_ _;I q _; i \�i S IT30. SITE AREA.450,846 Sr L _ /�/S` .. !` 91 \ � r -I I AREA OF WORK a 450,846 SF �`:', 4 �4--TR'AC) 1 ` .-_j°°.L_—. 'i — 1 `_26—`,-. .- ``��„f / 3• CUT=54,974 CY 8246r TON) C� ' '/*1 1P'• 16— ,15 / /14 ` 5\, /�, nu.= 19.2JJ CY(28,850 TON)• QUANTITIES: \``.t 1`�,.��V. ,� \ ,Limil '_ / �\\—I tor ( ,, g g g I- _l \ \\��I./. /J/ .' i - . 5-, I' '\-1 I �ate/ '� \ ' x\ $ %@ r(r r L -1 4 , Lgj� >\/ I I [ ,_y�LS. /,e�#'/ '\C I IO Is rRc ~ I _Yt ,,18 , —i Q I8, k L _` 23` \/ 1 co ------_ ,TneEREPANA \ \r~\' ' 1 1 ` .1 JI a \N;A: \\i‘k\\WAIN' \\----2z qr., I 1 r _ I `i \+ I I r`� J I \ ,,, , \I __-- \ \ , r \ / T7?.1 cT' / / • • N e\ ' ' /s \ r\ \\ V \ � � � \\ \ �� /•< \\ �-- I I7 'L A--S "y .5Yc EASEMENT \__ L / \ I \ ��, 1 n \\ 11 a:j \\ \\ \\\ /i' �\` / r-- I I I -�7\�T-r� \ • \ i // '% \ \ _;_/ 1 � \ \ \�. / I �i \ \�\ \ \ \/ ,` / / / I Y \ \ \ \ i// ° / / l / _te % / / / ! [--1 r \\ \ \, i r_,( / / / \` �____ / / / //e� C ��, \\ \ 1 / / \ \ /P / i ;/ ; �;yY�J� \"� \fie \ \ : � ' \ ��\'/ // d3J 3,,,,. -----Y---- _1 I < /\ --\\ � \ /,L ]r_-1 N.a\--\\ \/ C / ' / \" r -,< i TT-C\ J �j\ \/ ' \F / / rdooff , ) V \i�' \//2111111 C\\ ><L \1> ;i \/ / j / \ / 1 , / \/T// / 13T/ I '©�a'r,��Y o�ilM1�i ti`M1 h M1 -. ✓/X/ \\ \\ \\ /r°O/ I / )'iJ A /pp •1 � �V y3< \\ \\ \\\ / �/ $ s C _ C/ / Q$U\\ 1 \\ \\ / h__ k. e��/off \ \ \ • gg/..uP e I \\ \\/- > N i \ \I / _ /� �/ / \ \ \\i / / sre/ L ,. r--T---I r--r-r , AreeXor \ r lI I F- 1\Ya/c- /l-T-r f-T f1 -I-r-I-r-I-T-T 1I 1 \ 1 s�T ( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ I 1 1 -f,t,,$c/=a1 LJ-L_I_1_ 1J JJ 11 I 1 I 1 1 II j 1 1 I I 1/�„, III 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 r-r-r- TT-r-111 L-_LL off!L-J LJ-LJ-I-LiJJJ L L1-L1_LJII ia 3AY XOIN '�°� II 1 �4CT�-7 /fel'InT--1 r-r-r7°T"°r-/-r, / ( \ \\ \\ ; ./11111---1�I I I I I• I I I 1.1--T--T-1 11 1 J /�`(\\\\>>>�,�,/'1-11JTTF-1j,�r 1r77 TTL7.711.1 1=71-==T=1-Jw I I / (\\\ /�1 I I I I I I r-]csF_ I I I I i:.':;I Inj 11 1 In 1 I '-TTTZ-r7T-1- -F-\-(yyliy -LLU111LC=J L_i1 aAYiNve_o1':_f:tJ LJ_t_-1_-�1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I \ y lT-r-77 ;F�--I,--� r--r- r ':..A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ) //1 J T 1 1 I:I I1 I---1 I I----I r I 1.: ;.i 1 i?i-1 J i ) 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1."r /`( 1 r I1 1-17 L:�'.;.::I rT7 it rrr 1- TT-I -11-11f b i % -JJJJ—L-J.1/G_1\�iLJ_L71JiLL-_4�',R�L±J ,LLLLJ �Jtl1_L.� L L1-LJ // //--Tim-r �- a 3Ar No.N3d 1 1 I ,,,,,, I 1 I ( I I I I I ( I I I r I-1-7 j I j r L/ / • 1y4,0,< t - - -H ;_�yl I I 'I 1 1 1 1 /'=,:-•1-i---1 I--, - --i-T'r-i I / xti. I I I 1I I 11 I - °I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I - • / ¢$ / LJ-L1_LLJLL11LL1_L1-LJ_LJ-_J1_ I 1 ( I I I I I I I I I / �2 / a 3Ar Xran L-LL e r 1L1J J-__-y 4' / 4rti i Tii?i l i 4i iiiiiiii 1 10 -Tr rrr- III / / `.&I-4I-4--I--k44 '-{-lerrrrT1-41=1-r,L_1LUJ 1 III / ` / ,rl I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I al ( I I I I I I I I"I I - lp / /LLLL11111JJ LLLL11111_J°I I 111 / / • 33AY mn -_L_J_ I I' _ / / / _ / as %POI 1 aoi /�/ �� 93AY NMI --------—� / r7r1-T7777-r7 rrr'. ��--r-77 'I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I C I I I Z'. L_•ij, r 1 1 I. ( I I I III 1e� }--F*-; - T \ I I II IIIIIIII'IV1Ir:.=11I� \ LLL11111J1J L1�1J: JJJJ�,t,\ �_L_ A d Y \ '�: ,- ---�gde�J \\\\\\ _�r .®� ms ro.. �w�au;wpY••3•d wie 22 06e.p tlddY ]lM A8 N06LVtl 'ON _ • '(dap WOM a!IVnd/Eu�pr1 0/6u,uuold ®, � Sl.f®• M [tl/ida OW I dYY 1Itl130 OOOH2108H013NMf; ''1°0 9-� u«Nw 49 I. /i/Y„s 111H NO1N32J 30V1R13H 30 A1I3 V `m .O'-.r eo ..... A —�-. " U _ CD ' ) s _RI . :. �� • C❑R Ord R- O 074• •Ii �S. i - RC • 0 y RC . . • LE._ 7—.1-7. ., /i • 1 \ . • ."-. cr. .__ .._,___ . ..___ : • .. • • - RC • cDcS ; � . __ ° _ • . . ...� • ` CAR i It 1 sif LC)r .- T 2,a4 — --1A1 A. •••• . •••• • ....•'. RC(P) • L a RC • L1 : \C❑ - • —► i I • ;R•:-8 iiii_st + �.•. •+ • 1.. 1 Li___03.. - I�I+J++�.., -r�� _, _, :- - - R-8 . .- I I. -1_d -•1-•G -_ . ._00 f ^`1T� -ter i4 -I I[1:-- --)1- - R.7-7-8 -'s) . (1%.40% . _____\..4\:\:::....,,...\•...-;\1-1eAtt,:\._..\\ii _Lt._ • ------- �\ ice., „-1_—� —_ '�/---•— --mil' =I - .......----- s'-' .1*---: ....:.f..-. I ..---- - \ :T:------------------- ,--------- R-8..[\ _ RMI R-8 CNI __.-. __._R -.•-_... .. ............. ....-- -_-•---.... _ •--- _ \/ v-----.---\..g11.16111...-IP0-1 I i ; ! LEI 1,,1 -. . \ %r°- \ 6'16)1 / ----- t.• .,-, \ /) )--------- (g; °u_ P-1 / • . • Z 0 N 11`1 v- MAT I-. rt . _ :.CITY ,oF RENTON: NAIL,El k,. Planning/Building/Public Works Department • Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator is October 19, 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 Environmental Review Committee(ERC)on October 17, 2000: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED • HERITAGE RENTON HILL • LUA-00-053,PP,ECF , The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8),which allows residential development of,between.5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this,project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would • range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each.-TheTrriinimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. ' The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project,is-subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. Location: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7thCourt, and S 7th Street. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM,November 6, 2000. 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 Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at(425)430-7382. r • • For the Environmental Review Committee, Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior.Planner . cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources . • WSDOT, Northwest Region • Duwamish Tribal Office - 'Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe(Ordinance) ' . - US Army Corp.of Engineers • AGENCYLTRI • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 , 1:: .7 rt--$ , CITY F RENTON _ . . . Planning/Building/Public Works Department. Jesse Tanner;Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator : October.19,2000 • . Mr. Ryan.Fike - Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue.Drive, Suite 100-A • Bellevue, WA 98005 SUBJECT Heritage Renton Hill • • Project No: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr: Fike: 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.October 17, 2000, issued a threshold Determination .of Non-Significance=Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. • • Appeals of the environmental.determination must be filed in Writing.on or before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. 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 4-8.1.10:':Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office; (425)-430-6510. A Public Hearing will be held by the:Renton Hearing- Examiner at his regular meeting in:the Council s. Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, on November 14, 2000 at 9:00.AM to consider the proposed Preliminary Plat.. The applicant;or representative(s)of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will,be mailed to you one week before the hearing.. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part;of this.public hearing. The preceding information will assist you in planning borimplementation 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=7382: . For the Environmental Review Committee, • • U . Elizabeth Higgins,AICP Senior Planner • cc; : : .Renton School District#403/Owners • Parties of Record "- Enclosure • • 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 • • • • CITY OF.RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) • MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: - Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of.between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project Would be 6.8'du/a.. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City:of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. • LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Wa•y_SE;S 7th Court, and S 7th. Street •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 the: King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). This will be"required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements was 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 of drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in the most recent KCSWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. These measures 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation,_maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be_required prior to recording of the plat.. . 5.' The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of:$7.5.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording ofthe plat. 6.. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $488.00 per each new single family lot created by the proposed plat. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. Heritage Renton Hill • LUA-00-053,PP,ECF. .. • Mitigation Measures (continued) : Page2of2 7. .The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of $530.76 per each new single family • residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. • 8. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc.; (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 9. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating'that a.known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall•be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. 10. The rear setback at the lot located in the northwest corner of the property (Lot 35 as shown on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet and clearing within ten feet"of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the applicant and dated 8/31/00. 11. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction is ceased immediately,followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. 12. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project,;would be;prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact"Analysis, Addendum No.:2," by Transportation'Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000: • 13. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline Easement'for a secondary, emergency only access: • MITMEAS : . • • CITY OF RENTON-. DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) . ADVISORY NOTES. . APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF: APPLICANT: Bennett Development • ;PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat:process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development.: The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8); which.allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8:0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8. du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42'(instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City;of Renton Hearing,Examiner will also be required. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL Intersection of Beacon;Way SE, S 7tn Court, and S 7th Street 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.:is - Plan Review-Sanitary Sewer 1. There is an existing 8" sewer main in SE 7tn Court, adjacent to:the north side of the proposed plat. The new project can be served, by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main through the proposed subdivision.' 2. The conceptual sanitary sewer main shown;.on 'the'.drawing "submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. 3. .A sewer cleanout will need to be located five feet outfrom buildings. 4.: Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual sewers). Side sewer lines must have a 2 percent slope. 5. All utility plans must comply with the City of Renton• ,Drafting Standards:, • • 6: Show finished floor elevations on the sewer construction`plan sheet:`, 7. , The vertical profile of the sewer main will be required. 8.- The project is located in Aquifer,Protection Area Zone 2... ,9. Any new sewer mains are to be separated from water lines by a minimum of-10 feet. There is a 7.5. foot minimum separation from other utilities.' Heritage Renton Hill _ LUA-00-053,PP,ECF _. Advisory.Notes(continued) Page 2 of 2 • 10. Sewer Development Charges of$585.00 per single family residence will be required for this plat. .The ' ;fee for this project would be $16,380.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance'of,the construction permit for the preliminary plat.: • Plan Review-Water : . : 1: There is.an existing 6 water main in Jones Avenue S, an 8" water main in SE 7th Court, and an 8" Water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel:: 2.: ;The.proposed project is located in the 490 foot water pressure zone. Static water pressure will range ;from approximately 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet.: 3. Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire flow and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is*Measure along a travel. route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as part of this project to meet this criteria., 4. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6"water main iri•Jones Avenue S. 5. Installation of 8"water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants are required. 6. Connection to the 8"stub along the north'property line is required (see plan W-2038). 7. Connection to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S is required;(see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan shall be revised to show-,this connection.. 8. Water System Development charges-of:$850:00:pernewsingle family lot will be required for this. The charge for this plan would be $48,450.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary` plat.-' ' . Plan Review—Stormwater Drainage 1.. A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. 2. Drawings submitted to the City of Renton'are:to be ,on 22 inch x 34 inch sheets: The information ' - pertaining to the City of Renton should be removed from the title block of the sheets submitted. 3. Before any construction or development_activity occurs, a pre-construction meeting must be held with the City of Renton Development Services Division, Construction Services (425-277-5570). •: • 4. The City of Renton retains the right to restrict the timing of land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions may be necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare;or for the protection of the environment: 5. .Surface Water System 'Development charges of$385 per new single family lot will be required for this plat. The fee for this project,would be $21,945.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat, Plan Review-Transportation and Street Improvements 1.:. All electrical and communication facilities to be underground behind the sidewalk. If right-of-way, space is not available,then in_a utility easement.:Construction of these franchise utilities must be 1. inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat.:'- 2: Streets over 700 feet in length are required to have two means of access.. ADVISORYNOTES Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP;ECF Advisory Notes(continued) , Page 3 of 3 3. Street lighting is required to meet City standards. Minimum lighting level is 6:1 uniformity ratio and 0.2 foot candle level. ,The street lighting conduit to be located under the sidewalk. . • 4. The minimum right-of-way width is 42 feet(modified from street standard width of 50 feet). 5. The cul-de-sac is required to,havea minimum pavement radius of 45 feet and-right-of-way radius of • 55 feet. 6. :A 5 foot sidewalk at the curb is required " 7. Payment of a Transportation Mitigation fee of$75 per new average weekday trip, estimated at 9.55 new trips per single family lot,will be required prior to recording of the plat. It has been estimated that this 57 lot plat would result in approximately 544:35 additional average (weekday)trips. The Transportation Mitigation Fee would be$40,826.25.- Plan Review-General 1. 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. 2. The construction permit application(s) must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. • 3. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is.5 Percent of the first$100,000 of the estimated construction costs;4 percent of anything over$100,000;:but less than $200,000, and 3 percent of anything over$200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when°the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. : 4. An easement that meets City standards for ingress, egress, and utilities shall be provided by the applicant to the property abutting the east property boundary at a point within 200 feet of the northeast property corner of the proposed plat. . Parks Department Review. = 1. Payment of a Parks Mitigation fee of$530.76 for each new single family lot will be required prior to recording of the plat. The Parks fee will be$30,253.32. Building Department Review 1. Demolition permits will be required. Fire Prevention Department Review 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1'500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. .. • 2. Provide a 20 foot paved secondary emergency access from the cul-de-sac within-the development to the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement (Beacon -Way SE). This would be an emergency access only and can be gated or chained. 3. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street: 4. A Fire Mitigation fee of $488 is required for all new single family lots. Payment is required prior to recording of the plat. The Fire Mitigation fee for the proposed project would be$27,816.00. Property Services Department Review 1. Comments will be provided under separate cover. ADVISORYNOTES Heritage Renton,Hill_. ;'. ;.:::. LUA-00-053,PP,ECF.'.. Advisory Notes(continued) • _ ' : ' • • Page 4 of 4` Development Services Department Review 1. The site is designated Residential Single Family in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The property is zoned-Residential 8 (R-8).:,• 3 Densities allowed in the R-8 Zone are 5.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a) minimum and 8.0 du/a maximum... 4. • Minimum lot size in the.R-8 Zone is 4500 sf; with minimum width of 50 for interior lots_and 60 for • corner lots."The minimum permitted lot depth,is 65 feet.,Lot dimensions must be shown On the final site plan demonstrating that all lots meet these:minimums. . . . 5.: Heights of buildings in theR-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories, or 30 feet. • . 6. - Required setbacks in the R-8 Zone are 15 feet for houses and 20 feet for attached garages which access from the front when houses front"streets created after S_ epternber 1, 1995, 20 foot rear yard setbacks; 5 foot side yard setbacks for,interior lots and 15 feet sideyard setbacks for corner lots..All setbacks are minimums. Setback dimensions should be shown on the construction drawings, but setback lines must be removed prior to recording_the final plat. 7. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 Zone,is 35 percent for,lots over 5,000 sf or 50 percent for lots 5,000 sf or less. . 8. Dead end streets cannot exceed 700 feet in length, measured from,the edge of the connecting street - to the end of the cul-de-sac. 9. Retaining walls in excessof four(4)feet require_engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 10. Construction easements obtained from; abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction of retaining walls on or near..property lines. "These agreements must include protection measures for (or permission to potentially damage.or,"remove) trees located. on abutting properties • within 20 feet of the property liner• 11. The applicant shall draft and. record `a .maintenance; agreerrient or establish. a Homeowners' Association for the maintenance of all common improvements (access and utility easements, rights- of-way,and stormwater facilities):- A draft of the document shall be submitted to the City of Renton for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to,:the recording of the preliminary plat. 12. Performance, Standards for Land Development Permits (RMC:4-4-130K), including "Protection Measures During Construction" (RMC 4-4-130K7) relating to trees, shall be followed by the applicant. • The applicant shall adhere to the definition of"tree".a found in RMC 4-11-200, "drip line" as found in . RMC 4-11-040, and the measurement of trees as found in RMC.4-11-030. • . . 13. The Washington State,Department of Natural Resources may:require a Forest Practices"Permit for the conversion of timber land to another use. : 14. The applicant should contact Paul Alexander.of The King County Department of Transportation; Metro _ Transportation, Metro"Transit Route Facilities et 206-684-1599, regarding Metro's requirements for• : potential transit service in the area(no service is currently available to Renton Hill). • ADVISORYNOTES : Smooth Feed SheetsTM • �°• 0 R Q 5 3� Use template for 5160® • Mr.Frank Gallacher -Mr.Bob Gambill nns.Lily Garfield 719 Jones Avenue South Seattle Public Utilities, 10th Floor 265 Maiden Lane East Renton WA 98055 710 Second Avenue Seattle WA 98112 Seattle WA 98104-1714 Ms.Patricia Gilroy Ms.Rosemary Grassi Ms:Kathy Griffm 535 Renton Avenue So. PO Box 1188(422 Cedar Av S) 1425 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Ann Grinolds Mr.Manly Grinolds Mr.Roger Grinolds 324 Cedar Ave. So. 1223 South 3`d Street 330 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.John Guiliani Ms.Bambi Gunderson Mr.Russ Haag 1400 South 7th Street 1107 South 4th Street 704 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Cynthia Halse Mr.Frederick Hartley Mr.&Mrs.Dan Hemenway 15404—167th Place SE 701 High Avenue South 1712 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98058 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055. Sharon Herman/Chuck Lyden Ms.Pat Hodgsen Hopkins and Chombers 711 Jones Avenue South 620 Renton Avenue South PO Box 691 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Margaret Houser Diane Hyatt/Terry Stange Mr.&Mrs.W.Jaeckel 2331 SE 8th Place 720 Cedar Avenue South Falcon Ridge Newsletter Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 2342 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bill Johnson Mr.&Mrs.Phil Johnson Mr.Wayne Jones,Jr. 1425 Beacon Way South 350 Renton Avenue South Lakeridge Development Inc. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 PO Box 146 Renton WA 98057 Ms.Agnes Koestl Mr.&Mrs.Ken Kraght Ms.Ruth Larson 428 Renton Avenue South 527 Renton Avenue South Renton Hill Community Association Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 714 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Randy Lemke Ms.Elizabeth Lewis Mr.&Mrs.Dwayne Liston 415 Cedar Avenue South 1525 South 6th Street 17703— 114th Place SE Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 ,&,AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5260Tm 'W109ZS case- slag, saiPPV ®AU3AV V Ms.Barbara Lux Mr.Robert Lux ivir.Carl Maas 1412 South 9th Street 1410 South 7th Street Ms.Kathy McGatlin Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 1724 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Ms.Mary MacDonald Mr.&Mrs.Michael Mack Mr.Louis Malesis 802 Cedar Avenue South 906 High Avenue South 1718 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Eric Mastor Mr. &Mrs.Don Miles Mr.Keith Moberg 808 Renton Avenue South 532 Renton Avenue South 627 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Clint Morse Marianne Nicol/Mark Johnson Ms.Roseanne Nolan 525 High Avenue South 316 Renton Avenue South 2048 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Elsa Norris Mr.Bentley Oaks Ms.Cathy O'Neill 1513 South 7th Street 1321 South 7th Street 575 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Paul Ossorio Mr.&Mrs.Deone Perlatti Mr.Gino Petralia 708 Renton Avenue South 1520 South 9th Street 813 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Janice Potter/Mr.Dwight Potter Ms.Josephine Potter Ms.Paula Provin Falcon Ridge Association 1314 South 7th Street 712 Renton Avenue South 2411 SE 8t Place Renton WA 98055-3065 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Dana Reiman Mr.Wayne Rossman Mr.George Salurmini 1410 Beacon Way South 533 Grant Avenue South 519 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Slapnick Mr. &Mrs. Louis Sutter Mr.Rick Thibodeau 531 Grant Avenue South 721 High Street 1000 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Lynn Thrasher Mr.Mario Tonda Joe Vanderpool/Elsa Norris 904 Grant Avenue South Mr.Victor Tonda 1513 South 7th Street Renton WA 98055 1308 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 ®09L5 Joj aleidwal asn wlslaays paad 4}oows SmoOth Feed SheetsTM . , _ Use template for 5160® Mr.Ken Adams Mr.James Baker M .&Mrs.Thomas Barr 706 Renton Avenue So. 524 Mill Avenue So. 802 High Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Ms.Dianne Beatty Mr.&Mrs.Brian Beckman Mr.Pat Bellport 1730 SE 7th Court 435 Cedar Avenue So. 411 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Barton Bennett Mr.Douglas Bergquist Mr.&Mrs.Mike Bishop 1807 SE 7th Court River Ridge Estates Homeowners Assoc. 326 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 1801 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Dino Boscolo Mr. &Mrs.Claude Bouchard Ms.Ruth Bradley 915 High.Avenue So. 1506 Beacon Way South 709 High Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Douglas Brandt Ms.Darlene Bressan Mr.&Mrs.John Burkhalter 610 Renton Avenue So. 901 High Avenue So. 901 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Margaret Burkhalter Ms.Dina Calhoun Ms.Eleanor Cantrell 715 Jones Avenue So. Mr.Robert Davis 1416 South 7th Renton WA 98055 433 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Ralph Carter Mr.Timothy Cogger Mr. &Mrs.Barry Conger 630 High Avenue South 609 Grant Avenue South 1301 South 9th Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bert Custer Ms.Gina Custer Ms.Cheryl Danza 714 Cedar Avenue So. 1209 South 7th Street 706 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Robert Elliot Mr.&Mrs.Quentin Ellis Mr.Dale Fountaine 300 Renton Avenue So. 715 High Avenue South 617 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Don Faull Sheri Frank/Grant Anderson Mr.&Mrs.W.Free 804 Renton Avenue So. 426 Cedar Avenue South 1012 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 AVERY®�. Address Labels Laser 5260TM • wi0�ZS Jasei slac,-- 5saappv ®A2l3AV g Mr.Jack Wardell Mr.&Mrs.Larry Welch Mr.James Wilhoit 523 Renton Avenue South 310 Renton Avenue South 910 Grant Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Rich Yarbrough Mr.Dean Yasuda Mr.Dick Zugschwerdt 338 Renton Avenue South 2058 SE 8th Place 802 Grand Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Bill Collins Mr.Kevin Oleson Mr. &Mrs.Mark DeWitt 420 Cedar Avenue South Renton School District#403 501 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Transportation Department Renton,WA 98058 1220 North 4th Street Renton WA 98055 Mark&Kimberly K.Mehlhaff David&Victoria Miles Rod Kunnanz 532 Grant Avenue South 1510 South 6th Place 810 High Avenue Souoth Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Marty L.Zander Dan O'Rourk 806 High Avenue South 501 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 A.F.and Nancy Alexander Steve Johnson Robert Mountjoy 1518 Cedar Avenue South 1514 Beacon Way South 810 High Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Debra Goltiani Darlene Moore Jason Donahue 811 Jones Ave. South 1511 So. 9th St. 419 Cedar Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Newell/McSherry Elizabeth Prescott Mr.&Mrs. Gerald Hanger 815 Renton ave. So. 435 Cedar Ave. So. 905 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ruth Helsey Rachel Johnson/Mykel Papke Resident Marvin Wright 620 Grant Ave. So. 707 Renton Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Camron Smith Grant Anderson Roger Knutson 2140 SE 8th Place 426 Cedar Ave. So. 805 Jones Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 nO9i5 aoj aleidwal as wislaaqs paaj wows SMobth Feed Sheets"'" Use template for 5160® 1 Mr.&Mrs.Richard Weitz Ivii.&Mrs.Johnson Hugo Chaves 718 Renton Ave.So. 1333 Beacon Way So. 326 Cedar Ave.So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Gilroy Paul Lammer Jack Holt 1316 So. 10th Street 15234 SE 176t P1. 1517 So. 6th St. Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98056 Renton WA 98055 Resident Residents Residents 300 Renton Ave. So. 316 Renton Ave.So. 1729 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.&Mrs.Egan Mary Breda Jeff Fettinger/Martin Cibis 810 Grant Ave.So. 900 Grant Ave. So. 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Steve Briggs Tomac Patricia Gilroy 600 Grant Ave. So. 912 Grant Ave. So. 535 Renton Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Melanie Thompson Resident Resident 1307 So. 9th 626 Renton Ave. So. 1724 SE 761 Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Resident 801 Jones Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 6,.AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5260TM Elizabeth Higgins- Bennet homes Page ao — os3./ From: <bentley.oaks@philips.com> To: <ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 10/6/00 8:46AM Subject: Bennet homes Dear Ms.Elizabeth Higgins For a reminder, I am BentleyOaks, and my wife and I live at 1321 S 7th on Renton Hill. We will have been on the hill for 7 years this December. We had a meeting up at Phillip Arnold Park last night which I am certain you were aware of. A couple of items were of specific interest which I wanted to address specifically for the record. Zoning: It appears that there is no record of the change in the property zoning from R4 to R8. From a legal standpoint, does this have to be cleaned up before the Bennet Homes project can continue? Traffic: The traffic continues to be an issue. In particular with respect to the continued lack of emphasis by the Renton City Police. A single policeman showing in the am simply is an indication that the City of Renton is only interested in perception of enforcement rather than getting serious about the matter. Seventh street off of Renton Avenue continues to be "drag strip"for some of the people on the hill and the new traffic for the mountain bike enthusiasts. 40+ mph speeds would not be uncommon during the week by some. There seems to be an interest is traffic accidents over this issue. Does it seem unfortunate that if we dont have a serious accident,that we assume we dont have a problem? Boarding Houses: It appears that someone has started a boarding house on Cedar. Now with the Zoning Codes for the hill, I dont not understand why the building was not"Red Tagged"due to lack of permits etc. I am sure that the building inspectors have no problem in stopping out of specification structures, why doesn't the City of Renton do the same for situations like this. So in summary. While I am sure that the City Council and the Mayor do what they consider to be a good job for us all, I think that it would be appropriate for them to get their house in order add make an effort to address zoning, and traffic and improper"boarding houses" before new problems arise from the consideration of projects such as the Bennet Homes proposal. There just seems to be too many loose ends associated with this whole issue. Its seems that the City of Renton is relying on the Renton Hill Group to do all the hunting, when it is the City of Renton who should have the data at hand . Perhaps we should make the list of issues, and address each and everyone to closure before new proposals such as the Bennet Homes are even considered. If you have the opprotunity, please respond as having received this email. Best Regards, Bentley Oaks CITY OF RENTON . . PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS" MEMORANDUM • rrY DATE: October 3,2000 • nFJ' • TO: Arneta Henninger ' ° f A(� FROM: Nick Afzalie-' JLO/Liji�� "V/��Uj� SUBJECT: Heritage Renton Hill Transportation Planning staff, in coordination with Karl Hamilton (Transportation Operations), have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum No.2 and preliminary plan submitted with your September 19, 2000 memo and have the following comments: • The Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum No. 2 addresses our previously noted concerns and is,therefore, acceptable. • The revised design for the entry to the proposed development at South 7th Court, as shown on the latest preliminary plans, is acceptable. • If a second(emergency) access is required,will it be provided by easement between Lots 18 and 19? Secondary access should be gated to assure it is used only by emergency vehicles. • Assume on-site roadways will be named streets. Also, assume we will have the opportunity to review design details related to street lighting, channelization and signing at the entrance of South 7th Court and throughout the development site. H:\DIVISION.S\TRANSPOR.TAT\OPERATIO\KARL\PW MEMO.doc\jj , ( C.) ; Proposed Mitigation Measures: + HCY J1. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project,estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new lot. LL'1�t0 J 2. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$488.00 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 3. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family NOTICE OF APPLICATION II residential lot created by the proposed plat. AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) Ii Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Senior Planner, Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on September 29,2000.This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing on November 14.2000,at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers,Seventh Floor, 1, Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton.If you are Interested in attending the hearing,please contact the I Development Services Division,(425)430-7282,to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled.If comments DATE: September 15,2000 I 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 Hearing Examiner.If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-00.053,PP,ECF record and receive additional Information by mall,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. APPLICATION NAME: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre roe bymeans of the I CONTACT PERSON: ELIZABETH HIGGINS,AICP(425)430-7382 PP P P property,rty preliminary plat process, Into 57 lots suitable for single family residential I: I zoned development.The property is Residential 8(R•8),which allows residential I 'PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre(du/a). The , proposed density for this project would be 6.8 dula. Lot sizes would range from 1 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each.The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 1 sf.The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42'(Instead of 50').The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. I. PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,S 7'Court,and S 7'Street ---11,--- _ r I -- OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M):As the Lead Agency,the City of LI =i"r-`�\t i F--- ___ - �+:; Renton has determined that significant environmental Impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project.Therefore, -- '`-- L ---- .'...N.. as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110,the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS(M)process to give notice that a 1 `___ _`_''r_-r,`4F- DNS-M is likely to be issued.Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated Into a single `•-__ �_=.-'i�"�{-�fs ===i comment period.There will be no comment period following the Issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- W-?,,._y _ =7 _=�==y )'ti4. � Significance Mitigated(DNS-M).A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. •�-�,'r;==i-=-i__L`r%l5, ___ _ , _ PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: April 28,2000-REVISED 9/14/00 _�r( ir_�1_+:±.-.3E2).r\-&2'14 1 _ NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 4,2000-REVISED 9/15/00 • 'r%f-� -�i=,(----ak-3i_�F�"��h • lr' Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat approval ,`T _�� L_-€_,if'L f,_�,_`_i r-„_j`,as'qX'"M``,i`y(' L.g Requested Studies: Geotechnical engineering report,traffic Impact analysis,surface water ---i C__ i i_=i-i mA_i( r". lY: r5,7, - drainage preliminary technical information report. ' `'-'41 ____ _~=i;rr h- _L,^ --EC:C.G�Do . ( i 0 Location where application may `_ -"i--'- *�ICCCCCCG o �� C°,;-,fit",,.:�'�" """ be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, - ' -ipi--' i•._;'-F x ,1+,QQ CCCCCp I;;i Sixth Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 / " it(_+==i1F_}-_i1i- _7t1-_ -;1 ti,QQopep ,c`�`'', ''t '�"�:, PUBLIC HEARING r .__ _i r--2-'"�'k`" ir'I i-_:`-_i "�G6m�l�©� ,,c ;•ti, ,+'�j j i Public hearing scheduled for November 14,200D,before the Renton Hearing I < i �--�- _r,c.^, ,� ,_� �� ' � � ' Examiner in Renton Council Chambers.Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th `� rr�-, - ..'9 _ ]_-' 1, ,__L�j�•,;��Ir=`•' floor of the Renton City Hall located al 1055 Grady Way South. "K - r1_F-,F-i r'�---,' „_ " Q)u +5' fit)="'' CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ) '"i- -`- -i�__� ., = r��`^•' �rn�•�,:'.- ' Land Use: Vacant land,zoned Residential 8 `i,A.,,__-__--__-__- - ' Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential ___--- --- • Environmental Documents that -" �,�`( Evaluate the Proposed Project: Traffic Impact Analysis,Geotechnical Engineering Report.Drainage Technical Information Report(Preliminary),Environmental Checklist - Development Regulations - , Used For Project Mitigation: Stale Environmental Policy Act,Clly of Renton Municipal Code,King County "S •••- Surface Water Design Manual s ' • CERTIFICATION - I, n A v-e z 1 )-e ,, ,,,j , hereby certify that 9 copies of the above document were posted by me in el conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on .5 +. ►S, co • Signed: d ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me,a Nortary Public,in and for the tate of ' Washington residing i emy¢,-n , on the 3it,_,0, day of ( •i,, 206 0 . 4 MARLYN KAMGHEFF NOTARY PUBLIC ,0 STATE OF WASHINGTON .! COMMISSION EXPIRES MARILYN KAMCHEFF JUNE 29, 2003 MY'APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:672.9.03 ,. CITY _,F RENTON ..il: ve. Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator September 15, 2000 Mr. Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 SUBJECT: Heritage Renton Hill Project No. LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr. Fike: • The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, the "hold" on the application has been removed. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on October 10, 2000. .Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on November 14, 2000 at 9:00 AM to consider' the proposed Preliminary Plat. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you one week before the hearing. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Please contact me, at(425)430-7382, if you have any questions. Sincerely, Elizabeth Higgins,AICP • Senior Planner cc: Renton School District#403/Owners _ Parties of Record Accoptanco 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 �\Tf.:e...�..er..nnl�inc Glle/rnn.•nlerl.n�lcrinl Ofl/nncl nnnc„mnr Mr.Ken Adams 1.�... lames Baker ... Thomas Barr / 706 Renton Avenue So. 524 Mill Avenue So. 802 High Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Ms.Dianne Beatty Mr.Brian Beckman Mr. Pat Bellport 1730 SE 7th Court 435 Cedar Avenue So. 411 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Barton Bennett Mr.Douglas Bergquist Mr. &Mrs.Mike Bishop 1807 SE 7th Court River Ridge Estates Homeowners Assoc. 326 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 1801 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Dino Bosco Mr. &Mrs. Claude Bouchard Ms. Ruth Bradley 915 High Avenue So. 1506 Beacon Way South 709 High Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Douglas Brandt Ms. Darlene Bressan Mr. &Mrs. John Burkhalter 610 Renton Avenue So. 901 High Avenue So. 901 Jones Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Margaret Burkhalter Ms.Dina Calhoun Ms.Eleanor Cantrell 715 Jones Avenue So. Mr.Robert Davis 1416 South 7th Renton WA 98055 433 Cedar Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Ralph Carter Mr. Timothy Cogger Mr. &Mrs.Barry Conger 630 High Avenue South 609 Grant Avenue South 1301 South 9th Street Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bert Custer Ms. Gina Custer Ms. Cheryl Danza 714 Cedar Avenue So. 1209 South 7th Street 706 Renton Avenue So. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Robert Elliot Mr. &Mrs. Quentin Ellis Mr. Dale Fountaine 300 Renton Avenue So. 715 High Avenue South 617 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs. Don Faull Ms. Sheri Frank Mr. &Mrs. W. Free 804 Renton Avenue So. 426 Cedar Avenue South 1012 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Frank Gallacher : • 3ob Gambill i.,... Lily Garfield 719 Jones Avenue South Seattle Public Utilities, 10th Floor 265 Maiden Lane East Renton WA 98055 710 Second Avenue Seattle WA 98112 Seattle WA 98104-1714 Ms.Patricia Gilroy Ms.Rosemary Grassi Ms.Kathy Griffin 535 Renton Avenue So. PO Box 1188 1425 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Ann Grinolds Mr.Manly Grinolds Mr.R. Grinolds 324 Cedar Avenue South 1223 South 3rd Street 330 Cedar Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. John Guiliani Ms.Bambi Gunderson Mr. Russ Haag 1400 South 7th Street 1107 South 4th Street 704 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Cynthia Halse Mr.Frederick Hartley Mr. &Mrs.Dan Hemenway 15404— 167th Place SE 701 High Avenue South 1712 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98058 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Sharon Herman Ms. Pat Hodgsen Hopkins and Chombers 711 Jones Avenue South 620 Renton Avenue South PO Box 691 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.M. Ann Houser Ms.Diane Hyatt Ms. Patty Jaeckel 2331 SE 8th Place 720 Cedar Avenue South Falcon Ridge Newsletter Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 2342 SE 8`s Place Renton WA 98055 Mr.Bill Johnson Mr. &Mrs. Phil Johnson Mr. Wayne Jones, Jr. 1425 Beacon Way South 350 Renton Avenue South Lakeridge Development Inc. Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 PO Box 146 Renton WA 98057 Ms. Agnes Koestl Mr. &Mrs.Ken Kraght Ms.Ruth Larson 428 Renton Avenue South 527 Renton Avenue South Renton Hill Community Association Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 714 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Randy Lemke Ms.Elizabeth Lewis Mr. &Mrs.Dwayne Liston 415 Cedar Avenue South 1525 South 6th Street 17703 — 114th Place SE Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 l , Ms.Barbara Lux —. Robert Lux tvu. Carl Maas 1412 South 9th Street 1410 South 7th Street Ms.Kathy McGatlin Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 1724 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Ms.Mary MacDonald Mr. &Mrs. Michael Mack Mr.Louis Malesis 802 Cedar Avenue South 906 High Avenue South 1728 SE 7th Court Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.Eric Mastor Mr. &Mrs.Don Miles Mr.Keith Moberg 808 Renton Avenue South 532 Renton Avenue South 627 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs. Clint Morse Ms.Marianne Nicol Ms.Roseanne Nolan 525 High Avenue South 316 Renton Avenue South 2048 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Elsa Norris Mr.Bentley Oaks Ms. Cathy O'Neill 1513 South 7th Street 1321 South 7th Street 575 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Paul Ossorio Mr. &Mrs.Deone Perlatti Mr. Gino Petralia 708 Renton Avenue South 1520 South 9th Street 813 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Janice Potter/Mr. Dwight Potter Ms. Josephine Potter Ms.Paula Provin Falcon Ridge Association 1314 South 7th Street 712 Renton Avenue South 2411 SE 8th Place Renton WA 98055-3065 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms.Dana Reiman Mr. Wayne Rossman Mr. George Salurmini 1410 Beacon Way South 533 Grant Avenue South 519 Renton Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Janet Slapnick Mr. &Mrs.Louis Sutter Mr.Rick Thibodeau 531 Grant Avenue South 721 High Street 1000 High Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs.Lynn Thrasher Mr.Mario Tonda Mr. Joe Vanderpool 904 Grant Avenue South Mr. Victor Tonda 1513 South 7th Street Renton WA 98055 1308 Beacon Way South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr.'Jack Wardell .emu. &Mrs.Larry Welch lvu:James Wilhoit 523 Renton Avenue South 310 Renton Avenue South 910 Grant Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mr. &Mrs. Rich Yarbrough Mr. Dean Yasuda Mr.Dick Zugschwerdt 338 Renton Avenue South 2058 SE 8th Place 802 Grand Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 F3,11 ECaxot (Alkyls \<•e i Oleson '-IZo -Ce610-r S Rev,-kon ScAr\ �sAo 403 U.)IA 9 a)5 J -Tva s p o lam- 2 ls1-. 27 C-) 4 Srtr2e� 'Rer lZrn , l-S `18OS 5 i ,c:_ f,,,,;,, , . L'll i.,_ r , ,,, , ,„t. ®FCC/ aF Air if September 13,2000 %./kr—�av'"�0v SEp Elizabeth Higgins,AICP �C` lCu City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 Grady Way South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053,PP,ECF Ms. Higgins, The purpose of this letter is to submit the addition information and revisions that you and the Environmental Review Committee(ERC)have requested in your May 26,2000 letter. With this letter we are submitting the following: • Five(5)copies of the additional Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum No. 2 • Twelve(12)copies of the revised Overall Plat Plan set • Five(5)copies of the revised Drainage Control Plan • Four(4)copies of the revised Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan • Twelve(12)copies of the revised Detailed Grading Plan • Twelve(12)copies of the revised Neighborhood Detail Map • Five(5)copies of the revised Generalized Utilities Plan • One(1)copy of the revised 8/2 "x 11"plan reduction set • Twelve(12)copies of this letter This submittal should address all your concerns in the May 26,2000 letter. If there is any addition information or additional copies needed we would be glad to supply you with them. If you have any questions regarding the revisions or addition information,please contact me at (425)709-6508. Sincerely, Ryan 1e Project Manager B ennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr Suite 100-A Bellevue WA 98005 • Tel: 425-709-6559 • Fax: 425-709-6553 265 Maiden Lane E /41,F<o Seattle, WA 98112 coy/I •FA, June 7, 2000 ✓(/ 9Fi�4AtiVNo cQv oy/It-A, Elizabeth Higgins, AICP "te 2O Senior Planner �� , f� Development Services Division — Development/Planning Renton City Hall —6th Fl. 1.055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Higgins: Thank you for speaking with me extensively about the proposed development on Renton Hill by Bennett Development. • I am also writing to express my concerns about the proposed development. Firstly, the proposed access to the property owned by the School District can only be accessed by the right of way next to my property (1707 SE 7th Ct). When ' I bought my house I was not aware that the landscaped area was a public right of way and not as it appears, a part of River Ridge Development. Therefore, I could not have anticipated having a road put in next to my property. The proposed, road would not only create significantly more traffic noise but also visually degrade my line of sight. Instead of a fairly quiet street because of the buffer from the landscaped area, I will have a busy road next to my house. Instead of a landscaped area to look at, I will have pavement. Secondly, the new development will remove an area which makes Renton Hill so special. To find a bit of nature so close to downtown which houses all sorts of wildlife is an asset not only to Renton Hill but also to Renton. The value of houses on Renton Hill have increased and new expensive houses have been built on the Hill not only because of its close in location but also because of the open space created by the undeveloped property. It's disappointing to see Renton continue to sell off it's assets. Sincerely yours, Lily Garfield Elizabeth Higgins-,.Re,Project.LUA-" w'5 w ...»n» �».w,.,v...»,.,.Page , 1.1 From: Elizabeth Higgins To: G, Collins, William Date: 6/7/00 8:50AM Subject: Re: Project LUA-00-053 Dear Mr. Collins Thank you for your comment. I informed the applicant of this a couple of weeks ago. I am guessing they ordered the sign over the telephone and the sign company(which, by the way, also put the location and telephone number for the former City Hall on the sign, but has since corrected that) heard "Second" instead of"Seventh." The applicant has not submitted the information requested, but when they do and a new hearing date is set, you, as a party of record,will be informed of it. Thank you again for continuing to participate in this process. Elizabeth Higgins >>> "Collins, William G"<William.Collins2©PSS.Boeing.com> 06/07/00 08:13AM >>> Dear Elizabeth: I know that the preliminary public comment period is closed, but I wish to point out that the written legal documents posted at various locations in the community and at the"proposed"job site, all have a Project Address that is different than what is posted on the 8 ft by 4 ft sign posted near 7th and Beacon (Proposed Land Use Action). A member of the Renton Building Department called this a"misrepresentation of fact." It would appear, to someone unfamiliar with the project,that both legal documents(the sign and the 8-1/2 x 11 legal notices) both state the job site as being one-half mile apart. (Measured in a straight line) I wish to point this out to you as a point that may be brought up at a later date during a future public hearing. y � CITY �F RENTON :77SOILPlanning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 26,2000 Mr.Ryan A. Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053,PP,ECF Hold Letter Dear.Mr.Fike As you are aware,the comment period for the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat closed May 19, 2000. This week those comments have been considered by the appropriate departments of the City that are reviewing the land use action submittal. In particular,the project/park access as proposed was discussed in a meeting of members of the Development Services,Public Works (Transportation), and Community Service(Parks)Departments of the City of Renton. In addition to the design of the entry to the proposed preliminary plat and Philip Arnold Park, general transportation issues in the Renton Hill area were discussed. As you are aware,this project was scheduled for review at the May 30,2000,Environmental Review Committee.(ERC) so that they could make a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) Threshold Determination. At this time, additional information will be required prior to the ERC meeting. Therefore,the ERC meeting,and subsequently,the public hearing previously scheduled for June 27, 2000,will be rescheduled. Until additional information, as outlined in this letter, is received and accepted as adequate,the project is on hold, as of the date of this letter. As mentioned, a primary concern is_related to transportation issues on Renton Hill. For this reason,please ask the transportation engineers to supply the following: Traffic Count • Provide traffic counts for a period of twenty-four hours per day for one week for the following streets (not intersections): 1. S 7th Street between Grant Avenue S and Renton Avenue S 2. Cedar Avenue S between S 4th Street and S 5th Street 3. Renton Avenue S in the 300 block Park Traffic • Discuss additional traffic to parks for ball field use,group picnics, and general park use and how traffic generated by the park location relates to capacity of the proposed development. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer t I Mr.Ryan A. Fike Bellevue,WA 98005 Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053,PP,ECF May 26,2000 Page 3 Accident Records • Provide accident incident reports for the past five years for intersections and streets in the Renton Hill area. Characterize these by nature,location,number of incidents. This area includes streets bounded by Interstate 405 on the west and north,the Shuffieton Right of Way to the south, and the Cedar River greenway to the east.The Falcon Ridge development may be excluded. Intersection Reconfiguration Design • The intersection reconfiguration proposed is not acceptable to the Transportation Division or the Parks Department. The existing access along Beacon Way S to the park must remain as it is now. Access to the plat should be evaluated directly from SE 7th Court east of the Beacon Avenue ROW. This new intersection would include a stop sign for the new street at SE 7th Court.The existing interchange would remain unchanged. This configuration would require vehicles exiting the plat to stop at SE 7th Court,turn left onto SE 7th Court,and stop again at the existing top sign at SE 7th Court's intersection with the Seattle Pubic Utilities' ROW, Beacon Way S, S 7th Street,and Jones Avenue S. Analysis • A traffic analysis of this intersection must be submitted that demonstrates that it would operate effectively given the amount of increased traffic generated by the proposed development and the unusual number of streets that intersect. If you have any questions,please call me at 425-430-7382. You or the transportation engineer may also contact Neil Watts,Director of Development Engineering Plan Review at 425-430- 7278. Sincerely Elizabeth Higgins,AICP Senior Planner Cc: Karl Hamilton,Transportation Planning Leslie Betlach,Parks Department Jennifer Henning, Development Services Neil Watts,Development Services Parties of Record file ,:- ems( /2 c�...✓` t`- .t—� 1724 SE 7TH COURT RE N T O N, WA 98055 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON MAY 2 2 2000 May 15, 2000 RECEIVED Reference:LAU-00-053,PP,ECF Heritage Philip Arnold Ms. Elizabeth Higgins, AICP,Principal Planner Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Higgins: We would like to express our concerns regarding the proposed Heritage Philip Arnold development. We have a sincere interest in this project as it affects our home, as we live in River Ridge adjacent to the proposed development, and the homes of Renton Hill community as a whole. Our concerns are primarily in regard to the impact this development will have on our and Renton Hill's quality of life. The primary impacts this development will have are two-fold. The additional development will significantly increase the traffic on Renton Hill and the proposed changes to the park access will increase the traffic impact to our River Ridge development. As you are aware, there are two means of access to Renton Hill,Renton and Cedar Avenues. The primary access route is Renton Avenue, which in my estimation handles well over seventy five percent of the traffic on and off the hill. I estimate that 175 to 200 lots are directly served by Renton Avenue. This estimate is based on the number of lots on and to the east of Renton Avenue. The proposed development has 56 lots that would be served by Renton Avenue access. These additional lots represent a 30 percent increase in lots served by Renton Avenue. Based on 9 plus trips per household this is over 500 additional trips per day of traffic to be handled by Renton Avenue. Renton Avenue is not designed or suited for the present traffic let alone such a significant increase in traffic. Renton Avenue is narrow with parking on one side and two blind vertical curves. It is hazardous at all times. Two large vehicles cannot safely pass requiring one vehicle to pull over. The additional traffic, in addition to the present residential traffic, does not take into account the traffic to and from the park, especially when baseball games are scheduled. South 7th street is not currently marked for through traffic having uncontrolled intersections from Philip Arnold Park to Renton Avenue. In-fact 7th is the main thoroughfare by default which has created an unsafe condition for out-of-area drivers. The present traffic from the park after a ball game comes out at excessive speeds in a steady stream. Increased traffic from the new development will only exasperate the condition. One of the proposed mitigation measures is a fee based on the estimated additional vehicle trips attributed to the proposed development. We are unclear how this fee could be used to —2— May 15,2000 alleviate the traffic issues. Renton Avenue cannot be widened without removing the one side parking on the east side. Removal of this parking would create an extreme hardship on the residents of Renton Avenue that have older homes with limited or no on property parking We are aware that traffic counters were placed near the I-405 overpasses late last year for a short period of time. We do not believe that any traffic counters were placed on Renton Avenue or S. Th Street and therefore, do not believe that an accurate traffic study was conducted. We request that the City conduct a well-planned traffic study to determine the true traffic on Renton Avenue. Our second concern is the proposed access to the new development via the River Ridge development entering onto SE 7th court. The present park access would be abandoned and would be via the proposed development. We strongly disagree with this proposal as having a serious impact on River Ridge and on the proposed development if it is approved. As a River Ridge resident with small children, we do not want additional traffic from the new development onto our dead end street, even for a short distance at the "entrance", let alone streams of park traffic. At present, the park traffic is isolated from River Ridge. We are sure that prospective residents of the Heritage development would not want park traffic through their neighborhood either. We request that the City take this into review and leave the present park access unchanged no matter where the Heritage access is proposed. Additionally,we feel that the Heritage access should be off Beacon Way. Under no circumstance would we be in favor of opening the gates near the Park to Puget Drive. While this could provide another access route to the Hill, it would cause Renton Hill to become a thoroughfare for the residential areas to the south. We understand that this access was open in the past causing a marked increase in traffic and crime on Renton Hill. This access would destroy the safety we presently enjoy in our neighborhood. We understand that the sale price offered by the developer for the School District property is contingent on the number of developable lots approved. While this may be in the best interest of the School District to obtain the highest price it is not in the interest of the residents of Renton Hill or the community as a whole. Other uses of the property should be explored. With ever increasing development within the City of Renton, this remains as one of the few natural undeveloped areas close to downtown. We feel that this natural area and what if offers to the community and wildlife should not be lost to the addition of more homes. We understand that we cannot stand in the way of "progress", however, we respectfully request that you consider the significant negative impacts a development of this size will have on us and Renton Hill. Sincerely, . 714tichit-rn . 1)04.,UN„ Carl Maas and Kathy McGatlin 425-255-4629 IIIIIMIPPV9PMUrPr;IMIIIIPF"Il , t L E k, �--- 33U c,)` PIA! io ....---- -.-.,„,„Jr, , JOKY .- r-- ..�`. 4- • /mil- dr4 F,ogFig/ R/a4vJ ,o/cf, PiuAleiRA.- ,OL 4ivvr ?, frtj .Ni9NT - v 450 O11///i0,✓ /ass J r# 07 "7 ,-Wrao,✓ (,,,AlthN qg 5 -.' (:.\a Is` ss Ih lliliill(171II111111lI111173i{tI1111li1111iiI?'lfii't-1111i1 A NOTleE . • ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION&PUBLIC HEARING POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: HERITAGE RENTON HILL PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property,by means of the preliminary plat process,Into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property Is zoned Residential 8(R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre(du/a). The . proposed density for this project would be 6,8 dula. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square • feet each,The minimum tot size In the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf.The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street tight-of-way widths of 42'(instead of 50').The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee.A public hearing before the City of Renton Heating Examiner will also be required. Location: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,S 7°i Court,end S 7°i Street THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED - THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. Appeals must be filed In writing together with the required 575.00 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)-430-65101: A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the 7th floor of City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,Washington,on November 14, 2000 at 9:00 AM to consider the proposed Preliminary Plat. If the Environmental Determination Is appealed,the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. , " 1: F' is _ 171 . iPAI • - ti _� -j _ :'',! iill ." t i t , amq -i fi,:t_ _ �: - :LLLLLoI- t f :-t ,BL t r-.1 i -1,=:-a,}^ \cocoa: •„'0; 1 �;, .:5,. i inco ng n . IIII:C -- _ . 1 • ;: - '•• y(t'J FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT l SERVICES DIVISION AT(426)430.7200, ' DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification. CERTIFICATION I, lPAké.QJQ- cq.ici_) , hereby certify that 9 copies-of the above • document were posted by me in 9 - conspicuous.places on or nearby the described property on , Oct 20 ) Z9 o , Signed: �ep,,,,,ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me,a Nortary Public,in and for thef Washington residing in G&4 -1 ,on the &5-11` day of 1Qese t/063-o ¢: ,,Y-. P*.V I:c 6 ZA CO EF(r` - c----M aAi/.... 7/...''' Iri t.,10TARY PUBil ie '' GATE OF VUASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES r `RUNE 29 2003 • MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29.03 - t-a NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON,WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. HERITAGE RENTON HILL LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Environmental review for proposed division of property into 57 lots suitable for single family homes. Location: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, So. 7th Court and So. 7th Street. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. 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 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office (425)-430-6510. A Public Hearing will be held in the Council Chambers on November 14, 2000 at 9:00 AM to consider the preliminary plat. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing. Publication Date: October 23,2000 Account No. 51067 dnsmpub.dot CITY OF RENTON - - - DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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 the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. 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 Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: October 24,2000 DATE OF DECISION: October 17, 2000 SIGNATURES: ,/ /eit 01/7/0. Gregg i r , d inistra or DATE Departm of lanning/Building/Public Works r_\ / / 7(00 _ _ ,JIm Shepherd.dmostrator DATE • /Community Servi Lee a r, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department dnsmsig r CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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 the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements was 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 of drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in the most recent KCSWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. These measures 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. 5. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of $75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot.The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $488.00 per each new single family lot created by the proposed plat. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Mitigation Measures (continued) Page 2 of 2 7. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of $530.76 per each new single family residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 9. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. 10. The rear setback at the lot located in the northwest corner of the property (Lot 35 as shown on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet and clearing within ten feet of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the applicant and dated 8/31/00. 11. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction is ceased immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. 12. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project,would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2," by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000. 13. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline Easement"for a secondary, emergency only access. MITMEAS CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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. Plan Review—Sanitary Sewer 1. There is an existing 8" sewer main in SE 7th Court, adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new project can be served by extending an 8" sewer main from this existing main through the proposed subdivision. 2. The conceptual sanitary sewer main shown on the drawing submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. 3. A sewer cleanout will need to be located five feet out from buildings. 4. Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual sewers). Side sewer lines must have a 2 percent slope. 5. All utility plans must comply with the City of Renton Drafting Standards. 6. Show finished floor elevations on the sewer construction plan sheet. 7. The vertical profile of the sewer main will be required. • 8. The project is located in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. 9. Any new sewer mains are to be separated from water lines by a minimum of 10 feet. There is a 7.5 foot minimum separation from other utilities. • Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Advisory Notes(continued) Page 2 of 2 10. Sewer Development Charges of$585.00 per single family residence will be required for this plat. The fee for this project would be $16,380.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 6" water main in Jones Avenue S, an 8" water main in SE 7th Court, and an 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. 2. The proposed project is located in the 490 foot water pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from approximately 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. 3. Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire flow and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measure along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as part of this project to meet this criteria. 4. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S. 5. Installation of 8"water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants are required. 6. Connection to the 8"stub along the north property line is required (see plan W-2038). 7. Connection to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S is required (see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan shall be revised to show this connection. 8. Water System Development charges of$850.00 per new single family lot will be required for this. The charge for this plan would be $48,450.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Stormwater Drainage 1. A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. 2. Drawings submitted to the City of Renton are to be on 22 inch x 34 inch sheets. The information pertaining to the City of Renton should be removed from the title block of the sheets submitted. 3. Before any construction or development activity occurs, a pre-construction meeting must be held with the City of Renton Development Services Division, Construction Services (425-277-5570). 4. The City of Renton retains the right to restrict the timing of land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions may be necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare, or for the protection of the environment. 5. Surface Water System Development charges of$385 per new single family lot will be required for this plat. The fee for this project would be $21,945.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Transportation and Street Improvements 1. All electrical and communication facilities to be underground behind the sidewalk. If right-of-way space is not available, then in a utility easement. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. 2. Streets over 700 feet in length are required to have two means of access. ADVISORYNOTES • Heritage Renton Hill LUSA-00-053,PP,ECF Advisory Notes(continued) Page 3 of 3 3. Street lighting is required to meet City standards. Minimum lighting level is 6:1 uniformity ratio and 0.2 foot candle level. The street lighting conduit to be located under the sidewalk. 4. The minimum right-of-way width is 42 feet(modified from street standard width of 50 feet). 5. The cul-de-sac is required to have a minimum pavement radius of 45 feet and right-of-way radius of 55 feet. 6. A 5 foot sidewalk at the curb is required 7. Payment of a Transportation Mitigation fee of$75 per new average weekday trip, estimated at 9.55 new trips per single family lot,will be required prior to recording of the plat. It has been estimated that this 57 lot plat would result in approximately 544.35 additional average (weekday)trips. The Transportation Mitigation Fee would be$40,826.25. Plan Review—General 1. 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. 2. The construction permit application(s)must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 3. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5 percent of the first$100,000 of the estimated construction costs;4 percent of anything over$100,000, but less than $200,000, and 3 percent of anything over$200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. 4. An easement that meets City standards for ingress, egress, and utilities shall be provided by the applicant to the property abutting the east property boundary at a point within 200 feet of the northeast property corner of the proposed plat. Parks Department Review 1. Payment of a Parks Mitigation fee of$530.76 for each new single family lot will be required prior to recording of the plat. The Parks fee will be$30,253.32. Building Department Review 1. Demolition permits will be required. Fire Prevention Department Review 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. Provide a 20 foot paved secondary emergency access from the cul-de-sac within the development to the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement (Beacon Way SE). This would be an emergency access only and can be gated or chained. 3. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. 4. A Fire Mitigation fee of $488 is required for all new single family lots. Payment is required prior to recording of the plat. The Fire Mitigation fee for the proposed project would be$27,816.00. Property Services Department Review 1. Comments will be provided under separate cover. ADVISORYNOTES • Heritage Renton Hill LUA-00-053,PP,ECF Advisory Notes(continued) Page 4 of 4 Development Services Department Review 1. The site is designated Residential Single Family in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8). 3. Densities allowed in the R-8 Zone are 5.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a) minimum and 8.0 du/a maximum. 4. Minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4500 sf, with minimum width of 50 for interior lots and 60 for corner lots. The minimum permitted lot depth is 65 feet. Lot dimensions must be shown on the final site plan demonstrating that all lots meet these minimums. 5. Heights of buildings in the R-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories, or 30 feet. 6. Required setbacks in the R-8 Zone are 15 feet for houses and 20 feet for attached garages which access from the front when houses front streets created after September 1, 1995, 20 foot rear yard setbacks; 5 foot side yard setbacks for interior lots and 15 feet sideyard setbacks for corner lots. All setbacks are minimums. Setback dimensions should be shown on the construction drawings, but setback lines must be removed prior to recording the final plat. 7. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 Zone is 35 percent for lots over 5,000 sf or 50 percent for lots 5,000 sf or less. 8. Dead end streets cannot exceed 700 feet in length, measured from the edge of the connecting street to the end of the cul-de-sac. 9. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 10. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction of retaining walls on or near property lines. These agreements must include protection measures for (or permission to potentially damage or remove) trees located on abutting properties within 20 feet of the property line. 11. The applicant shall draft and record a maintenance agreement or establish a Homeowners' Association for the maintenance of all common improvements (access and utility easements, rights- of-way, and stormwater facilities). A draft of the document shall be submitted to the City of Renton for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to the recording of the preliminary plat. 12. Performance Standards for Land Development Permits (RMC 4-4-130K), including "Protection Measures During Construction" (RMC 4-4-130K7) relating to trees, shall be followed by the applicant. The applicant shall adhere to the definition of"tree" a found in RMC 4-11-200, "drip line" as found in RMC 4-11-040, and the measurement of trees as found in RMC 4-11-030. 13. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources may require a Forest Practices Permit for the conversion of timber land to another use. 14. The applicant should contact Paul Alexander of The King County Department of Transportation, Metro Transportation, Metro Transit Route Facilities at 206-684-1599, regarding Metro's requirements for potential transit service in the area (no service is currently available to Renton Hill). ADVISORYNOTES , I 7 • STAFF City of Renton REPORT '' Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE: October 17, 2000 Project Name: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Applicant: Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 . File Number: LUA-00-053, PP, ECF Reviewing Planner: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP • r-- 1 rr--r'-~i L-\tF= a .y \ \I\\ e, i �``*.`. I \ i \\ • 1 11 A r----I \ L -+ ` r-t-y r__>`Zl fJ L__ __J I _ e `o•�\ 1 1 / tip` 1 1 I'----I 1--+---1 L---y•:.`,r--1--I L---------' ��. 1\\1 "° �T~ `.a,\ II I 1-----I I ! . i iim ir'J -11_1 1::-_; -1 1, '\C---- i • .\� \\ ,, , , I l I.1 „ i I\ - I I\ \--�I\♦ `'--'--- -.,T. \ \I I„F., `I,,N. `�_I'_r�1'' a r-T--n 3 r-ir--F--+--1 17 \,:1 .\ . \\\``y\I I \ 1 I".--T\---1 1\\„„S ° %-+.y,e. I--ir- r--1---i'F�-I\ Y ;_w. _- i 1 I i „ ��Iy,'Al: f Lie -/ l h--IF--41-__+__4--L\ ' ij♦ 1 L-aL- r -T -IFr_1 L i aCl 1 -1J_ I 1/ X 11 \\ z 1 4 L_JL_J I I I L_l'L 1 Y�)IIr----�-i e L _1 I , /(-°1 I IL_J r__T__l.F I_1 \ 'i gl I _ I J L_JL_J L--1--J r_31_J Ir; f)1 1- tl - __'J-n u i�_r`u__�- ',1-'• i.° 1',r--T--i r -,E_�, r-,-�T-, \'j'r., 1 'I e I �� f �; r--E-;L--1,x°':k:'I x�i 1-=_JE','Z'-'F I;I ``♦i l 7'1„ ,. I i C 1I 1 A:3^1 /L _Y-jr L_ L-�L i£'.e}x1 J I~'-ti__�j`�`,v�s'.�I \\\ i1 L „ I A I oZ r- I 1-- L _J` r-r r a Op♦:a >nr. `-. c „ I "� I I_,I F--I H-� I nTY•rt- r� 1 )K > �� I -� 1 l llp L 'rel.... is l I 1 F. r___y L__ I L__1__ L_1_L L� Ct�J � �/1 I��. . l\\ oc ii T -ir rram „�,� ,r-,, F -I - F i I -�11 --I rr'_1 Ti I IL_J L__L_�♦� II:I':111l t7 \ III/ 1 1 r--1 r-n 1 1 r-r11 I . Jam, •' 1V��` n.r.. I 1 \ r--T--1 r-1- -1 L--Jr--r--r---1 1 ♦♦w- 1V::::: v COY r 1 I L__a I'L_J I.1-_JL_J L__i I .. I 1� ■ C Yn/�I/�G�i• ��I „ I I I EI I I:'I r-1t1 II '1•1 .r-1 w�' gi®O �GI��GID •C"T Tr��,A\\u�>T v;� \-(� \r--r-i r--1---I:---Ir-4---1--� 'L♦4 0 Ei <\\\iji .7 L"> 1: 'ram#. I J 1 I I ¢¢L__ I L_J H-1i 1 I I �tiD , • T1�\\ .4[ //7,111 j --I 11kilk I F--'}--_¢1--- -.k.' JL- -L_J ♦''4°��e�� El Fey \\11-Yti ;.• 'C.%.›."L 1 i-1=(f=, • II / 1 " Y--1 I ��::�.cJ?y"JI I L_L_JJ o::'1 o r=7�4" P.Y.r.' ,"tK'`>/-r-\ \\ L-' C I __ __ L-J-im _�_J L_±_ .. u.�.Mci.♦1 / I© - ]• y 1_7 \ { -'-'--� Y III �� I I I T I I L_JI j T--7� u�ws.n.`v�l© -]�'J (\ 1"t7nJ_Z \,1-`�� '/ / _ '•.I ; �j�. M r1-I---I 1 II I rJ-1--� ,w.,.a�'.,. ` '�h'i\�L�L1-\''., \,�`�1�'Y— �/ S I I I I m `I Ir r 1 7 • Pi~ ''� q u d i t \�\_ - \ \ \ 1 9 \ \\\ \\\ !-i,i\ ry i C1 • Project Location Map ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviro, al Review Committee Staff Report HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARk i-LAT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 2 of 16 Project Description: Bennett Development has proposed subdivision of an approximately 450,846 sf (10.35 acre) property into 57 lots suitable for detached, single family houses. Lots would range in size from 4,504 sf to 8,318 sf. The average lot size would be approximately 5,350 sf. The triangular-shaped property is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way South with SE 7th Court, Jones Avenue South, and South 7th Street. Although Renton Hill is a well established neighborhood, land abutting the proposed project to the north has been developed fairly recently into the"River Ridge," eleven- lot, subdivision. "Falcon Ridge,"a large (80 lots)subdivision, lies to the southeast. Philip Arnold Park, a developed park in the City of Renton park system, is adjacent to the southwest. The Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement, which is used occasionally for overflow parking from the park, separates the park from the proposed development property. The property is in a Residential 8 (R-8) Zone, which requires/allows between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). Approximately 88,862.4 sf (2.04 acre) of the site would be public right-of-ways and therefore is deducted from the gross square footage of the site for density calculations. The net site area is approximately 361,983.6 sf (8.31 acre), therefore the density would be 5.5 du/a. Access would be from a new public street that would intersect with SE 7th Court, in the River Ridge development.The new street would terminate in a cul-de-sac. An emergency-only access would connect the cul-de-sac with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement. A modification from street standards has been requested to reduce the width of the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet. There are no existing structures on the site. Approximately 54,974 cubic yards of topsoil would be cut on the site, with approximately 19,233 cubic yards of fill material being replaced following excavation. The project requires Environmental Review, Preliminary Plat approval by the Hearing Examiner, and administrative approval of a reduced public street right-of-way(from 50 to 42 feet wide). Project Location: The project is located on Renton Hill, southeast of the intersection of Beacon Way South with SE 7th Court,Jones Avenue South, and South 7th Street. Exist. Bldg.Area gsf: N/A Proposed New Bldg.Area gsf: N/A Site Area: 450,846 sf (10.35 acre) Total Building Area gsf: N/A RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommend that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance—Mitigated. ercrpt.doc City of Renton PB/F•W Department Environ. 21 Review Committee Staff Report • ' HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 3 of 16 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. Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day 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 the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements was 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 of drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in the most recent KCSWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. These measures 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. 5. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$488.00 per each new single family lot created by the proposed plat. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 7. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 9. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/F•W Department Enviror al Review Committee Staff Report ' HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY-FLAT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 4 of 16 10. The rear setback at the lot located in the northwest corner of the property(Lot 35 as shown on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet and clearing within ten feet of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the applicant and dated 8/31/00. 11. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction is ceased immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. 12. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project, would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2,"by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000. 13. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities"Cedar River Pipeline Easement"for a secondary, emergency only access. 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. Plan Review—Sanitary Sewer 1. There is an existing 8"sewer main in SE 7th Court, adjacent to the north side of the proposed plat. The new project can be served by extending an 8"sewer main from this existing main through the proposed subdivision. 2. The conceptual sanitary sewer main shown on the drawing submitted for the formal application appears to be in order. 3. A sewer cleanout will need to be located five feet out from buildings. 4. Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel (no dual sewers). Side sewer lines must have a 2 percent slope. 5. All utility plans must comply with the City of Renton Drafting Standards. 6. Show finished floor elevations on the sewer construction plan sheet. 7. The vertical profile of the sewer main will be required. 8. The project is located in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. 9. Any new sewer mains are to be separated from water lines by a minimum of 10 feet. There is a 7.5 foot minimum separation from other utilities. 10. Sewer Development Charges of$585.00 per single family residence will be required for this plat. The fee for this project would be$16,380.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S, an 8"water main in SE 7th Court, and an 8"water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. 2. The proposed project is located in the 490 foot water pressure zone. Static water pressure will range from approximately 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. ercrpt.doc City`of Renton P/B/F•W Department Environs t Review Committee Staff Report • ' HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY! _T LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 5 of 16 3. Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire flow and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measure along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as part of this project to meet this criteria. 4. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S. 5. Installation of 8"water mains in the interior streets of the plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants are required. 6. Connection to the 8"stub along the north property line is required (see plan W-2038). 7. Connection to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S is required (see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan shall be revised to show this connection. 8. Water System Development charges of$850.00 per new single family lot will be required for this. The charge for this plan would be$48,450.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Stormwater Drainage 1. A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. 2. Drawings submitted to the City of Renton are to be on 22 inch x 34 inch sheets. The information pertaining to the City of Renton should be removed from the title block of the sheets submitted. 3. Before any construction or development activity occurs, a pre-construction meeting must be held with the City of Renton Development Services Division, Construction Services (425-277-5570). 4. The City of Renton retains the right to restrict the timing of land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions may be necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare, or for the protection of the environment. 5. Surface Water System Development charges of$385 per new single family lot will be required for this plat.The fee for this project would be$21,945.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Transportation and Street Improvements 1. All electrical and communication facilities to be underground behind the sidewalk. If right-of-way space is not available,then in a utility easement. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. 2. Streets over 700 feet in length are required to have two means of access. 3. Street lighting is required to meet City standards. Minimum lighting level is 6:1 uniformity ratio and 0.2 foot candle level. The street lighting conduit to be located under the sidewalk. 4. The minimum right-of-way width is 42 feet(modified from street standard width of 50 feet). 5. The cul-de-sac is required to have a minimum pavement radius of 45 feet and right-of-way radius of 55 feet. 6. A 5 foot sidewalk at the curb is required 7. Payment of a Transportation Mitigation fee of$75 per new average weekday trip, estimated at 9.55 new trips per single family lot, will be required prior to recording of the plat. It has been estimated that this 57 lot plat would result in approximately 544.35 additional average (weekday)trips. The Transportation Mitigation Fee would be $40,826.25. Plan Review—General 1. 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. 2. The construction permit application(s) must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/P.W Department Enviror. al Review Committee Staff Report HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY'FLAT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 6 of 16 3. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5 percent of the first$100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4 percent of anything over$100,000, but less than $200,000, and 3 percent of anything over $200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for construction permits (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. 4. An easement that meets City standards for ingress, egress, and utilities shall be provided by the applicant to the property abutting the east property boundary at a point within 200 feet of the northeast property corner of the proposed plat. Parks Department Review 1. Payment of a Parks Mitigation fee of$530.76 for each new single family lot will be required prior to recording of the plat. The Parks fee will be$30,253.32. Building Department Review 1. Demolition permits will be required. Fire Prevention Department Review 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. Provide,a 20 foot paved secondary emergency access from the cul-de-sac within the development to the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement (Beacon Way SE). This would be an emergency access only and can be gated or chained. 3. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. 4. A Fire Mitigation fee of$488 is required for all new single family lots. Payment is required prior to recording of the plat. The Fire Mitigation fee for the proposed project would be$27,816.00. Property Services Department Review 1. Comments will be provided under separate cover. Development Services Department Review 1. The site is designated Residential Single Family in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8). 3. Densities allowed in the R-8 Zone are 5.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a) minimum and 8.0 du/a maximum. 4. Minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4500 sf,with minimum width of 50 for interior lots and 60 for corner lots. The minimum permitted lot depth is 65 feet. Lot dimensions must be shown on the final site plan demonstrating that all lots meet these minimums. 5. Heights of buildings in the R-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories, or 30 feet. 6. Required setbacks in the R-8 Zone are 15 feet for houses and 20 feet for attached garages which access from the front when houses front streets created after September 1, 1995, 20 foot rear yard setbacks; 5 foot side yard setbacks for interior lots and 15 feet sideyard setbacks for corner lots. All setbacks are minimums. Setback dimensions should be shown on the construction drawings, but setback lines must be removed prior to recording the final plat. 7. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 Zone is 35 percent for lots over 5,000 sf or 50 percent for lots 5,000 sf or less. 8. Dead end streets cannot exceed 700 feet in length, measured from the edge of the connecting street to the end of the cul-de-sac. 9. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environ dl Review Committee Staff Report • HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY'"L_T LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 7 of 16 10. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction of retaining walls on or near property lines. These agreements must include protection measures for (or permission to potentially damage or remove)trees located on abutting properties within 20 feet of the property line. 11. The applicant shall draft and record a maintenance agreement or establish a Homeowners'Association for the maintenance of all common improvements (access and utility easements, rights-of-way, and stormwater facilities). A draft of the document shall be submitted to the City of Renton for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to the recording of the preliminary plat. 12. Performance Standards for Land Development Permits (RMC 4-4-130K), including "Protection Measures During Construction" (RMC 4-4-130K7) relating to trees, shall be followed by the applicant. The applicant shall adhere to the definition of"tree"a found in RMC 4-11-200, "drip line"as found in RMC 4-11-040, and the measurement of trees as found in RMC 4-11-030. 13. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources may require a Forest Practices Permit for the conversion of timber land to another use. 14. The applicant should contact Paul Alexander of The King County Department of Transportation, Metro Transportation, Metro Transit Route Facilities at 206-684-1599, regarding Metro's requirements for potential transit service in the area (no service is currently available to Renton Hill). D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C.240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Earth/Geology Impacts:The site is located on the Covington Drift Upland, an elevated drift plain in the Puget Sound Lowland geomorphic'province. The Puget Sound Lowland is a basin lying between the Cascade and Olympic Mountains and is covered mainly by glacially-deposited sediments. The plain was formed during the last period of continental glaciation that ended approximately 13,500 years ago. The site lies near the northwestern corner of the upland plain at an elevation of approximately 400 feet above sea level. In Renton, the area is known as "Renton Hill." The soils on the property, as indicated in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, King County Area, Renton Quadrangle are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (6 to 15%) and Indianola loamy fine sand (6 to 15%), which are consistent with the site's glacial history and field tests. The applicant has provided a geotechnical report by Geotech Consultants, Inc. ("the geotech"), dated September 14, 1999,for the proposed Preliminary Plat. Subsurface conditions were explored by means of fourteen pit excavations on the property. Material encountered included native topsoil, loose gravelly sand, occasional boulders, loose fill including construction debris, concrete, and asphalt rubble. No groundwater seepage or wet soil was observed during the tests. The report indicates that existing soils were identified as weathered, gravelly sand overlaying dense to very dense, gravelly sand. Loose fill with concrete rubble and other construction debris and household garbage was encountered to a depth of 13 feet below grade on the west portion of the property. Regarding former coal mining activities in the vicinity of the property,the City of Renton Coal Mine Hazards map (RMC 4-3-050.R.3.a(1) i) indicates the area of the property has a"moderate"hazard from abandoned coal mines. The Geologic Structure Map of the Renton Coal Mine, Renton Coal Company(undated), also indicates up to five shafts at levels 6 through 9 crossed the property from north to south. The coal mine hazards are typical of the Renton Hill Area, with the exception that"high"hazards are indicated along the west side of the hill. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environs tl Review Committee Staff Report HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARYi-::fiT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 8 of 16 The geotechnical engineering report, supplemented by information obtained from an Abandoned Mine Assessment, prepared by Hart Crowser, Inc., dated August 16, 1999, indicates that the site is underlain by three deep coal seams. Two of the seams have historic mine workings. The shallowest of these lies approximately 250 to 300 feet beneath the surface. The deeper one is 475 to 765 feet below the surface.These may have been mined into the early 1920s. According to the geotech report,there were no apparent signs of slope instability, or evidence of mines as indicated by air shafts, trenches, or ground subsidence. Hart Crowser's recommendations regarding potential subsidence caused by past coal mining activity and remaining mine shafts were incorporated into the Geotech Consultants report. These recommendations include the following: • The geotechnical engineer should review the construction documents to verify that the recommendations have been incorporated into the design of the project. • All footings should be continuous, with increased steel reinforcement,to span potential isolated subsidence areas and reduce differential settlement. • Post-and-beam construction should be considered to allow for relatively easy releveling in the event of settlement. • Concrete slabs-on-grade should be avoided in favor of floors on joints. • All new construction should include vapor barriers and well-ventilated crawl spaces to mitigate mine gas emissions. • Rigid structural materials, such as concrete and masonry, should be avoided where possible in favor of more flexible materials like steel and timber. • Avoid siding, weather stripping materials, and interior floor and wall coverings that are settlement sensitive. • Plan regular maintenance for weather stripping, utilities, and mechanical systems which may be affected by building movement. In addition,the report further states that, "at the time of earthwork, any areas of fill in structural areas should be thoroughly investigated to verify that they are not underlain by old air shafts or mine openings. Ground subsidence could result in distress or damage to pavements and utilities and periodic maintenance and repair of these should be expected." Due to the potential risk for noticeable differential foundation settlement due to ground subsidence, staff recommends that a note be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the,area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. Although there is no apparent evidence of prior occupation or development of the site, there are signs that grading has taken place in the past. Most notably,there is a"U"shaped cut slope located near the center of the site. A gravel road, apparently abandoned,crosses the southeast portion of the property to the toe of the cut slope. The engineers have speculated that gravel may have been removed from the site at the base of the slope. A 1967 aerial photograph indicates that most of the property was cleared of vegetation and may have been used at that time as a"borrow pit"for extraction of gravel used for the sub-base of Interstate 405, which appears, in the photograph,to be under construction through Renton. Slopes on the property are in excess of 40 percent with a vertical increase of greater than 15 feet. Therefore,they are "protected" under the Critical Areas Ordinance No.4835. The before-mentioned extraction of material from the sloped area of the site may have caused the slopes to be increased to the current grade of 40 percent and more. Based on the fact, as indicated on the topography map,that these slopes are isolated on the site, staff recommends an exception to prohibition of development of protected slopes in the Critical Areas Ordinance be granted so that grading may occur in the protected slope area. This exception may be granted through a modification of the Critical Areas Ordinance for: "Grading to the extent that it eliminates all or portions of a mound or to allow reconfiguration of protected slopes created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or public or private road installation..." (RMC 4-3-050.K.2) ercrpt.doc City of Renton PB/PW Department Environs rl Review Committee Staff Report , HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY'-_ T LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 9 of 16 Further indication of former surficial mining activity on the west portion of the property is shown on the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, King County Area (Renton Quadrangle, Sheet 11, dated 1970). In addition to grading of the slopes, according to the geotech,some overexcavation may be required to expose competent bearing soils.The geotechnical report recommended that the fill be removed from building areas. Fill soils are not suitable for supporting the loads associated with the proposed development. Foundations in these areas either will need to be overexcavated, or be pile-or pier-supported. The geotechnical report stated that shallow slope movement may occur near the steep slope located at the northeast corner of the property at Lot 35 (as shown on Preliminary Plat plan dated 8/31/00). The property corner is located at the top of an approximately 63%slope that is immediately off site. The geotech recommends setting houses and other occupied structures back from this slope twenty-five feet and not clearing or grading within ten feet. The conceptual grading plan, as submitted, is consistent with these recommendations, in terms of the ten foot setback. The building setback is shown on the conceptual plan at twenty feet. Staff recommends that this setback be increased to twenty- five feet as recommended by Geotech Consultants, Inc., in their report dated September 14, 1999. Staff recommends that the applicant be required to follow all recommendations of Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. The conceptual grading plan indicates that approximately 54,974 cubic yards (82,461 tons) of cut material will be created and 19,233 cy(28,850 tons) of fill would be required. This indicates a high number of hauling trips by large trucks will be necessary. To reduce the impact on local streets, staff has recommended additional restrictions on hauling hours, beyond those required by City of Renton codes (see also Transportation section). The applicant must submit a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with construction drawings as required by Renton Municipal Code. Staff recommends erosion control methods be in place during site and building construction as a condition of approval of the Preliminary Plat. Such erosion control shall be in place prior to the start of construction. Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 2. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a known potential for ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations of Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. 3. The rear setback at the lot located in the northeast corner of the property(Lot 35 on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot, prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet and clearing within ten feet of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the applicant and dated 8/31/00. 4. 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 the KCSWDM. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements was well as building construction. 5. 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 of drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in the most recent KCSWDM. 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. ercrpt.doc City of Renton PB/PW Department Environ,: 1 Review Committee Staff Report 'HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY .hl LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 10 of 16 6. 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. 7. 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the plat. Nexus: RMC 4-4-060, Grading, Excavation, and Mining Regulations; RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations; SEPA 2. Air Impacts: It is anticipated that some adverse air quality impacts would be associated with the site work, building construction phase of the project, and to a certain extent,with subsequent occupation of homes. Project development impacts include dust resulting from grading, exhaust from construction vehicles, and odors from roofing installation, and roadway paving. Dust would be controlled through the use of temporary erosion control measures and the sprinkling of the site as needed. Odor impacts are unavoidable and would be short-term in nature. Post development impacts include vehicle exhaust and the exhaust from heating. Vehicle and construction equipment exhaust, and exhaust from heating sources are controlled by state and federal regulations. The removal of a significant number of trees (see Vegetation, below) may have an effect on air temperature, wind direction and velocity, and acoustics in the neighborhood of the property from a resulting change in the microclimate and environment. Staff encourages the applicant to preserve as many existing trees as possible in accordance with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations, `Tree Preservation: Trees shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible on the property where they are growing" in order to reduce potential impacts. No site specific mitigation for the identified potential impacts are required. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 3. Water Impacts: Surface water: There are no known wetlands or surface water bodies on the site, according to the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. The property is not shown to be in a flood-prone area on FEMA maps. Ground water:There was no indication of groundwater to a depth of 13 feet, or that problems associated with groundwater would be encountered, according to the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999.The project is located in the City of Renton Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. Stormwater Control: Stormwater flows generated by the proposed development would remain on site temporarily, until pre-development release rates are achieved Stormwater will be collected in a series of catch basins and routed to a biofiltration swale and infiltration pond. Release will be to a piped system north of the property. Runoff from individual lots would be discharged into infiltration trenches located within each lot. Infiltration discharge systems would be consistent with existing infiltration rates. The applicant has proposed utilizing the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. No mitigation is required. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environ 21 Review Committee Staff Report , HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARI I-EAT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 11 of 16 Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 4. Vegetation Impacts: Due to soil removal and grading on site, most of the trees and vegetation would be removed. The applicant has provided a Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan that indicates approximately 389 evergreen and deciduous trees would be removed prior to site construction. Approximately 32 trees would be preserved, if possible. Ornamental residential landscaping would be provided by the developer, house builder, or homeowner in areas cleared of vegetation for site and house construction. The applicant has proposed that several landscaped areas or"pocket parks"would be created.These areas total approximately 16,896 sf (0.39 acre). A portion of the stormwater tract would also be preserved as a"landscaped area." The submitted plans indicate that trees would be preserved in these areas if possible. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: Not applicable 5. Animals Impacts: The area of the proposed project is shown on the City of Renton Wildlife Habitat Map (December 4, 1991) as having a"Forest Habitat." The applicant has indicated that songbirds and deer are known to be on or near the site. Other mammals that adapt easily to urban environments are likely to inhabit the property, such as coyote, raccoon, opossum,squirrel, mice, and rats.The proposed development would have a significant impact on wildlife habitats located on the property. There has been a continuing reduction in wildlife habitat on Renton Hill as land has been developed from natural habitat on all sides of the property.Wildlife on the property will probably move into the Cedar River Natural Area, a 243 acre protected open space abutting the property to the north. In all likelihood, some of the above mentioned wildlife would continue to forage for food in the residential community on the property in spite of development. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 6. Energy and Natural Resources Impacts: The applicant has proposed that natural gas be used to heat homes and both natural gas and electricity would provide additional energy needs. Energy conservation is regulated by the State of Washington Energy Code. The property is mapped on the City of Renton natural resource map as a possible source of sand and/or gravel, in the City's"Critical Area and Resource Lands,"dated March 1, 1992. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable ercrpt.doc City of Renton PB/PWDepartment Enviror al Review Committee Staff Report HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINAR}ri AT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 12 of 16 7. Environmental Health Impacts: The applicant submitted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated September 9, 2000. This report identified construction debris (wood, plastic piping, pieces of concrete and asphalt, etc.),tires, bottles,furniture, yard waste, and other household items disposed of on the property as being apparently non-hazardous. The construction debris, however, could include asbestos-containing building materials, remnants of lead-based paint, or products containing PCBs. Therefore, staff recommends a condition that would require all construction debris and discarded items to be excavated from the site and construction to cease immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during removal. A records search did not reveal hazardous conditions or sites near the property. The closest areas of potential contamination are the Pacific Car and Foundry(National Priority List, one mile north) and the Northwest Pipeline (Washington State Department of Ecology confirmed and Suspected Contaminated Sites, seven-eighths of a mile to the southwest). Neither of these are considered near enough to influence the environment at the project site. In addition to temporary noise and odors associated with construction activities, an increase in traffic noise and sound associated with single family residential neighborhoods can be expected if this project is developed. The applicant has proposed a fifteen foot"vegetative buffer"along the north property line, adjacent to the River Ridge development, which would somewhat reduce these impacts to that neighborhood. Mitigation Measures:The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site and construction to ceased immediately,followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. Nexus: Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Regulation III, Article 4; Model Toxic Control Act Cleanup Regulation WAC 173-340 8. Land Use Impacts: The property is currently vacant and has not had known development in the past. Aerial photographs indicate the property was covered with low vegetation at least from 1936 to 1946. Clearing of vegetation commenced by 1960. Mining may have occurred around 1967, and cleared land is still shown on the northern portion of the property in 1968 through 1974. By 1980,the northern portion of the property is again covered by low vegetation with more dense vegetation on the remainder of the property. The property is owned by the Renton School District, but declared surplus property several years ago and therefore, is available for development. Property to the north was developed into the River Ridge subdivision in 1994. Falcon Ridge, another single family residential subdivision, developed in 1989, lies to the east and south. A Seattle Public Utilities right-of-way,for the Cedar River pipeline, abuts the property along its west boundary. Philip Arnold Park, a developed City of Renton facility, is adjacent to the west. The proposed development is consistent with the current zoning of the site, Residential 8 (R-8), which requires development of at least five dwelling units per net acre. Net acreage is determined by deducting areas of public and private streets. The maximum density allowed in the R-8 Zone is eight dwelling units per acre. The proposed project, with 57 lots, would have a density of 5.5 dwelling units per net acre. Development of the property has been envisioned through the comprehensive planning process. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property is Single Family Residential. Therefore,the proposed development is consistent with the policies of the comprehensive plan. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable ercrpt.doc • City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror, al Review Committee Staff Report • HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY FLAT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 13 of 16 9. Housing Impacts: The property is currently vacant and no housing units would be eliminated due to the development of the property.The applicant has requested approval to subdivide the property into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. Home values have been estimated by the applicant to be in the"middle income range." No conditions to reduce or control housing impacts are recommended. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 10. Aesthetics Impacts: The applicant has proposed several pocket parks and landscape areas throughout the proposed development. A fifteen foot"vegetative buffer"has been proposed within the 20 foot rear setback area along the north property line. Properties with rear yards abutting the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement would probably erect fences, which would change the character of the area facing Philip Arnold Park. No conditions, beyond what the applicant has proposed, are recommended to mitigate impacts of the proposed development on aesthetics. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 11. Light and Glare Impacts: The proposed project would generate light from street lights, interior and exterior residential lighting, and vehicle headlights. Additional traffic, generated by the proposed development, could increase light on streets throughout the area. Homes, particularly those adjacent to Philip Arnold Park, could be impacted by light spillover from a lighted sport field, parking lot lights, other park lighting, and vehicle headlights from park users. There are no city or state regulations, however, beyond nuisance law,that regulate visual discomfort. Therefore no mitigating measures are recommended. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 12. Recreation Impacts:The applicant has proposed that several landscaped areas or"pocket parks"would be created within the development.These areas total approximately 16,896 sf (0.39 acre). These would all be accessible to either community members,from within the development, or the community,from the Seattle Public Utilities easement (depending on the park's location) if they remain unfenced. Their small size, however, will limit there usefulness. Philip Arnold Park, a 10 acre, developed City of Renton park, is located adjacent to the property across the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future residents that would utilize existing City park and recreation facilities and programs. The City has adopted a Parks Mitigation Fee of$530.76 per each new single family lot to address these potential impacts.Therefore, payment of a Park Mitigation Fee is recommended as a condition of approval. Payment is required prior to recording the plat. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environ zl Review Committee Staff Report HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARYrcaT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 14 of 16 Mitigation Measures:The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. Nexus: Park and Recreation Facilities Mitigation Policy and Fee Resolution No. 3082; Environmental (SEPA) Ordinance 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts:The proposed project would be located on Renton Hill, a well-established neighborhood in the City approximately 0.5 square mile in area. The Renton Hill neighborhood is somewhat of an "island" in the center of the City. On the north and east it is isolated from the Cedar River and Maple Valley Highway by steep, wooded slopes. To the west, one must bridge Interstate 405 to access the area (see Transportation, below). Access from the south is limited because the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline easement is closed to through traffic. The neighborhood is characterized by older homes, some dating to the beginning of the century. Newer development has been limited, except for single-lot subdivisions with newer single home construction and River Ridge, an eleven-lot subdivision developed in the 1990's. Due to the closeness of the neighborhood, homes are passed from one generation to another, and several generations of the same family and extended families live in the same neighborhood. While a 57 lot subdivision may not seem large in another context, on Renton Hill it may have a impact on the character of the neighborhood. It could be argued, however,that a potential change would probably not be more than other neighborhoods in the City are experiencing, particularly since growth is now contained within city boundaries due to the Growth Management Act. The evolution of the Renton Hill neighborhood has been somewhat constrained due to a lack of available land, therefore the development of this project would be a more dramatic change. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 14. Transportation Impacts:The proposed project would be accessed at the only place the property abuts a public street. A new public street into the development would intersect with SE 7th Court,the access road to the River Ridge development. The internal streets would terminate in a cul-de-sac at the south portion of the property. An emergency access road would connect the cul-de-sac with the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement. The applicant submitted a traffic impact study, "Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis," by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated January 27,2000. Subsequently, additional information was requested by staff and the applicant responded by submitting, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No.2,"by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000. The following information is summarized from the submitted traffic studies: • Sight distances at the nearest main intersection, where Beacon Way S, S 7th Street, SE 7th Court, and Jones Avenue S come together, meet American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) stopping sight distance requirements because each leg would be stop-sign controlled. • Although the distance between the entry road to the project and the intersection (110') is below the City design guideline for spacing of intersections (150'when possible), traffic operations should be adequate, based on low traffic volumes. • Cedar Avenue S is a 27 foot wide, two lane road, with parking on both sides. Through traffic is occasionally reduced to one lane. • Renton Avenue S is a 26 foot wide two lane street, with parking prohibited on the west side. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror, al Review Committee Staff Report • HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 15 of 16 • Both Cedar and Renton Avenues are signed for the northbound, downhill traffic to yield to southbound, uphill traffic. • South 7th Street, east of High Avenue S, is a 30 foot wide road, with no curbs or gutters, and a sidewalk only on the south side. Parking is allowed on both sides. • South 7th Street, west of High Avenue S, is 36 feet wide, with no curbs or gutter, but with sidewalks on both sides. Parking is allowed on both sides. • Between Cedar and Renton Avenues, S. 7th Street is very steep with grades in excess of fifteen percent. • All intersections studied meet Level of Service (LOS) B or better(the City of Renton requires LOS D or better at intersections). • Although additional traffic volumes from the proposed project would increase traffic on Renton Hill by approximately 25%, Levels of Service would not be impacted. • There is no transit service for residents on Renton Hill, due to the steep grades and narrow lanes. • There does not appear to be any existing recurring accident problem (accidents reported). • There is no appreciable increase in traffic due to usage of Philip Arnold Park (traffic volume counts do not vary significantly on a seasonal basis). • No improvements are planned by the City of Renton for streets on Renton Hill. The City of Renton regulates construction hauling (RMC 4-4-030C.2)so that it must occur only between the hours of 8:30 am and 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday. Due to the narrowness of the existing streets, however, staff recommends that the required Construction Plan Traffic Control Plan (RMC 4-4-030C.1.a) be approved conditionally upon inclusion of a requirement that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project, be prohibited to operate on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified by the traffic consultants in their report of September 11, 2000. It is estimated that the proposed project would generate approximately 9.55 new average daily trips (weekday) for each new single family residential home. Fifty-seven parcels are proposed, therefore, an estimated 544 trips per day will be added to the transportation system. The City of Renton has adopted a Transportation Mitigation Fee to address the impacts to the City's transportation system caused by development, including this proposed project. The applicant would need to pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee of$75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is estimated to be$40,826.25, and is payable prior to the recording of the plat. Mitigation Measures: 1. The Construction Plan traffic control plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw, associated with the project, would be prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report, "Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2,"by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc„ dated September 11, 2000. 2. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. Nexus: RMC 4-4-030C Construction Standards 15. Fire Protection Impacts: The proposal would result in the construction of 57 new single family lots. Future residents would potentially have the need for emergency services which would impact the City's Fire Department. Fire Prevention Bureau staff report that they can serve this development provided that the City Code required improvements are installed, appropriate fire access is provided, and Fire Mitigation Fees are paid. In order to offset the impacts associated with new development, all new residential construction is subject to a Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee is calculated on a per lot basis. The current fee is $488.00 per single family lot. The total feet would be $27,816.00 Due to the length of the internal roads, a second access would be required by code. The applicant has proposed an "emergency only"secondary access from the end of the cul-de-sac to the Seattle Public Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement. As a condition of approval,the applicant shall obtain an access permit from the Seattle Public Utilities for the secondary, "emergency only"access. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Envirom l Review Committee Staff Report • HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY; f LUA00-053,PP,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 17,2000 Page 16 of 16 Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall pay the Fire Mitigation Fee equal to$488.00 per new single family lot. The Fire Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. 2. The applicant shall obtain an access permit in order to use the Seattle Public Utilities"Cedar River Pipeline Easement"for a secondary, "emergency only access". Nexus: Fire Mitigation Fee Resolution No. 2913; Environmental (SEPA) Ordinance E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in.the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. 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 Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. ercrpt.doc I °` 1'w' �"""' CITY OF _1 HERITAGE RENTON HILL '"y2/qq s �4\ RENTON NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP `e — e�„ ` on ttvuprs eup e% - .� i�i Plan mg/Building^Public works Dept • N0. REVISION BY Oh�c 1 r.rrn � Mk�+ Gregg�Zl ean P.E.,AEministroto. I- \ b r ,----- :I -7--1 \\� .�I I r;:a i-811-7 arrrrrTTT771 \ 1 I 11 $ 1a111I1II1111 4-ice-�- �V- *++ -1 VI 1 I I 1 I 1 1 'I 1 I \\\\y^�� 1__I_Li_ . �\`��--.1J.J' LLLL1111.1 I I. . / _______ MAIN AVE9 / /\\� / 8'r f08 I / /C 8R108 L_ / / J ----__rrL_ MILL AVE 9 / / 1 I I I ja/ / r-1 I1 11 1 1II rrrTTTT7771a/ / _ Ia1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I Ia1 I I I I I I I I I I' / /' m —rLmLl —If rr"rTTTT��-I�i I-1-1-'�f'-f--1•'F�'1'-I� / / II 1 1 1 1 1 I`I I I I I I I I I 11:1 11 1 1 I I I �4_�! / ' / r CEDAR AVE 8 1__J_l_l--IJ--J LL1111111JJ LLL11111J.1J" / Yy,' -----'-I rTTT-n-r-r--I-'1 r-rr-- _ _cEDARAYEs / R:° / I I I I I I I I I I' iliiiiiir r r� - T��TT r�l ��—r -ram_. 20" j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1' 1 I -.. I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I/ V% / / T I +-4 -I-+ -�-I I F IJJ , J N J �( / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, 1 1 1`�;`: 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r- / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 r.1 1 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1+'" ' 1 1 J LJ.-1J_J___1__J LJ_14:;:_:L,J_LJ_1_L 1_I_11____�}'a,LJ1L_ / / _ RENTON AYE 8 / / 1ar1 77-7 r7-TT-7-r71-1� rT-I-..: -- RENJONAYEB _I I ..... 17rrr7-r„--r-, r7-rrrr- I �-1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 11 1 1 1 ;;r�. 111 1 1 1 11-\ / j =1 J I I L_J 11 1 LJJJ II I-1� I I ,lam / I I I I I I / / lyr rTT-� I ;;:�I r 17 I rT- . ;1 W� J{1 -� ,r1 1 1 I I I I I r 1 / I 1 I 11 I I I / J L_111_J ..,::r. 1 1 I I r--II L--I 1 r`1 I I 1 I J' ��i I I I I I I I I 1 I r-- :._1_L1�_J__J L__LL_L;:-LLJ_Li \ I I I I I I I I 1 f -- _ •::;j GRANT AVER 1� 1— I a1 --mar-i:a.„1--TT—rr-r-11 r-:7TTrm—,-7 ��\\� j LLJ_L11L_. I I ;L_-1--JI I 11`1 1`.7.V4 11 II 4--1 aC_J 1 I 1 I 1 1 1)' "\ \`\) 11 , ir'7--I---T--i m F7LT7LT-7 T—F7I�ff=�T1lTrr/�y '� \ \�`�/`y// r 1 �1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I:I-_-1 1 1 1 1 \ \Ji I 1 L1_1__1__J L J._1J._1_L 1_L J I L_1LLLY 0. z_:%2 LL 1 I NIGH AVE_8 _ �,_ / 1 1 I-I I LJ 1 1 I I 1 1 Ir? I 1. 1 1/+°4 I I_NIG 1YE9 1 1 L1_1J_1J_J 11 I I 11 1 1 1 11 1 )arm 1 _J I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 rrrr 1-T-I 7-r1 I :/a,4.,p,P, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I y /,,"5a/L--I I L-_J \ 1 LJ_1_I_1J_1_LLLL1_1J_1_L,' 0\^4/ \1 1 I I 1 \\ 1 JONES AV.8. / � :r--_,L_J L__1__J \\ \\ II \-- __ %7/ / /fir i - - \\\ \\ u' I \\\ ee Cd/ ' /a Rom(/�/% --�/ \ \ \ ' F \d�:3 RI \ / \ \ \ ado `E�' --.//Jq ram^ 7 / 4,41 \\ \\ \\ -1 034 <4 V s C arT--/ N \ \V 1 \\n. /ib v o P S Sa / // / / % \ ' \\ \'/ - w�r:ylk alit:�1� �1-4 ;a; \ \ / /'� L ,�'TTT—r-1.7-' / I Dye/ \\ / \' /� \. \Ill I I I I ?\ / I / j \ i 1/ \(/�1 /<7r11-1-r 1�/- B / I a�°id/ i X' \ •_, \\ /7G��\ r�k i�r--- --------Rr--e CORP. -------�/ f/ /;/ \\ \\ \� _�C'/4F�y • i l ��-_ / / \ \ \\alb �_�� / j /�`` m--� s i • /' \\\ \\\ \\ \\�} r-1 j / j // i of /� �: \` \\ \\ \fir�� !! I / lj / /', / �1./ / /i' `> \\ \\ \\.-- \ 1 II ! /!1 _ / / / / I I I I ' zm , \ \1 ,U I !�^\ I I !/ I L-=_-/ r-/-J / \ r IT 1- .\'_A- i \\\/'/,/ / \\\\ \\\ \\\\ 11 i -----�i / rI / \` \ \\ 1 1,B \\ \\ m / ?`.. , \\\ \ \\\ I"; \ \ l i ______--- \`/, yy// �p \ --- ------ \`d\\ I _,y--- \ `Y "\�\O,�\ \ \\ I NOISS a5NYtl1"IyY d5'd 1 .1t _--j\7 � i 1—i— \ \/ \\ \\ \\ —__—��i _—�i�9\\\ 1\\� -- --T-- Y .\ \ _— -9 , }:r `.a • /�� I �yi RIVEB RIDGE N\ \\� \ \ Q,v '-';-• .' __'--e. ' • E RSR e'8A8 I EI 18 niovOR$ \\ \�� ! }nae' f¢u.wv \\�� ``t- ,�� sos �yje -------'' — -__-__ 1_l _ _ I III \ r,r!�r _ // .�,� = a `'`.\; w1/A �''1 :.��>' �i'Lnx,/i� ��`'L .. I ,, i i �I I �_" �--� ` I i"�`. o z I >� •. r `�� `\ \�\7-i�"/�� >`. r , STORMWATgR 1' '\\44•� 24J,,1\ 42� `\4T- 401 39 ,I 38 32,_ \36 \\ \\ \\ ,`, '`\\Ij F \c�,.�Ir . 41�f►\ !b TRACT> �\ II ` \ ! \ I \ ii W NUMBER •+TA RADIUS IENCIN q ` _ / ' -� 1 • 0 w Cl r 2840 1x0O' III �� /• ��`\ sb� --iw ,1 \ `... -' ,''a.'�.o�.. __ _�.-�^ \,\, \ `,o\ \, �� -, cz z:z a 7zxcD ® .I \ �� ` $ \e •0 •' --° •4 I I`_ o,,, \�\ r9 'u ` \ ‘ . ., w L '1►% ;), i'\,1��`` '� - - - - 10 ,_'J : ' '_ -$AD - ��\ . \�\` _ ,, ...,... ._,..__ _.... .--___... .... ...Thv •,_ , r ... , \\0 , / ,.. r- , / , , 1w , I L/S \�' , 7 \ \ \111, ` \`J i i �.rro `.`` TRACT ` J'`,� 46 �'4 y�1�. /48. �,49- -50..._ , �F, I 4 / i r \y\ Y /J 5`A\ iliif,rr 5 - Oakum /P il d • 4 I / , !r {rr,rr \ 455 C= -I �. b-� 1 I''/L_` /^I' I -�,4,I 0, I • ,! /' \\\ ,ij E Z so ID \ .`1�, \,` 3 �. N. - '/'1? \ 56 4 \ 1 t j I sere` I I ` - - I 3_ rr �T� ;F JO r r �✓ $,4 � \ r` 2 r ; 1 _ a' I1 / , „., , ...., zE,1-'' i ' .,-,- 4/ \ . ii,o3 4 • 0-4s,,-J`. -'':--f • ----;7/•/I-----, , ,' : ''i ' / 1" / N \ 1 � I \ S } 4� . ( - 8' '9 i > � 7�; _2, � _ ' _ / / • �`� s* \ - „ -- .- „ � � � —em �,`\ / / \ fq - -I ARE AREA=450,846 SF AREA 07 WORK=450,846 SF `.r 9`1 .. AS` "--4,— S- - yI ------� / / \ am� 1, 1� 4_TRCf _ ,// / \ 'I, . /, !3 \ •�—\ •� - I / T L /OUANRIE �� .. ' - \ I ` r\ — i CUT=54,974 CYf8z46r TON) ' 1 .,,, i -:: / ,FILL=rs,z3 crze,eso TON) i \ i ` '-� _ P' ` I �- \\, ' 1 I ` �_25 - ' •`_ 6 I \\ I \ I I pp d':L i,...� i i a\_ // 1 r I \\I I -- I! 4 I I I J J I c�; ot►LiSS: . 1- I o 1 ,, `-TRAC• •`\err-, `\ \.` ,E-� '• I I .t. 9' L -1 'II r'Aatit!LD?A I" \s`•rm.\ '' •' .v IB // - 1\O,7 1 ;23SSS: }'�I i 1 1 - n s \ I \i 22( £"II I I I • '; I J r�� J ��/ .. '21 I _ - I 1 /r z 1 �\ t f - 1 1\ / / .s® .\ TRACT ' . r i� \7/ / \ C - 1�� i C / / • / — ,...\,_ _ \\ gg n iaJJo J:ssMcs» .Q d�\� ,tr7i.%si "01XCE,r.rc,/ SJ ' I 1 \ \\ \ •\ ,+aif @ r \ 'jam U.- ,iui! ;o.'i I I it \\ , \ \ X SSMH 2 JJ, ��[ _---_aviv�'a ,j ``Sr� �\� I`T7 a. , ,_ 'c'v,"ccr .curr rqs(/ .,._- .,., rc.o \\ vat.7.n;:vnv-(m \\ \\ \\\ v r .—. —. -- - _ *f4`—�.' ,L " ,-' -- - I i' slna'aa.wu-;°mass 1 r rcr m,lx � -� �/'•. . ,- - :',; • xal gam. r'i., d� /' S ------ , t� \ \ 5 YT vv 1�,:0-{, T, Y t,•,a _a_-�._ . -- _ - -a-iO3 a J S. TH ST•T . ,' , , -t r (1,/� \I• �, \ ' �usca I , `I I' j ; 't75 I\ ,v Q 1 x r.r ,[p t' "" S S �I` 04 MSTOR WATER \ •\ / _ I \ \ \ / 1 �- La~ •I e�Ec:, sc`i •' '•'l 6 /��\\ ��0, •• - -- — �(r• 44••. : 142 4f'-'' 40 I ,3J 1 -37 ,,Mt \ \ % `\ `\'\\\i. o " "I�'•! �,. { is , v, / , ,�' /:: __ _ / � /fig / I f;/t�\ `r' ��"si ,' ••' cca,oi7 p\\ I- - c r i ---'',\ \ I\ \ \ 7 w W NUMBER DELTA RAD/US ®/ 1,\ .Y �( - -1.n,1'reJ. • yY - 4 f•/'' s' \ \ \ i 0 NI ~cr C2 2B27'I2" 12500' 62.OB' \�\ \'• A�A� /µ - F.�T.'� �� ' I�l� .� � _'„�,__, \\ \\\; \ < .._ 491 /I Ir.'A�b \` . ;TRACT,, ` \, PARK 1'/ X , \ \,\p,1. ' '\ t\ \\ N\ / i i • 4ti�\�� a.._1 _`("i _ 45 ' �46 \\�I♦r;�,� - �%49. -50- 5f-'� \ ( ' i,p 1 <A a :_ c_\., PPROPOSED,a<\ a;uII)11 i i fs.Z ^c _I i �\ `• \`\sr�' \ \-'i/=- �,�\,i!i'1:/gr.'f/.: f'//i ,-, / , i' �fb571 1 /./FZ -a --T \\ . �0 •T ` //� 56 55 .34 r` :�3 ,i f2, qF1 • p I 1 I rit:( .. tie `II 1 I �t►� `\ �,� — le— ., / ,,, i _ / \ \ I e z \•\��. ,1 I s .` t` ==_ 'it'-;r 1*,'----- *, /< 1 4 71 08 I I \\ \ ��`.�`` --� r 7►6i r.' - - s!_'.a.,.-- �/ , - , • '�^ \\\ \ i 1 ¢ ' \`*•10°...6. \ '(`\44' ty Z ~ 2 e••. k• \: :se -1 9 1 101/,lfl',- -"'72;_ $ \\ ,, �- 5i'- I % \\ >/ -i' fq ' r -1 -st, ‘\le*: -IRAcq„,,, :_-..:,-;-_5,-.."--2-, ,, ,,f, , , -___26 --,,,,..,4 -;:.-nl / 3 t .3 \Ns \,� \ ' ai__f) `,(76--,-,'15/ 'fA I 1 I I n',..t,1,L \;"-1, �_-.a_!,.'.•';�•p.h�fq[' h\ y\�7\, 4' \ •\ 1 I ' / p ¢cawoIpi 1 va. l \\ I- \v nt��Iv \ ct j ' 1 -- sm s..,,iY.1 I -I `25 , V '_i I I \\ P •- Irl - • \.••_ OI 1 I I I l 1 iI I~ , II .` , 11 [:- I o`i' °1�j \ \ i2f1 I \,1 \ 1 1 J r— J J I •\� �. \ _ \ ' F 1 \\ / I —� 1 I `9' 'cr}` -20,,'. �\ _ '�\\ \(/ �i n s —1 1 4 OrO \ \\\ \c\ i/ \` \i1, \, \\ \ �\ / '/\ - ' \,• �1 \\ \\ \ . \\ / i x/�cw.s<e m-..-a / 1\ 1 �' xcm'o:'M.uss rxcsx>\ � �-s..s�'�.; 6°P�r'".rei':�roxl / G' • // I \r am \\\ „ \\ \�� p.ssM \ \ {',F (s uirvl a5'rWO' I roaE I II \\ \\� \\ ---sous a t� `ice I s,„ o oxl xxx RIVER:':c-�- \ Id''CA `•.i::r� ..':;., a_ ' .ERs` / aoirw ri..rlw9' vE �sm va!_•r090.99 rub �\ \\ �� $ � �+• `% n � t� •x��`. o °°:er xo_ woff sti =rs:_ I I T:,noo \ �� \ \ �� :R ' • ` -/�' ~' I r�,[I• IOzz.2.�" -6 ,\\¼\ 4J 44 / ••_' -PRoagc:!s /" %/" /�/- `�• \I i \ I �\ �� w w NUMBER DELTA {ice®� N, I�N'O� q .\C`ti �� ` .- �'�,.�/ . �1 1 \ _ : C2 2877'12" FEEIZIlrEIMI , I �:�\ ' •ii"• .tT•.' 1 '_� —r \ \ \\ '1JJ. `---- ..- 1 fin\ ' 1� %` i I /' J ' ti��A :�` I --- PARK ! I 1 1p�I1, ' ; r • A 1 1 . / / `Y. � n: 1 .f - ;- -----\ , 45 / /46 '14$I/'//4a- �:49� `--60- / 51 -�� J ! / ill 4 0O 4 1 I \\l �`�4,'\ Il C__`,II J 1:`1 l I 1 l/,i% i , // 1 I / ,,1, ' / !i E $' _ \ �\1•� �:i\`,\'�57-�;:iri;�i / , (- �il��r \ Iif11/'/ >-.Z 'w SCALE:°i .I$ J ---'/fir/' `56 551 /341 53., : 1 '-� Q1 I IIUfilE.w a '°d I '\per I ) \• -` ___�/I?iV _ � 1 / � '1 I IIf'� Y� CJ a `E 1 �\ 'I` A \`. ""'4 i �/ I ---- J•')\'``� .e� •i f s''It •.a� j\ \\ mE i 1 I ;y� • v' �\ 1'r .-��:. 4 I 129�I/,! �`,ror_ / \ \ WI �► ;. I I ems... —` gyp._ram u/ / ,,%- \ G 71 I Oi I �, \`�,�� q,; /M.; - .. r-r- ;=t_ F � ~' ,/ pp. /'•�' I I /<\ \ 1\ -�, I , \ \'}• ,► \ • : lei J, , i,:/� ram/ \ \` 'y • /' / i /. // \\ \\ \ tl Q I �� ` '� 1 = %�i'/ - - -' ��: x� 4� / i\ \\ \ ,, Yy I- W a 6� \ :g'I/ J, t 1\ /r ;''1 / N\ \\ ,..- \,, riP 2 `\ '7,y��'� `tam - i-•- - --- _ / �� \ % \ I "\: 4�• 1 -' - _ •!I. - --` "') /1.- 7/ / \\ till •� �b -.7k-, ;� - , , — ` IALL LOTS TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL ` �� sy 1 ` 1 �, i, L ..•:Thy ' " / TF :/ I �\` • I C I "I c"' ' '''''`‘Z*\‘)'• Pli'llnillay" ;---'-' - ' ':14 i'\ F� I I O I I 1 o*e \ T ` \ ` 1co I W F CO \ *:�1::j 1 is i \1 22Cy"`I I 1- .--1 7 _J I ��A�y�.•_ ' 1_-, 1 I I I I I I i 0��9�V. 4s _1 1'I .\1I 1 I F I - I �► f ' 21',~ 1l I 2 -J \\‘ .4 Y ao _/% -I\\ \\ / / / e i \ 4` \\- 1 .56 //- \- / iAy/ //r / W /- \ \ %., •,4r6;,, �`71o604 °/i��\ \\ ,'� \cam,. $ `, i \ y� O \�\, \\ �� \ //'/. mmilismolli SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. ETERSON 11 l 1 IT'I4U! CONSULTING---- I: N cI I N 1. I. I( S RENTON HILL AIRPORT WAY 4030 Lake lishington s 9 � Blvd.N.E. ite 200 Kirkland, 98033 s zee sr 4 ty Tel(425) -5874 s y1 s�' S Jro ST Fax(425) -7216 ��%/ \\\�\ �i 1�\�� A Ni s tth sr I \ " R SITE 2 0 J L- \\ I C2 ,2 . I I --',\ : 1 GRADY WAY m h > �v�i,� 000000l ? 8. m SIT. % •' _1 S89'S6'7 E_829.J4'\�� \ i P °ARN� �• 2, Q 7 r-fi>-� T STORMWAIER p PARK Q• 3 on 4 4/ J7 JB O _t _ SW 16th I 1 I y '� ,� mAcr sr m 'AD � , A illis I L_� I, ;7�► m. GET a ::„. 200• o 2DD• I I �_1 I off© ROAD 8• 0 � VICINITY MAP: Q W i SD4/12/00 - � ao2.1 IIW 17 ,�-�_ ; MOTTO SCALE Q 2 1 - - ' ' , dlil� ®L_� L• GENERAL NOTES: Co I L I I \ -/-' I® I __lip I _ OWNER: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT CO i L NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH U5 TRACT �1 300 LW.7th Cl T3478'40" 25.OD 58.68 \ ) u t RENTON,WASHINGTON 98055 J DEVELOPER: BENNETT DEVELOPMENT C2 2827'12" 125.00' 62.08' I �\��'' ---II _ r I I I \� y�l® �SS SUITE f00 AEWE V If-I I I - I LA TRACT .v4 W /'\Iv� (425) �WASHINGTON 98005 �j I -/V\\ (425)709-6508 6 q \/'4� roQbQy CONTACT:RYAN FIRE 1 I _ I I ` \ "56\> ENGINEER. PETERSON CONSUL RNG ENGINEERS m� _ 4 ({ 4030 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N.E. I I- 1 1 ter_ - /\ \\ TE 200 KRKLAND,WASHINGTON 98033 R I _ �J / \ \ ` (425)827-5874 '4 7 I--� - I \ \ 1i� CONTACT:JENNIFER SRN,,P.E. KEY MAP SURVEYOR: MEAD GILMAN&ASSOCIATES SCALE 1-.200' P.O.BOX 189 4 ROODINVILLE, WASHINGTON 98072 01 (425)486-I252 CONTACT:EDWARD ANDERSON,P.L.S BENCHMARKS/DATUM: TOTAL AREA:(#/) 10.35 ACRES(CROSS) o F BENCHMARKS 1 1/2-BRASS DISC&CITY OF RENTON/415-Nf/4 C0.4.SEC.20-23-5 a a a a a a a a a a a 1 CASED 4 X4-CONC MON{RTH X,80'1 E OF TOTAL AREA R.O.W. 7.04 ACRES Z THE INTX OF S 7771 ST.&JONES AVE.S NET AREA B.JI ACHES ELEVATION-J47.J4' IIIII CITY OF RENTON/I18 TOTAL LOTS 57 RESIDENTIAL LOTS 1 STELC CASED CONC MO 14TH 7/4'BRASS PIN,lla S OF THE INTX OF YklUEL1 MAAAL}.IE 1 MAX S 77 H ST.&RENTON AVE.S ALLOWABLE DENSITY: S00 OU/ACRE DESIGNED. 1 STEM ELEVATION.305.80' PROPOSED DENSITY: 6.86 DU/ACRE CARD LE DENNEY DATUM: HAW 88(CITY OF RENTON) ZOMNL` R-B,URBAN RESIDENTIAL Q EO TEES .1 SIETG DATE 4/10/00 PROPOSED USE.: SINGLE-FAMILY,DETACHED FILE NAME PPIHER25 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXISTING U5C SINGLE-FAMILY,DETACHED IIMI THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST BOUNDARY: FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD GILMAN&ASSOCIATES QUARTER OF SECTION 20 TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH.RANGE 5 EAST,W.M.,IN KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TOPOCRAPHYI FIELD SURVEYED BY MEAD GILMAN&ASSOCIATES COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION,SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT Q.R , O'BEGINNING,` THENCE SOUTH 895637'EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION UTILITIES/PURVEYORS: • �. �III,��ft,.... s A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH QT 07 43'J8'REST ALONG THE EASTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 818.33 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 71D5'12'REST A DISTANCE O'109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY SERER/WATER: CITY OF RENTON j1•0 I•1 MARGIN OF THE CITY OF SEATTLES CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY• THENCE NORTH 44' '-• - , 20'15-WEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 1148.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE STORM DRAINAGE: CITY OF RENTON WESTERLY UNITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 01'620-EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LIMITS A DISTANCE O'JJ74 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING GAS/POWER: PUGET SOUND&ENERGY '' �'..�a� LOT AREA'S(LISTED IN SQUARE FEET) TELEPHONE US NEST 1'454704AL ;,VIM I. 5,990 71 5,482 25. 4,750 37. 5,527 49. 4,750 CABLE: AT&T I EXPIRES: 9/9/00 I • 2. 5.353 14. 4.965 26. 4,750 38. 5.500 50. 4,749 FIRE DISTRICT: CITY OF RENTON .A 4,875 M. 4,750 27. 4,750 J9. 5,500 57. 5.825 STAMP NOT VALID 4. 4.625 16. 4,750 28. 4,750 40. 5,500 52. 5,863 - UNI SIGNED AND ED 5. 4,504 17. 6,090 29. 4,750 41. 5,500 53. 4,750 SCHOOL DISTRICT: SCHOOL DISTRICT/40J EQ DAZ -- 6. 5.557 18. Z584 J0. 4,750 42. 5,500 54. 4,750 7. 5,799 19. 7,J79 JT. 4.754 4S 5,500 55. 4,750 • JOB NUMBER HERM-0025 8. 5,443 20. 8.378 32. 4,946 44. 5,500 56. 4,731 ' 9. 4,750 21. 5,000 JJ 6.121 48. 4,750 57. 6,660 10. 4,750 22. 5.000 34. G549 46. 4,750 c I/. 4,750 2.1 4,857 J5 6,905 47. 4,750 SHEET NUMBER I OF 4 12. 5.625 24. 4,750 J6. 7,406 48. 4,750 mosiimlinm SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. P ETERSON CONSULTING \\ \ \� // EX. SS IH I Nr/4 CaL SEC 20-2a-5 `\ / / I I. N. (, I \ I I I: 1 ` \ RIM JJ6. . FOUND CASED CONC MOM \\`' / \_ •�•' CTR.CH .J78.7(NWSW) 7 •$• \ I \ •\ �� \\\� I EX. CB,rnPE II / ems \\ I ' 4030 Lake Washington S i0P J44.4 \ • �+ E,. CB. TYPE I/ LDOL' NOT OPEN / / • T Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 \ / `0\ �. E IL 334.7(SW) EX. CB,TYPE I / ; X. SSMH\l' • • • IQ IE JJ7.8(SE) I TOP 34J.5 / •'� i - Kirkland,WA 98033 7X.JJ7.7 112•IE J37.6(NW) • 12'IE J40.4(5)/ 1 Tel(425)827-5874 \\ 12'IE J40.5('RI I :TR.CHNL.326.9`441N�\ • 0 I Gs CATV I Fax(425)822-7216 Pill GA 7 `• ` �i GV W]N� SL�■ \ � 2 / i�17�' '`` RX. 466� // "-IF - _ • I 75'YEGETARtE I III .11 Q `i /l, /CT(2.LHN�.J40.i(NE.SW) // J/ _BUFFER 2 . - /L — O �` --�_ -- -4580'5637 E� 9.,i4 �� _ 2 / -711/4��►➢ � 1 350/ / \ 1 --��: l / 6 WOOD FENCE 50' , so' r sD r Q h \ Q\ �• I.r�e�'" 1 AREA' i / i- -r r1 r----1 -�"-- • 33,� I �' � T. 8„•fC CB r•p4/i/i7 ,/ /' 1 f>1�)�L�\A I / I QEx CB.rmErl a �\-� i ilk _\•rE.440.9(N)\�l I I i/ / o \ I/ 0. . TOP JJ8.9 jr \ CI �,. .rPTL \ ► \� ± /� + y + I I 1 S�ORMWA7ER- // 1 " I`. \�t.I ` 4.11 e'IE JJ6.2(NE) \ i UTP •, , I / I ,SSOd\'' -k°vv, )` '1 4500 x/. 8'if 336.1(SE) PV\ \\ \ R 9/I ; I 1 1 / 79ACT I I _f_1 \ \E\I R �' / 10 le I ��\\\ \y - "• ` I 1 I 1 / // d' I `� I '��'�J — Q W ' /• \ \ �I ` ` 1 , 1 / / / �' ti uj ",,1 /x\ /x�� }`\ " '�l '�� I ��Iiyof / / I \ I� (1I / \I \' '�* \+ T ti k �0 Wit! / / r9r /� \ 1 ! ..- sOF • � \ p/�� Q W IVCC �1 _.^� • W o .. , 1 m WO I 1 / ', '\\ 4�A , 1 �`'r'fii 7 ''--0---v----�- - -1=°°.ROAD It a°. ��I ,„..4, >. ILak/i IT\ PQ i;\ �1\\, sQs*'I ,l0 I I 16 50 ,S66 110 I V NUMBER DELTA RADIUS LENGTH \\\ I \"'e\` \�\\m• 1 TRACT •;' '5'• \ 1 - PARK I ! I I' j i I \'s`;\,\,\, it %// \fl ;\ m 1' 4,7�f I./14.75:i II U II Cl 13428'40" 25.00' 58.68' \ � „1 C2 2877'12" 125.00' 62.08' \\ I \ \+ \ I / ap o A' -/ /'` Q -- II/ X I / ^ r • Jo• \\\\I \ \\\1-.\ a lV \v I///41.zvst (` 6•RiIM1� 'i!•�s I�./ L*� CO 12. < \\\\� s.•\`\J///6____ .i1 �' 1 ' . z44444444444 \10, • y \ 1\� ; \`_ /. / \\1 �O -_- Si PROJECT MANAGER \\ \ , \ / / \ (\ �/ , — � DESIGNED ,L STEM i —I II .�,•.* \l.. �\ + \ �. o / // fit ` ,/ , ' .CARD a OCNNer \ •\ `_ \ \ s^.I�/\4.625 mT. / \\ • I // DAILY 4 O :.`\\�G I +\ .;�\\ \ /•> / \ 1 �/ FILE NAME PP2NER25 40' 0 40' I \T9Q l\�♦/\ Z;\s. \v/ /\-----\� \ \„9 \\ %\ .\ �/ 5 I I ' \. _ ..\ \ \ \ \ 4,504 sL SCALE 1' 40' I .... ... .......... �:S f. \ \\�' `�+i\ /G'% ''L • -1 \ "•;, ; \\ Id� � //�3�9'xL 47011AL�'\ , \D \ -~�\ ''� -c-- - I\• \ '. \\�.•` �C• v ``\ , STAMP EXPIRES:9/9/00 \ Ts \�: .'� — �\ ---- STA G EDTND \ 09 `\ � \ \ -.. J' UNLESS SIGNED AND DATED \ \\• \ 4;\��1 ,;- cT; j°DND,,,aERHERM-0025 k SHEET NUMBER 2 OF 4 iimmli SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. DETERSON ,�\ i / —\ -�\ CONSULTING 1 !/ �� \ � 1 \ (, 1 \ I I 1: s r �, I\\ \\ \ �� 4030 Lake Washington II i \\ \ \ ,,\ Blvd.N.E.,Suite 200 Kirkland,WA 98033 III \ \\ \\ Tel(425)827-5874 40 I N \\ \ Fax(425)822-7216 4o q _• _I BSBL 1 IT�_ _ 70 \ _ rs'rrct-r�n� --' \\ \ O -� - '_ -- • S8i38 37 E 829. , _u_sB -s'xr000 FENCE -------\ --- \ Z ` 2 r\---I--i r----y- --, r---� r-- - i 'r9 r�Yi, _ __ im.it I Li / 11. 1 1 .\\�\\\ a Z 3 I' _—`f�\ I ;'I I I I I I / ,1 I I / , tl 1 I \\ �. 11124 \35 1 \•�\ I� 0 \ \ 0i. I i I - L. 1 I q � 1 Ow �,�� '' 1 16. i a3°s:11t ',�f " ( \\\ Q / \ \ < Ii\ ' l I �� I / o 'V' I. II Q3'�*. 1 i I 1 \ \ `1`"�.'ll(`\ I \ \+, v // , 2 \`ssodv.r, - �' �>` �F 5,500 427 ` 1 s,540�r. 1 �5•f . 1 L 150'#d X -37—I `436�;• 20.1-1 y, +.•-\--1 \ 1 \ 11 W ` -4 \\\ \. I 1 +i o6 1 1/ i= J I \ I a \ �\i c�L -� \ Il et cc d 1 I '�,Nyi,„..A _-1 �� I / 111u �' /' 1 y/ `� \( F� I / I \�\\ Q IN • L---.71 1--- 4,, 7Tr t.�.a-' C/.I 7 -'/ L AU/� / \�c-\\•AL 1 1aii`i et.+� N e \\ 44 O +✓ 411 \ so• 50' N t o..• 5• / 'so. / r 6. \ 1 / \\ .*` /---\ W W .1- ... �;7 v `\ a i mi a'%!fir:{T IL IA �N.� 6• f -a 1 i J 0. 14 14 o --_ _-, ' d -� --ROAD A --- vim °' C 'A` �—-- _ >. • a:�m / % PARK I / I Ijab r \\1 I // a o ;:. I, J4 H i / h�f ♦�\ ��ri �c o-�-- 1 A a�/ / iiiiiimmoii 'm 1 ca • _.x!°t�x4. I/ 45 l A /46 1 11 i ) //;}"o 0 I-. I . h• 7- r 1 I Aiwa \\\ / .` \ 4hd OR) / Vr/ _ �_ -- .._,4' 4,750 a° I• I -4750 at I' I -4. it/1 II.y;/,'y 1 4 %r 1 4,749 j I 5,825 at \ `'s `''k• �-r, �i / O - . -6,`` 1 /1 1 1 1 1 i 1ililli/X (L�] 11[[`r ' i �I Wry-- \ I_ l9 -1.'\' _`'`' ', / ,'' r I�I I�I IpI �� L--1-7 L---J L r L--- L-.s6 L�_-J� 1L ��. - s - us \`I / //c 11(1yr.I 411 / // 8 � J \ ` \\1\1 \ ` o .� _++� 1 \ �'. 50' ' S I •;� 50' S0' � •50' 75' I (��(l�'y ANIs \ \ . 7 0 • 1JI; •ry I,7?ry 5• 5e' 7 - BS' 27'• �. \I1 �$tl /�MnA 1 � ' •\N / /�- \ / I� r%„ \+�BSB� / ..__-,g " gal I i 4.754 aL �. 1 I T Hr VO �r � \\1�0. / - / v b� \\\(n - - - ii -- a ili�1�11 a% 1 / l , aF -`j'��1`� \ '. \\ i // °� / I I IJ I 1' 1 / 1 � '1 e i / / % zddddddddddd *.e97 aL,r -� 57/r �i�/ e 1 a lam.. \ 1 I I / r (` 1 M1 6,660 aAi, L' 11 ( 1 ,;:•:111 1 ,,;1 4 :� I I 7 / \ b� -__\•-a- / / • I\'56✓ �•' 1 55 / it;:�iF. 5'+3_ : " [I.. .ICI 0 I I I I ,c smc / 1 -c-'/ //� 1 ,4, /. 4,750 s/. 4.750 ¢¢..,, s/., r q '! 1 rk Titsl I "r!' `�`- YlCuhbl MANAGER z l ! I I I �fi I I Y 1 1 s ERG / i i / / a _ r I�I� _ a I _-- 1 atikDESIGNED• • C -- g'- � �'� Ig ��-r fl �g�i'*�7� �1"'+�a1� - GEOID I sm er \ ' / \\ //� \ f :•� 7 50' - W F s /// E`y ' \ DATE 4/70/m \,b. `--- •\ 's�.`er®_ aiIawtrrmILIaD �dim �y� % • o I I i / \ \-_ F E NAME PAPIER25 immi • \ 4.sa ac / r% / 7L \ ` � �•,r �4 r»t-ti >L',- 1-J( ( O/ /< \• \ ,\- --///%�� 4 a ivis�:rta•sa+rarsa>_� ,4* 1 0, �^5 / / \. \• \ // /-//rci J / 25' ..sP / s +� 50• w2:, -Gj,, t ijf I I 4 // ro/,,,,,/.... / �B;aa. \ \\S. /\ \ / i 1, /// ,/ \ \ \ 1 Q rrT i•IF ./ 1 / "y'/ / `+ti .�1' t ' \\ \\ , 17/,�'/ /•. ' �_- 1 -/7 -7 C-- S� `r^ l 0i/I Q I I 4i'O g�F/y i/ /�\ .. t,..,w..) ' cc liar \ B\\yam\ `4 /!:kY7af.--1,--,E08/-- +'arih9ar1 ' M 4.7s/09 Y./Zy i-''ram / L/INr IA \1 1-+\\ tIO/I j // \\\ �sLcaAu . \ --. �_-- -± \I I Cr /) _-,I 1 - 141 T�. 2 --�-/-'" ( -- / EW,RE9/9/OO Ka \- � / /• / 'Ill --- - �' 11 1 \�� STAMP NOT VALID UNIE451CN®ANDDATED iiMiniii Alln \\v 4\\\ \\ it:, `Il�Ar'� i •\0 — - ��-% / / / �F r P. i. --26-—��-. \v/I `\�_` JOD NUMBE7l ( I HERM-0025 k - SEE SHEET 4 3o 4 SEC. 20, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. 13 ETERSON SECS SHEET 3 ICONSULTINC ' . /< \ �✓'�t I11! \\ `� +//� \ 'f%^'t�°' • -•rl + sa• _— F • � \ 1' I /\ AV�A�101MIw�,S1-1_ i AI�J `\ I / �\ \\ 48 - l - r +, ,/ / / / / Tel(425)827-5874 _ - J3 �e / I / // 5 / mot- �+ 6 -.,- r�, �_� 1 < Fax(425)822-7216 • � \�/ /�j b/�\J �- aa.arl��:aor� � �_iv L ��s Air j.45/ i < /�? 25' �7 wr 50' �Tz 1 !ii / RT Cf — / 2 \o. \/ / O /'Bse 5p 7�rF I I ! r I 6. 1.4:\\ , c, i/ 1 / �- ill f -,L_t7 _7 C- _ + l / 4.7.a J O ® \\ y-2' :r. \ / /x 4 / / / /I L - �� r ' 1 u_ i e r/y // /�\ 2 \ . l� \ - _1 - /,yJ11 / / I , / 1� t: i /( I r IA F+ I / \ _ \\ \ / / 7'_-1-4-I- I r 10 r"- iL/ •• 1 '' 1- g k 9r n-4= w `/ ' 1 / \ ►i \. al, 4 i `�99L, N-••4/' '',•0 .11 � 4./so A soil". 1--�12'L L.4 R; �p \I I �` = 10 %1 �l / \ a \��♦ at—_\ �_ _ L1r-�_J L--- �— ly Jr >_a" r 411# QL-q\ 1-0— �\4-// IA-\ J \ liG \ \�� '�z. vs \\ • -F 63�_' --mesa i //S'/ /50• -- 4 Q *�' \ __� ' /r \ — 4. W \ .9Pa 41 ^` ACjT I w�/:,'.-/ / // // M 1,,,,, !�(p/ I ` CC - \q \ •�� \ 4,56, .,/ E ,,�-1 r 38, -1_ % —2B �`--o Q W \\ ♦ \�/ / -, \ I EI/ / 1 I r; 01 r--- i z1 i 121' I I \` I__/� I 'i$'i. _.Alik s.cn \ o I _I I \ IO Ih I I ,-2a5r/ I1/ $ \ V1 iU O P �\�/ .•Y• �� , `j� ''`` s // "•I ofosue .rj�� r' 1 1, \\ � \ �► \ Ir^ss, -, �s9_s.r._— •4 I 1 11 \\ �� ‘:::::„FTIlik'"\ L./isr -.-', II \': '♦ ZI 5./.2 / I U I I / R.55• 1rm 1'hf n cry , o I I 6 \ Q�. 1 40' o ao' \\'. _.�� V 18 I 1 / i••I!1' --1 / II ;'-''n '� \ I 6 JSB4 ., 11 t,lib liQ 9\4.+`s�.i.t-...`10 2\ —I F-- —I 5 0 SCALE r..40' 1/4 1 \ ,� \\\,•// •1/\\\ \�/ • `„_ 54 \ h I\4-- ��'�8 I 1 zdQ444444444 \\( / \ \7 9 // \ 1 \ I 5,000.4I 1 1 / \ 00 I I MM.I MANAGEK \\'/ \ < p \ '.\ I-CIO^� — i 1/ II I DESIGNEE! sro0 O �� \ \\ �'I I l - ) 11 I 1 I I CARD B.DENNEY CITY OE RENTON ,� �� \\\ \\ \ I ` )I •I I/ s,o21s; II n 1 I MOM a sroe / 1 DATE: 4/10/00 • •••• \1\ �♦ \\.\f \ \I 26 III �— I I i1 .I I FILE NAME PP4NER25 \\ �� i\ \ ...\ 11 4s to • ...."\ ---- 01,6 ' '0 ,p\ H 76 q\571 kO0 / \ \ // 4.R � JONAL•`' al`6) C\ \' `\\----------,' --_- - / \ \ / I I EXPIRES:9/9/00 \ ♦ \\\ / \ \ \ STAMP NOT VALID \ / .\ \\/ \ \ \ UNIE4 SIGNED AND DATED \; \y \ `\\ \\ \ /// \\ / JOBNUMBEBHERM-0025 - • �� \\ /—I \\ \• •/ 91EET NUMBER k 4DF4 C • - • • '.\\ . I ' \ ‘4‘'' ' : / \ isa c 1 150 •.,. 0/ , • • sa.,-",. .„,/ Scale 1" = 50' • . \ '.,, '7. ry.Tun"-n-' (' =MM. PLAT OF FALCON RIDGE(CEDAR RIDGE) VOL 129.PC.51-57 4 i''.' ...i.*:ia.• '. f''''';'' . /4., 11,...NAO 88(CITY OF RENTON) V ___. ,_. es., ?.3"... \A, • 7'-'111Walf a.a. " -..._.' ,,--":..,.... . I i . , S'.-'71•1•4•ST.- -`..W.-..,'V'*•'.'.\./•'4'.,\,.s\.••,-'•,•Jrr`.:•:\:IAN-..,N,.v.4`...1\i0:4,:'2,\-,/''1.',,.:,,4,•--,.r4s.,',7.'./ff'/'S'-_11a..,,C,i-_0'gi.,./,'/.._,...C-'..3,.I..'.....•'A.2,: ,".",....,'.-.-,-----1-".2....-:/•-:..:•:,. 0.--,.' - ---'"---\e-_-'.,'-/''r v.,-,-3'---e-._,.ris,t.r..„-.-,,---../,'..,s's.,7..6_'.'.-'•.----.,",,,,.\crp.,.;,-' .m...rO,fzC ONO,TO:ON,UR,.. N.T,,.E/R..VC.oAr.aL.s"EF 2' ' - -- . \ . ' - ..”- tit WC..MISSY / -1„ (."" \c,,L,-MCip •?.. . ''''''Ig--...°6' \* " 6\-:: :.„ .,,,,_,\(,1:HI 1•\'' ,to<C.::4‘;;, ,,\O,Y -•-• , ( **".L. .... .., .„:____)r- ... ..- (14e,7,6„ ..x 0-4' \4_, z)\ - ... • r• . • 1,j.,7?.rr.. REFERENC£5. / / ',Z, 'st.','\\.\ '-' 1,, 41-3(3" Cd,C) --" .7 ...„4, , -„,WI LOS.I.Li•06.0.Oa 032.....0 IL I \ I /--- -.4:-......._ .._./ , (-- .' )f /4.: .-,h•-•.,...f' f, -e' 0” ROTF5. 7e,'-'1I'-------..>,.., ""*. /s••••:. cii{ „--se\-- \. . \Ilk' '•\ ''''' Pi.( :cNa,)/""'''. -.}11 e. fr:.,, -6,--. _, 0.. , (0,)) - , •,, .„•4\ - .,,,, ,..,...,. ...., 3.i„.. ..„, .„,./-7-_,,,.,. ' F...,-F.F.s...z:?r,FiEticarit:Failsucl,,, \ •.• \,,,,,,,,,, 04._ jr.. -,.._, v- \- /)Cr•---' 4_.:.S....*1,-...71.-.-c---7'''\ ..,.111L;l'" ' . 1 ••••--- ...•;-., / 3 .•5•••MS MO,...OF.tO SKI.•LL f•SlY(.••C.nco.0 C>>,\*'• \‘'N. . •\v....r.., _____.-,1,” ,(....?"., _..-----2, )0' '... /..‘ . (ViGL OV:53.**/.15_e. Tr 110 " . ,1 • CM,F,C,C1R..........•.1 MC,LOC...IMAM.•40 931. OA\ ,‘,.•\,.....\s:VrCliit .,,,,or (..A..pref rcp. _ ..--.).. 1---- ---4%`• ) \,, ,..5' • • ( k...:':tiii.,... -r---;---voz•-:-/' ---E......-_-_ ........ ' •••••• -.---G,(6-,2. y A.f. , • cl.„54,.;1,17;gc717:=E:17.4;j::"'"''' <(‘ .",, ‘• ' •\- .'"' ------ ''''II \-,40;...c.'r-. --.,--- ,.-------: ° 7 --,-..-vr.q(A-,-- .1,,, ____ . 01L.k.MILICUEIMLE l',<,‘‘ \\ . ' ' .'-'-'.7' l_tV/C6''-X". io 'N . ) c,..,,9 /.,... laILD:LLEGESD SX119E41.1E9F191 •caw MS•MP.IX. MOS 1•••M 3. •,U PINOT•'MPH.•••• 0 PPM,PM( .•VC... S•33.2 VP MR kt 6 5.•3.9 , \V" \\VI. \' '',....0. , .,,,.,LVZ"///- e" • / r' r PK 2 10 33.• ' .,1 PO..•MI..MI (- CM A.C.O. MPS'11"' r X.. 1.11g.0,0•01'.."" C*,\ )k \.. 31•Pr. ......'''..1•V... -....--•••.........4, / 8•7?).'" _......., / .e-,, t.,t,r ‘O lm . .\\ '', .-,,_.-.•_7-----%-,-.- ' clitfi.(af • •./-.. --404, fl'<' .17: -I. '')_\ .,sm.,LwAr tatr 07 v.,./MI•HltPla I, RIO; ,•••••):t .••••••L... 19 SIMI Lora.vittn1 . MOS•7.(. 10.•30 5 171...L.1...far.:'32: l'Ap ‘, '5 ):. ,....„..W,,c,1,-,_____.....:‘" ''''''', .,......._00 ri:I: .. i Ria"'' •On•LIM., I/:Z k t'a4 .... -(;',57, • '----":;: .,4)2,gi--• / ... ..„ o TILEP.C.I MEP \._ 6 C11111.TPE•rear.344.1 A.ii,‘S, 1.... '',... c.'-'4%..• 1 t ic if ifpf•I CI •..PAPAW COMO NOT OK. .-- 2", M Vg` Ea marLA Rpm 4c, . • . bye IR 1:1.1 /P,.3 \':• '• :.•, /A-e..--..__.1 2, -.r /.#(--- a e. , ,_.- -,', \ :•„, . 4, , 7 e.i, ....,_...,c,,,,. ;., . CADA,•arsur T 10'FP Ro•-cor . 7.1:27:. Fa; c`' \\ s\\.,• • • ' 0- , • --' ,e•-' Gl. ..,„, .., • •3.10.1 TREK I KIIKNO. ‘• ‘h,‘,• 4,, I.., 9”j3'. \ 0".j401,---0,------ LIECT1.•L PAM I/ (L- 7. 0••-k---e". *-C;t\s' • ,•••, 4' rg.'" 0 ....••••.0•1 . . 'l.S•' ' " ''N s. C'''y / •"'',.„......,,,,,...__/U-gik--,,,,-' .(:.., 0""‘ 1 * corarr.AS•.0,10 0 ••••P.........• • ..4,\•/ ,. ..* "W' ....;-•• • . • b" ."" . „,.., ri/' \f-''s \ • '74" ..,„ .... . . . - 0 -...tanzravt,ffr, ill::: 11199LEICKSEDCK NI •,.. ,se.s 5,.• --,.... 1 \ It-- _../ 7-- %":7,4:,.." -z.T.= . 5•451..1.1,1•01 wee.01.4”.•••••1001:430,1•0.3 MUMS '. ,S NIK,',,•‘( e. \ ‘a•••• ..*'. fU TAR r RVF 1 111E-LVIS • ;,..L.--sisiiiitTra---wa,..-fr.41,,r4,- 'liP,. s...-, cy---„, , 1; 1 N77 7.17I,2 MOO I.0•1 . :rera:NoV•itry":11'441"7/7X=Z11:4V" ••••‘ . b. g-C3. ., I - „,,s......, ••• •._ .... (...,,..;11- . , ,,-7;77 sv sum 511,:sway Lams A 0141•Si 0, .**4'." s s.< \s •' \'". -.W:1 i ......\lifZfrol•.:... ' • 1.,, Atea.ci &dnicivrb & .11164oc.. s, ' s: .4.:‘-----,,A . ,- •(-•. 0 ,„ _, ,, PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS <,‘ s P O.BOA 289.WOODINVILLE.WA 98072 (.25).86-,252 , • reTES:0/0/00 ' '. 'T `‘ ' ''. v. to' ''''' HERITAGE ARNOLD ir Dr .fl, • i' . ..1A, .\ XP s'• fiENNETT CORPORATION • \ ...,`„N‘ 9 LAKE NELLEVUE BELLEVUE,WA5NINGT01.2005 • ‘ -2 .1.,,.... , •,\.\. ..... TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY I. .. ....--/ . ' 99172 . .• . • • • . • . , NW1/4. NE1/4, SEC. 20, T. 23 N.. R. 5 E.,W.U. _ • •-• . , • • 8 i fi' \\\ \may \ i I • �1' ,k. '/ \ /-\ `\\\\ \\ \\\�� "a \`,,W'I ss�{K I NN/CM a°-: / \1 1' \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\\ ° I COW / \ G ` 4� I 4 N 0 .GC® / 1 1 FlY£F RIDGE \\ \\\ \\ \ p. g'IrOe.` :7 3 _ �rY*J _�J 1 1 n,°aa \ \ \ \ j� � _ !' uRR }3 95 J GROUND I I VOL. w 8 9. -___\ w_ \ -. z Gay , F / . I I 8`` 07 ,ram i vo S. TH ST. 7`.\ y �� a: f{\E.a. ` '%'�' _ % r p O! t , o LT �\ Cf /`, �b `', , , (Oi)/ .1/( _�` ,-F-^-- Q' / IA O.{��'J--' I X-`12i� \ ? T \� z I 4d TR �n�_rb.{ ``` p`o�/ �/I I/'i STORMWATER--''f \\44•‘��4�� 42 4T_ ' 40 39 I 38 V j'37� ,36a ^'R t�,`� �it., ��Y\�\II• �,j�, A ' ,\ `f �C 11' I , , / 'TRACY j �\ _ `\\.. - Q �l1 / e . lY :‘, \Iw \ NUMBER DELTA RADfUS ® .\07 I �O yppr' / // /^� { �\`•' � I--^'[ -� i_,�'/ �j ,•• \\\6. 0 Z Cl 10428.40•' \�\ Iy\, O • .‘U; - / , I - .. i.i \ ° / iiv/ / _ ��,,`Y( ��.;Q \ \ ,��4 Y.i^•I- rr C2 2827.12•• �l f ..\N pA / �✓ / qa'�r �'- w j ""�� `�. \ i �,, ° ° �— •\ ��,"� DAD_ 'DO° \ ♦ \9\ �`' -__ ` x v / ,.y, \ /` \\ \ wry / `�J.71� .rib +mow \J1 I ,� `4,,(.v , \ -- °- _ Ill' . P/ , p/ Y �` `, - IwrE 'Pn I - ' 4. I ` �l C �'� `i j" 1 Q �I' \, 1/•/ . 'a'a,, /1le \\.\4 y, / iF • I .�` I L/S --- ` �;:" PARK / I \,.:.1 • 'h C� \ /rR°r=i-'— T „` TRACTL,' _\`1(�`, _- ___ / 45 / 46p �Il4jiic48 c4N-50. *576 4 1+y In I /,/<N[�z I ``\ �� \\� 'o, I:; !�\`\p /,,65Qom//'-'1%'0 / •,. / ii (T.P-f , 1g11 ` LB ' / /Op 8.E 7 �/ , i�'\\ b . O�un- , \\S+^ Lki14'i�/0 / I •', p40/ GE", _6r , / /I[� ag so r�I \ 0----A `'\. _; _ij/i.. '--• / 'A' Q" "RQ ,.0 I III/�"Z aw scNc-srw ` . JG'1^, 56 55 /54i'+.`5-,. 53_� '1K�°A- Is 3p 1 1 I`+a!'y..J`E"W a 1 O� ,`.,Lv °i �- =''1i a'I - . ' IC6 ►'a'{;1 I\I / ' \--_ ` U Q 1 t' \ v O, �I I 1 =� =\ ,� a f ;. ill \E F , , 111.1t)1a��\ ,.4) 4 / a,;}•:/4i`S . ''.80-,A` _ - ei! �..e.O• `®10 •i• i/e'.0 ` i \\ `I rx �T- G 71 - �r \^.;. ;\'�° / ri .pia_ 4';=,v �s •-'i 1 b ;. /� \\ �� , MI G 1 ,r,w_ __ 0`a\• fir `` y:,h,,q-- 7 A/ .5,/ \\ \\ `I i ro 1 i lyPi Z J TY CF F£NTCN \` / `_ - -- i//'/IA / 777 %—• I / \ \ i ft) ,,, AFNCLD PART: 2 I r1S o, 07, :>�6:�9 ;RI 1.��, ;ir__-! �,Si `.•v4°� \\ \>„, *.:, \ -. =%', - 64 40 1 ..4 ') I-. ) / \ 1E r —I \qt, ��, Q• AC Q - - ,ex ',/ 4, q `Iii{,2��6 `''''< . 1 �� / �- '1 \v., .I.\'4-95R-47-3 Jo /.. 14J° rJ . I,_' • l_�`-:4 ;;tiii / h\ I NOTE \i I_:`/ . - �%1 /l� 9 ; U LY4 25 .' I• 1 •"-go,.'Fso I / \\\ 7 I ENTIRE SITE TO BE CLEARED. \\ ♦/`. � ��f7 °'*qi. 0 _ _ \ I I I ME \`''\'' 1`��''� ', I s/ ,0 ('� r ----- L APPLICANT RETAINS 7HE RIGHT ♦ ita• A' r, 2.4.J `1 I I j TO SALE ADDI RONAL TREES y\` ♦ a Y� I J �` I IF SITE CONDITIONS PERMIT- `' i*r 7/ \' a '. �,d /.\\'-P"I ��0 \�3 } I I Q 1 <"_ .NL s. Ira-# /� l L TRACT 1. I �1 o:.r18 ( p4,-.CO °_1Q 1 I ,e 1 TREE LEGEND �,`I 1\sue` ^' \ I I <I, 1 Fc CEDAR I ♦�I /_.RR fA'i #ra r I L I I _ N CEMLDCK �' '�� 1 \ 0 \ \ 2 I 1 r I .X- CONIFER AS NO7ED ' �y \\‘‘`. - \q \t� ^� ^. \O ill ! I- 1 I _'� 1 I ° NDINDUM SEE DRUOUSTER �' \' `N ` V ^^ \ �' I 21, I I I I I -- 0I r2•-It'MIXED DECIDUOUS �'#I'_No. ♦' '`,� \\\. q 0 I 1 'i I �__-- 1 1 l / INDINDUAL TREE DR CLUSTER 'C�\ `I ` '^d �-.L _ ________----1 1 \ / / i -121'&LARGER MIXED DEGDUOUS ♦ / ` S r I \ % 5 —J O --- �y.. L/S-.„. ^ 20 7' 4\ \ \ / INDINDUAL TREE OR LWSJER I •vN' 00.7,kACT T' \ \ 1 — :�\ \\ \ �"*.\\ i / • • o r yp ,w 'tee ,�^•6 r ...v . s„_...,..,Ha. r. ,. ._ � _ Bentley Oaks 10/10/2000 08:13 AM ELOPTo: ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us@SMTP D�CITY OFRENTON PLANNING cc: Subject: Arterial Definitions NOV 0 2 2000 Classification: Unclassified RECEIVED Elizabeth, A short note for our meeting this morning. It would seem that if we continue to only discuss the traffic issue, that we are focusing on the traffic itself rather than backing up and looking at it from a more macro level. I would think it is fair to assume that Cedar is nothing more than an access alley with the cars parked on both sides of the street. That situation ,1, truly forces one car per in the event you meet some one on the hill. If cars were parked line to line,on both sides of the street, Cedar would become a one way street. This leaves Renton Avenue as the principle s arterial for the hill. I would expect,without having read the traffic report, that 80% ►�of the traffic uses , Renton Avenue. Unfortunately, going down the hill results in a funnel. 7th avenue is full width even with cars parked on the side of the street, but Renton avenue results in an almost one way situation. There remains just enough room to allow two cars but in a controlled situation. People being what we are, and with the continued influx of people either from the park activities, or the bicyclists, or added housing begins to erode the old time consideration of"Yield to uphill traffic" Coupled with the sense of urgency we all have gives rise to a situation where there will be a serious accident on Renton Avenue. Someday it will happen. In that event, the question will come up as to why the situation on Renton avenue was allowed to exist knowing full well the increase in traffic flow caused by the proposed project both during its development as well as after it is completed. It would seem that the City of Renton may be putting itself in a situation where it should have known the possibilities of human error and either prevented further development on the hill or took specific action to manage the traffic flow to allow normal access to and from the hill. I do not feel that it is prudent for the city to rely on the good judgement of the population such that it assume on eveyone making a sacrifice to always drive slower,to always watch for children more often, and not to speed. I dont expect the environmental statement addressed this part, but isnt this situation of our daily environment such that you cannot separate traffic from the environmental concerns? And if it is separated, should it be? And if it is, should they be considered as a package. Perhaps the individuals who will review all of the forthcoming information will. Best Regards Bentley Oaks 1321 South Seven 0/ib 5 37, •.6K-a•-i --- /fie' 5 • ,--d.::.'' '''' . _. . . . _ ,•77.0 L E iv‘ ,,, ...„--------„,„--- -„,‘,%',,,,,474...,.,:; ilesdo,-/ - • (A/44 qg'P' -- . ((/) . FM ' ,.------------- ,..-.• - -., .-. ? . 5, i.-%I ..,n..Mr''''''''''.,•a.....,. .,...,'"''''=-9,;-.!-Z-.''.,-...6... ee. ., . . S,. IIISMN. ,.. :' ,i • ... Ci'il 0.i: ArTiVil 0001001e7/./ SeY illCe5 a 1/15) Oil -,' • 105S- 50411 6.0'."" tifi'-y g1•10;I , . . . •.::„.„) /1---4,Th'or, : /445 . E/I I/ba-4 gi,-)i>i 5, A-1 G/0/ Seqi0-- ,...-.-..: ,-,. ,› • ; ; . 1. a „ ; 1 ;; ; Iiiiij131111iiiiiiiiii ii1M I!hill??itiliiiiii hlla Willarvirall." . , .711111111.1rP.P. 7111.111.11111•• 33usA -- ,,- . c7) 1\, 31 O'' ,' / 411M1iZikeN — N . I -—-----`'"7-7-7---------,-. 446. Eliabe.-141 05 en s Ave,tarne4A+ .5-erace,5 /o$ 564/1.2+/-1 6 rt-elj kit . tP4 gevv-4-rivt U aLgti gg0 S'-- / • . . it t I t it I 1 i t it i i 11 1 I t t 1 , i i iliii!if!itlililliSiiiilitifii:::::i;.:1:--i:lii:ili::1,1:1 :/ i � �l • 01 iN CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 29,2000 TO: Elizabeth Higgins FROM: Sonja J.Fesser SUBJECT: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA-00-053,PP Format and Legal Description Review Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and find that comments addressed to the applicant in a previous review memo dated May 11,2000 still apply to the current submittal. These comments are as follows: Has the encroachment of approximately 3,239 square feet onto the subject property from Lot 3 of the plat of River Ridge been addressed? Said encroachment was referenced in the April 6,2000,title report as being disclosed in the Survey recorded under King County Record No. 20000330900003. Has the City of Seattle provided written approval for the use of the water pipe line right-of-way for access to the subject plat? The applicant should formally request the City of Renton to pursue with the City of Seattle an easement adequate for the purposes needed for the subject plat, if that has not already been done. Information needed for final plat approval includes the following: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number,LUA-XX-XXX-FP and LND-10-0354,respectively, on the drawing,preferably in the upper right-hand corner. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number for the final plat will be different from the preliminary plat and is unknown as of this date. A licensed surveyor will need to prepare and sign the final plat drawings. Show ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. Provide plat and lot closure calculations. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards,with reference points of all new right-of-way monuments set as part of the plat. \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\H:\FILE.SYS\LND\10\0354\RV000921.DOC September 21, 2000 Page 2 Include a statement of equipment and procedures used,per WAC 332-130-100. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note the date the existing monuments were visited,per WAC 332-130-150, and what was found. Note all easements, agreements and covenants of record on the drawing. Note the encroachment, if still pertinent, on the drawing. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted(give plat name and lot number)or unplatted. The city will provide addresses for the proposed lots after the preliminary plat. The addresses will need to be noted on the drawing. On the final plat submittal,remove all references to trees, utility facilities,topog lines and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for the preliminary plat approval. Required City of Renton signatures(for approval of the plat) include the Administrator of Planning/Building/Public Works,the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required. The appropriate King County approvals need to be noted on the drawing also. The owners of the subject plat need to sign the final plat document. Include notary blocks as needed. Include a dedication/certification block on the drawing. Because the subject property falls within Zone 2 of the City of Renton Aquifer Protection Area,the Aquifer Protection Notice needs to be noted on the drawing. See the attachment. Because the subject property also falls within an area identified by the city as a moderate(medium) coal mine hazard area,the following statement needs to be noted on the final plat drawing: "The lots created herein fall within a coal mine hazard area as identified by a geotechnical engineer at the time of this subdivision. Presence of such a hazard may trigger mitigation measures at the time of construction." An updated Plat Certificate will be required,dated within 45 days of Council action on approval of the plat. Note that if there are restrictive covenants or agreements to others as part of this subdivision,they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated document(s)are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat shall have the first recording number. The recording number(s)for the associated document(s)will be referenced on the plat in the appropriate locations. September 21, 2000 Page 3 Fee Review Comments: The revised Fee Review Sheet for this review of the preliminary plat is provided for your use and information. NSF PROPERTYCES FEE REVIEW FOR SUBDI S No. 2000 -020 . APPLICANT: -331 11.1ETf 'bEv.(12IEL F.L 1::>I,- i—) 4-4O ) RECEIVED FROM (date) JOB ADDRESS:ILI C�r16F W,6.Y 9.)S.TiH &-. S.-r7H CT) WO# 5� Lc7j' . U -PLAT(i-i r-J'AG>= LND -p1+11 1�A*-sl,1c�LD) # VI ATURE OF WORK: 1 PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF SUBDWISION BY LONG PLAT, NEED MORE INFORMATION: 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHORT PLAT,BINDING SITE PLAN,ETC. 0 PID#'s 0 VICINITY MAP ❑ FINAL REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION,THIS REVIEW REPLACES 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE 0 OTHER PRELIMINARY FEE REVIEW DATED 0 FRONT FOOTAGE ❑ SUBJECT PROPERTY PARENT PID# 2 D 30 5—cf I IO )4 NEW KING CO.TAX ACCT.#(s)are required when assigned by King County. It is the intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below may be applicable to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are potential charges that may be due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements(i.e.underground utilities,street improvements,etc.) Triggering mechanisms for the SDC fees will be based on current City ordinances and determined by the applicable Utility Section. Please note that these fees are subject to change without notice. Final fees will be based on rates in effect at time of Building Permit/Construction Permit application. ❑ The existing house on SP Lot# ,addressed as has not previously paid SDC fees,due to connection to City utilities prior to existance of SDC fee Ord. SP Lot# will be subject to future SDC fees if triggering mechanisms are touched within current City Ordinances. ❑ We understand that this subdivision is in the preliminary stage and that we will have the opportunity to review it again before recordation. •The following quoted fees do NOT include inspection fees,side sewer permits,r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PARCEL METHOD OF ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS NO. NO. ASSESSMENT UNITS OR FEE Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WATER Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WASTEWATER - Latecomer Agreement(pvt)OTHER - Special Assessment District/WATER Special Assessment District/WASTEWATER Joint Use Agreement(METRO) Local Improvement District * Traffic Benefit Zones $75.00 PER TRIP,CALCULATED BY TRANSPORTATION FUTURE OBLIGATIONS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WATER 0 Estimated #OF UNITS/ SDC FEE 0 Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd SQ.FTG. Single family residential$850/unit x 5047 -.4-7-7,ErONS-reSzq Mobile home dwelling unit$680/unit in park 48 t450 Cro Apartment,Condo$510/unit not in CD or COR zones x Commercial/Industrial, $0.113/sq.ft.of property(not less than$850.00)x Boeing,by Special Agreement/Footprint of Bldg plus 15 ft perimeter(2,800 GPM threshold) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WASTEWATER 0 Estimated ❑Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd Single family residential$585/unit x 5.7 $-Se7 7c—^ 00 Mobile home dwelling unit$468/unit x 33 i 345.0o Apartment,Condo$350/unit not in CD or COR zones x Commercial/Industrial$0.078/sq.ft.of property x(not less than$585.00) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-SURFACEWATER 0 Estimated ❑Pd Prey. ❑Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd Single family residential and mobile home dwelling unit$385/unit x 5 Cirr All other properties$0.129sq ft of new impervious area of property x 21,9'45.Co (not less than$385.00) PRELIMINARY TOTAL $ --1•d4-7I-,�0:00 l cyl c� ki 5�0/tea 10;74o.00 Signature Revi • mg Authority DATE w o Alpai❑ *If subject property is within an LID,it iI de elopers responsibility to check with the Finance Dept. for paid/un-paid status. ❑ Square footage figures are taken from the King County Assessor's map and are subject to change. m 0 • ❑ Current City SDC fee charges apply to N- t 4 0 c:/template/feeappl/tgb EFFECTIVE July 16, 1995/Ord.Nos.4506,4507,4508,4525, and 4526 City or rcenton Department of Planning/Building/Pub • orks • _ . ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 19vo .e171).1 Se,Wtce.A COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higginss:,,�,„,,,,,-;. - • V PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 g ,Tti V a r • LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,South 7th Court&South 7th Street _SEP,. 1 5 ?'rr.. 9 SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): CITY OF RENTON ILtTY SYSTEMS SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Prelimita�y Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 sego �ti•Y °� CitivolRenton 41„, haL ♦ Development Services Division `e'‘Nso< 1055 South Grady Way, 6th Fir Renton, WA 98055 Date: October 13, 2000 TO: Ryan A. Fike FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Sr. Planner Bennett Development Development Services Div. Development/Planning Phone: (425) 709-6508 Phone: (425) 430-7382 Fax: (425) 709-6553 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 SUBJECT: Heritage Renton Hill Format and Number of pages including cover sheet: 5 Legal Description Review Notes REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ As ❑ Please ® For your be mailed Requested Comment review • Comments from Property Services • Fee Review Please share with your engineer. Call if you have questions. 1ks./11 Zvi A. Ahead of the curve • • CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: May 11, 2000 TO: Elizabeth Higgins FROM: Sonja J.FesserR SUBJECT: Heritage Philip Arnold Preliminary Plat,LUA-00-053,PP Format and Legal Description Review Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the following comments: Comments for the Applicant: How is the encroachment of approximately 3,239 square feet onto the subject property from Lot 3 of the plat of River Ridge(disclosed in a Record of Survey recorded under King County Recording No. 20000330900003)to be addressed? Has the City of Seattle provided written approval for the use of the water pipe line right-of-way for access to the subject plat? The applicant should formally request the City of Renton to pursue with the City of Seattle an easement adequate for the purposes needed for the subject plat, if that has not already been done. Information needed for final plat approval includes the following: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number,LUA-XX-XXX-FP and LND-10-0354,respectively, on the drawing,preferably in the upper right-hand corner. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number for the final plat will be different from the preliminary plat and is unknown as of this date. Show ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. Provide plat and lot closure calculations. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards,with reference points of all new right-of-way monuments set as part of the plat. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used,per WAC 332-130-100. \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\H:\FILE.SYS\LND\10\0354\RV000510.DOC IMP May 10, 2000 imp Page 2 Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note the date the existing monuments were visited,per WAC 332-130-150, and what was found. Note all easements, agreements and covenants of record on the drawing. Note the encroachment, if still pertinent, on the drawing. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted(give plat name and lot number)or unplatted. The city will provide addresses for the proposed lots after the preliminary plat. The addresses will need to be noted on the drawing. On the final plat submittal,remove all references to trees,utility facilities,topog lines and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for the preliminary plat approval. Required City of Renton signatures (for approval of the plat) include the Administrator of Planning/Building/Public Works,the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required. The appropriate King County approvals need to be noted on the drawing also. The owners of the subject plat need to sign the final plat document. Include notary blocks as needed. Include a dedication/certification block on the drawing. Because the subject property falls within Zone 2 of the City of Renton Aquifer Protection Area,the Aquifer Protection Notice needs to be noted on the drawing. See the attachment. Because the subject property also falls within an area identified by the city as a moderate(medium) coal mine hazard area,the following statement needs to be noted on the final plat drawing: "The lots created herein fall within a coal mine hazard area as identified by a geotechnical engineer at the time of this subdivision. Presence of such a hazard may trigger mitigation measures at the time of construction." An updated Plat Certificate will be required,dated within 45 days of Council action on approval of the plat. Note that if there are restrictive covenants or agreements to others as part of this subdivision,they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated document(s)are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat shall have the first recording number. The recording number(s)for the associated document(s)will be referenced on the plat in the appropriate locations. i'new easements are shown for the benefit of future owners of the proposed lots,then include the following statement,juxtaposed to the subject easements: "Area for private(water, sewer,utilities, 11111 May 10,2000 Page 3 access,etc.) easement." Since the new lots created via this plat are under common ownership at the time of recording,there can be no easement until such time as ownership of one of the lots is conveyed to others,together with and/or subject to specific easement rights. Also, add the following Declaration of Covenant language on the face of the subject drawing,Jf the previous paragraph applies: DECLARATION OF COVENANT.• The owners of the land embraced within this plat, in return for the benefit to accrue from this subdivision, by signing hereon covenants and agrees to convey the beneficial interest in the new easement shown on this plat to any and all future purchasers of the lots, or of any subdivisions thereof This covenant shall run with the land as shown on this plat. Fee Review Comments: The Fee Review Sheet for this review of the preliminary plat is provided for your use and information. 40 giO AQUIFER PROTECTION NOTICE THE LOTS CREATED HEREIN FALL WITHIN ZONE 2 OF RENTON'S AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF RENTON ORDINANCE NO. 4367 AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 4740. THIS CITY'S SOLE SOURCE OF DRINKING WATER IS SUPPLIED FROM A SHALLOW AQUIFER UNDER THE CITY SURFACE. THERE IS NO NATURAL BARRIER BETWEEN THE WATER TABLE AND GROUND SURFACE. EXTREME CARE SHOULD BE EXERCISED WHEN HANDLING OF ANY LIQUID SUBSTANCE OTHER THAN WATER TO PROTECT FROM CONTACT WITH THE GROUND SURFACE. IT IS THE HOMEOWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE CITY'S DRINKING WATER. MIP PROPERTVVICES FEE REVIEW FOR SUBD ' NS No. 2000 -020 . APPLICANT: 131=J.11..1ETT 1DEV. zal.1. -ac�j �ISTI=O T4k409) RECEIVED FROM (date) JOB ADDRESS:Il l G1 CpO1J c PsE2s. ci.4 yyb•(S.)9.77I4 '. S.-ri -i cr ) WO# NATURE OF WORK: t( R - t-I►Up Al I.lcsl 1 LND# PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF SUBD ISION BY LONG PLAT, NEED MORE INFORMATION: 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHORT PLAT,BINDING SITE PLAN,ETC. 0 PID#'s 0 VICINITY MAP O FINAL REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION,THIS REVIEW REPLACES ❑ SQUARE FOOTAGE 0 OTHER PRELIMINARY FEE REVIEW DATED 0 FRONT FOOTAGE ❑ SUBJECT PROPERTY PARENT PID# 20e.30 5—q I 10 NEW KING CO.TAX ACCT.#(s)are required when assigned by King County. It is the intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below may be applicable to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are potential charges that may be due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements(i.e.underground utilities,street improvements,etc.) Triggering mechanisms for the SDC fees will be based on current City ordinances and determined by the applicable Utility Section. Please note that these fees are subject to change without notice. Final fees will be based on rates in effect at time of Building Permit/Construction Permit application. ❑ The existing house on SP Lot# ,addressed as has not previously paid SDC fees,due to connection to City utilities prior to existance of SDC fee Ord. SP Lot# will be subject to future SDC fees if triggering mechanisms are touched within current City Ordinances. ❑ We understand that this subdivision is in the preliminary stage and that we will have the opportunity to review it again before recordation. The following quoted fees do NOT include inspection fees, side sewer permits, r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PARCEL METHOD OF ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS NO. NO. ASSESSMENT UNITS OR FEE Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WATER Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WASTEWATER Latecomer Agreement(pvt)OTHER Special Assessment District/WATER Special Assessment District/WASTEWATER Joint Use Agreement(METRO) Local Improvement District Traffic Benefit Zones $75.00 PER TRIP, CALCULATED BY TRANSPORTATION FUTURE OBLIGATIONS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WATER 0 Estimated #OF UNITS/ SDC FEE ❑ Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd SQ.FTG. Single family residential$850/unit x 5! .47,6 00.O0 Mobile home dwelling unit$680/unit in park Apartment,Condo$510/unit not in CD or COR zones x Commercial/Industrial, $0.113/sq.ft.of property(not less than$850.00)x Boeing,by Special Agreement/Footprint of Bldg plus 15 ft perimeter(2,800 GPM threshold) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WASTEWATER 0 Estimated ❑Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd Single family residential$585/unit x 5 Ca $32 r 7rc0.C ) Mobile home dwelling unit$468/unit x Apartment, Condo$350/unit not in CD or COR zones x Commercial/Industrial$0.078/sq.ft.of property x(not less than$585.00) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-SURFACEWATER 0 Estimated ❑Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd Single family residential and mobile home dwelling unit$385/unit x 5, 21 D 560.00 All other properties$0.129sq ft of new impervious area of property x (not less than$385.00) PRELIMINARY TOTAL $ 10i 9.?A.00 I N Signature of Reviewing Authority DATE CuID a o rt o ❑ *If subject property is within an LID,it is developers responsibility to check with the Finance Dept.for paid/un-paid status. ❑ Square footage figures are taken from the King County Assessor's map and are subject to change. PI m N ❑ Current City SDC fee charges apply to F,,, 0 ra 4 0 0 c:/template/feeappl/tgb EFFECTIVE July 16, 1995/Ord.Nos.4506,4507,4508,4525, and 4526 Sala()CU City on Department of Planning/Building/Pu v orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:4tp-e:r1 tt e4 COMMENTS DUE: MAY 19, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 4, 2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Philip Arnold WORK ORDER NO: 78678 41YCF4 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court South 7th Street M�y �'CO SITE AREA: 10.35 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): CiT, 4 ZpnnWW l OF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: UT/ f/1, The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 56 lots suitable for si116 ►1Y residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, ha en requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 LightGlare 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 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 City oo ton Department of Planning/Building/P lc viorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: poiIc,,c, COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court&South 7th Street SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 n' v_. B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS 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 impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 0 A\ k A Signature of Director or t orized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 City of rwmon Department of Planning/Building/Publk, ...,rks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COI,1S ,td- n SeWtce5 COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, �OOO rA APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins ' Qlty PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 at/ 8 ?O LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court&South 7`h Street ►�, �o SITE AREA: 10.35 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): °/UN SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 A10 Aft; We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas w additional information is neede to properly assess this proposal. �(.44,c4, DateØd%o natu of Dire r or Authoriz Re resentatry Routing p Rev.10/93 V h City o.+;:......ton Department of Planning/Building/Put.:_-: irks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: raks COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,200 j APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins ��.qq cr, C-c Tr-i lii PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 Z (-) -ta 'ia , � LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,South 7th Court&South 7th Street ao ti cii m c."' SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): -5. U SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Prelimina Rat in e757 lot ,., suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-o iay from 50 fe 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of R ton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 1 Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts impacts Necessary Earth I Housing Air 1 1 Aesthetics Water I Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Usel Utilities Animals I Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources , Preservation I Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 6(-t// — '6 ig17 2 14i B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS cO q , -, 1-724--/7 -.2,te,.-L. __4- - ) /67;7 C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS . -*11,/,e_ atU' riZ dZ771/ 1C&C4.71 i 1 g n I , We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is ne d to properly assess this proposal. dVd^—• 9 / NV Signature of Director or Authorized epresentative ate Routing I Rev.10/93 i City __nton, Department of Planning/Building/Pc.,,, :'Yorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:�a COMMENTS DUE: MAY 19, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 4, 2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Philip Arnold WORK ORDER NO: 78678 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court&South 7th Street SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 56 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet, has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment I Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth 1 Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resourcels Preservation • Airport Environment • 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Nrzol4u44,ar.e, 7 '1 , B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS /Ze liae )1927,7a3 /5 1 r 1—GOO a>"7/ 41-741 -tto—e fui,hot er/2 e11410.2Lrek.4 c1/4_,pact-4V1 °-2-4-gp-?7j<-) ?14.5- 1- 7' ,o(y),A-076,- a-A-A-;-/y eL)744‘ ZtW-7a.4-ki C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Il-v' 1 f4d"#J ) CC ..S-C? te/O 1- l� \.11A,l/tA. sa/LA. /24 1 /24a. • We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. /2 /V&I S gnature of Director or Aut orized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 City ,..;enton Department of Planning/Building/F UU111.• Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: E(_,OVioWttL De-udJ2pvva.A4 OMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 2000 APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Hlgglns,_ PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,South 7th Court&South 7th Street SEEP 1 6 _DO SITE AREA: 10.35 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): E(..;UNOMIC SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of E Pre' Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the pu.3fie9ig -way from 50 feet to 42 feet,has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 N Airyp)7t UrvY- cor,v,va-rvvs Few-- c_P L✓tivry I rv-A C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have review this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas w e additional in or ati• is needed to properly assess this proposal. 1`t Date 9/67/� Signature of {ector or Aut rized Representative Routing / Rev.10/93 V City .:`nton Department of Planning/Building/Pu Vorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: c_ov.locivt..-__ ,JCOMMENTS DUE: MAY 19, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 4, 2000 APPLICANT: 1Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Philip Arnold WORK ORDER NO: 78678 pp _ LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, South 7th Court&South 7th Street flEa SITE AREA: 10.35 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): MAY 5 2000 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 56 to st�i °•�:- 'orosingt xiily residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 0 feel `�•'•• • een requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton an. a ::4 - r. the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 i Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-'RELATED COMMENTS e-f,„t-re"- 15 t 31 G../V1 OChr i►/fit_.- ,S1 rv&L& 1 i "i . PbLtGY I SS U uS 6z i 5 t`49 r `T1- 2Lk-- t(�L 1 Giq!1 67t/ Zt nL i l '6'b`7;j-L-.. Z-C J3L— A-01042656-'10 • rV-U 7 t Gi"fl L ) SS U L� . 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 impact or areas where a rtiona)'informa ded to properly assess this proposal. am' Signature of i ector or Aut rized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 V City o en on Department of Planning/Building I Pub,`''irks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: erg fr-e, eAN-hol' COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2000 APPLICANT: ';Bennett Development PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: Heritage Renton Hill WORK ORDER NO: 78678 LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,South 7th Court&South 7th Street SITE AREA: 10.35 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property by means of a Preliminary Plat into 57 lots suitable for single-family residential development. A modification of street standards, reducing the public right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet,has been requested. An environmental review by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton and a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner will be required. 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 ,512_12_ Cp'wl tom/✓ B. POLICY,-RELATED COMMENTS Nye C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS at:fir ate" e4` 615L'nA A. s' I . We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly asse s this proposal. q 2.o da Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 C.,S O + + CITY OF RENTON =' FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM DATE: May 4, 2000 TO: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal t SUBJECT: Heritage Phillip Arnold Plat, S 7th eet & Beacon Way SE MITIGATION ITEMS; 1. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single family ✓ structures. 2..Provide a 20 foot paved secondary emergency access from the East dead end cul-de-sac to Beacon Way SE. This can be an emergency access 1! only and can be gated or chained FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS; 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structures. 2. Access roadways are required to be/a minimum 20 foot wide paved roadway. The gate on Beacon Way,,S'E should either be removed or relocated to accommodate the in eased traffic and Fire Department access:: . 3. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. ✓ Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. J SCHEDULE A2 Order No. 398618-5K DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89°56'37" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 929.67 FEET.TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER • OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 01°43'38" WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 818.33 FEET; • THENCE SOUTH 71°05'12" WEST A DISTANCE OF 109.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S CEDAR '. RIVER PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTH 44°20'15" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 1148.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LIMITS OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 01°46'02" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LIMITS A DISTANCE OF 33.14 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. • Page 3 0City of Renton ♦ .0 Development Services Division DEC 34 2001 WH -N� 1055 South Grady Way I L,�Renton City Hall i� �_�v �,r r:;�cr� ; -�;.,� ` P.,,c Renton, WA 98055 LETTER Date: TRANSMITTAL December 4; 2001 TO: Larry Warren ( FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Attorney Senior Planner Development Services Phone: . Phone: (425)430-7382 Fax: (425) 430-7300 ISUBJECT: Heritage Renton Hill I Number of items including cover sheet: 6 REMARKS: ® As ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please ® For your Requested ASAP Comment review - • Land Use Permit Master Application, received Apr 28, 2000 • Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, TP&E, January 27, 2000 ` r ( l • Stopping Sight Distance Exhibit (3 sheets) The Master Application and Traffic Analysis were in the yellow file when it was sent to the Hearing Examiner in November 2000. The Stopping Sight Distance Exhibit was introduced at the public hearing by Jon Nelson of Peterson Consulting Engineering on December 12, 2000 (see page 17 of the Hearing Examiner Decision of January 25, 2001 for reference). p, ': `° 1 .'1ILAJii. Ahead of the curve i HERITAGE RENTON HILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA00.053 PP ECF ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ADDENDUM NO. 2 Prepared for Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT '4 _ ; 9 Lake Bellevue Dr. Suite 100A -'s Bellevue, WA 98005 �, n` �' Transportation . ,...,•.--_,,i i ,;_ -,,_ ,„.)� �� x,.�� ro� � x —a t*� �� a .G.a � .Engineering ,,...,: , .. :-,7lan �,,:. t in x & . , .,, Inc . ..,,I. i. .. ,,, r-' -' - , .+% - . ' ' " -- , ' 4 ' i.' ' 2223 - 112th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 Bellevue, Washington 98004-2952 Telephone: (425) 455-5320 Facsimile: (425) 453-5759 '4 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. fr2223-112"AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 101-BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 98004-2952 ICTOR H.BISHOP.P.E.President TELEPHONE(425)455-5320 AVID H.ENGER.P.E.Vies President FACSIMILE(425)453-5759 September 11, 2000 Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT ' 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat, LUA00-053,PP,ECF Arnold Property - Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum No. 2 Dear Mr. Fike: We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis addendum No. 2 for the proposed Arnold property single family residential project located on the northeast side of Beacon Way S.E., south of S. 7th Ct. in the City of,.Renton. The original report was prepared by Transportation Planning & Engineering (TP&E) and is dated January 5, 2000. Addendum No.1 was prepared by TP&E and is dated January 21, 2000. This addendum No. 2 has been prepared to respond to the May 26, 2000 letter to Mr. Ryan A. Fike from Elizabeth Higgens, Senior Planner for the City of Renton. Below are our responses: Traffic Volumes The City requested 24-hour traffic counts for one week at the following locations: 1. S. 7th St. between Grant Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S. 2. Cedar Ave. S. between S. 4th St. and S. 5th St. 3. Renton Ave. S. in the 300 block. Trafficount performed 24 hour counts at the above locations for 20 days between Saturday, June 24, 2000 and Sunday, July 23, 2000. The averages of each individual day as well as the average daily traffic (ADT, taken over the seven days of the week) and average weekday traffic (AWDT, average of Monday through Friday traffic) are shown in the table below: • 1LLarry kl-ProJec sIR0680991R068Orptadd2.doc • • Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT I ` Page - 2 - 24 Hour Traffic Volume Count Summary Total Two-Way Traffic Volumes Count Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat. Sun. ADT AWDT 1 940 932 1003 1067 995 921 858 959 987 2 727 726 990 900 758 693 657 779 820 3 1000 1033 785 937 1164 1037 945 986 984 The counts reveal that the traffic on S. 7th St. and Cedar Ave. S. is fairly constant throughout the week with a slight increase on Wednesday and Thursday. Likewise, traffic volumes are fairly constant on Renton Ave. S. throughout the week with the least amount of traffic during the middle of the week. Our original traffic report for the project presented 24-hour counts that were taken on Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S. on the west side of 1-405. From these counts estimates were made on the amount of traffic at the above count locations. Our estimates proved to be slightly higher than the actual counts. Therefore our original study can be considered conservative. Park Traffic • The counts taken for this addendum also indicate that there is not an appreciable increase in traffic due to usage of the Phillip Arnold Park. The counts that were taken • am. '-''. y in December of 1999 are very close to the latest counts taken in June and July 2000. Park usage is at its highest during the summer months for ball field uses, picnics and general use. However, the extra traffic generated by the park during the summer appears to be offset by increased traffic during_the rest of the war,.. T.his_cguld.be_q,;} attributable to school being in session and fewer people taking,vacations Burin the rest ' o�"flie y 9 P P,�. . .K�.g. _.-.....„�... .9- d_ �..R. The location of the Phillip Arnold Park should not affect the capacity of the proposed Arnold property residential development at any time of the year. As discussed below, the Arnold property access and S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection should have ample capacity to operate efficiently. Accident Records The City requested that the accident incident reports for the past five years for intersections and streets in the Renton Hill area be provided. The area requested includes streets bounded by Interstate 405 on the west and north, the Shuffleton Right Jj of Way to the south, and the Cedar River greenway to the east. !' 1LLarrykl-ProjedslR0880991R0880rpfadd2.doc ; r r • R ° ?t Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT Page - 3 - The accident records were researched and provided by the City of Renton. There were three_accidents that occurred on all of Renton Hill in the last five years. The location, date and type of each accident is detailed below: High Ave. S./S. 9th St. — Occurred on June 2, 2000. One vehicle backed into another vehicle. There were no injuries Mill Ave. S. 444 feet north of S. 5th St. — Occurred on April 7, 1996. A vehicle backing out of a driveway hit a parked vehicle. There were no injuries. Cedar Ave. S./S. 7th St. — Occurred on April 10, 2000. .A vehicle struck a parked vehicle. There were no injuries. There does not appear to be an unusually high number of accidents or any apparent accident pattern. Note that there were no recorded accidents near the Phillip Arnold Park entrance or other intersections near the Arnold Property project. Intersection Analysis The access to the proposed Arnold Property has been redesigned and is shown in Figure 1. The City has requested an analysis of the access intersection in conjunction with the existing S. 7th St./Beacon Way S./Jones Ave. S./S. 7th Ct. intersection (referred to as the S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection). The existing S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection has five legs and operates as an all-way stop intersection. The existing traffic volumes on S. 7th St. indicate that at most, an average of 987 pot4 etitecy. vehicles are currently being routed through the S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection even during the heaviest summer months. The peak hour is approximately ten percent of the daily traffic volume, or 99 trips. This corresponds to an average of one vehicle every 36 seconds. An all-way stop intersection can easily accommodate 400 to 500 or more vehicles per hour before average vehicle delay begins to move from a level of service (LOS)A to a LOS B. Both of these LOS grades indicate extreme efficiency and minimal average vehicle delays. The proposed Arnold Property project will add approximately 60 PM peak hour trips to the S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection. This will increase the total to 160 PM peak hour trips. This corresponds to an average of one vehicle every 23 seconds. Poisson probability curves show that for an average of one vehicle every 23 seconds, there is a 95 percent probability that there will be 3 or fewer vehicles arriving during the same 23 second interval. This still corresponds to average vehicle delays in the LOS A range. • The redesigned Arnold Property site access onto S. 7th Ct. allows for sight distance in excess of 300 feet along S. 7th St. and S. 7th Court. The S. 7th St./Beacon %Larry id-Projecfs1R0680991R0680rpfadd2.doe Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT Page - 4 - Way S. intersection and all of the legs are clearly visible from the Arnold Property access. Since the S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection is an all-way stop intersection, all of the vehicles coming from the intersection will be clearly visible at the Arnold Property access. Sight distance is not anticipated to be a problem at the proposed Arnold Property access. The low traffic volumes at the S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection indicate that there should be no queueing problems and therefore egress from the Arnold Property access to S. 7th Ct. should not be a problem. This addendum responds to the City's comments. If you have any questions please call me. ro�w Very truly yours, . D �' p.4' TRANSPORTATION PLANNING �e it% & ENGINEERIN , INC. cjOi -bC 411111.1 30251 � `41 CISTBZ ÷ . LDH:sv FssloN�� r�'~y,�i.0� Larry D. bbs, P.E. • �; AL , q Senior Transportation Engineer I Lam-,.EXPIRES 9/15/02_ s • • 11Larry Ic-ProjecfMR0680991R0680,pladd2.doc \ _ \ \�' �/' EX. SS 'H I Nl/4 COR SEC 20-23-5 \\ / \ RIM JJ6. FOUND CASED CONC M \`/� �t CTR. CH . 328.2 (NW,SW) 7' emsi \' ` \�\ I I• EX. S.TYPE II / \ S� `� �9. f)C CB. TYPE 11 TOP J44.4 ��`� TOP JJ7.7 COULD NOT OPEN /` �\‘‘ 8 IE 334.7(SW) IEX. CB.TYPE I / '\P t'4! !((�� lE J31.B (SE) TOP J4J.5 •�:X SSMN �f�1�` � TR"IE JJl.6 (NW) 12"If 340.4 (S) / i/M JJ7.7 �� • !2"IE J40.5 (!�2) :1R. CHNL J26.9�( eye \ • P7UGA :/ �■ \� I G ■PM �4 I iJ �TV �/• i�� TRZ Gitmiiio4 '71-4.--;(4000. % . Mid • St•,17-51-' ......" ••• N.14............" .. lit: ....,110 . _... :40ittroPP.- 7 _...mulii!lip7=111....et : /A1Pr . . VW •40111*. -..—• :111500 . . V .1 Cr. ail_ . • ' ' - '-,401114,_4 I „Ierr;oier_ _ .„„„ "I'v/riOlif 1 ,,,/ / \ 1 _______________L'i,---1 '..','S--411.440.470ig. 0- ,--(#4e--";t*-1m-IP-.. 1.111 - 1 ARtA 1 1-h No). , 4.1.tpc...1 • . , . .J.. 1 ''."-:,..\ ' ''' '. 701111114# • 1-7 t Yttil..LA tf 8-.. . ..; ...-4...e4 /".,,i EX.' CB TYPE 6 • )( "" �►`;r--"~t l2'IEf09 1/(//yy TOP JJ8.9 �� G I'" !lP7L \��I l \ "P��, , / 8"IE J36.2 E 8"!E J36.4 (SE) r . ‘�PV\�\� `�\ :j ! 1 I � • \ ` \7�\ .:- I 1 il1 f.7,I ki • ‘ . 40 ••.. .. .. f'.4..41-4 •.-,..;Pi L. .41 . f\ ' • • \I \ v***‘• \\N ..ot- ‘. -----;---z.: VOW: 1W I i\5-04.. I \' \41:47141.' t\ I . ' eill 1 f 4. \ ,;-lik \ \ :qi•.•'/' ,.:-?Zz.t.,,q,,4x..:L...:%4 :. ); ckr, ‘1,\ 11110.1., ‘ • - OH . / • 7Ro .,,,. 0 PTL / ' I '/ I , `.\ `�� \ -!- I - I-- • I .� - r FIGURE SITE ACCESS ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS .. 1. '. . ADDENDUM NO. 2 -. J XIGN3ddV RENTON, WASHINGTON' TRAFFICOUNT S MI ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCI 1 TPE175T 1 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20701 ' Pace : 3 Begin < EB >< WB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/23 2 ` 5 2 10 4 15 12:15 - 3 17 4 5 7 22 12:30 1 1 6 0 5 1 11 12:45 0 1 6 11 39 0 6 10 30 0 12 21 69 01:00 2 9 1 9 3 18 01:15 ' 1 7 0 9 1 16 01:30 0 10 0 7 0 17 01:45 0 3 6 32 0 1 4 29 0 4 10 61 02:00 0 11 0 9 0 20 02:15 1 i 9 0 4 1 13 02:30 0 ' 6 0 4 0 10 02:45 1 2 10 36 1 1 8 25 2 3 18 61 03:00 1 1 8 0 3 1 11 03:15 0 1 12 0 11 0 23 03:30 1 12 0 6 1 18 03:45 1 1 3 13 45 1 1 9 29 2 4 22 74 04:00 0 16 1 4 1 20 04:15 0 6 0 10 0 16 04:30 . 1 1 13 0 10 1 23 04:45 0 1 7 42 0 1 11 35 0 2 18 77 05:00 0 ' 7 0 25 0 32 05:15 1 7 0 10 1 17 05:30 0 1 9 1 5 1 14 05:45 0 1 12 35 1 2 11 51 1 3 23 86 06:00 0 7 0 8 0 15 06:15 0 13 0 17 0 30 06:30 1 1 7 0 8 1 15 06:45 0 1 5 32 2 2 3 36 2 3 8 68 07:00 0 1 8 1 9 1 17 07:15 0 3 4 5 4 8 07:30 2 9 1 11 3 20 07:45 0 2 6 26 7 13 8 33 7 15 14 59 08:00 3 8 4 2 7 10 08:15 5 6 5 1 10 7 08:30 4 4 5 5 9 9 08:45 3 15 3 21 5 19 2 10 8 34 5 31 09:00 7 1 7 8 14 9 09:15 2 - 6 3 4 5 10 09:30 61 2 8 4 14 6 09:45 8 23 5 14 8 26 4 20 16 49 9 34 10:00 2 I 4 10 0 12 •I'" 4 10:15 61 6 11 3 17 9 10:30 8 j 1 10 1 18 2 i 10:45 3 19 • 1 12 5 36 0 4 8 55 1 16 ' 11:00 7 ' 4 5 4 12 8 11:15 10 ,. 0 13 3 23 3 . 11:30 8 i 2 5 1 13 3 ( 11:45 4 29 1 7 8 31 1 9 12 60 2 16 Totals 105 341 139 311 244 652 Day Totals 446 450 896 Split % 43.0% 52.3% 56.9% 47.7% Peak Hour 11:001 03:15 09:45 04:15 09:45 04:30 Volume 291 53 39 56 63 90 P.H.F. .72, .82 .88 .56 .87 .70 1 , II 1 1 . . 1 RE1TON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCK 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20701 . Paae • 2 Begin < EB >< WB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/22 -_ 1 9 0 6 1 15 12:15 2 5 1 10 3 15 12:30 0 9 3 7 3 16 12:45 1 4 7 30 0 4 15 38 1 8 22 68 01:00 0 3 0 4 0 7 01:15 0 8 1 5 1 13 01:30 0 2 1 4 1 6 01:45 1 1 6 19 0 2 14 27 1 3 20 46 02:00 0 9 0 10 0 19 02:15 1 5 0 7 1 12 02:30 0, 6 1 7 1 13 02:45 0 1 10 30 0 1 6 30 0 2 16 60 03:00 0 9 0 9 0 18 03:15 0 3 0 7 0 10 03:30 0 4 0 3 0 7 03:45 0 * 11 27 0 • 11 30 0 * 22 57 04:00 2 6 1 7 3 13 ' 04:15 1 3 0 6 1 9 04:30 0 6 2 5 2 11 04:45 1 4 5 20 0 3 7 25 1 7 12 45 05:00 0 3 2 10 2 13 ' 05:15 0 12 1 7 1 19 05:30 2 10 3 4 5 14 05:45 0 2 7 32 3 9 3 24 3 11 10 56 06:00 0, 6 2 10 2 16 06:15 1' 6 1 3 2 9 06:30 0 4 2 2 2 6 06:45 1 2 12 28 0 5 8 23 1 7 20 51 07:00 0 6 1 5 1 11 07:15 3 6 5 8 8 14 07:30 1 2 9 3 10 5 07:45 0 4 . 3 17 2 17 . 2 18 2 21 5 35 ' 08:00 4' 6 4 3 8 9 08:15 2 2 6 4 8 6 08:30 2'' 8 5 2 7 10 08:45 1, 9 3 19 6 , 21 2 11 7 30 5 30 ' 09:00 2. 1 5 3 7 4 09:15 4, 0 2 1 6 1 " 09:30 ' S' 4 9 7 14 11 09:45 2 13 8 13 4 20 4 15 6 33 12 28 10:00 2 0 3 3 5I 3 10:15 41 3 7 0 11 3 10:30 6 5 8 5 14 10 . 10:45 7 19 6 14 6 24 2 10 13 43 8 24 11:00 7 1 7 0 14 1 11:15 10 3 13 0 23 3 • • 5 11:30 9 1 13 5 22 6 11:45 13 39 1 6 7 40 1 6 20 79 2 12 Totals 98 255 146 257 244 512 Day Totals 353 403 756 Split % 40.1% 49.8% 59.8% 50.2% Peak Hour 11:00 05:15 11:00 12:00 11:00 12:00 Volume 39 35 40 38 79 68 P.H.F. .75 .72 .76 .63 .85 .77 I - _ 2 ' . • RENTON, WASIINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCH 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20701 Paae 1 Begin < EB >< WB >< Combined > Friday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/21 2 4 0 6 2 10 12:15 0 6 0 7 0 13 12:30 2 4 3 9 5 13 12:45 0 4 13 27 0 3 4 26 0 7 17 53 01:00 0 10 1 7 1 17 01:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 01:30 0 , 5 0 6 0 11 01:45 0 ' 10 33 0 1 8 27 0 1 18 60 02:00 1 0 0 6 1 14 02:15 0 5 0 4 0 9 02:30 0 6 0 4 0 10 02:45 1 2 10 29 1 1 6 20 2 3 16 49 03:00 0 8 0 5 0 13 03:15 0 13 0 6 0 19 03:30 1 11 1 7 2 18 03:45 1 2 10 42 0 1 9 27 1 3 19 69 04:00 0• 8 0 10 0 18 04:15 0 5 0 5 0 10 04:30 0 10 2 3 2 13 04:45 0 • 16 39 3 5 13 31 3 5 29 70 05:00 3 9 3 7 6 16 05:15 1 10 6 2 7 12 05:30 0 12 6 2 6 14 05:45 1 5 7 38 7 22 8 19 8 27 15 57 06:00 2 6 4 11 6 17 06:15 0 11 4 2 4 13 06:30 0 7 8 8 8 15 06:45 0 2 8 32 7 23 4 25 7 25 12 57 07:00 2 6 3 8 5 14 07:15 3 6 9 7 12 13 07:30 ' 2 8 9 4 11 12 07:45 0 7 9 29 6 27 10 29 6 34 19 58 08:00 4 13 8 6 12 19 08:15 1 5 6 10 7 15 08:30 3 5 5 5 8 10 08:45 6 14 9 32 6 25 5 26 12 39 14 58 09:00 4 8 6 7 10 15 09:15 - 6 8 6 3 12 11 09:30 4 9 8 16 12 25 09:45 8 22 . 5 30 11 31 1 27 19 53 6 57 10:00 7 11 8 2 15 ..., 13 10:15 3 6 6 1 9 7 10:30 3 5 2 1 5 6 10:45 • 4 17 1 23 4 20 2 6 8 37 3 29 • ' 11:00 9 4 3 2 12 6 11:15 , 1 1 10 1 11 2 11:30 1 4 3 0 4 4 11:45 6 17 5 14 6 22 3 6 12 39 8 20 Totals 92 368 181 269 273 637 Day Totals 460 450 910 Split % 33.7% 57.7% 66.3% 42.2% Peak Hour 09:15 04:45 09:15 03:15 09:15 03:15 Volume 25 47 33 32 58 74 P.N.F. .78 .73 .75 .8 .76 .97 13 . " RNTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/17/2000 LOC9 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20701 . Paoe I Begin Mon. 07/17 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time EB WB EB WB ED WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 12:00 am • * • • • * • * 4 3 4 4 6 6 5 4 01:00 — * • • • • • * * 0 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 02:00 * • * • * * * • 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 03:00 • * * • • * • * 2 1 0 0 3 1 2 1 04:00 * * * * • * * * 0 5 4 3 1 1 2 3 05:00 * • • * * * • * 5 22 2 9 1 2 3 11 06:00 * * * * • * * * 2 23 2 5 1 2 2 10 07:00 • * • • • • * * 7 27 4 17 2 13 4 19 08:00 • * * • • • • * 14 25 9 21 15 19 13 22 09:00 * • * • * * * • 22 31 13 20 23 26 19 26 10:00 * • * * • * * * 17 20 19 24 19 36 18 27 11:00 * • * • * * * * 17 22 39 40 29 31 28 31 12:00 pm * • • * * * * * 27 26 30 38 39 30 32 31 01:00 * * • • • * * * 33 27 19 27 32 29 28 28 02:00 * * • • • * * • 29 20 30 30 36 25 32 25 03:00 * * * • * * * * 42 27 27 30 45 29 38. 29 04:00 * • * * • • • * 39 31 20 25 42 35 34 30 05:00 * * * * • * * * 38 19 32 24 35 51 35 31 06:00 * • * * • * * * 32 25 28 23 32 36 31 28 07:00 * * * • * * * * 29 29 17 18 26 33 24 27 08:00 * • * * * * • • 32 26 19 11 21 10 24 16 09:00 * • * * * * * * 30 27 13 15 14 20 19 21 10:00 • * * • • * * * 23 6 14 10 12 4 16 7 11:00 * * * • * * * * 14 6 6 6 7 9 9 7 Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 460 450 353 403 446 450 421 436 0 0 0 0 910 756 896 857 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 109.2% 103.2% 83.8% 92.4% 105.9% 103.2% AM Peaks 09:00 09:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 Volume 22 31 39 40 29 36 28 31 PM Peaks 03:00 04:00 05:00 12:00 03:00 05:00 03:00 12:00 Volume 42 31 32 38 45 51 38 31 ADTs . ' ' I • _ 4.: , • % 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/17/2000 LOCH 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20702 Page : 1 Begin Mon. , 07/17 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am • • * * * * * * 4 4 2 3 6 4 4 4 01:00 _ * • • * * * * a 0 0 1 0 2 2 1 1 02:00 * • * * • * * 0 3 0 0 1 4 0 2 03:00 * 1 * * * * * a * 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 04:00 • * * * * a * * 7 1 5 2 3 2 5 2 05:00 *, * * • * * * * 13 3 4 2 3 2 7 2 06:00 * * * • * • * * 17 5 10 3 1 1 9 3 07:00 * * * * * * * 24 5 12 5 13 2 16 4 08:00 * • * • • * * * 18 8 12 5 12 8 14 7 09:00 a, * * a a a a * 35 8 18 6 16 7 23 7 10:00 * * • * * a * * 21 13 14 12 19 6 18 10 11:00 * a * * a a a * 15 17 28 22 29 32 24 24 12:00 pm *i * * * a a * a 15 26 19 20 20 22 18 23 01:00 at * * a a a a * 22 18 25 20 24 15 24 18 02:00 *, * * a * a a * 20 22 16 15 18 22 18 20 03:00 * * * a * * * * 22 26 19 12 26 24 22 21 04:00 * • * a * * * a 37 27 22 21 25 21 28 23 05:00 a * • * * * a * 31 33 32 9 26 23 30 22 06:00 * * a * • * a a 16 27 23 18 35 20 25 22 07:00 • * * * • * a * 19 17 10 16 22 25 17 19 08:00 •I * * * • • a * 12 27 8 13 8. 16 9 19 09:00 *1 • * * * a a * 16 9 6 10 12 6 11 8 10:00 a a * * • a a a 6 13 8 11 6 10 7 11 11:00 * * • a • * a • 3 8 8 8 6 3 6 6 Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 375 322 304 235 333 278 337 280 0 0 0 0 697 539 611 617 Avg. Day .0%, .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 111.2% 115.0% 90.2% 83.9% 98.8% 99.2% AM Peaks 09:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 Volume 35 17 28 22 29 32 24 24 1 PM Peaks 04:00 05:00 05:00 04:00 06:00 07:00 05:00 12:00 Volume 37 33 32 21 35 25 30 23 ADTs V • 1 1 ..,: 1 . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH S S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 L0C8 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20702 Page 1 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Friday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/21 __ 1 4 3 2 4 6 12:15 lj 3 1 4 2 7 12:30 1 4 0 11 1 15 12:45 11 4 4 15 0 4 9 26 1 8 13 41 01:00 0, 5 0 5 0 10 01:15 0' 4 0 4 0 8 01:30 0 4 0 5 0 9 01:45 0 * 9 22 0 * 4 18 0 • 13 40 02:00 0, 7 1 4 1 11 02:15 0 4 1 4 1 8 02:30 0 1 1 7 1 8 02:45 0, * 8 20 0 3 7 22 0 3 15 42 03:00 2 7 1 2 3 9 03:15 0 6 0 7 0 13 03:30 0 3 0 8 0 11 03:45 0 2 6 22 1 2 9 26 1 4 15 48 04:00 0 7 0 4 0 11 . 04:15 2 13 0 9 2 22 04:30 2 8 - 0 4 2 12 04:45 3 7 9 37 1 1 10 27 4 8 19 64 05:00 2 12 1 12 3 24 05:15 7, 4 0 9 7 13 05:30 2 9 1 4 3 13 05:45 2 13 6 31 1 3 8 33 3 16 14 64 06:00 6 7 3 8 9 15 06:15 3 3 1 4 4 7 06:30 3 3 1 7 4 10 06:45 5 17 3 16 0 5 8 27 5 22 11 43 07:00 3 4 1 5 4 9 07:15 11 4 2 5 13 9 07:30 5 6 0 4 5 10 07:45 5 24 5 19 2 5 3 17 7 29 8 36 08:00 4 3 2 13 6 16 08:15 5 2 1 6 6 8 08:30 1 . 6 3 3 4 9 , 08:45 8 18 1 12 2 8 5 27 10 26 6 39 09:00 8 5 1 1 9 6 09:15 8 3 3 4 11 7 09:30 7 5 1 3 8 8 09:45 12 35 3 16 3 8 1 9 15 43 4 25 10:00 8 0 1 5 9 '' 5 10:15 5 3 5 3 10 6 10:30 2 1 4 2 6 3 10:45 6 21 2 6 3 13 3 13 9 34 5 19 11:00 2 1 1 0 3 1 11:15 4 2 5 1 9 3 , . 11:30 2 0 2 5 4 5 11:45 7 15 0 3 9 17 2 8 16 32 2 11 Totals 156 219 69 253 225 472 Day Totals 375 322 697 Split % 69.3% 46.4% 30.6% 53.6% Peak Hour 09:00 04:15 11:00 04:15 09:00 04:15 Volume 35 42 17 35 43 77 P.H.F. .72 .80 .47 .72 .71 .80 I I I • - 6 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT C$DAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCI 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20702 Pane 2 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/22 1 4 1 5 2 9 12:-i 5 '"" 0; 5 1 5 1 10 12:30 1 6 0 5 1 11 12:45 0 2 4 19 1 3 5 20 1 5 9 39 01:00 0 7 0 6 0 13 01:15 1 11 0 3 1 14 01:30 0 3 0 6 0 9 01:45 0, 1 4 25 0 • 5 20 0 1 9 45 02:00 0 3 0 8 0 11 02:15 0 3 0 4 0 7 02:30 0 7 0 1 0 8 02:45 0 * 3 16 0 * 2 15 0 • 5 31 03:00 1 11 0 4 1 15 03:15 1 3 1 2 2 5 03:30 0 3 0 4 0 7 03:45 0 2 2 19 1 2 2 12 1 4 4 31 04;00 1 11 .1 5 2 16 04:15 2 2 0 5 2 7 04:30 0 4 0 6 0 10 04:45 2 5 5 22 1 2 5 21 3 7 10 43 05:00 0 9 0 1 0 10 05:15 2 7 1 1 3 8 05:30 2 12 0 3 2 15 05:4 5 0 4 4 32 1 2 4 9 1 6 8 41 06:00 1 8 0 5 1 13 06:15 5 3 2 4 7 7 06:30 4 5 0 5 4 10 06:45 0 10 7 23 1 3 4 18 1 13 11 41 07:00 1 5 2 4 3 9 07:15 3 0 1 3 4 3 07:30 3 2 0 4 3 6 07:45 5 12 3 10 2 5 5 16 7 17 8 26 08:00 4 3 3 2 7 5 08:15 3 1 1 1 4 2 08:30 0 2 1 5 1 7 08:45 5 12 2 8 0 5 5 13 5 17 7 21 09:00 2 3 0 1 2 4 ' 09515 4 2 2 4 6 6 09:30 5 0 3 2 8 2 09:45 7 18 ' 1 6 1 6 3 10 8 24 4 16 10:00 3 1 1 1 4 .p 2 10:15 4 1 4 1 8 2 10:30 3 2 3 6 6 8 10145 4 14 4 8 4 12 3 11 8 26 7 19 11:00 5 2 2 3 7 5 11;15 8 1 7 2 15 3 11:30 12 4 4 0 16 4 11:45 3 28 1 8 9 22 3 8 12 50 4 16 Totals 108 196 62 173 170 369 Day Totals 304 235 539 Split % 63.5% 53.1% 36.4% 46.8% Peak Hour 10:45 04:45 11:00 01:30 11:00 12:30 Volume 29 33 22 23 50 47 P.H.F. .60 .68 .61 .71 .78 .83 I 1 l RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCO 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20702 P&ae 3 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/23 1, 8 1 7 2 15 12:15 4 8 3 7 7 15 12:30 0 2 0 2 0 4 12:45 1 6 2 20 0 4 6 22 1 10 8 42 01:00 1 10 1 3 2 13 01:15 0 6 0 4 0 10 01:30 1 2 0 3 1 5 01:45 0 2 6 24 1 2 5 15 1 4 11 39 02:00 0 3 0 6 0 9 02:15 0 3 1 5 1 8 02:30 0 5 0 4 0 9 02:45 1 1 7 18 3 4 7 22 4 5 14 40 03:00 0 5 0 4 0 9 03:15 0 7 1 2 1 9 03:30 0 8 0 10 0 18 03:45 0 • 6 26 0 1 8 24 0 1 14 50 04:00 0 3 0 7 0 10 , 04:15 1 6 1 5 2 11 04:30 0 9 1 5 1 14 04:45 2 3 7 25 0 2 4 21 2 5 11, 46 05:00 0 10 1 5 1 15 05:15 1 6 1 6 2 12 05:30 1 4 0 7 1 11 05:45 1 3 6 26 0 2 5 23 1 5 11 49 06:00 0 11 0 6 0 17 06:15 0 12 0 4 0 16 06:30 1 8 0 3 1 11 06:45 0 1 4 35 1 1 7 20 1 2 11 55 07:00 3 5 0 7 3 12 07:15 5 7 1 4 6 11 07:30 1 6 0 6 1 12 07:45 4 .13 4 22 1 2 8 25 5 15 12 47 08:00 4 1 1 5 5 6 08:15 5 0 2 0 7 0 08:30 3 4 5 6 B 10 08:45 0 12 3 8 0 8 5 16 0 20 8 24 09:00 6 4 1 1 7 5 09:15 3 3 0 2 3 5 09:30 ' 5 2 3 0 8 2 09:45 2 16 3 12 3 7 3 6 5 23 6 18 10:00 3 1 1 5 4,ov 6 10:15 7 2 1 0 8 2 10:30 5 2 2 3 7 • 5 10:45 4 19 1 6 2 6 2 10 6 25 3 16 . 11:00 6 2 6 2 12 4 11:15 9 2 5 0 14 2 , 11:30 3 2 8 1 11 3 11:45 11 29 0 6 13 32 0 3 24 61 0 9 Totals 105 228 71 207 176 435 Day Totals 333 278 611 Split % 59.6% 52.4% 40.3% 47.5% Peak Hour 11:00 05:45 11:00 03:30 11:00 05:30 Volume 29 37 32 30 61 55 P.H.F. .65 .77 .61 .75 .63 .80 I 1 . 1 ti RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/17/2000 LOCI 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20703 . Paae 1 Begin Mon. 07/17 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am _- • * * * • * * * 5 9 5 5 13 15 8 10 01:00 * * * • * • * * 4 5 3 4 5 7 4 5 02:00 • • * * • * * * 1 3 2 3 1 6 1 4 03:00 * * * * * * * * 1 1 4 2 1 4 2 2 04:00 * * * * * * * * 3 2 4 5 1 0 3 2 05:00 * • • • * * • * 16 4 8 2 5 2 10 3 06:00 * * * • a * • * 28 3 7 4 5 3 13 3 07:00 a a • • • * • * 35 8 27 4 16 4 26 5 08:00 • • * * a * * * 38 23 24 11 25 18 29 17 09:00 * * a • • • * * 34 34 31 24 30 20 32 26 10:00 * * * • * * * * 26 33 43 23 44 25 38 27 11:00 * * * * * * * * 42 23 47 41 33 27 41 30 12:00 pm • * * * * * * • 30 29 57 40 39 47 42 39 01:00 • * * * • * * * 29 42 36 38 38 42 34 41 02:00 * • • • a • * • 28 42 47 55 35 30 37 42 03:00 • • • • • * * * 37 56 37 52 36 52 37 53 04:00 a * • • * • • • 35 56 27 32 39 45 34 44 05:00 * * • * • * • a 30 51 34 55 45 39 36 48 06:00 • ' * • • • • • • 31 48 36 49 31 49 33 49 07:00 • * • • * • • • 40 40 23 25 36 37 33 34 08:00 • * • * a • • • 32 40 19 25 22 31 24 32 09:00 * • * • • * * • 31 38 23 23 20 23 25 28 10:00 * * • a * • • * 14 28 16 18 13 26 14 24 11:00 * * • * * • * * 9 17 11 12 9 10 10 13 Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 579 635 571 552 542 562 566 581 0 0 0 0 1214 1123 1104 1147 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 102.3% 109.2% 100.8% 95.0% 95.7% 96.7% AM Peaks 11:00 09:00 11:00 11:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 Volume 42 34 47 41 44 27 41 30 PM Peaks 07:00 03:00 12:00 02:00 05:00 03:00 12:00 03:00 Volume 40 56 57 ,55 45 52 42 53 ADTs RF,NTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY 8-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 360-491-0116 File I.D. : TPE20703 Paste : 1 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Friday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/21 __ 3 4 3 6 6 10 12:15 0, 8 2 7 2 15 12:30 1 11 3 4 4 15 12:45 1 5 7 30 1 9 12 29 2 14 19 59 01:00 2 9 2 11 4 20 01:15 2 7 1 10 3 17 01:30 0 9 1 11 1 20 01:45 0 4 4 29 1 5 10 42 1 9 14 71 02:00 0 8 0 10 0 18 02:15 0 5 1 11 1 16 02:30 0 4 0 10 0 14 02:45 1 1 11 28 2 3 11 42 3 4 22 70 03:00 0 7 0 17 0 24 03:15 0 11 1 18 1 29 03:30 1 9 0 10 1 19 03:45 0 1 10 37 0 1 11 56 0 2 21 93 04:00 0 10 0 17 0 27 . 04:15 0 9 0 11 0 20 04:30 1 5 0 11 1 16 04:45 2 3 11 35 2 2 17 56 4 5 • 28 91 05:00 3 9 2 13 5 22 05:15 4 7 1 12 5 19 05:30 4 5 0 20 4 25 05:45 5 16 9 30 1 4 6 51 6 20 15 81 06:00 7 13 2 12 9 25 06:15 4 4 1 15 5 19 . 06:30 9 6 0 8 9 14 06:45 8 28 8 31 0 3 13 48 8 31 21 79 07:00 7 16 1 7 8 23 07:15 10 6 3 10 13 16 • 07:30 10 10 3 10 13 20 07:45 8 35 8 40 1 8 13 40 9 43 21 00 08:00 9 11 6 10 .15 21 08:15 6 10 2 5 8 15 08:30 15 5 7 5 22 10 08:45 8 38 6 32 8 23 20 40 16 61 26 72 09:00 8 ° 6 11 8 19 14 09:15 8 8 11 10 19 18 09:30 7 15 4 12 11 27 09:45 11 34 2 31 8 34 8 38 19 68 10 69 10:00 10 3 10 9 20 'V 12 10:15 5 2 8 8 13 10 10:30 4 5 8 6 12 11 '10:45 7 26 4 14 7 33 5 28 14 59 9 42 11:00 6 2 9 3 15 5 11:15 14 2 4 4 18 6 , 1 11:30 14 2 3 5 17 7 i 11:45 8 42 3 9 7 23 5 17 15 65 8 26 Totals 233 346 148 487 381 833 ' Day Totals 579 635 1214 Split % 61.1% 41.5% 38.8% 58.4% Peak Hour 11:00 03:15 08:30 04:45 08:30 03:15 Volume 42 40 37 62 76 96 P.H.F. .75 .90 .84 .77 .86 .82 I 1 I - 0 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOC$ 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20703 . Paae 2. Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/22 1' 10 3 11 4 21 12:15 1 14 1 8 2 22 12:30 1 14 0 12 1 26 12:45 2 5 19 57 1 5 9 40 3 10 28 97 01:00 1 5 2 9 3 14 01:15 1' 11 0 16 1 27 01:30 1, 7 0 6 1 13 01:45 0! 3 13 36 2 4 7 38 2 7 20 74 02:00 0: 17 1 15 1 32 02:15 0' 13 1 11 1 24 02:30 2 8 0 15 2 23 02:45 0 2 9 47 1 3 14 55 1 5 23 102 03:00 1 11 2 21 3 32 03:15 2 8 0 8 2 16 03:30 0 8 0 10 0 18 03:45 1 4 10 37 0 2 13 52 1 6 23 89 04:00 1 7 4 10 5 17 04:15 0 4 1 6 1 10 04:30 3 6 0 11 3 17 04:45 0 4 10 27 0 5 5 32 0 9 15 59 05:00 2 12 0 12 2 24 05:15 1 7 1 12 2 19 05:30 3[ 8 1 20 4 28 05:45 2j 8 7 34 0 2 11 55 2 10 18 89 06:00 3' 14 0 10 3 24 06:15 0 4 2 10 2 14 06:30 1 3 1 15 2 . 18 06:45 3 7 15 36 1 4 14 49 4 11 29 85 07:00 4 4 0 9 4 13 07:15 9 12 4 8 13 20 07:30 9 3 0 3 9, 6 07:45 5 27 4 23 0 4 5 25 5 31 9 48 08:00 6 3 3 8 9 11 08:15 4 9 3 4 7 13 08:30 9 - 4 0 8 9 12 08:45 51 24 3 19 5 11 5 25 10 35 8 44 09:00 9, 4 3 6 12 10 09:15 7 7 10 4 17 11 09:30 101 8 7 7 17 15 09:45 51 31 4 23 4 24 6 23 9 55 10 46 10:00 9! 4 7 3 16 .A• 7 10:15 161 2 4 6 20 8 10:30 9, 5 4 6 13 11 . 10:45 9, 43 5 16 8 23 3 18 17 66 8 34 11:00 7 0 8 6 15 6 11:15 15, 9 10 2 25 11 , 11:30 15 0 7 3 22 3 ' 11:45 10 47 2 11 16 41 1 12 26 88 3 23 Totals 205 366 128 424 333 790 Day Totals 571 552 1123 Split % 61.5% 46.3% 38.4% 53.6% Peak Hour 11:OO, 12:00 11:00 02:15 11:00 02:00 Volume 47, 57 41 61 88 102 P.H.F. .78 .75 .64 .72 .84 .79 1 1 1 I RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/21/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 1 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE20703 . Paae : I Begin < 1 NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. . P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/23 2 ' 13 5 8 7 21 12:15 — 31 11 3 18 6 29 12:30 71 5 5 9 12 14 12:45 1 13 10 39 2 15 12 47 3 28 22 86 01:00 1! 9 2 15 3 24 01:15 31 13 3 9 6 22 01:30 01 10 2 8 2 18 01:45 11 5 6 38 0 7 10 42 1 12 16 80 02:00 0, 10 1 5 1 15 02:15 11 9 2 11 3 20 02:30 0' 7 0 5 0 12 02:45 01 1 9 35 3 6 9 30 3 7 18 65 03:00 01 8 1 12 1 20 03:15 01 9 0 12 0 21 03:30 01 7 2 13 2 20 03:45 11 1 12 36 1 4 15 52 2 5 27 88 04:00 11 6 0 18 1 24 04:15 0! 13 0 4 0 17 ' 04:30 0 11 0 12 0 23 04:45 0, 1 9 39 0 * 11 45 0 1 20 84 05:00 1' 20 0 6 1 26 05:15 2, 9 1 10 3 19 05:30 11 7 1 7 2 14 05:45 1 5 9 45 0 2 16 39 1 7 25 84 06:00 01 9 0 15 0 24 06:15 11 10 1 18 2 28 06:30 21 6 1 9 3 15 06:45 2! 5 6 31 1 3 7 49 3 8 13 80 07:00 11 10 0 12 1 22 07:15 3, 7 1 7 4 14 07:30 31 7 2 9 5 16 . 07:45 91 16 12 36 1 4 9 37 10 20 21 .73 08:00 41 5 5 8 9 13 08:15 3' 3 4 10 7 13 08:30 6 9 6 5 12 14 08:45 12, 25 5 22 3 18 8 31 15 43 13 53 09:00 91 6 6 4 15 10 09:15 2 7 2 10 4 17 09:30 7 5 6 5 13 10 09:45 12' 30 2 20 6 20 4 23 18 50 6 43 10:00 171 4 4 6 21 10 10:15 121 4 9 7 21 11 10:30 10 4 10 4 20 8 10:45 5 44 1 13 2 25 9 26 7 69 10 39 11:00 6 4 8 3 14 7 11:15 111 2 7 2 18 4 11:30 51 1 6 2 11 3 ' 11:45 lii 33 2 9 6 27 3 10 17 60 5 19 Totals 179I 363 131 431 310 794 Day Totals 1 542 562 1104 Split % 57.7%, 45.7% 42.2% 54.2% Peak Hour 09:45; 04:15 09:45 03:15 09:45 03:15 Volume 511 53 29 58 80 92 P.H.F. .75I .66 .72 .80 .95 .85 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 I .J I 1 1 1 1 1 1 L • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S ITH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOCH 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 . Paae : t Begin Mon. 06/19 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time WB ES WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB 12:00 am * a * • a a * a a * 4 8 2 4 3 6 01:00 * * * • * • * * * • 1 6 4 6 2 6 02:00 * * a * * * * a * * 2 2 2 4 2 3 03:00 * a a * a * r * • • 0 1 2 1 1 1 04:00 a a * a * * * a a * 1 0 1 1 1 0 05:00 a a * a a a * a * a 6 1 2 0 4 0 06:00 a i a * a a a a a a a 9 3 3 2 6 2 07:00 a a • • a • • • a • 16 6 16 3 16 4 08:00 a a a a • a a * * a 21 9 21 15 21 12 09:00 * * * * * • a * a • 22 14 28 16 25 15 10:00 * a a a a * a * a * 33 29 31 24 32 26 11:00 a * a * * * a • a * 37 35 31 21 34 28 12:00 pm a * a a * a a * a a 26 24 21 40 24 32 01:00 * * • a * * * a a • 33 44 32 36 32 40 02:00 a a a * a a * * * * 22 41 25 25 24 33 03:00 a * a a a a * a * * 24 26 34 37 29 32 04:00 * • • * a a * • • * 22 25 31 37 26 31 05:00 * * a • * a • a • • 53 33 33 30 43 32 06:00 • a • a • • * a a • 32 39 35 30 34 34 07:00 * , a a a * * • * * • 27 28 26 34 26 31 08:00 a ' a a a * a • a a a 21 20 22 27 22 24 09:00 al * * * * a * a a * 12 16 23 29 18 22 10:00 a , * • a * * a * a * 10 21 8 15 9 18 11:00 * * a a a a * a a * 4 12 2 6 3 9 Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 438 443 435 443 437 441 0 0 0 0 0 881 878 878 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 100.2% 100.4% 99.5% 100.4% AM Peaks 11:00 11:00 10:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 Volume 37 35 31 24 34 28 PM Peaks 05:00 01:00 06:00 12:00 05:00 01:00 Volume 53 44 35 40 43 40 - 13 L , RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S'7TH ST BTWN 1 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOC# 1 TPE I 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 , Page : 2 Begin Mon! 06/26 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB FJ 12:00 am 3 2 1 2 0 7 2 3 4 3 5 4 3 6 3 4 01:00 1 1 1 0 3 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 3 5 1 2 02:00 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 03:00 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 1 04:00 3 2 3 1 6 1 6 1 6 2 2 1 0 1 4 1 05:00 21 0 15 1 20 1 21 1 23 1 4 1 1 0 15 1 06:00 23 3 33 3 29 3 28 4 23 5 4 3 2 6 20 4 07:00 28 11 29 10 31 15 25 8 33 8 7 2 16 3 24 8 08:00 30 14 23 12 17 10 25 8 21 15 22 11 21 18 23 13 09:00 33 28 22 13 31 15 16 17 37 19 31 23 23 14 28 18 10:00 32 21 25 16 26 17 27 13 25 21 27 30 27 28 27 21 11:00 27 25 24 22 21 20 13 22 27 27 49 40 34 24 28 26 . 12:00 pm 20 30 39 40 33 35 30 34 29 33 44 62 28 43 32 40 01:00 32 35 36 42 26 31 35 30 31 32 25 51 26 40 30 37 02:00 28 35 26 31 22 31 25 33 25 34 42 40 33 28 29 33 03:00 20 29 25 54 18 35 26 39 35 .43 , 36 27 41 30 29 37 04:00 27 34 29 41 33 47 31 50 24 47 27 27 23 27 28 39 05:00 24 50 32 50 32 52 22 58 36 66 39 32 26 21 30 47 06:00 27 39 34 35 29 52 26 55 31 51 48 30 11 20 29 40 07:00 33 45 21 35 32 42 60 45 34 31 10 23 24 20 31 34 08:00 23 41 19 33 26 42 36 43 43 25 14 17 15 19 25 31 09:00 30 23 18 16 24 19 20 21 16 19 14 19 9 16 19 19 10:00 21 18 5 12 24 24 9 19 8 16 9 12 4 5 11 15 11:00 1 2 4 8 5 12 5 6 4 10 7 7 0 4 4 7 Totals 491 489 466 480 489 514 491 513 517 511 469 466 372 380. 472 479 980 946 1003 1004 1028 935 752 951 Avg. Day 104.0% 102.0% 98.7% 100.2% 103.6% 107.3% 104.0% 107.1% 109.5% 106.6% 99.3% 97.2% 78.8% 79.3% , AM Peaks 09:00 09:00 06:00 11:00 07:00. 11:00 06:00 11:00 09:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 10:00 09:00 11:00 Volume 33 28 33 22 31 20 28 22 37 27 49 40 34 28 28 26 PM Peaks 07:00 05:00 12:00 03:00 12:00 05:00 07:00 05:00 08:00 05:00 06:00 12:00 03:00 12:00 12:00 05:00 Volume 3I 50 .39 54 33 52 60 58 43 66 48 62 41 43 32 47 • • _.. .. • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOCH 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 . Pane 3 Begin Mon. 07/03 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB 12:00 am _4 5 9 11 a a a * * a a a a * 6 8 01:00 1 1 2 3 a * a * a a * a * * 2 2 02:00 1 0 1 1 a * a * * * a • a a 1 0 03:00 0 2 2 2 a * a a a * * * • • 1 2 04:00 2 1 2 1 a * * a - a * * a * a 2 1 05:00 11 2 2 1 * a a a * a a a a • 6 2 06:00 17 6 6 7 • * * a * a * a a a 12 6 07:00 19 7 13 1 * * * * * a a • a a 16 4 08:00 22 13 10 7 * a * * a * * a a * 16 10 09:00 28 24 19 16 * * a * a * • • a * 24 20 10:00 33 23 26 29 a * a a * * * * a • 30 26 11:00 28 24 26 25 a * * * * a * • a * 27 24 12:00 pm 22 30 25 38 a a a a a * a * • * 24 34 01:00 37 44 34 23 • * a * a * • a a a 36 34 02:00 37 33 25 27 • a a a * a a a a a 31 30 03:00 35 35 30 35 a a a * * a * * a a 32 35 04:00 31 41 28 27 * * a a a a a a a a 30 34 05:00 26 41 21 37 * * * * * a • a a * 24 39 06:00 30 25 17 30 a a * a • a • a a a 24 28 07:00 32 26 16 27 a a a a * a a * a • 24 26 08:00 20 20 26 19 a a a * a • • a * a 23 20 09:00 13 24 14 27 a • a a a a a a * * 14 26 10:00 11 12 32 12 * • a * * a a * a a 22 12 11:00 3 11 25 21 • a a • a * a a a * 14 16 Totals 463 450 411 427 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 441 439 913 838 0 0 0 0 0 880 Avg. Day 104.9% 102.5% 93.2% 97.2% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% AM Peaks 10:00 09:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 Volume 33 24 26 29 30 26 PM Peaks 01:00 01:00 01:00 12:00 01:00 05:00 Volume 37 44 34 38 36 39 ADTs le- 15-.--- REN,TON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH S S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOC& 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 . Paae 2 Begin Mon. 06/26 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB LB NB SB 12:00 am 3 I 2 2 1 1 3 3 4 3 1 3 9 2 6 2 4 01:00 `" 3 2 4 2 3 3 1 2 7 2 1 5 2 6 3 3 02:00 1 3 1 1 5 6 5 7 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 . 3 03:00 4 3 0 2 3 2 2 4 2 5 2 3 1 5 2 3 04:00 7 2 8 2 7 4 8 3 7 2 5 0 1 2 6 2 05:00 20 7 16 6 14 4 14 3 13 10 1 1 3 0 12 4 06:00 21 6 20 5 29 5 36 8 26 6 6 4 1 5 20 6 07:00 24 8 24 5 30 11 34 14 25 7 8 2 7 7 22 8 08:00 17 5 16 6 15 11 17 10 16 6 19 8 18 9 17 8 09:00 25i 12 24 12 21 23 24 24 25 13 18 21 11 13 21 17 10:00 24 9 23 11 19 19 18 15 22 11 29 15 20 15 22 14 11:00 22 13 20 16 23 23 23 26 20 19 26 24 31 22 24 20 12:00 pm 22 21 22 23 29 25 30 29 22 23 26 27 24 31 25 26 01:00 20 24 28 20 27 37 28 41 29 20 23 35 22 26 25 29 02:00 19 . 22 24 26 20 36 25 32 24 26 19 26 19 20 21 27 03:00 25I 24 16 31 21 35 21 33 22 ,27 25 24 31 18 23 27 04:00 22 19 15 21 29 50 30 52 22 43 24 29 35 29 25 35 05:00 27 ' 32 31 36 32 40 32 41 24 39 26 28 24 21 28 34 06:00 16 34 17 38 24 57 24 60 24 37 22 21 15 11 20 37 07:00 27 18 31 20 29 41 30 42 21 27 14 17 15 19 24 26 08:00 19 , 29 21 32 21 41 21 42 18 23 16 19 10 19 18 29 09:00 15 I 24 17 28 24 28 25 28 12 18 8 14 6 11 15 22 10:00 13 9 12 8 17 22 20 24 7 7 7 15 10 9 12 13 11:00 3 10 4 10 10 11 7 14 5 11 5 11 2 6 5 10 Totals 399 . 338 396 362 453 537 478 558 397 384 336 359 313 311 395 407 737 758 990 1036 781 695 624 802 Avg. Day 101.0% 83.0% 100.2% 88.9% 114.6% 131.9% 121.0% 137.1% 100.5% 94.3% 85.0% 88.2% .79.2% 76.4% • AM Peaks 09:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 07:00 09:00 06:00 11:00 06:00 11:00 10:00 11:00 . 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 . Volume 25 13 24 16 30 23 . 36 26 26 19 29 . 24 31 '22 24 20 PM Peaks 05:00 06:00 05:00 06:00 05:00 06:00 05:00 06:00 01:00 04:00 12:00 01:00 04:00 12:00 05:00 06:00 Volume 27 34 31 38 32 57 32 60 29 43 26 35 35 31 . 28 '37 qo • • . _ 1 RENTbN, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOC& 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Page 3 Begin Mon. 07/03 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am 21 2 2 6 * * * * * * * * A * 2 4 01:00 __ 01 3 1 3 A * A * • * * • * • 0 3 02:00 1 1 2 3 A * * • * * * A * * 2 2 03:00 3 3 0 2 * A * • * A * * A * 2 2 04:00 51 2 1 1 A * A * A * • • • A 3 2 05:00 6 6 0 0 • * * • * * A * • * 3 3 06:00 10i 6 6 3 * A A * A A A A • * 8 4 07:00 20 3 3 3 • A A * * A A A A A 12 3 08:00 161 5 8 5 • * A A * • • * A • 12 5 09:00 20 11 10 10 * * * * A • • • * * 15 10 10:00 201 25 25 11 • * * A * A • * * * 22 18 11:00 301 16 20 18 * * * * * * • A * • 25 17 12:00 pm 13j 22 22 25 * * • * * • A A * 18 24 01:00 31 29 29 19 A A * * A * • * * • 30 24 02:00 21, 27 14 22 A * A * A A • * A * 18 24 03:00 30 29 18 22 * A * * A A • A A * 24 26 04:00 221 34 23 18 * * * * * • A * A * 22 26 05:00 271 37 19 31 * * * A * A A * A • 23 34 06:00 281 27 11 30 • * * A * A • A A • 20 28 07:00 17, 19 14 18 • • A A A • A • A A 16 18 08:00 161 22 11 15 • • • * A • • * * • 14 18 09:00 131 22 19 24 A * A * * A * * A A 16 23 10:00 10, 15 18 15 * * * • * * A * * • 14 15 11:00 5 14 16 19 A A * A * * * • A * 10 16 Totals 3661 380 292 323 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 331 349 746 615 0 0 0 0 0 680 , Avg. Day 110.5% 108.8% 88.2% 92.5% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% AM Peaks 11:001' 10:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 10:00 Volume 301 25 25 18 25 18 PM Peaks 01:001 05:00 01:00 05:00 01:00 05:00 Volume 31, 37 29 31 30 34 ADTs IA • i 1 - -: 18 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK i LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOCO 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 i Direction 1 Pace : 1 Begin Mon. I 06/19 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB' SB NB SB NB SR NB SR NB SR NB SB NR SB NB 4R 12:00 am • * • * • * * * * * 1 14 0 8 0 11 01:00 _ * * * * * * * * * • 0 11 1 5 0 8 02:00 • * * * * • * * * * 3 3 1 5 2 4 03:00 * * * * * * * * * * 0 1 0 1 0 1 04:00 * * • * • * * * • * 0 1 1 4 0 2 05:00 *1 * * * * * * * ` * 5 4 0 0 2 2 06:00 • * • * • * * ` 6 1 1 1 4 1 07:00 * * * ` • ` * • * * 5 8 12 3 8 6 08:00 * * * • * * • 17 14 21 14 19 14 09:00 * • * • * * * * * • 20 18 33 20 26 19 10:00 * * * * • * * * * ` 15 35 35 34 25 34 11:00 *, * * * • * * • • • 19 44 31 27 25 36 12:00 pm * * * * * * • * * • 27 28 30 47 28 38 01:00 *' * * • * * * * • * 33 42 36 57 34 50 02:00 *. * * * ` * * * * * 25 49 27 36 26 42 03:00 * * * * * * * * * * 30 44 39 45 34 44 04:00 * • • • • * • * 4 • 25 41 24 47 24 44 05:00 * * * • • ` * * • * 31 42 22 31 26 36 06:00 * * * * • * * * * * 34 58 15 29 24 44 07:00 • • * * * • • • • * 17 36 20 22 18 29 08:00 *I * • * * * • * * * 12 25 10 23 11 24 09:00 *I * * * * * * * * * 12 20 14 22 13 21 10:00 *' * * * * • * * * * 7 34 7 7 7 20 11:00 * * * * * * * * • * 2 17 3 4 2 10 Totals 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 346 590 383 492 358 540 0 0 0 0 0 936 875 898 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 96.6% 109.2% 106.9% 91.1% AM Peaks 09:00 11:00 10:00 10:00 09:00 11:00 Volume 20 44 35 34 26 36 PM Peaks 06:00 06:00 03:00 01:00 01:00 01:00 Volume 34 58 39 57 34 50 p • 19 . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 10Ct 3 TPE I 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE16703 Direction 1 Page 2 Begin Mon.'. 06/26 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am 2 7 1 9 0 4 0 2 1 8 2 8 2 8 1 7 01:00 "- 0 1 0 1 5 4 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 5 1 2 02:00 3 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 4 1 4 1 2 03:00 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 4 1 0 1 1 04:00 5 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 3 2 1 05:00 12 6 13 4 14 4 4 1 11 3 2 0 1 1 8 3 06:00 20� 3 23 5 28 4 8 2 23 6 4 7 3 5 16 5 07:00 28 12 32 10 32 17 11 9 31 7 7 4 11 3 22 9 08:00 21 16 22 17 7 7 9 5 22 21 18 12 21 14 17 13 09:00 24 14 27 17 16 10 11 16 34 23 20 28 25 16 22 18 10:00 27 29 30 33 22 14 14 19 24 30 22 36 37 37 25 28 11:00 19 32 23 36 20 19 13 24 31 39 39 47 25 34 24 33 12:00 pm 32, 34 36 38 18 38 18 24 29 41 46 63 33 43 30 40 01:00 23 27 28 58 35 32 17 28 30 46 21 49 42 44 28 41 02:00 26 47 26 41 20 36 20 31 26 46 28 44 42 35 27 40 03:00 31 53 28 63 16 36 18 53 29 64 37 45 33 50 27 52 , 04:00 26 56 33 50 17 37 9 43 30 68 23 33 21 37 23 46 05:00 18 61 27 78 9 55 13 60 37 74 32 40 29 35 24 58 06:00 32 48 35 56 14 36 10 37 31 59 50 40 8 34 26 44 07:00 231 51 32 51 18 36 30 49 20 37 10 24 23 26 22 39 08:00 25' 52 17 41 8 28 18 36 30 39 8 26 12 26 17 35 09:00 2t 31 22 27 10 20 12 32 13 30 8 24 12 24 15 27 10:00 13. 20 3 20 4 17 8 22 10 21 10 19 5 9 8 18 11:00 5; 5 5 7 0 13 5 11 4 13 6 8 5 6 4 9 Totals 444' 609 468 665 317 468 249 504 470 680 397 570 392 499 391 571 1053 1133 785 753 1150 967 891 962 Avg. Day 113.5%. 106.6% 119.6% 116.4% 81.0% 81.9% 63.6% 88.2% 120.2% 119.0% 101.5% 99.8% 100.2% 87.3% j AM Peaks 07:001 11:00 07:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 10:00 11:00 09:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 11:00 j Volume 28' 32 32 36 32 19 14 24 34 39 39 47 37 37 25 33 PM Peaks 12:00 05:00 12:00 05:00 01:00 05:00 07:00 05:00 05:00 05:00 06:00 12:00 01:00 03:00 12:00 05:00 Volume 32 61 36 78 35 55 30 60 37 74 50 63 42 50 30 58 • 20.' 1 ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/19/2000 LOCI 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page . 3 Begin Mon. 07/03 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time • NB $B NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB. NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am 2 5 9 14 * • * • • • • • • • 6 10 01:00 0 0 1 7 * * * •. * • * • • * 0 4 02:00 1 2 0 1 * * * • * * • • * * 0 2 03:00 0 4 3 2 * * * * • * • * • • 2 3 04:00 1 2 1 2 * * * • 4 • • • • * 1 2 05:00 10 2 2 1 • * * * • * • • * • 6 2 06:00 12 5 6 10 • * * • • • • • * * 9 8 07:00 12 6 9 3 * • * • * • • • • • 10 4 08:00 24 14 14 9 * • • • • • • • • • 19 12 09:00 23 26 18 19 • * * • • * • • • • 20 22 10:00 26 25 23 39 • * * • • • • • • • 24 32 11:00 29 39 28 40 * * * • * • • * • * 28 40 12:00 pm 29 39 29 41 * * * • • • • * * * 29 40 01:00 34 48 36 32 * * * • • • * • * • 35 40 02:00 40 50 28 45 * • * • * * * • • * 34 48 03:00 35 45 40 58 * • * ` * * * • * • 38 52 04:00 22 41 36 36 * * • * • • • • • * 29 38 05:00 21 46 29 49 . * • • • • • • • • • 25 48 06:00 29 37 19 46 * * * * * * • • • 24 42 07:00 28 34 15 26 * * * * * * * • * • 22 30 08:00 11 28 24 25 * * • * * • * • * • 18 26 09:00 7 25 11 24 • * * * * * • * * * 9 24 10:00 3 12 16 13 • * • * • • • • • * 10 12 11:00 3 13 26 25 * * • * • * • * * • 14 19 Totals 402 548 423 567 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 412 560 ' 950 990 0 0 0 0 0 972 Avg. Day 97.5% 97.8% 102.6% 101.2% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% AM Peaks 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 Volume 29 39 28 40 28 40 PM Peaks 02:00 02:00 03:00 03:00 03:00 03:00 Volume 40 50 40 58 38 52 ADTs 1 • • _ 21 RENTON, WASHINGTON; TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOC•8 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 I , Paae 1 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. ' P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/24 1 5 2 8 3 13 12:15 __ 2 8 3 5 5 13 12:30 1 5 1 6 2 11 12:45 0 4 8 26 2 8 5 24 2 12 13 50 01:00 0 9 1 6 1 15 01:15 0 5 2 15 2 20 01:30 1 12 2 13 3 25 01:45 0 1 7 33 1 6 10 44 1 7 17 77 02:00 1 5 0 9 1 14 02:15 1 3 2 14 3 17 02:30 0 7 0 9 0 16 02:45 0 2 7 22 0 2 9 41 0 4 16 63 03:00 0 10 0 7 0 17 03:15 0 9 1 9 1 18 03:30 0 . 5 0 10 0 15 03:45 O * 0 24 0 1 0 26 0 1 0 50 04:00 0 0 0 1 0 1 04:15 - 1 7 0 7 1 14 04:30 0 4 0 9 0 13 04:45 0 1 11 22 0 * 8 25 0 1 19 47 05:00 0 10 0 11 0 21 05:15 1 19 0 6 1 25 05:30 21 12 0 11 2 23 05:45 3 6 12 53 1 1 5 33 4 7 17 86 06:00 2 1 5 1 15 3 20 06:15 2 11 1 8 3 19 06:30 3 13 1 10 4 23 06:45 2 9 3 32 0 3 6 39 2 12 9 71 07:00 3 9 1 7 4 16 07:15 4 l 6 1 5 5 11 07:30 4 7 2 8 6 15 07:45 51 16 5 27 2 6 8 28 7 22 13 55 i 08:00 21 4 1 5 3 9 08:15 6 2 4 5 10 7 08:30 3 , 7 2 4 5 11 08:45 10' 21 8 21 2 9 6 20 12 30 14 41 09:00 7 . 5 5 5 12 .. 10 09:15 4 1 5 3 9 4 - 09:30 6 1 1 5 7 6 09:45 51 22 5 12 3 14 3 16 8 36 8 28 10:00 61 3 10 7 16 10 10:15 7 2 5 7 12 .04 9 10:30 9, 2 6 4 15 6 10:45 11 33 3 10 8 29 3 21 19 62 6 31 11:00 11 2 14 3 25 5 ' 11:15 10 2 6 5 16 7 11:30 11 0 7 2 18 2 i 11:45 51 37 0 4 8 35 2 12 13 72 2 16 I Totals 152; 286 114 329 266 615 Day Totals i 438 443 881 Split % 57.1%• 46.5% 42.8% 53.5% Peak Hour 10:45 05:00 10:45 01:15 - 10:45 04:45 Volume 43 53 35 47 78 88 P.H.F. .97 .69 .62 .78 .78 .88 i 1 I -- 22 • ' RENXON, WASHINGTON, TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN i 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AYES & RENTONIAVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Paae : 9 Begin < NB >< EB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/25 2 7 0 9 2 16 12:15 — 0 I 4 1 10 , 1 14 12:30 0 I 5 1 10 1 15 12:45 0 2 5 21 2 4 11 40 2 6 16 61 01:00 1 11 1 12 2 23 01:15 0 , 6 1 6 1 12 01:30 1 8 0 10 1 18 01:45 2 4 7 32 4 6 8 36 6 10 15 68 02:00 0 5 2 7 2 12 02:15 0 5 0 5 0 10 02:30 2 7 1 4 3 11 02:45 0 2 8 25 1 4 9 25 1 6 17 50 03:00 1 10 0 13 1 23 03:15 0 6 0 6 0 12 03:30 1 10 1 9 2 19 03:45 0 2 8 34 0 1 9 37 0 3 17 71 04:00 1 7 1 13, 2 20 04:15 0 ' 12 0 12 0 24 04:30 0 6 0 6 0 12 04:45 0 1 6 31 0 1 6 37 0 2 12 68 05:00 01 10 0 6 0 16 05:15 1 , 9 0 10 1 19 05:30 0 9 0 3 0 12 05:45 1 ; 2 5 33 0 • 11 30 1 2 16 63 06:00 0 11 0 8 0 19 06:15 1 8 0 9 1 17 06:30 0 4 1 3 1 7 06:45 2 ' 3 12 35 1 2 10 30 3 5 22 65 07:00 51 9 1 10 6 19 07:15 41 4 1 9 5 13 07:30 3 8 1 8` 4 16 07:45 4 , 16 5 26 0 3 7 34 4 19 12 60 08:00 8 ' 4 3 8 11 12 08:15 3 5 4 9 7 14 08:30 6 6 5 4 11 10 08:45 4; 21 7 22 3 15 6 27 7 36 13 49 09:00 41 7 4 8 8 15 09:15 7 6 5 11= 12 17 09:30 8j 3 5 5 13 8 09:45 9' 28 7 23 2 16 5 29 11 44 12 52 10:00 9 5 9 6 18 ,,, 11 10:15 111 2 5 3 16 5 10:30 0' 1 7 6 7 7 10:45 111 31 0 8 3 24 0. 15 14 55 0 23 ' 11:00 6 1 2 3 8 4 11:15 71 0 5 2,. 12 2 11:30 11, 0 7 1 18 1 11:45 7, 31 1 2 7 21 0 6 14 52 1 8 Totals 1431 292 97 346 240 638 Day Totals 435 443 878 Split % 59.5%1 45.7% 40.4% 54.2% Peak Hour 09:301 03:30 10:00 12:15 09:30 03:30 Volume 371 37 24 43 58 80 P.H.F. .84, .77 .66 .89 .80 .83 1 . _ __._ 23 RENTON, WASH'INGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7tH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Paae 3 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Monday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/26 1 3 1 9 2 12 12:15 -. 1 9 0 8 1 17 12:30 1 3 0 5 1 8 12:45 0 3 5 20 1 2 8 30 1 5 13 50 01:00 0 8 0 7 0 15 01:15 0 10 0 10 0 20 01:30 1 8 1 11 2 19 01:45 0 1 6 32 0 1 7 35 0 2 13 67 02:00 0 5 0 6 0 11 02:15 0 9 0 7 0 16 02:30 0 6 0 14 0 20 02:45 0 8 28 0 * 8 35 0 * 16 63 03:00 0 6 0 11 0 17 03:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 03:30 1 3 1 6 2 9 03:45 0 1 3 20 0 1 6 29 0 2 9 49 04:00 0 8 0 7 0 15 04:15 0 6 1 11 1 17 ' 04:30 2 8 0 12 2 20 04:45 1 3 5 27 1 2 4 34 2 5 9 61 05:00 2 6 0 10 2 16 05:15 2 4 0 8 2 12 05:30 7 9 0 20 7 29 05:45 10 21 5 24 0 * 12 50 10 21 17 74 06:00 5 , 7 1 10 6 17 06:15 2 6 1 10 3 16 06:30 11 8 1 5 12 13 06:45 5 23 6 27 0 3 14 39 5 26 20 66 07:00 8 5 1 14 9 19 07:15 4 10 4 9 8 19 07:30 11 9 2 7 13 16 07:45 5 , 28 9 33 4 11 15 45 9 39 24 78 08:00 7 7 3 10 10 17 08:15 10 7 3 15 13 22 08:30 7 4 3 10 10 14 08:45 6 30 5 23 5 14 6 41 11 44 11 64 09:00 8 15 , 8 5 16 20 09:15 10 3 3 7 13 10 09:30 6 7 7 4 13 11 09:45 9 33 5 30 10 28 7 23 19 61 12 53 10:00 9 2 3 9 12 11 . 10:15 9 16 6 3 15 ' 19 10:30 6 1 9 2 15 3 1 10:45 8 32 2 21 3 21 4 18 11 53 6 39 11:00 1 3 8 0 9 3 11:15 7 0 7 1 14 1 11:30 12 1 4 0 16 1 11:45 7 27 0 4 6 25 1 2 13 52 1 6 Totals 202 289 108 381 310 670 I Day Totals 491 489 980 Split % 65.1% 43.1% 34.8% 56.8% Peak Hour 09:15 07:15 09:00 05:30 09:00 05:30 Volume 34 35 28 52 61 79 P.H.F. .85 .87 .7 .65 .80 .68 I _J RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOC9 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Page 4 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Tuesday Time A—M. M1. A..M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/27 1 12 1 16 2 28 12:15 — 0 7 1 12 1 19 12:30 0, 8 0 6 0 14 12:45 0 1 12 39 0 2 6 40 0 3 18 79 01:00 0 5 0 14 0 19 01:15 0; 8 0 6 0 14 01:30 0 10 0 11 0 21 01:45 1 1 13 36 0 11 42 1 1 24 78 02:00 0 8 1 6 1 14 02:15 0 7 2 10 2 17 02:30 0 8 0 4 0 12 02:45 0 3 26 0 3 11 31 0 3 14 57 03:00 1 5 0 13 1 18 03:15 0 8 0 16 0 24 03:30 0 7 0 12 0 19 03:45 1 2 5 25 0 * 13 54 1 2 18 79 04:00 0 8 0 11 0 19 04:15 0 9 1 7 1 16 04:30 1 5 0 9 1 14 04:45 2 3 7 29 0 1 14 41 2 4 21 70 05:00 1 12 0 16 1 28 05:15 3 10 0 8 3 18 05:30 8 7 1 13 9 20 05:45 3 15 3 32 0 1 13 50 3 16 16 82 06:00 8 8 1 9 9 17 06:15 5 11 0 8 5 19 06:30 10 6 1 8 11 14 06:45 10 33 9 34 1 3 10 35 11 36 19 69 07:00 4 2 0 9 4 11 07:15 10 5 3 8 13 13 07:30 8 6 3 8 11 14 07:45 7 29 8 21 4 10 10 35 11 39 18 56 08:00 7 6 3 9 10 15 08:15 4 4 2 6 6 10 08:30 7 6 3 9 10 15 08:45 5 23 3 19 4 12 9 33 9 35 12 52 09:00 3 5 3 5 6 10 09:15 8 4 4 = 4 12 8 09:30 6 3 3 3 9 6 09:45 5 22 6 18 3 13 4 16 8 35 10 34 10:00 2 4 3 4 5.0e 8 10:15 7 1 4 4 11 5 10:30 8 0 5 1 13 1 , 10:45 8 25 0 5 4 16 • 3 12 12 41 3 17 11:00 6 1 4 1 10 2 11:15 6 1 1 5 7 6 - 11:30 6 1 9 1 15 2 11:45 6 24 L 4 8 22 1 8 14 46 2 12 Totals 178 288 83 397 261 685 Day Totals 466 480 946 Split % 68.2% 42.0% 31.8% 57.9% Peak Hour 06:30 12:00 11:00 03:00 10:15 04:45 Volume 34 39 22 54 46 87 P.H.F. .85 .81 .61 .84 .88 .77 25 , R$NTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 . Page : 5 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/28 0 8 2 9 2 17 12:15 — 0 9 3 11 3 20 12:30 0 9 0 7. 0 16 12:45 0 * 7 33 2 7 8 35 2 7 15 68 01:00 2 4 0 10 2 14 01:15 1 8 1 7 2 15 01:30 0 7 0 5 0 12 01:45 0 3 7 26 1 2 9 31 1 5 16 57 02:00 0 6 1 1 1 7 02:15 0 7 0 9 0 16 02:30 0 5 0 6 0 11 02:45 0 • 4 22 0 1 15 31 0 1 19 53 03:00 0 5 . 0 7 0 12 03:15 0 4 0 11 0 15 03:30 1 3 0 7 1 10 03:45 0 1 6 18 0 * 10 . 35 0 1 16 53 04:00 1 8 0 8 1 16 04:15 2 6 0 7 2 13 04:30 1 9 1 16 2 25 04:45 2 6 10 33 0 1 16 47 2 7 26 80 05:00 3 11 1 18 4 29 05:15 3 6 0 14 3 20. 05:30 5 11 0 10 5 21 05:45 9 20 4 32 0 1 10 52 9 21 14 84 06:00 5 9 1 18 6 27 06:15 7 5 1 10 8 15 06:30 12 9 1 16 13 25 06:45 5 29 6 29 0 3 8 52 5 32 14 81 07:00 2 12 0 10 2 22 07:15 13 5 6 15 19 20 07:30 6 4 4 7 10 11 07:45 10 31 11 32 5 15 10 42 15 46 21 74 08:00 5 9 1 7 6 16 08:15 4 5 4 11 8 16 ' 08:30 4 6 2 11 6 17 08:45 4 17 6 . 26 3 10 13 42 7 27 19 68 09:00 9 6 1 10 10 16 - 09:15 10 11 5 4 15 15 09:30 7 5 2 1 9 6 09:45 5 31 2 24 7 15 4 19 12 46 6 43 10:00 7 19 3 7 10 'M` 26 10:15 8 1 5 8 13 9 10:30 6 3 5 7 11 10 ' 10:45 5 26 1 24 4 17 2 24 9 43 3 48 ' 11:00 6 0 3 5 9 5 11:15 1 1 5 4 6 5 , . 11:30 6 2 8 2 14 4 i 11:45 8 21 2 5 4. 20 1 12 12 41 3 17 Totals 185 304 92 422 277 726 Day Totals 489 514 1003 Split % 66.7i 41.8% 33.2% 58.1% Peak Hour 07:15 04:45 09:45 04:30 07:15 04:30 Volume 34 38 20 64 50 100 P.H.F. .65 .86 .71 .88 .65 .86 i 26 • RENTON, NASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 711H ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 • GRANT AYES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 . Page . 6 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Thursday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/29 0 4 1 7 1 11 12:15 1 10 0 10 1 20 12:30 __ 1 6 0 9 1 15 12:45 0 2 10 30 2 3 8 34 2 5 18 64 01:00 0 6 1 8 1 14 01:15 0 6 0 9 0 15 01:30 0 13 0 6 0 19 01:45 0 • 10 35 0 1 7 30 0 1 17 65 02:00 1 9 1 4 2 13 02:15 0 6 0 9 0 15 02:30 0 6 1 8 1 14 02:45 0 1 4 25 0 2 12 33 0 3 16 58 03:00 0 5 0 12 0 17 03:15 1 7 0 12 1 19 03:30 0 5 0 11 0 16 03:45 1 2 9 26 0 * 4 39 1 2 13 65 04:00 1 9 0 13 1 22 04:15 1 10 1 16 2 26 04:30 3 6 0, 8 3 14 04:45 1 6 6 31 0 1 13 50 1 7 19 81 05:00 3 5 0 16 3 21 05:15 4 4 0 17 4 21 05:30 3 5 1 12 4 17 05:45 11 21 8 22 0 1 13 58 11 22 21 80 06:00 7 5 3 9 10 14 06:15 7 10 0 21 7 31 06:30 9 2 0 11 9 13 06:45 5 28 9 26 1 4 14 55 6 32 23 81 07:00 5 10 1 11 6 21 07:15 8 9 3 14 11 23 07:30 7 29 2 15 9 44 07:45 5 25 12 60 2 8 5 45 7 33 17 105 08:00 6 5 1' 12 7 17 08:15 4 6 1 15 5 21 08:30 7 8 2 4 9 12 08:45 8 25 17 36 4 8 12 43 12. 33 29 79 09:00 2 9 4 6 6 15 09:15 3 6 3 5 6 11 09:30 5 3 3_ 4 8 7 09:45 6 16 2 20 7' 17 6 21 13 33 8 41 10:00 5 6 3 7 8 13 10:15 11 1 2 6 13 7 10:30 5 2 5 5 10'e 7 10:45 6 27 0 9 3 13 1 19 9 40 1 28 11:00 3 1 1 0 4 1 11:15 3 0 9• 3 12 3 11:30 4 1 6 1 10 2 11:45 3 13 a 5 6, 22 2 6 9 35 5 11 Totals 166 325 80 433 246 758 Day Totals 491 513 1004 Split % 67.4% 42.8% 32.5% 57.1W Peak Hour 05:45 07:00 11:00 04:45 09:45 06:45 Volume 34 60 22 58 44 111 P.H.F. .77 .51 .61 .85 .84 .63 • 27 . RER.tTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AYES 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 . Page 7 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Friday Time - A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/30 1 7 2 8 3 15 12:15 -- 2 6 1 3 3 9 12:30 0 9 0 11 0 20 12:45 1 4 7 29 0 3 11 33 1 7 18 62 01:00 0 9 0 8 0 17 01:15 0 6 0 7 0 13 01:30 0 10 0 9 0 19 01:45 0 6 31 1 1 8 32 1 1 14 63 02:00 0 7 0 11 0 18 02:15 0 5 0 6 0 11 02:30 0 7 0 8 0 15 02:45 0 • 6 25 0 " 9 34 0 • 15 59 03:00 0 9 0 8 0 17 03:15 1 10 1 11 2 21 03:30 1 9 1 12 2 21 03:45 0 2 7 35 0 2 12 43 0 4 19 78 04:00 1 4 0 8 1 12 , 04:15 2 4 1 8 3 12 04:30 1 7 0 11 1 18 04:45 2 6 9 24 1 2 20 47 3 8 29 71 05:00 5 11 0 13 5 24 05:15 4 14 0 20 4 34 05:30 5 10 1 17 6 27 05:45 9 23 1 36 0 1 16 66 9 24 17 102 06:00 6 12 3 8 9 20 06:15 10 8 0 14 10 22 06:30 4 8 1 12 5 20 06:45 3 23 3 31 1 5 17 51 4 28 20 82 07:00 7 8 1 14 8 22 07:15 6 7 3 5 9 12 07:30 14 9 2 7 16 16 ° 07:45 6 33 10 34 2 8 5 31 8 41 15 65 08:00 6 9 b 5 • 6 14 .08:15 5 28 4 8 9 36 08:30 6 3 6 6 12 9 08:45 4 21 3 43 5 15 - 6 25 9 36 9 68 09:00 12 ' 4 2 7 14 11 09:15 11 6 7 3 18 9 09:30 5 3 4 6 9 9 09:45 9 37 3 16 6 19 3 19 15 56 6 35 10:00 6 1. 2 5 8 .o 6 i 10:15 4 3 9 5 13 8 i 10:30 9 1 5 3 14 4 i 10:45 6 25 3 8 5 21 3 16 11 46 6 24 . 11:00 6 0 3 1 9 1 11:15 4 0 7 4 11 4 11:30 8 3 7 0 15 3 11:45 9 27 1 4 10 27 5 10 19 54 6 14 Totals 201 316 104 407 305 723 Day Totals 517 511 1028 Split % 65.9% 43.7% 34.1% 56.2% Peak Hour 09:00 07:30 11:00 04:45 09:00 04:45 Volume 37 56 27 70 56 114 P.H.F. .77 .5 .67 .87 .77 .83 28.. R5NTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCH 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Pane 8 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Saturday Tjje A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/01 2 10 0 16 2 26 12:15 -- 2 11 1 24 3 35 12:30 1 11 2 9 3 20 12:45 0 5 12 44 1 4 13 62 1 9 25 106 01:00 0 9 0 16 0 25 01:15 0 3 0 11 0 14 01:30 0 6 0 15 0 21 01:45 1 1 7 25 1 1 9 51 2 2 16 76 02:00 0 6 0 11 0 17 02:15 0 16 0 4 0 20 02:30 0 9 1 12 1 21 02:45 0 • 11 42 0 1 13 40 0 1 24 82 03:00 2 16 2 7 4 23 03:15 0 8 0 5 0 13 03:30 0 4 0 3 0 7 03:45 0 2 8 36 0 2 12 27 0 4 20 63 04:00 1 6 0 4 1 10 04:15 0 6 0 3 0 9 04:30 1 9 1 8 2 17 04:45 0 2 6 27 0 1 12 27 0 3 18 54 05:00 0 5 0 10 0 15 05:15 2 9 0 8 2 17 05:30 2 10 1 8 3 18 05:45 0 4 15 39 0 1 6 32 0 5 21 71 06:00 0 11 1 10 1 21 06:15 0 22 0 6 0 28 06:30 3 12 2 5 5 17 06:45 1 4 3 48 0 3 9 30 1 7 12 78 07:00 4 2 1 6 5 8 07:15 2 3 1 3 3 6 07:30 1 1 • 0 6 1 7 07:45 0 7 4 10 0 2 8 23 0 9 12 33 08:00 3 4 4 4 7 8 08:15 3 4 3 6 6 10 08:30 7 3 2 2 9 5 08:45 9 22 3 14 2 11 5 17 11 33 8 31 09:00 8 4 6 6 14 10 09:15 5 4 7 5 12 9 09:30 9 5 5 3 14 B 09:45 9 31 1 14 5 23 5 19 14 54 6 33 10:00 6 3 11 3 17.'e 6 10:15 8 1 4 4 12 5 10:30 9 2 10 3 19 5 10:45 4 27 3 9 . 5 30 2 12 9 57 5 21 11:00 16 5 14 2 30 7 11:15 11 0 7 3 18 3 11:30 15 1 ' 10 1 25 2 11:45 7 49 1 7 9 40 1 7 16 89 2 14 Totals 154 315 119 347 273 662 Day Totals 469 466 935 Split % 56.4% 47.5% - 43.5% 52.4% Peak Hour 11:00 05:45 11:00 12:00 11:00 12:00 Volume 49 60 40 62 89 106 P.H.F. .76 .68 .71 .64 .74 .75 29 ' REN'TON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Paae 9 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/02 __ 2 5 1 6 3 11 12:15 0 6 2 8 2 14 12:30 1 7 1 11 2 18 12:45 0 3 10 28 2 6 18 43 2 9 28 71 01:00 1 5 1 11 2 16 01:15 0 6 1 11 1 17 01:30 1 6 2 8 3 14 01:45 1 3 9 26 1 5 10 40 2 8 19 66 02:00 0 8 0 7 0 15 02:15 0 6 1 7 1 13 02:30 0 6 0 3 0 9 02:45 0 • 13 33 1 2 11 28 1 2 24 61 03:00 0 6 0 6 0 12 03:15 0 16 0 7 0 23 03:30 2 10 0 9 2 19 03:45 0 2 9 41 0 * 8 30 0 2 17 71 04:00 0 4 0 8 0 12 ' 04:15 0 5 1 6 1 11 04:30 0 5 0 7 0 12 04:45 0 " 9 23 0 1 6 27 0 1 15 50 05:00 0, 3 0 5 0 8 05:15 0, 9 0 3 0 12 05:30 1 8 0 8 1 16 05:45 0 1 6 26 0 • 5 21 0 1 11 47 06:00 0 4 0 8 0 12 06:15 0 2 2 4 2 6 06:30 0 4 4 3 4 7 06:45 2 2 1 11 0 6 5 20 2 8 6 31 07:00 7 7 2 5 9 12 07:15 3 9 0 5 3 14 07:30 1 7 1 5 2 12 07:45 5 16 1 24 0 3 5 20 5 19 6 44 08:00 0 4 4 6 4 10 • 08:15 5 3 3 2 8 5 08:30 7 3 3 9 10 12 08:45 9 21 5 15 8 18 2 19 17 39 7 34 09:00 11 1 2 5 13 6 09:15 3 4 5 3 •8 7 ' 09:30 4 3 2 4 6 7 09:45 5 23 1 9 5 14 4 16 10 37 5" 25 10:00 6 0 4 1 10 '04 1 10:15 10, 2 5 1 15 3 10:30 7 2 9 1 16 3 10:45 4 27 0 4 10 28 2 5 14 55 2 9 ' 11:00 9 0 5 1 14 1 11:15 9 0 4 2 13 2 11:30 6 0 7 1 13 1 11:45 10'' 34 0 • 8 24 0 4 18 58 0 4 Totals 132 240 107 273 239 513 Day Totals 372 380 752 Split % 55.2% 46.7% 44.7% 53.2% Peak Hour 11:00 02:45 10:15 12:30 10:15 12:30 Volume 34 45 29 51 59 79 P.H.F. .85 .70 .72 .70 .92 .70 _. .. _ - 30- . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AYES 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Paste 10 Begin - < WB >< EB >< Combined > Monday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/03 0 10 0 8 0 18 12:15 -- 1 4 1 5 2 9 12:30 1 4 3 4 4 8 12:45 2 4 4 22 1 5 13 30 3 9 17 52 01:00 0 10 0 19 0 29 01:15 1, 9 0 11 1 20 01:30 01 10 0 5 0 15 01:45 0 1 8 37 1 1 9 44 1 2 17 81 02:00 0' 12 0 10 0 22 02:15 0 11 0 7 0 18 02:30 0 5 0 7 0 12 02:45 1 1 9 37 0 * 9 33 1 1 18 70 03:00 0 14 1 3 1 17 03:15 0 8 0 9 0 17 03:30 0 7 1 8 1 15 03:45 0 k 6 35 0 2 15 35 0 2 21 70 04:00 0 5 0 9 0 14 04:15 0 11 0 9 0 20 04:30 1 9 0 13 1 22 04:45 1 2 6 31 1 1 10 41 2 3 16 72 05:00 2 7 0 5 2 12 05:15 2 5 0 11 2 16 05:30 31 6 1 11 4 17 05:45 4 11 8 26 1 2 14 41 5 13 22 67 06:00 4' 10 2 8 6 18 06:15 4' 9 1 6 5 15 06:30 6 6 2 8 8 14 06:45 3 17 5 30 1 6 ' 3 25 4 23 8 55 07:00 4 7 4 10 8 17 07:15 4 10 1 5 5 15 07:30 4 8 1 8 5 16 07:45 7 19 7 32 1 7 3 26 8 26 10 58 08:00 6 6 3 7 9 13 08:15 4 5 3 7 7 12 08:30 8 3 5 - 4 13 7 08:45 . 4 22 6 20 2 13 2 20 6 35 8 40 09:00 6 2 6 11 12 13 r 09:15 10 7 7 5 17 12 09:30 7 2 8 3 15 5 09:45 5 28 2 13 3 24 5 24 8 52 7 37 10:00 6 2 5 5 11 ,,,, 7 10:15 11, 2 8 3 19 5 10:30 4 4 5 2 9 6 10:45 12 33 3 11 5 23 2 12 17 56 5 23 11:00 6 0 4 1 10 1 11:15 7 1 3 3 10 4 11:30 9 1 10 5 19 6 + 11:45 6 28 1 3 7 24 2 11 13 52 3 14 • Totals 166 297 108 342 274 639 Day Totals 463 450 913 Split % 60.5% 46.4% 39.4% 53.5% Peak Hour 10:45 01:30 09:00 12:45 10:00 12:45 Volume 34 41 24 48 56 81 P.H.F. .70 .85 .75 .63 .73 .69 . ... _._. ._... . . -.. ... .- 31.. 1 . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELN HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVES S RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCK 1 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18701 Paae : 11 Begin < 1 WB >< EB >< Combined > Tuesday Time -A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/04 0 3 1 8 1 1 12:15 2 5 6 10 8 1 12:30 5 10 3 9 8 1 12:45 21 9 7 25 1 11 11 38 3 20 1 63 ' 01:00 0! 11 1 4 1 1 01:15 0 9 1 6 1 1 01:30 0 8 0 8 0 1 01:45 21 2 6 34 1 3 5 23 3 5 1 57 02:00 l 5 0 7 1 1 02:15 0, 9 0 7 0 1 02:30 01 4 0 8 0 1 02:45 0 1 7 25 1 1 5 27 1 2 1 52 03:00 0 5 1 7 1 1 03:15 1 10 0 12 1 2 03:30 1 7 1 7 2 1 03:45 0 2 8 30 0 2 9 35 0 4 1 65 04:00 1! 14 0 6 1 2 04:15 0' 5 0 7 0 1 04:30 1 3 1 7 2 1 04:45 0 2 6 28 0 , 1 7 27 0 • 3 1 55 05:00 01 4 0 14 . 0 1 05:15 0, 8 0 7 i ! d 1 05:30 1 6 1 8 2 1 05:45 1 2 3. 21 0 1 8 37 1 3 . 1 58 • 06:00 1 ' 4 3 7 4 1 06:15 2 3 2 4 4 06:30 1 � 3 1 10 2 1 06:45 2 6 7 17 1 7 9 30 3 13 1 47 07:00 0 3 1 9 1 '1 . 07:15 2 1 0 11 2 1 07:30 8 6 0 3 6 07:45 3 13 6 16 0 1 4 27 3 14 1 43 08:00 2 6 1 4 3 1 08:15 - • 2 8 - 0 11 " 2 1 08:30 3 7 1 1 4 . 08:45 3 ' 10 5 26 5 7 3 19 8 17 45 09:00 7 3 6 5 13 09:15 3 6 3 11 ' 1 6 1 09:30 3 2 5 6 a;, t 8 .p ; 09:45 6 ' 19 3 14 2 16 5 27 8 35 41 ' 10:00 7 ' 2 5 7 12 10:15 5 ' 2 8 2 13 • 10:30 5 9 7 2 12 1 10:45 9 26 19 32 9 29 1 12 18 55 2 44 11:00 '7 10 1 5 8 1 11:15 4 3 13 5 17 • 11:30 ... 6 •5 7 5 13 1 11:45 9 26 7 25 4 25 6 21 13 51 1 46 Totals 118 293 104 323 222 61 Day Totals 411 427 838 Split % 53.1% 47.5% 46.8% 52.4% Peak Hour 10:00 10:30 10:30 06:30 10:45 03:15 Volume 26 41 30 39 56 73 P.N.F. .72 .53 .57 .88 .77 .82 • 0. • • • • 32 RcNTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 _ S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 . Paae : 1 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. R.M. P.M. 12:00 06/24 2 4 3 10 5 14 12:15 -- 1 12 4 8 5 20 12:30 0 9 2 4 2 13 12:45 2 5 3 28 2 11 8 30 4 16 11 58 01:00 1 7 2 9 3 . 16 01:15 0 9 2 11 2 20 01:30 0 4 1 12 1 16 01:45 0 1 6 26 2 7 7 39 2 8 13 65 02:00 1 2 1 6 2 8 02:15 2 9 1 10 3 19 02:30 1 4 1 7 2 11 02:45 1 5 6 21 0 3 7 30 1 8 13 51 03:00 1 10 3 7 4 17 03:15 1 9 0 7 1 16 03:30 0 3 1 4 1 7 03:45 2 4 6 28 0 4 9 27 2 8 15 55 04:00 - 0 9 0 3 0 12 04:15 2 3 1 14 3 17 04:30 3 8 0 9 3 17 04:45 1 6 7 27 0 1 6 32 1 7 13 59 05:00 0 8 0 13 0 21 05:15 1 10 0 4 1 14 05:30 2 4 0 8 2 12 05:45 0 3 7 29 0 • 6 31 0 3 13 60 06:00 2 8 0 6 2 14 06:15 0 3 0 8 0 11 06:30 2 8 2 6 4 14 06:45 3 7 6 25 1 3 4 24 4 10 10 49 07:00 3 3 1 1 4 4 07:15 3 4 1 8 4 12 07:30 3 4 . 2 4 5 8 07:45 1 10 3 14 0 4 6 19 1 14 9 33 08:00 8 2 0 5 8 7 08:15 3 2 1 6 4 8 08:30 5 8 1 3 6 11 08:45 7 23. 8 20 4 6 6 20 11 29 14 40 09:00 3 2 3 7 6 9 09:15 4 3 = 7 3 11 6 09:30 4 3 6 1 10 4 09:45 10 21 2 10 9 25 2 13 19 46 4 23 10:00 10 2 1 6 11,E 8 10:15 7 1 4 5 11 6 10:30 9 3 4 3 13 6 10:45 7 33 3 9 4 13 2 16 11 46 5 25 11:00 12 2 4 1 16 3 11:15 7 1 7 5 14 6 11:30 4 4 8 3 12 7 1 11:45 6 29 1 8 8 27 2 11 14 56 3 19 Totals 147 245 104 292 251 537 Day Totals 392 396 788 Split % 58.5% 45.6% 41.4% 54.3% Peak Hour 09:45 04:30 11:00 04:15 11:00 04:15 Volume 36 33 27 42 56 68 P.H.F. .9 .82 .84 .75 .87 .80 33 • REHTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Paae . 2 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A=hL P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/25 _ 2 2 2 8 4 10 12:15 0 10 0 7 0 17 12:30 0 10 1 11 1 21 12:45 0 2 4 26 1 4 9 35 1 6 13 61 01:00 0 , 7 0 3 0 10 01:15 0 7 1 6 1 13 01:30 1 4 3 12 4 16 01:45 0 1 7 25 1 5 8 29 1 6 15 54 02:00 1 7 2 4 3 11 02:15 2 4 1 6 3 10 02:30 2 6 0 6 2 12 02:45 0 5 4 21 0 3 7 23 0 8 11 44 03:00 0 9 1 4 1 13 03:15 0 10 1 7 1 17 03:30 0 8 0 3 0 11 03:45 0' * 8 35 0 2 6 20 0 2 14 55 04:00 0 11 0 4 0 15 , 04:15 1 10 1 13 2 23 04:30 1 8 0 7 1 15 04:45 0 2 10 39 1 2 8 32 1 4 18 71 05:00 2 6 1 7 3 13 05:15 1 7 0 3 1 10 05:30 1 12 0 7 1 19 05:45 0 4 2 27 0 1 7 24 0 5 9 51 06:00 2 6 1 4 3 10 06:15 0 4 1 4 1 8 06:30 0 3 2 1 2 4 06:45 1 3 3 16 0 4 2 11 1 7 5 27 07:00 3 6 1 6 4 12 07:15 2 0 1 4 3 4 07:30 1 7 2 7 3 14 ` 07:45 3 9 4 17 1 5 4 21 4 14 8 38 08:00 6 3 1 7 7 10 08:15 2 1 2 6 4 7 08:30 4 2 3 4 7 6 08:45 6 18 2 8 4 10 5 22 10 28 7 30 09:00 4 ' 1 2 1 6 2 09:15 4 2 4 1 8 3 09:30 3 0 2 3 5 3 . 09:45 3 14 1 4 6 14 4 9 9 28 5 13 10:00 11 2 4 1 15 '►°' 3 10:15 4 1 3 2 7 3 10:30 6, 4 3 3 9 7 10:45 3 24 1 8 5 15 2 8 8 39 3 16 • 11:00 2 1 6 1 8 2 11:15 8 1 4 3 12 4 ,. 11:30 9 0 8 1 17 1 11:45 15, 34 1 3 7 25 1 6 22 59 2 9 ' Totals 116 229 90 240 206 469 Day Totals 345 330 675 Split % 56.3% 48.8% 43.6% 51.1% Peak Hour _. 11:00 04:00 . 11:00 12:00 .. 11:00 04:00 Volume 34' 39 25 35 59 71 P.H.F. .56, .88 .78 .79 .67 .77 34 - ' REMTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH S S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 . Paae : } Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Monday Time La. P-[i. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/26 __ 1 6 0 6 1 12 12:15 0 7 1 6 1 13 12:30 1 4 1 5 2 9 12:45 1 3 5 22 0 2 4 21 1 5 9 43 01:00 2, 3 0 4 2 7 01:15 1 5 1 7 2 12 01:30 0' 8 1 8 1 16 01:45 0 3 4 20 0 2 5 24 0 5 9 44 02:00 0, 5 1 6 1 11 02:15 1 6 1 4 2 10 02:30 0 4 0 7 0 11 02:45 0 1 4 19 1 3 5 22 1 4 9 41 03:00 0 - 10 1 3 1 13 03:15 2 4 0 3 2 7 03:30 1 5 0 9 1 14 03:45 1 4 6 25 2 3 9 24 3 7 15 49 04:00 0 5 0 5 0 . 10 04:15 1 3 2 3 3 6 04:30 3 5 0 4 3 9 04:45 3 7 9 22 0 2 7 19 3 9 16 41 05:00 4 6 2 7 6 13 05:15 6 6 2 5 8 11 05:30 4 9 1 11 5 20 05:45 6 20 6 27 2 7 9 32 8 27 15 59 06:00 5 4 2 9 7 13 06:15 6; 3 3 9 9 12 06:30 5' 2 0 8 5 10 06:45 5 21 7 16 1 6 8 34 6 27 15 50 07:00 8 5 2 7 10 12 07:15 7 8 4 7 11 15 07:30 6 8 1 2 7 . 10 07:45 3' 24 6 27 1 8 2 18 4 32 8 45 08:00 6 4 0 11 6 15 08:15 4 5 1 10 5 15 08:30 .. 4 .4 . 2 3 .. 6 7 08:45 3 17 6 19 2 5 5 29 5 22 11 48 ' 09:00 3 2 5 5 8 _ 7 09:15 7' 2 3 8 10 - 10 09:30 7 6 3 6 10 12 09:45 81 25 5 15 1 12 5 24 9 37 10 39 10:00 4' 4 3 3 7 'I°' 7 10:15 9 5 2 2 11 7 10:30 7 3 2 2 9 5 10:45 4 24 1 13 2 9 2 9 6 • 33 3 22 11:00 4 1 2 3 6 4 11:15 6 1 2 3 8 r 4 11:30 6 0 3 2 9 2 11:45 6 22 1 3 6 13 2 10 12 35 3 13 Totals 171 228 72 266 243 494 Day Totals 399 338 737 Split % 70.3% 46.1% 29.6% 53.8% Peak Hour 09:30 ' 04:45 08:45 05:30 09:00 04:45 Volume 28 30 13 38 37 60 P.H.F. .77 .83 .65 .86 .92 .75 35 •RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOC% 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 . Page 4 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Tuesday Time A.Ii. I p.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/27 0 5 0 5 0 10 12:15 1 7 1 8 2 15 12:30 1 1 5 0 6 1 11 12:45 0I 2 5 22 0 1 4 23 0 3 9 45 01:00 2 6 0 6 2 12 01:15 1 1 7 0 5 1 12 01:30 0 11 2 4 2 15 01:45 1 1 4 4 28 0 2 5 20 1 6 9 48 02:00 1 4 0 8 1 12 02:15 0 1 7 0 4 0 11 02:30 0 I 3 1 8 1 11 02:45 01 1 10 24 0 1 6 26 0 2 16 50 03:00 0 3 1 9 1 12 03:15 01 4 1 6 1 10 03:30 0I 5 0 8 0 13 03:45 0 * 4 16 0 2 8 31 0 2 12 47 04:00 0 4 1 4 1 8 04:15 2 1 6 1 3 3 9 04:30 3 1 3 0 4 3 7 04:45 3 8 2 15 0 2 10 21 3 10 12 36 05:00 2I 7 1 8 3 15 05:15 6I 7 2 6 8 13 05:30 21 10 2 12 4 22 05:45 61 16 7 31 1 6 10 36 7 22 17 67 06:00 711 4 1 10 8 14 06:15 51 3 1 10 6 13 06:30 4 2 2 9 6 11 06:45- 4 20 8 17 1 5 9 38 5 25 17 55 07:00 9 6 2 8 11 14 07:15 6 9 2 8 8 17 07:30 7 9 1 2 8 11 07:45 2 24 7 31 0 5 2 20 2 29 9 51 08:00 6 4 1 12 7 16 08:15 4 6 0 11 4 17 08:30 2 4 2 3 4 7 08:45 4 16 7 21 3 6 6 32 7 22 13 53 09:00 3 2 '6 6 9 8 09:15 61 2 2 9 8 11 09:30 91 7 2 7 11 14 09:45 6II 24 6 17 2 12 6 28 8 36 12 45 10:00 2, 2 3 3 5 .e 5 10:15 11I 10 3 2 14 12 10:30 6' 0 3 1 9 1 10:45 4 23 0 12 2 11 2 8 6 34 2 20 11:00 3 0 2 4 5 4 11:15 6 2 3 3 9 5 11:30 51 2 4 0 9 2 11:45 61 20 0 4 7 16 3 10 13 36 3 14 Totals 158 238 69 293 227 531 Day Totals 1 396 362 758 Split % 69.6%1 44.8% 30.4% 55.1% Peak Hour 09:30 06:45 11:00 05:30 09:30 05:00 Volume 28. 32 16 42 .. 38 67 P.H.F. .63 .88 .57 .87 .67 .76 1 I 1 III - 36.. ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Paae 5 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. P—M. A-M..._ P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/28 __ 0 7 1 6 1 13 12:15 0 5 0 7 0 12 12:30 1 8 2 8 3 16 12:45 0 1 9 29 0 3 4 25 0 4 13 54 01:00 1 3 0 8 1 11 01:15 0 4 2 10 2 14 01:30 2 8 0 11 2 19 01:45 0 3 12 27 1 3 8 37 1 6 20 64 02:00 1 8 2 5 3 13 02:15 2 5 2 9 4 14 02:30 2 4 1 7 3 11 02:45 0 5 3 20 1 6 15 36 1 11 18 56 03:00 1 4 2 11 3 15 03:15 1 5 0 7 1 12 03:30 1 10 0 7 1 17 03:45 0 3 2 21 0 2 10 35 0 5 12 56 04:00 1 7 1 10 2 17 04:15 0 14 2 9 2 23 04:30 5 4 1 14 6 18 04:45 1 7 4 29 0 4 17 50 1 11 21 79 05:00 4 4 1 16 5 20 05:15 4 10 2 8 6 18 05:30 1 10 0 7 1 17 05:45 5 14 8 32 1 4 9 40 6 18 17 72 06:00 6 5 1 19 7 24 06:15 7 9 2 12 9 21 06:30 6 5 1 17 7 22 06:45 10 29 5 24 1 5 9 57 11 34 14 81 07:00 9 10 2 10 11 20 07:15 8 5 3 10 11 15 07:30 8 3 3 11 1 11 14 07:45 5 30 11 29 3 11 10 41 8 41 21 70 08:00 4 4 2 10 6 14 08:15 4 5 1 16 5 21 08:30 2 5 4 7 6 12 08:45 5 15 7 21 4 11 8 41 9 26 15 62 09:00 6 15 3 8 9 23 09:15 5 3 7 5 12 8 09:30 6 5 5 10 11 15 09:45 4 21 1 24 8 23 5 28 12 44 6 52 10:00 5 6 4 5 914 11 10:15 6 4 5 6 11 10 10:30 5 3 8 7 13 10 10:45 3 19 4 17 2 19 4 22 • 5 38 8 39 11:00 5 3 4 3 9 6 11:15 7 3 7 4 , 14 7 11:30 6 1 5 3 11 4 71:45 5 23 3 19 7 23 1 11 12 46 4 21 Totals 170 283 114 423 284 706 Day Totals 453 537 990 Split % 59.8% 40.0% 40.1% 59.9% Peak Hour 06:45 01:30 09:45 05:45 11:00 05:45 Volume 35 33 25 57 46 84 P.H.F. .87 .68 .78 .75 .82 .87 _ . _ 37 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT ' CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCH 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Page 6 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Thursday Time A.M. E.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/29 • 0 7 2 6 2 13 12:15 — 0 5 0 10 0 15 12:30 1 8 0 9 1 17 12:45 2 3 10 30 2 4 4 29 4 7 14 59 01:00 0 3 1 8 1 11 01:15 0 4 0 9 0 13 01:30 1 8 0 13 1 21 01:45 0 1 13 28 1 2 11 . 41 1 3 24 69 02:00 0 6 4 8 4 14 02:15 3 6 1 12 4 18 02:30 2 6 2 3 4 9 02:45 0 5 7 25 0 7 9 32 0 12 16 57 03:00 0 4 1 9 1 13 03:15 2 5 2 7 4 12 03:30 0 10 0 7 0 17 03:45 0 2 2 21 1 4 10 33 1 6 12 54 04:00 0 7 0 10 0 17 04:15 1 15 1 9 2 24 04:30 •6 4 1 15 7 19 04:45 1 8 4 30 1 3 18 52 2 11 22 82 05:00 2 4 0 17 2 21 05:15 5 10 2 8 7 18 05:30 1 10 0 7 1 17 05:45 6 14 8 32 1 3 9 41 7 17 17 73 06:00 8 5 2 20 10 25 06:15 10 9 3 13 13 22 06:30 6 5 1 18 7 23 06:45 12 36 5 24 2 8 9 60 14 44 14 84 07:00 15 10 3 10 18 20 • 07:15 8 5 3 10 11 15 07:30 8 3 6 12 14 15 07:45 3 34 12 30 2 14 10 42 5 48 22 72 08:00 3 4 2 10 5 14 08:15 5 5 1 17 6 22 08:30 3 5 2 7 5 12 08:45 6 17 7 21 5 10 8 42 11 27 15 63 09:00 7 16 3 t 8 10 24 09:15 5 3 5 5 10 8 ; 09:30 8 5 8 10 16 15 09:45 4 24 1 25 8 24 5 28 12 48 6 53 10:00 4 12 4 6 8 18 10:15 5 2 3 6 8 .° 8 10:30 5 2 8 8 13 10 10:45 4 18 4 20 0 15 4 24 4 33 8 44 . 11:00 5 1 3 5 B 6 11:15 7 2 10 4 17 6 11:30 6 2 5 4 . 11 6 , 11:45 5 23 2 7 8 26 1 14 13 49 3 21 Totals 185 293 120 438 305 731 Day Totals 478 558 1036 Split % 60.6% 40.0% 39.3% 59.9% Peak Hour 06:15 03:30 11:00 05:45 06:45 05:45 Volume 43 34 26 60 57 87 P.H.F. .71 .56 .65 .75 .79 .87 _. 38 . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH a S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCH 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Pape 7 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Friday Time 8-11. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/30 1 5 1 5 2 10 12:15 -- 0 7 0 8 0 15 12:30 2 5 0 6 2 11 12:45 0 3 5 22 0 1 4 23 0 4 9 45 01:00 0 6 0 6 0 12 01:15 1 7 1 5 2 12 01:30 1 12 1 4 2 16 01:45 5 7 4 29 0 2 5 20 5 9 9 49 02:00 0 4 0 8 0 12 02:15 0 7 0 4 0 11 02:30 0 3 1 8 1 11 02:45 1 1 10 24 0 1 6 26 1 2 16 50 03:00 0 5 3 3 3 8 03:15 1 4 2 6 3 10 03:30 1 7 0 7 1 14 03:45 0 2 6 22 0 5 11 27 0 7 17 49 04:00 1 2 0 7 1 9 04:15 1 7 0 12 1 19 04:30 3 8 0 5 3 13 04:45 2 7 5 22 2 2 19 43 4 9 24 65 05:00 2 4 3 9 5 13 05:15 5 8 2 6 7 14 05:30 2 10 3 11 5 21 05:45 4 13 2 24 2 10 13 39 6 23 15 63 06:00 6 2 1 13 7 15 06:15 7 9 2 8 9 17 06:30 8 8 2 6 10 14 06:45 5 26 5 24 1 6 10 37 6 32 15 61 07:00 9 2 3 11 12 13 07:15 7 7 2 4 9 11 07:30 7 6 1 9• 8 15 07:45 2 25 6 21 1 7 3 27 3 32 9 48 ' 08:00 8 2 0 7 8 9 08:15 4 5 1 5 5 10 08:30 1 8 2 7 3 15 08:45 3 16 3 18 3 6 4 23 6 22 7 41 09:00 2 2 5 6 7 8 09:15 7 4 3 4: 10 8 09:30 9 3 3 5 12 8 • 09:45 7 25 3 12 2. 13 3 18 9 38 6 30 10:00 0 3 3 1 3 . 4 10:15 12 3 3 3 15 6 10:30 6 1 2 1 8 2 10:45 4 22 0 7 3 11 2, 7 7 33 2 14 11:00 3 1 4 6 7 7 11:15 6 2 4 2 10 4 11:30 5 1 5 0' 10 1 31:45 6 20 1 5 6 19 3 11 12 39 4 16 Totals 167 230 83 301 250 531 Day Totals 397 384 781 Split % 66.8% 43.3% 33.2% 56.6% Peak Hour 06:15 12:45 11:00 04:15 09:30 04:45 Volume 29 30 19 45 39 72 P.H.F. .80 .62 .79 .59 .65 .75 .. RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR'AVE'S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Paae 8 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P__11. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/01 1 4 2 9 3 13 12:15 -- 1 11 4 7 5 18 12:30 0 8 1 4 1 12 12:45 1 3 3 26 2 9 7 27 3 12 10 53 . 01:00 1 6 1 8 2 14 01:15 0 8 2 10 2 18 01:30 0 4 0 11 0 15 01:45 0 1 5 23 2 5 6 35 2 6 11 58 02:00 1 2 0 5 1 7 02:15 1 8 1 9 2 17 02:30 1 4 0 6 1 10 02:45 0 3 5 19 0 1 6 26 0 4 11 45 03:00 1 9 2 6 3 15 03:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 03:30 0 3 1 4 1 7 03:45 1 2 5 25 0 3 8 24 1 5 13 49 04:00 0 8 0 3 0 11 04:15 2 3 0 13 2 16 04:30 3 7 0 8 3 15 04:45 0 5 6 24 0 * 5 29 0 5 11 53 05:00 0 7 0 12 0 19 05:15 0 9 0 4 0 13 05:30 1 4 1 7 2 11 05:45 0 1 6 26 0 1 5 28 0 2 11 54 06:00 1 7 0 5 1 12 06:15 0 3 1 7 1 10 06:30 2 7 2 5 4 12 06:45 3 6 5 22 1 4 4 21 4 10 9 43 07:00 3 3 0 1 3 4 07:15 2 4 1 7 3 11 07:30 2 4 1 4 3 8 • 07:45 1 8 3 14 0 2 5 17 1 10 8 31 08:00 7 2 2 5 9 7 ' 08:15 2 . 1 1 7 3 8 08:30 4 6 1 1 5 7 , 08:45 6 19 7 16 4 8 6 19 10 27 13 35 09:00 2 2 , 2 7 4 09:15 4 2 6 2 10 4 09:30 3 3 5 2 8 '5 09:45 9 18 1 8 8 21 3 14 17 39 4 22 10:00 9 1 3 6 12 7 10:15 6, 1 4 3 10 ,/ 4 10:30 8 3 4 4 12 7 10:45 6 29 2 7 4 15 2 15 10 44 4 22 , 11:00 11 0 4 2 15 2 11:15 6 1 6 6 12 7 11:30 4 4 7 2 11 6 I 11:45 5 26 0 5 7 24 1 11 12 50 1 16 Totals 121 215 93 266 214 481 Day Totals 336 359 695 Split % 56.5%' 44.7% 43.4% 55.3% Peak Hour 09:45 04:30 11:00 04:15 09:45 04:15 Volume 32 29 24 38 51 61 P.H.F. .88 .80 .85 .73 .75 .80 J 40 • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Page • 9 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A,M. P_L A./4, P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/02 1 2 2 7 3 9 12:15 0 9 1 6 1 15 12:30 0 9 2 10 2 19 12:45 1 2 4 24 1 6 8 31 2 8 12 55 01:00 0 6 1 3 1 9 01:15 0 6 2 5 2 11 01:30 1 4 2 11 3 15 01:45 1 2 6 22 1 6 7 26 2 8 13 48 02:00 1 6 1 4 2 10 02:15 2 4 0 5 2 9 02:30 0 5 0 5 0 10 02:45 - 0 3 4 19 0 1 6 20 0 4 10 39 03:00 0 8 1 4 1 12 03:15 0 9 3 6 3 15 03:30 0 7 0 3 0 10 03:45 1 1 7 31 1 5 5 18 2 6 12 49 04:00 0 10 1 4 1 14 04:15 1 9 0 12 1 21 04:30 0 7 0 6 0 13 04:45 0 1 9 35 1 2 7 29 1 3 16 64 05:00 2 5 0 6 2 11 05:15 0 6 0 3 0 9 05:30 1 11 0 6 1 17 05:45 0 3 2 24 0 * 6 21 0 3 8 45 06:00 0 5 0 4 0 9 06:15 0 4 2 4 2 8 06:30 0 3 2 1 2 4 06:45 1 1 3 15 1 5 2 11 2 6 5 26 07:00 3 5 2 5 5 10 07:15 1 0 2 4 3 4 07:30 1 6 1 6 2 12 07:45 2 7 4 15 2 7 4 19 4 14 8 34 08:00 6 4 1 7 7 11 08:15 2 2 1 4 3 6 08:30 4 2 2 3 6 5 08:45 6 18 2 10 5 9 5 19 11 27 7 29 09:00 3 1 2 1 5 2 09:15 4 3 4 - 2 8 5 09:30 2 1 1 4 3 5 09:45 2 11 1 6 6 13 4 11 8 24 5 17 10:00 10 2 3 2 13 _ 4 10:15 3 1 4 3 7'� 4 10:30 5 5 4 2 9 7 ' 10:45 2 20 2 10 4 15 2 9 6 35 4 19 11:00 2 0 5 0 7 0 11:15 7 1 4 4 11 5 11:30 8 1 7 2 15 3 11:45 14 31 0 2 6 22 0 6 20 53 0 8 Totals 100 213 91 220 191 433 i Day Totals 313 311 624 Solit % 52.3% 49.1% 47.6% 50.8% Peak Hour 11:00 04:00 11:00 12:00 11:00 04:00 Volume 31 35 22 31 53 64 P.H.F. .55 .87 .78 .77 .66 .76 4'I , REJJTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 Paae 10 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Monday Time A-M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/03 0 1 0 5 0 6 12:15 -- 1 3 0 6 1 9 12:30 1 8 2 5 3 13 12:45 0 2 1 13 0 2 6 22 0 4 7 35 01:00 0 3 0 6 0 9 01:15 0 9 1 10 1 19 01:30 0 12 0 4 0 16 01:45 0 • 7 31 2 3 9 29 2 3 16 60 02:00 . . 1 4 . 0 6 1 10 02:15 0 10 0 6 0 16 02:30 0 1 1 7 1 8 02:45 0 1 6 21 0 1 8 27 0 2 14 48 03:00 1 8 2 8 3 16 03:15 1 4 0 4 1 8 03:30 0 11 1 6 1 17 03:45 1 3 7 30 0 3 11 29 1 6 18 59 04:00 0 5 0 10 0 15 , 04:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 04:30 4 3 2 13 6 16 04:45 1 5 6 22 0 2 5 34 1 7 11 56 05:00 1 4 0 7 1 11 05:15 1 9 1 4 2 13 05:30 0 6 2 12 2 18 05:45 4 6 8 27 3 6 14 37 7 12 22 64 06:00 0, 7 0 8 0 15 06:15 6 8 3 9 9 17 06:30 3 8 2 5 5 13 06:45 1 10 5 28 1 6 5 27 2 16 10 55 07:00 3 4 1 5 4 9 07:15 5 5 1 3 6 8 07:30 5 7. 0 .5 5 12 • 07:45 7 20 1 17 1 3 6 19 8 23 7 36 08:00 1 6 1 6 2 12 08:15 4 6 1 8. 5 14 08:30 8 2 2 4 10 6 08:45 3 16 2 16 1 5 4 22 4 21 6 38 , 09:00 3 5 , 1 4 4 9 09:15 3 6 2 8 5 14 09:30 8 1 7 6 15 7 09:45 6 20 1 13 1 11 4 22 7 31 5 35 10:00 7 4 3 0 10 4 10:15 3 0 8 8 11 8 10:30 4 3 10 3 14 6 10:45 6 20 3 10 4 25 4 - 15 10 45 7 25 11:00 8 3 5 6 13 9 11:15 7 1 4 2 11 3 11:30 10 1 5 5 15 6 11:45 5 30 0 5 2 16 1 14 7 46 1 19 Totals 133 233 83 297 216 530 Day Totals 366 380 746 Split % 61.5% 43.9% 38.4% 56.0% , Peak Hour 10:45 01:30 10:15 05:30 10:45 05:30 Volume 31 33 27 43 49 72 P.H.F. .77 .68 .67 .76 .81 .81 • • J 4: • REgTOH, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH & S 5TH ST LACEY,. WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 2 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18702 . Mae 1 11 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Tuesday Time AJM, P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/04 -_ 0 5 0 2 0 7 12:15 0 7 2 6 2 13 12:30 1 6 3 5 4 11 12:45 1 2 4 22 1 6 12 25 2 8 16 47 01:00 0 7 1 7 1 14 01:15 0 8 0 4 0 12 01:30 1 6 0 2 1 8 01:45 0 1 8 29 2 3 6 19 2 4 14 40 02:00 1 5 1 3 2 B 02:15 0 5 1 6 1 11 02:30 1 1 0 7 1 B 02:45 0 2 3 14 1 3 6 22 1 5 9 36 03:00 0 4 0 7 0 11 03:15 0 8 1 5 1 13 03:30 0' 3 1 2 1 5 03:45 0 • 3 18 0 2 8 22 0 2 11 40 04:00 1 7 0 3 1 10 04:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 04:30 0 4 1 3 1 7 04:45 0 1 4 23 0 1 6 18 0 2 10 41 05:00 0 8 0 13 0 21 05:15 0 3 0 7 0 10 05:30 0 5 0 7 0 12 05:45 0 • 3 19 0 • 4 31 . 0 • 7 50 06:00 1 3 0 5 1 8 06:15 1 3 0 6 1 9 06:30 3 3 0 9 3 12 06:45 - 1 6 2 11 3 3 10 30 4 9 12 41 07:00 1 3 1 3 2 6 07:15 0 2 0 . 6 0 B 07:30 1 3 2 2 3 5 '07:45 1 . 3 6 14 0 3 7 18 1 6 13 32 '08:00 0 4 0 3 0 7 08:15 1 4 1 4 2 8 08:30 4 2 2 3 6 5 08:45 3 8 1 11 2 5 5 15 5 13 6 26 09:00 5 5 2 - 7 7 12 09:15 2 7 2 11 4 18 09:30 0 2 3 4 3 6 09:45 3 10 5 19 3 10 2 24 6 10, 20 7 43 10:00 6 1 3 4 9 5 10:15 5 1 3 2 8 3 10:30 - 6 4 3 3 9 7 10:45 8 25 12 18 2 11 6 15 10 36 18 33 11:00 6 7 7 6 13 13 11:15 2 . 6 2 8 3 ;11:30 7 6 3 7 10 13 ;11:45 5 20 2 16 2 18 4 19 7 38 6 35 ;Totals 78 214 65 258 143 472 Day Totals 292 323 615 Split % 54.5% 45.3% 45.4% 54.6% Peak Hour 10:00 01:00 10:30 04:45 10:45 12:15 Volume 25 29 18 • 33 41 54 P.H.F. .78 .90 .64 .63 .78 .84 • 43 , RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT REN1'ON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page 1 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P-M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/24 0 4 5 8 5 12 12:15 -- 0 8 2 8 2 16 12:30 1 6 3 8 4 14 12:45 0 1 9 27 4 14 4 28 4 15 13 55 01:00 0 14 3 13 3 27 01:15 0 2 0 12 0 14 01:30 0 9 5 11 5 20 01:45 0 • 8 33 3 11 6 42 3 11 14 75 02:00 2 11 3 10 5 21 02:15 1 2 0 14 1 16 02:30 0 6 0 15 0 21 02:45 0 3 6 25 0 3 10 49 0 6 16 74 03:00 0 5 1 13 1 18 03:15 0 11 0 10 0 21 03:30 0 9 0 9 0 18 03:45 0 • 5 30 0 1 12 44 0 1 17 74 04:00 0 4 0 12 0 16 , 04:15 0 5 0 10 0 15 04:30 0 5 0 9 0 14 04:45 0 • 11 25 1 1 10 41 1 1 21 66 05:00 1 4 1 10 2 14 05:15 1 12 0 9 1 21 05:30 1 7 0 11 1 18 05:45 2 5 8 31 3 4 12 42 5 9 20 73 06:00 2 10 1 21 3 31 06:15 1 10 0 12 1 22 06:30 3 6 0 15 3 21 06:45 0 6 8 34 0 1 10 58 0 7 18 92 07:00 3 6 2 7 5 13 07:15 . .. 0 -4 - 3 7 3 11 07:30 2 3 3 12 5 15 . 07:45 0 5 4 17 0 8 10 36 0 13 14 53 j 08:00 1 3 1 7 2 10 08:15 4 0 5 7 9 7 08:30 5 6 3 5 8 11 08:45 7 17 3 12 5 14 6 25 12 31 9 37 09:00 0 ' 2 6 5 6 7 09:15 7 6 6 6 13 12 09:30 8 1 3 2 11 3 09:45 5 20 3 12 3 18 7 20 8 38 10 32 10:00 3 3 12 12 15,e 15 • 10:15 4 2 3 11 7 13 • 10:30 1 2 8 5 9 7 10:45 7 15 0 7 12 35 6 34 19 50 6 41 . 11:00 4 0 14 1 18 1 11:15 7 2 9 8 16 10 • 11:30 4 0 8 5 12 5 11:45 4 19 0 2 13 44 3 17 17 63 3 • 19 Totals 91 255 154 436 245 691 Day Totals 346 590 936 Split % 37.1% 36.9% 62.8% 63.1% Peak Hour 09:15 12:15 11:00 05:45 10:45 05:45 Volume 23 37 44 60 65 94 P.H.F. .71 .66 .78 .71 .85 .75 I j RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOC8 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page • 2 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A.M._ P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/25__ 0 8 2 8 2 16 12:15 0 3 3 14 - 3 17 12:30 0 9 2 16 2 25 12:45 0 * 10 30 1 8 9 47 1 8 19 77 01:00 0 11 3 16 3 27 01:15 0 6 1 9 1 15 01:30 0 11 1 16 1 27 01:45 1 1 8 36 0 5 16 57 1 6 24 93 02:00 0 5 3 12 3 17 02:15 1 8 0 7 1 15 02:30 0 5 0 10 0 15 02:45 0 1 9 27 2 5 7 36 2 6 16 63 03:00 0 10 1 13 1 23 03:15 0 12 0 7 0 19 03:30 0 6 0 12 0 18 03:45 0 * 11 39 0 1 13 45 0 1 24 84 04:00 0 10 0 11 0 21 04:15 0 4 1 11 1 15 04:30 0 7 1 15 1 22 04:45 1 1 3 24 2 4 10 47 3 5 13 71 05:00 0 6 0 10 0 16 05:15 0 5 0 7 0 12 05:30 0 4 0 8 0 12 05:45 0 * 7 22 0 * 6 31 0 * 13 53 06:00 0 5 0 7 0 12 06:15 0 4 0 8 0 12 06:30 1 3 0 6 1 9 06:45 0 1 3 15 1 1 8 29 1 2 11 44 07:00 4 4 1 7 5 11 07:15 4 6 1 3 5 9 07:30 3 5 1 6 4 11 07:45 1 12 5 20 0 3 6 22 1 15 11 42 08:00 8 2 2 6 10 8 08:15 4 2 6 4 10 6 08:30 4 2 3 9 7 11 08:45 5 21 4 10 3 14 4 23 8 35 8 33 09:00 5 1 _ 4 6 9 7 09:15 9 6 4 5 13 11 09:30 7 3 8 6 15 9 09:45 12 33 4 14 4 20 5 22 16 53 9 36 10:00 8 3 9 2 1740 5 10:15 14 1 8 2 22 3 10:30 4 2 8 2 12 4 10:45 9 35 1 7'I 9 34 1 7 16 69 2 14 11:00 11 1 1 2 2 13 3 11:15 2 2 • 1 6 1 8 3 11:30 10 0 I 9 0 19 0 11:45 8 31 0 3 I 10 27 1 4 18 58 1 7 Totals 136 247 122 370 258 617 • Day Totals 383 492 875 Split % 52.7% 40.0% 47.2% 59.9% Peak Hour 09:30 03:00 10:00 01:00 09:30 01:00 Volume 41 39 34 57 70 93 P.N.F. .73 .81 .94 .89 .79 .86 _ _ . . .. .- 45 ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCH 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Pane 3 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Monday Time A._M_. P•M• A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/26— 1 4 2 11 3 15 12:15 1 7 3 9 4 16 12:30 0 8 1 6 1 14 12:45 0 2 13 32 1 7 8 34 1 9 21 66 01:00 0 0 1 0 1 0 01:15 0 6 0 5 0 11 01:30 0 8 0 11 0 19 01:45 0 • 9 23 0 1 11 27 0 1 20 50 02:00 2 3 1 10 3 13 02:15 1 10 0 10 1 20 02:30 0 6 0 11 0 17 02:45 0 3 7 26 0 1 16 47 0 4 23 73 03:00 1 6 0 11 1 17 03:15 0 14 1 10 1 24 03:30 1 8 1 18 2 26 03:45 0 2 3 31 0 2 14 53 0 4 17 84 04:00 1 7 0 12 1 18 04:15 2 7 0 16 2 23 04:30 1 4 0 14 1 18 04:45 1 5 8 26 1 1 14 56 2 6 22 82 05:00 1 5 2 12 3 17 05:15 3 3 1 16 4 19 05:30 4 6 1 19 5 25 05:45 4 12 4 18 2 6 14 61 6 18 18 79 06:00 6 7 1 10 7 17 06:15 3 10 0 15 3 25 06:30 6 8 1 6 7 14 06:45 5 20 7 32 1 3 17 48 6 23 24 80 07:00 4 6 2 14 , 6 20 07:15 11 5 4 14 15 19 07:30 - 7 6 3 11 10 19 07:45 6 28 6 23 3 12 12 51 9 40 18 74 08:00 3 9 4 16 7 25 08:15 4 8 4 11 8 19 08:30 4 6 5 16 9 22 08:45 10 21 2 25 3 16 9 52 13 37 11 77 09:00 7 13 2 6 9 19 09:15 3 5 4 12 7 19 09:30 8 3 4 5 12 8 09:45 6 24 6 27 4 14 8 31 10v 38 14 58 10:00 2 0 5 9 7 9 10:15 6 7 11 3 17 10 10:30 7 3 5 5 12 8 10:45 12 27 3 13 8 29 3 20 20 56 6 33 11:00 5 3 6 1 11 4 11:15 _ .. 5 ..0. 6 1 11 1 11:30 4 1 9 0 13 1 11:45 5 19 1 5 • 11 32 3 5 16 51 4 10 Totals 163 281 124 485 287 766 Day Totals 444 609 1053 Split % 56.7% 36.6% 43.2% 63.3% Peak Hour 10:15 02:45 11:00 04:45 10:15 02:45 Volume 30 35 32 61 60 90 P.H.F. .62 .62 .72 .80 .75 .86 46 ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 DiraCtion 1 Paoe 4 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Tuesday Time R_._M. PPM, R.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/27 _ 1 5 2 12 3 17 12:15 0 8 3 10 3 18 12:30 0 9 2 7 2 16 12:45 0 1 14 36 2 9 9 38 2 10 23 74 01:00 0 5 1 15 1 20 01:15 0 7 0 10 0 17 01:30 0 9 0 17 0 26 01:45 0 * 7 28 0 1 16 58 0 1 23 86 02:00 1 7 1 11 2 18 02:15 0 5 1 10 1 15 02:30 0 8 0 7 0 15 02:45 0 1 6 26 0 2 13 41 0 3 19 67 03:00 1 7 0 11 1 18 03:15 0 8 1 16 1 24 03:30 0 7 0 23 0 30 03:45 0 1 6 28 0 1 13 63 0 2 19 91 04:00 0 8 0 15 0 23 04:15 1 7 0 10 1 17 04:30 1 6 0 11 1 17 04:45 1 3 12 33 0 • 14 50 1 3 26 83 05:00 0 10 1 16 1 26 05:15 '3 7 1 14 4 21 05:30 .5 3 1 23 6 26 05:45 5 13 7 27 1 4 25 78 6 17 32 105 06:00 7 10 1 14 8 24 06:15 3 12 0 15 3 27 06:30 7 5 2 15 9 20 06:45 '6 23 8 35 2 5 12 56 8 28 '20 91 07:00 5 7 1 13 6 20 07:15 12 8 4 15 16 23 07:30 ,8 4 3 11 11 15 07:45 7 32 13 32 2 10 12 51 9 42 25 83 08:00 3 5 4 10 7 15 ' 08:15 ;4 7 4 11 8 18 08:30 '4 1 6 10 10 11 08:45 11 22 4 17 3 17 10 41 14 39 14 58 09:00 8 5 2 5 10 10 , 09:15 3 7, 5 7 8 14 09:30 9 3 5 6 14 9 09:45 7 27 7 22 5 17 9 27 12 44 16 49 10:00 2 1 6 5 8'� 6 10:15 7 1 12 9 19 10 10:30 8 0 6 4 14 4 ' 10:45 13 30 1 3 9 33 2 20 22 63 3 23 ' 11:00 6 1 7 3 13 4 11:15 6 2 7 2 13 4 11:30 5 r 1 10 1 15 2 31:45 6 23 1 5 12 36 1 7 18 59 2 1Z Totals 176 292 135 530 311 822 Day Totals 468 665 1133 Split % 56.5% 35.5% 43.4% 64.4% Peak Hour 10:15 12:00 11:00 05:00 10:15 05:30 Volume 34 36 36 78 68 109 P.H.F. .65 .64 .75 .78 .77 .85 47.. RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page 5 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/28 0 4 1 11 1 15 12:15 0 2 2 11 2 13 12:30 0 10 0 5 0 15 12:45 0 * 2 18 1 4 11 38 1 4 13 56 01:00 3 11 2 12 5 23 01:15 1 8 1 10 2 18 01:30 0 8 0 3 0 11 01:45 1 5 8 35 1 4 7 32 2 9 15 67 02:00 0 5 0 3 0 8 02:15 0 3 1 11 1 14 02:30 0 5 0 12 0 17 02:45 0 * 7 20 0 1 10 36 0 1 17 56 03:00 0 4 0 6 0 10 03:15 0 1 0 12 0 13 03:30 0 4 0 10 0 14 03:45 0 * 7 16 0 * 8 36 0 * 15 52 04:00 1 4 0 5 1 9 04:15 0 3 0 6 0 9 04:30 2 8 0 12 2 20 04:45 1 4 2 17 0 * 14 37 1 4 16 54 05:00 2 3 3 18 5 21 05:15 2 2 1 16 3 18 05:30 5 1 0 12 5 13 05:45 5 14 3 9 0 4 9 55 5 18 12 64 06:00 5 2 0 11 5 13 06:15 7 2 2 7 9 9 06:30 7 6 0 9 7 15 06:45 9 28 4 14 2 4 9 36 11 32 13 50 07:00 5 3 1 7 6 10 07:15 12 5 5 13 17 18 07:30 11 6 5 10 16 16 07:45 4 32 4 18 6 17 6 36 10 49 10 54 08:00 2 2 2 4 4 6 08:15 0 4 0 6 0 10 • 08:30 3 2 1 7 4 9 08,:45 2 7 0 8 4 7 11 28 6 14 11 36 09:00 4 3 2 9 6 12 09:15 6 . 5 2 4 8 9 09:30 2 2 3 4 5 6 09:45 4 16 0 10 3 10 3 20 7'e 26 3 30 10:00 2 3 2 1 4 4 10:15 6 0 4 9 10 9 10:30 7 0 3 6 10 6 10:45 7 22 1 4 5 14 1 17 12 36 2 21 11:00 5 0 3 4 8 4 11:15 3 0 7 5 10 5 11:30 5 0 5 3 10 3 11:45 7 20 0 • 4 19 1 13 11 39 1 13 Totals 148 169 84 384 232 553 Day Totals 317 468 785 Split % 63.7% 30.5% 36.2% 69.4% Peak Hour 06:45 01:00 10:45 04:30 06:45 04:30 Volume 37 35 20 60 50 75 P.H.F. .77 .79 .71 .83 .73 .89 i • 48 ' 'RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCH 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Pane _ 6 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Thursday Time A.M. E.11. A-M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/29_ 0 4 1 5 1 9 12:15 0 3 0 4 0 7 12:30 0 7 0 7 0 14 12:45 0 * 4 18 1 2 8 24 1 2 12 42 01:00 0 3 0 6 0 9 01:15 0 6 0 12 0 18 01:30 0 4 0 3 0 7 01:45 0 • 4 17 0 * 7 28 0 * 11 45 02:00 0 6 0 8 0 14 02:15 0 6 0 4 0 10 02:30 0 4 0 12 0 16 02:45 0 * 4 20 0 * 7 31 0 * 11 51 03:00 0 1 0 15 0 16 03:15 0 5 0 17 0 22 03:30 0 5 0 7 0 12 03:45 1 1 7 18 0 * 14 53 1 1 21 71 04:00 ' 0 3 0 8 0 11 04:15 0 2 0 13 0 15 04:30 0 2 0 10 0 12 04:45 0 • 2 9 0 * 12 43 0 • 14 52 05:00 1 5 0 16 1 21 05:15 2 4 1 19 3 23 ' 05:30 0 1 0 11 0 12 05:45 1 4 3 13 0 1 14 60 1 5 17 73 06:00 1 2 1 7 2 9 06:15 2 3 0 13 2 16 06:30 3 3 1 7 4 10 06:45 2 8 2 10 0 2 10 37 2 10 12 47 07:00 2 2 0 10 2 12 07:15 3 5 3 16 6 21 07:30 . 2 14 4 14 6 28 07:45 4 11 9 30 2 9 9 49 6 20 18 79 08:00 2 1 0 12 2 13 08:15 3 5 1 10 4 15 08:30 1 5 2 8 3 13 08:45 3 9 7 18 2 5 6 36 5 14 13 54 09:00 4 6 7 11 11 17 . 09:15 2 4 2 7 4 11 09:30 2 1 1 7 3 8 09:45 3 11 1 12 6 16 7 32 9 . 27 8 44 10:00 1 4 4 7 Ir 11 10:15 5 0 4 6 9 6 10:30 5 2 5 4 10 6 10:45 3 14 2 8 6 19 5 22 9 33 7 30 11:00 2 0 5 2 7 2 11:15 3 0 6 4 9 4 11:30 5 3 5 3 10 6 11,•45 3 13 2 5 8 24 2 11 11 37 4 16 Totals 71 178 78 426 149 604 Day Totals 249 504 753 Split % 47.6% 29.4% 52.3% 70.5% Peak Hour 10:15 07:00 11:00 05:00 11:00 07:15 Volume 15 30 24 60 37 80 P.H.F. .75 .53 .75 .78 .84 .71 49. . ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3,. 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE187O3 Direction 1 Pave 7 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Friday Time A.M. P-M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 06/30__ 1 6 6 8 7 14 12:15 0 6 2 12 2 18 12:30 0 10 0 9 0 19 12:45 0 1 7 29 0 8 12 41 0 9 19 70 01:00 0 7 0 14 0 21 01:15 0 7 0 11 0 18 01:30 0 6 1 11 1 17 01:45 0 * 10 30 1 2 10 46 1 2 20 76 02:00 0 8 1 14 1 22 02:15 0 5 0 9 0 14 02:30 0 7 0 12 0 19 02:45 0 * 6 26 1 2 11 46 1 2 17 72 03:00 0 9 0 23 0 32 03:15 0 5 0 8 0 13 03:30 2 9 0 18 2 27 03:45 0 2 6 29 0 * 15 64 0 2 21 93 04:00 i0 7 0 12 0 19 04:15 0 4 1 16 1 20 04:30 1 8 0 22 1 30 04:45 1 2 11 30 0 1 18 68 1 3 29 98 05:00 2 14 1 24 3 38 05:15 3 7 1 17 4 24 05:30 3 9 1 18 4 27 05:45 3 11 7 37 0 3 15 74 3 14 22 111 06:00 3 12 3 14 6 26 06:15 9 6 0 16 9 22 06:30 7 5 2 14 9 19 06:45 4 23 8 31 1 6 15 59 5 29 23 90 07:00 1 4 0 16 1 20 07:15 8 6 3 7 11 13 07:30 8 5 2 7 10 . 12 07:45 14 31 5 20 2 7 7 37 16 38 12 57 08:00 3 6 2 7 5 13 08:15 7 20 6 10 13 30 08:30 7 2 9 12 16 14 08:45 5 22 2 30 4 21 10 39 9 43 12 69 t09:00 8 5 4 10 12 15 09:15 6 3 8 4 14 - 7 09:30 10 4 5 12 15 16 09:45 10 34 1 13 6 23 4 30 16 57 5 43 10:00 10 2 4 7 14'� 9 10:15 2 2 11 6 13 8 10:30 8 3 7 6 15 9 10:45 4 24 3 10 8 30 2 21 12 54 5 31 11:00 6 1 8 3 14 4 11:15 8 1 12 5 20 6 11:30 6 1 10 2 16 3 11:45 11 31 1 4 9 39 3 13 20 70 4 17 Totals 181 289 142 538 323 827 Day Totals 470 680 1150 Split % 56.0% 34.9% 43.9% 65.0% Peak Hour 09:15 04:45 11:00 04:30 11:00 04:30 Volume 36 41 39 81 70 121 P.H.F. .9 .73 .81 .84 .87 .79 50 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 . 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCK 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page 8 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.M. P_.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/01 — 2 12 3 18 5 30 12:15 0 7 0 23 0 30 12:30 0 15 2 13 2 28 12:45 0 2 12 46 3 8 9 63 3 10 21 109 01:00 • 1 10 0 17 1 27 01:15 0 8 1 9 1 17 01:30 0 1 0 14 0 15 01:45 0 1 2 21 2 3 9 49 2 4 11 70 02:00 0 2 2 11 2 13 02:15 1 11 1 8 2 19 02:30 0 9 1 12 1 21 02:45 0 1 6 28 0 4 13 44 0 5 19 72 03:00 0 16 4 14 4 30 03:15 1 10 0 7 1 17 03:30 0 4 0 13 0 17 03:45 0 1 7 37 0 4 11 45 0 5 18 82 04:00 0 6 0 9 0 15 04:15 0 4 0 6 0 10 04:30 0 5 0 7 0 12 04:45 1 1 8 23 2 2 11 33 3 3 19 56 05:00 0 7 0 9 0 16 05:15 0 6 0 9 0 15 05:30 1 14 0 12 1 26 05:45 1 2 5 32 0 • 10 40 1 2 15 72 06:00 0 16 1 11 1 27 06:15 0 21 0 9 0 30 06:30 3 6 3 9 6 15 06:45 1 4 7 50 3 7 11 40 4 11 18 90 07:00 2 1 2 6 4 7 07:15 0 4 1 2 1 6 07:30 • 2 2 1 7 3 9 07:45 3 7 3 10 0 4 9 24 3 11 12 34 08:00 2 2 3 5 5 7 08:15 3 3 4 9 7 12 08:30 4 2 4 3 8 5 08:45 9 18 1 8 1 12 9 26 10 30 10 34 09:00 6 2 10 7 16 9 09:15 _ 5 2 6 6 11 8 09:30 3 4 5 5 8 9 09:45 6 20 0 8 7 28 6 24 13 IA 48 6 32 10:00 9 3 15 3 24 6 10:15 5 0 5 7 10 7 10:30 5 4 11 3 16 7 10:45 3 22 3 10 5 36 6 19 8 58 9 29 11:00 8 • 5 18 0 26 5 11:15 7 0 10 4 17 4 11:30 12 0 9 2 21 2 i 11:45 12 39 1 6 10 47 2 8 22 86 3 14 Totals 118 279 155 415 273 694 Day Totals 397 570 967 Split % 43.2% 40.2% 56.7% 59.8$ Peak Hour 11:00 05:30 11:00 12:00 11:00 12:00 Volume 39 56 47 63 86 109 P.H.F. .81 .66 .65 .68 .82 .90 51= ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page : 9 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/02 __ 1 9 1 6 2 15 12:15 0 4 3 10 3 14 12:30 1 10 2 10 3 20 12:45 - • 0 2 •10 . 33 2 8 17 43 2 10 27 76 01:00 0 9 1 10 1 19 01:15 0 9 1 10 1 19 01:30 0 12 1 13 1 25 01:45 0 • 12 42 2 5 11 44 2 5 23 86 02:00 1 10 1 12 2 22 02:15 0 8 2 6 2 14 02:30 0 10 0 6 0 16 02:45 0 1 14 42 1 4 11 35 1 5 25 77 03:00 0 3 0 11 0 14 03:15 0 13 0 10 0 23 03:30 1 6 0 12 1 18 03:45 0 1 11 33 0 •, 17 50 0 1 28 83 04:00 0 3 0 8 0 11 04:15 0 5 1 11 1 16 04:30 0 7 1 11 1 18 04:45 0 • 6 21 1 3 7 37 1 3 13 58 05:00 0 8 1 11 1 19 05:15 0 8 0 7 • 0 15 05:30 0 5 0 10 0 15 05:45 1 1 8 29 0 1 7 35 1 2 15 64 06:00 0 2 0 8 0 10 06:15 0 1 0 10 0 11 06:30 1 4 2 6 3 10 06:45 2 3 1 8 3 5 10 34 5 8 11 42 07:00 2 5 1 B 3 13 07:15 3 7 0 3 3 10 07:30 1 6 2 7 3 13 07:45 5 11 5 23 0 3 8 26 5 14 13 49 08:00 0 2 9 6 4 8 08:15 5 3 4 4 9 7 08:30 6 2 3 12 9 14 08:45 10 21 5 12 3 14 4 26 13 35 9 38 09:00 7 0 4 6 11 6 09:15 8 7 6 6 - 14 13 09:30 2 2 2 7 4 9 09:45 8 25 3 12 4 16 5 24 12 41 8 36 10:00 10 2 8 3 18'e 5 10:15 12 1 4 2 16 3 10:30 10 1 16 2 26 3 10:45 5 37 1 5 9 37 2 9 14 74 3 14 11:00 5 2 7 3 12 5 11:15 5 3 9 1 14 4 11:30 8 0 8 1 16 1 11:45 7 25 0 5 10 34 1 6 17 59 1 11 Totals 127 265 130 369 257 634 , Day Totals 392 499 891 Split % 49.4% 41.8% 50.5% 58.2% Peak Hour 09:45 01:15 10:30 12:45 10:00 12:45 Volume 40 43 41 50 74 90 P.H.F. .83 .89 .64 .73 .71 .83 r 52 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCI 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page • 10 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Monday Time A-M. P.M. A—M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/03 0 16 1 10 1 26 12:15 — 1 5 1 5 2 10 12:30 0 5 2 8 2 13 12:45 1 2 3 29 1 5 16 39 2 7 19 68 01:00 0 7 0 17 0 24 01:15 0 10 0 10 0 20 01:30 0 10 0 9 0 19 01:45 0 * 7 34 0 * 12 48 0 * 19 82 02:00 0 11 1 13 1 24 02:15 0 10 1 12 1 22 02:30 0 10 0 12 0 22 02:45 1 1 9 40 0 2 13 50 1 3 22 90 03:00 0 10 0 12 0 22 03:15 0 6 1 9 1 15 03:30 0 14 2 9 2 23 03:45 0 • 5 35 1 4 15 45 1 4 20 80 04:00 0 4 0 9 0 13 04:15 1 4 1 10 2 14 04:30 0 6 0 13 0 19 04:45 0 1 8 22 1 2 9 41 1 3 17 63 05:00 2 6 0 10 2 16 05:15 4 6 0 15 _ 4 21 05:30 1 3 0 9 1 12 05:45 3 10 6 21 2 2 12 46 5 12 18 67 06:00 7 10 1 11 8 21 06:15 0 5 1 10 1 15 06:30 4 7 1 8 5 15 06:45 1 12 7 29 2 5 8 37 3 17 15 66 07:00 3 6 2 9 5 15 07:15 5 7 2 10 7 17 07:30 1 10 2 6 3 16 07:45 3 12 5 28 0 6 9 34 3 18 14 62 08:00 8 4 4 9 12 13 08:15 5 2 3 . 8 8 10 08:30 6 2 4 4 10 6 _ 08:45 5 24 3 11 3 14 7 28 8 38 10 39 09:00 6 5 6 10 12 15 , 09:15 8 0 6 8 14 8 09:30 5 1 8 3 13 4 09:45 4 23 1 7 6 26 4 25 10 49 5 32 10:00 2 2 4 4 6 6 10:15 9 0 6 2 15' 2 10:30 7 1 8 4 15 5 1,0:45 8 26 0 3 7 25 2 12 15 51 2 15 11:00 3 1 12 5 15 6 11:15 11 1 4 4 15 5 11:30 10 1 13 1 23 2 11:45 5 29 0 3 10 39 3 13 15 68 3 16 1 Totals 140 262 130 418 270 680 _ Day Totals 402 548 950 Split % 51.8% 38.5% 48.1% 61.4% Peak Hour 10:45 02:00 11:00 12:45 10:45 02:00 Volume 32 40 39 52 68 90 P.H.F. .72 .90 .75 .76 .73 .93 • 53 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 06/24/2000 LOCO 3 TPE 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE18703 Direction 1 Page 11 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Tuesday Time A.M. E-M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/04 - 1 8 3 9 4 17 12:15 1 6 4 12 5 18 12:30 5 8 6 8 11 16 12:45 2 9 7 29 1 14 12 41 3 23 19 70 01:00 0 10 2 5 2 15 01:15 0 11 1 5 1 16 01:30 0 7 4 10 4 17 01:45 1 1 8 36 0 7 12 32 1 8 20 68 02:00 0 7 0 13 0 20 02:15 0 7 0 13 0 20 02:30 0 5 0 10 0 15 02:45 0 ` 9 28 1 1 9 45 1 1 18 73 03:00 0 13 1 15 1 28 03:15 1 6 0 16 1 22 03:30 0 11 0 13 0 24 03:45 2 3 10 40 1 2 14 58 3 5 24 98 04:00 1 16 0 6 1 22 04:15 0 10 0 13' 0 23 04:30 0 5 1 10 1 15 04:45 0 1 5 36 1 2 7 36 1 3 12 72 05:00 1 9 0 15 1 24 05:15 - 0 7 0 10 0 17 05:30 1 10 1 11 2 21 05:45 0 2 3 29 0 1. 13 49 0 3 16 78 06:00 1 6 3 18 4 24 06:15 2 1 2 4 4 5 06:30 1 5 2 10 3 15 06:45 2 6 7 19 3 10 14 46 5 16 21 65 07:00 0 5 1 10 1 15 07:15 2 3 1 11 3 14 07:30 4 4 1 1. 5 5 07:45 3 9 3 15 0 3 4 26 3 12 7 41 08:00 2 9 0 7 2 16 ' 08:15 4 2 2 10 6 12 08:30 4 9 1 3 5 12 08:45 4 14 4 24 6 9 5 25 10 23 9 49 • i 09:00 4 3 5 7 9 10 09:15 2 3 3 5= 5 8 09:30 7 3 6 7 13 10 09:45 5 18 2 11 5 19 5 24 10 . 37 7 35 10:00 10 0 8 5 18 , 5 10:15 3 1 10 5 13 6 10:30 4 5 5 2 9 7 10:45 6 23 10 16 16 39 1 13 22 62 11 29 11:00 8 - 14 5 7' 13 21 11:15 5 5 18 8 23 13 11:30 2 3 13. 3 15 6 11:45 13 28 4 26 4 40 7 25 17 68 11 51 Totals 114 309 147 420 261 729 Day Totals 423 567 990 Split % 43.6% 42.3% 56.3% 57.6% Peak Hour 11:00 03:30 10:45 03:00 10:45 03:00 Volume 28 47 52 58 73 98 P.H.F. .53 .73 .72 .90 .79 .87 . - 54 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/03/2000 LOCI 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 Page 1 Begin Mon. 07/03 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB £B WB £B WB FJ3 12:00 am ." * * * * * * 1 2 3 4 4 7 5 7 3 5 01:00 * * * • • * 0 0 2 5 4 7 3 5 2 4 02:00 * * * • • * 1 0 2 0 2 2 5 2 2 1 03:00 * * • • • + 2 1 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 04:00 * * • • • * 5 3 3 3 4 1 2 1 4 2 05:00 * • • * * * 17 1 22 3 2 1 4 0 11 1 06:00 * * * • • * 32 4 25 3 9 2 5 1 18 2 07:00 • ` * • * • 33 7 35 14 12 1 14 1 24 6 08:00 + • 6 • 6 • 20 21 27 32 25 20 16 16 22 22 09:00 ` * • * ` 25 20 24 16 44 41 18 19 28 24 10:00 * * * • * * 38 28 31 17 39 51 40 29 37 31 11:00 * * • • * * 25 35 21 35 33 48 31 23 28 35 12:00 pm * * • • • * 32 32 30 35 34 45 27 33 31 36 01:00 * * * • * * 46 34 43 37 46 40 28 32 41 36 02:00 * * • • • * 28 39 25 41 40 48 29 36 30 41 , 03:00 * * •* • •• * 27 50 38 52 42 41 32 43 35 46 04:00 * •* * • * * 29 50 25 41 34 37 29 31' 29 40 05:00 + * • • • * 39 56 33 56 37 40 38 30 37 46 06:00 * * * • 36 54 31 63 35 25 45 40 33 48 36 46 07:00 * • * * 61 49 36 38 15 33 26 22 35 29 35 34 08:00 * * * * 43 42 61 28 30 22 27 25 34 27 39 29 09:00 • * • * 26 26 18 27 23 26 19 20 18 18 21 23 10:00 • * * • 8 17 • 17 19 11 23 9 17 3 13 10 18 11:00 * * * • 2 4 3 6 10 10 8 8 3 6 5 7 Totals 0 0 0 0 176 192 566 564 515 533 547 565 454 450 530 535 ' 0 0 368 1130 1048 1112 904 1065 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% 33.2% 35.8% 106.7% 105.4% 97.1% 99.6% 103.2% 105.6% 85.6% 84.1% AM Peaks 10:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 09:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 11:00 Volume 38 35 35 35 44 51 40 29 37 35 PM Peaks 07:00 06:00 08:00 06:00 01:00 .05:00 01:00 02:00 05:00 06:00 01:00 03:00 Volume 61 54 61 63 43 56 46 48 38 48 41 46 • • • 55 ,ReNTON, WASHJINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/03/2000 LOCI 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 . Pace 7 Begin Mona 07/10 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time WB EB WB ES WB EB WB EB WB EB WR EB WB EB WB FJ 12:00 am 2 1 0 2 3 1 * * * * • * * * 2 1 01:00 1 1 1 0 1 3 * * * * * * • * 1 1 02:00 0 1 0 1 0 0 * * * • • a * * 0 1 03:00 2, 0 1 0 2 0 * * * * * * * • 2 0 04:00 3 2 7 5 3 3 * • * • a * + * 4 3 05:00 171 4 16 2 19 5 * * * * • * • • 17 4 06:00 26 1 1 31 3 34 3 * * * * * • * * 30 2 07:00 251 6 31 10 28 5 * * * * • • * • 28 7 08:00 18 10 22 20 17 11 * * * * • * • * 19 14 09:00 271 20 38 14 24 18 * • • ' • • * • 30 17 10:00 281 27 23 27 28 23 * * • * * * • • 26 26 11:00 30, 27 30 25 12 11 * * * * * • a * 24 21 12:00 pm 29 28 36 38 0 0 + * • * * • * • 22 22 01:00 24 32 28 26 0 0 * * * * * * * * 17 19 02:00 29 28 23 34 0 0 * * * a a a * • 17 21 03:00 26, 45 30 47 0 0 * * * • . * * * • 19 31 04:00 26 36 34 34 0 0 ' * I * * • + • * 20 23 05:00 28 54 41 59 0 0 * * * • a a * * 23 38 06:00 38j 40 22 40 0 0 • * * • • * • * 20 27 07:00 21 31 30 39 • • * * a • a • • * 26 35 08:00 25 30 23 27 • a a * * a * a a * 24 28 09:00 231 27 19 31 * a * * * a * * * • 21 29 10:00 4 15 10 19 * a a a • + + a • • 7 17 11:00 41 6 4 9 * * a * a * a a • • 4 8 Totals 456, 472 500 512 171 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 403 395 928 1012 254 0 0 0 0 798 Avg. Day 113.1% 119.4% 124.0% 129.6% 42.4% 21.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% AM Peaks 11:001 10:00 09:00 10:00 06:00 10:00 06:00 10:00 Volume 30 27 38 27 34 23 30 26 PM Peaks 06:00 05:00 05:00 05:00 07:00 05:00 Volume 38 54 41 59 26 38 ADTs - .,k 56 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/03/2000 LOCO 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Page 1 Begin Mon. 07/03 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SR 12:00 am __ • * • * * • 4 1 6 3 6 3 4 4 5 3 01:00 * * * * • * 0 0 4 1 3 4 4 4 3 2 02:00 * • * I • • * 2 0 3 1 1 3 3 2 2 2 03:00 * • • • * * 0 2 0 2 5 0 1 1 2 1 04:00 •, * * * • • 6 10 4 6 2 6 3 4 4 6 05:00 *, • * * * • 3 12 5 9 1 1 1 3 2 6 06:00 •, • * • • • 8 27 5 23 3 6 4 3 5 15 07:00 •, • * * * * 3 33 8 32 1 10 3 13 4 22 08:00 *, • * • * * 15 12 16 22 13 10 16 13 15 14 09:00 • * * • • * 12 22 17 26 17 23 9 12 14 21 10:00 * * * * * * 18 22 15 25 28 27 12 32 18 26 11:00 * * * * * * 22 16 20 22 23 27 25 31 22 24 12:00 pm * * * * * * 13 24 26 9 21 25 23 25 21 21 01:00 * * * * * • 21 24 17 22 22 le 28 28 22 23 02:00 * * * * * * 29 18 32 18 31 29 26 28 30 23 03:00 * • * * • • 27 16 33 34 26 26 22 22 27 24 04:00 • * * • * * 39 22 27 22 30 23 21 20 29 22 05:00 • * • * • • 35 22 34 27 31 39 35 21 34 27 06:00 * * • • 37 21 39 24 31 27 34 24 34 24 35 24 07:00 * * * • 24 28 29 15 21 13 28 21 25 33 25 22 08:00 * * • • 18 16 22 25 22 13 14 12 23 22 20 18 09:00 • * * * 20 13 23 11 20 16 15 11 16 17 19 14 10:00 • • • • 14 7 18 9 24 13 16 11 9 1 16 8 11:00 * * * • 5 4 5 3 10 10 12 8 4 4 7 6 Totals 0 0 0 0 118 89 393 370 400 396 383 367 351 367 381 374 0 0 207 763 796 750 718 755 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% 30.9% 23.8% 103.1% 98.9% 104.9% 105.8% 100.5% 98.1% 92.1% 98.1% AM Peaks 11:00 07:00 11:00 07:00 10:00 10:00 11:00 10:00 11:00 10:00 Volume 22 33 20 . 32 28 27 25 32 22 26 PM Peaks 06:00 07:00 04:00 08:00 05:00 03:00 06:00 05:00 05:00 07:00 06:00 05:00 Volume 37 28 39 25 34 34 34 39 35 33 35 27 I 57 'RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/03/2000 LOCH 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Paae 2 Begin Mon. 07/10 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NE SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am __ 3 1 1 3 2 2 * * * * * a • • 2 2 01:00 2 0 1 0 2 . 0 * * • * • • • * 2 0 02:00 0 0 2 0 2 1 * * • * * * * * 1 0 03:00 1 3 0 2 0 3 * • * * • • * * 0 3 04:00 4 5 3 7 2 6 * * * a * • * * 3 6 05:00 3 11 4 13 3 10 • * • * * • • • 3 11 06:00 4 19 4 32 6 29 * • • * • • * • 5 27 07:00 2 28 8 35 5 27 • * a * * * * • 5 30 08:00 12 21 5 10 11 19 * * • * • • * * 9 17 09:00 13 16 13 26 15 24 * a * • * • * * 14 22 10:00 12 24 14 19 22 25 * a a a a * a • 16 23 11:00 17 21 20 26 • * * * a * * a a a 18 24 12:00 pm 26 12 36 29 * * * a a a a a * * 31 20 01:00 17 17 21 18 * * * • a a * a * * 19 18 02:00 20 22 24 24 a a a a * a • a * a 22 23 03:00 26 27 34 23 * * * a * * * • • • 30 25 04:00 34 17 37 28 • ' • • • • a a • * * 36 22 05:00 36 29 39 30 * a a a • * a a a a 38 30 06:00 32 31 32 21 * • * a a a • • • • 32 26 07:00 24 12 26 22 * • a a a a * * a * 25 17 08:00 19 13 17 19 * • • a * a * • • • 18 16 09:00 20 13 25 16 • * a a a • a * a * 22 14 10:00 16 3 16 8 * * a a a a * • • a 16 6 11:00 7 2 8 3 a a * a a a a a a • 8 2 Totals 350 347 390 414 70 146 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 375 384 697 804 216 0 0 0 0 759 Avg. Day 93.3% 90.3% 104.0% 107.8% 18.6% 38.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% AM Peaks 11:00 07:00 11:00 07:00 10:00 06:00 11:00 07:00 Volume 17 28 20 35 22 29 18 30 PM Peaks 05:00 06:00 05:00 05:00 05:00 05:00 Volume 36 31 39 30 38 30 ADTs RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/03/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 Page 1 Begin Mon. 07/03 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 am __ • • • ` • * 1 2 1 6 6 13 3 10 3 8 01:00 * • * * • • 1 1 1 1 6 7 3 7 3 4 02:00 * • * • • * 0 0 1 1 1 3 7 2 2 2 03:00 * * * * * * 4 3 2 1 3 4 2 3 3 3 04:00 * * * * * * 5 2 1 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 05:00 * * * • * • 18 1 27 5 3 3 3 0 13 2 06:00 * * • * • * 28 4 28 5 10 3 5 3 18 4 07:00 * * • * * • 39 7 39 12 11 4 14 1 26 6 08:00 • • * * • * 29 13 29 29 34 17 14 8 26 17 09:00 * * * * * • 25 17 35 15 44 34 28 16 33 20 10:00 • * • • * 39 26 32 17 41 43 36 37 37 31 11:00 * * * * * * 26 30 27 40 35 44 35 34 31 37 12:00 pm * • * ` • • 33 31 31 38 38 45 36 39 34 38 01:00 * * * * • * 38 36 48 40 51 34 28 33 41 36 02:00 ` * • * * * 30 42 36 36 35 45 22 32 31 39 03:00 ` • * * * * 24 50 26 53 38 47 26 39 28 47 04:00 ` * •* ` * * 29 43 28 51 36 45 28 32 30 43 05:00 * * • 32 68 39 58 36 43 34 31 35 50 06:00 * • • * 33 53 37 54 35 34 44 35 27 41 35 43 07:00 * • * * 49 44 40 33 23 36 23 16 29 27 33 31 08:00 • ` * * 36 45 53 29 25 29 23 28 26 26 33 31 09:00 * ` * * 24 27 20 26 24 29 18 23 13 23 20 26 10:00 * * * * 8 14 13 25 12 18 10 18 10 16 11 18 11:00 * • * * 2 4 6 8 9 14 6 11 6 10 6 9 Totals 0 0 0 0 152 187 570 551 559 569 555 567 438 472 535 547 0 0 339 1121 1128 1122 910 1082 Avg. Day .0% .0% .0% .0% 28.4% 34.1% 106.5% 100.7% 104.4% 104.0% 103.7% 103.6% 81.8% 86.2% AM Peaks 07:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 09:00 11:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 11:00 Volume 39' 30 39 40 44 44 36 37 37 37 PM Peaks 07:00 06:00 08:00 05:00 01:00 05:00 01:00 03:00 12:00 06:00 01:00 05:00 Volume 49 53 53 68 48 58 51 47 36 41 41 50 , 59 'RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOONT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY 8-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/03/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 Paae 2 Begin Mon. 07/10 Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Sat. Sun. Week Avg. Time NB SB NB SB NB SR NB SB NB SB NA SB NB SR NB Ti 12:00 am 5 1 3 5 5 2 • * * * • • * * 4 3 01:00 1 3 1 2 1 4 * * * • • * * * 1 3 02:00 0 1 0 0 0 2 * • * • • • • * 0 1 03:00 2 0 1 1 2 0 * * * * • * * * 2 0 04:00 5 1 7 1 5 1 * * * * * • • * 6 1 05:00 16 4 14 4 16 6 ' * * * * • • • * 15 5 06:00 30 4 27 3 33 3 * * • * • • • * 30 3 07:00 33 10 39 12 45 0 •• • * • • • • • 39 10 08:00 25 9 30 18 27 9 ♦ * • • • • 27 12 09:00 30 19 38 16 29 19 * * • • * • • • 32 18 10:00 28 27 25 21 24 20 * * • * * • • * 26 23 11:00 30 30 26 26 * * * * • * • * • * 28 28 12:00 pm 29 33 26 30 * * * * • * * * * * 28 32 01:00 29 27 27 33 • • • * * * • * * * 28 30 02:00 29 29 20 28 • • * • * • • • * * 24 28 03:00 35 54 22 48 * * • • • • * • • • 28 51 04:00 27 32 ' 29 38 • * * ► * • * * • * 28 35 05:00 29 66 33 51 • * * * • * • • • • 31 58 06:00 27 43 27 51 * • * • * * * • • • 27 47 07:00 25 33 27 41 * * * • • * • • • * 26 37 08:00 22 34 22 26 • * * * * • * • * * 22 30 09:00 17 26 12 25 * * * • * * * * • • 14 26 10:00 10 14 12 17 * * * * * • * * • • 11 16 11:00 7 5 5 7 • * • • * * * * • ♦ 6 6 Totals 491 505 473 504 187 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 483 503 996 977 261 0 0 0 0 986 Avg. Day 101.6% 100.4% 97.9% 100.2% 38.7% 14.7% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% AM Peaks 07:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 07:00 10:00 07:00 11:00 Volume 33 30 39 26 45 20 39 28 PM Peaks 03:00 05:00. 05:00 05:00 05:00 05:00 Volume 35 66 33 51 31 58 ADTs - 60 ANTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. TPE19401 Pace : 1 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. P11.. A-EL P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/05 __ • * • • * 12:15 * * • * • • 12:30 * • * * * • 12:45 • * * * * • • * • • 01:00 * * * * * 01:15 * * * • 01:30 A A * * * • 01:45 * • • • * • A • A A • • 02:00 • • • A • • 02:15 ♦ • • * * • 02:30 * • * * A A 02:45 * * * ' • ♦ * * * * • • • 03:00 a * * * • • 03:15 * * * A • A 03:30 * * * * * • 03:45 * * • * * * * * A • * * 04:00 * * * A A A 04:15 * * * * A A , 04:30 * • * * • A 04:45 * * • * * * * A * * • 05:00 * * * * • 05:15 * * * A A * 05:30 * 6 * 20 • 26 05:45 * * 7 13 * * 25 45 * A 32 58 06:00 * 13 * 16 * 29 06:15 A 9 • 17 * 26 06:30 • 7 • 9 * 16 06:45 * * 7 36 * * 12 54 * • 19 90 07:00 * 16 * 20 • 36 07:15 • 29 * 10 * 39 07:30 A 10 * 12 * 22 07:45 • * 6 61 * * 7 49 * • 13 110 08:00 * 4 * 8 * 12 08:15 * 9 ' * 14 • 23 08:30 * 15 * 13 • 28 08:45 • * 15 43 * • 7 42 • A 22 85 • 09:00 A 7 * 7 A 14 09:15 * 3 * 3 * 6 09:30 * 5 * 5 * 10 09:45 * * 11 26 * * 11 26 * * 22 52 10:00 A 2 * 7 * ' 9 10:15 * 4 * 4 • 8 10:30 * 2 • 4 * 6 10:45 * * 0 8 * * 2 17 * * 2 25 11:00 * 1 • 0 * 1 . 11:15 • 0 • 2 * 2 11:30 * 1 • 2 * 3 , 11:45 * * 0 2 * * 0 4 A • 0 6 Totals 0 189 0 237 0 426 Day Totals 189 237 426 Split % A 44.3% * 55.6% Peak Hour 06:45 05:30 06:45 Volume 62 78 116 P.H.F. .53 .78 .74 • _i 61 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 . Paue . 2 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Thursday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/06 __ 0 10 2 8 2 18 12:15 0 7 0 12 0 19 12:30 0 3 0 6 0 9 12:45 1 1 12 32 0 2 6 32 1 3 18 64 01:00 0 13 0 8 0 21 01:15 0 11 0 9 0 20 01:30 0 14 0 10 0 24 01:45 0 • 8 46 0 7 34 0 * 15 80 02:00 1 3 0 6 1 9 02:15 0 7 0 11 0 18 02:30 0 6 0 12 0 18 02:45 0 1 12 28 0 * 10 39 0 1 22 67 03:00 1 4 0 13 1 17 03:15 0 7 0 10 0 17 03:30 0 4 1 12 1 16 03:45 1 2 12 27 0 1 15 50 1 3 27 77 04:00 0 5 0 10 0 15 04:15 1 7 1 16 2 23 04:30 2 6 2 15 4 21 04:45 2 5 11 29 0 3 9 50 2 8 20 79 05:00 3 8 0 10 3 18 05:15 4 12 1 17 5 29 05:30 3 9 0 16 3 25 05:45 7 17 10 39 0 1 13 56 7 18 23 95 06:00 9 8 0 17 9 25 06:15 5 6 1 21 6 27 06:30 _ . 9 8 3 10 . 12 18 06:45 9 32 9 31 0 4 15 63 9 36 24 94 07:00 9 8 1 12 10 20 07:15 7 6 1 9 8 15 07:30 9 . 5 2 14 11 19 07:45 8 33 17 36 3 7 3 38 11 40 20. 74 08:00 2 9 3 7 5 16 08:15 9 8 2 5 11 13 08:30 2 33 5 6 7 39 08:45 7 20 11 61 11 21 10 28 18 41 21 89 ' 09:00 7 6 6 6 13 12 , 09:15 3 - 4 4 7 7 11 09:30 11 k 3 5 8 16 11 09:45 4 25 5 18 5 20 6 27 9 45 11 45 10:00 11 5 . 6 8 17 ' 13 10:15 11 4 8 5 19 9 ' 10:30 7 6 8 4 15 10 10:45 9 38 2 17 6 28 2 19 15 66 4 36 11:00 6 1 7 1 13 2 11:15 8 1 8 1 16 2 11:30 8 ' 1 9 1 17 2 11:45 3 25 0 3 11 35 3 6 14 60 3 9 Totals 199 367 122 442 321 809 Day Totals 566 564 1130 Split % 61.9% 45.3% 38.0% 54.6% Peak Hour 10:00 07:45 11:00 05:30 10:00 05:15 Volume 38 67 35 67 66 102 P.H.F. .86 .50 .79 .79 .86 .87 _ 62 R$NT(N, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY 0-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 Paae 3 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Friday Time A-M. P.M. A-M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/07 0 10 1 7 1 17 12:15 - 0 6 0 9 0 15 12:30 0 8 2 8 2 16 12:45 3 3 6 30 1 4 11 35 4 7 17 65 01:00 0 9 1 12 1 21 01:15 0 14 2 4 2 18 01:30 0 11 1 16 1 27 01:45 2 2 9 43 1 5 5 37 3 7 14 80 02:00 2 5 0 13 2 18 02:15 0 4 0 11 0 15 02:30 0 7 0 11 0 18 02:45 0 2 9 25 0 • 6 41 0 2 15 66 03:00 1 10 0 11 1 21 03:15 0 9 0 11 0 20 03:30 1 7 0 12 1 19 03:45 0 2 12 38 0 * 18 52 0 2 30 90 04:00 1 4 0 11 1 15 04:15 0 5 0 13 0 18 , 04:30 1 9 1 9 2 10 04:45 1 3 7 25 2 3 8 41 3 6 15 66 05:00 5 6 1 12 6 18 05:15 4 4 1 16 5 20 05:30 9 13 0 15 9 28 05:45 4 22 10 33 1 3 13 56 5 25 23 89 06:00 8 15 0 11 8 26 06:15 . . 6 .9 . 1 8 7 17 06:30 5 5 1 3 6 8 06:45 6 25 6 35 1 3 3 25 7 28 9 . 60 07:00 9 1 2 7 11 8 07:15 9 6 7 6 16 12 07:30 9 5 2 10 11 15 07:45 8 35 3 15 3 14 10 33 11 49 13 48 .08:00 9 9 6 5 15 14 ' 08:15 5 6 3 6 8 12 08:30 7 10 9 5 16 15 08:45 6 27 5 30 14 32 6 22 20 59 11 52 09:00 2 6 0 5 2 11 09:15 7 3 7 13 14 16 09:30 9 10 4 6 13 16 09:45 6 24 4 23 5 16 2 26 11 40 6 49 10:00 8 3 3 6 11 .E 9 , 10:15 3 5. 4 6 7 11 10:30 11 1 6 3 17 4 t 10:45 9 31 2 11 4 17 8 23 13 48 10 34 11:00 6 5 6 4 12 9 . 11:15 7 3 8 5 15 8 11:30 4 2 11 0 15 2 11:45 4 21 0 10 10 35 1 10 14 56 1 20 Totals 197 318 132 401 329 719 Day Totals 515 533 1048 ' Split % 59.8% 44.2% 40.1% 55.7% Peak Hour 07:00 05:30 11:00 05:00 08:00 05:15 Volume 35 47 35 56 59 97 P.H.F. • .97 .78 .79 .87 .73 .86 63 • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S 6 RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOC9 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 Paae : 4 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Saturday Time A.i. P—M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/08 "' 1 6 0 17 1 23 12:15 1 9 4 8 5 17 12:30 1 9 1 10 2 19 12:45 1 4 10 34 2 7 10 45 3 11 20 79 01:00 0 8 2 8 2 16 01:15 1 11 3 8 4 19 01:30 3 13 0 15 3 28 01:45 0 4 14 46 2 7 9 40 2 11 23 86 02:00 2 13 1 5 3 18 02:15 0 11 0 11 0 22 02:30 0 8 0 18 0 26 02:45 0 2 8 40 1 2 14 48 1 4 22 88 03:00 1 9 0 8 1 17 03:15 0 7 0 10 0 17 03:30 0 13 1 12 1 25 03:45 1 2 13 42 0 1 11 41 1 3 24 83 09:00 2 10 0 10 2 20 04:15 0 8 0 9 0 17 04:30 2 10 0 13 2 23 04:45 0 4 6 34 1 1 5 37 1 5 11 71 05:00 0 5 0 4 0 9 05:15 1 8 1 10 2 18 05:30 1 6 0 8 1 •14 05:45 0 2 18 37 0 1 18 40 . 0 3 36 77 06:00 1 20 0 12 1 32 06:15 2 10 1 7 3 17 06:30 3 11 0 11 3 22 06:45 3 9 4 45 1 2 10 40 4 11 14 85 07:00 2 11 0 6 2 17 07:15 1 7 1 5 2 12 07:30 2 3 0 7 2 10 07:45 7 12 5 26 0 1 4 22 7 13 9 48 08:00 6 , 8 . 2 4 8 12 08:15 3 11 5 8 8 19 08:30 9 5 4 7 13 12 08:45 7 25 3 27 9 20 6 25 16 45 9 52 09:00 10 6 7 4 17 10 09:15 12 = 4 10 3 22 7 09:30 13 7 14 9 27 16 09:45 9 44 2 19 10 41 4 20 19 40 85 6 39 10:00 7 6 13 4 20 10 10:15 13 2 11 6 24 8 j 10:30 9 1 15 3 24 4 10:45 10 39- 0 9 12 51 4 17 22 90 4 26 11:00 - ' 5 3 11 1 16 4 11:15 11 0 13 3 24 3 11:30 6 3 10 1 16 4 11:45 11 33 2 8 14 48 3 8 25 81 5 16 Totals 180 ' 367 182 383 362 750 Day Totals 547 565 1112 Split % 49.7% 48.9% 50.2% 51.0% Peak Hour 09:00 05:45 10:00 02:15 09:30 05:45 Volume 44 59 51 51 90 107 P.H.F. .84 .73 .85 .70 .83 .74 • 64 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCN 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 • Page 5 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Sunday Time A.M. P.M. A-M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/09 -- 2 9 2 5 4 14 12:15 1 7 2 10 3 17 12:30 2 6 3 12 5 18 12:45 0 5 5 27 0 7 6 33 0 12 11 60 01:00 1 7 0 8 1 15 01:15 1 7 0 8 1 15 01:30 0 7 1 6 1 13 01:45 1 3 7 28 4 5 10 32 5 8 17 60 02:00 3 8 1 11 4 19 02:15 1 8 0 8 1 16 02:30 1 4 1 10 2 14 02:45 0 5 9 29 0 2 7 36 0 7 16 65 03:00 0 9 0 15 0 24 03:15 0 7 0 10 0 17 03:30 1 7 0 9 1 16 03:45 1 2 9 32 0 • 9 43 1 2 18 75 04:00 0 10 0 7 0 17 04:15 1 7 1 11 2 18 ' 04:30 1 5 0 5 1 10 04:45 . 0 2 7 29 0 1 8 31 0 3 15 60 05:00 1 10 0 12 1 22 05:15 0 8 0 3 0 11 05:30 2 11 0 8 2 19 05:45 1 4 9 38 0 * 7 30 1 4 16 68 06:00 0 8 0 12 0 20 06:15 0 8 0 10 0 18 06:30 1 5 1 17 • 2 22 06:45 4 5 12 33 0 1 9 48 4 6 21 81 07:00 2 7 0 12 2 19 07:15 5 3 0 3 5 6 07:30 2 8 1 5 3 13 . 07:45 5 14 17 35 0 1 9 29 5 15 26 64 08:00 3 14 2 4 5 18 08:15 6 10 7 6 13 16 08:30 3 6 3 8 6 14 08:45 4 16 4 34 4 16 9 27 8 32 13 61 ' 09:00 4 5 7 7 _. 11 12 _ ._ .. _ 09:15 6 7 5 1 11 8 - 09:30 5 5 1 4 6 9 09:45 3 18 1 18 6 19 6 18 9 37 7 36 10:00 3 2 7 6 10 14 8 10:15 10 1 4 4 14 5 10:30 10 0 11 1 21 1 10:45 17 40 0 3 7 29 2 13 24 69 2 16 11:00 9 1 4 4 13 5 ' 11:15 9 1 6 2 15 3 11:30 6 1 6 0 12 1 , 11:45 7 31 0 3 7 23 0 6 14 54 0 9 Totals 145 309 104 346 249 655 Day Totals 454 450 904 Split % 58.2% 47.1% 41.7% 52.8% Peak Hour 10:15 07:30 10:00 06:00 10:30 06:00 Volume . 46 49 29 48 73 81 P.H.F. .67 .72 .65 .70 .76 .92 i 65 , 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S d RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCK 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 . Page 6 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Monday Time A,M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/10 — 0 5 0 8 0 13 12:15 1 2 0 7 1 9 12:30 1 10 0 4 1 14 12:45 0 2 12 29 1 1 9 28 1 3 21 57 01:00 0 6 0 1 0 7 01:15 0 7 0 12 0 . 19 01:30 1 4 0 8 1 12 01:45 0 1 7 24 1 1 11 32 1 2 18 56 02:00 0 13 1 3 1 16 02:15 0 12 0 9 0 21 02:30 0 1 0 6 0 7 02:45 0 • 3 29 0 1 10 28 0 1 13 57 03:00 0 5 0 13 0 18 03:15 1 6 0 10 1 16 03:30 1 7 0 10 1 17 03:45 0 2 8 26 0 * 12 45 0 2 20 71 04:00 1 7 0 6 1 13 04:15 ' 1 5 1 14 2 19 04:30 0 7 0 9 0 16 04:45 1 3 7 26 1 2 7 36 2 5 14 62 05:00 3 6 3 10 6 16 05:15 1 7 1 14 2 21 05:30 8 7 0 22 8 29 05:45 5 17 8 28 0 4 8 54 5 21 16 82 06:00 3 2 0 8 3 10 06:15 12 11 1 10 13 21 06:30 9 12 0 6 9 18 06:45 2 26 13 38 0 1 16 40 2 27 29 78 07:00 4 1 0 7 4 8 07:15 6 5 2 7 8 12 07:30 . 6 12 3 11 9 23 07:45 9 25 3 21 1 6 6 31 10 31 9 52 08:00 2 11 1 11 3 22 08:15 8 7. 2 3 10 10 08:30 2 1 4 12 6 13 08:45 6 18 6 25 3 10 4 30 9 28 10 55 09:00 9, 12 1 8 .. 10 20 , 09:15 ; 7 2 6 7 13 9 09:30 5 5 3 6 8 11 09:45 6 27 4 23 10 20 6 27 16 , 47 10 50 10:00 10 2 5 4 15 6 10:15 6 1 8 3 14 4 10:30 7 0 5 7 12 7 10:45 5 28 1 4 9 27 1 15 14 55 2 19 11:00 8 1 4 1 12 2 11:15 9 1 10 2 19 3 11:30 ' 8 2 7 3 15 5 ' 11:45 5 30 0 4 6 27 0 6 11 57 0 10 Totals 179 277 100 372 279 649 Day Totals 456 472 928 Split % 64.1% 42.6% 35.8% 57.3% Peak Hour 10:45 06:00 10:45 05:00 10:45 05:00 Volume 30 38 30 54 60 82 P.H.F. .83 .73 .75 .61 .78 .70 E i . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCI 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 Pace 7 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Tuesday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. R.M. P.M. 12:00 07/11 0 9 1 11 1 20 12:15 0 6 0 7 0 13 12:30 0 10 1 10 1 20 12:45 0 * 11 36 0 2 10 38 0 2 21 74 01:00 1 11 0 8 1 19 01:15 0 1 0 5 0 6 01:30 0 9 0 7 0 16 01:45 0 1 7 28 0 * 6 26 0 1 13 54 02:00 0 10 0 9 0 19 02:15 0 4 1 7 1 11 02:30 0 2 0 10 0 12 02:45 0 * 7 23 0 1 8 34 0 1 15 57 03:00 1 6 0 12 1 18 03:15 0 6 0 19 0 25 03:30 0 5 0 8 0 13 03:45 0 1 13 30 0 * 8 47 0 1 21 77 04:00 1 11 0 14 1 25 04:15 1 8 2 5 3 13 04:30 3 8 1 8 4 16 04:45 2 7 7 34 2 5 7 34 4 12 14 68 05:00 2 9 1 13 3 22 05:15 3 11 0 17 3 28 05:30 3 8 0 14 3 22 05:45 8 16 13 41 1 2 15 59 9 18 28 100 06:00 5 8 0 9 5 17 06:15 11 6 3 13 14 19 06:30 7 5 0 13 7 18 06:45 8 31 3 22 0 3 5 40 8 34 8 62 07:00 4 5 1 13 5 18 07:15 10 10 3 9 13 19 07:30 12 9 4 10 16 19 07:45 5 31 6 30 2 10 7 39 7 41 13 69 08:00 4 4 1 7 5 11 08:15 6 4 6 10 12 14 08:30 4 10 8 4 12 14 08:45 8 22 5 23 5 20 6 27 13 42 11 50 09:00 6 9 4 8 10 17 09:15 8 4, 5 10 13 14 09:30 11 5 0 5 11 10 09:45 13 38 1 19 5 14 8 31 18* 52 9 50 10:00 6 3 9 7 15 10 10:15 6 3 7 6 13 9 10:30 7 4 5 2 12 6 10:45 4 23 0 10 6 27 4 19 10 50 4 29 ` 11:00 9 1 4 3 13 4 11:15 9 . 0 4 2 13 2 11:30 8 2 8 3 16 5 11:45 4 30 1 4 9 25 1 9 13 55 2 13 . Totals 200 300 109 403 309 703 Day Totals 500 512 1012 Split % 64.7% 42.6% 35.2% 57.3% Peak Hour 09:00 05:00 10:00 05:00 09:45 05:00 Volume 38 41 27 59 58 100 P.H.F. .73 .78 .75 .86 .80 .89 67 1 �` RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT S 7TH ST BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 1 GRANT AVE S & RENTON AVE S LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCI, 1 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19401 Page 8 Begin < WB >< EB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. P.11. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/12 __ 1 0 2 12:15 2 0 2 12:30 0 0 0 12:45 0• 3 0 * 1 * 0 4 • 01:00 0 0 1 01:15 0 0 2 01:30 1 0 1 01:45 0 1 0 • 3 • 0 4 • 02:00 0 0 0 02:15 0 0 0 02:30 0 0 0 02:45 0 * 0 • • * 0 * • 03:00 1 0 1 03:15 1 0 1 03:30 0 0 0 03:45 0 2 0 • * * 0 2 • 04:00 1 0 . 1 04:15 1 0 2 04:30 0 0 0 04:45 1 3 0 • 3 • 3 6 • 05:00 5 0 7 05:15 2 0 3 05:30 8 0 . 10 05:45 4 19 0 * 5 * 4 24 * 06:00 8 0 10 06:15 12 0 12 06:30 6 0 6 06:45 8 34 0 * 3 • 9 37 • 07:00 . 1 * 2 07:15 7 * * 8 * 07:30 13 * * 15 07:45 7 28 • • 5 • • 8 33 • • 08:00 5 • * 10 * ' 08:15 4 * * 5 08:30 4 * • 5 r ' 08:45 4 . 17 * * 11 * * 8 28 09:00 9 * * 13 * 09:15 2 * * 6 09:30 6 * * 9 * 09:45 7 24. * * 18 * * 14 42 • * 10:00 12 * * 15 'It 10:15 4 * * 9 10:30 9 * 18 10:45 3 28 * * 23 * * 9 51 • • 11:00 10 * • 16 * 11:15 2 * * 7 * 11:30 0 * • 0 * 11:45 0 12 • • 11 * * 0 23 • * ' Totals 171 0 8 0 254 0 Day Totals 171 83 254 ' Split % 67.3% • 32.6 * Peak Hour 06:00 10:1 09:45 Volume 34 2 56 P.H.F. .70 .7 .77 68 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCH 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Page 1 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. P.M. A-M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/05 -- * * • * * 12:15 * * * * * * 12:30 * * • * * * 12:45 * A A * • A A * * * A 01:00 * A • * A • 01:15 * * * A * * 01:30 * * * * * • 01:45 A • * • • • • ♦ ♦ • At • 02:00 A * * A • 02:15 A * A * A A 02:30 * * A • * 02:45 • ♦ • • A * * A * * ♦ * 03:00 * • A * * * 03:15 * * • • * 03:30 * A * A * 03:45 A A A * * * •. * * * A • 04:00 * * * * * * . 04:15 A • * A * * 04:30 * * A * • * 04:45 * ♦ • • A ♦ ♦ • a • A * 05:00 A A A * A * 05:15 * * A * A • 05:30 * 1 • 0 • 1 05:45 * * 18 19 * * 6 6 * • 24 25 06:00 * 8 * 7 * 15 06:15 * 8 * 5 * 13 06:30 * 11 A 5 * 16 06:45 * * 10 37 A * 4 21 * * 14 58 07:00 * 8 A 8 * 16 07:15 * 4 • 11 * 15 07:30 * 8 * 6 * 14 07:45 * A 4 24 * * 3 28 A * 7 52 08:00 * 2 * 1 * 3 08:15 * 9 * 8 * 17 08:30 * 4 * 1 * 5 i08:45 A * 3 18 * * 6 16 * A 9 34 09:00 * 6 A 0 * 6 09:15 * 2 * 6 * 8 ' 09:30 A 8 • 2 * 10 09:45 A * 4 20 * * 5 13 *,. * 9 33 10:00 * 7 * 2 * 9 10:15 * 1 * 4 * 5 10:30 5 * 1 • 5 10:45 * * 1 14 * * 0 7 A * 1 21 . 11:00 * 3 * 3 * 6 11:15 * 1 A 0 * 1 11:30 A 0 A 0 * 0 11:45 * * 1 5 * * 1 4 * * 2 9 Totals 0 137 0 95 0 232 Day Totals 137 95 232 Split % * 59.0% • 40.9% Peak Hour 05:45 06:45 05:45 Volume 45 29 68 P.H.F. .62 .65 .70 69 ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCH 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 . Paae 2 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Thursday Time A._M, P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/06 -- 2 3 0 7 2 10 12:15 1 5 0 6 1 11 12:30 .. 1 .4 . 1 3 2 7 12:45 0 4 1 13 0 1 8 24 0 5 9 37 01:00 0 4 0 4 0 .8 01:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 01:30 0 3 0 10 0 13 01:45 0 • 6 21 0 • 4 24 0 • 10 45 02:00 1 8 0 3 1 11 02:15 0 12 0 1 0 13 02:30 0 6 0 4 0 10 02:45 1 2 3 29 0 * 10 18 1 2 13 47 03:00 0 5 2 3 2 8 03:15 0 4 0 4 0 8 03:30 0 7 0 4 0 11 03:45 0 * 11 27 0 2 5 16 0 2 16 43 04:00 0 4 1 5 1 9 04:15 4 15 4 7 8 22 04:30 1 9 4 3 5 12 04:45 1 6 11 39 1 10 7 22 2 16 18 61 05:00 0 9 2 4 2 13 05:15 0 4 2 7 2 11 05:30 2 14 5 7 7 21 05:45 1 3 8 35 3 12 4 22 4 15 12 57 06:00 3 12 9 8 12 20 06:15 2 13 5 5 7 18 06:30 0 7 8 6 8 13 06:45 3 8 7 39 5 27 5 24 8 35 12 63 07:00 0 9 11 2 11 11 07:15 0 8 11 5 11 13 07:30 1 7 6 7 7 14 07:45 2 3 5 29 5 33 1 15 7 36 6 44 08:00 5 5 3 5 8 10 08:15 3 5 6 5 9 10 08:30 3 7 1 8 4 15 08:45 4 15 5 22 2 12 7 25 6 27 12 , 47 • 09:00 3 8 6 2 9 10 t 09:15 2 6 5 4 7 10 09:30 4 7 6 3 10 10 09:45 3 12 2 23 5 22 2 11 8 . 34 4 34 10:00 5 7 7 1 12 .° 8 10:15 3 2 4 4 7 6 10:30 4 6 3 3 7 9 10:45 6 18 3 18 8 22 1 9 14 40 4 27 11:00 6 2 5 0 11 2 11:15 4 0 3 2 7 ` 2 11:30 6 1 7 1 13 2 11:45 6 22 2 5 1 16 0 3 7 38 2 8 Totals 93 300 157 213 250 513 . Day Totals 393 370 763 Slit % 37.2% 58.4% 62.8% 41.5% Peak Hour 10:45 05:30 06:30 12:45 10:45 05:30 Volume 22 47 35 28 45 71 P.H.F. .91 .83 .79 .7 .80 .84 J 70 F . • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST S S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Paae : '{ Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Friday Time A-M. P.M. AEL P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/07 '" 1 6 1 3 2 9 12:15 2 8 1 1 3 9 12:30 0 3 0 4 0 7 12:45 3 6 9 26 1 3 1 9 4 9 10 35 01:00 1 5 1 2 2 7 01:15 2 2 0 8 2 '10 01:30 0 8 0 5 0 13 01:45 1 4 2 17 0 1 7 22 1 5 9 39 02:00 1 8 1 4 2 12 02:15 1 9 0 2 1 11 02:30 1 8 0 8 1 16 02:45 0 3 7 32 0 1 4 18 0 4 11 50 03:00 0 6 0 9 0 15 03:15 0 11 2 5 2 16 03:30 0 9 0 8 0 17 03:45 0 * 7 33 0 2 12 34 0 2 19 67 04:00 0 6 0 0 0 6 04:15 1 8 3 8 4 16 04:30 2 3 0 6 2 9 04:45 1 4 10 27 3 6 8 22 4 10 18 49 05:00 1 9 1 5 2 14 05:15 1 13 4 6 5 19 05:30 1 9 2 8 3 17 05:45 2 5 3 34 2 9 8 27 4 14 11 61 06:00 2 9 4 10 6 19 06:15 3 8 9 4 12 12 06:30 0 7 4 9 4 16 06:45 0 5 7 31 6 23 4 27 6 28 11 58 07:00 1 3 11 4 12 7 07:15 4 8 9 3 13 11 07:30 2 5 5 3 7 8 07:45 1 8 5 21 7 32 3 13 8 40 8 34 08:00 6 4 5 1 11 5 08:15 3 6 4 4 7 10 08:30 3 3 6 3 9 6 08:45 4 16 9 22 7 22 5 13 11 38 14 35 09:00 5 , , 9 10 2 15 11 09:15 4 6 5 4 9 10 . 09:30 5 3 5 7 10 10 09:45 3 17 2 20 6 26 3 16 9 ,'e 43 5 36 10:00 4 8 7 4 11 12 10:15 5 6 2 5 7 11 10:30 2 5 11 2 13 7 10:45 4 15 5 24 5 25 2 13 9 40 7 37 11:00 3 3 5 3 8 6 11:15 4 3 4 3 8 6 11:30 6 3 6 2 12 5 11:45 7 20 1 10 7 22 2 10 14 42 3 20 Totals 103 297 172 224 275 521 Day Totals 400 396 796 Split % 37.4% 57.0% 62.5% 42.9% Peak Hour 11:00 04:45 07:00 03:00 08:45 04:45 Volume 20 41 32 34 45 68 P.H.F. .71 .78 .72 .70 .75 .89 71 ,, RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCI 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 . Page 4 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Time AaL P.-M-. Aat. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/08 -- 2 5 1 5 3 10 12:15 3 7 0 6 3 13 12:30 1 2 1 7 2 9 12:45 0 6 7 21 1 3 7 25 1 9 14 46 01:00 1 9 1 6 2 15 01:15 1 2 0 3 1 5 01:30 0 8 2 5 2 13 01:45 1 3 3 22 1 4 4 18 2 7 7 40 02:00 0 8 2 11 2 19 02:15 1 6 0 3 1 9 02:30 0 9 0 4 0 13 02:45 0 1 8 31 1 3 11 29 1 4 19 60 03:00 2 9 0 7 2 16 03:15 1 8 0 4 1 12 ' 03:30 2 3 0 6 2 9 03:45 0 5 6 26 0 * 9 26 0 5 15 52 04:00 - 0 9 0 5 0 14 04:15 1 6 3 8 4 14 04:30 0 8 2 8 2 16 04:45 1 2 7 30 1 6 2 23 2 8 9 53 05:00 1 6 0 7 1 13 05:15 0 8 0 14 0 22 05:30 0 6 1 8 1 14 05:45 0 1 11 31 0 1 10 39 0 2 21 70 06:00 1 7 3 7 4 14 06:15 1 6 2 3 3 9 06:30 1 8 1 6 2 14 06:45 0 3 13 34 0 6 8 24 0 9 21 58 07:00 0 7 2 1 2 8 07:15 0 4 0 9 0 13 07:30 1 10 1 6 2 16 07:45 0 1 7 28 7 10 5 21 7 11 12 49 08:00 1 4 3 2 4 6 08:15 3 5 3 4 6 9 08:30 4 2 3 5 7 7 08:45 5 13 3 14 1 10 1 12 6 23 4 26 09:00 6 3 6 6 12 9' 09:15 4 4 2 2 6 6 09:30 4 6 8 2 12 8 09:45 3 17 2 15 7 23 1 11 10 ,0. 40 3 26 10:00 9 2 8 3 17 5 10:15 6 2 9 3 15 5 10:30 5 3 4 3 9 6 10:45 8 28 9 16 6 27 2 11 14 55 11 27 11:00 1 4 6 3 7 7 11:15 9 3 6 2 15 5 ' 11:30 5 2 6 1 11 3 11:45 8 23 3 12 9 27 2 8 17 50 5 20 Totals 103 280 120 247 223 527 Day Totals 383 367 750 Solit % 46.1% 53.1% 53.8% 46.8% Peak Hour 10:00 02:30 09:30 05:00 10:00 05:15 Volume 28 34 32 39 55 71 P.H.F. .77 .94 .88 .69 .80 .80 • 72 : ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4020 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST & S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOC# 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Paae 5_ Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time A—FL P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/09__ 0 5 2 9 2 14 12:15 2 6 0 2 2 8 12:30 1 9 2 5 3 14 12:45 1 4 3 23 0 4 9 25 1 8 12 48 01:00 0 9 1 5 1 14 01:15 2 5 2 9 4 14 01:30 2 7 0 8 2 15 01:45 0 4 7 28 1 4 6 28 1 8 13 56 02:00 0 9 1 4 1 13 02:15 1 3 1 13 2 16 02:30 1 3 0 2 1 5 02:45 1 3 11 26 0 2 9 28 1 5 20 54 03:00 0 9 1 6 1 15 03:15 0 6 0 5 0 11 03:30 0 3 0 6 0 9 03:45 1 1 4 22 ' 0 1 5 22 1 2 9 44 04:00 0 5 0 3 0 8 04:15 3 7 1 6 4 13 ' .04:30 0 3 3 4 3 7 04:45 0 3 6 21 0 4 7 20 0 7 13 41 05:00 0 10 1 6 1 16 05:15 0 6 0 4 0 10 05:30 1 5 1 8 2 13 05:45 0 1 14 35 1 3 3 21 1 4 17 56 06:00 0 8 0 5 0 13 06:15 0 8 1 6 1 14 06:30 0 9 0 4 0 13 06:45 4 4 9 34 2 3 9 24 6 7 18 58 07:00 0 10 3 12 3 22 07:15 1 4 3 3 4 7 07:30 2 5 4 5 6 10 07:45 0 3 6 25 3 13 13 33 3 16 19 58 08:00 2 4 1 7 3 11 08:15 6 8 6 7 12 15 08:30 2 7 1 3 3 10 08:45 6 16 4 23 5 13 5 22 11 29 9 45 09:00 2 . 6 5 6 7 12 09:15 2 2 2 3 4 5 - 09:30 2 3 3 4 5 7 ' 09:45 3 9 5 16 2 12 4 17 5 21 9 33 10:00 0 5 7 0 7'04 5 10:15 5 1 4 0 9 1 10:30 5 2 8 1 13 3 10:45 2 12 1 9 13 32 0 1 15 44 1 10 11:00 5 1 8 1 13 2 ` 11:15 5 0 6 2 11 2 11:30 8 1 9 1 17 2 , 11:45 7 25 2 4 8 31 0 4 15 56 2 8 Totals 85 266 122 245 207 511 • Day Totals 351 367 718 Split % 41.0% 52.0% 58.9% 47.9% Peak Hour 11:00 05:45 10:45 07:00 10:45 06:15 Volume 25 39 36 33 56 67 P.H.F. .78 .69 .69 .63 .82 .76 73 ' • . TRAFFICOUNT Site Code 2 CEDA WASHINGTONSBWN4820 YELM HWY B-195 Starte Date: 07/05/2000 CEDAR AVE S BTN LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 4THlST 6 S 5TH ST 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 JCN 2 TPE175T Pace 6 >< SB >< Combined > Monday Begin < NB p•M• A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M9 '2:0 6 0 3 0 2:15 07/10 0 2:15 10 0 2 1 12 17 2:30 45 1 1 5 0 2 1 5 12 2 4 10 38 01: 0 3 5 26 0 7 0 8 01:00 0 6 O1:30 1 0 5 1 11 4 0 3 0 7 i1:40 0 2:00 1 2 6 17 • 2' 17 1 2 8 34 1 0 •4 0 6 0 10 ' 2:15 0 7 0 9 0 16 02:15 0 4 0 4 0 8 02:30 0 * 5 20 0 • 3 22 0 • 8 42 02:45 06 0 10 1 16 )3:15 0 3:1 1 4 3 6 3 10 3:40 0 12 0 2 0 14 03:454 13 53 0 1 4 26 0 3 9 27 0 13 04:00 0 9 2 3 5 13 04:15 3 10 2 7 2 17 04:30 0 10 04:45 1 4 5 34 1 5 3 17 2 9 18 51 05:00 1 6 0 05:15 11 5 3 9 3 20 1 11 4 920 05:30 0 5 14 13 65 05:45 1 3 8 36 4 11 6 29 i 16 06:00 0 10 9 14 12 26 06:15 3 126 3 13 06:30 0 7 3 06:45 1 4 3 32 66 19 55 07:15 0 31 7 23 8 63 07:00 0 6 6 2 9 9 07:30 0 6 4 8 4 14 '07:45 2 2 5 24 9 6 28 22' 12 110 30 9 36 08:00 4 7 6 4 10 5 08:15 3 1 5 5 5 ;08:30 3 4 2 '08:45 2 12 7 19 6 21 23 13 8 33 99 32 09:00 ,0 6 47 3 9 6 09:15 5 3 1 4 2 6 09:30 1 533 09:45 7 13 6 20 4 16 33 13 111 �,29 9 10:00 3 3 0 8 5 10:15 5 5 3 2 11 8 10:30 1 6 101 36 3 19 10:45 3 12 2 16 6 24 1 3 7 6 11:00 2 4 6 0 117 1 11:15 5 1 5 0 11 1 11:30 6 2 9 38 2 9 11:45 4 17 0 7 149 21 198 2 222 475 - Totals 73 277697 Day Totals 350 347 Split % 32.8% 58.3% 67.1% 41.68 Peak Hour 11:00 05 07:00 05:30 09:45 05:30 1791 28 34 38 75 P.N.F. Volume 70 .85 .77 .60 .86 .72 74 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 tOCt 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Pa¢e 7 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Tuesday Time A.M. E.M. AJ1. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/11 -- 0 8 1 3 1 11 12:15 0 8 0 7 0 15 12:30 0 8 0 14 0 22 12:45 1 1 12 36 2 3 5 29 3 4 17 65 01:00 0 5 0 2 0 7 01:15 1 4 0 2 1 6 01:30 0 7 0 9 0 16 01:45 0 1 5 21 0 • 5 18 0 1 10 39 02:00 0 6 0 7 0 13 02:15 1 6 0 8 1 14 02:30 0 5 0 2 0 7 02:45 1 2 7 24 0 * 7 24 1 2 14 48 03:00 0 7 0 8 0 15 03:15 0 13 2 7 2 20 03:30 0 9 0 2 0 11 03:45 0 * 5 34 0 2 6 23 0 2 11 57 04:00 .. 0 13. 1 9 1 22 04:15 1 11 1 6 2 17 04:30 2 7 4 5 6 12 04:45 0 3 6 37 1 7 8 28 1 10 14 65 05:00 0 13 2 9 2 22 05:15 1 9 5 5 6 14 05:30 2 7 3 9 5 16 05:45 1 4 10 39 3 13 7 30 4 17 17 69 06:00 0 11 6 11 6 22 06:15 4 5 8 3 12 8 06:30 0 11 4 3 4 14 06:45 0 4 5 32 14 32 4 21 14 36 9 53 07:00 0 11 15 6 15 17 07:15 4 6 12 9 16 15 07:30 2 6 4 4 6 10 07:45 2 8 3 26 4 35 3 22 6 43 6 48 08:00 1 5 3 4 4 9 08:15 1 5 2 4 3 9 08:30 1 2 0 4 1. 6 08:45 2 5 5 17 5 10 7 19 7 15 12 36 09:00 1 , 7 5 2 6 9 09:15 5 7 4 3 9 10 - 09:30 4 6 9 8 13 14 09:45 3 13 5 25 8 26 3 16 11 39 8 41 10:00 3 4 4 0 7 l''' 4 10:15 6 9 8 7 14 16 10:30 1 1 3 1 4 2 10:45 4 14 2 16 4 19 0 8 8 33 2 24 11:00 7 3 7 2 14 5 11:15 3 2 8 0 11 2 11:30 5 2 7 0 12 2 11:45 5 20 1 8 4 26 1 3 9 46 2 11 Totals 75 315 173 241 248 556 Day Totals 390 414 804 Split % 30.2% 56.6% 69.7% 43.3% Peak Hour 11:00 03:15 06:30 05:15 06:45 05:00 Volume 20 40 45 32 51 69 P.H.F. .71 .76 .75 .72 .79 .78 75 RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT CEDAR AVE S BTWN 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 2 S 4TH ST 6 S 5TH ST LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCI 2 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19402 Page 8 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A11. P._M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/12 1 * 0 * 1 * 12:15 1 * 1 • 2 • 12:30 0 * 0 * 0 • 12:45 0 2 • • 1 2 • * 1 4 * • 01:00 1 * 0 * 1 • 01:15 1 • 0 * 1 * 01:30 0 • 0 • 0 * 01:45 0 2 • • 0 * • • 0 2 • • 02:00 1 • 0 • 1 • 02:15 0 * 1 * 1 • 02:30 0 * 0 * 0 * 02:45 1 2 * * 0 1 * * 1 3 * • 03:00 0 • 0 * 0 • 03:15 0 * 2 * 2 * 03:30 0 • 1 • 1 • 03:45 0 * * * 0 3 • * 0 3 * * 04:00 1 * 0 * 1 • 04:15 0 * 2 • 2 04:30 1 * 2 • 3 • 04:45 0 2 ' • 2 6 • * 2 8 • `• _ 05:00 0 ' 2 • 2 • 05:15 0 • 3 • 3 05:30 2 * 3 • 5 • 05:45 1 3 * * 2 10 * • 3 13 • • 06:00 2 * 7 • 9 • 06:15 2 • 7 • 9 * 06:30 2 * 6 * 8 * 06:45 0 6 * * 9 29 • * 9 35 • 07:00 0 * 5 • 5 * 07:15 1 • 11 • 12 • 07:30 0 * 7 • 7 * 07:45 4 5 * * 4 27 * * 8 32 * • 08:00 3 • 7 • 10 • 08:15 1 , • 2 * 3 * 08:30 2 * 5 * 7 * 08:45 5 11 • • 5 19 • * 10 30 • • i 09:00 8 * 3 * 11 * 09:15 2 * 5 • 7 09:30 1 • 9 * 10 * 09:45 4 15 * * 7 24 * * 11 39 * * 10:00 10 * 9 • 19 ,M'' * , 10:15 3 * 8 • 11 * ' 10:30 6 * 5 * 11 • 10:45 3 22 * • 3 25 * 6 47 • 11:00 4 * 7 • 11 * 11:15 0 • 0 • 0 • 11:30 * • * • * 11:45 * * * • * * * 11 * * Totals 74. 0 153 0 227 0 Day Totals 74 153 227 Split % 32.6% *. 67.4% Peak Hour 09:45 09:30 09:45 Volume 23 33 52 P.H.F. - • .57 • .91 - .68 76 • . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 . Paae • 8 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Wednesday Times A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/12 __ 2 • 1 • 3 • 12:15 0 • 1 * 1 * 12:30 2 * 0 * 2 12:45 1 5 * • 0 2 * * 1 7 * * 01:00 0 * 2 * 2 * 01:15 1 • 2 * 3 * 01:30 0 • 0 * 0 • 01:45 0 1 • • 0 4 • • 0 5 • • 02:00 0 • 2 * 2 • 02:15 0 • 0 * 0 • 02:30 0 * 0 * 0 • 02:45 0 * • * 0 2 * • 0 2 * * 03:00 1 * 0 * 1 03:15 1 • 0 * 1 03:30 0 * 0 * 0 * 03:45 0 2 * • 0 * * • 0 2 * * 04:00 1 * 0 * 1 • 04:15 1 * 0 * 1 '• 04:30 1 • 1 • 2 ' 04:45 2 5 * • 0 1 • * 2 6 • * 05:00 4 • 2 * 6 * 05:15 2 * 1 • 3 05:30 6 * 2 * 8 * 05:45 4 16 * * 1 6 * * 5 22 • • 06:00 6 * 2 * 8 • 06:15 8 • 0 * 8 06:30 10 * 0 * 10 * 06:45 9 33 * * 1 3 * * 10 36 • • 07:00 6 * 2 * 8 * 07:15 13 * 1 * 14 07:30 16 * 3 * 19 07:45 10 45 • * 2 8 * * 12 53 * * 08:00 10 • 3 * 13 * 08:15 7 * 2 • 9 • 08:30 5 • 1 • 6 08:45 5 27 * * 3 9 • * 8 36 • 09:00 , 8 • 5 • 13 • 09:15 _.. 5 • 5 • 10 P 09:30 7 * 3 * 10 09:45 9 29 * • 6 19 • • 15 48 * • 10:00 9 * 3 * 12'e • 10:15 2 * 3 • 5 * 10:30 7 * 6 • 13 * 10:45 6 24 * • 8 20 * • 14 44 * • 11:00 8 • 7 * 15 * 11:15 6 A 6 • 12 * 11:30 0 • 0 • 0 11:45 • * • • • • * • • 27 • * Totals 201 0 87 0 288 0 Day Totals 201 87 288 Solit % 69.7% * 30.2% • Peak Hour 07:15 10:30 07:15 Volume 49 27 58 P.N.F. .76 .84 .76 77 • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCH 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 . Paae 7 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Tuesday Time A.hL P.M. A,M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/11 -- 0 8 2 10 2 18 12:15 2 3 1 4 3 7 12:30 0 4 1 10 1 14 12:45 1 3 11 26 1 5 6 30 2 8 17 56 01:00 1 11 1 6 2 17 01:15 0 2 0 9 0 11 01:30 0 8 1 10 1 18 01:45 0 1 6 27 0 2 8 33 0 3 14 60 02:00 0 5 0 8 0 13 02:15 0 6 0 6 0 12 02:30 0 4 0 5 0 9 02:45 0 * 5 20 0 * 9 28 0 • 14 48 03:00 1 5 0 13 1 18 03:15 0 3 0 15 0 18 03:30 0 6 1 11 1 17 03:45 0 1 8 22 0 1 9 48 0 2 17 70 04:00 1 14 0 14 1 28 04:15 1 5 1 7 2 12 04:30 2 6 0 6 2 12 04:45 3 7 4 29 0 1 11 38 3 8 15 67 05:00 0 7 1 13 1 20 05:15 2 7 1 12 3 19 05:30 4 5 1 15 5 20 05:45 8 14 14 33 1 4 11 51 9 18 25 84 06:00 6 8 1 10 7 18 06:15 8 6 2 15 10 21 06:30 7. 7 0 14 7 21 06:45 6 27 6 27 0 3 12 51 6 30 18 78 07:00 8 3 1 12 9 15 07:15 10 10 3 10 13 20 07:30 13 9 6 10 19 19 07:45 8 39 5 27 2 12 9 41 10 51 14 68 08:00 4 4 1 10 5 14 08:15 8 4 6 6 14 10 08:30 8 10 6 4 14 14 08:45 10 30 4 22 5 18 6 26 15 48 10 48 09:00 6 6 4 7 10 13 09:15 11 3 5 6 16 9 09:30 7 3 . 1 6 8 9 09:45 14 38 0 12 6 16 6 25 20 ,e. 54 6 37 10:00 4 5 7 9 11 14 10:15 8 3 4 3 12 6 10:30 8 4 4 3 12 7 10:45 5 25 0 12 6 21 2 17 11 46 2 29 11:00 6 0 7 2 13 2 11:15 7 0 5 1 12 1 11:30 9 3 6 2 15 5 11:45 4 26 2 5 8 26 2 7 12 52 4 12 Totals 211 262 109 395 320 657 Day Totals 473 504 977 8nlit % 65.9% 39.8% 34.0% 60.1% Peak Hour 07:00 05:45 11:00 06:15 08:30 05:45 Volume 39 35 26 53 55 85 P.H.F. .75 .62 .81 .88 .85 .85 78 • RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCA 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 . Paae • Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Sunday Time ABM. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/09 _ 1 13 3 10 4 23 12:15 1 8 2 11 3 19 12:30 1 10 2 12 3 22 12:45 0 3 5 36 3 10 6 39 3 13 11 75 01:00 2 6 2 10 4 16 01:15 0 8 0 6 0 14 01:30 0 8 0 10 0 18 01:45 1 3 6 28 5 7 7 33 6 10 13 61 02:00 3 7 1 8 4 15 02:15 2 6 1 9 3 15 02:30 1 3 0 10 1 13 02:45 1 7 6 22 0 2 5 32 1 9 11 54 03:00 1 6 1 12 2 18 03:15 0 8 1 6 1 14 03:30 1 3 1 14 2 17 03:45 0 2 9 26 0 3 7 39 0 5 16 65 04:00 1 7 0 9 1 16 04:15 1 8 1 9 2 17 04:30 0 9 1 8 1 17 04:45 1 3 4 28 0 2 6 32 1 5 10 60 05:00 0 10 0 10 0 20 05:15 0 6 0 4 0 10 05:30 3 9 0 10 3 19 05:45 0 3 9 34 0 • 7 31 0 3 16 65 06:00 1 9 1 11 2 20 06:15 0 5 0 6 0 11 06:30 2 5 1 14 3 19 06:45 2 5 8 27 1 3 10 41 3 8 18 68 07:00 2 6 0 8 2 14 07:15 2 5 0 3 2 8 07:30 4 8 1 6 5 14 07:45 6 14 10 29 0 1 10 27 6 15` 20 56 08:00 2 6 1 3 3 9 08:15 5 10 3 7 8 17 08:30 3 8 2 9 5 17 08:45 4 14 2 26 2 8 7 26 6 22 9 52 09:00 4 3 4 6 8 9 09:15 7 4 5 2 12 6 09:30 10 4 2 8 12 12 09:45 7 28 2 13 5 16 7 23 12 44 9 36 10:00 6 6 10 6 16,6- 12 10:15 9 2 5 6 14 8 10:30 7 2 13 2 20 4 10:45 14 36 0 10 9 37 2 16 23 73 2 26 11:00 9 0 6 5 15 • 5 11:15 7 2 8 3 15 5 11:30 11 2 10 0 21 2 11:45 8 35 2 6 10 34 2 10 18 69 4 16 Totals 153 285 123 349 276 634 Day Totals . 438 472 910 Split % 55.4% 44.9% 44.5% 55.0i Peak Hour 10:45 12:00 10:00 06:00 10:45 12:00 Volume 41 36 37 41 74 75 P.H.F. -• .73 .69 .71 .73 • .80 .81 79 . ; ,# . RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCH 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 Paae 4 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Saturday Tine A.M. P-tL. A-M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/08 -- 1 7 3 15 4 22 12:15 2 8. 3 8 5 16 12:30 2 9 3 14 5 23 12:45 1 6 14 38 4 13 8 45 5 19 22 83 01:00 . 2 12 2 6 4 18 01:15 1 10 2 9 3 19 01:30 2 14 1 9 3 23 01:45 1 6 15 51 2 7 10 34 3 13 25 85 02:00 1 7 1 12 2 19 02:15 0 11 0 6 0 17 02:30 0 11 1 11 1 22 02:45 0 1 6 35 1 3 16 45 1 4 22 80 03:00 1 10 1 8 2 18 03:15 0 6 1 13 1 19 03:30 1 12 0 17 1 29 03:45 1 3 10 38 2 4 9 47 3 7 19 85 04:00 2 6 0 10 2 16 04:15 0 12 0 10 0 22 04:30 1 9 1 14 2 23 04:45 0 3 9 36 1 2 11 45 1 5 20 81 05:00 2 8 1 6 3 14 05:15 1 7 1 14 2 21 05:30 0 10 1 11 1 21 05:45 0 3 11 36 0 3 12 43 0 6 23 79 06:00 1 18 0 10 1 28 06:15 2 11 1 9 3 20 06:30 4 9 0 6 4 15 06:45 3 10 6 44 2 3 10 35 5 13 16 79 07:00 2 10 0 5 2 15 07:15 2 9 1 4 3 13 07:30 3 2 1 5 4 7 07:45 4 11 2 23 2 4 2 16 6 15 4 39 08:00 8 7 2 6 10 13 08:15 6 5 6 9 12 14 08:30 10 8 5 6 15 14 08:45 10 34 3 23 4 17 7 28 14 51 10 51 09:00 10 5 6 6 , 16 11 09:15 10 4 8 5 18 9 09:30. 14 5 11 7 25 12 09:45 10 44 4 18 9 34 5 23 19 78 9 41 10:00 10 4 10 4 20'P' 8 10:15 14 2 9 6 23 8 10:30 8 2 12 7 20 9 10:45 9 41 2 10 12 43 1 18 21 84 3 28 11:00 6 2 10 6 16 8 11:15 10 0 10 3 20 3 11:30 9 2 9 0 18 2 11:45 10 35 2 6 15 44 2 11 25 79 4 17 Totals 197 358 177 390 374 748 Day Totals 555 567 1122 Split % 52.6% 47.8% 47.3% 52.1% Peak Hour 09:30 01:00 10:30 02:45 09:30 05:15 Volume 48 51 44 54 87 93 P.H.F. .85 .85 .91 .79 .87 .83 80 L RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 . Ease : 3 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Friday Time A,1L P.M. A_._hi. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/07-- 0 9 2 12 2 21 12:15 0 8 1 6 1 14 12:30 0 8 1 8 1 16 12:45 1 1 6 31 . 2 6 12 38 3 7 18 69 01:00 0 10 0 13 0 23 01:15 0 14 0 9 0 23 01:30 0 14 1 12 1 26 01:45 1 1 10 48 0 1 6 40 1 2 16 88 02:00 1 7 0 10 1 17 02:15 0 6 0 10 0 16 02:30 0 13 0 10 0 23 02:45 0 1 10 36 1 1 6 36 1 2 16 72 03:00 1 6 0 10 1 16 03:15 0 8 1 13 1 21 03:30 1 5 0 13 1 18 03:45 0 2 7 26 0 1 17 53 0 3 24 79 04:00 1 7 0 17 1 24 04:15 0 6 0 14 0 20 04:30 0 10 1 11 1 21 04:45 0 1 5 28 0 1 9 51 0 2 14 79 05:00 5 11 1 14 6 25 05:15 6 6 1 14 7 20 05:30 10 10 1 16 11 26 05:45 6 27 12 39 2 5 14 58 8 32 26 97 06:00 6. 10 0 15 6 25 06:15 6 9 2 12 8 21 06:30 9 8 1 4 10 12 06:45 7 28 8 35 2 5 3 34 9 33 11 69 07:00 8 3 2 9 10 12 07:15 9 7 5 7 14 14 07:30 10 8 2 10 12 18 07:45 12 39 5 23 3 12 10 36 15 51 15 59 08:00 6 8 6 12 12 20 • 08:15 5 6 2 7 7 13 08:30 9 6 11 8 20 14 08:45 9 29 5 25 10 29 2 29 19 58 7 54 09:00 10 6 5 7 15 13 09:15 10 4 2 9 12 z 13 09:30 8 6 4 7 12 13 09:45 7 35 8 24 ' 4 15 6 29 11 50 14 53 10:00 7 2 2 2 4e 4 10:15 10 6 5 7 15 13 10:30 6 2 4 3 10 5 10:45 9 32 2 12 6 17 6 16 15 49 8 30 11:00 6 3 12 3 18 6 11:15 9 2 10 7 19 9 11:30 6 2 9 2 15 ' 4 11:45 6 27 2 91 9 40 2 14 15 67 4 23 Totals 223 336 133 436 356 772 Day Totals 559 569 1128 Split % 62.6% 43.5% 37.3% 56.4% Peak Hour 07:00 01:00 ' 11:00 03:30 10:45 05:30 Volume 39 48 40 61 67 98 P.H.F. .81 .85 .83 .89 .88 .94 • 81 i ' RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCB 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 Paop 2 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Thursday Time A.M. Q.M.. A.M. P.M. A.M, P.M. 12:00 07/06 _ 0 12 1 7 1 19 12:15 0 7 1 10 1 17 12:30 0 7 0 6 0 13 12:45 1 1 7 33 0 2 8 31 1 3 15 64 01:00 1 10 0 10 1 20 01:15 0 10 0 11 0 21 01:30 0 9 0 9 0 18 01:45 0 1 9 38 1 1 6 36 1 2 15 74 02:00 0 6 0 7 0 13 02:15 0 10 0 6 0 16 02:30 0 6 0 15 0 21 02:45 0 * 8 30 0 * 14 42 0 * 22 72 03:00 2 6 1 15 3 21 03:15 0 6 1 11 1 17 03:30 - - 1 2 1 14 2 16 03:45 1 4 10 24 0 3 10 50 1 7 20 74 04:00 0 6 0 9 0 15 04:15 2 4 1 10 3 14 04:30 2 10 1 14 3 24 04:45 1 5 9 29 0 2 10 43 1 7 19 72 05:00 1 8 0 17 1 25 05:15 5 6 1 17 6 23 05:30 5 8 0 18 5 26 05:45 7 18 10 32 . 0 1 16 68 7 19 26 100 06:00 6 10 1 14 7 24 06:15 3 11 1 14 4 25 06:30 7 4 2 15 9 19 06:45 12 28 12 37 0 4 11 54 12 32 23 91 07:00 10 9 0 6 10 15 07:15 6 6 3 10 9 16 07:30 13 10 2 14 15 24 07:45 10 39 15 40 2 7 3 33 12 46 18 73 08:00 4 9 2 5 6 14 08:15 12 8 2 8 14 16 08:30 6 24 2 10 8 34 08:45 7 29 12 53 7 13 6 29 14 42 18 82 09:00 8 6 8 7t 16 13 09:15 4 4 4 9 8 13 09:30 10 5 2 6 12 11 09:45 3 25 5 20 3 17 4 26 6 42 9 46 10:00 8 2 6 11 14'e 13 10:15 12 3 9 6 21 9 10:30 10 6 8 4 18 10 10:45 9 39 2 13 3 26 4 25 12 65 6 38 11:00 8 2 6 2 14 4 11:15 3 1 6 1 9 2 11:30 10 1 9 2 19 3 11:45 5 26 2 6 9 30 3 8 14 56 5 14 Totals 215 355 106 445 321 800 Day Totals 570 551 1121 Split % 66.9% 44.3% 33.0% 55.6% Peak Hour 06:45 07:45 J1:00 05:00 10:00 05:30 Volume 41 56 30 68 65 101 P.H.F. .78 .58 .83 .94 .77 .97 82 O ' I N RENTON, WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENTON AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BLOCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCI 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 . Paae : 1 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Wednesday Time A.M. Pa. A,M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/05-- • * * * • * 12:15 * • * • • • 12:30 * * • * * * 12:45 * • * • * * * * • * • * 01:00 * * • * * • 01:15 • • • • * • 01:30 • • • * • * 01:45 • * • • * • • * . • 02:00 • * • * • • 02:15 • • • * • * 02:30 • • * * • • 02:45 • * • * * • * * 4 * * • 03:00 4 • • • • * 03:15 • • * * * * 03:30 • * • * • • 03:45 * 4 • * • 4 * * • • * * 04:00 4 • • 4 4 * 04:15 • * • * ' 4 * 04:30 • • • * • • 04:45 • • * • • * * 4 4 * 4 * 05:00 • • • * 4 • 05:15 • 3 * 10 * 13 05:30 • 13 • 26 * 39 05:45 * * 9 25 • * 20 56 • • 29 81 06:00 * 8 • 15 * 23 06:15 * 8 • 12 • 20 06:30 * 8 • 8 • 16 06:45 * * 9 33 • * 18 53 * * 27 86 07:00 * 11 * 18 * 29 07:15 * 22 • 10 * 32 07:30 * 9 • 9 * 18 07:45 • 4 7 49 • * 7 44 • * 14 93 08:00 * 2 * 10 • 12 • 08:15 • 6 • 13 • 19 08:30 * 18 * 14 • 32 08:45 * * 10 36 * * 8 45 * * 18 81 09:00 * 8 • 3 * 11 09:15 * 4 * 5 -* 9 09:30 • 5 * 9 .• 14 09:45 * * 7 24 * * 10 27 + * 17 51 10:00 * 2 * 5 4'• 7 10:15 * 2 • 5 * 7 10:30 * 4 * 3 • 7 10:45 * * 0 8 * * 1 14 • * 1 22 11:00 * 2 • 0 •• 2 11:15 • 0 * 2 • 2 11:30 4 0 * 2 ' * 2 11:45 * * 0 2 * * 0 4 * * 0 6 Totals 0 177 0 243 0 420 Day Totals 177 243 420 Split % * 42.1% * 57.8% Peak Hour 06:45 05:30 05:30 Volume 51 73 111 P.H.F. .57 .70 .71 83 RE . WASHINGTON TRAFFICOUNT RENT AVE S IN THE 4820 YELM HWY B-195 Site Code : 3 300 BI:OCK LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Start Date: 07/05/2000 LOCO 3 TPE175T 360-491-8116 File I.D. : TPE19403 Paae : 6 Begin < NB >< SB >< Combined > Monday Time A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 07/10 2 6 0 8 2 14 12:15 `" 2 3 1 10 3 13 12:30 1 10 0 6 1 16 12:45 0 5 10 29 0 1 9 33 0 6 19 62 01:00 0 10 0 3 0 13 01:15 0 7 2 8 2 15 01:30 0 6 1 - 6 1 12 01:45 1 1 6 29 0 3 10 27 1 4 16 56 02:00 0 8 1 6 1 14 02:15 0 10 0 6 0 16 02:30 0 5 0 6 0 11 02:45 0 • 6 29 0 1 11 29 0 1 17 58 03:00 0 6 0 12 0 18 03:15 0 8 0 14 0 22 03:30 2 12 0 15 2 27 03:45 0 2 9 35 0 • 13 54 0 2 22 89 04:00 2 10 0 6 2 16 04:15 1 5 1 12 2 17 04:30 0 5 0 9 0 14 04:45 2 5 7 27 ' 0 1 5 32 2 6 12 59 05:00 2 3 2 16 4 19 05:15 4 8 1 18 5 26 05:30 7 8 1 18 8 26 05:45 3 16 10 29 0 4 14 66 3 20 24 95 06:00 6 4 i 2 6 8 10 06:15 10 3 0 13 10 16 06:30 11 10 1 7 12 17 06:45 3 30 10 27 1 4 17 43 4 34 27 70 07:00 10 7 3 6 13 13 07:15 7 6 2 10 9 16 07:30 6 6 3 8 9 14 07:45 _ 10 33 6 25. 2 10 9 33 12 43 15 58 08:00 6 9 1 11 7 20 08:15 10 5 2 5 12 10 08:30 6 3 4 14 10 17 08:45 3 25 5 22 2 9 4 34 5 34 9 56 09:00 10 9 2 6 12 15 09:15 8 2 3 9 11 11 - 09:30 6 3 6 4 12 7 09:45 6 30 3 17 , 8 19 7 26 14 49 10 43 10:00 7 6 4 3 11,, 9 10:15 7 1 9 2 16 3 10:30 6 1 6 7 12 8 10:45 8 28 2 10 8 27 2 14 16 55 4 24 • 11:00 6 1 6 1 12 2 11:15 6 4 8 2 14 6 11:30 13 2 7 2 20 4 11:45 5 30 0 7 9 30 0 5 14 60 0 1a Totals 205 286 109 396 314 682 Day Totals 491 505 996 Split % 65.2% 41.9% 34.7% 58.0% Peak Hour 06:15 03:15 11:00 05:00 10:45 05:00 Volume 34 39 30 66 62 95 P.H.F. .77 .81 .83 .91 .77 .91 84 ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Prepared for Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 Prepared by TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2101 - 112th Ave. N.E., Suite 110 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone - (425) 455-5320 • January 27, 2000 ` 30251 4jk ' Oi,6N,FCISZ.Ey3; s4ry ,SION AL � G ° 4- 1. _, 'I. EXPIRES 9/15/0D • < i TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2101-112th AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 110—BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 98004 TELEPHONE(425)455-5320 :TOR H.BISHOP P.E.President DAVID H.ENGER.P.E.Vice President FACSIMILE(425)453-7180 January 27, 2000 Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT 9 Lake Bellevue Dr., Suite 100-A Bellevue, WA 98005 Re: Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Fike: We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis for the proposed Arnold property single family residential project located on the northeast side of Beacon Way S.E., south of S. 7th Ct. in the City of Renton. This study was prepared to City of Renton guidelines. We have visited the project site and surrounding street network, and have discussed the scope of this study with Mr. Neil Watts of the City of Renton Public Works Department. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and the surrounding street network. Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan. The plan consists of the layout of 60 single family residential lots. Access to the site is proposed onto S. 7th Court via an internal plat road. The plat road will intersect S. 7th Ct. near the S. 71h St./Beacon Way S. intersection. The Arnold property vehicular access is limited to E. 7`h Ct. because the City of Seattle will not allow the use of their right-of-way for permanent roads. The City of Renton does not feel that access onto the • City of Seattle right-of-way would be beneficial. The plat road has a connection to Beacon Way S. that will be used for emergency access only. Traffic circulation on the plat road is accomplished via an internal roadway loop. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Trip Generation • Table 1 shows the trips generated by the proposed Arnold property single family residential project. The trip generation for the project is calculated using average trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997 for Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Land Use Code 210). A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination ('exiting or entering) inside the proposed development. These trip CA-FINAL.PROJECTSIRenton R068099rpt.doc , L ., Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT January 27, 2000 Page 2 generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor and service and delivery vehicle trips. The new trips generated by the Arnold property are estimated to be 45 trips during the AM peak hour, 61 trips during the PM peak hour and 574 trips during an average weekday. During the PM peak hour 64% of the trips will be entering and 36% will be exiting the development. Trip Distribution Figure 3 shows the estimated trip distribution and calculated site-generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on the characteristics of the street network, existing traffic volume patterns, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (business, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), and expected travel times. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing PM peak hour traffic volumes at pertinent intersections affected by site-generated traffic. Per discussion with City staff, the pertinent street intersections are the following: Main Ave. S./S. 4`h St. Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. Cedar Ave. S./S. 3`d St./Mill Ave. S. Renton Ave. S./S. 7`h St. The turning movement traffic volume counts at the Main Ave. S./S. 4`h St. and Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. intersections were obtained from the City of Renton. The City counts were taken in September and June, 1999, respectively. The remaining counts were performed by Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. on Tuesday, December 7, 1999. Additionally, 24-hour traffic volume counts were taken on Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S. for three days from Tuesday, December 7, 1999 through Thursday, December 9, 1999. These average daily traffic (ADT) volumes also appear on Figure 4 along with ADT estimates on other roadways based on the actual counts. Copies of the counts are attached. Roadway Facilities Figure 5 shows existing traffic control, number of roadway lanes, number of approach lanes at intersections, and other pertinent information in the site vicinity. The primary streets and the City's classifications within the site vicinity are: CA-FINAL PROJECTSIRenfon R068099rpf.doc V ? 1 S i , Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT January 27, 2000 Page 3 Main Ave. S. Principal Arterial • S. 4th St. Minor Arterial Mill Ave. S. Minor Arterial Cedar Ave. S. Local Access Renton Ave. S. Local Access S. 7'St. Local Access Beacon Way S. Local Access Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S. are currently the only routes up or down Renton Hill. Cedar Ave. S. is a 27 foot wide, two lane road with curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides of the street. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street, making through traffic use a single lane in sections depending on the location of the parked cars. Renton Ave. S. is 26 feet wide with curb, gutter and sidewalks on both sides of the street. There are signs posted on Renton Ave. S. prohibiting parking on the west side of the street. Therefore parking on the street occurs only on the east side of Renton Ave. South. Both Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S. are signed for the northbound, or downhill, traffic to yield to the southbound, or uphill, traffic. South 7th St. east of High Ave. S. is a 30 foot wide road with no curbs or gutters, and sidewalk only on the south side. West of High St. S., S. 7th St. is 36 feet wide with no curbs or gutters and sidewalks on both sides. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street for the entire length. Between Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S., S. 7' St. is very steep with grades in excess of 15 percent. There are no sidewalks on either side in this section. Beacon Way S. fronting the property is not constructed on a City of Renton right-of-way but rather a Seattle Water Pipeline right-of-way. The road is gated approximately halfway along the Arnold property frontage, with no through vehiclular access. Beacon Way S. does provide access to a driveway into the City's Phillip Arnold Park. The S. 7th St./Beacon Way S. intersection is a level, five-leg intersection with stop sign control on each approach. The other streets intersecting at this location are E. 7th Ct. and Jones Ave. South. The City of Renton Code, Chapter 34 provides minimum design standard guidelines for various classifications of roadways. The minimum design standard for a residential access street is a 32 foot wide roadway with curb, gutter and sidewalks on both sides located within a 50 foot wide right-of-way. Parking is allowed on both sides. The existing streets on Renton Hill • do not meet these minimum design requirements, however the use of the standards is to serve as a guideline for design projects. The design standards likely did not exist at the time the the existing Renton Hill streets were constructed. Level of Service Analysis Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions • CA-FINAL PROJECTSIRenfon R068099rpt.doc • 1 Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT January 27, 2000 Page 4 include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst(congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate, and LOS E and F are low. Table 2 shows calculated levels of service (LOS)for existing conditions at the pertinent street intersections. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual- Special Report 209 3rd Edition updated December 1997. The LOS shown indicate overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average delay per vehicle. The 1997 HCM update revised the LOS at intersections and changed the LOS threshold to average control delay. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: TYPE OF A B C D E F INTERSECTION Signalized <10.0 >10.0 and <20.0 >20.0 and <35.0 >35.0 and <55.0 >55.0 and <80.0 >80.0 Stop Sign Control <10.0 >10 and <15 >15 and <25 >25 and < 35 >35 and < 50 >50 Currently all of the study intersections are operating at LOS B or better and therefore meet the City requirements of LOS D or better at intersections. Transit Service There currently is no transit service for the residents on Renton Hill due to the steep grades and narrow lanes. Metro transit service is available on Main Ave. S., Mill Ave. S. and Houser Way South. The Renton Transit Center is located to the west of Main Ave. S. between S. 2nd St. and S. 3`d St. for connections to Seattle and other major Puget Sound destinations. Accident History The City of Renton provided intersection accident data from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998 for the study area. There were no recorded traffic accidents at any of the intersections on Renton Hill during the above time period. The accidents recorded at the Main Ave. S./S. 4th St. and Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. intersections are summarized below. There were no traffic fatalities and there does not appear to be an unusually high number of accidents at any of the locations examined in the site vicinity. There does not appear to be any existing recurring accident problem. CA-FINAL PROJECTSIRenfon R068099rpf.doc ( f ' 1114 Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT January 27, 2000 Page 5 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT SUMMARY Intersection 1996 1997 1998 Total Main Ave. S./S. 4`h St. 1 8 5 14 Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. 0 7 3 10 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Planned Roadway Improvement Projects The City of Renton has no planned roadway improvements for any of the streets on Renton Hill. There is, however, a street improvement project on Main Ave. S. that is currently being constructed. The Main Ave. S./S. 4' St. intersection will be modified to add separate northbound and southbound left turn lanes and phases. Currently a new traffic signal has been installed, but the channelization changes have not been completed. The traffic signal is assumed to be constructed and operational for future year calcualtions in this analysis. No other planned roadway projects are in the Arnold property vicinity. Traffic Volumes Figure 6 shows projected 2001 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background growth. The compounded annual traffic volume growth factor used in this analysis is 3% per year on the arterials and zero growth on the Renton Hill local access streets as directed by the City. No proposed "pipeline" land development projects were included, as.directed by the City. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Traffic Volumes Figure 7 shows the projected 2001 PM peak hour traffic volumes and estimated ADT traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site-generated PM peak hour and ADT traffic volumes shown on Figure 3 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. Levels of Service Table 2 shows calculated LOS for future with and without project conditions at the pertinent street intersections. Our analysis shows that all of the pertinent intersections are expected to operate at or above LOS B for 2001 conditions without or with the Arnold property project. The planned traffic signal improvements at the Main Ave. S./S. 4th St. intersection are assumed to be constructed and operational for future conditions. • CA-FINAL PROJECTSIRenfon R068099rpLdoc 11 Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT January 27, 2000 Page 6 Traffic Operations The addition of the Arnold property traffic volumes will introduce approximately 25 percent more traffic to the Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. S. streets on a daily basis. During the PM peak hour, which is the highest trip generation hour of the day, the Arnold property will add approximately 30 PM peak hour trips to Cedar Ave. S. and Renton Ave. South. This is equivalent to approximately one new vehicle per two minute time span. There is no existing traffic accident problem on any of the local access streets on Renton Hill and the addition of the Arnold property traffic should not change this situation. The seasonal use of Philip Arnold Park was not considered in this report. According to residents, the Park causes an increase of traffic volumes during the summer months. The good levels of service (LOS) for the intersections in the area indicate that a substantial increase in traffic volumes could occur and still be within the City's LOS requirements. Traffic counts during. the park's peak season would have to be taken to verify this assessment. The S. 7'h St./Beacon Way S. intersection should operate satisfactorily with the addition of the Arnold property traffic volumes due to the low traffic volumes exisitng at this intersection. The Beacon Way S./S. 7'h St. five-leg intersection meets AASHTO stopping sight distance requirements because each leg is stop-sign controlled. A motorist at any leg of the intersection can see cars that are stopped on the other legs. The lack of any reported accidents at the Beacon Way S./S. 7'h St. intersection indicates that there is currently not a safety issue even during the Philip Arnold Park peak season. The Arnold property site access onto E. 7'h Ct. is located less than 150 feet from the S. 7'h St./Beacon Way S. intersection. The design guideline for the spacing of intersections is 150 feet, when possible, according to the City. Although a connection to E. 7h Ct. has a less than ideal spacing to the Beacon Way S./S. 7'h St. intersection, traffic operations should be adequate. The Arnold property site access can be located approximately 110 feet from the Beacon Way S./S. 7'h,St. intersection due to the property boundary constraints.. Sight distance at the proposed access should be sufficient to see the stopped vehicles at the Beacon Way S./S. 7'h St. intersection and therefore meet any AASHTO requirements. An increase in traffic accidents is not anticpated with the addition of the Arnold property access. A stop sign should be installed at the Arnold property access point onto E. 7'h Court. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION Traffic Impact Fees The City of Renton requires a traffic impact mitigation fee of$75. per net new average daily trip. Therefore the Arnold property traffic impact mitigation fee is $75. X 574 = $43,050. No other traffic mitigation fees should be required. CA-FINAL PROJECTStRenfon R068099rpLdoc Mr. Ryan A. Fike BENNETT DEVELOPMENT January 27, 2000 Page 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report uses existing traffic data collected at the pertinent intersections for analysis. Level of service analyses were performed for existing and projected future (2001) traffic volumes, using the collected traffic data, for the without and with project conditions. The evaluation of the traffic impact of the proposed Arnold property identifies that the project will not cause a significant adverse affect on the operation of any of the study intersections, with none of the study intersections operating worse than LOS B. There are no apparent traffic safety issues identified at the pertinent street intersections. Based on our analysis, the Arnold property project should be approved with the following traffic mitigation measures: 1. Remit the fee of$43,050 to the City of Renton as payment to the City's traffic impact fee program when required by the City. 2. Construct the internal plat streets, intersections and driveways to City of Renton standards. 3. Install a stop sign on the site access street at E. 71h Court. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions please call me. Very truly yours, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERIN , INC. • LDH:sv Larry bbs, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer CA-FINAL PROJECTS Renton R068099rpl.doc Y 1 1 TABLE 1 VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION 60 Single Family Residential Lots Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis TIME PERIOD AVERAGE TRIP TRIPS TRIPS TOTAL RATE ENTERING EXITING Average Weekday T = 9.57(X) 287 (50%) 287 (50%) 574 AM Peak Hour T = 0.75(X) 11 (25%) 34 (75%) 45 PM Peak Hour T = 1.01(X) 39 (64%) 22 (36%) 61 • T = Trips Generated X = Dwelling Units The trip generation is calculated usisng the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997 for Single Family Detached Housing (Land Use Code 210). A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the proposed development. CA-FINAL PROJECTSIRenfon R068099ipf.doc • I TABLE 2 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis INTERSECTION PROJECTED PROJECTED EXISTING 2005 W/O 2005 W/ PROJECT PROJECT _ Main Ave. S./S. 4th St. B (16.9) B (16.3)* B (16.4) Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. B (11.1) B (11.6) B (11.8) Cedar Ave. S./S. 3rd St./Mill Ave. S. South Approach A (7.4) A (7.4) A (7.5) Overall A (7.3) A (7.3) A (7.4) Renton Ave. S./S. 7th St. South Approach A (7.5) A (7.5) A (7.6) Overall A (7.2) A (7.2) A (7.4) * Assumes the planned traffic signal modifications are in place. Note: Number shown in parentheses ( ) is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the intersection as a whole, which determines the LOS for intersections per the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, 3rd Edition updated 1997. • C.1-FINAL PROJECTSIRenton R068099rpt.doc a 1, , 'ai'..�Ifrlp T{r a. nM --- :r-11— ' - _ . •� t'J h1. •- f1 mr nrta � �®� • no �iYp R t _ t• :.'r�,y ,.." I ,VIA/ TN ,0• 4 il„� �.IR 12'.: 4 f Y�'. kL': ` 4 sera �� ..J . ,•= �.:. I. .. ... • •• ' it J • ; • : . • 1 ^ ., .":.sr 9tD7 aLIYI • :.I-: V A071i1t '_'f, iiti r j"• ). ��;E.:": r- , AIR rR-•• KF ��p lik-f vVtm - �,,: v .7. •a item \ • • ,env.::.: , IL , e. • . .. f: Ili ,Q��('.'-^1. � _ 7 1 �4'1�1_.. / C1?� • . � �tMltlr rere..sr, Sge. r ' 2 1� !•]I . .:�//r-r s x' tottmr16 >.!gPl :� .;�' IN S 3R0 �ii �®� ''a�,.,a;K.'r 1G,j •r� .Imam..90o...�. lI i..4. \ ,. ,90 \ ielg r, y l�ib it•U iregil '/. :'1, ,,%'':.`.a'::"1: -e • f , >r .. .or , r.t. v, A taunt _ ° .•:,:..,.: ri : R. ,,►a 'b'^� 00,,I, Nib= po al ' Via• •",C. •.e: :fir '�141: ,.f Sfeti.. 4. • 3d A � s-:,.:"'' .[17, 'r�rii . 71.0.,r" :.--.:,-rgfuqr.a,.01 11, � .Aa■ 0^7�,21;' 515 1 1 EN_fif:��.i:• -F "�:;_ ...•.;GI:' .,?, 'r' F p*.f �� ,ii lmot rltl.sY r _ � ,�f>rr '1 r'''i,-- ..••• ;:r,o"•^7Yj ".' r7'n`n1.., 169 Z • 1 t maw S woo: :.tt :'. • , :4' ' \'_. •;;.,7CI I,:D.(.. .1. ... /,` L :, .I;.,;.:. rt 1 :� � ®�/I:�:�Y i,El�Isrx •�•`•; "• .20'.' �� ,_ ,�Wi , .�,•..'�'_;7.:I'S": ..r.-.: •.::,: , ., = � -� l i:_ ifs ,. ' .:.. 7,,. .• ; k:. f: ° '` ors. �►," �:. ;. :• •: .. • t7rAwt:•,"Yf*� � �� 1® ��•��,v�i�;�• .�°1 7 :.+ !..' • �Y.� e . ,,�,�.�i*. .,la• .a!-�;yii:'�• • �;rrr y "�.4 t �1� t 9 .An:s "7lli Wig, '3�:�a :"QAj�� i t'tA.• ,,r, . :Ih �V.��b, Y 1� y..El ,, , 1 e•PI16EF0 h. :0 .• _ st n�O '.;i 231.13. w k •ems• 'P 1� 'x•eM' e - '? sow, '''4S? ` •' b• - `n4 r1! i SY?JNDST s 27PD 1 • _ 7w.._-- _ > e t• I:r„ r xnm •� .[ ,7'�yT ��S 1••.; __(tf L. 1 IJ „y x u st`1.E`'S "44 e 1• '.:''iiii • :141Msf I"`:•.1yS ",R ( :.;,.1 itli ir � '° •� Latta ,, SE flir_� n is 1' r �. C. .1. I 6211°a.- : Y s INN :�j i \ }I ` _S IF •.1.,••. .. y ®S[IMF°ST �• ~1•'' ` sw 25TM .4 ;. W , n Tb' hs_I t7nl�d s 1111E sE 164T11 t Mi 3 •iY:`l:'' aJ 4'i::. ! S y,,N a I my- i 7 V: SE t[sm '/• 11700 16Sn r tr II .{iit1(7S'y►�alE�1t in f` ,,1 >„~St i xlsr r{ r�' II y. 1 n ns� . . ' Irnr. I: f Ct�il�x�'VF �'-1 ..: d tin f .g 111rM'7t vii ` '1 �j'� rt !,y-•- •a 1.. Sr SK1zJOT7Y ..'• s S ' < B „;,e + r �_ uA 1 -. ♦ .1'• S1 i n < <I 291g' r E.1 Ailx r 1681H I a ll� • = S[rITOPI ST• ma;��i�1 ph-- -28.1,..—Pi e, V SW _ �© fi�l _� w -�3e � .� y •'� 3trX ST S 1 NO ST . SE 7i10 ST •,'' . - S,s ��® urr`.„: 3 x ?'34. u n80�1X - 17.y; it` t„ a x p .. I. J _• ' 515 ,,, 1,.:,,_ x^•ss ',aex •a sE ; g ti. 1. j,, sr sIrSw $II a n •+ c , 7i a.'i SY NTH ST •. .,a:. ,• • '„w,• 6 st usni nfln;ax A7 s[ a u f -- SE 176TH - I �V'-' ST pETF �� - -. >=:i _ :•I1 _• ._• _WRY 11 : :h xl ...o 1 nIY "Reproduced with permission granted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS). Ws map In copyrighted by 1HOMAS BROS. MAPS). It to unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for personal tine or resale, without permission. All rights reserved." r c-F VICINITY MAP1 fri IGURE ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 1 P l I 1 • ill f I 1... • 1 l I .. 1 11: I/i 10 9,[04 . , 1 / I \ CI i . 41 4* 40. M *o fr ` ilt. it T.; 1 1 A • i f ry . . . . st I( /.4, 44% . ia 1v r \� • }n 7 a R !a q • \ 15 It• IC '� 4 s +d tJ li 71, i• 1kRom Al l ( ...‘ SITE PLAN FIGURE ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 1 ii J / en ,,,i;,/ A ..i 1.t / — M N 5 Itoi S 405 not to scale 50c N1 j ell C illNIA l�ti �a at N �� *._1 li ir 17% r6 en S4th 6— f St. ' � 4 en ei U) IN OUT TOTAL Q 39 22 61 m o ai U a c a c Os ce oo a� �el o m i CI O _ (V 50% h 41-11 19— - S 7th St. �j,// mT�l Project Site/ cn / a o LEGEND c xx% Trip Distribution Percentage X—► PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction (XX) Average Daily traffic r -\ FIGURE SITE GENERATED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Ili_ ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 3 i 1 r Uy / A N 41615 405 not to scale see \aJ Wednesday 6-2-99 1 i 4:00-5:00 PM o 36) 6, IA ,15 / Tuesday 12-7-99 ti,. 7,7N94:45-5:45 PM ti 51 A§ e; ` 68 r Wednesday _ } 9-6-99 1, 2_► i Nk N 4:00-5: 90 PM 0 .-O `4 N 1 i k -0--18 �� ir"23 el S 4th 93_v / �'� St. 19--► I • o o 20B"4, ro�;t cn ai a > * Q d' .c L a)) cn \ > 0 v ai a) > t C..) Q u7 c o .- Ci 61 a CC °nod Gco v' °y g i v) S Q ai> V` • ,c o ^ti, d Vr� `32 O -c 4, (895*))1` r-10 (1075*) _ 3_A? i e m S 7th St. j l� 34--► t Project 33—Ia. 'fNQ1 Site/ Tuesday 12-7-99 cn 4:00-5:00 Pm �i Q m LEGEND o', -3• (XX) Average Daily Traffic Volume (XX*) Average Daily Traffic Volume Estimate X—• PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1-FIGURE� ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 4 ai / i = 1%01 s 405 not to scale Sec ,t),o� o� k oe : 1X y 1c.? e S 4th t St. N mot � .' U, CII ai c o ¢ L. N o -o ai U ¢ L C n- o i N Co'Lo_ v' °y N E > S' N ¢ El C yip Atli 1 c ^� t' 'Y'" �i'' ,� �Y' .'` :' rr�r l S 7th St. �� / Future I' �I�.� Project Channelization 25 mph `�' �� Site IFGFND en �" / 0 Traffic Control Signal a 'I Stop Sign m d Yield Sign c o XX mph Posted Speed Limit --• Approach Lane & Direction XL Number of Roadway Lanes i ^ ` FIGURE EXISTING CONDITIONS ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 5 a > Q — N ,I,ay 5 405 not to scale sex / M f0 tt 9�� 0 cp c4 ,P6 6 TN ''-18 co o: )tr N 2-r Nrn .-o, N...4 /,' Mk .4-18 r23 co S 4th 99--" ,� • St. 221—% 1t l `� U) rn ai U) Q c Q .o `ocn \ o Q c O co o o Gioa� `n '4, > to S Q ; C: 0 o t ^w �Nr� `32 o v, to Pl$ �10 x 34—•' i t r S 7th St. *.' / /7Fc77 33-A LIVEN-o Sites U) ai Q 1 c 0 LEGEND X-► PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction 1 I 1FIGURE� PROJECTED 2001 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT PROJECT ARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 6 1 C. \ tn . i / III a N dal s 405 not to scale sel �pJ tow I !i Pt R._ tAlb4L. r18 Nro „.: d' 2-1k Nato POi�o NI...5 Itk .-22 P-29 S 4th 25 99-Jr Si --► )t r •. 221'1/4 to'' . CD N tti ¢ w a ... N to 'O v N r. U Q N0 C •,Y a T 60 at 0' p_ o ro(4.6/ al Q 6 I o Q d Z Ni__33 6 rn Ict (1182) J1k r;' ,�/ mT7 53.J-- l rS 7th St. Project 33-1116. u o Site a m C p LEGEND (XX) Average Daily Traffic Volume X--► PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction / PROJECTED 2001 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT FIGURE 1 ffNeARNOLD PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 7 Arnold Property 01/05/00 Main Ave. S./S. 4th St. 12:21:41 Existing SIGNAL97/TEAPAC[Ver 1.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.53 Vehicle Delay 16.9 Level of Service B Sq 11 1 Phase 1 I Phase 2 1 **/** * * * * ++++ /I\ <* * <++++ V A ++++ I • A ++++ v North <+ + +> ++++> 1 + + + **** + + + v G/C=0.539 I G/C=0.381 I G=, 53.9" I G= 38.1" I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4 .0" OFF= 0.0% I OFF=57.9% I C=100 sec G= 92 .0 sec = 92.0% Y= 8.0 sec = 8.0% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% 1 Lane (Width/1 g/C I Service Rated Adj 1 1 HCM 1 L 190% Max) 1 Group 1 Lanese Reqd Used 1 @C (vph) @E (Volume! v/c 1 Delay 1 S 1 Queue 1 N Approach 15.9 B 1W TH+RT1 24/2 10.365 10.539 1 1834 1 1905 1 1101 10.578 1 15.9 1*B 1 356 ftl S Approach 15.7 B 1LT+TH+RTC 24/2 10 .361 10.539 1 1713 1 1785 1 1007 10.564 1 15.7 1 B 1 329. ft1 E Approach 20.2 C+ ELT+TH+RTI 12/1 10.189 10.381 1 429 1 544 1 68 10.125 1 20.2 1 C+I 58 ftl W Approach 22 .5 C+ 1 RT 1 12/1 10.258 10.381 1 476 1 597 1 242 10.405 1 23.1 I *C+l 212 ftl ILT+TH 1 12/1 10.218 10.381 1 399 1 510 1 130 10.255 1 21.5 1 C+I 114 ftl 1 • Arnold Property 01/05/00 Main Ave. S./S. 4th St. 12:22:00 2001 w/o proj SIGNAL97/TEAPAC[Ver 1.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.55 Vehicle Delay 16.3 Level of Service B Sq 41 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I **/** + * * + * * ++++ /I\ +> <* * <++++ vA ++++ I A **** v North <* + +> ****> ++++ * + + ++++ v * + + v G/C=0.054 I G/C=0.543 I G/C=0.275 I G= 5.0" I G= 50.0" I G= 25.3" I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0" 1 1 OFF= 0.3% I OFF= 9.8% I OFF=68.5% I C= 92 sec G= 80.3 sec = 87.3% Y=12.0 sec = 13.0% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% _ I Lane $Width/I g/C I Service Rate' Adj I I HCM 1 L 190% Max, 1 - Group 1 Lanes! Reqd Used 1 @C (vph) @E 'Volume, v/c 1 Delay I S 1 Queue 1 N Approach 15.0 B+ I TH+RTI 24/2 10.372 10.543 1 1871 1 1922 1 1169 10.608 1 14.9 I *B+I 344 ftl 1 LT 1 12/1 10.129 10.054 1 1 1 78 1 3 10.031 1 41.3 1 D+I 25 ftl S Approach 14.3 B+ I TH+RTI 24/2 10.351 10.543 1 1839 1 1891 1 1062 10.562 1 14.2 1 B+1 316 ftl 1 LT 1 12/1 10.129 10.054 1 1 1 77 1 3 10.032 1 41.3 I*D+I 25 ftl E Approach 25.6 C+ ILT+TH+RT1 12/1 10.159 10.275 1 268 1 387 1 68 10.176 1 25.6 1 C+1 63 ftl W Approach 24.0 C+ 1 RT 1 12/1 10.249 10.373 1 478 1 584 1 257 10.440 1 22.2 1 C+1 210 ftl ILT+TH 1 12/1 10.196 10.275 1 253 1 369 1 137 10.371 I 27.6 I *C 1 129 ftl 2 Arnold Property 01/05/00 Main Ave. S./S. 4th St. 12:22:22 2001 w/ proj SIGNAL97/TEAPAC[Ver 1.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.55 Vehicle Delay 16.4 Level of Service B Sq 41 I Phase 1 1 Phase 2 I Phase 3 I **/** + * * A + * * ++++ /I\ +> <* * <++++ vA ++++ A **** V North <* + +> ****> I ++++ * + + ++++ v * + + V G/C=0.054 I G/C=0.543 I G/C=0.275 I G= 5.0" I G= 50.0" I G= 25.3" I I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0" I 1 OFF= 0.3% I OFF= 9.8% I OFF=68.5% I C= 92 sec G= 80.3 sec = 87.3% Y=12 .0 sec = 13.0% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% I Lane (Width/1 g/C I Service Rate' Adj I I HCM 1 L 190% Maxi I Group I LanesI Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E (Volume! v/c 1 Delay I S I Queue I N Approach 15.0 B+ I TH+RTI 24/2 10 .372 10.543 11871 11922 11169 10.608 I 14 .9 I *B+I 344 ft1 I LT 112/1 10.129 10.054 I 1 I 78 I 3 10.031 I 41.3 I D+l 25 ftl S Approach 14 .4 B+ I TH+RT1 24/2 10.354 10.543 1 1835 1 1887 1 1075 10.570 I 14.3 1 B+1 319 ftl 1 LT 1 12/1 10.129 10.054 1 1 1 77 1 3 10.032 1 41.3 1 *D+1 25 ftl E Approach 26.1 C+ ILT+TH+RTI 12/1 10.167 10.275 1 262 1 380 1 85 10.224 1 26.1 1 C+I 79 ftl W Approach 24 .2 C+ 1 RT 1 12/1 10.249 10.373 1 478 1 584 1 257 10. 440 1 22 .2 1 C+1 210 ftl ILT+TH 1 12/1 10.200 10.275 1 255 1 371 1 144 10.388 1 27.7 I *C .1 136 ftl 3 • •, Arnold Property 01/05/00 Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. 12:22:38 Existing SIGNAL97/TEAPAC[Ver 1.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.55 Vehicle Delay 11.1 Level of Service B+ Sq 11 I Phase 1 ! Phase 2 ! **/** * * * * • /I\ * *> I V A I A ++++ North + +> ****> I + + ++++ + + V G/C=0.260 I G/C=0.660 I I G= 26.0" 1 G= 66.0" I I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0" I OFF= 0.0% I OFF=30.0% I C=100 sec G= 92.0 sec = 92.0% Y= 8.0 sec = 8.0% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% I Lane IWidth/I g/C I Service Rate! Adj I I HCM I L 190% Maxl I Group I LanesI Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E 'Volume' v/c I Delay I S I Queue 1 N Approach 28.5 C ILT+TH 112/1 10.181 10.260 1 271 1 443 1 58 10.131 1 28.5 I *C 1 61 ftl S Approach 28.0 C 1 TH+RTI 24/2 10.174 10.260 I 519 I 789 I 67 10.085 1 28.0 I C I 37 ftl W Approach 10.0 B+ 1 RT 112/1 10.172 10.660 I 991 11031 I 24 10.023 I 5.9 1 A 1 25 ftl 1 TH 1 24/2 10.459 10.660 12299 12305 11485 10.644 I 10.7 I*B+I 358 ftl 1 LT 112/1 10.314 10.660 11115 11153 I 396 10.343 I 7.7 1 A 1191 ftl 4 Arnold Property 01/05/00 Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. 12:22:58 2001 w/o proj SIGNAL97/TEAPAC[Ver 1.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.58 Vehicle Delay 11.6 Level of Service B+ Sq 11 I Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 **/** * * * * /I\ * *> I vA A ++++ North + +> ****> + + ++++ + + G/C=0.260 I G/C=0.660 I G= 26.0" I G= 66.0" I I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0" I OFF= 0.0% I OFF=30.0% I C=100 sec G= 92 .0 sec = 92.0% Y= 8.0 sec = 8.0% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% I Lane (Width/1 g/C 1 Service Rate! Adj I I HCM 1 L 190% Maxi 1 Group 1 Lanes! Reqd Used 1 @C (vph) @E !Volume) v/c. 1 Delay 1 S 1 Queue 1 N Approach 28.5 C ILT+TH 1 12/1 10.182 10.260 1 270 1 441 1 59 10.134 1 28.5 I *C 1 62 ftl S Approach 28.0 C 1 TH+RTI 24/2 10.17.4 10.260 1 519 1 789 1 67 10.085 1 28.0 1 C 1 37 ftl W Approach 10.6 B+ 1 RT 1 12/1 10.172 10.660 1 991 1 1031 1 24 10.023 1 5.9 1 A 1 25 fti 1 TH 1 24/2 10.481 10.660 1 2299 1 2305 1 1576 10.684 1 11. 4 i*B+1 380 ft! 1 LT 1 12/1 10.325 10.660 1 1115 1 1153 1 420 10.364 1 7.8 1 A 1 202 ftl 5 -. Arnold Property 01/05/00 Houser Way S./Mill Ave. S. 12:23:12 2001 w/ proj SIGNAL97/TEAPAC[Ver 1.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary • Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.57 Vehicle Delay 11.8 Level of Service B+ Sq 11 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I • **/** * * * * /1\ * *> . v A A ++++ North + +> ****> I + + ++++ + + v G/C=0.260 I G/C=0.660 I • I . G= 26.0" I G= 66.0" I Y+R= 4.0" I Y+R= 4.0"• I • I OFF= 0.0% I OFF=30.0% I C=100 sec G= 92.0 sec = 92.0% Y= 8.0 sec = 8.0% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% I Lane )Width/I g/C I Service RateI Adj I 1 HCM 1 L 190% Max, 1 Group 1 Lanes! Reqd Used 1 @C (vph) @E !Volume' v/c 1 Delay 1 S 1 Queue 1 N Approach 28.7 C 1LT+TH 1 12/1 10.186 10.260 I 273 1 446 1 73 10.164 1 28.7 I *C 1 77 ftl S Approach 28.1 C 1 TH+RTI 24/2 10.176 10.260 1 519 1 789 1 80 10.101 1 28.1 I C 1 44 ft, • • W Approach 10.6 B+ 1 RT 1 12/1 10.175 10.660 1 991 1 1031 1 33 10.032 1 5.9 1 A 1 25 ftl I TH 124/2 10.481 10.660 1 2299 12305 1 1576 10.684 1 11.4 I *B+I 380 ft! 1 LT 1 12/1 10.325 10.660 1 1115 1 1153 1 420 10.364 1 7.8 1 A 1 202 ftl • • • • > '' HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 3.1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS 07�:ksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information 1. Analyst: LDH 2 ' Intersection: S. 3rd St./Renton Ave S. 3.: _Count Date: Existing 12-7-99 4. Time Period: PM Peak 01...:ksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 Li 1. LT Volume: 24 1 18 11 2. TH Volume: 43 28 6 2 3 RT Volume: 10 9 9 0 4 Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5. Flow Rate LT: 24 1 18 11 6 Flow Rate TH: 43 28 6 2 7 Flow Rate RT: 10 9 9 0 B. Flow Rate Total: 77 38 33 13 9- Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1. Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 1•... Opposing Approach 1 1 1 1 12. Conflicting Approach 1 1 1 1 1 . Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 1, . T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 W rksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 Li L1 1 Flow Rate Total: 77 38 33 13 2. Flow Rate LT: 24 1 18 11 3. Flow Rate RT: 10 9 9 0 4 Prop LT in lane: 0.31 0.03 0.55 0.85 5. Prop RT in lane: 0.13 0.24 0.27 0.00 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 E hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 9. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 1' . hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 . hadj -0.02 -0.14 -0.05 0.17 Worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 Li Total lane flow rate 77 38 33 0 13 hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.01 hd, final value 4.0 3.9 4.1 4.3 ! x, final value 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.02 6'. Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7. Service Time 2.0 1.9 2.1 2.3 :.Jrksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bond •' L1 L1 L1 Ll L. Total lane flow rate 77 38 33 13 ?. Service Time 2.0 1.9 2.1 2.3 3 Degree Utilization, x 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.02 I. Departure headway, hd 4.0 3.9 4.1 4.3 i. Capacity 886 903 858 810 is Delay 7.4 7.1 7.3 7.4 1:. Level Of Service A A A A 3. Delay Approach 7.4 7.1 7.3 7.4 ) - LOS, approach A A A A LL Delay, Intersection 7.3 Li. LOS, Intersection A 8 '► HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 3.1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS Worksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information 1. Analyst: LDH 2 Intersection: S. 3rd St./Renton Ave S. 3 Count Date: 2001 w/ proj 4. Time Period: PM Peak 6 rksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 1- LT Volume: 24 1 18 11 2. TH Volume: 54 47 6 2 RT Volume: 10 9 9 0 4 Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5. Flow Rate LT: 24 1 18 11 E Flow Rate TH: 54 47 6 2 7 Flow Rate RT: 10 9 9 0 B. Flow Rate Total: 88 57 33 13 ' 9. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I . Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 1_. Opposing Approach 1 1 1 1 12. Conflicting Approach 1 1 1 1 3: . Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 3 . T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 F'-rksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 ] Flow Rate Total: 88 57 33 13 2. Flow Rate LT: 24 1 18 11 3. Flow Rate RT: 10 9 9 0 4 Prop LT in lane: 0.27 0.02 0.55 0.85 Prop RT in lane: 0.11 0.16 0.27 0.00 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ? Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 1 hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 9. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 10. hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 : .. hadj -0.01 -0.09 -0.05 0.17 Worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 Total lane flow rate 88 57 33 13 hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.01 hd, final value 4.0 4.0 4.2 4.4 x, final value 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.02 b. Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7. Service Time, 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 '.. )rksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service North Bound South Bound East Bound West Botgtd • •S L1 L1 L1 L1 1. Total lane flow rate 88 57 33 13 2;. Service Time 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 Degree Utilization, x 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.02 4. Departure headway, hd 4.0 4.0 4.2 4.4 5. Capacity 881 890 840 794 E;. Delay 7.5 7.3 7.3 7.5 is Level Of Service A A A A 8. Delay Approach 7.5 7.3 7.3 7.5 S LOS, approach A A A A ].,.. Delay, Intersection 7.4 11. LOS, Intersection A 10 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 3.1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS Worksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information 1. Analyst: LDH 2 Intersection: S. 7th St./Renton Ave S. 3. Count Date: Existing 12-7-99 4. Time Period: PM Peak Worksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 1. LT Volume: 30 5 1 3 2. TH Volume: 21 21 10 34 3 RT Volume: 4 0 32 33 4. Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5. Flow Rate LT: 30 5 1 3 E Flow Rate TH: 21 21 10 34 7 Flow Rate RT: 4 0 32 33 8. Flow Rate Total: 55 26 43 70 9 Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 .. Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 11. Opposing Approach 1 1 1 1 12. Conflicting Approach 1 1 1 1 1 . Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 1_. T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 H rksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 1 Flow Rate Total: 55 26 43 70 2; Flow Rate LT: 30 5 1 3 3. Flow Rate RT: 4 0 32 33 4 Prop LT in lane: 0.55 0.19 0.02 0.04 5. Prop RT in lane: 0.07 0.00 0.74 0.47 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ; Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 & hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 9. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -. hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 7 . hadj 0.07 0.04 -0.44 -0.27 W-^rksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 Li L1 L1 Total lane flow rate 55 26 43 70 hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.06 i hd, final value 4.2 4.2 3.7 3.8 ! x, final value 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.07 6. Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7- Service Time 2.2 2.2 1.7 1.8 hurksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service - North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bo'j4d t t L1 L1 L1 L1 1: Total lane flow rate 55 26 43 70 2. Service Time 2.2 2.2 1.7 1.8 3^ Degree Utilization, x 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.07 4 Departure headway, hd 4.2 4.2 3.7 3.8 5. Capacity 835 833 956 920 6 Delay 7.5 7.3 6.9 7.1 7 Level Of Service A A A A B. Delay Approach 7.5 7.3 6.9 7.1 9.. LOS, approach A A A A 1-:. Delay, Intersection 7.2 1i. LOS, Intersection A 12 . 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 3.1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS Worksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information 1, Analyst: LDH Intersection: S. 7th St./Renton Ave S. Count Date: 2110 w/ proj 4. Time Period: PM Peak D;• rksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 I. LT Volume: 30 25 1 3 2. TH Volume: 21 21 29 45 .~ RT Volume: 4 0 32 44 Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5. Flow Rate LT: 30 25 1 3 ( Flow Rate TH: 21 21 29 45 Flow Rate RT: 4 0 32 44 8. Flow Rate Total: 55 46 62 92 ? . Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 : I. Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 11. Opposing Approach 1 1 1 1 12. Conflicting Approach 1 1 1 1 . Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 - T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 I orksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 L1 L1 Flow Rate Total: 55 46 62 92 ii Flow Rate LT: 30 25 1 3 3. Flow Rate RT: 4 0 32 44 Prop LT in lane: 0.55 0.54 0.02 0.03 - Prop RT in lane: 0.07 0.00 0.52 0.48 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Geometry Group 1 1 1 1 hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 9. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 "). hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 ` 1.70 1.70 1. hadj 0.07 0.11 -0.31 -0.28 ,worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L1 = L1 L1 . Total lane flow rate 55 46 62 92 - hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.08 . hd, final value 4.3 4.4 3.9 3.9 . x, final value 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.10 6. Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7. Service Time 2.3 2.4 1.9 1.9 worksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bond L1 L1 L1 L1 1. Total lane flow rate 55 46 62 92 2 Service Time 2.3 2.4 1.9 1.9 Degree Utilization, x 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.10 4. Departure headway, hd 4.3 4.4 3.9 3.9 5. Capacity 808 798 899 901 E Delay 7.6 7.6 7.2 7.3 7 _ Level Of Service A A A A 8. Delay Approach 7.6 7.6 7.2 7.3 S. LOS, approach A A A A ] , . Delay, Intersection 7.4 11. LOS, Intersection A ' 14 Tk. Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 13623 184th Ave NE, Woodinville,WA 98072 Phone: (425)861-8866 FAX: (425)861-8877 • Turning Movement Diagram 125 b 77 48 v U 4 Mill Ave S/S 3rd St 10 43 24 Mill Ave S/S 3rd St R v A 9 17 ♦ 6 33 30 46, 18 68 11 13 2 35 V 0 • w 1 28 9 61 38 Check In: 161 ‹ 99 Out: 161 %HV PHF Intersection: Cedar Ave S @ Mill Ave S/S 3rd St EB 0.0% 0.65 Location: Renton WB 0.0% 0.69 Date of Count: -rues 12/7/99 NB 0.0% 0.86 Peak Period: 4:45 P - 5:45 P SB 0.0% 0.88 Checked By: LBP Intersection 0.0% 0.89 Prepared For: TP&E TM-99v822b 15 • C2 Traffic Count Consultants,Inc 13623 184th Ave NE,Woodinville,WA 98072 Phono:(425)861-8866 FAX:(425)861-8877 Vehicle Volume Summary • Intersection: Cedar Ave S MIII Ave S/S 3rd St Date of Count: Tues 12/7/99 Location: Renton Checked By: LBP Time From North on(SB) From South on(NB) From East on(WB) From West on(EB) Interval Interval Cedar Ave S Cedar Ave S Mill Ave S/S 3rd St Mill Ave S/S 3rd St Total Endinat T L • S R T L SRTL S R T _.. L SR 4 ,K:>iE Yt x.>_:.•...:.n:.. ..;..5.,:...:.,.Y:>:.�:::,:,,;: ::0,. L :�1': :.Q::' :�;s+ .�:5 ><...:.<,,. n> x�. 1:30 P 0 2 12 0 0 1 7 3 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 30 T T ir•: ;ROB:cam 4 Ito 5:00 P 0 9 9 2 0 0 4 6 0 6 0 2 0 4 0 0 42 x:::. w �7 is i ,■ i:txr O :k:R S:S tth: 1{ .:=K: :::�,is <�t: .. 'S iO.F • 'YY: 5:30 P 0 7 12 3 01 8 0 0 5 1 6 0 1 1 0 45 {:k :ip: nhi AA ::Y:.= ..��;:I p:t'v :Y,.:..:5.::�i.:. ...� ...:?: •'.3:i:r:.: t �:SJ. ....:. : :. ...... ....... ..... LY.. ... %.:i:t ��ue:: 9;V 6:00P 0 3 10 0 ' 0 0 5 2 0 5 2 • 4 0 1 1 0 33 .4:tigi Win 3vt 6:30P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 Ogg ?'R' //��R'Q !:WR^ �\ .V 93�Kk �rn a :Q::ri. >;O:s::Yt ��.y,�r: '•�k it:'yc ixc. ..::.. .:.: 7:00P 0 , 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 . ..Total Survey 0 32 , 78 13 0 2 47 16 0 32 9 18 0 15 3 0 265 S+,^ 'icy 7s 3; :+ii'u'�•i'r.;.y:ne•y:0',:C, ;r• ..yryv� r �rC•. ..i._ .hi •;rrr n•r evs,•,c�y �::»:Z`ri i y'''!-r:�:4r:��...e:••X•:�Yr�r ra: qq o:i� :yy:��v�t:i^�'r'r�}' ,e�� !:r!r..�:'rv�' � •y'v' ry�� • u,�ro,�t�r,r�+r,�,' ��'L,oar ,3. ,g�'�'r�':L'�'�Sy�... 22 { �..n.'.r: ( 1p..'1;.., J yC �p](.{y (pal it1 W\'>� 6pyj1 y �jL•3}�(¢�� g Y �! r� �ri 8 y6� •S l..rrN,< i 11r'�' :y"ii':"::'i!rh.r.j:' ,$r• .�+ �{ y►�yi'��(77QQ,,'(p14� ..4,0. :i,r\flR4 ••1:.1(�'( tklif_,.Mq�T'}gQir�O; it V4ry f"g:t.E',S .yM a ,y(f'A Y[� 9''$¢ "[' h'•[,e,4.,-,�rl:V,L:jhjy'S,�.r'<'r:{i'":l:l':1J°Jo4n:�.S lST\?'Ir�'n:�XJ:V:4'C7!... �� } 7S Yr •1+''l, ir�iA'['.I rL ' -SY Ry.:'�"� 1�," r•r>..4 Total 0 24 43 10 0 1 28 9 0 18 6. 9 0I 11 I 2 0 161 • Approach 77 38 - 33 13 161 %HV 0% 0% 0% 0° 0% . PHF 0.88 0.86 0.69 0465 • 0.89 Legend: T= Number of heavy vehicles(greater than 4 wheels) L= Left-Turn S= Straight R= Right-Turn HV=Heavy Vehicles PHF= Peak hour Factor(Peak hour volume/(4*HIghest 15 minutes)) Prepared For: TP&E - TT9-99v822b 16 TC2 Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 13623 184th Ave NE,Woodinville,WA 98072 Phone: (425)861-8866 FAX: (425)861-8877 Turning Movement Diagram . • 111 › d 55 56 J A S 7th St IL- 4 21 30 S 7th St A 32 19 a �/ _ ~ 10 43 89 - , . �� 1 107II� .- --- 3 • 70 3a y� ir 8a v 33 L r 5 21 0 r tn • to ' d 55 26 Check ' _ In: 194 < 81 > Out: 194 • %HV PHF Intersection: Renton Ave S EB 0.0% 0.88 . Location: Renton WB 0.0% 0.90 Date of Count: Tues 12/7/99 NB 0.0% 0.81 Peak Period: 4:00 P - 5:00 P SB 0.0% 0.92 Checked By: LBP Intersection 0.0% 0.90 Prepared For: TP&E TM-99v821b ' 17 TC2 Traffic Count Consultants,Inc. 13623 184th Ave NE,Woodinville,WA 98072 Phone:(425)861-8866 FAX:(425)861-8817 Vehicle Volume Summary Intersection: Renton Ave S Date of Count: Tues 12/7/99 Location: Renton Checked By: LBP Time From North on(SB) From South on(ND) From East on(WB) From West on(ED) Interval • Interval• Renton Ave S Renton Ave S S 7th St S 7th St Total _ Ending at T L S R T L S R T L - S R. T L S R I;gt.iAtra 3.EP„ig ,E91:Lkoit0 37 9Datinfaq . 4:30 P 0 8 6 1 0 1 4 0 • 0 0 2 ti 0 0 8 8 16 ....................19)74 ig9ermigiTEE2..F40 IgggiCIAM ;HEW U71i(ifsgtg.:(giggjEOR 00.03:4 5:00P 0 5 5 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 3 8 0 1 7 7 14 • gitalli0;iilffig ntig a.AS; . * 5:30 P 0 4 3 0 • 0 0 4 I. 0 0 0 2 5 0 11 5 8 31 gig MEd 19‘,Efni:afg.rgf.4gi 044.1;FA • 6:00 P 0 4 3 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 2 3 0 1 3 5 25. _ 41:04:!!;MONi.aVA.;IR0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O. 6:30P 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SFAM•Etii: giMM'iP4T0545,T61:1i].(1A ACtigki REAM 7:00P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ - Total Survey 0 46 36 6 0 11 35 0 0 1 17 47 0 4 52 58 313 r91 • Total 0 30 21 4 0 5 21 0 0 1 10 32 0 3 34 33 194 _ • Approach . 55 26 43 70 194 %HV 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% PHF 0.92 0.81 0.90 0.88 0.90 • Legend: T= Number of heavy vehicles(greater than 4 wheels) L=Left-Turn S=Straight • R= Right-Turn HV-=Heavy Vehicles PHF= Peak hour Factor(Peak hour volume I(4*Highest 15 minute* • Prepared For: TP&E 174-99v82.1b 18 . oi3e, . : . Rvs" E 1 :D4-1Z27 7ET2A 3::P..hafE 711. :.Z. : &..J.Cond.:DRY • . . - MAIN AV 3 2 47, ST 1M1::: AV S7A.thboue.:1 1WEst113ua !Ea," • • • LEft T. F.1iht Other. 1 Left Thru R4t OthEr 1 Lift T f1:oht C-Ler in. m. it Other : Total Date C3/0:03 • - - • - • • oe o 210 2 4 :2 2 2 : 4 197 2 0 : :4 4 2Z : 429 la•ao 1 232 STI : t .3 :S7 2 2 . 17 !‘ 52C ! 17..2 15:30 1 22C 7 6 1 12 3 z e : 713 s 7 11 E 41 1 4E2 1-145 0 221 4 4 1 7 3 :93 9 : 13 7 52 e : 526 I Total 2 553 16 14 1 36 11 S C I 7 721 23 2 1 SI 17 IR 1 Ism Flo% o 263 5 2 1 5 2 1 0 1 1 23 S : 23 7 47 C 579 L :15 0 237 12 013 5 0011215 9 01 24 ! SO01571 1t:30 247 11 0 1 7 2 3 0 ! 1 197 12 1 1 15 2 43 1 542 A:45 1 253 6 1 18 3 010241 12 0. 137, 5 5E 01629 1 Total 0 1T12 34 3 1 23 13 4 1 3 5E2 41 1 1 93 13 209 it 1 2321 • • —TALE 2 12SL 52 17 : 59 22 9 7 1 10 1513 6•4 3 1 154 23 336 1 4271 19 • •'- . . . . L:ac.1.:.c.- :ZUW: 7 ,..i.. ..11:... :,.,; ::.1,1.... 5:te D1.1., Z: ty:LELISAT :ZA;.6; TEZ:.r.c.:Z4,:a..! . .Z.. E..;.%A Date: C5M155 B. rd t :D4-1027 P27;-.A :.-..ft.a.a :C: 1331 ' • FilE I.D. : IncEN 3.1rf.CQnd.:DRY Pay : 2 CAT:2:1:22ZST2IAN3, F.PiTi VE;11CLE2 • - .. . • . -- MAIN AV 3 :XRIE AV Z ;S 4TH 37 1 Southbound glstbo.nd .INortLboune !East:Jo...rid ' I . . . Left Thru RiOt Other 1 Left Thru P.1W;,t Otter ! 1_Eft 7hru P.Mht Other I Left Thru Right Other I Total Date 09/08193 - - - - • • - -- P-Ik Hour Analysis By Entire Er tic.. far the Pr ' : 15:2,21 t.L1 17:C0 on 09/08/99 ;4 sk start 16:00 1 16:ZZ • ' 15:0Z I 16:CO I Volume C 1012 34 3 : 23 13 ,.; 11 I 3 862 41 1 I 93 19 208 0 1 percent 0% 96% 3% 0% : 51% 4C% 5% 0% I 0% 35% 5% 0% I 23% 6% 65% 0% I L'. total 1049 I 45 I 507 I 320 I Lghest 16:00 : 16:45 : 16:45 I 16:15 I Volume 0 253 5 J 2 I 3 3 0 0 1 0 241 12 0 I 30 5 58 0 I I total 276 ; 17 I 253 I 93 I 1:F .95 I .55 I .90 I .86 I b • i . 1 NAIN .II s 1 1 i • . _ 3 • 33 - T:El • 0 '7:3 . • - Qt 1. ., 1 , . 1.G 1 L. 0 3i3 2 .• /3. - 21 • 3 1 34 i 1, 0 12 13 3-59 0 - 0 1 l 1 rgaILMEIMMILMEMEIMITIMEMPIMIJ 1.---•—— . 1 , fe)/i F. AtiMilliTEMERIMITEEM=g11139Mil ) 2, 0 tal,.-_, - _I - - .4 .1TH ST 4 . 0 3 - - CARS I PEDEST R I ANS - • . - - -- — 18 r...-t= 0,J ' ;lEf•W'I VE1:I CL.E 3 - 18 34 45 1 8 • 121 ---- -- . 89 - - • . 4 93 23 . ----------,: . 375 105 '7_6 ' el - - • • 1 8 1_______ ---- • ------ . 1 19 32..'0 Inte•risect ion Total 0 • i • 2, 317 SO 19 ________________ lt 1 203 -------- 5 208 S 4.1.1-1 ST -- 2, 1 49 - I --- • 0 0 :, 3 c:- 1 , - 2.% - Es 3 il - 4 1 :' - 1 1 , 0 1 2 - 0 • 28 • 0' - 0 208 , • 862 4 1 • 1 , ..! ) . _ MA ii A 1...1 '3 I I 16 20 01S P City of Renton ier :OVERCAST r-aris,7crtaticr. Syctens Ciyisig: \4 Site CouE : d0lk'+l�l�l:�• tf" by:E6r Jamar Technalaoies. Inc. �.n ` Start bate: 06/002/53 1 :D4-1028 PETRA Software IC) 1991 g`l'I File I.D. : TMGOISP Cond.:DRY Page : 1 CARS.FEDESTRIANS, HEAVY VEHICLES • MILL AV S !HOUSER WY S IMILL AV S IHOUSER WY S I 5outhbcsuna IWestoound !Northbound !Eastbound I I I - Left Tnru Right Other I Left Thru Right Other I Left Tnru Right Other I Left Thru Right Other I Total 06i02/59 tl.;... 5 3 0 0 I , 0 0 0 2 1 0 9 3 0 I 89 283 6 0 1 400 5- 3 5 0 0 I 0 0 O 31 0 9 6 01 103 290 8 1 I 434 4 4 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 5 1 I 98 316 4 0 1 442 5 3 8 0 0I 0 0 0 1 I 0 12 3 1 I 95 324 6 0 I 453 a :l 15 20 0 0 I 0 0 0 6 I 0 40 17 2 I 391 1213 24 1 I 1729 iQ= 3 11 0 0 I 0 0 0 2 I 0 10 3 0 I 33 327 5 1 I 455 2 8 0 01 0 0 0 21 0 10 6 0I 91 363 5 01 487 6 B 0 1 1 0 0 0 01 0 8 B 1 I 94 375 7 1 1 503 4 9 0 0 i 0 0 0 1 I 0 7 3 0 I 98 346 6 0 1 474 15 '36 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 I 0 35 20 1 I 376 1411 23 2 I 1925 If E 30 56 0 1 I 0 0 0 11 I 0 75 37 3 I 767 2624 47 3 I 3654 • • • WANG OK DATE 6-4-11 21 • City of Renton ler :OVERCAST Transportation Systems Division Site ;cae : 00000000 ted by:E6F Jamar Technologies, Inc. Start Date: 06/02/99 I :D4-1028 PETRA Software it) 1991 File 1.D. : TMC0I5P •L-nd.:DRY Pape : 2 CARS.PEDESTRIANS, HEAVY VEHICLES MILL AV S IHOUSER WY S !MILL AV S 'HOUSER wY S i Southbound !Westbound INortnbourd !Eastbound I I I I I Left Thru Right Uther•.I Left lhru Right Other I Left lhru Right Other I Left Thru Right Other I Total /02/99 ---- -- Hour Analysis By Entire Intersection for the Period: 15:00 to 17:00 on 06/02/99 art 16:00 I 16:00 _ I 16:00 I 16:00 ;IC 15 36 0 1 I 0 0 0 5 I 0 35 20 . 1 I 376 1411 23 2 I ent 29% 69% 0% 2% I 0% 0% 0% 100% I 0% 62% 36% 2% I 21% 76% 1% 0% I c'-:1 52 I 5 I 56 I 1812 I e 16:30 I 16:00 I 16:30 I 16:30 Me 6 8 0 1 I 0 0 0 2I 0 8 8 1 I 94 375 7 1 otal 15 I 2 I 17 I 477 I .87 1 .62 I .82 I .95 I ! 3.`12- I Ma 3.32- MII_L AV S . - 1 - la - 34 - 15 376 0 1 0 . 36 15 •41.1 5 • 0 $ MtGWtl WWWWOMMIN URIS r-------- 51 —i ItatulditteEMMISEMEREEETEREENNI I --- 462 ---------_1 - 0 c .1ER WY S 0 • y_i 0 ----•- - CARS, PEDESTRIANS -- • 0 0 • HEAVY VEHICLES - 0 • 0 0 0 0 344 - ' 32 376 - 0 1, 810 1, 446 0 • 0 , 383 28 1, 411 1, 810 Intersect ion Total 15 1, 916 1, 446 1, 411 `,fG� .1 0 23 HOUSER WY S I 114 -----�; L.. 0 2 0 - 0 - 3:3 - 15' - 1 L 59 0 35, 20 1 ) MILL AV S 22 • `•y 'traffic Count Consultants, Inc_ ` 13623-184th Avenue NE Woodinville, WA 98072 : S 3rd Street w/o I-405 a`vv >�, V Site: 106 1' : PE/vim AV E Q Date: 12/06/99 1es : J .erval Mon 6 Tue 7 ( (Wed 8 Thu 9 Fri 10 Sat 11 Sun 12 Weekday Avg. B _ W13 Ell WE En WB EB WB EB WB ED WB EB WB ED WB EB 1:`..3 • 3 4 6 6 6 8 • • • • * • 5 6 )1:00 • • • 1 8 1 7 3 2 • • * • * * 1 5 12:00 • • 1 2 0 0 4 2 • • * • • • 1 1 )1'0 1 1 1 0 0 2 • • • • • • 0 1 <. 0 * • 9 2 10 2 10 1 • • • • • • 9 1 )5:u0 • • 26 to 22 6 23 6 • • • • • * 23 7 )6:00 • • 40 11 48 12 38 8 *• • • • • • 42 10 37'0 • • 60 22 54 16 58 11 • * • • • * 57 16 )f 0 • • 45 26 38 19 47 20 • * • * • * 43 21 3:_:.°0 * • 30 28 34 26 34 26 • * • * • * 32 26 10:00 • * 20 22 27 32 32 26 • • • * * * 26 26 11:00 • • 28 26 28 29 26 41 * * • * • * 27 32 2::'M • • 30 31 26 36 40 30 • • * • * • 32 32 0 •.10 * • 31 40 24 30 33 28 • * • * • • 29 32 0.:J0 • • 34 44 27 36 26 38 • • • * • • 29 39 03:00 • • 28 58 23 54 33 68 • • • • 28 60 0^Y1)0 • • 30 54 26 66 27 64 • • * 27 61 0 ' )0 " " 26 52 31 60 30 74 • • • • • * 29 62 0 )0 * • 27 63 29 49 30 44 • • • • • • 28 52 07:00 • • 16 36 26 46 21 37 • • 21 39 08:00 • 4' 18 32 9 23 15 27 * • • • 14 27 0 •)0 • • 23 32 10 22 12 18 • • * • • • 15 24 1 )0 * * 8 12 7 14 13 16 • • • • • • 9 14 1.:30 • • 4 9 9 6 7 12 • * * • • • 6 9 Atnb 0 0 539 625 516 597 568 609 0 0 0 0 0 0 533 603 p.hied 0 1,164 1,113 1,177 0 0 0 1,136 Alit% 0.0 .0 46.3 53.7 46.4 53.6 48.3 51.7 0.0 .0 0.0 .0 0A .0 46.9 53.1 u • m Fir • * 07:00 09:00 07:00 10:00 07:00 11:00 • • • * • • 07:00 11:00 A...at • • 60 28 .54 32 58 41 • * * • • 57 32 M eA. lr • • 02:00 06:00 05:00 04:00 12:00 05:00 * • • I • • 12:00 05:00 o: ne * • 34 • 63 31 66 40 74 • • • • • * 32 62 • • • • )3t3 File: TPE106 Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: ,?3 :ralIIC l:0unt 1..:011eultaut8,littC. 13623-184th Avenue NE" Woodinville,WA 98072 Itle1 : S 3rd Street w/o I-403 Site: 106 tF Date: 12/07/99 tl. tc..Al WB EH Combined Day: Tuesday :Sat AM PM AM PM AM PM 11•10 1 3 5 29 2 4 8 30 3 7 13 59 . 1 15 1 7 2 8 3 15 1 :30 1 11 0 6 1 17 12:45 0 6 0 8 0 14 t 00 0 1 6 31 4 8 10 40 4 9 16 71 (: 15 0 10 1 12 1 22 01:30 1 5 3 6 • 4 11 cr"45 0 10 0 12 0 22 is 00 0 1 10 34 0 2 7 44 0 3 17 78 02:15 1 9 1 14 2 23 02:30 0 6 1 12 1 18 1 45 0 9 0 11 0 20 t ::00 0 1 6 28 0 1 10 57 0 2 16 85 03:15 0 9 0 18 0 27 r-:30 1 6 1 15 2 21 I. :45 0 7 0 14 0 21 04:00 1 9 8 30 1 1 14 53 2 10 22 83 04:15 2 9 0 15 2 24 :30 3 5 0 12 3 17 ,..:45 3 8 0 12 3 20 05:00 4 26 7 26 2 10 10 32 6 36 17 78 :15 5 7 4 16 9 23 :30 8 9 2 14 10 23 05:45 9 3 2 12 11 15 06:00 9 40 5 27 4 12 23 64 13 52 28 91 .:15 12 8 4 11 16 19 ,.:i:30 9 5 2 14 11 19 06:45 10 9 2 16 12 25 ':00 22 60 7 16 6 22 10 36 28 82 17 32 ':15 19 4 8 9 27 13 07:30 12 1 4 9 16 10 ^7:45 7 4 4 8 11 12 1:00 9 43 7 18 8 26 10 32 17 71 17 50 u8a5 14 2 4 8 18 10 08:30 8 5 4 9 12 14 8:45 14 4 10 5 24 9 9:00 10 30 5 23 10 29 10 33 20 59 15 56 09:13 4 4 3 9 9 13 .9:30 5 3 6 6 11 9 9:45 11 1I 8 8 19 19 10:00 11 19 4 8 8 22 4 13 19 41 8 21 10:15 1 1 5 5 6 6 0:30 1 3 4 • 2 5 5 :"..0:45 6 0 5 2 11 2 11:00 6 28 0 4 2 25 3 9 8 53 3 13 .1:15 8 1 " 9 2 17 3 .1:30 4 2 6 3 10 5 11:45 10 1 8 I 18 2 Totals 263 274 162 463 425 737 it% 61.9 37.2 38.1 62.8 Law Totals 537 625 1,162 Day Splits 46.2 53.8 i tk Hour 06:45 01:15 08:45 05:15 06:45 03:15 ' lame 63 35 • 31 65 83 91 Factor 0.72 0.88 0.77 0.71 0.74 0.84 Data tilt: TPE106 Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: 124 l.l'anic l.OW1t(. nnsultatlt8,Inc. . 6 ' ;' 13623-184th Avenue NE • Woodinville,WA 98072 tie1 : S 3rd Sheet w/o 1.405 Site: 106 th'- Date: 12/08/99 LI. • • il 11 W13 EB Combined Day: Wednesday 'Bin AM FM ____AM PM AM PM 12:00 3 6 4 26 4 7 10 37 7 13 14 63 1' 15 1 4 •2 11 3 15 1...30 0 10 1 8 1 18 12:45 2 8 0 8 2 16 l' '70 0 1 6 25 0 7 8 29 0 8 14 54 C„ .15 0 6 2 6 2 12 01:30 1 2 3 5 4 7 M•45 0 11 2 10 2 21 t,. 00 0 0 7 27 0 0 12 36 0 0 19 63 Oa:15 0 7 0 4 0 11 02:30 0 7 0 13 0 20 '`''45 0 6 0 7 0 13 1 . 00 1 1 8 23 0 0 10 54 1 1 18 77 • 03:15 0 10 0 14 0 24 a1:30 0 2 0 16 0 18 •43 0 3 0 14 0 17 t,t:00 2 10 4 26 0 2 14 66 2 12 18 92 04:15 2 8 0 16 2 24 :30 3 11 2 20 5 31 :45 3 3 0 16 3 19 05:00 4 22 11 31 1 6 18 60 5 28 29 91 ^e:LS 4 7 2 13 6 20 :30 9 5 1 8 10 13 v3:45 5 8 2 21 7 29 06:00 14 48 7 29 2 )2 14 49 16 60 21 78 :15 11 4 3 14 14 18 :30 11 7 4 11 15 18 06:45 12 11 3 10 15 21 :00 16 54 10 26 4 16 16 45 20 70 26 71 ':13 19 6 4 10 23 16 07:30 10 3 6 7 16 10 07:45 9 7 2 12 11 19 • 1:00 6 38 1 9 4 19 8 23 10 57 9 32 =::3:15 14 3 4 3 18 6 08:30 8 4 6 7 • 14 11 • 8:45 10 1 5 5 15 6 • 9:00 6 34 3 10 6 26 6 22 12 60 9 32 09:15 4 4 8 5 12 9 . n9:30 13 2 6 9 19 tl 9:45 11 1 6 2 17 3 ' 10:00 8 27• 0 7 10 32 7 14 18 59 7 21 • 10:15 6 5 6 3 12 8 0:30 6 2 10 2 16 4 ',, 0:45 7 0 6 2 13 2 11:00 5 28 3 9 2 29 2 6 7 57 5 15 1:15 11 0 14 2 25 2 i1:30 6 6 7 1 13 7 11:45 6 0 6 1 12 1 Total. 269 248 156 441 425 689 t. it% 63.3 36.0 36.7 64.0 1,..y Total. 317 597 1,114 Day Splits 46.4 53.6 : (lc flour 06:30 06:30 09:45 04:15 06:45 04:15 lame 38 34 32 70 74 103 Factor 0.76 0.77 0.80 0.88 0.80 0.83 Data File: TPE106 Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: 2 25 i rat l le COU111 U0118U11111119,Inc. ', 13623-184th Avenue NE . 1 Woodinville,WA 98072 itlel : S 3rd Street w/o 1-405 Site: 106 ile2 Date: . 12/09/99 ti . . te. 11 WH EB Combined Day: Thursday Nu; AM PM AM FM AM FM _ ._ 12:00 0 6 7 40 2 8 7 29 2 14 14 69 1 15 0 11 4 6 4 17 1 30 2 6 2 7 4 13 12:45 4 16 0 9 4 25 C.7.00 2 3 9 33 0 2 8 27 2 5 17 60 ( 15 0 8 1 7 1 15 (1 30 1 11 0 7 1 18 01:45 0 5 1 5 1 10 I 00 0 4 11 26 0 2 6 37 0 6 17 63 t; •15 0 7 1 9 1 16 02:30 3 2 1 10 4 12 r:•45 1 6 0 12 1 18 :00 0 0 9 33 0 2 20 68 0 2 29 101 03:15 0 5 0 12 0 17 03:30 0 8 1 19 1 27 :45 0 11 1 17 1 28 :00 0 10 9 27 0 1 14 64 0 11 23 • 91 04:15 1 9 0 16 1 25 :30 2 6 0 15 2 21 :45 7 3 1 19 8 22 05:00 2 23 7 30 0 6 14 73 2 29 21 103 05:15 3 13 2 16 7 29 :30 7 5 3 27 10 32 __:45 9 5 1 16 10 21 • 06:00 11 38 10 30 4 9 14 44 15 47 24 74 ' :13 9 8 3 11 12 19 :30 11 8 1 8 12 16 06:45 7 4 • 1 11 8 .15 • 07:00 19 58 6 21 2 12 9 37 21 70 15 58 ':15 16 4 4 9 20 13 ..::30 10 4 4 6 14 10 07:45 13 7 2 13 15 20 1:00 10 47 7 15 4 20 5 27 14 67 12 42 t:15 10 2 6 6 16 8 0 8:3 0 14 4 3 10 • 17 14 "8:45 13 2 7 ' 6 20 8 9:00 8 34 2 12 3 25 6 18 11 59 8 30 'u9:15 5 4 7 5 12 9 09:30 12 4 8 3 20 7 9:45 9 2 7 4 16 6 .0:00 7 32 5 13 5 26 6 17 12 58 11 30 10:15 8 4 9 4 17 8 0:30 8 2 1 5 9 7 0:45 9 2.. 11 2 20 4 )1:00 4 25 2 7 14 42 4 11 18 67 6 18 • 11:15 4 2 8 4 12 6 1:30 8 ' 3 8 2 16 5 • .1:45 9 0 12 1 21 1 Totals 280- 287 155 452 433 739 9-iit°ro 64,4 38.8 35.6 61.2 1 r Totals 367 607 1,174 Day Splits 48.3 51.7 F k Hour 07:00 • 12:45 11:00 04:45 07:00 05:15 .ume 58 44 42 76 70 106 1 :tor 0.76 0.69 0.75 0.70 0.83 0.83 26-- Data File: TPE106 Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: 3 • +r 4 11'11111C 1.ounr l.•o119u1[anr9, inc. c 4,• ' 13623-184th Avenue NE • • Woodinville,WA 98072 it]el : S 4th Street w/o I-405 �� , � ��,.�`� Site: 8 it 2 : C60A 4 A Vti JQ ) Date: 12/06/99 'it..:3 : . atervat Mon 6 Tue 7 (Wed 8 ( Thu 9 Fri 10. • Sat 11 Sun 12 Weekday Avg. ;e' n EB WB ED WD ED WB ED WB ED WB ED WB EB WB EB WB 1: M • • 5 6 8 8 15 6 * • • • • • 9 6 01:00 • * 4 2 1 0 5 1 * • • • • * 3 1 02:00 • • 1 2 2 2 3 1 • • * * • • 2 1 17.00 * * 3 4 0 2 1 2 • * • • * • 1 2 ( 00 * • 5 11 1 7 0 6 • • • • • • 2 8 I,:;00 * • 4 23 4 25 4 22 • • * * * • 4 24 06:00 • * 4 39 3 41 3 34 • • • • * • 3 38 07:00 • * 11 54 16 64 14 58 • • * * • * . * 13 58 I .00 * * 25 38 28 46 17 43 • • • • • • 23 42 I 00 • • 21' 45 14 56 16 38 • • • * • • 17 46 lii:00 • 20 35 29 26 29 35 * • 26 32 11:00 • 1• 20 27 22 35 26 30 • • • • • 22 37 1-''•1'M • * 29 34 44 34 42 32 * * • • a • 38 33 - :00 • '• 33 36 27 4) 36 33 • * • • • * 32 36 :00 42 31 40 44 48 46 • • • • • • 43 40 03:00 • * 48 44 56 34 63 49 • • I * * ` 55 42 04:00 * '• 61 42 50 53 53 42 • * * • * • 54 45 :00 * i* 65 32 57 42 63 44 • • • • • • 61 39 :00 * * 44 33 61 39 44 28 • * * * * * 49 33 .,.:00 • • 46 - 37 55 23 40 27 • • • • * • 47 29 08:00 • 41 20 38 18 32 19 • * 37 19 na:00 • • 38 16 29 14 39 20 • • • • 35 16 :00 • '• 21 13 23 13 23 10 • • • • • • 22 12 :00 * * 14 4 6 14 15 4 • • • • * • 11 7 :deb 0 0 605 630 614 681 633 650 0 0 0 0 0 0 609 646 (billed 0 1,235 1,295 1,283 0 0 0 1,255 ip,..,..% 0.0 .0 49.0 51.0 47.4 52.6 49.3 50.7 0.0 .0 0.0 .0 0.0 .0 48.5 51.5 '' ow * '* 08:00 07:00 10:00 07:00 10:00 07:00 * • • • • • 10:00 07:00 V .une * i• 25 54 29 64 29 58 • • • • * * 26 58 PM P1r • :• 05:00 03:00 06:00 04:00 03:00 03:00 • • • • * • 05:00 04:00 V bite • '" 65 44 61 53 63 49 • • • • • 61 45 • • • Data File: TPEO8 Printed: 01/03/2000 Page: l .,n•••..l.uuu lU l ...UlllllLllar illl.. 13623-184th Avenue NE e 4.. r& Woodinville,WA 98072 itlel : S 4th Street w/o I-405 Site: 8 it1e2 Date: 12/07/99 it 111 EB WH Combined Day: Tuesday le t AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 0 5 6 29 1 6 12 34 1 11 18 63 -:15 3 8 1 5 . 4 13 . :30 1 8 4 3 5 11 12:43 1 7 0 14 • 1 21 01:00 0 4 7 33 0 2 7 36 0 6 14 69 :15 1 8 2 13 3 21 :30 3 . 11 0 9 3 20 01:45 0 7 0 7 0 14 ':00 0 1 10 42 0 2 6 31 0 3 16 73 . :15 0 9 2 4 2 13 02:30 0 12 0 12 0 :24 02:45 1 11 0 9 1 20 :00 3 '3 8 48 4 4 11 44 7 7 19 92 ..:15 0 12 0 10 0 22 03:30 0 13 0 11 0 24 :45 0 15 0 12 0 27 :00 0 5 25 61 3 11 6 42 3 16 31 103 04:15 2 I 4 2 14 4 18 n4:30 0 12 4 12 4 24 :43 3 1 20 2 10 5 30 :,.,:00 1 4 26 65 2 25 6 33 3 29 32 98 •05:15 2 16 4 10 6 26 :30 0 13 10 8 10 21 :45 1 10 9 9 10 19 06:00 1 1 4 11 44 6 39 7 33 7 43 18 77 'S:15 1 12 9 13 10 25 i:30 1 12 12 9 13 21 mi:4S 1 9 12 4 13 13 07:00 2 11 12 46 12 54 15 37 14 65 27 83 F:15 3 12 12 7 15 19 t:30 3 13 14 8 17 21 07:45 3 9 s 16 7 19 16 -2:00 2 25 15 41 11 38 10 20 13 63 25 61 1:15 8 9 5 2 13 11 08:30 4 10 10 5 , 14 15 08:45 11 7 12 3 23 10 9:00 7 i21 3 38 14 45 9 16 21 66 12 54 e .9:15 4 ' 9 11 2 15 11 09:30 5 7 11 2 16 9 9:45 5 19 9 3 14 22 0:00 2 121 8 21 9 35 3 13 11 56 11 34 10:15 4 7 10 3 14 10 10:30 11 3 10 2 21 5 .0:45 4 3 6 5 10 8 ' 11:00 7 20 3 14 9 27 1 4 16 47 4 18 11:15 0 3 8 1 8 4 1:30 6 3 8 1 14 4 1:45 7 5 2 1 9 6 y Totals 124 482 288 343 412 825 Split% 30.1 58.4 69.9 41.6 r I .,Totals 1606 631 1,237 L-y Splits 49.0 51.0 P-'kHour 08:15 - 04:45 07:00 03:00 08:45 04:30 ' ,ume 30 75 54 44 75 112 I :tor 0.68 0.72 0.84 0.92 0.82 0.88 Data File: TPE08 Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: 1 8— d , 1 r11111c Louut I.On8ultnnt8,111C. '£'s 13623-184th Avenue NE `• • Woodinville.WA 98072 Title' : 8 4th Street w/o 1-405 Site: 8 ritle2 I • Date: 12/08/99 C` 3 . I<: -val EB WE Combined Day: Wednesday Be ut AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 3 8 8 44 2 8 10 34 5 16 18 78 1:15 2 10 - 3 7 5 17 1:30 1 14 1 6 2 ' 20 12:45 • 2 12 2 11 4 23 .11:00 0 1 10 27 0 0 10 41 0 1 20 68 '1:15 0 6 0 12 0 18 vl:30 1 5 0 10 1 15 01:45 0 ! 6 0 9 0 15 100 2 2 9 40 1 2 6 44 3 4 15 84 2:15 0 9 0 6 0 15 02:30 0 5 0 12 0 17 •.,'2:45 0 17 1 20 1 37 3:00 0 0 17 56 0 2 12 34 0 2 29 90 u3:15 0 10 2 10 2 20 03:30 0 17 0 6 0 23 _.3:45 0 12 0 6 0 18 ,4:00 1 1 13 50 0 7 12 53 1 8 25 103 04:15 0 j 10 4 16 4 26 14:30 0 14 1 13 1 27 14:45 0 13 2 12 2 25 05:00 0 4 12 51 2 25 7 42 2 29 19 99 05:15 1 21 4 14 5 35 15:30 1 16 9 10 10 26 15:45 2 8 10 11 12 19 06:00 1 3 10 61 8 41 15 39 9 44 25 100 •16:15 1 17 10 7 11 24 )6:30 1 20 11 10 12 30 ' 06:45 0 14 12 7 12 21 07:00 2 16 16 55 16 64 6 23 18 80 22 78 17:15 5 12 14 9 19 21 J7:30 7 11 19 7 26 18 07:45 2 16 15 l 17 17 7 )8:00 4 29 12 38 9 45 6 18 13 74 ' 18 56 )8:15 8 9 10 6 18 15 08:30 9 9 12 2 21 11 08:45 8 8 14 4 22 12 09:00 2 14 8 29 14 55 5 14 16 69 13 43 ' 09:15 7 8 22 3 29 11 09:30 2 7 11 6 13 13 09:45 3 6 8 0 11 6 10:00 6 29 8 23 8 25 4 13 14 54 12 36 10:15 6 5 10 1 16 6 10:30 9 3 1 4 10 . 7 10:45 8 7 6 4 14 11 11:00 6 22 1 6 8 35 2 14 14 57 3 20 11:15 4 3 10 10 14 13 11:30 7 0 3 1 10 1 11:45 5 2 14 1 19 3 Totals 129 , 486 309 369 438 855 °->1it6.6 29.5 56.8 70.5 43.2 ay Totals 615 678 1,293 Day Splits 47.6 52.4 —:akHour 08:00 06:13 07:00 02:30 08:30 02:45 olume 29 67 64 54 88 109 actor 0.81 0.84 0.84 0.68 0.76 0.74 . , Data Pile: TPE08' —Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: 2 29 4 r �/ 1:rllltIC count consultant ,inc. 13623-184th Avenue NE i•..-�'Y' Woodinville.W�,98072 Title! y : S 4th Street w/o 1-403 Site: 8 Tille2 Data: 12/09/99 1-4 • 1• m'al E13 W B Combined Day: Thursday lkgin AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 4 15 12 42 0 6 18 33 4 21 30 75 ,2:15 6 •13 4 7 10 20 ;2:30 3 7 2 4 5 11 12:45 2 10 0 4 2 14 11:00 0 5 6 36 1 t 8 33 1 6 14 69 11:15 1 12 0 7 1 19 • 01:30 2 9 0 10• 2 19 • 01:45 2 9 0 8 2 17 D2:00 4 5 13 48 0 1 8 46 . 4 6 21 94 D2:15 0 11 1 . 9 l 20 02:30 1 11 0 10 1 21 . ••02:45 0 13 0 19 0 32 03:00 0 1 11 63 0 2 16 49 0 3 27 112 03:15 0 16 2 11 2 27 03:30 1 20 0 9 1 29 D3:45 0 16 0 13 0 29 04:00 0 0 16 53 2 6 8 43 2 6 24 96 04:15 0 16 1 14 1 30 04:30 0 9 2 9 2 18 04:45 0 12 I 12 1 24 05:00 0 4 21 63 2 22 13 44 2 26 34 107 05:15 t 14 4 10 5 24 05:30 2 15 8 to 10 25 05:45 1 13 8 11 9 24 06:00 0 ' 3 12 44 7 34 5 28 .7 37 17 72 06:13 2 6 6 10 • 8 16 06:30 0 12 12 8 12 20 06:45 1 14 9 5 10 19 07:00 2 14 12 40 12 58 6 27 14 72 18 67 07:15 2 10 14 7 16 • 17 07:30 6 11 18 7 24 18 07:45 4 7 14 7 18 14 08:00 0 ' 17 5 32 8 43 6 19 8 60 11 51 08:15 3 7 9 4 12 11 08:30 8 1 13 12 3 20 16 . 08:45 6 7 14 6 20 I3 09:00 5 16 8 39 11 38 2 20 16 54 10 59 09:15 3 11 7 . 12 10 23 09:30 3 8 13 2 16 10 09:45 5 12 7 4 12 16 10:00 9 , 29 12 23 12 35 3 11 21 64 15 34 10:15 9 5 9 2 18 7 10:30 4 3 6 5 10 8 10:45 7 3 8 1 15 4 11:00 10 26 4 15 10 50 2 4 20 76 6 19 11:15 5 ' 6 12 0 17 6 11:30 3 2 14 2 17 4 • •' 11:45 8' 3 14 0 22 3 Totals . 135 498 . 296 357 431 855 9p140/6 31.3 58.2 68.7 41.8 )ay Totaia 633 633 1,286 • Day Splits 49.2 50.8 ?eek Hour 10:15 03:15 07:00 02:30 11:00 02:45 Volume 30 68 58 56 76 . 115 Factor 0.75 0.85 0.81 0.74 0.86 0.90 Data Pile: TPEOB. Printed: 01/05/2000 Page: 3 r.rellg..ram ' a. <:. y.�....r .� rx'1 �x. i.... Ai ..;>.'T:e••.:z<v,' •:na:.>,x<3r x..r.k t: $w-»:rkl,�<orkxs%cri.:; S:�' ••r>r.y.; ':�tes, i ': ie.":�:^.c,::`t'�' .ic.. �,.,.... ... ..;,.�r .. ...i•v<.�.x., @,K-,vnr«u.•�kc<..,s;fn;3;�xc. ��:a:r.S�^1r. '•t' .�>zzk •F' .?i�5n»:.:;:r: ....r,.Kvn..x<::-,::.-:%?kTkcS'A�:2K•.>,R'+aaaW.J:. .....^ ?x•3;:...^ .:��. ^:<3xaaso:�Sla �>,x:'':;:i •:i�S.9=R;,S,r»?K>itt!;c<3:R$; �Y- �:y: x>'-i.Rs>;k.z):•. .> q„>.: 75a:.6o. .'YK`4.�':�c n ':. r :t;>Yk'•T1�QEk� ,1.�11?`� >:LI:CATI:C?hl''. '�^n�$::-�:> r:m -'��:�:kA':,��....,>,.��:,�;.: >:�: „:;+t.:o; .)<Et�i�:::,ef•�•.'u.•'•;"'Cgy?i?.u»;{n�>.�r�a.:+2?ie �.':�'a.•nx»fr»wv.<�:n:�r a.<a'ia:.• 'e°:?5,;: wttr:esa:x". �� ,3n 3,.r :,ac>p•r ,:r'vi ...r�:r.,c;;n,;:•. �.H.� o, 7•:• � k•,t -^.;,."�j;;�,� >.� .�,;�r,M .�Y.try. • • A•m, t •rm+;:a•,> ;s$:, ..^�A<tr.:e•> >4 SL:Y.x::.;>�i":� :!<:.,.. :3a,:� ,y . :i!:-C'^•i•�* <:y;}, -4:3 w+>�r«•e•. ►. .N s" 3' 'tT4gt�,F,�,:si2. l>,.<. w_ ..:...... , . . e: k p c c�..... :kilt Q1j% w: f yl :; i{1� �te><. t �:f® s � ANNEXATION $ SUBDIVISION: • • • r COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ REZONE $ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ — �.SPECIAL PERMIT $ SHORT PLAT $ • _TEMPORARY PERMIT $ • TENTATIVE PLAT $ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ iC PRELIMINARY PLAT $ SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ . FINAL PLAT $ • GRADE & FILL PERMIT $ ' (NO. CU. YDS: _ ) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: $ _VARIANCE $ (FROM SECTION: ) _ PRELIMINARY WAIVER $ FINAL _WETLAND PERMIT _ROUTINE VEGETATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: • $ MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ _ BINDING SITE PLAN SHORELINE REVIEWS: • SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT ' $ • CONDITIONAL USE $ VARIANCE • $ r EXEMPTION $No Charoe ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ REVISION • • $ s:.,... r:. ..,:P..at«xca:':-.:...... <�%::•«. •ieic;V„t sr� E„sY .cx<. •.>-:o:uo :aw �yt ..moo' <Yc�<?1i+,Jv:' r..>'S�?Sc<u;R>. ',r.x:-•� `T`r rwc3rn: <.j 2'•�<,•.>o�a..�a�''`'..1 qq f3'•r>.'w::r '�'=`xr"� � ...\'�'<'• t::it.":<n w".•:':.e a:J:y4 '::>%i:.jp>. �.?�<:^' « e ,..:..1.r!1N.,::..nr...n.IP.<> ,�s�;�s.�.:::...>��.:,,<i�:......-�..,c:.Yw.H>�,......- >:...::.. I, (Print Name) 1-)'irifn AL/f14SJ ,declare that I am(please check one) the owner of the property Involved in this application,)(the authorized representative to act tb't the property owner.(pleaee attach proof of authorization),and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained end the information herewith submitted era in all respects true end Correct to the beet Of my knowledge end belief. • • �61 SO / �1 Tr�/ ATTEST: Subsori ed o sworn to before me, a Note Pubic,In and' t� L r�l f�.l r� !�� for the State of __ _wising at / i Notary (Name of Owner/Representative) ,or.the 7day of All.?E'l4,4f a/I /7 (Signature of Owner/RepreseKtive) I%Z(Signature of otublic) • .T TR na. >•� ka< � t . ::.. . ...�.,..... >..... .. .;, .c-.r.. ..:. .. .:..>?>�....^.,n. �3o`s:;>•3:',", �r.,�a:�i o«:iy, K.xc.2w •:�<. ..... ....:..:.�.. ,.r..:...... :. ...3.5�>hkE......:. .... .. :,.n3::.:..... .. t,..,,.w... .... .:xf•Z'.. :%✓- ..l: :k{„! �;[R;" .. .....:........... ...•..,.t.. .....::. ...........n. k,>..>n.:.na.. ..<.?S t.e„ .. n.....+ YS?„ aY f> ":kE' ..:...,.a........ ,..:: .....:. .,>..n S.r.>.tt.,s. ........ .....n .....:.... .> 2 •,..t• ..:h>..>,.:<!.: �.:x�!:kkz�.F.'».. .. ..... .,.n„ .3rn.:..:.:..� � ♦..,,.,,:c � � 'S M i<^� '':�• ..r.>s....,c ��^."�3r'..,,�>-x�'c:`'. ..<.« >'!^ :;3.%�,.c ..n'�:f:�n•�.•.siy>�1,:.:::.?'?.:r :.kt%':.,w1>.e,:>:.:'::i2^\^4^ S+`>c>:,1: ::t;�::�r;<�,. �:..;>M .�•:< 'ChttF< a ilsyn�: v.< .e � i�" E. ..,:..... :�.,. r Vv.;. 0:^•,t.:t�..>. Y"•r v : h7:Y:'. .<�e" W�>.: .:'�:� by .,..>,..• w...->p-rt'.?...w....r��r:es,:t'..Hv>.,•s�...x <r�w..r.rn> A«„SP4C: •iGt>±a�:7f��<:'.. :CtS•:V T EES:> tip•>'•.-^:•n". .AG 'PR` VID• •M<n:�. Y r x.r E. EEC ai•>M1'n;. - ..::.. s'.'r.:.>•ew:k.�........., „h....<...wy.,:..>::,..n>., :<'::':S%S>'^',::t:j'tsPC.> n .e+> .h's>:py{ .i"�'•<•��• 'qr Tr�•w..> IAA sTEaaP.00c AevrsFn aa� . ,:r.A0.::$,::;;;:;'.iii:040..N.:1M.VirAEMENWiiiiiiinii.'''''''i!ii..Maii:,:iMV';',,,,,:;:,i?):',55,:!i:',,:,::::::::::;''':'',''5.':i,':ii:iiii§Migi.:M.%iiii,ig:iiicii*.. W:if.1 .:i:iiME:Ai:i*:::,:1*;:i:::i:::::::K:i*:,:iiSiV.M:**Mi,*,,,,,,,,... •.V.: ' 0%..1-ttanelSANSIKMONAMONME:g. .cgeMetg.1;0606fig.t.UP.WROMONKI. 0*.?"0"....4*:%50.efiNOK:1100MIA:': IA '7:irg...10Watiel:ROONAINIMBIEN:11.61AYE0.56.0ft&tt#1.Wittg35,1V0.targ6:'46:84OVMSAI$MWAMX*' ...krR." .:;::: ::;:::::::Z:•::::'::::::::::;::...i.;..;...:::.;:::::"::::;;;e:.;:::::>:::=:::.;.",::::.;::::::::.;::::::::::.;..;.;;:::::;:::::;:f; :i*i::::::::::: :iiIiii.'§OlgagNiagiii.MWRigga.WW50.E.MONSWOOMONMEMOM1040:gMA4W. ....... .. . .IL. N D .::. .A E::..P Sr::R M 11. ii;I:mmii:: mioimiiii:ii;ii:i:x:is:::•::::::*:.*:.:0,:::,,.::::::::::, ...........••,,,,...„•:•:•:•:„.„,„„„,,,„.:„,„„,............,......,.....,.....,...................,,,,,......,....,.:„,.:„.:,....:.„„,:„„.,........,...., ...............„..........................._.w........w.....................................w.............„:„.•:-...„,..---...„--...„..-...........—..........•••..,....... .......................:....„.... ..............•••.•..•.•.•.•.•MASTER.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.••.•..••.••.••.•.••..•.•.••••••••••I••••••A•••••••••••••••••••p:.••-•-•••p••••••••••••••••.•E•• •.I.•c•.• ..••.:A••• • •p•.•.••."i......o..„..........-i::N.••••...im..::::.:::.:m.••m••••••o••i••:•i•i•ii:•m.:•:•a•••i•.g-:.:i.g•-ii.mi•i••.:••••ii•i•••ii•i]•i,:••ii••i•i•ii::••i:::::••i-iii::i::iio::•:..i•g-g.c•-iiiiK•.i•••:]•K]•::•:-i•i:••::•i•*•••i:.:.•:m•*••••i•:-i*.i:]:••:•:i*i•••;•„-.::m0.-x::::?ii- .•. .............. . ........................,.......,.:„..........................................„......_,............................, ,_......... ............ ......... ...... ..........•...............„...„.:„...,.:...„:.„......,...................•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••„:„:.--,,:•:•:•:„.•-•• ..:.,:: ••••• ..:.,•••• ••:•••••••••••••••••••••...... ............. .....::::::•:::::::.::„.:::::.:.•.:•:::::„;:......... .:::::.. • ..... ..:. . .. .......,.........................._. .. .........,....„.:.:.:.:.:;.....,......:„...:,..:.:._:„..........................• ••:•::••••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•::•::......• ........mik.....m.„.....iiiiii. . ................ ........ ............. .. ... . .. .................................................................................... . .. •!::!.PROPF3TX:ii0.WN. R(S.) : • •::,:•-.• -: .,.•. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••,•••••••••••••••••••••••,•••:•.• PROJECT INFORMATION .., . . ...,........................„................:....,..:.............:...........-.::.-...-:::...:.:::.:::.:::::::.:.• Note: If there is more'than:lo11e::fecial.•01tin:ertgeesei•attaCh an addit.idneI. - notarized Master ApplintiobjeKaa"Chit4riai-: :i!:.'.:i.:!::::'•::-.:*:.:.: • ..:•:-.-:.:: PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: • Pen --16,K -1-a. )v__ Ph i (i p 4-rn.c.! Id.-1-0.() a,h00) Di "403 PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: ADDRESS: -Lni-- rse.c.1.1 0 ri D-(-- &'.CLCs-)n (-tkt_Ad S i'h I (..c) ..*.•:)ui •-1 — --,Ith si-A-exl•I ...Lb s ) .-rf-) coikr+-, 0 b or ruci-itA .o.aNi-- Of Phi(1-0 Alt-v.101cl CITY ZIP: KING COUNTY As3ESSOR-S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): : . . . ' e n ton (Diti _f_) DOS--gi 10 , • . TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING LAND USE(S): 42cj -204-- •13co nDne_ •........................................................................,..,.....,....................,..,.................:...............,...,............„......,.„„..,....,....,,,..........................................,.... goluiliAppppmwsiti:At40111100diti.Woptt;:ii:Miliii'iis PROPOSED LAND USES: . _. NAME: • \2,u)ovn h v-e. c n(jt.e., Earn Wil oi COMPANY (if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: a n neA-i- Devel Dp n-l-e„n 1- - , g_Q5 , Jexic12-- Skrqtf_ -0,-.1(r1 Li-9 ADDRESS: • vi-'2,) PLANNING C PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVEThrikra-W6FAINTEDNON (if applicable): LI-A-' S le I le vadf.Lik if)04 . cl • • I. JA APR 2 8 2000 CITY: ZIP: EXISTING ZONING: 15el 1 ev ilk, °I &XYE3 RECEIVED ,. TELEPHONE NUMBER: 4-Lc3- 7c9 - (060E PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): : ........................--.............-.. ............,.... ....................--...„.......—................-............„....-................................- 1:11:111:11,:;:egi•:::.: 0PN.:TA0Vieg11$0..N.IIIIIIMMISEE K_)A - • ,,,. SITE AREA (SQ. FT. OR ACREAGE): .,-. NAME: •,-----, . - •\ • • I D'a34 C .,•,.,..2. ..- s .. .,,,,...•., , , : . ., ....... COMPANY (II epplicab.e,: Appl t Ca.111 PROJECT VALUE: ,•!'','\.\ .„ ,.,1 , •,•-- - 07A - ,.. ADDRESS: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? )(. ._ . 2-C\f "e. /2-- CA-A2A-2--) CITY: ZIP: • IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? • I' O ' t. I C- CIfX_K- i)A,u Lc h 6 TELEPHONE NUMBER: -•iil t• • , SCR:. -)(c.- .t.A,- -.1J -L\_c...cc._, eRT at-o0 9 December 27, 2001 STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) CERTIFICATION I, MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk for the City of Renton, Washington, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter, do hereby certify that the supplemental records herein enclosed are true and correct copies included in the land use file known as Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat; File No. LUA-N-5 PP, R,ECF 00 Alte Marilyn fete , City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 27th day of December, 2001. �G�ssio ��'�� Notary Public in and for t e Stat of ryr Nv Washington, residing in i v N,,,A4 , 2 PuBuc • — ‘‘ W4SH 1 COY °� City of Renton • 4..... 4=, :,c77, + .0 + Development Services Division �� Renton City Hall ;,:..; ,%, \,‘,:...,,,,:,,,L., i .i h N 1055,South Grady Way : I ,,4;a Renton, WA 98055 LETTER Date: TRANSMITTAL December 11, 2001 TO: Larry Warren FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Attorney Senior Planner Development Services Phone: Phone: (425)430-7382 Fax: (425) 430-7300 SUBJECT: Heritage Renton Hill I Number of items including cover sheet: 2 REMARKS: Z As ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please ® For your Requested ASAP Comment review • Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2, TP&E rn 77,, IkI ��JJJT r.Q a zu e ,' 1 i1 1 2001 WARREN w , v1lllb_S pQ Dearrn+dm-El 1 v'Vl i vox.. Ahead of the curve • CITY OF RENTON • .ALL Hearing Examiner Jes.se Tanner,Mayor . Fred J.Kaufman February 12;2001 • Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill.Community Association 714 High Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 • RE: Request for Reconsideration,Renton Heritage Hill , ' ' Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings: :.-:: :. , LUA00-149,AAD and'LUA00-053,PP ECF: - :.': >, . . Dear Ms:Larson:. This office received a request for reconsideration•Tegardingthis matter-and the response follows.. First,this office does not discount:that there will.be impacts on:the:.community,both short-lived impacts and long-term impacts. The short-lived(which itself is a relative term).impacts will be. the concrete impacts of development,including construction.traffic and noise. The long-term ' impacts will be increased traffic and noise from new;residents.. That not mean that those impacts will create an overall untoward;impact asirequired for.a SEPA determination of significance. This office will generally,address the concerns in the=manner used by the request. Page 8,#21: The issue was:;.the proposed reduction in hauling truck trips due to a change in • grading.plans. 'The applicant proposed to more closely balance the cut and fill. The change in grading.plans is now considered part of:the.application and cannot;be altered without submitting a new application. The party that ultimately develops the site is not relevant to the permit as reviewed and altered.: The ultimate developer.would be:bound.by.the.application as it was reviewed and:approved. Stafford Crest as.well`as:a number of large apartment complexes have : all resulted in construction traffic similar to if not larger than the construction traffic anticipated. It is:not so significant as.to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement: Page 8,422: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the documents and bolstered by the testimony There will be additional traffic,and there will be a fraction of a second delay at the signal-controlled-intersection which will not be noticeable.. The LOS for the various intersections,which:is,currently excellent,will not be changed other than that fractional,delay. There is rio question that the hill and.its-various route_s are.quite steep,but the entire record demonstrates that traffic can negotiate it satisfactorily.. • Page 9,#24:Again,,the record demonstrates that:the hill is,now negotiated'by current residents : and can be similarly bynew residents.':•,Staff supported the applicant's studies that the sight distance is acceptable. The record,is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearing or. hearings;and the information submitted is not timely at this point. = anp l9®gcgOO1 1055 South Grady'Way kenton,Washington 98055.-(425)430-6515;-: ,[+ ., - • = .:: This er,eontains 50%'r "cled material'20% ost consumer" I I.',, PaP eCY P fl - r Ruth Larson Page 2 Page 10, #34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Page 10, #38: As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need,and if the roadway deteriorates, it will be scheduled for repair whatever the surface or subsurface . conditions. Page 12; #9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with the other issues presented,on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants in this decision. • Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes and the summarized testimony.:This office Will not • comment on testimony. Page 24,#18: The construction of the overpasses means:that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains as"it had beenin'the past: It may inconvenient to reach or leave the hill,but no more so than for other residents of South Renton when trains run through town. ." t Page 24, #25: The City has a set of adopted policies on how traffic-4to be evaluated. Those • policies were utilized, andthere-is;capacity•toL handle,the.traffic. As o matter of policy review, • - this office attempted to reduce traffic impacts"tojsome,extent byreducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to:,the,Council:wentbeyond.mere:technical issues and dealt with the more personal impacts of the traffic on those residents'along the commute This recommendation also went against stated City Council policythat density reduction by the Hearing Examiner was not generally appropriate.':It seemed that in'•these circumstances,the balancing of impacts demanded a reduction even if that reduction was modest: Page 25,#26: There will be more traffic. That is,clearly stated::The way LOS is calculated shows that there is capacity for more.,cars, andthat*LOS will.not suffer. ,Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will"notice the change..-:That, again, is not refuted. :There is no doubt that residents will notice more traffic. There will be even_less traffic with the reduction of . the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. , Page 25,#28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in terms of grade. Residents On West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills and those near Group Health have steep grades: Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features; The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8.to allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City-Council to allow a 50,lot plat. If the City Council chooses, it may modify its adopted policies and/or change the Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this: time. Ruth Larson Page 3 In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported problems. .But the record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis.as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton;Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated, although it will affect,but not adversely.(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill: As this office noted at"the public hearing, there is no doubt that if some future development were proposed,these new residents.will be right alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now living on Renton Hill.. That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannot be accommodated: The record reflects that it can be accommodated. In closing,there is no reason to.alteror reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal of the Recommendation to the City Council to approve the plat. Since this office is aware that an appeal has:already=been,filed with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original decision,there is no reason to extend the appeal period. t Ifthis office can provide any"additional assistance,please:feel free to write. Sincerely, k Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer ;;'.y • Larry Warren;City Attorney.''..•' :_,;•.:. • Neil Watts,Development Services - Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services -. City.Clerk Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON 0a?gar! FEB 0 8 200 RECEIVED CITY CLERKS OFFICL REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to.occur...page ,11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum to EXH2O, including.photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. `Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up seniors, twice per week'for=lunch'and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr.Nelson stated`that=as a result of his analysis-and actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony of those who deal with the convergence zone on a. daily basis should carry more weight than someone who"actually drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 F grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page'24-25,#25: Staff noted that-the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of.Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic - NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes.sure Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some.accountability;to the tax paying residents who are forced to."adjust" to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads; alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or'the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High.Ave. So. Renton.Wa. 98055 6 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov.. 12, 2000 meeting in your. council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During"construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline: barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from.the West,they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger,building lots with fewer homes and have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a 25% increase in size and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations. Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic'systems.All were old and extremely high maintenance: River- _ • Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System. That also allowed four new homes to be built and three or.:four more are in the_ -_. _. _ planning stages to'be built on the North side of' the pipeline: Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an"oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine-problems with a rider on the titles of each property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature . finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and . highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate. light .and air; to. facilitate adequate provision for water, sewerage, parks .and recreation areas,. sites for. schools. .and schoolgrounds and other public requirements; to provide for proper ingress and' egress; to. provide. for 'the expeditious . review- and. approval of proposed subdivisions which conform- to zoning standards and local plans and. poli'cies; -to 'adequately provide .for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c293 § 1; 1969 ex. . c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note:: Throughout this' chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed to '"this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex. s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- 1981 c 293: "If any provision of"this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the . ac.t or the : application. of.. the provision to- other persons or circumstances is not .-affected. " . [1981 c 293 § 16. ] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rage 1 of Z RCW 58.17 .110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 .02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval . Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rage z, ui NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 : See RCW 36. 70A. 900 and 36.70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 ....__ ... .. . • ::::..4';;—*"-7-4. 1,,W-Yr ,r=f-ii.7,..-; : 0 © CITY .OF RENTON c, * °“. 4 .1*.,,N60;7.`.. •'-. ' - .74E-4-. - -•= IrP -,..— ...7, ',1, ..u. . . . 1 ..1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 FEB I 20 1 ty,fr_...$t0d4 amr:EAa U e 3 : i- us cn 3. ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED cc cc .0. ar FB MUER ''' P**' Mama Y4AMIAJWX- _ • .---:: -',.. . .., • PRSRT f IRST'.CLASS SEA VA 981 02113101 Jason Donahue 419 Cedar Ave. So. • Renton WA 98055 • . .. . :, • ' • -me- 1 • .,: . .. . .. _ , \0 0 i • -: . • .-, iNOT DELIVERABLE 5 •:-•-•.-7 ,. . i - - , ' ' 1 AS ADDRESSED • - .(- •- - • - ..., • UNAOLE TO FORWARD '- - cr A .t. .- o) 1 . .4. RETURN TO SENDER• , ' • c•:• ?of,-,- I. gE, ' • -.J.s.,....,.-, ,..) ,./ .z.:::,-.-a._ IldiduhilmildiddAhnhhAuhlthbild,dhL IA .. fkr , 1 CITY OF RENTON, Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J:Kaufman . • February 12; 2001 Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue S Renton, WA'98055 RE Request for Reconsideration,Renton Heritage:Hill •Appeal and Preliminary.Plat-Hearings • - • LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dear Ms.Larson: • This office received a request for reconsideration regarding;this:matter and the response follows. First,this office does:not discount that there wilt be impacts on:the:cominunity,both.short-lived impacts and long-term'impacts, The short-lived(which'itself is a;relative term),imipacts will be th'e concrete impacts of development, including.construction traffic and noise. The long-term impacts will be increased.traffic_and noise fronr,new residents:::That'does not mean that those • impacts will create an overall untoward impact as;required for.a SEPA determination of • significance. This office will generally.address the concerns in the used by the request. Page 8,#21: The issue was:..the•proposed reduction in hauling truck trips due to a change in • grading plans. :The applicant proposed to more closely balance the cut and fill: The change in.. • grading plans is now considered part of the application and cannot.be altered.without submitting a new application. The party that ultimately develops the site is not relevant to-the permit as reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would he bound by the application as it was reviewed and'approved. Stafford`Crestas well as a number of large apartment complexes have all resulted'in construction traffic similar to if not larger than the construction traffic anticipated. It is not so significant as to require the preparation'of an environmental impact statement: _ Page 8,#22: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the documents and bolstered by the.testimony: There will be additional traffic,and there will be a fraction of a second delay at the signal-controlled intersection which will not be noticeable The • LOS for the various intersections,which is currently excellent,will not be changed other than that fractional delay.. There is no question that the hill and its-various.routes are quite:steep,but the entire record demonstrates that traffic can negotiate it satisfactorily.. Page 9,#24:Again;the record demonstrates thatthe hill is now negotiated by.current residents and can be similarly negotiated by new residents.`.Staff supported:the applicant''s studies that the sight distance is acceptable. The record is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearing or hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this point. 19O1 2001 1055 South Grady'Way -.Renton,Washington 98055 =(425)430=6515 -: . ri); J - - .: _: �Thic nanar,rnntains F,O%'rarvclwd maternal 90%nest rnnsumwr. -`+'IB/:A.C!*.l'�� _ • Ruth Larson Page 2 Page 10,#34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Page 10, #38:As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need, and if the roadway deteriorates, it will be scheduled for repair whatever the surface or subsurface conditions. Page 12, #9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with the other issues presented,on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the_appellants in this decision. • • Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes and the summarized testimony. This office will not comment on testimony. Page 24,#18: The construction of the overpasses'means that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains as it had been:in the past-Itmay be inconvenient to reach or, leave the hill,but no more so than for"other residents of South Renton when trains run through town. Page 24, #25: The City has a set of adopted policies on how-traffic is to.be evaluated. Those policies were utilized, and there is capacity toliandle,the traffic. As a matter of policy review, • this office attempted to reduce traffic impacts to some extent byreducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to:the Council wentbeyond mere technical issues and dealt with the more personal impacts of the traffic"on those residents along the commute route. This recommendation also went against stated City Council policy:that density reduction by the Hearing Examiner was not generally appropriate.:It seemed that in°these circuinstances,:the balancing of impacts demanded a reduction even:if that reduction was modest: Page 25, #26: There will be more traffic. That is clearly.stated. The way LOS is calculated shows that there is capacity for more.cars,andthatLOs will,not suffer. Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notice change: That, again, is not refuted. There is no - doubt that residents will notice more traffic. There will_be even less traffic with the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and'did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. . Page 25, #28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills and those near Group Health have_steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features: The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8to allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to allow a 50,lot plat. If the City Council chooses, it may modify its adopted policies and/or change the Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this: time. i' • Ruth Larson Page 3 In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported.problems. .But the record does riot show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated, although it will affect,but not adversely.(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill. As this office noted at•the public hearing, there is no doubt that if some future development were proposed,these new residents will be right alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now living on Renton'Hill.. That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannot.be accommodated. The record reflects that.it can be accommodated. In closing,there is no reason to alter or reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal ors the Recommendation to the City Council to approve the plat. Since this office is aware that an appealhas alr"eady"been filed with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original-`decision;there is no reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any,,additional assistance,"please;feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren, City"Attorney Neil Watts,'Development Services' ' Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services . City.Clerk Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON ikoa q,m FEB 0 8 2001 RECEIVED CITY CLEWS OFFICE. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum to EXH2O, including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. `Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New.asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor. it. ,. ...., When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr. Nelson stated that as a result of his analysis and actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony. of those who deal with the convergence zone on a daily basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25,#25: Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic— NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes sure Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There .. should be some accountability to the tax paying residents who are forced to `adjust" to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town; or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare,for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or'the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So: Renton Wa. 98055 6 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per.year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park.I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building lots with fewer'homes and have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a 25% increase in size and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations: '' Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic systems. All were old and extremely high.maintenance.River • Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System. That also allowed four new homes to be built and three or four more are in the planning stages to be built on the North side of the pipeline. Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an"oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider on the titles of each property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 { RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature - finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets .and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public -on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light and air; to facilitate adequate provision for water,; sewerage; parks. and recreation areas,. . sites for schools. and schoolgrounds and other public requirements; . to provide., for proper ingress and egress; to provide. for. the expeditious review and approval of proposed subdivisions which conform to zoning standards and local plans and- policies; to adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note: Throughout this chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed to "this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex.s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110. Severability -- 1981 c 293: "If any provision of this act or its application' to any person or ' circumstance 'is held invalid, the remainder of theact .or the application .of the provision . to 'other persons or circumstances- :is not affected. " [1981 c 293 §._16..] _ http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rage I or L RCW 58.17 .110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 2 of 2 NOTES:, Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 : See RCW 36.70A. 900 and 36.70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 5t):•W' .c. 'Irsle. , .0,—...i. - ----m.~. , 0 0 CITY OF RENTON 0 CO •:; - ' % Tetiren`A .. .ma 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 rx 0-1- c. FEB 1 a 3 3 el) 1 Olk_.-lkilt — .. . „...1- - f: eu cr) CC CC ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 0.. el PB M ET E R .":4411±A 7!$84.11.1 _Itr.z.2..v TIZES:.41 -- , 7,77. ' "'; ;• f:",.1 '0,.:''; , • PRSRI ,FIRSICLASS SEA YA 981 02/13181 Mr. George Salurmini 519 Renton Aventie South Renton WA 98055 -_-,z- - - PI' tie SUCH ---I 1 ':-, 7t;:*4 1••• : Je- - 1 ....,.i ' ;:- .. , AtiDAESS' ::' - k.. r cp:, 1, --- - __ __ , i - ,,, _ _.. Hi i in II li ii II II iiii ii iii iiiiimimmiiiiIiiiiimmummittiiiiiititsisimitit 1 ,-- ) : John R. Giuliani . 33usA __. 1400 South 7th Street i .' I .0 L E 4, f W fill '•-, 'Renton, WA 98055.3063 1 .9- tAAPPY- "t/-4 '.. 20 EC..1/ ,.. T'c.--v•,',.-...1 Y cl.,.. ,. . ...„.e' Ot....... fz,,v-i-Orti //914-Ritu6 t--- prifliea FReP ‘i--7 Iftek'6'10111 706.5- _S—oce-4 642 gp y (..A.,q4.,y ,...... .. ...._ .... Re-p?T:o/V,„ OW. c7ra.5:5„--- „• - . i I • -.Jt,.,u7.-_-.::::.-t...-.:3::::.::-; i :6,1::: :ii::::hhA :::ii•...'''''„. ''' ..''''i:i:::: :• ?4-(-'?7yv -/-i / k--i /-cq-c-r - c---tv., . cwb 'wry) clp iii-i-- I 2s I✓i2 L oS 001) �3TAT 9NIN' H 9//"l� \/ NO1N3a�0 llll� / G (.I U n 1\ 0 002 0 ::: p r\1 I9 91 741f/yZ ///f2/01 41/ AM'OWD - ,_.e 1/�/ h OX p >7 0712 7�'b' p l 01 /09/n (240- VE7 ---;/Q 72.2)04,1 i</oae J1 We/a 1/nP71./J/4fi Ja / J,7 Y- c el 04/ Si dZia l/ 71,00 2/a 10 111 /49-0 r air,J/,7a(/0�a / i t,/ Ay- 0--- 0Z/ r/ 2ia Smn VS. _ga/ 0n){01 41m 9ei /t7jj ids 0 eie-d4119 /a()101-9 Zeo J� l 02 fk2/c/ CW/1 Z1d i a1,), (2hVy y T 7i'0 4i0..141e� rv9 00-1;, i1//1,ta i o/ s0Vd ) I N 14/1/,-MOJI _/ 0 oal. ) 'Yhl Zi o' 000- A)--'- // ,,,,,,,,,,,, I 1 it lit % r r . I i 4.• • i • •►J L .. .I w t 1 J t I. a 1 r► • ` +. ,,fir•. ••f• •• • .•:r, . • • It +� •:r.' .t t-:-Ltd r) _ . / g (1 P biriy v6) +7 • \ fcl' ., 41 . • )' .41iY 1 ' a ,'t,'* • t .t E 'r, 1 �.:,I ,r" fir •*err t •, , } � i'^� �: 4* Aff• w R. ' l 4 wry ! , r, , • a.. { ,,R , ` •,. PI, ` '.d , 1�1 . jt ) N .ft• it. +; / ; :PI r, y awe • I f , t , r•1 a I ' J ..J 0( ' ,4 AA 1 'J 1 e• Vixiviti " ,P,S. I.,' )V1* 4 • . :.4 lik.. . . . , � L ,,, ., „v..). . , 0 000 OUJI -MHNN t, 0< -0H> IIFMIIIIIIIIICIIIIAH- INK Mr ..1. WI. 14 * 41' ,:i$' �..' I -. Mr 1 (NA O. .......,--"" • D •......- . ...' ..? -.., . — . ... . , • - * : .• . •ve, . • • . . . . I., 11 , I /. • • 1:11::1,1 -r; IL! r s - -:. • ._ , , . ...1 -../ '• c•s., . .• • , ' _ ....... 1 . . . •*,., i . f -, ' -4 ', .. •. •,'' 4 ," '. 401 41 -., ....:, • ;vp,4 •., .. .-,- • • • ., • • .te.o.,,, • „,, ,., .' . :•• .' . ' , • „..--......: . ..p.• -,, , r.•.:, . . ,c''''',.,ity'''''''17140r• 7.1, - . • : ' , .,, , i si,r,Att•-•, N„,; 4' • ... 4 . l• ' ... 4 . . % . 01 -•'. '._ ‘ .; .• , v . . , a ,• ".I % 1 s• • .......,•• ' ...-.• ••obi 1•:-.1••••,,,,• ,1 - A N , •••••‘ .‘, 1.".'.•:,,.:.- . ,1 •ti 411%•i't'• -.• ••, •:-•-\ 3 • ° ' - • )'' P , : ., . ' ,!,'.,;,, •„;4',0;it)/ ,i•I I, ..,'4, It', - ., —.... ,‘ .: .'''.,i ''' '' .,•:/., ii;,,,,,k,!..;, ,..• r( 4., 14j, .-/$'• 1.11:4 ,"f 4, ,,*' • c ', , f . 4, • '"‘'.. ,,i•,,, .. k a. '' . ,•,•',.,.Is,'e,., I,, 4 .41`. • , , , '- .11, 1 , • . . -,. ' ' .11 ; ..1,' I' 11• 41 • ',k' , t , .., . .. . ••••1 t•, , • -• ' . • t' . I 11 74' ' .• •4 , . ' :.•' Vt'!1:14 • 'iri...: ' .s '.t.i.''.irt:!;",';.,, ,‘,,.. 4 • '',,'w-- )1%,sc •4:::•'. .;• ',..1‘... ... ' ' ' S. . el, , ...-. •„:.‘4:,'1,';',..•P „I,". • . !1' ."„ •,, 11 ' ' . L !....1.'1.4,1S. X.17L1..,'.'.•''' .''' •'IF . • •• '. sr 7r -•I •1: 11..,, ,..4i4r*I;'. . ' . : ' '—e:...iiir, t 'y .. • 'r e , r'. • ' -t '.'s'it; -. ' , ' i4t4.„.* ,t;i ii, , .,..,,i,,,r4.....:•, , , .,.• 4 it,, , ., 4 - • li ti 1 4 4•• ' ill 4%$),, '.4 0,,. 4?;',4 im,„IX ' ,.. ft '( .1,,,..ri 7 $ . .P-pk,up , ,4 , elott, •reg 4 , • °a : f.." . r Y.t.A. ,b.' '' trifr ,E • ' ' ' •.1 4, ,. • , • . 1.,...,.pfvf,likr tpc-fi' 1 ' . _ \..„. , • ,•,, i.i. , , • f„ .G. f it ;al 11'21': ', . . • ''.. 4 . *1 Iv (413",.1.4‘cr,tf i,""n,it:,:e,..p.,., . .... a. . ' • ', ' ' :‘ •' ' ' '. - 4;''t 4NVIrlitiY •ir '7:1.1:1 r: ..„,._ _ "'.... •t.',.. r. t,..,* ,,‘: r. . ,,,.. ,y,._ ,., ./ • -...^. .''•I ''...;,st• •.,‘.'7 . , .• s li.,:.‘ e., . ; ?. 1 1:' • % , , it" „,ii, i , ) 'e ., • - ^. r " •• • '. , . • . . .• , / ;f1'.•• :' :f; .. 4t... 4. •," • •. ,..t. :. • -. ..." . •• . . , . i. , ... _. •- 0. ...1. —.• re,......: t .4 y„ . ..-.4.• . - „,..,.,...: •• • s, tr .,.. i. g • ". 1 t ' •011 7, 4. 44. pe' /4e,,... 4- t.4, • •04. il .'it •'' VT' • $ •,4i° • '' • 4,0 1 " .• .. i . 't- v* ', 7 f. ..-,;•,.e.... „' .,-..... ...,... ; • ,..... .. • . . .0„.:. .. ..kt . ...,• .. „. • 4 , ...,,. . . ,.........„.... - ,. -... . , .i.i, • 1 ,...4,,• A. • „es-. ...,,,,!..• f. ..•I ...A /'.."JY,i 10.•-r• 1•,',......f:- ,'• • ..‘-'. .1.. V •i ••101 • -s • 0 . , 04' 0 •Ir,1- "fill.:,' 9 pi 16 • 11 ,,'/, ••,", •V, ;ION • . ,,•=-- et 11 ',:r 44,1: . . • -- ' 1 '. Wfr'ff'( '• , ',I le . • fitli'if,111141 ;' ••••-• -_- at . • r I,'/ • — 4 .11 ",.' liii 1 '''.'" . " ••• i, ' • ' s , .... ,-- li- • 1 t ,'/ ,, .' r... , , • 4. oi, d I/ • . . _ /' • ...-- ,..-,-.‘'f 4 • ,,, / . -„,„,,,,,, -,....?,,„„,p,,,,, . .., - • , - • -6. • • . - '.,e-- ,,, - r p?Irj . rt . • . -/// ,., - I • Ali - - • • • .r.4 1% .7.4; .4, " • 4 . , ' • ... • s. '-'1- .4644eg f • - .-',i 4 i."- • , ,. ,'• .1 , $ . .,,,gdy .• .-- / •P-4ip , $ „ t•-`4 , , •• . ••r•-'". • • ...C. ' e , 1,.,,X.*.'",'• 4. , i . • ' N. • . J., 1 f•.N - ,oli 4 4 . - '^''' •. igos , . , r ' t . . IA • ,g4 .A.8..‘ ,. P • 11-4 •IIW i - A. ' / r • , k . k .' •• .1. r ; s•. / ',... re' ..' ' . • . 7 ., *4 A ., . v. • •,, 4, 4 . p .4r 00 i ., I, . - 40, i ..... A irLd A • ..4 ,. ...it , t, , iv„ , . .i • , itillkjitt soll T(.. , if 1 • .st , . t,. .14 ,I 4 , • V'.' • • ,: ... .411 4*. , •. ts.. . i.:4 , - , ... . ••.; 4, -..i.1 ;,,,,,..., . „„. .,: • .7.,,.. :• '.,.. ,':: • , ,, • .1. ii .,. .- 4. ipo, , • • . ,.... * • 1!. ,•' . 0 . • tt , •I • • ' . th• • A Ito • .A a- to \ '1< V 1 a 0 CITY OF RENTON sal Office of the City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED \)„, itq6,069 , 0 -/-g65 , {.&0TOJL) LL A/47- 2._ 490- Ecc r 1 4I -�1 1 ..if • . ! I • r ♦ it I !� i 1 r.... jii • 01 Ai • ....... , „ .„ . . . , L ,....„, ,, ,., • . ,.. . ...—4'. ‘-,!' . ,:e . ' voSii, e, -r.,-. ' , . . -ems *' It r . LI �, 4 MI I�IMI I MI �, .7114' NI N NI 1 IHI �\ ^xl �' UII 0 1.« 11 10 IINRfI 'w, i .. '� ; • - ' ..1 ry ,yy. 1 .. i 4 p all •I knA ' ' 1►CAUTION ~ ' i .!I 1 r . . •... 11111111111.11.11111"1"111, . •. • • . . .... .Ili . . 1 7 . . • •••• ;air- -,- ,.41. --•,_ • .--‘,..- . - t: r - --- • , 4, _Foil -.....1E- . - .. .. .. .. . •I p - " . . •,..4.., . •:-...if ' - .- . ...--,- •• ,.. sap...1( .t tr...: : t ",f,'• •-, , .. . . :'•.' •• . . . • '..7. - '"gliV k, ,. t, \ t V '• Et, Z./ . .. - ' , if, 7.*,,, .i, \, . ll ).. •.4 . V::;.:. • 0,;'. . / ' • / 4111 .7 M 0 .,.,. ‘. ./,' , I .„, , , _ . : ,..: . . . ... . • , 1 ��w +. J \. 7:8141/4.4111111111H.Alikluma. • HY, +� 'A e.`,k � , {; Ilia il1,�. ?. - i • ••:,..;,•,‘• ,. . • *ill, t .., • .,„ , ., f. .., .4• . ... . . ..,Ak.-1 • • %• )..'-.... - "..:1•' ' 1-.., ' Ict,sit--%"*.fo"..,': '''' ; 4. . a 1i .� ,,.;ill), 1 IPilli,:.:1, .., i. - 1 411 _ • • ,0 • ` ` Atr a r sk MI q fig Y_, a ice . \ I 7 07,, 1 Ill t ) ' Rw ,* 1 il ft. �NII�- i f ... N . jut . , I . , _ ,.... .,. ,, , let •--i Is ce. ;;- A • r•� err * • _. ,� �F•"�i+ ''kink. E, r+ a. -I • ''tom.. . ._,i 11 ��_ fir �._ . ri=iirrlirr-Miiiiiiiifir 'W • t ,, J b ;� T ` - I‘ �1 •• \ om. .. t , i , • 4 . i % ,t4 iV' • ' II - . 0 .., \ , ,... .... *. N• -.....0-40-. r . ..., . _ . . -.. .1 It 1. , ll p rclwilipro .i•• wow. a,. -�r.. rr rr 35�,•.,. �ryy��1m1 p 4 �� • ,.:•-'. .'t•„- Li " ....t1 + t i t!,y r * 1 , / III,• . . 7 . 1 .1 i-k41, --- - - ' _. r - � • • - �� • '_, 'erg 'r , 4.,1_,_ a its„M./ f 1 A ` -..... r -! i 401111111111 IMIIIMIIIMmminimmmb R^•rioAt iff:31 v .7 , • • . i • .L t y' t .• 4. .6* ; r: • . ICL •• ft • irei • • .4" .4. e 0'. • r 11, Or • (.• 7 1 f 1 . r 4 t 1 I. l .iy' y • 0. r r 1 < I , \\14:1..b. );.,:, , ' 1. 1 t• �S �� 74, .-;, Fir f1 a' •y_ 1rr11r11 rrir_r.rl11: 111.111111.1 .,�. � •'sue• ,• - - • .A5 ,, """0.-is- rillmNimmommwar• ':' . sal I r ., •,_ d�� ri L `. Tom' r • — V 411K. ...•a.;:, ::..,.,., .. .. . 01 1 -_ — Ord WI �I r s� . f sidiesa .,:v“.:-. ..- . '...:1." : . ' � S ,y , .Nt•y.*. . r l / I1 R i M I 17-t`'.70111 • 6- • • •,0 -(11/41r ,// or _ P.! - ..I• •• I..• Li . - ;'A c'+ � M• . • 1k; :' r1,7 ••••• :st • - , /". •• air 12. • alr•rr"4.• ••m• • -"*"4110, • . Aar r • MN , t. ,. ...!:',? „idgrailak111101. "........ . ' " . . ..... -. ..— 1....- - . ---..... r le Apr- \ )1111 ... ......,: ... -. . -.. ..- - • • ._ .- • .4 - .. . ' • ..r,. .41.6 er!C• - ,4. -, +1, ' •• , ', ,..''''.,•• .*N;• . -"`.- 1 . .. „ . . • N., , .'i. - r....7.,.. .1111'1. • —' ',.. ? .' •.•• ilt-Jen '',;:.: ,.,,.......' ' . '"' . •?;""):'...... -, ... .. ....... - ..a. . 4),.71..r, ... • ..it:: ;''':' . ,..i. .1 , • - - ‘-, - - ,4.....A. _ . ,. • .., • ' 1 ‘ • I i t • \I...A '• ' . 1, t . ,,t ' ai...- ', • . . 0 ., 1.• ; ' ,•.: . , I 1 0 .1.1' I 4‘.! '.1.'•••. ' 1 .' .' $i'.4/') . 1 I /4' ' • NI '4"1.e ' . '..., ;1$0 %..- ...- , , • ,,t) ot."4 ,, . i * •ille , v..• ,,.4,f _ ..% , • . , f •. ...,_ k` • ,.:,'...i." • ,q, t • )1'i . .!.4(4 ' 4 • I. 44.'1/11 ' ':' , : t )1 . • . ..lie ,... .. / ,,, A. • , "- . • , , 41. I).), r A .,. I, ,... • 111: . r . ' i ' f . , i , i ' ,.. nJ .." '4 4 F . I IMO s , . it " • ) / ite•, ' , ,t fif ., `.. ' 4' - .. .•), i ..* ,i , . e • 40,, t.; . , .10 ,r, ' !it • SO 41 C a ,,. 'Ne et : • . :I, , • . :., 1., ii , t .. 1 . ..r , I I 1 \III ''.:."'-'4 ‘•:,• g . ,. 1%,4*N,. .:- '• ' .. •"c..,. . . ' - •<.:9-'7 • C . ,V71* .)`:.• 1 . .5, ,... fr.(4... • •ke• •,•••••-,0, • :; .•., • • .,- ,..--- ,..-- • , 1 Airr. .....- . , .• . -6 ri Ito + .• —tif 4,./ 11, . . r I ' , - , 44 , 0110A' rIF , l• • 0. • :1, 1, 1 i 1 ' I °I • t , \ .., Ir t tiiI _0 II J R fir. 1 4 / . ; iv1 /I '1 t••:' . . ..se -.r. -..,,, '1. 1 .... . INA .....111.„,_ t.:.... , .. •i imilitia 3,_ • SSASSS. Sigir S '41111a. : .rs s seillElt --- •• . r rrr.. -....„ .., ..,.... ......._ _.e . . • . ... . I.q • f i ' At ,3 I • -t - .l am'a +- • r — • .-».)•►. o.- - .. r - a + . ' Ir:f., '0%) ._" f . . .. . 'f'.4.Itiratt . '_=.-e. .; ' .-. r r t - 1 ii ..1+ ,yr • w V .•, �' • ti' • ;... ' * +. 1, ••: . � ,' n`1 r 1 uWieff.• 41.114 t ,y ` t . • / .• • .., ,, �„• . 3; e. . , • t I ?. ,t `'4r _ F .h ' 4t. • • :.' ,. .i c_ a • A'--., a �, _ 4 • L t`•... • nip '; . i 1' il '' " 4 •w. t,: ,{ A' .1 s • ' Y '' .fie•, I 1 I t . '/ .1.:I. ir .1 1 -.' "..":.7:7: 1•::1:.;:47;4 4%Al:';',:li �6 � �i 1 , •: . .n ' •-: ".,,,,• 'C•% '": ' ' , • , .. .. • , • . . ' ' lie, ' • ' '.t.'0''' '". ' ' • .„„ • • :,, , .. :'Olt :;.. '' • :, , 't4. -. . /...III,' , . r• • .1.* ;! •' t.,,, . r • • .11,.• 0 ' ., . / . .' '•A1.1.. .4: t 'f .', '• ... .'..'....41113,.'i . . • ' it. •• • ) '( I : . • .•. . i!ri•Oi.* 'i '' .• ' II :.... ',1' • ‘ .,id . • . •)10',..;.. . '.... . • "-": • . . ........OS '."ftor• . 7••• .I- 1 .° .. -....r-.- .,.% ' s•lit .4. . . ' ' .li,:.-...' Tr".4.41Liphigoi - ... . 1 -. '- IP "'IL. • , . p - ..- . -1"1., - . 4,,,.. --,„„. •• .p. -..Nw•P-. . X- - - .........400,.. . • ...pi., ,44110. 01/0. orn.,.. .r.iiimptor-2 - .a ,7.11,,ftk., _ - ••• .... ...... - .....- 41r• ..". -.... . • • 4 • . o t ollaiii f'4;;; ter;' . OP ! s • ' • ...vogirsits.., , 1'1110:. _ • r ,frift _ .I ‘Illik + . fir 1• ' a,.. .r s 't, i • '4'4 i 1 . ii ar r•' y , M* « i ,it r a • A 1 lrt. 't • • 1 A i1 • v _ ., „. •, , . , , _ , ... _. , ,. -A*--.4„7'.... • its., ..,...:7 ....... ..... .. . .... ,,,.,..,.... .-...›.....,... 44--. ... is...,.... ......._.... i 8 4 ' a--irba.A•••• : i,-.4• L •_. •• A. ..„ — ri,'... ismeir--- ..;.• . ... . .• I . . ,..1..:At.' iirlia. ' ' . '.:41 • ‘ .. . ,. .... — -.‘. \ ..... v ....... _ . Fri - jtV-- -. . . .. • --a - ; 4 Ma,.•i • '.111r; • •.7 . • •„, /1"--- N ••,. -... • , • _`. .mow, . ! t r y •.'s r. ;+.. ' , �yyam' ,L_4 A,1 :It.�.'.' !►''.� � •;p �. ' • 1t -- • ; . R•• 11. t 1 .., r4.1 ' • h ♦ • `t - -, , CITY:OF RENTON Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman' November 7,,2000 Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill Community Association 714HighAveS Renton,WA 98055 Dear Appellant: • This Office has received an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC),State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat (LUA-00-053). The appeal hearing will occur on the same.date,-arid'time-as the original Public Hearing: November 14,2000 at 9:00a.m. in the`7th floor,City Council�Chambers'of the Renton City Hall. At that time the various official parties may motions'and,present their respective positions and evidence and call witnesses. The issues on an appeal will probably be more'limited,.than the issues'regarding the underlying Preliminary Plat. The hearing regarding the Preliminary;Plat will accept all relevant and non- repetitious testimony after the SEPA Because of the inherent limitations.due,tothe?:timing of the appeal and the scheduled public hearing,this office will invite any additional"written correspondence;as,soon as possible but will accept any documents at the public hearing itself If this office can be of further assistance,please feel free to write Sincerely Fred J.Kaufm Hearing Examiner . cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Applicant Parties of Record . • 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055.- (425)430-6515 Thic nanar rnntainc FO%rar-vnladsmatarial 90l nnct rnnclimdr..` • - F /s Appeal of Environmental Review Committee from October 17, 2000 CITY OF RENTON Project name: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat File Number: LUA-00-05 3, PP, ECF NO V 0 6 2000 File Fee: $75.00 RECEIVED CITY CLERKS OFFICE The Renton Hill Community Association finds the follow areas subject to question: ' y S f. . Criteria source - Environmental Review Committee Staff Report Dated October 17, 2000. Page 2, paragraph 5: Why should a street standards modification be granted that falls below the minimum standard? We have minimum standards, why are they not followed? Page 4, Item 10: What protection is offered to those abutting properties in River Ridge and Falcon Ridge? Page 4, Item 12: Renton Avenue South is now posted no vehicles in excess of 20,000: Why is this posting not.recognized? What criteria were used to increase this limit? Page 4, Item 13: What is the Width of the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline"? Will an emergency access permit be required to be received by the City of Renton before any permits are granted? Page 7, D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Impacts: "The site lies near the northwest corner of the upland plain at an elevation of approximately 400 feet above sea level." This statement does not go far enough. Renton Avenue South raises more that 300 feet in less than 4/10 of a mile and all construction vehicles on this project will use this street. The Hearing Examiner statement of 1978 File R- 178=78 "The streets are rather steep and serious questions can be raised concerning traffic safety if too many cars use the streets. Between South 3ra. and 7th Streets, Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue average 9.2% and 7.7% slope respectively: Renton Avenue has a short stretch that has a grade in excess of 15% between the same streets. With the grid iron street pattern, a vehicle (and anything which the vehicle might hit) can be in serious trouble should a serious mechanical problem occur such as brake failure". Page 8, Paragraph 5: Regarding the exception—Why? If we have areas that are "protected" and make continued exceptions the Critical Areas Ordinance is of no value and "protects" nothing. Page 9, Paragraph 5: "The conceptual grading plan indicates that approximately 54,974 cubic yards (82,461 tons) of cut material will be created and 19,233 cy (28,850 tons) of fill would be required. This indicates a high number of hauling trips by large trucks will be necessary." At 30 tons per truck with trailer, this equals 3,7.10.37 hauling trips and 3,710.37 empty trips. This will double if trailers are not used. Renton hill will be paralyzed. These down hill trips half full loads and half empty loads will have no place to Yield to up hill traffic. A truck that has committed to going down hill at 527 Renton Avenue South will not give anyone coming up the hill any place to go. What happens then? You are allowing seven hours per day for this hauling, how many days will it take for 7,420.74 trips? How will you provide for the safety of resident living and accessing their homes on Renton Avenue South? What kind of damage will this many trips do to Renton Avenue South? This issue must be addressed. Mitigation Measures: Page 9, Item 3: Does not address River Ridge abutting property. Air. Page 10, Paragraph 3: The application states that the property will be clear-cut. This ignores the following: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element:.VI. VEGETATION, Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Water. Page 10, Paragraph 2: If more than 13 feet of land is removed then the depth required should be from the proposed grade level and down 13 feet. 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph.1: 92% of the trees would be removed under this statement. The 32 trees that would be preserved will only be preserved "if possible". This does not conform to Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION, Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and 2 Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Again, why have a policy if is not to be adhered to? 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 2: Clarification is needed as to who will be responsible for landscaping and when. 4.Animals: Page 11, Paragraph 1: "Wildlife will probably move into the Cedar River Natural Area".... This does not address the solution to the "Deer Population on Renton Hill". It also does not address the protection of the deer and other wildlife. The State of Washington and the Mayor of the City of Renton have stated:-"deer are encouraged to relocate to an urban area". The Renton Hill herd have not gotten the message. In the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Community Design, Page 9-10,, "Discussion:. Natural and ornamental vegetation provides wildlife habitat, screens unsightly views, reduces exposure to noise and wind, softens the appearance of developed areas, provides shade, stabilizes soil and assists in the percolation of surface water runoff, and frames view corridors. Appropriate selection of vegetation is critical in the success of its survival and the effectiveness of the intended effect. These policies support the development of landscape standards and maintenance plans, and • coordination between landscape plans and drainage systems plans. Landscaping is encouraged along travel corridors and the preservation of significant landscape features such as heritage trees is expressed." Clear-cut and bulldozing completely dismiss this entire policy. Page 12, 8. Land Use. Paragraphs 3 and 4. There was a complete procedural failure on the part of the City of Renton in rezoning this property. The Renton Hill Community Association has been a group for more than.24 years. I have been its President for more than 18 years and have spoken both before the Renton City Council and the Hearing Examiner in that capacity. As President I have been on the City of Renton's mailing list to Community Organizations for more than 18 years as well as in the Renton Chamber of Commerce list of Organizations. My name and address are on file. When the State made its mandate to rezone, neighborhood meetings were held in many neighborhoods. Not Renton Hill. Page 13, 9. Housing. Paragraph 1. Bennett Homes will not be building these homes. The Home values will have to be stipulated to the Company actually doing construction. 3 Page 13. 10. Aesthetics. Paragraph 1. "....would probably erect fences,..." should be clarified. Will the fences be the same? Will the fences be hit or miss? Will some be wood and some chain link and some have no fence at all? Page 13. 11. Light and Glare. Paragraph 1. "Additional traffic, generated by the proposed development, could increase light on streets throughout the area." "Homes, particularly those adjacent to Phillip Arnold Park, could be impacted by light spillover....". Either the light will or will not have an impact on the neighborhood. Page 13. 12. Recreation. "The applicant has proposed that several landscaped areas or "pocket parks" would be created within the development." Who will create and where will they be created? Page 14. Historic and Cultural Preservation. Paragraph 3. ".....that a potential change would probably not be more than other neighborhoods in the City are experiencing,... ." Please name any other neighborhood in Renton that has: The same steep grades as Renton Hill, and the same limited street capacity (Renton Avenue South), and the same limited site distance areas, and the same access restrictions, and Yield to up hill traffic signs, and eight deer, and the same safety issues as Renton Hill. Paragraph 5. "Although the distance between the entry road to the project and the intersection (110') is below the City design guideline for spacing of intersections (150 when possible), traffic operations should be adequate based on low traffic volumes." Where is this measurement from and to? The map scale does not clearly indicate the area measured and does not look to be even 110'. This report does not address the safety issues during and after construction for the residents living in River Ridge. All traffic generated by this development will use the River Ridge access on South 7th Court. "Should be adequate"? Is that now? Is that during construction or just based on after completion? What access will be used and where will construction equipment be parked. When some of the testing on this property was done, access was achieved via the Seattle Water Pipeline Road and equipment parked on this access. What is the plan for all construction vehicles access? 4 Page 15. Fourth Dot. "...S. 7th street is very steep with grades in excess of fifteen percent. The grade in question is 26%. Quite an excess and closed if it is icy or we have snow. Page 15. Seventh Dot. "There is no transit service for residents on Renton Hill, due to the steep grades and narrow lanes." How can it be that streets that are too steep and narrow for transit are o.k. for earth hauling trucks, cement trucks, backhoe carriers, bulldozer carriers and on and on? Page 15: 10th Dot "No improvements are planned by the City of Renton for streets on Renton Hill." So where will the fee collected for Transportation Mitigation be spent? Page 15. Paragraph 1. "...construction vehicles in excess 26,000.gvw,. associated with the project..." What will this excess weight do to Renton Avenue South? And how will this affect the mine shaft Vent that continues to sink on Renton Avenue South?. Page 15. Paragraph 2. Again where will this mitigation be spent? Renton Hill has no marked crosswalks, corner yield signs, limited site distance signs, and only 4 speed limit signs. The North East corner of South 7th turning North on Renton Avenue South, is such that a turn will take all trucks into the oncoming side (South bound) of Renton Avenue South. Page 15 Mitigation Measures: 1. Gross Weight and Numbers of Trips and Road Damage answers. The Renton Hill Community Association does not write the policies of the City of Renton. It is the City of Renton's responsibility to enforce these policies. We ask.no more but..expect no.less. The continued "variance" policy does not protect the Cities residents. This proposal and Environmental Review do not "Provide-a healthy atmosphere to live and raise families" as stated in the City of Renton Vision, Mission and Business Plan Goals.. The safety of residents on Renton Hill is greatly jeopardized by even considering the shear numbers of trips required by the removal of cut material and addition of fill material. The City has failed to acknowledge the access hazards and danger this project places on all of Renton Hill's Residents. Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association 5 r. \4 NOTES RECEIPT DATE I 1 I 62/oo No. • 0 9 51 RECEIVED FROM 0 n !a< < t. Gunr•nr. . Ass 0 C.. ADDRESS ~1 U l A v S • �. FOR aT r e °t l — �11� A"" ° �'' (� G S 3 8 I g >,'ACCOUNT:`:. % t HOW PAID :.ii,t:'.':4, ;:AHT.OF'. .CAH-f; ACCOUNT - ' "`AMT nCHECK`:^ ` 3 .r,,PAID`.,-. •: [ Bi7iLANCE. :4ORDEY; BV� � Y r /^te • a ORDER,= • ©1998 ItEDIFORM®eLeo2 F ._ ..:,:, , .^.• ,,,d.; .:...... .. ...:.i,.,,r sc, a.,, ,. ,r,,,..u.,., r.eL .,.:.;:.. :H.tds..;u;.w4..., >, t ....ii,azc, - A' 4 atf •0 0 CITY OF RENTON 6 0 ::oee4w ...,,••••••=s0kom.V1000u00•01.0 0 l't1 401 . 1 NAL ?-• 5 ,bc ca 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 0 rn i— ' . NOV 0 7'0 0 , Fr'.:;,f.0 0 A :-. 0 erm 3 0 5 1...'a •"• us a) ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED krat , PEI PIETER U.S._ . ,,, A 715840i . POSTAGE , / • Ilt!--X \ / 3P ' fliri—VASS SER Allk Sti 1111181M i-,-,0- Resident 707 Renton Ave. So. --, Renton WA 98055 .7, ,•,:k ;:.ip • -, - %.*A0 I ADDRESS ,•<- .,._ , - --. h- ETURN TO SENDER - /;:,)IUPIP -.,/ 1 r...,..,.-,.-.,..,,Q,-1..1..1•,,,..,..:ri,, -t•4-t8.,"0... : . i ,E i...0. •. .. : .- . Y ••:t, : I „ CITY. OF RENTON Nu. I-7v Hearing Examiner , Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman November 7;2000 Ruth Larson;President Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Ave S Renton,WA 98055 Dear Appellant: This office has received an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC) State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat (IJUA-00-053). The appeal hearing will occur on the same date:and time;as the original Public Hearing: November 14,2000 at 9:00a.m. in the 7th floor, City Council;Chambers of the Renton City Hall. At that time the.various official parties may make motions.and,present their respective positions and evidence and call witnesses. The issues on an appeal will probably be more liinited.than the issues regarding the underlying Preliminary Plat. The hearing regarding the Preliminary:.Plat will accept all relevant and non- repetitious testimony after the SEPA appeal.;; Because of the inherent limitations`due to thetiimingtof the appeal and the scheduled public hearing,this office will invite any additional written correspondence as soon as possible but will accept any documents at the,public hearing itself If this office can be of further assistance;please feel free to`write. Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufm Hearing Examiner cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Applicant • Parties of Record 1055:South.Grady Way -Renton, Washington.98055.- (425)430-6515 This oaoer contains 50%recycled material:20%oost consumer . - J Appeal of Environmental Review Committee from October 17, 2000 CITY OF rRENTON Project name: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat File Number: LUA-00-053, PP, ECF N O V 0 6 2000 File Fee: $75.00 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE The Renton Hill Community Association finds the follow areas subject to question: `r: 4 S . . Criteria source - Environmental Review Committee Staff Report Dated October 17, 2000. Page 2, paragraph 5: Why should a street standards modification be granted that falls below the minimum standard? We have minimum standards, why are they not followed? Page 4, Item 10: What protection is offered to those abutting properties in River Ridge and Falcon Ridge? Page 4, Item 12: Renton Avenue South is now posted no vehicles in excess � of 20,000: Why is this posting not recognized? What criteria were used to increase this limit? p ' Page 4, Item 13: What is the Width of the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline"? Will an emergency access permit be required to be received by the City of Renton before any permits are granted? Page 7, D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Impacts: "The site lies near the northwest corner of the upland plain at an elevation of approximately 400 feet above sea level." This statement does not go far enough. Renton Avenue South raises more that 300 feet in less than 4/10 of a mile and all construction vehicles on this project will use this street. The Hearing Examiner statement of 1978 File R- 178=78 "The streets are rather steep and serious questions can be raised concerning traffic safety if too many cars use the streets. Between South 3th and 7th Streets, Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue average 9.2% and 7.7% slope respectively: Renton Avenue has a short stretch that has a grade in excess of 15% between the same streets. With the grid iron street pattern, a 1 vehicle (and anything which the vehicle might hit) can be in serious trouble should a serious mechanical problem occur such as brake failure". Page 8, Paragraph 5: Regarding the exception—Why? If we have areas that are "protected" and make continued exceptions the Critical Areas Ordinance is of no value and "protects" nothing. Page 9, Paragraph 5: "The conceptual grading plan indicates that approximately 54,974.cubic yards (82,461 tons) of cut material will be created and 19,233 cy (28,850 tons) of fill would be required. This indicates a high number of hauling trips by large trucks will be necessary." At 30 tons per truck with trailer, this equals 3,710.37 hauling-trips and 3,710.37 empty - trips. This will double if trailers are not used. Renton hill will be paralyzed. These down hill trips half full loads and half empty loads will have no place to Yield to up hill traffic. A truck that has committed to going down hill at 527 Renton Avenue South will not give anyone coming up the hill any place to go. What happens then? You are allowing seven hours per day for this hauling, how many days will it take for 7,420.74 trips? How will you provide for the safety of resident living and accessing their homes on Renton Avenue South? What kind of damage will this many trips do to Renton Avenue South? This issue must be addressed. Mitigation Measures: Page 9, Item 3: Does not address River Ridge abutting property. Air. Page 10, Paragraph 3: The application states that the property will be clear-cut. This. ignores the following: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION,-Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and Discussion. NOTE:The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Water. Page 10, Paragraph 2: If more than 13 feet of land is removed then the depth required should be from the proposed grade level and down 13 feet. 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 1: 92% of the trees would be removed under this statement. The 32 trees that would be preserved will only be preserved "if possible". This does not conform to Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION, Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and 2 Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Again, why have a policy if is not to be adhered to? 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 2: Clarification is needed as to who will be responsible for landscaping and when. 4.Animals: Page 11, Paragraph 1: "Wildlife will probably move into the Cedar River Natural Area"... . This does not address the solution to the "Deer Population on Renton Hill". It also does not address the protection of the deer and other wildlife. The State of Washington and the Mayor of the City of Renton have stated: "deer are encouraged to relocate to'an urban • area". The Renton Hill herd have not gotten the message. In the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element— Community Design, Page 9-10; "Discussion: Natural and ornamental vegetation provides wildlife habitat, screens unsightly views, reduces exposure to noise and wind, softens the appearance of developed areas, provides shade, stabilizes soil and assists in the percolation of surface water runoff, and frames view corridors. Appropriate selection of vegetation is critical in the success of its survival and the effectiveness of the intended effect. These policies support the development of landscape standards and maintenance plans, and coordination between landscape plans and drainage systems plans. Landscaping is encouraged along travel corridors and the preservation of significant landscape features such as heritage trees is expressed." Clear-cut and bulldozing completely dismiss this entire policy. Page 12, 8. Land.Use. Paragraphs 3 and 4. There was,a complete , procedural failure:on the part of the City of Renton in rezoning..this:property.:. _ The Renton Hill:.Community Association;has been a group for more-:than 24- - years. I have been its President for more than 18 years and have spoken both before the Renton City Council and the Hearing Examiner in that capacity. As President I have been on the City of Renton's mailing list to Community Organizations for more than 18 years as well as in the Renton Chamber of Commerce list of Organizations. My name and address are on file. When the State made its mandate to rezone, neighborhood meetings were held in many neighborhoods. Not Renton Hill. Page 13, 9. Housing. Paragraph 1. Bennett Homes will not be building these homes. The Home values will have to be stipulated to the Company actually doing construction. 3 Page 13. 10. Aesthetics. Paragraph 1. "....would probably erect fences,..." should be clarified. Will the fences be the same? Will the fences be hit or miss? Will some be wood and some chain link and some have no fence at all? Page 13. 11. Light and Glare. Paragraph.1. "Additional traffic, generated by the proposed development, could increase light on streets throughout the area." "Homes, particularly those adjacent to Phillip Arnold Park, could be impacted by light spillover....". Either the light will or will not have an impact on the neighborhood. Page 13. .12. Recreation. "The applicant has proposed that several landscaped areas or "pocket parks" would be created within the development." Who will create and where will they be created? Page 14. Historic and Cultural Preservation. Paragraph 3. ".....that a potential change would probably not be more than other neighborhoods in the City are experiencing,...." Please name any other neighborhood in Renton that has: The same steep grades as Renton Hill, and the same limited street capacity (Renton Avenue South), and the same limited site distance areas, and the same access restrictions, and Yield to up hill traffic signs, and eight deer, and the same safety issues as Renton Hill. Paragraph 5. "Although the distance between the entry road to the project and the intersection (110') is below the City design guideline for spacing of intersections (150 when possible), traffic operations should be adequate based on low traffic volumes." Where is this measurement from-and to? The map scale does not clearly indicate the area measured and does not look to be even 110'. This report does not address the safety issues during and after construction for the residents living in River Ridge. All traffic generated by this development will use the River Ridge access on South 7th Court. "Should be adequate"? Is that now? Is that during construction or just based on after completion? What access will be used and where will construction equipment be parked. When some of the testing on this property was done, access was achieved via the Seattle Water Pipeline Road and equipment- parked on this access. What is the plan for all construction vehicles access? 4 Page 15. Fourth Dot. "...S. 7d1 street is very steep with grades in excess of fifteen percent. The grade in question is 26%o. Quite an excess and closed if it is icy or we have snow. Page 15. Seventh Dot. "There is no transit service for residents on Renton Hill, due to the steep grades and narrow lanes." How can it be that streets that are too steep and narrow for transit are o.k. for earth hauling trucks, cement trucks, backhoe carriers, bulldozer carriers and on and on? Page 15: 10th Dot: "No improvements are planned by the City of Renton for streets on Renton Hill." So where will the fee collected for Transportation Mitigation be spent? Page 15. Paragraph 1. "...construction vehicles in excess.26,00.0 gvw,. • associated with the.project..." What will this excess weight do to Renton Avenue South? And how will this affect the mine shaft vent that continues - to sink on Renton Avenue South? Page 15. Paragraph 2. Again where will this mitigation be spent? Renton Hill has no marked crosswalks; corner yield signs limited site distance signs, and only 4 speed limit signs. The North East corner of South 7th turning North on Renton Avenue South, is such that a turn will take all trucks into the oncoming side (South bound) of Renton Avenue South. Page 15 Mitigation Measures: 1. Gross Weight and Numbers of Trips and Road Damage answers. The Renton Hill Community,Association does not write the policies of the City of Renton. It is the City of Renton's responsibility to.enforce these policies. We ask no more but:expect,no less.. The continued,``variance" policy does not protect the Cities residents..This:proposal'and Environmental Review'do not"Provide-a•healthy atmosphere-to live and raise families" as stated in the City of Renton Vision, Mission and Business Plan Goals. The safety of residents on Renton Hill is greatly jeopardized by even considering the shear numbers of trips required by the removal of cut material and addition of fill material. The City has failed to acknowledge the access hazards and danger this project places on all of Renton Hill's Residents. Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association 5 `4 • NOTES RECEIPT DATE 1 fa 0 0 NO. 0951 RECEIVED FROM 4. U re � f. COnr.nt- . MSS v C.. ADDRESS I Li LI I 9 K 4 V kr.N.--kviact $ 11 : 00 FOR Q--f rPO4 - LEA-.. G0... 0O C1 444'AGC0IlNT 4e,3: : „4in:A4.HOW pAio*Y>=:, ' ±`:ciAM 'CASH T.:OF:,' `Cooditi, ; ; 'CHECK,= i C S 6' BALAN E' ,'MONEY;^_, Dr ORDER;:; BVa! V' ~ r X., • •:> DUES ©1998 REDIFORM®8L802 -' ;.-.;>:•sa2S,n.'.,,.:�,:'.,;z .-.. �=. �. o: Wv4.M�-,u-s..-as- ,.a.�sawsz.... �.s,„ _ - _ �...., s,._.a.:3..eW✓—.y: .l:,,�-.r«.,r: �.: _�.<,i,r:tc,�F.rcr :,."..... c�,'•:k-s:. �ir 0 CITY OF RENTON - z yes,A T� �. AA' 'j ,.: 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 Ida ti a NOV 0 TO 0 02, ? >vgin - 0 3 0 5 r ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED Prd NETER ' A 765P,4o1 U.S. POSTAGE , (irks/yJOIV fused t-tY -lib ♦4s mat 410"rivet" N\ •REF, . N°uiv.eniA I/Co IOW:w PO�� Do f.\:f/X' S h a Nib t eSS n ' rr ' vap t reik 1.47stdte. `i' II Mr. George Salurmini % 519 Renton Avenue South ?� ,<.¢¢ e, Renton WA 98055 .d 0•, � O SUCH ; ri MI 6 j ADDRESS �t"� _ xi - '-, wd Syr L_ i i 111 11 II . p i 4. 41 11 1 -41 _r...•_-.14..4. ;t•, f iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii34Eiilifilliiinii:i:E tinlE4E(21;cii4i iii CITY OF RENTON IA Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman • November 7,2000 Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill Community Association - 714 High Ave S Renton,WA 98055 Dear Appellant: This office has received an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC) State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat (LUA-00-053). The appeal hearing will occur on the same date and time as the original Public Hearing: November 14,2000 at 9:00a.m. in the 7th floor, City Council:Chambers of the Renton City Hall. At that time-the.various official parties may.make motions and present their respective positions and evidence and call witnesses. The issues on an appeal will probably be more:limited than the issues regarding the underlying Preliminary Plat. The:hearing regarding the Preliminary,;Plat will accept all relevant and non- repetitious testimony after the Because of the inherent limitations due to'the;tirning-df the appeal and the scheduled public hearing,this office will invite any.•additional"written correspondence as soon as possible but will accept any documents at the public hearing itself • If this office can be of further assistance,please feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufm Hearing Examiner cc: Mayor Jesse_Tanner Jay.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil.Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Applicant Parties of.Record 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055.- (425)430-6515 This oaoer contains 50%recycled material,20%roost consumer Appeal of Environmental Review Committee from October 17, 2000 CITY OF RENTON Project name: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat File Number: LUA-00-053, PP, ECF N O V 0 6 2000 File Fee: $75.00 RECEIVED CITY CLERKS OFFICE The Renton Hill Community Association finds the follow areas subject to question: 4 s P ‘,, Criteria source - Environmental Review Committee Staff Report Dated October 17, 2000. Page 2, paragraph 5: Why should a street standards modification be granted that falls below the minimum standard? We have minimum standards, why are they not followed? Page 4, Item 10: What protection is offered to those abutting properties in River Ridge and Falcon Ridge? Page 4, Item 12: Renton Avenue South is now posted no vehicles in excess of 20,000: Why is this posting not recognized? What criteria were used to increase this limit? Page 4, Item 13: What is the Width of the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline"? Will an emergency access permit be required to be received by the City of Renton before any permits are granted? Page 7, D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Impacts: "The site lies near the northwest corner of the upland plain at an elevation of approximately 400 feet above sea level." This statement does not go far enough. Renton Avenue South raises more that 300 feet in less than 4/10 of a mile and all construction vehicles on this project will use this street. The Hearing Examiner statement of 1978 File R- 178=78 "The streets are rather steep and serious questions can be raised concerning traffic safety if too many cars use the streets. Between South 3rd and 7th Streets, Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue average 9.2% and 7.7% slope respectively: Renton Avenue has a short stretch that has a grade in excess of 15% between the same streets. With the grid iron street pattern, a 1 vehicle (and anything which the vehicle might hit) can be in serious trouble should a serious mechanical problem occur such as brake failure". Page 8, Paragraph 5: Regarding the exception—Why? If we have areas that are "protected" and make continued exceptions the Critical Areas Ordinance is of no value and "protects" nothing. Page 9, Paragraph 5: "The conceptual grading plan indicates that approximately 54,974 cubic yards (82,461 tons) of cut.material will be created and 19,233 cy (28,850 tons) of fill would be required. This indicates a high number of hauling trips by large trucks will be necessary." At 30 tons per truck with trailer, this equals.3,710.37 hauling trips and 3,710.37 empty trips. This will double if trailers are not used. Renton hill will be paralyzed. These down hill trips half full loads and half empty loads will have no place to Yield to up hill traffic. A truck that has committed to going down hill at 527 Renton Avenue South will not give anyone coming up the hill any place to go. What happens then? You are allowing seven hours per day for this hauling, how many days will it take for 7,420.74 trips? How will you provide for the safety of resident living and accessing their homes on Renton Avenue South? What kind of damage will this many trips do to Renton Avenue South? This issue must be addressed. Mitigation Measures: Page 9, Item 3: Does not address River Ridge abutting property. Air. Page 10, Paragraph 3: The application states that the property will be clear-cut. This ignores the following: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION,,Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Water. Page 10, Paragraph 2: If more than 13 feet of land is removed then the depth required should be from the proposed grade level and down 13 feet. 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 1: 92% of the trees would be removed under this statement. The 32 trees that would be preserved will only be preserved "if possible". This does not conform to Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION, Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and 2 Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Again, why have a policy if is not to be adhered to? 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 2: Clarification is needed as to who will be responsible for landscaping and when. 4.Animals: Page 11, Paragraph 1: "Wildlife will probably move into the Cedar River Natural Area".... This does not address the solution to the "Deer Population on Renton Hill"..It also does not address the protection of the deer and other wildlife. The State of Washington and the Mayor of the City of Renton have stated: "deer are encouraged to relocate to an urban area". The Renton Hill herd have not gotten the message. In the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element— Community Design, Page 9-10, "Discussion: Natural and ornamental vegetation provides wildlife habitat, screens unsightly views, reduces exposure to noise and wind, softens the appearance of developed areas, provides shade, stabilizes soil and assists in the percolation of surface water runoff, and frames view corridors. Appropriate selection of vegetation is critical in the success of its survival and the effectiveness of the intended effect. These policies support the development of landscape standards and maintenance plans, and coordination between landscape plans and drainage systems plans. Landscaping is encouraged along travel corridors and the preservation of significant landscape features such as heritage trees is expressed." Clear-cut and bulldozing completely dismiss this entire policy. Page 12, 8. Land Use. Paragraphs 3 and 4. There was a complete procedural failure on the part of the City of Renton in rezoning this property. The Renton Hill,Community Association has,been a group for more than'24 years. I have been its President for more than 18 years and have spoken both before the Renton City Council and the Hearing Examiner in that capacity. As President I have been on the City of Renton's mailing list to Community Organizations for more than 18 years as well as in the Renton Chamber of Commerce list of Organizations. My name and address are on file. When the State made its mandate to rezone, neighborhood meetings were held in many neighborhoods. Not Renton Hill. Page 13, 9. Housing. Paragraph 1. Bennett Homes will not be building these homes. The Home values will have to be stipulated to the Company actually doing construction. 3 Page 13. 10. Aesthetics. Paragraph 1. "....would probably erect fences,..." should be clarified. Will the fences be the same? Will the fences be hit or miss? Will some be wood and some chain link and some have no fence at all? Page 13. 11. Light and Glare. Paragraph 1. "Additional traffic, generated by the proposed development, could increase light on streets throughout the area." "Homes, particularly those adjacent to Phillip Arnold Park, could be impacted by light spillover....". Either the light will or will not have an impact on the neighborhood. Page 13. 12. Recreation. "The applicant has proposed that several landscaped areas or"pocket parks" would be created within the development." Who will create and where will they be created? Page 14. Historic and Cultural Preservation. Paragraph 3. ".....that a potential change would probably not be more than other neighborhoods in the City are experiencing,...." Please name any other neighborhood in Renton that has: The same steep grades as Renton Hill, and the same limited street capacity (Renton Avenue South), and the same limited site distance areas, and the same access restrictions, and Yield to up hill traffic signs, and eight deer, and the same safety issues as Renton Hill. Paragraph 5. "Although the distance between the entry road to the project and the intersection (110') is below the City design guideline for spacing of intersections (150 when possible), traffic operations should be adequate based on low traffic volumes." Where is this measurement from and to? The map scale does not clearly indicate the area measured and does not look to be even 110'. This report does not address the safety issues during and after construction for the residents living in River Ridge. All traffic generated by this development will use the River Ridge access on South 7th Court. "Should be adequate"? Is that now? Is that during construction or just based on after completion? What access will be used and where will construction equipment be parked. When some of the testing on this property was done, access was achieved via the Seattle Water Pipeline Road and equipment- parked on this access. What is the plan for all construction vehicles access? 4 Page 15. Fourth Dot. "...S. 7th street is very steep with grades in excess of fifteen percent. The grade in question is 26%. Quite an excess and closed if it is icy or we have snow. Page 15. Seventh Dot. "There is no transit service for residents on Renton Hill, due to the steep grades and narrow lanes." How can it be that streets that are too steep and narrow for transit are o.k. for earth hauling trucks, cement trucks, backhoe carriers, bulldozer carriers and on and on? Page 15. 10th Dot "No improvements are planned•by the City of Renton for streets on Renton Hill." So where will the fee collected for Transportation Mitigation be spent? Page 15. Paragraph 1. "...construction vehicles in excess 26,000_gvw,: associated with the.project..." What will this excess weight do to Renton Avenue South? And how will this affect the mine shaft Vent that continues • to sink on Renton Avenue South? . Page 15. Paragraph 2. Again where will this mitigation be spent? Renton Hill has no marked crosswalks; corner yield signs; limited site distance signs, and only 4 speed limit signs. The North East corner of South 7th turning North on Renton Avenue South, is such that a turn will take all trucks into the oncoming side (South bound) of Renton Avenue South. Page 15 Mitigation Measures: 1. Gross Weight and Numbers of Trips and Road Damage answers. The Renton Hill Community Association does not write the policies of the City of Renton. It is the City of Renton's responsibility toy enforce these policies. We ask no more but expect no less. The continued "variance" : . _ policy does not protect the Cities:residents. This:proposal'and Environmental .. Review do not"Provide a-healthy atmosphere-to live and raise families" as stated in the City of Renton Vision, Mission and Business Plan Goals.. The safety of residents on Renton Hill is greatly jeopardized by even considering the shear numbers of trips required by the removal of cut material and addition of fill material. The City has failed to acknowledge the access hazards and danger this project places on all of Renton Hill's Residents. Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association 5 l•-' '',-‘:,'Yr•;:•:2-,7:'-':?-.7:': -7:',f7-.` 17,:7-.-f',77':''''.:',. :,'::r,•''.;? ::.`.f 1.'• ..- ;:-'..---. 7'.::'''';',';':T..'j''rf.:F;:':''..,'.: .i'5:•7:c2":..;'-'''''::::7':'''''::?.:7 ':f'''. .iY--- ';..:': ,'. '''':.:',.'7.:'.F':k..,,YK:': . , ,:. I NOTES RECEIPT DATE II / 62/0 0 NO. 0951 ( Ass 0 Ca.-i. i C-0(Nn(V- . C... RECEIVED FROM 1ter-jr ° r` ADDRESS 77 ki 1,1 1.9 k 4v S $ FOR 1 Fei.x.',-..-A-ccouNT:Zo.,. ::::i, 'tc.-f7t,,,7.•HOW,PAI D 0'4,*111 •,,, :, 1 AtiVpF: .CASH , ACCOUNT : 4 ___. /54 6 411 ;1 1 Esiii:A44d 4.1011EY: Bye,c415tv, Dr. :,..DUE::.- :ez,RpE.„,: .... REDIFOrifie 8L802 :.:,,,:'-';;,i;,,,,..Fr.r•is V-.:::G,,,,,-:•;,-:',•:,‘:.:l•.,. ,:'.t._; ,42 •,/,.... • ,...—_,,, ,•.: •.,.;,:.:7,,'1,, •s::',,,, ,,,,--:..;-:-',..-,2,-.1-1.4.:,„,::,,',,:z;,:.;,::'.1,,40.1 ,.,,),.^ .-,:: .0.- Ni,1,,,:t .4&.;. :, ::... _ •• .. - ,.. . . 4i 0 \t/ CITY OF RENTON . 6 _4.. .1..,„,...___ ,.,e4...•an................./.9, , NA rc VA ca-4 Vittn,'„.,.,,,, .. . 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 o Hy 07'0 0 0.1 or, E 0 3 0o.,.. . f ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED z cc $A.,„x, PB PIE TER r , i ' 7158401 U.S. POSTAGE k)( - ',KIN:,., PR:F.3'M f IRSI-VLASS SEA NIA -981 'nit ii MD - :• ../ /1,5, ,_ •,„ A.F. and Nancy Alexander 1518 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 ,300c., ., 4, A 0 il 01 • -.... .... ADDRESS :::„....7,7) • , ,x, • ciA __ _____ __,_ __ — -4 RETURN TO SENDER • -1)" ..,.. \-itieler-4.42;5 Ci CITY OF RENTON: Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred,J.Kaufman November 7,2000 Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill Community Association 714:High Ave S Renton,WA 98055 Dear Appellant: • This office has received an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC) State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat (LUA-00-053). The appeal hearing will occur on the same date anditime as the original Public Hearing: November 14,2000 at 9:00a.m.in the 7th floor, City Council.•Chambers of the Renton City Hall. At that time the various official parties may make motions:,and,present their respective positions and evidence and call witnesses.. The issues on an appeal will probably be more;liinited,than the issues regarding the underlying Preliminary Plat. The hearing regarding the Preliminary-Plat will accept all relevant and non- repetitious testimony after theSEPA Because of the inherent limitations due to the;,timing'offthe appeal and the scheduled public • hearing,this office will invite any;additional written correspondence;as soon as possible but will accept any documents at the public hearing itself. If this office can be of further assistance,please feel free to;write: Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufm Hearing Examiner cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer . Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Applicant Parties of.Record • 1055 South Grady Way_Renton, Washington 98055.7 (42,5)430-6515 �:This oaber contains 50%recycled material.20%.nost consumer Appeal of Environmental Review Committee from October 17, 2000 CITY OF RENTON Project name: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat File Number: LUA-00-053, PP, ECF NO V 0 6 2000 File Fee: $75.00 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE The Renton Hill Community Association finds the follow areas subject to question: j 4 S p Criteria source - Environmental Review Committee Staff Report Dated October 17, 2000. Page 2, paragraph 5: Why should a street standards modification be granted that falls below the minimum standard? We have minimum standards, why are they not followed? Page 4, Item 10: What protection is offered to those abutting properties in River Ridge and Falcon Ridge? Page 4, Item 12: Renton Avenue South is now posted no vehicles in excess of 20,000: Why is this posting not recognized? What criteria were used to increase this limit? Page 4, Item 13: What is the Width of the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline"? Will an emergency access permit be required to be received by the City of Renton before any permits are granted? Page 7, D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Impacts: "The site lies near the northwest corner of the upland plain at an elevation of approximately 400 feet above sea level." This statement does not go far enough. Renton Avenue South raises more that 300 feet in less than 4/10 of a mile and all construction vehicles on this project will use this street. The Hearing Examiner statement of 1978 File R- 178=78 "The streets are rather steep and serious questions can be raised concerning traffic safety if too many cars use the streets. Between South 3rd and 7th Streets, Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue average 9.2% and 7.7% slope respectively: Renton Avenue has a short stretch that has a grade in excess of 15% between the same streets. With the grid iron street pattern, a e vehicle (and anything which the vehicle might hit) can be in serious trouble should a serious mechanical problem occur such as brake failure". Page 8, Paragraph 5: Regarding the exception—Why? If we have areas that are "protected" and make continued exceptions the Critical Areas Ordinance is of no value and "protects" nothing. Page 9, Paragraph 5: "The conceptual grading plan indicates that approximately 54,974 cubic yards (82,461 tons) of cut material will be created and 19,233 cy (28,850 tons) of fill would be required. This indicates a high number of hauling trips by large trucks will be necessary." At 30 tons per truck with trailer, this equals 3,710.37 hauling trips and 3,710.37 empty ' trips. This will double if trailers are not used. Renton hill will be paralyzed. These down hill trips half full loads and half empty loads will have no place to Yield to up hill traffic. A truck that has committed to going down hill at 527 Renton Avenue South will not give anyone coming up the hill any place to go. What happens then? You are allowing seven hours per day for this hauling, how many days will it take for 7,420.74 trips? How will you provide for the safety of resident living and accessing their homes on Renton Avenue South? What,kind of damage will this many trips do to Renton Avenue South? This issue must be addressed. Mitigation Measures: Page 9, Item 3: Does not address River Ridge abutting property. Air. Page 10, Paragraph 3: The application states that the property will be clear-cut. This ignores the following: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION, Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Water. Page 10, Paragraph 2: If more than 13 feet of land is removed then the depth required should be from the proposed grade level and down 13 feet. 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 1: 92% of the trees would be removed under this statement. The 32 trees that would be preserved will only be preserved "if possible". This does not conform to Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: VI. VEGETATION, Page 9-10. Policy CD-6.5, CD6.6, and 2 Discussion. NOTE: The objective of this policy is to "preserve vegetation for aesthetic and community character and as a means of safeguarding the environment". Again, why have a policy if is not to be adhered to? 4.Vegetation: Page 11, Paragraph 2: Clarification is needed as to who will be responsible for landscaping and when. 4.Animals: Page 11, Paragraph 1: "Wildlife will probably move into the Cedar River Natural Area".... This does not address the solution to the "Deer Population on Renton Hill". It also does not address the protection of the deer arid other wildlife. The State of Washington:and the Mayor of the • City of Renton have stated: "deer are encouraged to relocate`to an urban area". The Renton Hill herd have not gotten the message. In the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element— Community Design;Page 9-10, "Discussion: Natural and ornamental vegetation provides wildlife habitat, screens unsightly views, reduces exposure to noise and wind, softens the appearance of developed areas, provides shade, stabilizes soil and assists in the percolation of surface water runoff, and frames view corridors. Appropriate selection of vegetation is critical in the success of its survival and the effectiveness of the intended effect. These policies support the development of landscape standards and maintenance plans, and coordination between landscape plans and drainage systems plans. Landscaping is encouraged along travel corridors and the preservation of significant landscape features such as heritage trees is expressed." Clear-cut and bulldozing completely dismiss this entire policy. Page 12, 8. Land Use.'Paragraphs.3 and 4. There was.a complete procedural failure on the part of the City of Renton in.rezoning:this.property. The Renton.Hill'Community Association has been a group for more than 24 ., years. I have been its President for more than 18 years and have spoken both before the Renton City Council and the Hearing Examiner in that capacity. As President I have been on the City of Renton's mailing list to Community Organizations for more than 18 years as well as in the Renton Chamber of Commerce list of Organizations. My name and address are on file. When the State made its mandate to rezone, neighborhood meetings were held in many neighborhoods. Not Renton Hill. Page 13, 9. Housing. Paragraph 1. Bennett Homes will not be building these homes. The Home values will have to be stipulated to the Company actually doing construction. 3 Page 13. 10. Aesthetics. Paragraph 1. "....would probably erect fences,..." should be clarified. Will the fences be the same? .Will the fences be hit or miss? Will some be wood and some chain link and some have no fence at all? Page 13. 11. Light and Glare. Paragraph 1. "Additional traffic, generated by the proposed development, could increase light on streets throughout the area." "Homes, particularly those adjacent to Phillip Arnold Park, could be impacted by light spillover... .". Either the light will or will not have an impact on the.neighborhood. Page 13. 12. Recreation. "The applicant has proposed that several landscaped areas or "pocket parks" would be created within the development." Who will create and where will they be created? Page 14. Historic and Cultural Preservation. Paragraph 3. ".....that a potential change would probably not be more than other neighborhoods in the City are experiencing,...." Please name any other neighborhood in Renton that has: The same steep grades as Renton Hill, and the same limited street capacity (Renton Avenue South), and the same limited site distance areas, and the same access restrictions, and Yield to up hill traffic signs, and eight deer, and the same safety issues as Renton Hill. Paragraph 5. "Although the distance between the entry road to the project and the intersection (110') is below the City design guideline for spacing of intersections (150 when possible), traffic operations should be adequate based on low traffic volumes." Where is this measurement from and to? The map scale 'does not clearly indicate the area measured and does not look to be even 110'. This report does not address the safety issues during and after construction for the residents living in River Ridge. All traffic generated by this development will use the River Ridge access on South 7th Court. "Should be adequate"? Is that now? Is that during construction or just based on after completion? What access will be used and where will construction equipment be parked. When some of the testing on this property was done, access was achieved via the Seattle Water Pipeline Road and equipment- parked on this access. What is the plan for all construction vehicles access? 4 Page 15. Fourth Dot. "...S. 7th street is very steep with grades in excess of fifteen percent. The grade in question is 26%. Quite an excess and closed if it is icy or we have snow. Page 15. Seventh Dot. "There is no transit service for residents on Renton Hill, due to the steep grades and narrow lanes." How can it be that streets that are too steep and narrow for transit are o.k. for earth hauling trucks, cement trucks, backhoe carriers, bulldozer carriers and on and on? Page 15: 10th Dote "No improvements are planned by the City of Renton for streets on Renton Hill." So where will the fee collected for Transportation Mitigation be spent? Page 15. Paragraph 1. "...construction vehicles in excess 26,.000:gvw, associated with the project..." What will this excess weight do to Renton Avenue South? And how will this affect the mine shaft vent that continues to sink on Renton Avenue South? Page 15. Paragraph 2. Again where will this mitigation be spent? Renton Hill has no marked crosswalks; corner yield signs; limited site distance signs, and only 4 speed limit signs. The North East corner of South 7th turning North on Renton Avenue South, is such that a turn will take all trucks into the oncoming side (South bound) of Renton Avenue South. Page 15 Mitigation Measures: 1. Gross Weight and Numbers of Trips and Road Damage answers. The Renton Hill Community Association does not write the policies of the City of Renton. It is the City of Renton's.responsibility:to enforce these policies. We ask no more-but expect no.less.. .The continued "variance" policy does not protect the Cities residents. Thisproposal-and Environmental - Review do not "Provide a--healthy atmosphere-to live-and raise families" as stated in the City of Renton Vision, Mission and Business Plan Goals.. The safety of residents on Renton Hill is greatly jeopardized by even considering, the shear numbers of trips required by the removal of cut material and addition of fill material. The City has failed to acknowledge the access hazards and danger this project places on all of Renton Hill's Residents. Ruth Larson, President Renton Hill Community Association 5 r-•• • MOTES 0951 RECEIPT DATE / Co/0 0 No. RECEIVED FROM rel"-4- ° Li. I tco ei-nr- • Ass 0 c-• ADDRESS k Au .0 • • • • g FOR •1 P:'.itri'14,A-CCOUSIVA44k7A14rki.5.WHONVIPAIDA40040.4.. AMT.,,or-• CASH7.,,,AcOUNT - 14 C • 44140* NONEY BYDUE ORDER 0 Dr 1-av-eertA-A-12 : • - ©1998 RE:4KM®8L802 ti 0 CITY OF RENTON 43 CO IL{"6 4.... ..,0,*400, .... St.-irdr..... • vz —I f-eto el:‘.1 soLL 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 o c" NOV 0 T'0 0 ' t;.:1-'4'.6g a ::: 0 WI CO kat. nr, rD 1 f ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ,._ 715840i U.S. POSTAGP '... 1-tX • IPIIISRT TTRST-VASS SEA MA Sal 114'0810D Jason Donahue 419 Cedar Ave.So. ii^ Renton WA 98055 _ t.• It BL 1 MOT DELI VERA AN 0 1 co r% • AS ADDRESSED F.,...,., ,: -i, UNABLE, TO FORWARD ''''' t RETURN TO SENDER e..• /1" i '1,91. • •: : .• : :: • , : : s: : : :: : , is us ,,......:)..sog•-:.,1:-.;.."-'./-.-- :42. 'ItIssii:issisillsiitt:1•'••"•••1•10:.—isisisiiii i_ *_ 5�. • CITY :OF RENTON Hearing'Examiner Jesse;Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman November 20,2000 • Ryan Fike . Bennett Development • 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill • LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr.Fike: As you may be aware,a public hearing was begun on November 14,2000. That hearing dealt mainly:with _ ` an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC)•State'Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) determination in the Heritage Renton Hill,Preliminary Plat(LUA-00-053). In order to accommodate those persons who.could not testify at a later time or date,some testimony,regarding the Preliminary plat was . - taken. There was insufficient time to complete the on November:14,and the hearing was therefore continued to November 16,2000. It was during the.cburse of that'continued hearing that it became clear "that providing only two days notice(November 14 to November;16)of the continuance did not allow persons who might have already had prior commitments to attend the_second,hearing. This office, ' therefore,determined that the hearing_should be continued with additional lead time. The continued hearing will begin at 6:00 p.m.,on Tuesday',December 12,2000. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers on the 7th Floor of the Renton..City Hall:The matters relating to the appeal have been concludedTlie only issues to be discussed at this hearing will be regarding the Preliminary;Plat. = The only testimony and evidence that will accepted will have to be,relevant'and non-repetitious. This office will not entertain redundant testimony,as that adds nothing factual to the record and does not aid in the writing of the necessary fmdings and:conclusions required by City.and;State law. If this office can be of further assistance,please feel free to write. • Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse-Tanner. Jay Covington;Chief Administrative Officer Larry_Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Zanetta.Fontes ' Ann M:.Gygi Parties Of Record ' • 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington:98055 425)430-6515' This paper contains 50%recycled material,.20%post Consumer _. . . . . . CITY OF RENTON _. ,....._, _ ,4,43, • ... ....:C Hearing Examiner x cl -ie; :,,'p'4. o NOV 21'0 0 ,,,. - ,'„ — 0 .3 0 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 • . -0 .-. tz., en . , 4scaTi.,-,2 Y ' gr ix PB METER . i- E w A.,.1 7'158401 U.S.us POSTA ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED _ . . ' . . . . . • . . . ..' . .. . , • . , .. . ,--.. .— .-- • - . . • , . , . •„. . . . • , Ruth Helsey , • . • . -- r.,,: .-i . ! Marvin Wright 604 Grant Ave. So. ' ..„ . Renton WA WA 98055 , .. ,-,,,,, ,I: • .1 ,, • --,L C ,..,4::: .... . ...,---7. ,::;-•,, . .. . , . f As Ar,r;DREssErg .ifi,' ''''.1 7 •-••-•—:. ,s, •,. ., , iljNAFA.c. To-FOrNiv,,-1. . c --..,.......:10 •-,, (,) - - - - ------- -- - REriiPm.TO SENGER i i i 1 -i=i“iiiii • iiii=ihdiiiiiliiii!iilinilimilitiiiir, I i i ii . .. "------- ________, \':::,:, • • g,87113.S.-%2- .. "..•1' This nannr rrtr.fminc MI,...-.....,,,-...4...............',no/- -- .. - CITY OF RENTON ::•1- dir0) Hearing'Examiner: . Jesse;Tanner,Mayor Fred J Kaufman November 20,2000 Ryan Fike • Bennett Development • 9 Lake Bellevue Drive,Suite 100-A • .Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill •LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr.Fike: As you may be aware,a public hearing was begun on November 14,2000. That hearing dealt mainly with an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC),State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) determination in the Heritage.Renton Hill Preliminary Plat(LUA-00-053). In order to accommodate those persons who could not testify at a later time or date,some testimony regarding the Preliminary Plat was - taken. There was insufficient tune to complete the hearing on November 14,and the hearing was therefore continued to November 16,2060. It was'Airing the course of that continued hearing that it became clear that providing only two days notice(November 14 to November16)of the continuance did not allow persons who might have already had prior commitments to attend the'second,hearing. This office, therefore,determined that the hearing should be continued with additional lead time. The continued hearing will begin at 6 00 p m on Tuesday,December 12,2900. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers on the 7th Floor of the Renton City Hall: The matters relating to the appeal have been concluded The only issues to be discussed at this hearing will, be regarding the PreliminarYPIat. The only testimony and evidence that will accepted will have to be relevant and non-repetitious. This office will not entertain redundant testimony,as that adds nothing factual to the record and does not aid in the writing of the necessary findings and:•Conclusions required by CitY-:and State law. If this office can be of further assistance;please feel free to write. • Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington;Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director • Elizabeth Higgins Zanetta Fontes Ann M.Gygi Parties of Record •1055 South Grady Way Renton; Washington 98055 - 4 • , 4MMEEra . . . . . • "):.: ,CITY OF .RENTON . .. , • ,s.o Cf3 u4..I.'7, ,.). ' Hearing Examiner -.e- < tc al . 9,1:719,VI O.' J o,'.... .., '• . P NOV.21'0 0 t-1/..q — 0 3 0 :"di 5 -s 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 so 1— V.1 02 • — , . • PEi 17E11 . r' ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED -. . . . . . , , . . — -- _ --,-. ,, ri 7----i-•PF)., -,-- ' . . ;-- . ;';:- ii"-:1 __ _ ;• . ; Mr. George Salurmini . . • . 519 Renton Avenue South 1 . ....: • . , . Renton WA 98055 1 . , . . , - , • ! . ' . . • . . , . , . . . . . rio SUCH —1 , , ; . . .; A014 Zil 0,1 . . . . . . co P ,, . ___ _ (i) ,RE11.PN TD S'ENDE•'1 - '' • . • 1 • lliiiill:HWIPildil,k1:1:1,11:1 groz:r.,vninci naner.20%cost-consumer . ; --- - --- „._ Mrs.Elizaheth:F;tewis Renton1525 S 6th St. - .0.-....,-;,..?.-,•---''.--- - co • %, . . ,,',,:,;-,,,,i•..0-,..,4- , ' • , ‘ , : RoDo' . 0 5.cos,al S•,' iiik... ,--to-sitliO) , litAgs, 6.74,5ire. / ----- - e}Ce_ ,F5r-- /, -5 -5 ____o I .24-7 , , 2 ,....__4, / . <co s--,s- . 11111111/111111IthlillilifilifIll 1 ll 1 i I 1 I I II 1 1 if ill ! 1 i I! I III-I. CITY OF RENTON 4.447 'W-6&24... .:•;i,L,,, , .:J 7,k .,6 A 7'4 e;',<. •........,:—..-7.,:ii.,,,. . Hearing Examiner cc = —1 'f,";,•7,/q.,`:1 _ 2 1'0 0 ,:o‘'..e,,, ,s4 — 0 3 0 2 ; • 1055 South Grady Way - Rent6n Washington 98055 to i— w CO ::Irctil;771 .• - 1 • .,61. • Dn 1 0 riETEn i ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED il 22 00 PR- ii- EVM •u4 -2-14-A-L 'si ..e__ __,,___6.<_,./„. ..._ _ ------------- e_f_zz_e___ ___— ....--- ---27(---^- Le---2 - ---i- -- ----- °4--"'<-- -- a--a-- . Ms.Elizabeth Lewis I 1525 South 61 Street • Of, ,i,;.i, 0; __.- __, -2... _./17(--- -- , , Renton WA 98055 • 1,,:d_o____.e._.--- .---(k..t—e---t -, ..-65L..e4,,---/-1..! .....Ac---...z......., 6 Z7 ..;•:.:•4 '' .---g : Ze_e_.,_,:= ,Ii----,i--fri,--ilq,_!-,(ri(F- 11.01 Ci 1 1 1:7:, i 1 ,,- _ , - 'i -,-,%'t- i, ;,Y. 05:-SF.:::=: 1111"1"Iiiiiiishilalmild Lidniiimiitiii,iiiiimiiIiiI,Ii• ON — , i flli___ CITY -OF .RENTON. ..� Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner;Mayor Fred J.Kaufman November 20,2000 • • Ryan Fike . Bennett Development • 9 Lake Bellevue Drive,Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill LUA00-053,PP,ECF ' Dear Mr.Fike: • As you may be aware,a public hearing was begun on November 14,2000. That hearing dealt mainly with an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's(ERC)State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat(LUA-00-053). In order to accommodate those persons who could not testify at a later time or date,some testimony regarding the Preliminary Plat was - . taken. There was insufficient time to complete the hearing on November 14,and the hearing was therefore continued to November 16,2000. It was during the course of that continued hearing that it became clear .. that providing only two days notice'November14 to November.46)of the continuance did not allow persons who might have already-had prior commitments to attend the:second.hearing. This office, therefore,'determined that the hearing should be continued with additional'lead time. The continued hearing will begin at 6:00 p.m.,on"TuesdaytDecember 12,2000. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers-on the 7th Floor of the Renton.City Hall` The matters relating to the appeal�have been concluded The only issues to be discussed at this hearing will be regarding the Preliminary,Plat: The only testimony and evidence that will accepted will have to be.relevant"and non-repetitious. This office will not entertain redundant testimony,as that adds nothing factual to the record and does not aid in the writing of the necessary findings'and conclusions required by City;and State law. If this office can be of further assistance,please feel free to write. • .Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington;:Chief Administrative Officer Larry'Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Zanetta Fontes _ • Ann M..Gygi Parties of Record • • 1055 South Grady;Way=.Renton, Washington,98055 -'(425)430-6515 . .. :: This paper contains 50%'recycled.material 20%post consumer. 01( Y O14 • + ® ♦ s rtl YIP NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED. (DNS-M) DATE: May 4,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICATION NAME: HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 56 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,313 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,S 7th Court,and S 7th Street OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M): As.the Lead Agency,the City of ;Reriton-ha's 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: April 28,2000 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 4,2000 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat approval Requested Studies: Geotechnical engineering report,traffic impact analysis,surface water drainage preliminary technical information report. Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, Sixth Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing scheduled for June 27,2000, before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Land Use: Vacant land,zoned Residential 8 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project Traffic Impact Analysis,Geotechnical Engineering Report,DrainageTechnical..,_ Information Report(Preliminary) ' Development Regulations: " Used For Project Mitigation: State Environmental Policy Act,City of Renton Municipal Code.,King County Surface Water Design Manual NOTICE OF APPLICATION Proposed Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average - weekday trip attributable to the project,estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new lot. . 2. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$488.00 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 3. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 4. Permission for use of the Seattle Public Utilities easement shall be secured by appropriate parties prior to recording of the plat. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Principal Planner, Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on May 19,2000. This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing on June 27,2000,at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers,Seventh Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing,please contact the 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 Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail,please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: ELIZABETH HIGGINS,AICP (425)430-7382 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION __.. a1,4r. ' 1:::::" r-t1y I • \.N\ J L__ 4 I ,•..:• 1 n. r 4•i`J•. lI I---- I I--+--I I_--1\t+r--L--4 ------- ___- I'--4---1 1----_I ~-1___I r---1 -\ \------1 . - ., • L----1 L_1_J L---Z I \C---J .. ... \ r aI .n n. • a-r•sa"q-'1 s r-lr--t 1---i----1 1 /\ V.A. \\ I r—I r_-�r-1 r--� I I , v S. �., yy.. 1-,r��J ih-i1--1�1--_'1---1S1- - L\ r i,•,�\ . L=1J L--11---Idr--T---1Sr--1 ' `',''''1 I I 1 .. L_171 1 • iI---IL-J31---1---1.1--_ --1 <c,',,N ---' ' g L W L—JL_J 1 I I L- I r\ •/ Ail-- I 1 L.., "a I IL__I r--T--1 p_77T _-1 I\ --,1* I " j .. i,',(-"J L_JL_J L__1__J r_J1_J r' !1 I �1 '-) �,a, 1 I ra�m.r. I I I r �_J r_`\ N r'_._-__ i , -J 1 �r--1--I I .. I C n r--1- - -t r ri r 1i I I _,L__1--Jry-E:.4.,pa._j L_�\:.� L I i I 'r-. 1 .r � ji L —I L_{-,L„_p� - J - I `.. �;.I •\'r '..r.:,1, 1 n I .. I I I 11 1---1 I---1 11 I I I I:II I I L +e I Z;6:, • --.- . I 1 —�r--T--1 r---r, r i�r-1 r r'- 1 1.1■p 1 1--1---; • F.F■I✓J© I i \r-r- I I I I r-1 I I I IL_J L.__L_�`,� I r-- I - t I 11 I I I 1 \ 1. " I l.I-•r 1 r--T---1 r1- -1-1 1--J1--1 I I---1 '. 9 1::::::ti © ':'. • ...,. I L__J I L__I I.l__-.JL._I I I I. (� �I R p -- �+ " I I t1 I 1SI r-'-1t1 11 1.9 1 ' 1, \ ." ©:gffi ) © . 1 I. :I., ;,' ;i,; 1'•� I •r---'r-'--t r--1--1.1---1r--A-- 1' - 1` �i OO © • 1';1 r 1 I; oIr• 1 r--4----1 1---1 Iil Ir--1 r- I--y y q!�aB n i..:1 1 l,^''::ri ' ":.Li:;I''.,i�,~r J�--I---'I I I_L•-tom_ / I I----I 'I I �_ ..):..JI 1 L.--I-.J • C°,©�mg■ 0 r l .2 F',.r.:a? 1, ,-r-•:" / t I F--�'--1 r- h19`a afN o''�Jr-1 L_..I_ I Q14 m I'-�a1' 1 y I"I''Sif"•�.. \\‘ 'f/i\�• L__1__J L_J_Ld"L__IL_J L I__J 9,,. 1 )n t_• lar.. 1' I� 1 �u/' ��}.,• L I L . .r,..r I .. , 4 p-..?A._-1 '1.1 ' IJ_L_r-�:N\�`\•1 w:!,?:' T�� II r 1 r1-r-1 r—v-1 r11---1 cucr u- • .\\•,i` ' \ �',.' / `/`I� 1 r11--1 I B I rJ-1--I •.':.-t. .' ,\`©©�.-,�Li\,•',',\\..,cm 1`i IC' �� Cm7CJ 1--al---1 1---I---1 \.`-.�' rw`w+` n'�• "ter, ', r- I 11 I I I I ", - �' ' '' L-31.607i L-J �1=__------------ \\ „rK"•. • a°.. . . • /. - \\ '\ \ .. ._ •S • .NOTICE OF APPLICATION 6 0 CITY OF RENTON • . .4%,„ A......:z:=evff Nall, Planning/Building/Public Works 4 Ca , 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 , C.3 S FI, NAT 0 4'0 Airs0.4.0 — cs. * im crlf \ PB METER * EifiC \ * E 4 * ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED '' - ..t. - 7158401 U.S. POSTAO -A - i.. Zi (,-:-( _:;'!;-,pri -5y, P ••:_t,..\ . , 1 '' -21 " -i /',. 7 , .---- --..,-, DAVID SCH''ER 2064 SE : FL RENT WA 98055-3947 I PS E I .. 1:i i\,), ‹_----,::-_-_-, 1 _,',., -.• N,,,, 1 r--I— ..1 .--t JO, -- - __- - - - --- - - - - - - - - CA ADDI.:1'ESSFP. ' 1.1nl;I ; N 1 Ci f tAt i (14 \, ' . . 1. \V' bszl9M0tek5 iiiildiiiiniiiiiiiiiliihtitilitibiliiiiitinilliniill ________.....______., N• -31)-- z.J s • __ ___ ......____ _ • ® NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED: (DNS-M) DATE: May 4,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-00-053,PP,ECF APPLICATION NAME: HERITAGE PHILIP ARNOLD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 56 lots suitable for single.,family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a).'The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a. Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,313 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of Beacon Way SE,S 7th Court,and S 7h Street 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 43.21 C.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: April 28,2000 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 4,2000 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat approval Requested Studies: Geotechnical engineering report,traffic impact analysis,surface water drainage preliminary technical information report. Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, Sixth Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing scheduled for June 27,2000, before the Renton Hearing Examiner In Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Land Use: • Vacant land,zoned Residential 8 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project Traffic Impact Analysis,Geotechnical Engineering Report,Drainage Technical • • " ' ' Information Report(Preliminary) Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: State Environmental Policy Act,City of Renton Municipal Code,King County Surface Water Design Manual . .., . . NOTICE OF APPLICATION Proposed Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of$75.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project,estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new lot. 2. 'The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$488.00 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 3. The applicant shall pay the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of$530.76 per each new single family residential lot created by the proposed plat. 4. Permission for use of the Seattle Public Utilities easement shall be secured by appropriate parties prior to recording of the plat. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Principal Planner, Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on May 19,2000. This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing on June 27,2000,at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers,Seventh Floor,Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing,please contact the 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 Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail,please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: ELIZABETH HIGGINS,AICP (425)430-7382 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION • r-r.41 J L J 1 r-__--- -1 rT-- y-1 r \ \---I L I •;'� .`t.• ir • MI-----I r--4•--11 l • ' L___J r___ -\ J L---D L-1_J L-- 1 I J Liin ir.'J L_L_J Y TZ-11 'c � F--t-_ L_ F-+, / r-1r-1 Y--1 1 1 J \ Y ,'-•'` 4y Lx:-/ rF-iF- LF-_+--it-__L\ ' ice\ L717'4 F--J1--JSL--1---ItL--- -J <C•'•141 j 1 , I L :f L_JL_J I I 11--11� 1 4 �. ,_ r-- ' 1 , .. 1 L /-1 I IL_J r--T--1.I-- I-� I\ .'111 I I �,�i -I r� L�-I I--I--I r--i_J r-��y r_'-__-J • �' f. , _J I r-1Y--T--1I IL_ ,\ r-r-r-, •'-r- 1 re: r I! 1 I L__l- I 4t, L_ 1 I 1 11 •''• / a I -r[--1 -J;;' "_`J _y _L.I I ., ,I r-- ,r L-1I \,.at',•y.' ^-1 _ I r_ -)''i'. ..•_-"i I I LT_�-Ia L_ L_;L„p.t'-_Ip,r-Z TJ r--L_7�\.'ti'•1 \•.\�.� r:. 1 1 n �_.,_y I 11 F--} F-J I I I I111 I I I .. es -.d, I •i -'._. I I I L__ =J L__•L--J L_J_T_, Limi t L--K^� ie/ _! ! '• I -R r--T--1 r--- -1 r-r-ir-1 r--r ' - I ...-". 'r © I r•_-� 1 1 1 I r--1 I I I 1 iL_J L__L_j•,, a,� ••U E•U b)Jfl I • I • 1 r--1 I r--1 1 Yrll I I 1 I \ ` m " I t.�•r ..... I r--T--1 r--1-L-1 L-Jr--1 r--r--I 9 I:EC::C� © _ ;� \ I SL__J I L_J LI__..JL_ I.. I I. O ©��= © • 1 1 1.1+'`''. • '' . I i I I I 1 NI 1 1!I II I I I I. , r r- 1>)r 1 1�r - IF•-I r._I. ..I• e,. 0 ■� © - I ' 1I_ 1I L_Air-iI 1,jI I 1p "> ��mccYiW ,,•1/., ..=.+� 1}1 �, .. :; ir�i'. �r -+--lg1---I ISI Ir-ljr-1---IRS O n ,. ,1 \ a:':•• . I.hr:. F--}__� F-�---7 is JL_J H_-L-J p r •r i . ,!L r't;i;v,••. •., `•.• `' - I . / r---1 11 _ I H: JI IL.__I_._J• 4oy let ow © _1, .,• It \• .'r'•••. i $ 1 F--�'--1 r -;.0,Vo.y Jr-1 1___.I__I m I J F' 1 I`'•r1i�`•'• \` .'/ L__1__J L-J_t_id 7._IL_J L__I__J a ��r-•i ' I 4:t' \ 1 1 C .I 1 .. 1 � I I 0/'\r�4.. • rr i LT• 1 rT-r-1 r,V'r1 r11--1 to \��I�L ..'1 \^•1 L-I!-T_'d\Mll \'y!`. ' / I . H--1---1 F-+--I I--1---1 .. C' \• -t.,\..> / I I F.--1 I 0 I I I I a,.cr N \.,''v'ti T-1 \ - -.l L 1 J I 1 I r 1 1 ��(('.` .11�.... F--aF--1 r---1---1 .\.•-:;,. <a r- � I 11 I I I I v .war%s!'.. `vje,• \�•-1 I I r---r I---1--1 \ \ - `"'•µ'4 1 L J L-J__J 1-*-__ -___----- _ - • L_rl,- - �Cs \ \ • \ • I • \ ` `\\• l.. .I . .•.,- y NOTICE OF APPLICATION 0 c• CITY OF RENT ON ,,...Z.7 . 4 .iprogi I zaig,,,,,,,, ,esernamweeW -461 VAI, ,lieleiv el 1 4/NIL Planning/Building/Public Works 0 • 0‘4.4)d 1•It 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 to b- MIT 0 4'0 elm= ... , . t ,, 7P R1;87 057 U.S. POSTAGE ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED. kt • PRSRT F 1RST-CLASS SEA VA SR t5105 I 043 ' -• 1 `1 t ,-1,`,-t,,' ,- fi , PUGET WESTERN INC SUITE 310 - REEL WA 98011 000 . i INSUFFICIENT ‘, ,A i ADORES ' ( ... co 04 - , cipci, INV ' u) tRETURN TO SENDER a ,Y) -4 iiiiiliiiiilifilildiiiniiii -- 4-> •• �c CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department • Jesse Tanner,Mayor • Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 26,2000 Mr.Ryan A. Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 Re: Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053, PP,ECF Hold Letter Dear Mr.Fike As you are aware,the comment period for the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat closed May 19, 2000. This week those comments have been considered by the appropriate departments of the City that are reviewing the land use action submittal. In particular,the project/park access as proposed was discussed in a meeting of members of the Development Services,Public Works (Transportation), and Community Service(Parks)Departments of the City of Renton. In addition to the design of the entry to the proposed preliminary plat and Philip Arnold Park, general transportation issues in the Renton Hill area were discussed. • As you are aware,this project was scheduled for review at the May 30,2000,Environmental Review Committee(ERC) so that they could make a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) Threshold Determinatiion.''At;this time,additional information will be required prior to-the ERC meeting. Therefore;the.ERC`meeting,and'subsequently the public hearing previously scheduled for June 27,2000,will be rescheduled. Until additional information, as outlined in this letter, is received and accepted as adequate,the project is on hold, as of the date of this letter. As mentioned, a primary concern is related to transportation issues on Renton Hill. For this reason,please ask the transportation engineers to supply the following: Traffic Count • Provide traffic counts for a period of twenty-four hours per day for one week for the following streets (not intersections): 1. S 7th Street between Grant Avenue S and Renton Avenue S 2. Cedar Avenue S between S 4th Street and S 5th Street 3. Renton Avenue S in the 300 block Park Traffic :Discuss:additional traffic to parks-for ball field Use,group'picnics, and general park use and how.traffic.generated by the park location relates to capacity of the proposed development: 1055 South Grady Way-Renton;Washington 98055 alThis oaoer contains 50%recycled material.20%nnst noncumnr Mr.Ryan A. Fike Bellevue,WA 98005 Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat,LUA00-053,PP,ECF May 26,2000 Page 3 • Accident Records • Provide accident incident reports for the past five years for intersections and streets in the Renton Hill area. Characterize these by nature,location,number of incidents. This area includes streets bounded by Interstate 405 on the west and north,the Shuffieton Right of Way to the south, and the Cedar River greenway to the east.The Falcon Ridge development may be excluded. Intersection Reconfiguration Design • The intersection reconfiguration proposed is not acceptable to the Transportation Division or the Parks Department. The existing access along Beacon Way S to the park must remain as it is now. Access to the plat should be evaluated directly from SE 7th Court east of the Beacon Avenue ROW. This new intersection would include a stop sign for the new street at SE 7th Court.The existing interchange would remain unchanged. This configuration would require vehicles exiting the plat to stop at SE 7th Court,turn left onto SE 7th Court,and stop again at the existing top sign at SE 7th Court's intersection with the Seattle Pubic Utilities' ROW, Beacon Way S, S 7th Street, and Jones Avenue S. Analysis • A traffic analysis of this intersection must be submitted that demonstrates that it would operate effectively given the amount of increased traffic generated by the proposed development and the unusual number of streets that intersect. If you have any questions,please call me at 425-430-7382. You or the transportation engineer may also contact Neil Watts,Director of Development Engineering Plan Review at 425-430- 7278. Sincerely Elizabeth Higgins,AICP Senior Planner Cc: Karl Hamilton,Transportation Planning Leslie Betlach,Parks Department Jennifer Henning,Development Services Neil Watts,Development Services Parties of Record file •IirliwN ,._ .. ---rier--mor-rip-monmpimper, . , , _ , ,, , ; _ , ..... , • $ CITY OF RENTON ; - .. ;- ,;, . illa Plannin Buildin Public Works ,u Y09 g/ g/ x- PowM/ ;. 1055 South GradyWayRenton Washington 98055 co t NY 2 6'0 0 re �1 E ® „3 0 5 - g ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTEDAu ca - 75 8401 U.S. POSTAGE e _ -"CNC;)--) t:; George SalurminiVs Y 519 Renton Ave S Renton, WA 98055 avue op ADDRESS Cc" ' LAl_ ET'JEtPY r� SENDER c4 Jf:, }t t6r' .�'� i 1111,111,181ii.ifiii<<1,1,i,iir+iiili)il,,;iiiiliildilifilii1 - - • . i - 0 p CITY OF Rsea F,NTON ,O air( 0l `` _.Z:- Planning/Building/Public Works r q ��,, 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 9 5 to i. SEP 15'0 0 ep `c'A'n1 = Q _� 5 Y xikl'i:s ^3, ;3 �:3:il ` ..� fan *: t,v .`iL3';� PBM[TEn ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED a = 7138401 PDSTSGi: ; ,�° REASON CHECKEl ,1 le L 01`� Refused Unclaimed — O• Attempted Not nown Insufficient Address Mr.Louis Malesis - No Such Street 1728 SE 7th Court No Such Number No Such Office In State Renton WA 98055 Dig not remail in this envelope - - NO SUCH i -- o{ I ADDRESS `- "'•_- —. (\.-6-4/ci2S '' ti_41".. 1r.::/-..,,2-'-7, 1S tt ti i mi i ?t i ?i? im i ii i??Si i ms i it! it ��, (i � 1 iil 11 I1 l` � � 11 ' II ' � 1 I' 1 4724:-.4.:•• %4 0 CITY OF RENTON ... e ea ` 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 km 15'01 - - t. : 0 09 7. fr- ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED Q. g: Bart Bennett , ----•ir 1800 SE 7th Ct. Renton, WA 98055 • • SOT �tLllfERbBIE �`"'' `� ,� ..: - AF. AODRESSED..: .__--4,,- = _ . _�.�. __. = �� " . z LINABLE TO FORWAht, a ,•; , -: .. . _ . .__. . ...._... _- ----. __ , As RETURN TO=SENE?�� - f_ E'_�. - _t �.� � �f�j j) j F ! j � E /'%t. _-..7-43,elP i^ z.:::•,. \' :-;": ,1+1/..:1,al:Iil la/.fitsi'1?3.11;1 .i.l-'..l ,LI1M , %o © CITY OF RENTON `'' ` ice ... _ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055:: ,�1t Z 5'01., • ' = f) 97 = ,, ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED »" PB f r e-on -- Mr. George Salurmini 519 Renton Avenue South f Renton WA 98055 • X _ y .eta T. .,r s •,'-j :.:e _.e ':; -_- ��,V'_ .4a--SUCH C�i�!?,.. -• -- __ .• � ... tin„ + aigcr. It: .t i f - �:p 'y;. ,^:ii's - 4.$ r. `?;':sue- - _ __ ... ..' .__ i. VOIMINPIP a ,,V14 RE 1 RN jD SENI r:. 4 ![ � ! p ! a..� > - ti _.._._ _ -v r .. �:. -- .� _ II?iii? ii3ditfhl�illfifl!!?I'1t3!�liiil !£JLdiEi3l2f s"t4E l Y; CITY OF RENTON sy� Hearing'Examiner. Jesse Tanner,Mayor - Fred J.Kaufman November 20,2000 Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive,Suite 100-A Bellevue,WA 98005 • Re: Heritage Renton Hill LUA00-053,PP,ECF • Dear Mr.Fike: As you may be aware,a public hearing was begun on November 14,2000. That hearing dealt mainly with an appeal of the'Environmental Review Committee's(ERC),State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) determination in the Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat(LUA-00-053).'In order to'acoommodate those persons who could not testify at a later time or date,some testimony regarding the Preliminary Plat was . taken. There was insufficient time to complete the hearing on.November.14,and the hearing was therefore continued to November 16,2000. It was during the:course of that continued hearing that it became clear that providing only two days notice(November14 to NovemberJ6)of the continuance did not allow persons who might have already,had prior commitments to attend the secondhearing. This office, therefore,determined that the hearing,should be continued with additional'lead time. ' The continued hearing will begin at 6:00 p.m.,on'7uesdayTDecember 12,2000y. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers on the 7th Floor'of,the Renton:.City The matters relating to the appeal been concluded. Tlieonly issues to be discussed at this hearing will be regarding the Preliminary,Plat. The only testimony and evidence that'will accepted will have to be,relevant and non-repetitious. This office will not entertain redundant testiiiiony,as that adds nothing factual to the record and does not aid in the writing of the necessary findings and conclusions required by City and State law. If this office can be of further assistance,:please feel free to write. . • Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington;Chief Administrative Ofcer Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Zanetta Fontes . Ann M..Gygi - Parties Of Record •. 1055 South Grady Way- Renton Washington 98055 - (425)430- 6515 , :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consume: • „ s , __. r, \ ' - - . —. ITY OF RENTON _..Y".* . ..4e=----------,tti,-;-,-,i?.:4-at---",,,.?.„---,:;,•;.,.. '., . 'Z''.:1--d!!.'".2.:,,-.1- 47.-_•- e 4.. P3A- -.• ta,1 . ' ' a iin ..P .: Hearing Examiner . , - 1?,,,,7;e",.;if _ •=•Eil NOV 21'0 0 pft.t,V:A — 0 3 0 5 , • Grady Way - Renton Washington, 98055 - . lo 1-- &Li CO :„1.1,,.,-..2,1"1:;: '''' PB ',1i1TP11 .' DDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 715g401 u.s. PosincE , ! ,.:,t,•,..--,3, • - ------ • '',..,4 ..,:,,,,,,;.;•,,,!7'?•-.'.,.r,..".";r-;:"..v,.fi ".',:',.-:::%:::.', 1.1."1::,...,1:1 nr:'7.ti &.; ,).v..... '."..! I;- _... ::1 ,,,,•.---.:., +.1 0'Ns;.--,,; ''' '' '' ". • ,- : -',.-,.-.).''--.' '-/,0 0;..-., . • - Jason4i9 ceDonahuedar - --- -- Renton WA 98055 Ave. So. „..------.........-,......._„ .-----;---,. .......,-c., 4..„ •i 1RA3LE •,••••_:.-------..- . t: . . • -> ---- ,'-‘, ESSED • 1/4'; i 1 , , (co ,^..o.N i E 0 ' . . ' . . , . 0 FCRWt,P,D '--"--- V TO SENDER I IP i t II ts 1 1 ii 1 t t 1 i I tt I --- ) This paper contains 50%recycled paper,20%post-consumer - I _ -- ------ mai ...., a (flt - CITY OF RENTON la Planning/Building/Public Works sirox7,..t _ „ ,j 4„ cp,o . $1,4%*e a ... u 5 I, ei,ermii - .. 7 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 rai- OCT 20°0 0 ou ca , tE , , PB ME11:11 , ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 1.0 ,1-.-:, ea PR .7-- 1 61171E10 . PQ1-:ftGE : .„ ,-,' ,A ,, .,;,, , 3 1 cx) ...._... 0 .5 .. _ _. . , ...„ , ,...., Jason Donahue . . • 419 Cedar Avie_So Renton WA 9 DONA419 980553007 14500 15 10/26/00 RETURN TO SENDER DONAHUE1JABON MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS UNABLE TO FORWARD RETURN TO SENDER , ' - R ti tt.P. 9g).....Sre-•._..,:-..-.,.,--._.,..-4-.-..-4 il I i i II i u ;•.• • ,.:,...., ..„.,...:,..... ..:,...:. . .;.. ! , .., : ., , . .,...,....„ ..„...„ • .,.. ,,,,,,.; k CITY OF;RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department • Jesse Tanner,Mayor` • Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator October 19, 2000 • Mr: Ryan Fike Bennett Development 9 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 100-A • Bellevue, WA 98005 . SUBJECT: -.`Heritage Renton Hill •• Project No. L-UA-00-053,PP,ECF Dear Mr. Fike: .• : .. . :�.. , 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 October 17, 2000, issued a threshold Determination .of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Appealsof:the environmental.,determination must be filed..in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 6, 2000. 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 4-8-110.'':Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton:City:Clerk's Office,'(425)-430-6510. • • A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing:Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall,-'on November:14, 2000-at 9:00:AM to consider the..proposed Preliminary Plat. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public • hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you one week before the hearing.. If the Environmental Determination is appealed,the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. The preceding information will assist you i planning for implementat ion 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)430-7382. . For the Environmental Review Committee, Elizabeth Higgins,AICP = Senior Planner. - cc: ` ` Renton.SchoolDistrict#403/Owners Parties of Record :r, ! + •t:•_ Enclosure • _ . rinsmIaHar' • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 Ica► • • • CITY OF.RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF• , • APPLICANT: Bennett Development PROJECT NAME: Heritage Renton Hill DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division: of a 10.35 acre property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8), which allows residential development of between. 5.0 and 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would, be 6.8 du/a... Lot sizes Would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject to review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City_of'Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. • LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon;Way:SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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 the ',,King County Surface'Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). This will be required during the construction of both off-site 'and on-site improvements was 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 tp 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 of drainage swales shall conform ,to the specifications, presented in the most recent KCSWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be"used'to convey stormwater across the site. These measures 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 for the construction of the civil improvements of the plat. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion'control facilities shall . be required prior to recording of the plat., 5. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of;$7.5.00 per each new average weekday trip attributable to the project, estimated to be 9.55 average weekday trips per new single family lot..The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. .6.'. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $488.00.per each new single family created by the proposed plat: The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. • Heritage Renton Hill • LUA-00-053,PP,ECF. Mitigation Measures (continued) Page 2 of 2 • 7. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee at the rate of $530.76 per each new single family residential lot. The fee is due prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineers, Geotech Consultants, Inc., (report dated September 14, 1999), as they pertain to site development and building construction. 9. A note shall be added to the face of the plat, prior to recording, stating that a.known potential for • ground subsidence exists in the area and that building plans shall be designed in consultation with a structural engineer and shall conform to the recommendations_ of the Geotech Consultants, Inc., as found in their report dated September 14, 1999. 10. The rear setback at the lot located in the northwest corner of the property (Lot 35 as shown on the plan dated 8/31/00) shall be twenty-five feet. A note shall be placed on the title of the lot prohibiting building construction within twenty-five feet-and:clearing within ten feet of the rear property line, as shown on the revised plan submitted by the"applicant and dated 8/31/00. • 11. The applicant shall ensure that all construction debris and discarded items are excavated from the site' and construction is ceased immediately, followed by notification of the City of Renton Development Services Division within 24 hours, should hazardous material be discovered during said removal. 12. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include a condition that construction vehicles in excess 26,000 gvw; associated with the project, would be Prohibited from operating on Renton Hill during am and pm peak traffic hours as identified in the report,""Heritage Renton Hill Preliminary Plat Arnold Property Traffic Impact Analysis, Addendum No. 2," by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 11, 2000. • 13. The applicant shall obtain 'an access permit,in order to use,the Seattle Public Utilities "Cedar River Pipeline Easement"for a secondary,•emergency only access. • • • • MITMEAS CITY OF RENTON • DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES • • APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-053,PP,ECF- • APPLICANT: Bennett Development :PROJECT NAME: .: Heritage.Renton Hill • DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes division of a 10.35 acre-property, by means of the preliminary plat process, into 57 lots suitable for single family residential development. The property is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) which allows residential development of between 5.0 and 8:0 ' dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The proposed density for this project would be 6.8 du/a.• Lot sizes would range from 4,504 to 8,318 square feet each. The minimum'lot size in the R-8 Zone is 4,500 sf. .The applicant has requested a modification of street standards to allow public street right-of-way widths of - 42' (instead of 50'). The proposed project is subject,to_review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A public hearing before the City_of Renton Hearing Examiner will also be required. ' LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Intersection of Beacon Way SE, S 7th Court, and S 7th Street 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._`'.: :..:.'. .- .-. . Plan Review-Sanitary Sewer • • 1. There is an existing 8" sewer main in SE'7th Court, adjacent to.the north side of the proposed plat. The new project can be served by'extending an 8" sewer:main from this existing main through the proposed subdivision. • 2. The conceptual sanitary,sewer main "shown on the`;drawing submitted for the formal.application ' appears to be in order. 3. .A sewer cleanout will need to be located five feet out from buildings. 4.: Separate side sewers will be required for each parcel.(no dual sewers).Side sewer lines must have a " 2 percent slope. • 5: All utility plans must comply with the City of Renton Drafting Standards. 6: Show finished floor elevations on the sewer construction plan sheet. • 7.. The vertical profile of the sewer main will be required: ' 8. The project is located in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. .9. Any new sewer mains are to be separated from water lines by a minimum of 10 feet: There is a 7:5 foot minimum separation from other utilities. : . -. . • Heritage Renton Hill LIJA-00-053,PP,ECF • Advisory Notes(continued) • - Page 2 of 2 . . • 10. Sewer Development Charges of$585.00 per single family residence will be required for this plat. The' fee for this project would be $16,380.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S, an 8" water main in SE 7t" Court, and an 8" water main stub to the north boundary of this parcel. • • 2. The proposed project is located in the 490 foot water pressure zone. Static water pres-sure will range from approximately 40 psi at elevation 395 feet to 55 psi at elevation 360 feet. 3. Any new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM fire flow and shall be located within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measure along a travel route. Additional fire hydrants will be required as part of this project to meet this criteria. 4. The water main must be a looped system with two separate feeds. The conceptual utility plan needs to be modified to show the second feed to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S. 5. Installation of 8"water mains in the interior streetS.of the:plat to serve the domestic water meters and fire hydrants are required. . 6. Connection to the 8"stub along the north property line is required (see plan W-2038). 7. Connection to the existing 6"water main in Jones Avenue S is required (see plan W-1156). The water conceptual utility plan shall be revised to show this connection.'• " , Water System Development charges of$850.00 per new single family lot will be required for this. The charge for this plan would be $48,450.00. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of the construction permit for the preliminary plat. • ' • Plan Review—Stormwater Drainage - 1. A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the preliminary plat application for this project and appears to be in order. 2. Drawings submitted to the City of Renton,are to be on 22 inch x 34 inch sheets: The information pertaining to the City of Renton should be removed from the title block of the sheets submitted. 3. Before any construction or development activity occurs, a pre-construction meeting must be held with the City of Renton Development Services Division, Construction Services (425-277-5570). •• • 4. The City of Renton retains the right to restrict the timing of land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons,when such restrictions may be necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare, or for the protection of the environment. 5. Surface Water System Development charges of$385 per new single family lot will be required for this - plat. The fee for this project would be $21,945.00. This fee must be paid'prior to issuance of the • construction permit for the preliminary plat. Plan Review—Transportation and Street Improvements 1.. All electrical and communication facilities to be underground behind the sidewalk. If right-of-way. space is not available, then in a utility easement. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. _ , • 2. Streets over 700 feet in length are required to have two means of access. - , • , ADVISORYNOTES a Heritage Renton Hill LUA=00-053,PP,ECF : • • Advisory Notes(continued) • ' Page 3 of 3 • • -:3::.. Street lighting is required to meet City standards. Minimum lighting level is 6:1 uniformity ratio and 0.2 • foot candle level. The street lighting conduit to be located under the sidewalk. . : • 4. The minimum right-of-way width is 42 feet(modified fromhstreet standard width of 50 feet). 5. "The:cul-de-sac is required to have a minimum pavement radius of 45 feet and right-of-way radius of 55 feet.. 6.": A 5 foot sidewalk at the curb is required 7. : Payment of a Transportation Mitigation fee of$75 per new average weekday trip, estimated at 9.55 • new trips per single family lot,will be required prior to recording of the plat.- It has been estimated that this 57 lot plat would result in approximately544;35 additional average(weekday)trips. The _Transportation Mitigation Fee would be$40,826.25. Plan Review—General 1. 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. 2. The construction permit application(s) must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. • 3. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5 percent of the first$100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4:percent of.anything over$100,000, but less than $200,000, and 3 percent of anything over$200000. "Half,of this fee must be paid upon application for construction permits(preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. • There may be additional fees for water service related.expenses.::y 4: An easement that meets City standards,for ingress `egress, and utilities shall be"provided by the applicant to the property abutting the east property`boundary at a point within 200 feet of the northeast property corner of the proposed plat. Parks Department Review 1. " Payment of a Parks Mitigation fee of"$530.76for each new single family lot will be required prior to recording of the plat. The Parks fee will.:be$30,253.32. • Building Department Review • 1. Demolition permits will be required. Fire Prevention Department Review 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to • 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. • 2, Provide a 20 foot paved secondary emergency access from the cul-de-sac within the development to • the Seattle Public.Utilities Cedar River Pipeline Easement (Beacon Way SE). - This would be an emergency access only and can be gated or chained. • 3: All building addresses shall be visible from a public street 4.; A Fire.Mitigation fee of $488 is`required for all new single family lots. Payment is required prior to recording of the plat. The Fire Mitigation fee for the proposed project would be$27,816.00. Property Services Department Review 1:. Comments will be provided under;separate cover. • ADVISORYNOTES - • Heritage Renton.Hill - . LUA-00-053,PP,ECF° . • Advisory Notes(continued) : - • Page 4• of 4'. • • • • Development Services Department Review 1.:. The site is designated Residential Single Family in the Comprehensive Plan. ' -2. The property.is zoned Residential 8(R-8).;.' • ' :3. Densities allowed in the R-8 Zone are 5.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/a) minimum and 8.0 du/a maximum.' 4. Minimum lot size in the,R-8 Zone is 4500 sf; with minimum width of 50 for interior lots;and 60 for corner lots. The minimum permitted lot depth,is 65.feet. Lot dimensions must be shown on the final • site plan demonstrating that all lots meet these'minimums. - . 5.- Heights of buildings in the R-8 Zone are limited to 2 stories, or 30 feet. 6; Required setbacks in the R-8 Zone are 15 feet for houses and 20 feet for attached garages which access from the front when houses front streets created after September 1, 1995, 20 foot rear yard setbacks; 5 foot side yard setbacks for interior lots and .15 feet sideyard setbacks for corner lots. All. setbacks are minimums. Setback dimensions :should be shown on the a construction drawings, but • setback lines must be removed prior to recording the final plat. . 7. The maximum building coverage`in the R-8 Zone is 35 percent:for lots over 5,000 sf or 50 percent for lots 5,000 sf or less. 8. Dead end streets cannot exceed 700 feet in length, measuredfromsthe edge of the connecting street to the end of the cul-de-sac. ;.. ..:;`; 4.• 9.. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 10. Construction easements obtained from;.abutting::property owners may be necessary prior to Construction.of retaining walls on'or near-.propertyrlines. These agreements must include protection measures for (or permission to potentially„damage'or remove) trees located on abutting properties within 20 feet of the property line. 11,'The applicant shall draft end ,;record a .maintenance„`agreement or establish a Homeowners' Association for the maintenance of:all-common,improvements (access and utility easements,.rights.- ' of-way, and stormwater facilities):,A draft of the document shall be submitted to the City of Renton for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to the recording of the preliminary plat. 12. Performance, Standards. for Land Development Permits (RMC 4-4-130K), including "Protection Measures During Construction" (RMC 4-4-130K7) relating to trees, shall be followed by the applicant. The applicant shall adhere to the definition of."tree a found in RMC 4-11-200, "drip line" as found in RMC 4-11-040, and the measurement of trees es found in RMC4-11-030. 13. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources may require a Forest Practices Permit for" the conversion of timber land to another Use. ' 14. The applicant should contact Paul Alexander of The King County Department of Transportation, Metro Transportation, Metro Transit Route.Facilities at 206-684-1599, regarding Metro'srequirements for • • •potential transit service in the area(no service is currently available to Renton Hill). • ADVISORYNOTES c: : ,� :CITY OF RENTON . LL. Hearing Examiner . Jesse Tanner,Mayor• Fred J:Kaufman February 12,2001 • • . Ruth Larson,President ' • Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue S • Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration,Renton Heritage Hill._. - Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings _ • _ LUA00=149,AAD and LUA0O-053,PP,ECE Dear Ms:Larson: This office received a request for reconsideration regarding4his:matter and the response follows. First,this office does not discount that there will be impacts ort the community, both short-lived impacts and long-term impacts. The;;short-lived(which itself is a relative term).impacts will be. the concrete impacts of development,including construction traffic'and noise. The long-term ' impacts will be increased,traffic and noise from'-new:residents:; That:does not mean that,those impacts will create an overall untoward_impact`as:required for a SEPA determination of . • significance. • This office will generally..address the concerns in the-manner used by the request. Page 8,#21: The issue was:the proposed reduction in hauling truck-trips due to a change in • grading plans 'The applicant proposed to more closely balance`the.cut and fill. The change in grading plans is now considered part of the application and cannot be altered without submitting a new application. The party that ultimately develops the site is,not relevant to the permit as reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would be bound by the application as it was reviewed nand approved.' Stafford Crest as well as'a number of large apartment complexes have all resulted in construction traffic similar to'if not larger than the construction traffic anticipated. It is not so significant as to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. " Page 8,#22: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the . documents and bolstered by the-testimony: There will be additional traffic, and there will be a fraction of a second delay at the signal-controlled.intersection which will not be noticeable.:'The • LOS for the various intersections,which is currently excellent,will not be changed other than that - • fractional delay. There is rio question that the hill•and its various routes are quite steep,but the • entire record demonstrates that traffic can negotiate it satisfactorily:. • Page 9,#24: Again;the record demonstrates that the hill is now negotiated by current residents and can be similarly negotiated by,new residents. Staff supported the applicant's studies that the • sight distance is acceptable...The record is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearing or hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this.point. _ . 1901 gOO1 1055 South Grady'Way -.Renton,Washington 98055 -(425);430-6515 0 ! ; • - This oaoer contains 50/'recvcI d ma eria1.20l oast consu mer 21 exta' • • Ruth Larson Page 2 Page 10,#34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality.of the environment. Page 10,#38: As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need, and if • the roadway deteriorates,it will be scheduled for repair whatever the surface or subsurface • conditions. Page 12,#9 Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with,the other issues presented,on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants - in this decision. • Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes and the summarized testimony. This office will not comment on testimony. Page 24, #18: The construction of the overpasses'ineans-that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains as:-ithad beeninthe past It may be inconvenient to reach or r leave the hill,but no more so than for other residents of South,Renton when trains run through town. Page 24, #25: The City has'a;set of adopted policies on how`traff c"-is,tto,be evaluated. Those • policies were utilized, and`there is;capacity'tohandle.ihe traffic. As.a matter of policy review,. • this office attempted to reduce traffic impacts'to'some_extent by;reducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to the Council went beyondmere;technical issuesand dealt with the more personal impactsofthe traffic on those residents along the commute'route. This recommendation also went against stated City Council policy that density,:reduction by the Hearing Examiner.was not generally appropriate.:'•It seemed,that in these circumstances,,the balancing of impacts demanded a reduction even if that reduction was modest ;. Page 25,#26: There will be more traffic.`That is:clearly:stated` The way LOS is calculated shows that there is capacity for more cars,andthatLOS will not suffer. Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notice:.thechange::=That, again, is not refuted. :There is no doubt that residents will notice more traffic. There'will be even less traffic with the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. . Page 25, #28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills and those near Group Health have steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington . have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features: The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8to allow up to eight dwelling . units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to, allow a 50 lot plat. If the City Council chooses, it may modify its adopted policies and/or change the.Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this time. Ruth Larson Page 3 In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported problems. .But the record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated, although it will affect,but not adversely.(as used.in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill:.As this office.noted at-the public hearing, there is no doubt that if some future development were proposed,these new residents will be.right - alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now. living on Renton Hill:.That does not mean that new development does not fit or that.it cannot-be : • accommodated: The record reflects that it can be accommodated. In closing,-there is no reason to alter or"reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal or. the Recommendation to the City Council to approve the plat. Since this office is aware that an appeal,has;already-been,iled with the City Council and since • this letter did not change the original decision;there:is no reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any:additional assistance;please feel freeVto write. Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman - . .. . Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer • • Larry Warren, City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services ry,.. Elizabeth"Higgi'ns,Development Services . _ City.Clerk Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON FEB 0 8 2001 RECEIVED CITY CLERICS Of FICt REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 A S February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips: The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.)The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum to EXH2O, including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. "Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior, center will pick-up seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no.. gravel base underneath to anchor it., When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 A. some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level ,of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr. Nelson stated that as a result of his analysis..and, actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony of those who deal with the convergence zone on a daily.basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually drove the roads in question"a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The. elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25, #25: Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic — NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes sure Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some accountability to the tax paying._residents who are forced to'"adjust" to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get.to the County. Inadequate: City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 ti In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of.houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave: So. Renton Wa. 98055 6 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus,trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline,- barrier at"Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with-our.Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building.lots with fewer homes and have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is "evident but no small community should experience a°25% increase in size = and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations: .• Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic systems. All were old and extremely high maintenance. River Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System. That also allowed four new homes to be built and three or four more are in the - planning stages to be built on the North side of the pipeline. Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an"oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider on the titles of each.property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature . finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light and air; to .facilitate'.adequate provision-. for- water, sewerage, parks -and recreation ,areas, .sites._;for -schools _and schoolgrounds and other public .requirements; . to .provide ,for proper ingress and egress, to provide for the::expe.ditious . review and approval of proposed subdivisions which conform to zoning standards and local plans and policies; to adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note: Throughout this chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed to "this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex. s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- 1981_ c 293: "If any provision of this act or its application- to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ..act .or the application of _.the provision: to. .other persons .or circumstances ;is not .affected. [.1981. c., 293. .§.:.16..] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 2 RCW 58.17 .110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 2 of 2 NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 : See RCW 36. 70A. 900 and 36 .70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 \ 1 ..,..,.n...—"—;Eit-d;itiV a."114-- ..:.,..5...','• • 0 CITY OF RENTON 4J 4) ,,, .a.— ',..4",M;.ee 1:14 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 ec --I c) `-' FEB 121) 1 ;11,..11 -— -0 5-3 tu co ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED cc cc a.. Er PB METER -.-F-'7"-- _ - ,-; ,------ . ---. 7 -t'-'• `", ,......,, PRSRT FIRST-CLASS SEA VA 9BI 02/131ZI Jeff Schultek 613 Grant Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 . --liT G. WRITER<'-".:-- .tI.--, - - , 6.'-1 '''I •-' I ' %AI . p,14.-Z:5, 44' 1 - '-'' - -r''--',::::'•;E:';'414 tir*L.__ra.';••I ' ,•,' ,. i.A D DR rg5E E -''.-..,''. ..-- aa a) • D , , . . il I, • , - iN d 1 4 j N K N 0 WN . '. ,.;,;.,-4 ‘,, . e'A;i_A U I4R lri,) -I. ^ 1 la.P • IlilutHlillimhbililmilliiIIIII11.1,1111,111,ililinifil CITY OF RENTON Hearing Examiner • Jesse Tanner,Mayor . .. . Fred J.Kaufman • February 12,2001 Ruth Larson,President' Renton Hill Community Association • 714 High Avenue S Renton, WA.98055 RE: : Request:for Reconsideration,Renton Heritage Hill Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings • • LUA 00-149,AAD:and..LUA00-05.3,PP,ECE : Dear Ms.Larson: This office received a request for reconsideration regarding;this matter'and the response follows. First,this office does not discount that the• re wilt:be:impacts.on:the community,both-short-lived impacts and long-term impacts. The short-lived.(which-itself is a relative.term),impacts will be. the concrete impacts of development,:"including.construction traffic arid noise. The long-term impacts will be increased traffic,and noise from new residents:: That does not mean that those impacts will create an overall untoward,impact as required for a SEPA determination of _ • . • significance. . ` • This.office will generally address the concerns in themanner used by the request. Page 8,#21 The issue was:the proposed reduction in hauling truck trips due to a change in • grading.plans. The applicant proposed to more closely balancethe.cut and fill. The'Change in : . grading plans is now considered part of the application and cannot be altered without submitting a new application. The party that ultimately develops the site is net relevant to the permit as reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would be bound by.the application as it was reviewed and approved Stafford Crest as well as`a'num'berof large apartment complexes have : • all resulted in construction traffic:similar toif not,larger than the construction traffic anticipated. : It is not so significant as to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. Page 8,#22: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the documents and bolstered by the testimony: There will be additional traffic,and there will be a fraction of a second delay at the signal-controlled.intersection which will not be noticeable The : LOS for the various intersections,which.is.currently excellent,will not be changed other than that fractional.delay. There is no question that the hill and its-various routes are quite..steep,.but the entire record demonstrates that traffic can negotiate it satisfactorily:. Page 9,#24:Again,the record demonstrates that the hill is.now negotiated by current residents - and can be similarly negotiated by new residents: ,Staff supported.the applica•nt's:studies that the sight distance is acceptable. The record is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearingor hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this point • 1901, 2001 1055 South Grady'Way. Renton, Washington 98055.- 425 .430-6515; ;7y . vfoor,i4 - • • • This paper contains 50%recycled material'20./post consumer 'z ;�,.t' . Ruth Larson Page 2 Page 10, #34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has.more.than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Page 10, #38:As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need,and if the roadway deteriorates,it will be scheduled for repair whatever the surface or subsurface conditions. Page 12,#9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with,the other issues • presented,on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants , in this decision. Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes and the summarized testimony. This office will not comment on testimony. Page 24,#18: The,construction of the overpasses means that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains as it had been;'inthe past: It may be inconvenient to reach or. leave the hill,but no more so than for other residents of South.Renton when trains run through town. Page 24,#25: The City has a set of adopted policies on how traffic is to be evaluated. Those • policies were utilized,and there-is:capacity to handle:the-traffic. As a matter of:policy review,. • this office attempted to reduce traffic impacts;to;some.extent by,reducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to the Council Went beyond mere technical issues and dealt with the more personal impacts of the traffic on those residents along the commute route. This recommendation also went against stated City Council policy:that density reduction by the Hearing Examiner was not generally appropriate. It,seemed that in these circumstances,the balancing of impacts demanded a reduction even if that reduction was modest Page 25,#26:,There will be more traffic. That is,clearly:stated: The way LOS is calculated - shows that there is capacity for more.cars;and'that LOS:will'not-suffer. Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notice the change, That,again, is not refuted. :There is no - doubt that residents will notice more traffic. There will be even less traffic with the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. Page 25,#28:Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills and those near Group Health have steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features. The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8 to allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to - allow a 50 lot plat. If the City Council chooses, it may modify its adopted policies and/or change • the.Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this: time. • Ruth Larson Page 3 In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported problems. tut the record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton,Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated,although it will affect,but not adversely(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill. As this office noted at the public hearing, there is no doubt that if some future development were proposed,these new residents will be right alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now_ living on Renton Hill.. That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannot be accommodated. The record reflects that it can be accommodated. In closing,there is no reason to alter or reverse either the original decision-on the.SEPA appeal or the Recommendation to the City Council to.approve the plat. Since this office is aware that an appeal has already been filed with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original decision;,there:is no:reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any;additional assistance,please:feel free10 write. Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman • Hearing Examiner FJK:jt - cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer`°;' :, . . Larry,Warren, City Attorney �. , Neil Watts,Development-Services ``: . -.. , .. Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services City.Clerk Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON i oaaim FEB 0 8 200i RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S QFFICL REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately'750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum .to .EXH2O, including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. "Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr.Nelson stated that as a result of his'analysis and actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony-of those who deal with the convergence zone on a daily basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually. drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 • grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25, #2�5: Staff noted-that the City._anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic — NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes sure Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some accountability to the tax paying residents who are forced to "adjust" to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections servin this site, Main Avenue S.and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. n view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the luestions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith iloberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. 'age 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to he conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in he past, including other new residents. kdjustment to a.problem.does not make the problem go away. '.ONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner n the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the ►afety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access :o this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full tensity". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad !nough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner ias not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the eduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no dequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the ublic Interest. The approval of this development would leave the -sidents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither ddressed or resolved. CW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the bdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and neral welfare in accordance with standards established by the state prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the reets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote ;fe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... omplete text attached) W 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body all inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So. Renton Wa. 98055 6 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting..in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus,;,there,will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy.equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without the ability to access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in .. the development. : Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building lots with fewer homes and.. have all access come from the East while maintaining the:existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character.are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a'25% increase in size . . and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations.. Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic systems. All were old and extremely high maintenance. River • Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System.:That also allowed four new homes_to_be built and three or four more are in,the planning stages to be built on the North side of the pipeline.` Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an"oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider on the titles of each property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety.' RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The fmal statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON - Page 1 of 1 RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light ,and air; to facilitate adequate provision for water, _sewerage, parks and recreation. areas , sites for schools .and schoolgrounds and other public requireinents;' to provide for proper ingress and egress; to provide - for 'the •expeditious review- and approval of proposed subdivisions which conform..to zoning standards and local plans and policies;' tO adequately, provide for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] • NOTES: Reviser's note: 'Throughout this -chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed ,to "this chapter. "This act" [1969 ex. s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- '1981 c 293: "If any 'provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application.-of the- provision to other persons _ or circumstances is not affected.." [1981 c 293-. � ,16. ] • http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINWON rage i or z , RCW 58.17.110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rage Z. l➢1 NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 : See RCW 36. 70A. 900 and 36.70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 ....,--,--4;;,-.--:‘,2, -2....144.7--.....„------, 0 CITY OF RENTON Ci CO ... v°911.firs'r v. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 In c" FED I 2'0 1 -!it&Pfil '"' 0 5 3 z :! cc cc PB METES ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED cu. e.... \*".44-4,N...t• 115M11:1 341.1411,<TM-1,,,t,- yf,-0-5 laftSra FIRST-CLASS SEA VA 981 02113101 , , , ,,i Li.. "li,, ...j .ituksbl Resident 707 Renton Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 s--g SUCH I .. : ;-'" *: ..{. • ,_ - i --.- -. '-': 1 --1-,,,-- i ' '''.• AODOsS A- ...- -- Atlitir!"..19--:;,.•..7.,:.-;:t,11,.- ...„--__.-- ii 1 i 1 II 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 k) '_:-- '-.- - .4 , .. ' ivek-i•m-z.,,-..:-----.:--. iill!IiiIIIIMiiiiitilEllilifilliMilliIIIMI111111/MIIII 1—"r %4 CITY OF RENTON • - y • •.-<0 - :-...;• m--- -- umiL 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 1# 2 5'O 9 fiIis b• , " . 9 7 • ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED PBtit . ;1. 115a .f!...u4f Pos. ,- Resident 707 Renton Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 - ' h/ ,_ --- . '''NO SUCH _ .... ..� ,.ed .,air= R t,=. re.�1-`a- -_. � - - -tyi? -frr :ri,a.',i►s; ,� :r: - c - ,;. _t . `•, ��' - +ins_ ' ;I .- ... ._. ;. - :td- ;ram:.; ti : .- . •; ',Y .!' a t:'Yl1� ,f,- -. .t 1.i._ �'�.;'1.4_, ,�. r`'-"T, .jrt+:' ..�3�111££I3IIi£££Jinill'. 11-ii££s1dt£-£+ai£i£l£££f£)!£r£-?££Jld - • , ',!`••• . . .4- I 11 11 11 \ 1 111\1\1 At j _ 1!`;=-1. 11,t. I • • l • • • • . _ ' • • • __ .• • _ __ _ - - _ • N. ,• v (Elio OF RENTON • A r F ,�,:� "= ! —�� ... . - 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 'Ii12 5`01 �_ _� 0on - .9 7 - i ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED PBPIET REASom C Unda•i liECNE, -- -- A eaS o� 'u �' - _ 'x NoSClen o,• v,= .:;n.�, - , �' tAdnw ;'`' _ h St ess tiw No Suchreet oSu -u'nbe Do nt / _ o rem,iE.r fn Staf - A.F. and Nancy Alexander 1518 Cedar Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 a ;Y • h a: ,-U--C''r'yH-'.--.--4s,...-:..7 7 4,4 4' '•'''.,-'"*'.,4..,'1- i..-,..•.r-."„y.3•-- 1` — - .Ts... .it{��r+ - 't�'�'i.:>"'c�2.'s _- . - ,.Y1.�r'� L .�: m=.. . • ^ r ^::yam -10 •R .ScN-z-i _ ; (� . i_ ' ( .__. - .- -._ _ - - --"-J -rt$`vn -rr, '.l.z,.. -e'i:>.S% M '+� _ "Y,pp•�r L;:'il S �2� � fiis. ! ! Jj if tt}} ii }} ff I. .1_.«��..,}} _ - \ :4 ^_ "mil ` y— -- ' T. .r 2•' .` .h"`"S :.- lr !j ( �j •Itt Fiih1$1!?iiiFlFiS1?i1h i,i?1tIFFI•l.tl:F!.i.! 1. `"' - -Tt F_,=- " _ -» : _ -r. _vi:. ''.'"__''I _ _ i-j':•ii"'. Ili 1 _ I • = CITY OF RENTON Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J;Kaufman February 12;2001 • Ruth Larson,President Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue S.. . Renton,WA.98055 RE: Request:for Reconsideration;Renton Heritage Hill Appeal and Preliminary.Plat Hearings • . . • :LUA00-149,AAD and�LUA00=053,PP;ECF:._.- :.�� ,� ;::� � '= ::•_,: ,: .,_._. .;� ...: . .: :.. Dear Ms:Larson: This office received a request for reconsideration regarding this matter and the response follows.. . First,this officedoes:not discount;that there will be impacts on The community,both short-lived impacts and long-term impacts, The;:short-lived(which itself is a.relative term)impacts will be. the concrete impacts of development,including construction traffic and noise. The long-term impacts will be increased,traffic and noise from::newresidents.: That does not mean that those = impacts will create an overall untoward:impact as required for a SEPA determination of significance. - : This office will generally address the concerns:in the,manner used by the request. Page 8,#21: The issue was the proposed reduction in hauling truck trips due to a change in grading.plans. The applicant proposed tomore closely,balance the cut and fill: The change in grading plans is now considered part:ofthe application and cannot be altered without submitting a" new application: The party that ultimately develops the site is;not relevant to the permit as reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would be bound by the application as it was •reviewed and.approved.- Stafford Crest as well as�a number of large apartment complexes have all resulted:in construction traffic similar-:to.ifnot larger than the construction traffic anticipated. It is not so:significant as:to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement Page 8,#22: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the - ,documents and bolstered by the-testimony: There will be additional traffic, and there will be a fraction of a second delay at the signal-controlled intersection which will riot be noticeable.:The : • LOS for the various intersections,which is currently excellent,-will not be changed other than that • fractional.delay: There is no question that the hill and its various routes are quite steep,but the entire record demonstrates that traffic:can negotiate it satisfactorily:. : Page 9,#24:Again;the record demonstrates that the hill is now negotiated by current residents • and can be similarly negotiated by new residents. Staff supported the applicant's,studies that the sight distance is acceptable.. The record is closed. The appellant had the burden at the hearing:or hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this point. 1055 South Grady Way- Renton,_Washington 98055 -(425):430-6515 r � . :. This paper contains 50%recycled material,'20%post consumer w. "4}"� - A Ruth Larson Page 2 Page 10,#34: The availability of dial-up service is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Page 10,#38:As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need,and if the roadway deteriorates, it will be scheduled for repair whatever thesurface or subsurface conditions. Page 12,#9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with the other issues presented,on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants in this decision. Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the Minutes arid the summarized testimony. This office will not comment on testimony: Page 24,#18: The construction of the overpasses means that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains.as it had been in the past. It may be inconvenient to reach or• leave the hill,but no more so than for,other residents of South Renton when trains run through town. Page 24,#25: The City has,a set of adopted policies on how traffic is to be evaluated. Those policies were utilized,and thereis.capacity to:handle the traffic. As a matter of policy review,. • this office attempted to reduce traffic impacts;to:some extent by reducing the total number of lots. This recommendation to::the Council:went beyoncimere technical issues'and dealt with the more personal impacts of the traffic on those residents along the commute route. This recommendation also went against stated City Council policy that density by the Hearing Examiner w as not generally appropriate:`,It seemedthaf in these circumstances,the balancing of impacts demanded a reduction_even:if that reduction was modest: : ` Page 25, #26: There will be more traffic.- That is.clearlystated. The way LOS is calculated • shows that there is capacity for more cars;and;thatLOS will,not suffer Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notice_the change: That,again, is not refuted. :There is no, doubt that residents will notice more traffic. There will be even less traffic with the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal• . and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. Page 25,#28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills arid those near Group Health have steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features. The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8 to allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to allow.a 50 lot plat. If the.City Council chooses,it may modify its adopted policies and/or change the Zoning: This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this: time.' • Ruth Larson Page 3 In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported problems. .But the record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated,although it will affect,but not adversely(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill. As thisoffice noted at the public hearing, there is no doubt that ifsome future development were proposed;these new residents will be right alongside the current residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now living on Renton Hill.. That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannot,be accommodated. The record reflects that it can be accommodated. In closing,there is no reason to alter.or reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal or the Recommendation to the City Council to approve the plat. Since this office is aware that an appeal has already been filed with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original ilecision°:there.is no reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any additional assistance,please"=feel free to write. Sincerely,. Fred J. Kaufman • Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: . Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington,Chief Administrative.Officer Larry Warren,City Attorney. Neil Watts;Development Services , Elizabeth:Higgins,Development•Seryices City.Clerk Parties of Record i CITY OF RENTON rt oa gay! FEB 0 8 200i RECEIVED CITY CLERKS OFFICL REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself (including but not limited to Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum .to EXH2O,. including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. "Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to_anchor it. When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis.(LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: 'Mr. Nelson stated that as`a result of his analysis and.. actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony of those'who 'deal with the convergence'zone on a daily basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and.Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of.I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25, #25: ` Staff noted that the City anticipated an increase in overall traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic — NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes sure.Cities roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some accountability to the tax paying .residents who are forced to "adjust" to the amount of traffic generated by new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or" the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So. Renton Wa. 98055 6 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12, 2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus, there will be an additional semi trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses.' The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without: the ability to Access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building Jots with;fewer homes hand have all access come from the East while maintaining the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and.character.are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should experience a;25% increase in size ;. and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations... . Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South Oh were . septic yhigh --: on s stems.'All were old and extremelymaintenance:River • Ridge allowed.:residents to hookup:to the City Sewer System..That also allowed four new-homes to be built and three or four more are:in:the planning stages to be°built on the North side of the pipeline. - Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an"oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider on the titles of each property: We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel21.has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature - finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light and air; to facilitate adequate provision for water, sewerage, , parks ,-and recreation areas,- sites forschools . and schoolgrounds and other public requirements; to provide for proper ingress and' egress; to provide for the- expeditious review and:, approval of proposed subdivisions which .conform to zoning standards and local plans and policies; to adequately. provide for- the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note: Throughout this chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed to "this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex. s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- 1981 c 293: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or - circumstance is held invalid, . the remainder of- the act or the application of the provision to other persons,.or circumstances_ _is not affected.-" .11981. c 293 § 16. ] : • • • http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED C,UllE Ur. WASHINCil UN rage 1 of z RCW 58.17 .110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON rago`"1 NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17: See RCW 36. 70A. 900 and 36.70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 I i r . ,7-•,„;„„1,„7"-"""Tria;;;;-7.1? e ...,:sexe,,......:.,‘",.... 0 0 CITY OF ItENTON P GO 1V4'... ..44. cor„ '! la , 4 rfl A, A 5 v 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 c) FEB. 12'0 i ' '5‘01.0 - U 3 i‘t=1,12 '''' Ili CO 9 CC CC P B METER . Y ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED... PRSRT FIRST-CLASS SEA \IA 981 02113101 Ruth Helsey Marvin Wright 604 Grant Ave. So. Renton WA 98055 , RETURN UR N -;:—..-:-.7---,---,..,-, --, ' --- , \or, ..., TO WRITER-4(2 ''''" ' ' e 1 1 cs. - P Ill, .[ is ADDRESSEE . :3,-;,;-.., ' .: '..',: co9?- ,.,,L'.r,, 13:0Uillap tr.c9i2t.4.1,_, Ililidilitilimilifdilmilmilifilimliiiiilidliff.f1111 • _ _ ,_ • 1 • • • = CITY OF, RENTON, Hearing Examiner • Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J;Kaufman.. • • • February 12,2001 • .Ruth Larson,President- • Renton Hill Community Association 714 High Avenue S 'Renton, WA:98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration,:Renton Heritage Hill • Appeal•and Preliminary Plat Hearings _' ' • LUA00•149,AAD and LUA0O-053,PP,ECF ' :.;. :., . Dear Ms:Larson:' This office received a request for reconsideratiomregarding this.matter and the response follows. First,this office does;not discount there will.be;impacts on:.the community,both.short-lived impacts and long-term impacts., The:short=lived(which'itself is a relative term).impacts will be the concrete impacts of development including construction traffic and noise. The long-term impacts will be increased.traffic and noise from new residents:. That does not mean that those impacts-will create an overall untoward'impact-is°required for SEPA determination of • significance. . : This.office will generally,address`the concerns-in:the-manner used by the request. Page 8,#21 The issue was the.proposed reduction in hauling truck trips due to a change in • grading.plans. The applicant proposed to more closely balance the cut and fill. The change in : : grading.plans is now considered pareof the application and cannot be altered without submitting'a new application.'The party that ultimately develops the site is not relevant to the permit as r. • reviewed and altered. The ultimate developer would be bound-.by.the.application as it was reviewed and_approved. Stafford Crest as well'as'a%number of large apartment complexes have all resulted in construction traffic similar-to if notlarger than the construction traffic anticipated. .It:is.not so significant as to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement.. _ Page 8,#22: The overall impacts of additional traffic including LOS were considered by the :documents'and bolstered by the.testimony: There will be additional traffic, and there'will be a fraction of;a second delay at the signal-controlled intersection which will not be noticeable.:The LOS for the various intersections;_which is currently excellent,will not be changed other than that. fractional delay. There is no question that the Bill and its-various routes are quite steep,but the entire record demonstrates that traffic can negotiate it satisfactorily:: Page 9,#24:Again;the record demonstrates that the hill is-now negotiated by.current residents :and can be similarlynegotiated by new residents. ,Staff supported the applicant's studies that the sight distance is acceptable.- The record is closed. The appellant.had the burden at the hearing or • hearings and the information submitted is not timely at this point. • • 1055.South Grady Way -:Renton,Washington 98055•,- (425);430-6515 ..� • :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,20/post consumer .. • • • Ruth Larson Page'2 Page 10,#34: The availability of dial-up service.is not crucial to whether or not the subject proposal has more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment. Page 10,#38: As noted in the determination,roadway maintenance is determined on need,and if the roadway deteriorates, it will be scheduled for repair whatever the or subsurface conditions. • Page 12,#9: Sight distance was discussed above. Alone or coupled with the other issues presented,on appeal did not present evidence necessary to overcome the burden on the appellants in this decision. • • Pages 17 and 22 both reflect the minutes and the summarized testimony. This office will not ` comment on testimony. Page 24, #18: The construction of the overpasses'means that access to the hill is not completely blocked by passing railroad trains;as"it"had been it the past:' It may be inconvenient to reach or. leave the hill,but no more so than for other residents of South.Renton when trains run through town. Page 24, #25: The City has,a set of adopted policies on how traffic evaluated. Those • policies were utilized, and there'is,capacity'to handle"the traffic. As a matter of policy review,. • - this office attempted to reduce traffic impactsto:some.extent by,reducing,the total number of lots. This recommendation to.the Council'wenfbeyondrmere technical issues=and dealt with the more personal impacts of the traffic'on'those residerts'along the commute'route. This recommendation also went against stated City Council policythat density,reduction by the Hearing Examiner was not generally appropriate.At It seemed that in these circumstances,the balancing of impacts demanded a reduction even;if that reduction was modest: Page 25,#26: There will be more traffic.'"That is;clearly stated: The way LOS is calculated shows that there is capacity for more cars,and,that`LOS will not suffer. Add one new home to an existing block and one neighbor will notice the,change,:;Thai, again, is not refuted There is no doubt that residents will notice more-traffic. There will be even less traffic with'the reduction of the plat to 50 homes from the proposed 57 homes. The Fire Department reviewed the proposal-. . and did not indicate any new concerns over serving the existing community. Page 25;#28: Many areas of the City have less than standard roads,both in terms of width and in: terms of grade. Residents on West Hill above the airport have similar roads,and those in Windor Hills and those near Group Health have steep grades. Residents living along Lake Washington have rail blocked access and one lane roads. The City is either blessed or cursed by interesting terrain features,' The subject site was clearly reclassified to R-8 to allow up to eight dwelling - units per acre. That density was reduced somewhat by the recommendation to the City Council to • - • allow a 50.lot plat. If the City Council chooses,it may modify its adopted policies and/or change • The.Zoning This office has worked within the laws that govern this proposed development at this. time. Ruth Larson Page 3 In conclusion,nothing short of leveling the hill will resolve the purported.problems. But the record does not show that developing the subject site will have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the overall environment. The technical analysis as well as the experience gained by reviewing the accident history and habits of Renton_Hill residents demonstrates that this development can be accommodated, although it will affect,but not adversely.(as used in SEPA) affect,the current residents who live on Renton Hill..As this office noted at the public hearing, there is no doubt that if some future development were proposed,these new residents will be right - alongside the current.residents attempting to preserve the quality of life esteemed by those now living on Renton Hill..That does not mean that new development does not fit or that it cannot be accommodated: The record reflects that:it can be accommodated. In closing,there is no reason to alter or reverse either the original decision on the SEPA appeal or the Recommendation to the City Council to approve the plat. Since this office is aware that an appeal has already been filed with the City Council and since this letter did not change the original decision,there.is no reason to extend the appeal period. If this office can provide any additional assistance,pleaserfeel;free to write. - Sincerely, Fred J.Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner ,.,, .... Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer, Larry Warren,City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services: -. ' Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services City.Clerk Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON /i.f0e2 gar) FEB 0 8 200► RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings File Numbers: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF Dated January 25, 2001 Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Date: February 7, 2001 February 7, 2001 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton Request for Reconsideration File Nos.: LUA00-149,AAD and LUA00-053,PP,ECF January 25, 2001 Page 8, #21: "The original plans called for a substantial grade and fill effort...the number of truck trips would probably be reduced to approximately 750 trips. The original estimate would have generated approximately 3,700 trips." The applicant is not going to build or develop this property. This probable reduction of truck trips is not included as a recommendation, and probable is not binding to whoever does develop and build. (Probable: "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur...page 11; 4.c.) The number of trips generated by the construction itself(including but not limited to'Cement trucks, Lumber trucks, construction workers daily trips, Sheet rock, roofing, and etc) are not addressed. Page 8, #22: "The fact is, transportation impact analysis including LOS information and sight distance information shows that the existing road system can handle the additional traffic including the additional approximately 50 to 60 vehicle trips that would be generated during the peak hours." The transportation impact analysis did not include sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So., the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include 1 factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety"... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are not included regarding the problem sight area. Page 9, #24: The technical analysis would appear to show that at normal driving sitting position, the view is not significantly impaired. This statement leads to the request to add an addendum to EXH2O,, including photographs. This technical analysis is not complete and therefore not accurate. Page 10, #34: While there is no public bus route serving the hill, residents can apparently use a dial-up service for vans. This statement is in error. "Dial-up service is restricted to the disabled and in some circumstances qualified seniors. The senior center will pick-up.-seniors, twice per week for lunch and to shop at two designated stores. Page 10, #38: "Renton Avenue was checked and it is four inches of asphalt over crushed rock." John Giuliani (see page 18) stated that when Renton Ave was repaved, he personally observed that all the asphalt was removed down to the dirt. New asphalt was placed directly on top of the dirt with no gravel base underneath to anchor it. • When the City of Renton checked Renton Ave So, they drilled three holes and found crushed rock. Unfortunately they did not ask Mr. Giuiani where he watched the asphalt placed without any foundation. The sample holes were not in the area Mr. Giuiani observed. It would have taken one phone call to establish the location of the problem. The City's transportation people chose not to call therefore did not locate the problem area. Page 12, #9: The various analyses demonstrate that the LOS will not be substantially changed. The analyses also demonstrate that while there are 2 some constraints due to the steepness of the hill and the narrowness of the roadway, but that the additional traffic can be safely accommodated As with page 8, #22...The transportation impact analysis did not study sight distance on Renton Ave. So. The sight distance mentioned in the report spoke only to the intersection at Beacon Way So./S7th street. LOS was done only at intersections so does not include the 500 block of Renton Ave. So, the location of the sight distance problem. The Transportation Impact Analysis on Page 4 includes the following definition: Level of Service Analysis (LOS): "Conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel times, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety" ... It should be noted that"such as" indicates all these factors have to be looked at and included. There is no indication in the transportation impact analysis that these factors were looked at and they are certainly not included regarding the sight distance area. Page 17, John Nelson: Mr. Nelson stated that as a result of his analysis and actually driving the roads in question, he did not think there is any significant problem with sight distances on the roads in Renton Hill. Mr. Nelson did not include the convergence of traffic in his analysis. His analysis concerned one car. Many Residents of Renton Hill testified to the problems with sight distance on Renton Hill. Surely the testimony of those who deal with the convergence zone on a daily basis should carry more weight than someone who "actually drove the roads in question" a few times and then did analysis on a single vehicle. Please refer to the requested addendum to Exhibit 20. Page 22, Mr. Nelson: ...graphical measurements were made on 7th Avenue from the project site all the way down to Renton Avenue S and Cedar to the bottom of the hill. These were graphical measurements made on the computer. On-the-ground fieldwork was done all the way up Renton Avenue S. The Renton Hill Community Association has requested (no less than twice) that a road engineer make an on site physical determination of 3 grade percent be done at the 500 block of Renton Ave. S. A determination of grade percent using a topographic map does not provide the accuracy required for an exhibit that is given weight in an Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearing. The on-the-ground fieldwork was done only to provide measurement information and line of sight for a single vehicle. Exhibit EXH2O is incomplete. Findings. Page 24, #18: Reconstruction and realignment of I-405 during the last decade provided a second crossing of I-405, and both crossings were elevated and therefore removed the railroad crossing. This statement is in error. The realignment of I-405 did not provide an elevated crossing over the Railroad crossing on Mill Ave. S. The elevation only applies to the crossing of I-405. Daily the Spirit of Washington Dinner train passes thru the Mill Ave. S./Houser Way area at the foot of Renton Hill and blocks access to the Hill (twice for lunch and twice for dinner). Rail deliveries to The Boeing Company, Paccar, and Kenworth are all made on this Railroad track. Page 24-25, #25: Staffff noted that,the.City anticipated an,increase in overall .. traffic of approximately 50 percent, and that the 25 percent increase was reasonable. If the City of Renton Staff is anticipating and increase of 50 % in overall traffic — NO plat or permit should be approved until the Staff makes.sure Cities. roads are adequate to handle the increase. There should be some accountability to the tax..paying residents who are forced to "adjust" to the.amount of traffic generated by:new housing and those who pass thru the City to get to the County. Inadequate City streets should have been considered at the same time the growth management act was enacted. That the Cities and the Counties did not figure this out at that time doesn't necessarily mean the problem should not be addressed now. Perhaps a building moratorium would give local governments time to resolve this problem. Page 25, #26: The traffic analysis shows that the major intersections serving this site, Main Avenue S and S 4th Street, Houser Way and Mill, Cedar and S3rd and Renton Avenue and S 7th will suffer no degradation in LOS. 4 In view of the fact that #18 on page 24 is in error and that the questions raised in a December 11, 2000 letter written by Keith Moberg ( see paragraph 8) to the Hearing Examiner have not been addressed, this item should be reviewed. Copy of letter attached. Page 25, #28: Staff did suggest that new residents would have to adjust to the conditions of access just as other residents on the hill have adjusted in the past, including other new residents. Adjustment to a problem does not make the problem go away. CONCLUSIONS: In reading the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner in the Appeal and Preliminary Plat Hearings it becomes clear that the safety issues have not been resolved. Item 14 admits that if access to this project from Puget Drive was granted "the narrow and steeps streets would not be a issue and the plat could be built to full density". The Hearing Examiner has admitted the problem is bad enough to reduce the number of houses built. The Hearing Examiner has not met the traffic requirements. There is no evidence that the reduction of houses built will reduce the impacts. There are no adequate provisions for traffic that would indicate this plat is in the Public Interest. The approval of this development would leave the residents of Renton Hill with a traffic/safety problem that is neither addressed or resolved. RCW 58.17.010 states:..The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; ... (complete text attached) RCW 58.17.110 states:..(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall 5 determine: (a) if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication...(complete text attached) Neither the City or the Hearing Examiner have fulfilled the requirements of the attached RCW's Filed by: Renton Hill Community Association Ruth Larson, President Sharon Herman, Officer 714 High Ave. So. Renton Wa. 98055 6 LETTER FROM KEITH MOBERG (see para. 8) December 11, 2000 Mr. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton I am writing concerning the proposed Bennett Homes development on Renton Hill. I have attended the Bennett Homes informational meeting, Renton Hill Homeowners Assoc. meetings and the Nov. 12,.2000 meeting in your council chambers. While some questions have been answered I have a few of my own. I reside at 627 High Ave. S. less than 2 blocks from the proposed building site. The sheer number of proposed houses and the traffic associated with them has me questioning the safety and capacity of the existing road system. During construction which has been estimated at two years plus,:there will be an additional semi'trucks and trailers and various heavy equipment. Though you have received many written letters and voice concerns I have my own. As a professional firefighter I respond out of a Station that has over 5,000 runs per year. Time is critical on responses. The steepness of hills like Renton Hill slow extremely heavy vehicles like fire apparatus, trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the unique parking conditions on Renton Ave. S. and Cedar Ave. S. the ability of large vehicles to pass another is impossible. If my house were on fire or a family member was in a medical emergency these delays could be and are deadly. Magnify response times considerably if Renton Fire Department, Station 11 is out of quarters. Who in the City is willing to take responsibility for these delays? My next concern is the traffic light at the bottom of Renton Hill on Mill Ave. So. Presently it allows only three vehicles to proceed on a green light. A semi-truck and trailer equal the length of three cars. The new stop sign on Mill next to Station 11 and by old City Hall has traffic backed up to the intersection of Mill and Houser. After construction 57 new homes will be added to our hill. That is 9.55 trips per day per house according to your impact statement. 540 trips generated on top of the 200 plus households equals an increase of 25% in homes and traffic on a hill to steep for buses and described as a large cul de sac in a 1978 traffic study. My concern has been and still is the increased traffic on our small neighborhood roads. If egress for the development was East of the pipeline barrier at Phillip Arnold Park I doubt you would have the problems you have now. Bennett Homes in their first meeting with our Assoc. admitted without. the ability to.access Renton Hill from the West, they weren't interested in the development. Though the planned development is not popular I realize the right of the School District to sell their property. I would question how the 10 acres was zoned with no one on the hill notified of any zoning change. My solution would be to rezone to larger building lots with fewer homes and have all access`come,from the East while maintaining,the existing road block. With these or similar requirements met I scarcely believe you would have any major complaints. In conclusion Renton Hill is a unique neighborhood unlike any other in the City. The safety and character are prized by every resident. Change is evident but no small community should:experience a'25% increase in size and population without the same percentage increase in road improvements and safety considerations..: Thank you for your attention. Keith Moberg Presented to the Hearing Examiner during the hearing December 12, 2000, by Ruth Larson. Reference to RCW 58.17.110 (not new material) I would like to dispel some of the myths concerning Renton Hill. We did not oppose the River Ridge development. We welcomed it. None of the houses North of the Seattle water pipeline were on the City sewer system until the River Ridge developer applied for a permit that included a sewer line from this property to a connection on Renton Ave. So.All of the homes North of the pipeline from High Ave. So. Grant Ave. So. and on South 6th were on septic systems.All were old and extremely high maintenance. River • Ridge allowed residents to hookup to the City Sewer System. That also - allowed four new.homes.to be built and three or four more are in the planning stages to be built,on the North side:of the pipeline. Renton Hill did not oppose the Falcon Ridge development. The original plan of Falcon Ridge called for it's main access from the Seattle pipeline road and the removal of the gate on the pipeline. When the plan was changed to access from Royal Hills Drive, there was nothing to oppose. When Falcon Ridge requested a second gate be placed at the South end of the pipeline road to prevent late night disturbances and illegal activity on the road, Renton Hill absolutely agreed and the gate was installed. The City of Renton seems to have adopted an "oh well" attitude to the increase of 25% more traffic on Renton Hill without acknowledging the 25% loss of safety factor. The City has covered themselves by the statement of possible coal mine problems with a rider- on the titles of each property. We will hold the City responsible for any condition caused by this loss'of safety. RCW 58.17.110 states (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. We want to know just how Renton Hill resident's interest will be served. The City of Renton television channel 21 has a statement listing the organizational structure. The final statement of this structure states, "Renton Citizens are of course at the top of our organizational chart." We will see. REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 1 RCW 58.17.010 Purpose. The legislature finds that the process by which land is divided is a matter of state concern and should be administered in a uniform manner by cities, towns, and counties throughout the state. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with standards established by the state to prevent the overcrowding of land; to lessen congestion in the streets and highways; to promote effective use of land; to promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; to provide for adequate light and air; to facilitate adequate provision for water, sewerage, parks and recreation areas, sites for schools and schoolgrounds and other public requirements; .to provide for proper ingress and egress; to provide for the expeditious review and approval of proposed subdivisions which conform to zoning standards and local plans and policies; to adequately provide - for. t-he housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state; and to require uniform monumenting of land subdivisions and conveyancing by accurate legal description. [1981 c 293 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 1.] NOTES: Reviser's note: Throughout this chapter, the phrase "this act" has been changed to "this chapter. " "This act" [1969 ex.s . c 271] also consists of amendments to RCW 58 . 08 . 040 and 58 .24 . 040 and the repeal of RCW 58 . 16. 010 through 58 . 16. 110 . Severability -- 1981 c 293: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons; :or circumstances is not, affected. " 1198,1 ..c. 293 §. 16. ] . http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.010.ht 02/06/2001 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 1 of 2 RCW 58. 17 .110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication -- Factors to be considered -- Conditions for approval -- Finding -- Release from damages. (1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. (2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. No dedication, provision of public improvements, or impact fees imposed under RCW 82 . 02 . 050 through 82 . 02 . 090 shall be allowed that constitutes an unconstitutional taking of private property. The legislative body shall not as a condition to the approval of any subdivision require a release from damages to be procured from other property owners . (3) If the preliminary plat includes a dedication of a public park with an area of less than two acres and the donor has designated that the park be named in honor of a deceased individual of good character, the city, town, or county legislative body must adopt the designated name. [1995 c 32 § 3; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 52; 1989 c 330 § 3; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 5; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 11.] http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%20.../RCW%20%2058%20.%2017%20.110.ht 02/06/2001 " REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON Page 2 of 2 NOTES: Severability -- Part, section headings not law -- 1990 1st ex.s. c 17: See RCW 36. 70A. 900 and 36 .70A. 901 . 02/01/2001 :: p CITY OF RF"NTOI�T o co Yr� _ )w `U ti �,at =� 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 .=r FE8 l i0 I ;r!•� J32 ` - fi , . • r: ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED a°G. +'t 9�BmerFn e e *IF,-„._- • I Q / 4', „...74;i:ii- . , . /___Q/q, 6. 0___,4, c_57 . • PRSRT FIRST-CLASS SEA \A 981 a2I13t81 - )G 3� • A.F. and Nancy Alexander ..1518 Cedar Avenue South ' Renton,WA 98055 I.1 ;' . F:,..firf.... :,. ,^, i fl _ • . NO SUCH `�-� ;- - �`�V f0 r+ . L__'=.._ ... i ADDRESS x�_ . • m .. co [— ------ -, ---- -- — = t RETURN TD SEfi�I �." - . A t r� �, -. , f , • t' fIII -%g'r �=' Iiif? ffff ff??�f�5:i? ??? iiillf 3fF?' ? 1 ??