Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA00-168 . . , . . . ' • . . . .. . . . .. . ' , . .. • .. - - -. .. .. . .. . . •. ,. . . . . . .. . • . •. •. . . . . . . • • . . • • . . - . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• • • ". . . . . . . . . • • • ' . . . . . . . . . , . . . • - ' . ' • ' . . . . . . , . . .. .. . . . • • '. . '. . ', ' . . ' . . . .. • . . • • •. . . . • . . .. • . . . . . . . . . , . ' . . . . . . ' • . . . . .. '• " ' . . . . .. . . . . . ' . . . •. . • •. . ' • • • . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . - • • ' . . ' • . . . . • • • • - : - - .-- -. M ITH UN- •• . . . . • , • , . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . • -. • • • • . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. • . . • • . . . . . . . . SITE ANALYSIS •- BUII1DING•ANALYSIS . . . . . • - . . . . . • .- ... .. - . - - - . - ., - . .. .• . • ... . , . . .. • . . . - - - - ., . . . .. . .....Ana . , . •.MB ' • • . . • . ' . • . . EXISTING CONDITIONS • .BUILIIING HEIGHT- . . .. .OUILDING AREAS IMPERVIOUS AREAS . ' , • - . . . . . . . . . . , . . ' ' . . . . . . • . - . . . eicre-ederamea . . ', Cato•4.10 SF .........trries..ssed ..........,......,-. . • , - . • . , ...g. Too., Toni Tr 1,1,go',cel;-.100 a . • •. ••. •. • .. ' • Ilcus••Mb SP • . . . . • . • , f0i .;.="1r10:*:..ft.rr:".04:10'r=.."'.."' 1.1..1."............. p....,Nele,a1.1.1-MD S.K. • , . . . • • • - • • • •. , . , . ,,,,,,e-...............re-..e.-e SPetntani •11.01*bed pep*ba be 7S to.dr Ilre,2 r at In., . • • • • • T.1 • -30020 Se , • . • •. .• . • . . 11•41 cis r norrso,......saes•r.us...•es,.a osn. . ' •. • ••••••••Is.•••VM,....".•••••••••,,,, " • ,....m•-1100/11. red Inalpelaus...?..-MOS 51. . . . • . . . . •; • PRI:M.052D OT COVERAGE . .... . . . I TIPAN . .W.V. •Tat.SP ' .pm.b.10,-WM d . • • , . . . ' . . • . • PARKING'REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . • . • NM,0 •11103 GP . ' . • '''''''I••...r.!'' . . • . . . . . , . • • - -. . - . Ir., •sr.ss Sex. ...... . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . TIMI Corm, •2.00 0P 01 we mt.ons...win:oil,,•.,....,..... ' ••'•''•"••••'''''"...R."' . • ' - - -. . . - - • - • • • . . , . . . . . . . . • . ,.1.tolemal...0.1.0 gm.unt•3.1;paces r.,...) . • , . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . ., . • • • . 1.01 • . . • : ' . . • • . . . . . . • . • ' • • • - ' - . - .. •. -DEAN SHERMAN -.. • . . . . OPEN'COMMON SPACF • •• ' • • • ' • ' • • . " . •. • . . . . . . •. . • . . LANDSCAPINQ •...sags paldr.-04 anarsors r.a.0 apaes.....ea,.Ili•711 • • • . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . _ . .. • • ' •mm sp • , ..0,..ene g Ka•m..............pro... . • . ...,;1 1,1.4,4 Cowen 0,103,10011 • ' , • " ".. . . . . . . , .• . • Ted Ldeeereo -,,,,,.., • . • ' . • • •• ' . . , . - - .. . .. .. . . .. . _ „,.. •, • . . .. , • . . . , . . • • • . , - . • ' • ,.Pbtl la;;mos*roman Ccon 1.20 . . . . . . . • • • ' .. ' ' ' .. :. • . . 1100 O.0.M.1000 al en won/.of Om 11.11, Dean Sherman Apts. • . . . . . .. 01 unlaf.W.•Oh unIta gni aer• • • •. • • •. . • ' . • • -11%T.',,t.tt,...“. - • . • • ' . . . •. . . • , . . . • • . • . . . - • . ..- ' ..* -- . : .:Sth&Williams,Renton , • . . . . . . . • . . • • . . • . • • . - • . . - . . • • . . .• • . . . . . . . •-. . • • - - DS!LLD' .. • • • . . . . • : LT..r,:,..ecesi,To/- 5.To de oeordHeo To _ . CM OF RM.. . • • . . . • " • . .'.. . • . .. . • . • ; . ALLEY - ....TT..., . AM M.1010011S ' . . . .. ' . •. "C7'leggril" • : : . • . . . . • . . ' • . . • . . .. . ,. .. . . ... .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . , . ' . . • . • . . . • • • • . . . PM • • • 110.WIDEI .. .s, . . • • •• . • . ,. ' •. ' NO 1.213.26E '49.94' ' .... . • ... ..,.. • ..,-•4111111.1111111040. ... . ._...,_mislos.. '. /7_ .16iM.__obit,1,.Olio, . " Jillitallirrilk. 111:41111. , 110:1111011111:411S, , ha,171.11111,4111,_:. MilITIEGIIMIEGINIOM : Wr/' .• ' . . - •(./1 ' Iter11.4,11M11111.111.....6M111011104111011111".1411111***Mill t • . 1 _. . ilirv. ! .1 : ' ! ",'--1,-..T.-ri - . ..'W. , , :"'-i•iir',, ., .---.40', E.-1,r-. .--•••r-. ---W.- -.-W, ;--‘inFr- : --1.4.," .1 ' -....ir ,' ' .iPti'r--'i . I "1 . : 1 .: '; , . ,./ , . •. ------, ; ; , , - ; • ; ,, opOm colurri•spAr..! :. .1 • •• L. '". ' -le , -I, 1---:- I, A •E. '.-----,---.---7- •-- - - - •-• - ---- "'PR; - . • . • . - .. 1 , ! , 1 ' 1 OPEV COMMON'SPACE , I. 1. •i' 1. •• - : • 1 I •,. I 1 i - , ,AMMO ' '' t • t • C " , ________ • 1 1 ( V MP / ... . -,--------------- - 'wow. i..-1 wow* ,-, 400---01. --:,,..aismis. - .------_, . / •, '1..Ir • • • ”.P.iMI• .... L.-.. .. • EVEgig:- .• .. -. - . . . _. . , -----------1-011Millt Vil -- - -' I.;'---106-1•11.%49-11161 "• 11111111MMINIII.E. 1 liffillf/a _ ,I ,r . . . . - //A: • .. .• :.. :• :• - -- • - :• . . . . , •. . . . . •. . • • . ..• 1 : 7 i ON L_it'). . =....4+. • . . . • • . ,,r.r. rr-1-14- ..- . . • • . . .. . . ,‘,1 , . 1,--,- . , i ea (-Ill -1.. . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . , • • •- . - . . •.__ . , . . . • . . .: .•. • . , „ . .. . . . - • . . .. . . . . . - . . . • . . . 'iggi:'' 1 . . . •. -1..."‘ .ES- -". • • 1. '; „I.77.1 .. • . . .. . ' : : p . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • . r'; --. -, - .. • • . 4 iiI:ri. . 1 .• . . .i . . . _ . . • .... . . .. . : . . . .. • (4;,f. Ipli . ' .411 : -11 -1,,,ar I - • . . .- . • . ..:.:., : . . -. . • . . . -. "Oil, . 1 I . • BUILDING A' . • . - • BUILDING 19'• . ' . ; .,,M.....-T•L..,4- . . .49 UNITS • - • • • • - . 43 UNITS • •. . - -- 'TaPIPIOF 1:, 1 P' / . . - - •-• . • 111.1rii:. • •. . •• • • • - .. . . . . . . - •. . . . . . • - . • - . . 12./IEVPISITEPI)411 APE.• - ' / • . . ' . • • . . . • . , .. • • • . • '41 g i':. ; 1111" --r.p. „ . . . - . . . . . . .. . . •. ' .'. ' - • . • . . . . . • .- .. ... - ..- . I . . . . ' . .. . . . ' ptil, . . . ...,. . . . . . . . . . . . . stot .... . . • . • . . • Dr11411:2 • • . . . • • . . ,. . . . it .w. :.... . .. . .. ... . : I detill...t: . • . ..- . ..• ----' • ,t,..-..tr7T- 1 t , -. - . :d• . • . . . . • • . . . . .. .'. ti_. . SPACE ... .. • . r, • • . . ' .. • • , .. . . ' -: •..:.•. :i• • • 'I r-II rI . . . . . , iiiiills, 1 - . ..........". . . . . . .1irsi ...1' 1,11kg-.''''•i;IP' • . --4 TI-r r‹•5111Eal • • ' '.f-4:114:4' • I i I., Wri'-tri 4, • . • . 1111 .1*- -4- l'ili.f..,,c--fj.j.t.44443:1i .1 3:71; -.• '' ' .Z-,,.`,,i-'.J --' •-- • Cie,[11 A-__.I: . L_ i.LI: •• • • -...-_,-.• As1 ••• - -.I.J•4:717...111t1t, -,- --='''l .-'.- 1...,-_--..:...---,,,..,„,,,,,,m ____.,. .. 1 .. , , AT..14.111?4 ••••4 I .T''''•"S"-T''-' -'N.'s,-•' ''41-'' N r ipp 4,-;w1111111--1) I Ills, .-• ,. . ,,st 1,.„.....„...„. ....„,.. .„44,,,t4. .,:,• i ,„, .. ,• .,57.111-Y--, . • •• " I • . . i..'.•-•1" . '• i l'•334-14 ' ...-I-, .-1•-•-,,,,,,-,I4 #rFd-t-' ...,.,_,,,".• LtAje.' '-".-. 4:--Ili '1.';•C' •\0„.. ...._....! /1 titeliellAMPIO __40/1'1,-....';; ...-L:4---...-1•.': ....;,..L. "1,t.:ML•M•-._...'._LL:. ,----. • • . . , -.. -1-,- L. .+V-1., -"4-Wi-- .; -F;• •.'-'-, ' L. -_-..1 reassigesonel ,7. .11•13.5.1.9AW Alialirie--- IVINSI Vr--.410. =gb.74,7ihr-. _..1.11101.• '. 41/11.1-70;i1 :-' .' :•. ir-CPPI"1111111111Pr"111116 __ _I• 1'. • ''''' .----7- Lobo. s. . 1111Palaa.. liallaitliel.. VirailliblikarailliMIWAISMINI.. 111.0111111%1M 7. Affealligargiftli Y_____. Iiirlallmnig....... M.m. • •• ••!.....•_ -„---,,,-,_;.--e4taiir..,..--r.--....-viniE .lirr--empamenamioNimatalwaspaismr-i=r..-.-.-- -.11.-=,- ,:-.--a.-"Turionvig•Irdairowpitiellkratiriiiirmaiumitotossioligesummialioromm_,----- --.... 4-**•-4-.•• . • . : •. . . • . . . .•.- •..- •- .- MIPF MIPF . . Nill. W. ::-IVY . -NW- W • . •.' •Vir 11W. -Mil) L, •V. .•. . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .-,(1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .- . . • .. . . . . . . . . - . - . . • . - • • . • . . - • - . - • . . • . . . . . . . ... . • - - .. - . . • • • •- . . - WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH-. . . - • • - • 1 . . . • - . , • . . . . . . 501.29'4614 559.80' 142 ROADWAY/NO'R.O.WI . . . . 1.. • - • •. •. . . - . , •. -. •' ' . • • ' ' • •SITE PLAN .. . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . • •• , . . . . .• • •. . • . • . - - . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . - -. . . . . . - •. . . . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • .. . • . . . . - •• -. . - .. . . • . - . SITE PLAN . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . - . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . .11.. . • • 12.1142C.X. . . . . ... . ' ' , . - . • . . ' . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . • . • • . . .. ..• .. • .. . • . ', • . • . . . , . • • • . • • • • . ' . . . . . . . , . . . . . • , , . , • • ' ' • . . . . , • - . , " • • - . • . . . . . . .' ' ' ' . , . . , • ' , • '.• •• .• . • •. . . . . . . . . .. . • . •, . , . • . • • . • . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . , , . . . . . .' . .. . . , .• . . . . . . . • . . . . . - . . . • ' •SCHEMATC :. • . . . . .. . . . • . , . .. . • • .. • , .. , : . .• . . . . . . .-. . •. ' '•, • . • '. •. •• • • '. '. . . . . .. . . ,. ., . .. • • • • • ' ' • • • • • • •- •.At.0 0-0 . . " • . . . . . . .. • MITHUN AMIbm�O.a�grcrwPluen.n • s m aco seatl.,WA seeo,. ,E.»saA+a . . DEAN SHERMAN . - - Dean Sherrtian Apts. 5th&Williams,Renton ' - • • • MIMEO WR _ • DSI LLC' • • i .-1 . .. , . . . .i . . . 1. • . . . . . I a a • jm.o e. e .. Jy/I ex ek .,. Th • • I > a.av �w, ' PARKING'GARAGE FSTPE • • e L----- I I - -- .PARI4N0 LEVEL 1 . ^PARKING LEVEL 1 . _ • 8111EB�9B1811MN15UN•o.ow - - ..�....•4.............-4-......._..... - 6ET MITHUN i ATd,kw.Odp+us.q.nma 1fm Alftlunw.R . i 0.m7 i — 043 DEAN SHERMAN 011106 .. - Dean Sherman Apts. wuIIOL ' •5th&Williams,Renton iRPARm FOR DSI LLC • OW fwATTax WALL ROMP'We A-.60.unva vu ALLEY - 110•W1001 1 — -14 0\fTffTff�0\fmomm 11.J .00 OMM 111.• •••\\•MM \119.1 2k'NE34994..••••••• \\ M.M.01111ii,.M,� 1 .\\1• 1.\\.11.••••.,• pm� .,i-���� 1 . • i1 I 1 t i OR WACQ 1 i: 1 �PI$ i .I i I 1N --- I I I I I , , I i I I __ .iu' ,�i TM,' T•+'TiR'sidr Il _*+ -pit s=T+aa r - r. --- I -- --- - ti ill -- f WOMB B 11 BB ROM 1 414000Y 01=0 1!lOROCM 1!lDwOM \7UDIO 1 EmIl00Y I BBOROOM t• 1 BEDROOM of; -- ^ _-_ _. N b m . n r:";� � minw t mow ' �i t0 ' �'�-l-i,�,A ,% lanem 611e wN aPP I _ -_ BUDDING'A' /�I '1E4 -, 'r r EUIIDWO'6' _-_ �I _ .a�R a». �J :brat _i. f' ,� 4D or �UN�ITs sas /�/// f BEDRWY 1 209100Y r.....45 1!MOM. IOBBT 1 BEDROOM ---. f O®RDOI' LDBB7 I B®Iw0Y•6 1 BCOROWI 1 BlDADOY r. - OM IP 7 :'... -.- Tr ^.'". ,?r _ ,'i' _ ____- '__ _ _ ii l tR,+� on p,�riYt+s -.%¢i - fft:T ,"14' 1r r ItO tnt,t'F :'.- j _- r'-~ - - �'� I_. I- . fl'L.h'i �,l it74M37rffA ++Jli SA1M�81W �` 'N.r" !i ' 1 tlt'+f1'2 w+''4 , -- , , ; I ,Ir r,-,-4-i _rf,,,,,,e.i-�1 t_i' , :YT I4_1.r, 1 1 \ ' - .=rr. ,.r., - , -" ,ITS- � r._ — j rrua!tt�trca `..r'... rD iT _ : 1 -AW '�� r(u0 .R• ��... "P(,0 If,6 m' -Kn,l H•.) Kmo Rw) rtm) I Kw 7 ) rtm) 1244. 311.0 fix ® i »l EL am MWM.Nwe ��4x0A. 9 M6 W mm� afa a)2 f4( _ WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH 14T RUAOWAY/60.RO.WJ • - 1 RESIDENTIALCO - O RESIDENTIAL LEVEL STREET LEVEL _--- 1 f/JT•1-0 W10tM__ Ar 1 . 8\102I21/101WASI u11IOW0 I \IAT SET GAD AA\IQT�I If�T1/1\I - • • MITHUN . Soak WA pun ...6&limy ' • .. ruav66.3.7AS DEAN SHERNIAN • • Dean Sherman Apia. l0GiR7R 5th&Williams,Renton . !WAWA Rift - - DSI LLC _ ------------------ _ • iaa uw ms iw< i1 v • reneaoe vLOoxr . I f Og1 t ROOM ' t Oa W ®R0 RD011 t DRD011 t 0011 t ElDIf0011 7 21:020OY m t BR0011 . t Rea10011 f BEDROOM -GOA7 . N 1 F I _ R,tRRO _ R,iR00 S I —.--.-_ �_, wI�\/I�` — ---'m BUILDING'A' . . ^V� _ BUILDING•D' • I ,v 3 UNTT15 43 UNITSa.. 1 - • — 2 BEDROOM I 0120212261 106R0011 . 2it==0 . f 6®ROOM I BBDRDOY RnOfO I B®ROaY • I limey 2 BEDROOM' 1 . M 9A� • - I - WILLIAM AVENUE:SOUTH . . • . . - RESIDENTIAL I • ' •• LEVELS 3&4 I RESIDENTIAL LEVELS 3 & 4 "Mat. 3/32'•,'-0' 12/1,4400 S/ a%A1INO ,6,I AGM1S0622.0'M7 ' - .• '.luny crick f fF.I T01 ICTIf1N ' • MITHUN Archltect0.00sIgners0Planners IsoIAIssIonW.L , \ / I Seattle.WA Om I / , 0 Am 10 PL- Md.Ali-oe/ipVikA_t d_a• tIIieI,I,,lI„,i iif fi,ter1 r I. , ..:4 .." m. ,u...r..,,i limm, tr1V.A 1— Oa r 1 „ ____ 81 C mu DEAN SHERMAN . _...,4)I Dean Sherman Apts. , . LOGTIOII 114 I 5th&YMIIIams,Renton i + , 4L( Joh E i 112L 1,I!,r I d • ,;,..44 4? , „,„ ,;A, ' .' ' ! - i-- (IP- ,_ PL 1 r,....r- WipilkIS I 1 - 1 1 _ 1 EV + 1.- : iril —11111' ' i „, ii,„,... ,, H4,r, .... 111- - I ...... ?.4`MbillJ'1 tiIll if II:II r,,:,,,,,.,•_41 *,L,,, -,..7. ,. , , , , , '":..., ,',';',11,.0o L WWI ' l" ''' '•',..........._.1 - 1 ,411111/1----i-vi.-- -*1•11, 1,IL L.Tim-I , ,','LI', 4 .......,k ,,i,, • „.iiii., ,„,,,,,.,..,, ,, -, ,,,".,,,,,,,,,, . ,,, . . - - , , ..._ , , ,, ,,,,,, ., ,,lip, ,, 1,,,Ilf, vAgraiimums-i. I iitriir-iirana- --W--Jur -7,- - aloirea—i-i41011-ir mr-gli —MINIW--Miiiremmr_41101k.. Asolb. --'' : Lri----.-imimb- •w-=' L tiii--111111111,-'74,111...7eitagrilii.----vidilr-____. moindik-di-CCZ inums.--ft•li 106 -, , 'irMIREariiPliNOWIMPIIIIIKIIIF 1141WIIIIITifet.101.1ii- ----__ ,• i , , , mommalinsin , NIPP' .... _-- .., WILLI.AVeNue 0 -. " 1211y00"SITErLAN APP -----" - I./13/040 ---' . . , `.. I -- ....... -----, .... PLANT SClUL RET OTT 50TANICAL NAME COMMON Name EL. Coma= aILLSCSI G MAKS Z..* ' eeLLILLai maple I. BIB maw. SO1 CO c-r.,-..i.cm—,"..- :W::;—= Jr'. :et: 7.-- —.. MO Megn010 gn.6100,0 Nag*0/0We/0 10-II to 5 I 5 us atmel SJ C '.), Arb.s umdo°wow.. '11 Pr' Rt.aurnon .loon Curr. 2 gaL I Roe.cry! 1 gal I N.erom-11 ILL I Sarea.000 rundrolla Sersoccoco I gal Vrn..... .I./...P., .gc, 'LANDSCAPE PLAN Gaounoccnrea a wee Evergmen Ct.. 991 * couriaNert PLANTIN08/PLIMNIALS 1.1.0 enultiplax 0010n god.. . Cersopsis aurcula/o Nano 506s50001110 nor. voLALL, I goL ......, Nand=000.1100 14.0(01,L9m090 Sd L1.1 • • M I'T.H U N. AkAfes4iDmlpitasRPlannen CIS'. AWbnWq • .. Resm.Level a °� — _. - p sm. _ • _ Scale.�LAhm REBID.LEVEL 4 JJ 1.71 • • — — : ._I M E—.�i @-1 1101` -1 `r�i -� E I�� 1� o snnos' --- QP VUEPL_-_______�- - - _ —'_:_=_col =■_I`I__—_ 17�� I_--_ I --_ _��, ■®■ Millia • _-_ ReSID.LeVeL e 1a� - ■ = I=m j -2�•1_® 2,1 1=■0'=_ 11a. •-.Oe i■ 'i �I''0■l ■ o _ _ _ _ _ _ - wln ReRID.LEVEL s -- I- 7. ,1 1 • iI�lL1 1 Ull■=!o-g!U' i■_' 1i■imimi !ii' Ili .::. �I■l1 • ° I 1 DFAN SHERMA1', rpp QP 9DLFL. '� _ . P GDNG.SLAR_- _I_________- ;—_ ' — - I -' - _ — — _ - IDeanSherman APm•'. Tr • I Tv, — • ____.__..... ... - �I �/ t�\� i .5th&Williams,Renton .. _./ - `eauro o . wRADe LEveL, - ....r,b o.:.ee - _ -- I .. vRErARFO fOR Epp�p w aarI�LARIe4 GDNG sW - voRe mm>.s @ALLEY (WEST) ELEVATION - @ ems_ stater 7miItil. '�■ wi■ - �1 s ,, / 1 /� �w ■l ..— , i •, •• ■ ■ li.=r-7---•mini lf�i CDNMDN ■I!11I .�_ U■O. ■•— 1'2�Ie■I-'• % • 6I • RA6n�a��1 .• : r.- _ -- _RIM --inall _ — SPACE _ - E r` aum _- -� _ _ _ _ _ : ®G 0�1 LI;.11■jig'®� • 'ii-IiI®� II® ,, _'r1 1.. vol IIIIIII-Is- ®r oi=T 11■il = — Iffil • RnW j"• /i I)I--I_■■IIiI=!=,=G' mmig +1l.---■Ir O--IfIIII'_1 j% IIIIIII ■1!1 •11 _ .i /��®®® IIAel= I Oe Ye `': rl J ® i 1. - gri -®1031 a—.:)i ,i�- -®- 'I' ;l:1:: - _ "rf. �._ • . � ..� I �� ■1=iloi' I ®1 ® 1111.1.014.1_ 11=1 �, '' :"JII 1+�'. --- =I I ry 1.S.F2•__ R .1 i exert RR.auJ e - ' . • ' • . - • l.R I - mnaa' 'soR.nu • : - 'ej. "aa,enn 5(fEPUW APP — —_.:_ ----- • ----- — T -- @WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH_EAST) ELEVATION__ - _ . '. J.' . . •. . ., :r. : , . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . ., . . ,r- •.... • . . .. .: . : . . - Aw- ---- : ,— : . ' . .• . . • .• 2• - • : '• • •• - .- TUCCO M/ _ . . 1. .u.Ler. '.I:' � —, �, 1 ja w'w.uds" vrtuuus -, 'nu.er�'. 'I ' Avenue AVENUE I 1� ■1 a1 I •_ • — �■®=1 =11 = 1. sours :Noun, i '� �■ ■ '� ; ®illetIN� ■ ■ .'I = I— : h t: - _— - � -- — -- _ ar = __ roes:, aaeRpAL.` 1.. _ ■.�� - 1 � + -7: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS. 1 10 � , 1'1� a—I 1 1' A . .. • _ — - M: . p.. - '�A.' ':� ■_■ II o°!y1 ± - - --•- • touvR=� STH STREET ELEVATION - --- - CO RTYARD' L VATIO -- - - -- �_- - I � sRiwvwaiei eLRCAD,ARSD\650,DN I �' O . ' A5:0 ' • • U NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION_ �� ` ALTA / ACSM L'ANL7_,•TITLE SURVEY • Eir:,' American fond 7)Ue Association/ onedcan Congress on Surveying and Mapping ' roities '! • �''"s k• .National Society of Profesaional.Surveyols . 1 ++l!.ssGara6 H ,O{�•t� w ;� -s -- M' ;•l.=.Vi w } - N . • r : E i 1 fjyY I.iiEh ,N iI�'c,,�,id . •• �aa=� lli +�I" �rrY!is i !, • } • gypp`''�a @,}���y, • y - � . z • L __ __-_____-__ I h{�' FF LEGAL DESCRIPTION - . �� • E- %S•1 �, • 1 .. Lflh tt T1m000N 1)W 0 i r fF TOMJ OF REMON A[MROPlG ro PUT RECOEIOEO W WLIa:1 6 _ . 1 , i ,k, S .w ENWD DN y J S6 • •. 0 id. •m. '. .0 ENCFPf ME.NEsf 3 TOOT OF vID LOS CONVEYED FOR wl'EY PURPOSES Cl DEns 18COIAfD DEm1 � - ' i _ . j `G' If�, ! 0. - RECtliDMO IpS ola}Al IND 0103D4.. .. a ��<^;r�,,G. l5 O Ise �.._ SCALE:r.ao•. .- - >JJ 2d. !y�� • 9 TP - • SURVEYOR''/S NOTE e u f: C Ix,Y Py_ � - • • )C).aSsff1GT%kl°�'D SPEC61GlON5 TSR IAND ME SURVEY�CAOISIIUL SURVEYS AN'OMNI' AS ADOPTED AMOEWi UNIT�-'- -- ° ^'�7y.r ,,,It,,Nei;-_, GI • • - Tn£ASSOCMTDN;AND wERIGW CCNCR�ON SURVEYING AND YAPPING W loll. . • P° 7 a a PVC �IATLN• �NE1ls THE N.M.YAP s ATTIIS 5 fqi• -Poor CON1o0R WIENAE ND ORS.0 • ..t.��j��r{{yyYY" • • )t F,,j:T �_. 's'Glc'�a,•-m•. uwamlowuo wwlccuwrs wr occEFixo sruroNms. • - • • ''`�� fir, i,. uoG b '�..�, .3ON NETA pnm s m°i� ,.,as/t. NET PRfNmN"w v OF REMONNpNm . •• , Z , VERTICAL.TM s I4VD 1NmL HEIR cry OF RENION SURVEY CONTROL YONWFM TO Y131 • W r� 5 _p.4 � 1 EEEv rmx-aa t,Fm. .. y� tititi777____.f� �.NL TIME PbLIlON1pN'SMYMN ON TOS WP'Nl5 SIIt fNiWGlm FROM MR NaPoGN11, 5 �' +� .( '5 I)-j?�,�+ i�t' >f a //yY, oa, LEGEN l 'vvSScc RwcE 01...r mYv„NF,rt TEI Sm,a3.sN.o„m sFrm� a ws rwo _ - �J J �',Erddh� '.H0°RItdUi "M �E' .i :1��aRWr • 91PPLEYFNfN.RaVPr MRO'sE➢IELBFA31, Poo. W PRFPN°NO 1105.TIP,aAnmWusENW .: t- . ' •; <. ;y I r'4tCnNo d3w N°�c.Au m,NOi MEN A�EI"oR�TF1.1. .Gang° ��FE'�G,l'� �. ❑ 1�`� I• ° np1£SIWwN OX n1E W➢AND OROIC°FD 0Y ll�'RFRRQIL£o RRsr AYEAG01 Cob.. II - I 3q, -�.......UE '.RiWDSEt CONSULNIO MI S.NC.'HAS REUED WTDLLY ON FIRST AYFFGNS--__ _-__- __-_ " . _ lid""S,CIF.# E RARGHAUSIN Y 0 Sou s.slo$ sROI®I¢I.. nNGEN At0� �SawLR iHHE A sAC CONDITION TO CURAO AN mw SIDNEY i�w Nro nw- ... . - r5 t R s `m., wE.Fuu'n°°e .. . VW•'• : _ • II yZs' _ -o s.PRovom ARG -a.n°R mwRc FEEr(c.es3 n.ms). _ _y aI 1-f EI_ T Ef�I !R I C I ®. x Ol m/� 4F®oIRNImLW1O. Hf 1APPS 10(001 WR-OF-wCESSRro1 MIMS AVENUE F51G1 WY°�NU D SOOTNIYP1I1 STR T. - Di m I - ) ? il'' --1,•4j N� hrKf J k, • ,vuae mown tar THEREOF.OS 4, ON THE wmtr. _ p W L•/ Aj • e{ -I1 �t,,e 1"•c f ', 'g R •_ O reE• // )�Runawc faumN oWE 00130 uHE As 5 005 n AT Rretrt,wars FRou P0.OFFRIr Im°ro aun.O�xe N •N.> 1 •t"az PA tl XIT.i'I4 � 4£A RTualiag � '` \ % ANERS Ai•fN)mfgNS WpMwTEO. (UNL6Ti.sNOMN OTRAWISE.) Rkt. F�F i54�•'Lf� pl'1 House - if...-... ,f� //-• 1 _ .. .. •°sea cN°Uu°rac°Wsum°AE POMO/A THERE..a slo»E °'ammo'm°P NrmtaunEa.rw,sn.Fxs.on°wme O . W - - `Wx 1` 1 1 d�G.nk,$ I._. wD• 1.- E E / ' ' `.STRIPED PS... s...NO s1Au oDOOIIOIS SHOWN NFSYN+ARE AS nEEr mg OWED oN THE •N ' • • y t''; L!b�.'fi e' lrk. f-- •�.9 �'�Sl A�t 79 RouNo. ofXpl nT1005 61NE,000 NOT W0100 ARE ALSO USED FOR PARTING WECIES __- "0Sr '.;4a,i:S NT;. t7 yjB �inns I1 90,mIal,-t t 2 -Jd-'__W •_.. - ix°EmUAG"Hasr10 OTO°aRal v awx-THAN THOSE- s' No SURFACEOT ces,to1N1S OTtHER 0°'urm SFmox MIMES ouNo u,nmW•L EVIDENCE OCATIONS °F . ._- _-__ �p•L�{ � r amN� "Y1 V; it rF ' sux° 'Fxe'immi1P°A°iaG'�'iaraoNaLO•'F Yn `mCURVES"'ce '�ias"rp°"sxo'sm. s°�N'°aartmm o tL�i.'1` x � a G� tNY ENK BEEN TNOIt FROM PUBLIC MORES. BAROMWSFN CONS/LIMO - ' Tf .t {, 1�.v t,.t t C-'+ ) ] �`'fi' r' •ll lag TJ4 S, E GINFF%,NC.As"uu¢No Ramurc FOR n¢ACCURACY of wmz RECORDS. u. �.N rr-ae ZI y },�+131•`ii'ay' E �.� �. �y�{E',..idllO� I 3,R,,.,x"a tFF J" _ • t1.BARGNAUSEN +, 11++4.I,1N[r,�-,,A � I dY 4 iI )PSI 1•1 P= CEMETERIES.RUBBmInNn. OLLOOM.°IOM n &WELLS Ca5rEA6.NH NOI Ot!TE • 8 'I"''S°r. 4''+.�7 SE' I' 'i4 F t IT Y�$ 5U it$' PROPERTY. I . ¢ii a°Rc i Fey Chi a tQ'I�r '¢ly . } '' I /I�,r l W 1 1Y89T°N•L SURJE•rovry°O iNOTATE0 u REcoV comma INS Ps PROO comma ON OCTOBER Fcr OBER of . I ��v�y .y' [; y --A,41N'E.s;*''�L .Sr `� {150 % P' 1 .}uoo. _ '-GPE'� `1:41 ', 4 :r1 l S1?, �r 1 71` P ,t- Dos - _•-__-_• •_ •__-__ W-.� 'j ,3is I7 I yy F"^'�' 'm i'f�X�l` + t9�I ..h r R 3� _. Q v.IN Dsnx00.ARE W FEES(US,svR.ET•FEED. . . 1 , � h,E fq i'111 �+. F F% :f • • A.Tls s A FIELD TRAVERSE SURE. A SOD.FNE-SECOND DE 01000 TOTAL STATION WAS USED TO «51 '� f' I; �S' ' n I 0 ♦• 2' MEASURE ME A 0 0*1 AND DISTANCE RELATIONSHIPSOR OE1WEEN.WE OONTEOIIENO YONIMMAIpN AS 'I I iI1 1. fir +,1 ' 01.96'•z g+ ' Ca lsE...'� .. .sxaNN. EDSURE RATI05 OF.THE TMYERSE YEf OR ENC®EO THE E SPE MEDD W WAC 1V-tRl- �.. ' 'S5 !'•tl` 51.J ,; {tR � ; " •,'Q 050. 06TANE YOImIRINO FAIIPYETf HAS BFFN GlmRnt'.n AT AN NOS.e.m Nc WIIImT OtE ---III yR.`'' x Strr-,, k-Aj�d , a s{p r);c�lN' 7 q . _ .rEw DF Tt¢,GTE aF Tws sumEx _ 1 2 r .. • :IS.nos SURVEY WAs PREPARED FOR TIE IMO UAVE IAE OF�.LLG lamas TO RELY ON OR USE nis '>'d J • h Y3�k�u' F k S•E" l�O hY-i,1` �37 J .. CONSOLING oo wr EIimID ro Am/OR 01D PwDr 00004.MOI EIPRss 1✓EamsYATnx Or 1002*5FORMUi9N SSSSSSSS • 0. .ENGINEERS WC.NO/OR n2 PROEESLONAL IMm SURVEYOR WHOSE SEAL APPEARS G ai` 1''u:Rr 1, n x .A-•,X� `dS (7.i _ - xasox. • iliglt • .a a �� z1 FJSEMENIS AND'RES RICTIONS 11 -.-------- --EC - --- -- --- '- F.( i6�i 0 ST AYE0.GW NO.sw,oe-OK _ yy ST` C I. r J T-o.NOT APPLICABLE TO OESTIONN�ON ALTA SURVEY. W je Ut .1 I .. 1 1 sA • . :ReatoT'Family Practice clinic • :\.. e �ii 10.i1Rs PRORRre s SURJECf ro n¢IETOI°AND COtDILIg6 CT A PAR,NOmIP AGREEMENT DATED Q b F� j `6. A I /P OCf06EA a IReO.(NOIQt MEN • • n roI n s R ')' '1 ppa {' 1 1,.NOf AFILt..IDE iD 9E3xONFl on AUA suIMY. • o$N m • • REPO •_._� - __.._- _Iv -__._--_ NLa' 1 "-_.-_-___ 5E 1 s. u ' ___ 13.nos PR e!TY IS TOn4i. • NQ 10 zv I qo • 1 1i 2.Ys 0"i Svl • lO.nos PROPERTY S SUBJECT TO THE fries AID EaNallws OF A PERYhSVE USE ACREEaNr AS ^ m N o_ '+'� ti 4: RECONOED UNDER RECORDING No.°xo3unm.MORES OF Iwc comm.wA41mFDlw KM...) '✓ • �`jl I �� 'r ti��,E,/�� NAaa vu.KT WID � voTOA00010 DE TERMS POD"MEMOS R OF Imlc OF'MSNML'1 RECORD OFSURVEY AS REMROa)(NMI m 6 Y F I______ & Ml ^��b FW R PREPARATIONO T15 save) __-_ ay'�,-�m,� F.rmu.mEwl -�J_'•:JewwFTr Nv.�� 1 mvI Del 8 ,q7q `-" w `� � SURVEYOR'S CERfIFl(ATWN 0N 'SpA. • I 71 'Y®�ern'yY` �/IN t.a a tr •a g y-. '� °' r°`"RI R e xiia 114E PPE7. To.se,TIC we.sr AlmdWl TOLE Nam.,muP,vrr - J E 4 -:a•`s1�,�,4 i5<L'�l,stA r-..,r.y'y.,r+�.;y-`�,,ptb' 7' "^�N �T ^E '�4 3 s' THIS s To MOW MAT nes TAN FLAT MD THE mmEr a+LATCH IT s aysm.Do:ANTE(n w Q Teeow = "6 ,,p 1Yy OEUL IaoLOSLURs FOIL 01 900 ,NE TIME • % i .\ - r-, .,,,t, .. i{4',a,s d P t. ,B 'r"X€,S)�. ' p-�� ASCODvrf JOWLY YEmlw sD AND : PI - x ='--" -' - (� + .IE,fA . -Of eire.•C CO 6U IN M AND ADOPTED BF OF T AND R I N ISO.ND Or AN UMWMUL IIEL. • z(1<, y: ��.. .�+.$ ,r Of i11 MC COY &ffRCf Wl:acERRp.TiEiExlm .Etotm�. 'e IAu �1 /.' % wt. .. at PD Have - .. • [I�7\ __ Haws wt� x &.OCf.�' leis, Ht Eu° . eNtits 0.YaIYA aA55LY Pls. \ DUE: - 05`18-01•W id., 1 _� __ -_ • >„ • 1 -WIDIIF%''''TAB`taus M.Sass - l� • • • • • • • • • • • SE 1/4 3ECTKNJ 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17;lYVP..23 N,'ROE.5 E,V/.M. • .I • UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL . _ fn (� a^ ¢,asowamE4a, • f/1 • ..'(,.,m F F oopc 4.xi,5 tm Pro ®i _ I ;M�KETRArIEa,1 pD � k �a a,w w • R9nnnR-,end= - W I L Li A M S A •® a-- Of,i 1111.3310 aM.,AP — n�Roo N u,F • Y" ..... S: VE ti E - . — '- /^�-- • ..G� �`G — ....""� [���...,� - _. =i°c PANT 4•.xr�\�• c�SASI.P xl / . '�` V- de•Tp I-_ aUti4a �•siRSY. �� 1 J� d(W+a WREs� • 'j`� RPM—�;wr-1 - .cur}-- ¢•7 �riw�-m^ m- :luc �� d k DER e•.r �d a:. • .- .. 1 a. .8 - t .I. • _ _ _ rocl— ma ,cu:fR.�Q'`c. p• Fi L-��)- t -TOG wf E �'i�€aiiik�1 �. Z I �. •.... w ® _ - �R�: nwr � �� -"• t 7� c e---Milwm ! lfi1R a I r*" . • TI sNir a• J -1_1 '. 'L. 1' _ l A_ 9.• DC PflEtT 5b1 4•D. _ I , , • .ROM(SEE MAEIi PIMA) II. . t - ! '°"` • a f-I a I w' • rr:i s ,w z o W 20 io ,� ro RF,um'Y t.. �/% /%%/H// I• . � �. 99191 �,Y$1' Yg1 l �p �� �I .• �a jai I a } • Op. '• _ 'IIIIIII`I �QI _ � % ' ,, � OF• S:. co F saia1jJ I I y aim I aiuoaUia I� k Z R -- a5 . IciL' .� '�. �j of Q �i• (mw 2 nnm d=n., • • �g _ 50• ! ,p RERUA I f• 1i.RmcnatE Si I I I _ A _ + ;_ ' •.af)I♦)�Iar3x iFAx..R o 3A.• I� LL '� _.e_ _ _ i I. e., r !es .�i:+° _ • - _ tglGEkpJid --r _ Mh. di , __- ��+ rLhr w :... � - u.d.1[_�".n A'S1FttE1:rY�tll,: -.__ 'IIfk1@ t' ....m. . "if Na ,m •P ,+" MfUTi{ xHd 13.7� 'AAF17 d£L:Cf i •I ,- mm�;• V+}�i�� !f (�"aFj.iY. - -`�EETLTtf�p III �. ,�Y.�� I y PPwa kAE • -.ALLEY � Hry µ; C x • • t• ; JCL_. cJ "'vL 13— q ! •i • } j j I - • • • __ • • i • • m .F . r. r• BURRNET'T AVEN.UE S.. • • SANITARY'SEWER KEYNOTES: —— .• t•n r ov'u- CITY OF Ne�c N Q POOR DRAM row a sF4E>tr LEVEL PMomis Mu mmnAe m anvsE nor xml.•DOME IRON PIPE.s SWORN IzAiw �� oE3n wonKe ' Q Dir..mw NAM R..=war co4PAvr. - NOS LW AVENUE i NE GHA(� •- A.PRMME cxElOER Puw,mix x•PRESSURE DscrwpE PPE mraaamD,D EMsmc a•SIDE SExER As slam uR t AP/ .w-]ew: ' .mr• �;�h �t�'f, PRELJWNARY SAN1TARY SEWER PLAN Z -q Q Faf=SIDE.MIER 10 RE1411 AND BE ESED fat eismENt omaigG DISCWAGE FROM wee RUMP. / •I• cOMICt:9LL SNf1alW ` _I• , UNDERC'Ji0UND4PARKPIO LEVEL- CO• SM MI M REWUH AND BE 45ED.fOR COtA¢C1pN i0 tRd BIROwG EERER OISIXVPoE(],Db1) P%eot[t�`•! R715213 TL•L AVE,UF SWIM •'•:N'-i`6 • ® • LIFAxWES fEEf.itp4 9URDiNG S,H4C'NRG `.,,,o •4 MERE.RC SBJ32 e� 0 U,' urs ,e aA.NO__ 7 • . I EXPIRES x/5/4s I '(axs)ss,-axs rrhD FNoae6p' e46- NP-RR As RpAED ne< aRs U (Nx5)x5,ms aF �� �Y .ff 3.a 3 . m • • • • • • • • • • . . •~ 'SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17;TWP.'23 N,RGE 5 E,WM 4 ~, �Ii "3 • STREET LEVEL : 9 � y . . PRELIMINARY GRADWG'AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN ,� F m„ . I' hilefOLL OF OM 9. aw� t. WILLIAMS',,x • h • • _- O— -�� `� 'r•s� ES Kx By-J� "� cry s,•x. la r �; ;1 czAs ' .rr 'FMS cI,��'� 5'IF➢c —o�, Why •■L B'ss • .r' , 1°3aII e ' - I .ruA m. ,' • !� nxry - To. 1�+rlrc) t .' ]sBc ss i-L �J� �` €iiRi�,K ra,,e•, i [BIB..• w ' ]f F p'r( .M • T (� Y � � >!�i•e leis rtw" B• 1 .}_—inn tt 1--i W { e-(1Wu vmn I R „ ''.�. s np �'t 1 CYIlflSL� "� Y B a �■�■ ■■■I�isgir-• a [j �I Iml•f� Ex«xouvi o [�1.._... �i.SWt.1 ' " 51.�77C."... e*' .l�s �-: I i, ra sAr a • u< _ .I s. _ aanw w • W I r SI,Y.. A• BLDG B 'p'v1ai aW a nl I w F.F.a-su • BLDG A. ¢. • w 5::y 'wz I rr.a us igl F. 1 d ¢ i - r/ m 9E�HLVTD 9 � CO I 1" U0.5."S W ' 1 ....__ IA arm el I. "I ��-'' ieb �" g x Qr.) G)tll. •.d • 1 C C _ 111��� n • �91 @ 1 "_ ,:::."_'��q...�r::::� 1 i' .. "a [::1r:e' El lil II 1 r I �a II..111�� ��- -� # .iE j r. I I I i►/UI� I � . �O y t:r ' ' ' i --- - _ = v.c Miii �Nl .i'l'J9Cri `SkH4,1�1iFsti. -��7■ i ^• . .[ tiId4�` x ;"pnEuxl° t 1 s �''';tr-�t dx�71IWq�,B�FI. .�.i r1 e ,,A b --^k �K'1tt'01 j:'F4719`d-BIIP' TP An�`r • sa• id'I.r�o.".nans I ',,.p• _ - d ..z-_ 1�.>_-- $FR,IH4arV.y.� - I e " • um BAm , PPROPOSED RFT Ww , rme, . I A L L E Y B Iwt. '`-- Le�_ :n ,i f e �'' lay. r' I" • °�• w IL FIY y� I' 9 [eB- I" ff FEY0.ID" m•BECC emyr'B ,+AE p6 -_[ I r I. - • • �,'S'� '� ',I .I - •I jr.r- • i r'i� au .„rr•ae:w •ro " • o� - '' - r�"d a .7_ er `4,.-A l EI�a '� a 1 j3 I I o, a' "' �•`•I s i . I '� E • . " ( LEGEND 1' SHEET INDEX - ,nl § p`Y I1.xRrvrr" moa¢ ,CC MOM AM • • �_��� �..a g . pia :or s wmwix a WA eB RAN' .31.31.1330113® r D�xo BretmeB aeNA•STONY Ca..PM E91 E051,:dF//i. 74 -m �� oo � �t I�Fe O ..Br Bone Ow —'"",x_ s or s v xurc snBn vuB uses ov ss wo a IWar]av V 1yl • D4 sass ti7 .10.0T Sr)AVID iIANB1C IN I4,714 SF CWC(ElE WILE j I�l�•. . . '",< .. .000 sIusE,E W. z, Q PAVED•ruw,eil.wus(v) - •L: B�i11r�i.-�ii����, ���fll1� _ ' -ow. . . uBss s nB ALLEY c,l a wD�sTi��.! ' m "LEGAL DESCRIPTION mx]B s cbvrt Mk_ re s aavrt TOT. -cIE� �I as°as �,m ' • ID�® - �6 LOTS„rrwau�ln w Blna n a TOT:lmnua ��.. Aramvo ro w]BEM®ED w wevrE',a vws,vlae- B1orAa w xuxmr=au C.-OM In-nls us :::r7::::...cp..... us.w x1VB WYN1V,,D.9lMLICN. DWI 65 b5 TOR9ll4 mF166E 1D MM..6 BMW. - �L'1— . / x�.n am •E•••• " . • arar],E WWEsrr s FEET a YID UM COMM.RR UI oDvrvns wins m ve,eava]o ru<sow s nasals W • P_"2>'€°6�,= ' "'>< ]IlEY rUmoE6 er pm IEmmm lame ECM. • WA,EP OUILII'tpFAl1FM BLW,ESS TIM)DE mm',Blc rI]Bm+c,m . aj. Smart US .� ibi 910]W NO BIOSIM. (]1®1[3nBE Hn W]EP PNLR IFFAIImf,6 REQNED• _ - • M7EMIZ _IIll ' Cd M SI ATE ME BIbFD KAMM A..YflE GOV.D AB . , • CITY OFF RENTON" �, • 21C-✓' • FEPAFRTAENT PUBLJC women 'n t Y29Mal,�'AI�C IItM AVPIrIE WE �GHA�s Eg Oa. eottwE•w SUM f l�` PRELIMINARY GRADING AND O. 7` ;�i /A s c ,`n sx�W m Z STORM DRAINAGE PLAN ' m .. - - I- K�hme Anon babr.MA. • • " �rrrrisiia°e4PsTA;Avl]nc sou,x rp 'yy. ®®"u3__r,'��R/m• ,.eo -- _ • • ]adt 2 . m,,uamn e<..ho e° o® au__ .eue ren .B ° _ - _ • - Lm>rxEs v/sros, (.a)ss,- V. e.oN ,,,��.,-o�.�aff,. 1 3 'm • �� aiar.. r r . 1os1m1os1 17I 1 .1-, I « 1os•I 'd`angJ =. /. O 34 0e g. 7 7/1V 1311 N • •ex •, fit i . . :r.• . v•••,,46.1.. Is min . .,,, -1. 1.olk'N%,t: \ ' t z, . ..„.. .1. , ir... . . „6 , „ • • x ...., iiii --.• � //• 1 Si 3/I d • iz . . . N IIV .•t. • >n o .5..--'h.- •-r- • ��v+ �1�`'�' }1. . , • ii. .., ...."col'ien^k.a '6t!..7 0 ;,7b.** . ... 1 i ..., •• • 1 7 4P. (6G7 t •'.oc_ ..- :,. Lt . : : a �pp. ft a S' •^ 7 0® � ..„, _ .,,4.L',. .e,' • II 'salooLyo- lh • * ,...1084 . 8 emu 's mg gRkia. .i moor gi '4 4. I A I '- m....,41311,,HIN, '' • \ ?Villa I! s a ,,,.._... _,..... L.. ........ a9.2.1 ..._ ,.._ „cr. ii, .5t , =I, . t -g z... ill: e Itt -• , _ 1N~.n o N w 1�' 7N N�" �,u�.D ate. .CO �v. �'� 4 ... " !..t i ja_ , „..z . i,,.. .• ::_, , Ilill-t"':1--.Li%47.` R. v. T. rotar gifipiii2 03Eas me it . .17 I 3/Ld 113N11119 . • } tali- t -it, ar ad .or t , .., vs11— .,.0., .. i •Fa • -411)th 'f t*•'' 9••:.% ‘, ' 41‘... liti41111 "• Di •ii •• 1-!---,-' in s1•. .meµ q m. '(s. ,•I �, �I�r7A►vi. . iiiiE:ci- ii,..711T3_,,,,.'qvikl„ ;-� • 4i .0_,Irl ;19-, -2- E ; lip...i,' - L ,.,,-,--,... pil ,:t - -Fd $' l S. ; -% 34V :,�1 - .: St e3H1II'YS` 0 ,y� It t• G ,e QIt:! " - u• ~ tom,.;rri.�liclo g4- .03 r• •.� a py @olue •pg '.� a'l sl MCI p✓ FiA. uliit71:1 _ QL o�` I I!_.i ®!q 'R V�jp ao Ol Q = N_ CO fi III INyn' �L�Ll �P tj ii'®t®®® Y , .1 v,•../e y ,!(,-.*tom' /IL'7 • or or . - -, „ e',1 l/•^] • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • '�' I �; SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION n,VA'F 23 N,ROE.5 E.WM, (-`SIZE STREET LEVEL 04 WA;;�D P�q. to a.FED m __ -- K..ai -> • . �/ «�aaa WILLIAMsiAVENUE' S • ® • roMADE. o n o "mo " R_. rYR. A r rs�a = \ r E J _ - - a e «-n \ L� ----vr:rxt rrwl `--',-o�c _ F • • " ?II + - ' •a.» IXlx 6. ;IX e•R'C� ",y I .L.OS 6•p IkA I €� V•�a I r" _ untw vNu: r(w) I .,NLI —.. • ` - *nc-_—rt_ I.—._ ,O. -c , ., yam.r ye .. _ � �-1 _ . . •. •.• . • .i . .. . eery■ �■■Ear�,lrl "� 7 r■i ■0■ • r 1...... :..,... -Jr-- IhO�en;.l..ia � I �A v� .}' T iliti if��: w•C.'"A — ■■■■�■i �y'' 4 .Gr, 11 E :� Ex.l.eHolew. • _ • • A I • ■ a uI -m: II BLDG.BLDG B I 'Or.!NI e ¢. I . • ini:":21hEirliik i.;,-$ . -.•. • . . I Z 'a'- b v' PUN.PM '■j�;®p, f I • • MI I - • IIm • ''',i . • . -- 1._ _ �'�-W .eurc • Dq -� _ 'AIIYFf,:lcec uuroi'IkL' !4 trd:RN7®xnEm» • a'{ .1 ::: :i:,;.11 • - 1 � n r a aka r • - - L I � . O aE " - "' YhNauf. CFafW� � k 7 • 1 a. I ALLEY .Dc �. .+..' I • I 5 • SE . V j" 1 . i • • g Tn\n/n . 11r- r r nlT n i I - ' r 1 'V V I r �/i \L�I V 1 V • • • i� 9 • I I I . • • • • �. i B�1pNETT AVENUE S LEGEND y I. )"' _ r.S AVENUE ADM " - - - -- _ •- -- - ,-_ ro� "h"rm nrtwiuws"/ioc,E-,a•o\cluc laa u,m twx.cm • ' ro+orcla�c maw e-ro ,Y INE ❑ .caw REmwIEa mress an rAsr smear vows • • 1 • • ." • uaa --_m"` Qnaumoe mmlwc Dormlc ram snmcE(erorAy. _ -' pa —m—loc na m.E Q mmmc FIRE Nmwwr TO MAR ,•. • • ." CITY OF RENTON 1• - l2;IS•w- I�PARTAAENT OF PEIBLIC WOrRKH • Q ` ' 'Qom sc rD¢wow iD ee ewucEo,m NM xinrwr. 4 a A,4,,,.., W ' z"oDuiml n�vox r.E GHA(�. . - QxDr rwE mnRrNr. • .: - +' a1 x 0 S • / (y� PRELGQJARY WATER PLAN O'. ® meta[vuia[' lAr IQr G aE1FLT0R ooUBl£CH.. WAVE MED.AND'fl4%nSIM PRtYH110N DENCE ASI•D •E C }�/ a IIRS 6�1-%.8 . ,•t4 •. 4. eTnCCT Z • .� - • .®9Nlla SPRRW£R ROOD MIfX fAYif INDIG1aR VAIfE IRAI Alm ME aEPAR1rFNf WNNFCMN CY'��.: CaMAaf.e4L 51[RRNI ` „It.- o llDc�1.LEVEL CO • ----•� 10•b.r.+l[bi�IE.I[ paa)aUISD1E HataalC. -� .xeote ��•� Try?�, - O . . - - la rn''''DN,. "1•I "®DIDA J•aoYPDUND 1[R MN vWLT.wens An raST waumx VAEvE.dCR.. ' j. s a a ax15 rxm A'NUE saint . ,o . .„.l r rs 'dre w r..• _• d ,0.5-441,1i1,...".... RhVEMWN DCACE FM ooYFslla WA,FA SEANCE JxarAl.CM' IQllt,rA 9N4 tr aEtuv ESA— rau NDIFO rA- 'croR as ',/ ®oasmla . >w�R I.ns,_.. .. wa e:d+` .�`°'°°R" - .._ A+FR SFN•mE ro eE USm idV IRRGAImX rA,FR SQMCE ''I E ES_]/e/Dx I •(.1ue)2,..v,,c .auaw.w rffr 2 .ff 3 m . IIMIr_ ,, . WIPIIIIIMIIIMMINIMIIMMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII C 1111111114111111.111F F-- , ! 1 ,-•-4 '-sltit, 1•13.31_j,!1;t4.3_, a 0, k.ATY OF RENTON ; tt:VT 7-7440rOtti:-444.14.;:, ' G 6' 1111%.0 •‘41 MIL Planning/Building/Public Works n4iri - 7 "-DEC 29'00 f4e444-4. - n ..3 u nu 5 I' 1055 South Grady Way- Renton Washington 98055 4 l— - PB METES -4 _ 7158461 uttostAnF !! ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED - , . i I nq) ' 4 Ms. Katie Gilligan .V 434 Burnett Avenue South V ' z Renton WA 98055 . . '• . . , • , r.. I UR N _,----- - -- ,----- . , 1 , N K NOW N -- • ':-.--z: ' - '-'---; ,, •A At Ho A.2.I m., f--- - J 1 '-\ ."- -Lvt).. ..k.f.:71,2-774,2. litisilliiillomillithiiiilludilisilastirigillitiiiisiti •• •,, ,,,, rArk CITY OF RENTON ..LL `• Planning/Building/Public Works Department 7 e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator December 28, 2000 Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1291 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apts. LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Dear Mr. McDonald: . 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 January 23, 2001. 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 Project Manager . cc: S-D Renton LLC/Owner a.ptl6 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 :: This paper contains 50%recycled material.20%post consumer NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: December 28,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICATION NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four- — story, 86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an _ underground parking garage, and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown(CD)Zone. Environmental Review will be required. PROJECT LOCATION: 415-427 Williams Avenue South OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M): As the Lead Agency,the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 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: December 19,2000 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 28,2000 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Administrative Site Plan Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction permits,building permits Requested Studies: Traffic Study,Geotechnical Study,Stormwater Drainage Report Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department,City Hall,Sixth Floor,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g).provides that the Notice of Application(NOA)include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development, infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum,every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: City of Renton Municipal Code Proposed Mitigation Measures: 1. Fire Mitigation Fee: Fire Mitigation Fee is$388.00 per new multi-family residential unit. 2. Parks Mitigation Fee:Parks Mitigation Fee is$354.51 per new multi-family residential unit. 3. Transportation Mitigation Fee:Transportation Mitigation Fee is$75.00 per each new average daily trip[trip calculations are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Manual,Fifth Edition]. Genmalot osion Control: Install and maintain temporary erosion control measures for all stockpiled or disturbed areas. The mporary Erosion Control Measures must be installed and maintained throughout the duration of the project. iotechnical Engineering: Applicant shall follow the recommendations contained in the geotechnical engineering )ort. ents on the above application must be submitted in writing to Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Senior Planner,Development 3s Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on January 11,2001. If you have questions his proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail,contact the Planner. )1%IS MADE PARTIES OF RECORD FOR THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL FOR THIS SITE,DEAN SHERMAN I'MENTS LUA00-085,WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE MADE PARTIES OF RECORD FOR THIS PROPOSED :CT AND WILL RECEIVE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF PROJECT ACTIONS. Anyone who submits written 3nts will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. _ ECT PERSON: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Senior Planner,(425)430-7382 - - - .- SE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION .. ..... ... _ I. ..... 44•If •,,. *I 4f 40-'00 'II -TM'sel np' MIN' mom %sum F- - :.:, gl & • ... . • • . ..:F, E, 4- • K . 7 F•• ' • ic... ne.-nitpliami 11.1111 oe . ..,.,. ..n_ rt. a • . .,._3:2 '16 gilt 4 UV 1 •• ' 1 ' l• . -"' 33311"11k V° • .. • Aill'"A ``•-"' • . • ‘''''''"" =: • .17.-ftt: •N '..: lergior 0,19w' • • . W.12itap ...4 . ifii.111.1 Mal niku__1.• rii ,.. t ,,e, imi 8 ENE 4"re„„ ig• - . MOM. -k.A. ` .ris'". .7121' .,:'..: 1• 9 ipla.- • • Me wkc,ifg ' -',., k. ' • •Mr' .AN OEM, WM •'' .. 1 g•i. P..." gm. tztAr ' Q4'1' Prw- ' MAN iiii . :' • 6-atglii- 1 323 i • ' _40 . . _. 60 E I 1 Fa__I 4. •WA ER3.I.E1 1.1.3 3.7‘ r 117-1..0 • ign '''' maim imil . • ' a•tz, ...i gia'• . tIlli J.t Hafift ' :44 1 .• ...:.-.4 1 -..! • I a, 336 A . tie- . MEL' EINHAZ I no 0.1 ' .: f • n3•S' gliMI .1Mjal Eriat ,, ,..., '' . , •• ., P11=75V. .' n g9" IIIIMR- ' 41rril I TiFlat P • ILLJ ME i1122 1±i ION 8 1 4 .Win •;.': . tiliME 3:t0M3 ,,iii.". ' . ' . ' IQ 3111711 IME.:z •• .... - , . 7:: • .• , 4 0.00, .• . Tonkin Pcirk Z i park s - ' .mw 4 TH l•-:',7„114 :• : • 1.: kJ a .(d) g''''0)'. ,--o---i 4" :.: :. • Q .BM • . 19 M. . 12°2 j19 . : ... .. '. ' .4.--_ . •j! •4E1 ' . :Fru 4 i -.'.Ein...32 .18 . . :gi 3 is ;, ' '' 1 • 'at IA - '...4 g'... ..4,...rbrain - ... 2 .r.dig/ ..oNAFio 1 ir, . • ) . . ,. 'liti'Nrii • • ' •2 • “5 s'i• z‘v• . .!21) (r) 1 19 ilWool' . ::: . . • 14 est..iraiiitir.. " .CY'r •21. 6 15 se• ... Eas 4. •. . 4::.: . • . 16-.,t1 . Elul 6 al• , ''. j. • -.4r,-.1i4 7 14, , (1.,. 17 14 . • • ::,1*. 1.1 i511 AIM ' • • ' - -•• .4.1- • •El 8 .--11 -• " -I „ I 1 . 0 ..,!gii!'" a.,„,,,,, . ....___ ,,.. ... .. ...,.,i• ,,.,,r3 . , . ,.. ,, _ .1121m, . , •Ea 9 -,ir.j..."-.1.R...\ lz III ltj• "kg, irz . ,cz • so 1$1161° VIIkV, II pi q 4 . • ''5Tii ' 1-:. • • • % L St • • . . . • 5TH • . •• .: • 6 - , .,..'. I am% lm ErM4.7 44 ragum. li,-;.° "vga :n •:-. •MI 2' _.t4.._23 ,. , ,•,_ umgfili . , 2 lip Al tiyipz,11 .' • i .‹ . L.1: rp-i• „ , ,...._ . ., M .3 t'' 22 rl;. :IE:3 Elia _ Kr: 01 . tuilb ie,LI .: •:: f . I i V: 21 ESS liglial•EllMid 1 ON - . kre rgii is k+ . i ::. ''. M• ' 20 go ,:, 11111111. CM .4 Eiti, „:El 4 q N • .19 M. cr). 118 'Eill2 c° • ME .2 WIll.• to..55 1E1, -M -lc 1 Ell. ' a El9 Cc eigl iMi ''s LT6...T it'E . 43 Ps 1E7 ..• 61 ' ' . ' '. :. .. ' Eg •• •4 'g:I KU 1.---1111 ki Vj-rill Mi. • • EIMEHIM. •DO 7 L4 tur .L, x 1 r- 4, t": • • i .1.1 9• 16 my 1,K414 rmi- nc, : . . ip'.. ''• 4 IS 41-1 I.: IMPVA, MI III • NM Xal •: ..01.•a D Ea . ..,,,,8 , 1 • •.: -:11 14 EN aTiAI uni al 9 71.se•! ..' 9 a 333 • • ' A ii,c2 1.4.. ' - EPEICI _Iv):MEI 1,Ellg ""' i° Ilin .11 .,!6" Ei,,, 41-;%,1 isMs3; ,.... f 1...e, ..... 77: : •• . e Mile AL64 . , Ell A ET . i, 3.Iri - 2 ft7 • . A . " 4 v'•• 1.1 1 el hiii-0G.R . ..• • refoom . • . ... ,ro„.„ ettn • • 'ORT' -IBORHOOD DETAIL MAP 1..200' ' • a 0 CITY OF RENTON ..11. Planning/Building/Public.Works • 'Tris.3M - DEC 29'00 pe..r,1?2::: - u 3 0 5 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 -, 41- , „ "S;FE • PbmIttEit ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED -., ) , , _.,... . 2. ..., S D RENTON LLC ) T6T250 R6:7132cmolJoNRENR 1 DE1N1WARH:S:0-11 D52ET : h OEI.i vERABLE ----......_i_.4 ADDPESSED •-,_,-, i i .. —,.:•,_,--,,,I i, -Fsi-7----->,. _ __ _ (C. M :\stl ETURN TO WRITER if 4 1) 4rIa2s,-:- :ss.•.742. • iiIiiiiiiIiiiiiimiiiiiimidliiiiiiiiHilid : • C-)S-( ..?— • ,� ® 1+ �'N� NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: December 28,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF ---- APPLICATION NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four- story, 86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an - underground parking garage, and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown(CD)Zone. Environmental Review will be required. PROJECT LOCATION: 415-427 Williams Avenue South OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M): As the Lead Agency,the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 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: December 19,2000 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 28,2000 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Administrative Site Plan Review _ Other Permits which may be required: Construction permits,building permits Requested Studies: Traffic Study,Geotechnical Study,Stormwater Drainage Report Location where application may - be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department,City Hall,Sixth Floor,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development'regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA)include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development, infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum,every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: City of Renton Municipal Code Proposed Mitigation Measures: - 1. Fire Mitigation Fee: Fire Mitigation Fee is$388.00 per new multi-family residential unit. - 2. Parks Mitigation Fee:Parks Mitigation Fee is$354.51 per new multi-family residential unit. 3. Transportation Mitigation Fee:Transportation Mitigation Fee is$75.00 per each new average daily trip[trip calculations are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Manual,Fifth Edition]. Genmalot 4. Erosion Control: Install and maintain temporary erosion control measures for all stockpiled or disturbed areas. The Temporary Erosion Control Measures must be installed and maintained throughout the duration of the project. 5. Geotechnical Engineering: Applicant shall follow the recommendations contained in the geotechnical engineering report. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Senior Planner,Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on January 11,2001. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail,contact the Planner. PERSONS MADE PARTIES OF RECORD FOR THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL FOR THIS SITE,DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA00-085,WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE MADE PARTIES OF RECORD FOR THIS PROPOSED PROJECT AND WILL RECEIVE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF PROJECT ACTIONS. 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,Senior Planner,(425)430-7382 , PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION e6 4 3 '2 s€ 11 4 13. I .. • '1 '1 16 • lEde MD iW . ' ?�i�- Ir ti -_- 311• �C � .1/ 1{ , y®8 S .' .,z .• Fo�`�, 114,1 ill �1.' 13 309�•• 7I i •' " Me iggINE . '',./ A , •3.,...,, • ....---.4im •,xi el 11 e sn ,. . y 332: J II...-, ..,. LD:1 I' EltAr I. LL21_: rip,•..... • 1 IFINIVI mop ligii '. ' '. aze i rw ta eluv+ L®•13' 8.INJ• 7i w •336 }l . !'fl!!dI niey 1 �d `t', I' n . ��j fist° >Q Xi--- .• i 0tJ MU ,�S1i tlt E 8 • 4 11�l 6 Fr •i"- 1, S • T. •• ' •• 8 0,0, Tonkin Park%i Parks _ " • •nliti ��, 112° o.r• 19 • '011i. • �Vr . • 5 � - 'alo _. al ,®..3 18 • • . .!�^ 3��IB. i, sc -. ua I s • ±±j ® •1 l • ,,'tell ~al�'� { I. �y�.�e �07AflLINE� :um :ONAT/0 lM e � + �... '� �='11% 6.''36' ,;��,2 i i (.1.,, 519�' ®- . „al J I amp. ^� �� L..i Qggi f :_ I` r •y 1 Q�c io Put—,d7 • •.® 9 �. ®•l j, ?93.rig • Q - 'JIKt;I. I1GSi� row• ..,,, .., 1� `i1= :a q�u•s10 � „ II 1 I /II e0' ! s .•O5TH i - • •... % .k 5TH • Io'. I •t law �° tyi maim, 4i rr''.1' . �, vi�� : K a: mg °eo°,}®Q 73 @. •® 2 •• ,fr_ L mil•om . .,:i, ? l9 j. I . •• oil_••4. ,,21 ISIIII `t1111111111.1•'1•Era 14' •1�11'• 3 18 • •-L .Siid!�'J'' f i 1.6m ®' 1 20 1l ;•..= el •20 uL - ® 4 i -I 1 4 17 IlM.•. O f .Ii 4 .b ®EM rv37I9 ®. (/). n • lira. &IN .® 6 ®. Il l `.wihuzi :le „rills tu EMI Ct ,., ®vff in. Z 31 �ij�; � t� is ®. e.t;. . �;" 'O. 1_..: a s ~ .�rv�'ll 1� B • .8 I3 S�, i�l! 1 .1n; - s®, II• la OP „i 7'r?7 I 4 m 9 0': ..' 9 -12 in • _ (42 1�•112 ( 13 .A�.:1='. ' •i as l� l0 �s �t L l �i P� a , e0 lEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP ,°RTC 1'•200' Genmalot 'r• iTtkit. 1"\\"- \' \\\• 4---.1.1 91„, 14‘19:!e4tri:44/ s* ' ---mviL(ct':,4,.-7.-kItt 4r-, • '.4'r'4 ofr . . .. . -, ).y4 ,, • ,to , 1% , i \\\ • t 1 , • , • ,,it #11,10‘ "Vt: . •,.., ..."1".! %A . , I •lip .4-;i1 \NA.‘,\.. of 44' 4 N 1 , 0„,„„.., ...,,,.. A 1 / .tr-,- • - . t''' 4- . wo-r r ' .:...•..r IP . , . 'i,4,,,,, '-'. .,..... '1: \ A \ 1 .",:f-•,..% 1 * ''' .4... .. .4A • ‘ II l ,-- • .- - -1c, , M.' . _ e..1.,/!,',' '* ','&".•;i:Ir.?lr 1,- ' " - :'"it 0' ' I 04. *0, CV J / , — .•-•_,----„iiirp 7 Iii .'^eL.. . , ' fl ,th .,, i A'''',..v fihilt 1 . ,. . A .t-,.=1- , • ,,,,iilliiir I ov- —ir •:-.: -, 6,..,' ;$...-:-.. -ii, g ,,,, a Li ',.t , ,, 1, .. .1'--/, - L r III • ...,...t. ..„. .., *4 4 I 4 * IIII— • HE ' Ii" irk. 4'Isi It" ' IIIItlitill ' 4 I III I 411101W1 .:::..Y.- . 1 _ 1 iirgi I,, --_-. / iii • --, , mum - 1 fiiii 1 1 -. .: 1 iLl. ,.''',• UPI!" I 1 I I 1 I I 1111.1 A. - • 1 , .0 44( - Fr 1 i I ie if 1.1, 4 . ; ,..1r NAt Iv Riff • ;.4•Nk. 4 lit 4IW I 111111 IRE ii . .vm_ •• , , ,. f, i • vel.A i MINIM ItIi' . , 1 I1 1 1 ,. 11_401„ Ill I - • , - °P/4*-N MINN '' , .. 2...,„. it M. • MIN $ ' . . .. .., ..: .. .. ... ... , t...,- ". , ,V., . - , , . --4-• ,,.'4' r 'I lilt ..._....._ NM -MN mmumini ilhfilif.,M sour,.... ,... .._. ihm.i. lf=": al, ,,, _ if i . „, i ... _ , . .1.7, 4:44..- eg_mir -11' - ' ,,, ' ...e ... ,i.f t.';` 11111 —. 4 1 ,• • ''.4..e. -Aka`l'h '1 , 1k• ' INNIIII, NI..... w if,NINON /1/1/11 • - y . ! Immo,ifi •7.4'-I'.i.r.:%.:- Tiw tons' IIIIIIIN ' _.-- , I siliffmainlitin ON, I . ''. 1 4,* . .`. '::.,•••0•11; .4: • ' • I-- i k' ., 75. 7, -'.46-.' " mmar. ear 1 • AH, _. . ...,. . , ,,. , . 1 • . • , I . ::::,,..._.J_____:__. • 4011 , • , k , 1/1 ow f `4 'ket a:. . l_:.I r. , • '''''',.'. 4..4 I, t::' ''-? '. ' i ......... 44, , MII-4II WM141111411411' -f------. II 4 I 4 . . 1`''Mt . ' i k, .. 4. ,• , ,. 1 . * • i . . ., i.- '•• - 1 , I ..- . N.- , i •pa.- ' • s• 4 . —...47,1*•'. .., • G) 'MORR/S .. . , , ti .' AVE. .. • • , 2 �c�! 1•F',,, 1. IY '. = �\`I1 r •3��� .y IJti 1L.,Y! uI1 R. �' • 1<� Pi . .. O v 'a a .EO�' ., y• r-1 .�,� "!(S a• .' �lr`.Lc� r'sD 7i a s •0 .•.$M/THERS • . • •: AVE:.. _ S . • : • •• c . 8 t., �11ti "ta [; I r I?� . :FF, ••,` . ;r�' • o, i +f q E,7 13,g u�.e > • • Burnett . "1' r+Umor .. •.Park i AA `. . . . rt1.4 r- BURNETT ' . _ .: .AVE '' I K •?Drib am�ii�� • •igligrli 'Lill ,.fig. • .. 9 MN V. • -° 1 ffIni0- En-iiiiiii_N-1 • .. '* •' iY/LL/AMS '•� •.. '' �g.AVE; •••..1141.1 Wiii a b r e .9E6111101EN n-',Ilt, P .-mill WELLS • ti•. AVE • % gift. (Ogggelli:11M vti "i" i i Ian ".- ` 4 erg! a.,. 'MA/H :" , AVE. s • - .• VIESti vi a r, o y .g • • . - MILL' : ' r - _ I'II'' 0 I4oHI•�L::.I'1• I-II'd* ". rRialI I-I r...AF/E >�,. 0 p CITY OF RENTON 1 .1 Planning/Building/Public Works ;_ ��� e DEC 29101 �pqn, t4 a D .3 tj a ,.. 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 ; -: 1t.r. = � Y: ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 7 $4pd u.s A 6 E ; if12 ea ee FPI ±#R Ce ±is SEA,'.R Ei±d NORTHRN SANTA FE BURLINGTON I OR CURRENT RESID 1T�� , 1700-E=GOLF RD 400 SCHAUMBURG IL 60173-B820_ @_fRL700* 601732034 1700 19 01/05/01 . .T3 FORM 35'47 a :BLiRLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE �� FORTOWORTHOTX 76161-003'. _ I ' f 1 ' •1:{ i ` 1 - 11 11 1 ' tf1 R op afart-r -..... . :iii.ff 1..:1:: tfi fl:ff !."f . ff ffi iti.i3f1f1i'?f1• e_J Smoot deed SheetsT"" Use tempjte for 5160® I Z- Set DD -/fig SQUIRE DANIEL BOONE NORTHRN SANTA FE BURLINGTON NENA F.&IRENE F.CARINO OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 512 WILLIAMS AVE S 1700E GOLF RD 400 500 BURNETT AVE RENTON WA 98055-2726 SCHAUMBURG IL 60173-5820 RENTON WA 98055 GEORGE G.&AMY E.CASTELLANO CITY OF RENTON GARY J.&EVELYN M. DOWNS I OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT C/O 514 WILLIAMS AVE#S 200 MILL AVE S I 407 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON WA 98055-2726 RENTON WA 98055-2132 RENTON WA 98055-2748 I R.VAISE POST 1263 FRANK THOMAS S.&CHERYL GALT K.A.GILLIGAN OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 416 BURNETT AVE S 04254 12628 SE 169TH PL 538 WHITWORTH AVE S RENTON WA 98055-2551 RENTON WA 98058-6133 RENTON WA 98055-2415 DAWN N.GRIFFIN RON &ROSEMARY HALSEN KRISTINE L.HALVERSON ' OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 13827 146TH PL SE 707 S 4TH ST 518 BURNETT AVE S RENTON WA 98059-5503 • RENTON WA 98055-2568 RENTON WA 98055-2532 CHARLES R.&MARY C. HEADRICK MIKE HILDERMAN CURTIS G.HOLT I OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 438 WILLIAMS AVE S 504 BURNETT AVE S 1216 5TH AVE W RENTON WA 98055-2745 RENTON WA 98055-2532 SEATTLE WA 98119-3409 , DAVID+CAMILLE+RAPHAE JASSNY DOUGLAS &JENNIFER JOHNSON MAGUERITE KIRKMAN I OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT ' PO BOX 957 507 WELLS AVE S 431 WELLS AVE S RENTON WA 98057-0957 RENTON WA 98055-2703 RENTON WA 98055-2705 1 MANFRED M.&KAREN E. LABAND LOSH FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP TIMOTHY J.&KIMBERL MCCORMICK OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 3735 81ST AVE SE 2110 WESTERN AVE 15531 SE 168TH ST MERCER ISLAND WA 98040-3530 SEATTLE WA 98121-2110 RENTON WA 98058-8614 1 1 MENTAL HEALTH HOUSING FOUND JOHN W.&RUMI R.MILLER ROBERT R. MORAN OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 101 STEWART ST STE 1102 428 BURNETT AVE S 428 WILLIAMS AVE S SEATTLE WA 98101-1048 RENTON WA 98055-2582 RENTON WA 98055-2745 BRUCE NALDER 1 THEODORE L.&NANCY M. NIEMI I CHRISTOPHER J.OHNEMUS OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT ' OR CURRENT RESIDENT I 516 WILLIAMS AVE S#8 1917 SHATTUCK AVE S 500 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON WA 98055-2726 RENTON WA 98055-4249 RENTON WA 98055-2726 BERT &NITA OLSON NELSON D.&RHODA R.PALERMO ROBERT B.&JENNIFER N.RAPHAEL OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 430 BURNETT 9414 S 202ND ST PO BOXC957 RENTON WA 98055-1406 KENT WA 98031-1425 RENTON WA 98057-0957 6 AVERY® Address Labels . Laser 5160® • Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENT RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENTER REBECCA L.ROGERS OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 435 WILLIAMS AVE S 435 WILLIAMS AVE N#S 427 WELLS AVE S RENTON WA 98055-2748 RENTON WA 98055-1483 RENTON WA 98055-2705 RAUL R.ROMANO NEETA B.ROWE S D RENTON LLC OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 504 WILLIAMS AVE S 421 WELLS AVE S C 16720 NE 116TH ST RENTON WA 98055-2726 RENTON WA 98055-2781 REDMOND WA 98052-2250 JOHN HAYDEN SEE GENE P.&HUONG T.SENS SERVICE LINEN SUPPLY INC OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 438 BURNETT AVE S 7259 S SUNNYCREST RD 903 S 4TH ST RENTON WA 98055-2551 SEATTLE WA 98178-2655 RENTON WA 98055-2720 � I i JERRY D.SHREVE ROBERT C.&IRIS L.SMITH JESSE JAMES SOOY OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 5292NDAVES 819S5THST 50832NDAVE KENT WA 98032-5846 RENTON WA 98055-2719 SEATTLE WA 98122-6334 STANDREWS BLDG CORP RICK &LISA STONELL ETHEL SWANSON OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 505 WILLIAMS AVE S 411 WILLIAMS AVE S 505 WELLS AVE S RENTON WA 98055-2746 RENTON WA 98055-2748 RENTON WA 98055-2703 I � I , JOHN A.WALBURN BEN A.&KIMBERLI K.WILSON OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 426 BURNETT AVE S 424 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON WA 98055-2551 RENTON WA 98055-2745 I � i I . . I I AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® • Mr. Gary Klatt Ms. Barbara Horton Mr. & Mrs. Gary Down 411 Williams Avenue South 20613 SE 291st Place 407 Williams Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Kent, WA 98042-6880 Renton, WA 98055 Ms. Katie Gilligan Mr. & Mrs. Bert Olson Mr. & Mrs. John See 434 Burnett Avenue South 430 Burnett Avenue South 438 Burnett Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Mr. & Mrs. Ben Wilson Mr. Bob Moran Jude Waller 424 Williams Avenue South 425 Wells Avenue South 410 Williams Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Ted Niemi Ms. Louise Vittitow Mr. & Mrs. Rick Stone 1917 Shattuck Avenue South 532 Williams Avenue South 411 Williams Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Duryah Mohamath -S-D Renton, LLC Mr. Steven McDonalc 426 Burnett Avenue South 2100 — 124th Ave. NE Suite 100 Mithun Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98005 1201 Alaskan Way, F Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 Mike Hilderman Von Martin Seth Hale 504 Burnett Ave. S. 4803 Pacific Hwy E #3 19524 Ballinger Way Renton, WA 98055 Tacoma, WA 98424 PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Eric S. Wagner Sherman Homes 2100 124th Ave. NE, Suite 100 ""`; Bellevue, WA 98005 rali .,s of Rem . • Mr. Gary Klatt v Ms. Barbara Horton c✓Mr. & Mrs. Gary Downs 411 Williams Avenue South 20613 SE 291st Place 407 Williams Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Kent WA 98042-6880 Renton WA 98055 Ms. Katie Gilligan J Mr. & Mrs. Bert Olson r/ Mr. & Mrs. John See 434 Burnett Avenue South 430 Burnett Avenue South 438 Burnett Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 "Mr. & Mrs. Ben Wilson Mr. Bob Moran "Jude Waller 424 Williams Avenue South 425 Well Avenue South 410 Williams Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 a Mr. Ted Niemi 4 Ms. Louise Vittitow .'Mr. & Mrs. Rick Stonell 1917 Shattuck Avenue South 532 Williams Avenue South 411 Williams Avenue South Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 `t Duryah Mohamath I Property Owner: vContact Person 426 Burnett avenue South S-D Renton LLC Mr. Steven McDonald Renton WA 98055 2100— 124th Ave. NE, Suite 100 Mithun Bellevue WA 98005 1201 Alaskan Way, Pier 56, Ste.200 Seattle WA 98101 �" I 1 1i /Y1�n — DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS �I vin,� N t(dPNWL(�,� � LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF 504- r`, - S y: YO3 �Jw PARTIES OF RECORD py, Mc— 4155(9 !h )q ?r/t 12/28/00 Fr) r CITI1 ,)F RENTON Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman May 24,2001 John See Robert Moran Ben Wilson 436 Burnett Avenue S 425 Wells Avenue S 425 Williams Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Re: APPEAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW,DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS FILE No. LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD Dear Appellants: The Examiner's Report and Decision on the above referenced matter,which was issued on May 8, 2001, was not appealed within the 14-day period established by ordinance. Therefore,this matter is considered final by this office and the file on your appeal is being transmitted to the City Clerk as of this date. Please feel free to contact this office if further assistance or information is required. Sincerely, 4-7—:j - Fred J. Kau nan Hearing Examiner FJK/jt cc: Elizabeth Higgins, Development Services Sandi Seeger, Development Services :TTO' 1901, 2001 1055 South Grady Way Renton Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6515 Co This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer 644 fd t lY AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. County of King ) f`--being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 1 day of , affiant deposited in the mail of the United States a sealed enve e(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: SUBSCRIBED NN�,SW,QRN to before me this day of 4 , , 2001. yJti ssro,�,,, ?� ►, �07. % ,% ,�,.,�- a "--n, O % `'_= . Nagy Public ' . and for t e State of Washington, „/ j �' Residingat ,therein.►, 0 ,,,,,..,. Application, Petition, or Case No.: Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal LUA00-1 6 8,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT May 8,2001 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPELLANTS: Robert Moran John See Ben Wilson File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD LOCATION: 415 Williams Avenue S SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appeal of Site Plan Review PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Appellants' 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 April 3,2001 hearing. The official record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday,April 3,2001, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Parties present: Appellants: John See 438 Burnett Ave S Renton,WA 98055 Robert Moran 425 Wells Ave S Renton,Way 98055 Ben Wilson 425 Williams Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Representing applicant: John W.Hempelmann Cairncross&Hempelmann,P.S. 524 Second Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98104 Representing City of Renton: Russell Wilson,City Attorney Dean Sherman Apartments Apl:rz-_, File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 2 Elizabeth Higgins2 Development Services 1055 S Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 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, 168,SA-A,ECF,containing the original application, photographs, and other documentation pertinent to the proof of posting,proof of publication and other appeal. documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Neighborhood Map Exhibit No. 4a&b: Revised Site Plan(8-1/2 X 11), Colored rendering of Revised Site Plan Exhibit No.5a&b: Elevations(8-1/2 X 11),Colored Exhibit No. 6: Zoning Map rendering of Elevations Exhibit No. 7: Photo,4 story apartments and Exhibit No.8: Photo, alley between Burnett single family houses Avenue and Williams Avenue S Exhibit No. 9: Photo, Williams Avenue,view Exhibit No. 10: Colored Zoning Map looking north Exhibit No. 11: Letter(page 2 only)dated Exhibit No. 12i Site Plan, showing garage 12/11/00 to Bill Sherman entrance from alley Exhibit No. 13: CD Development Standards Exhibit No. 14: RM-U Development Standards Exhibit No. 15: RMC 4-6-0060G-H,Alley Exhibit No. 16: Panoramic view of Burnett Standards Station apartment project Exhibit No. 17: Letters from Charlie Bergman Exhibit No. 18: Aerial Photograph dated 3/10/01 Exhibit No. 19: Sketch of potential traffic pattern Exhibit No.20: Memo from Gil Cerise dated at 5th Street&Williams 3/29/01 (including map on page 2) Exhibit No.21: City of Renton Comprehensive Exhibit No.22: Resume of Mark Jacobs Plan Land Use Map Exhibit No.23: Photographs of alley Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner,Development Services, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 presented a brief overview of the project. The applicant has requested a review and approval of an 86-unit apartment structure in two buildings,4 stories above an underground parking structure. The project is located in south Renton,just south of the Downtown area. The project is bordered by Williams Avenue to the east, and S 5th Street to the south. The north end of the project is three lots south of S 4th Street, and the project is bordered by an alley between.Williams and Burnett on the west. The project is in the Center Downtown(CD)Zone. The project is surrounded by the CD Zone to the north, and to the west, south and east the zone is Multi-Family —Urban designation. The total size of the project site is slightly less than one acre. The building has been designed to be in two structures,with a parking garage underneath. On the ground floor all of the units will be accessible by individual entries from the courtyard that surround the structure. Access to the parking garage will be through the alley west of the site. The concept is to have a strong connection between the ground floor units and the sidewalk to increase pedestrian activity. The proximity of the project to Downtown Renton and the new Transit Center was a consideration in the design. The original plan had a driveway that was parallel to the alley,which required traffic to both enter and leave at the connection between Dean Sherman Apartments App:.u.: File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 3 the alley and 5t11 Street. The revised plan has the driveway to the underground parking perpendicular to the alley so that people entering and exiting the parking can go either direction. The alley is about 10 feet wide at the present time, and the applicant will be dedicating an additional five feet on the east side of the alley to widen it to 15 feet. This project will have a density of 93 dwelling units per acre,which is within the required and allowed range for the CD Zone. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance—Mitigated for the project, with the following mitigation measures: The recommendations of the Geotechnical Report shall be followed in the project design and construction, and the required Transportation,Fire, and Parks Mitigation fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit. John See,438 Burnett Avenue S,Renton, WA 98055 expressed concern that the 4 story building would be too large for the neighborhood. He entered a photo of a 4 story apartment building and single family homes on Williams Avenue, showing how the homes were dwarfed by the apartment building. Mr. See stated that he feels Williams Avenue should be used for entrance and exit to the parking garage rather than the alley because it is wider, can handle more traffic, and would be less dangerous than the narrow alley. He entered a photo showing his garage and the entrance to the alley and a photo of Williams Street. Mr. See also entered a Zoning Map with colored overlays showing the zoning in the vicinity of the subject site. Mr. See cited an excerpt from the Traffic Study dated December 11,2000 indicating there would be an additional 400 trips per day resulting from the project. He expressed concern about the stop sign at 5th Street and Burnett causing traffic to backup when cars enter and exit the alley. He also entered excerpts from the CD and the RM-U Zoning tables. He expressed concern about future high-density projects using the alley as well, and adding to the amount of traffic. Mr. See asked where the vent fans from the parking garage will be vented and if the fans will run continuously or will be on a timer.He would like to know what the noise level from the fans will be and how much pollution will be exhausted into the alley. He also asked how bright the lighting on the apartment building will be. In response to questioning from Mr. Hempelmann, Mr. See stated that it is possible to drive• over the curb and utility box to his driveway,but he does not like to do it because it is hard on his tires. He has not constructed an entrance into his driveway from the street because his parking area would be reduced due to the City's requirement that a driveways be at least five feet from a property line. Nita Olson,430 Burnett Avenue S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that she objects to the size of the proposed project. She feels that the entrance to the parking garage should be on Williams rather than from the alley. She expressed concern about access of emergency vehicles to the alley and entered an excerpt from RMC 44-6- 0060G-H, "Alley Standards." She expressed concern that the project will not have enough parking stalls for 86 units and residents and guests will park on the surrounding streets. She feels that the Council wants apartments in the downtown area so much,that they are disregarding the needs of the single family home owners. Ben Wilson, 424 Williams Avenue S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that he lives directly across Williams Avenue, to the east of the proposed project. He stated that he does prefer this modified design to the initial design that was submitted. However, he feels that the size of the building would be excessive for the neighborhood and that the proposed location is not suited for a development of this density. He expressed concern that the height of the building would have adverse affects on neighbors to the east in terms of sound reflection from 1-405, and in cutting off an hour or so of daylight every day. Mr. Wilson stated that he feels the proposed South Renton Neighborhood Plan appears to specifically prevent this type of over-scale development in an incompatible area. Scenarios he has heard proposed at City Planning Commission meetings indicate reducing the density of the area where this project will be built to no more than 75 units per acre. It seems inappropriate to approve a plan Dean Sherman Apartments Apt:,..: File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 4 at this time when the intent of the City is to put into place regulations that will make for a more compatible use with regard to the surrounding neighborhood. Bob Moran,425 Wells Avenue S,Renton, WA 98055 stated that he owns property on Williams Avenue S directly across the street from the proposed project. He expressed concern about the height of the proposed building. It would not fit the character of the existing neighborhood. Mr.Moran also expressed concern about the alley situation. Alleys are not designed for general travel,but as a means of access for pedestrians or vehicles to the rear of their property. The alley narrows considerably to the north. There is the problem of right-of-way if two vehicles meet in the alley. The alley is not wide enough for two vehicles to pass each other. With additional traffic on the alley,will the City of Renton be responsible for maintaining it? Mr. Moran also expressed concern about the height of the building blocking sunlight on his property. He entered a photo panorama showing single family homes next to the apartment complex on Burnett demonstrating how the single family homes there have lost the privacy of their backyards. Mr. Moran submitted for the file statements regarding how the apartment complex has impacted their lives from several of the neighbors living in single family homes on Burnett. Mr. Moran also suggested the balconies on the proposed project be enclosed rather than have open railings so that the contents of the balcony are not visible. Responding to questioning from Mr. Wilson,Mr. Moran stated that the driveways from his properties exit onto Williams and Wells Avenues. His concern with the alley situation involves possible future development which might impact his properties and the hope that there might be regulations put into place to prevent use of alleyways for access. Under questioning from Mr. Wilson, Mr.Moran stated that the tall trees in the area where the project will be built are not close enough together to block the sunlight in the evening. Ms. Higgins used an aerial photograph to show the configuration of the alleyway, and explained how it will be widened by five feet,beginning at the north boundary of the consolidated parcels that make up the property all the way to the intersection with S 5th Street. Sales Samoun,426 Burnett Avenue S,Renton,WA 98055 stated that he just purchased his house last November and was not aware at that time that this apartment building was going to be built. He expressed concern about the height of the proposed building and the fact that it would block his sunlight and view to the east. Donna See,438 Burnett Avenue S,Renton, WA 98055 entered a drawing she made of potential traffic patterns at 5th Street and Williams showing how traffic might be backed up as a result of cars stopping in order to enter the alleyway. Ms. See stated that if the entry were off of Williams,which is two-way,rather than 5th, cars could pass the stopped vehicle and not cause a backup of traffic. Katie Gilligan, 538 Whitworth Avenue S,Renton,WA 98055 stated she owns the property at 434 Burnett Ave. She uses the house there occasionally,but does not live in it. She expressed concern about the alley being used as access to the proposed project. Rebecca Lind, Senior Planner,EDNSP Dept., 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton, WA 98055 gave an overview of the City's long range planning for this area,using the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map that was adopted on March 1, 2001. The area that is referred to as South Renton is part of the Urban Designation of the City and has not changed since the initial adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. In order to remain an Urban Area,the capacity in the Center Downtown Area must maintain approximately 7,000 dwelling units,which would be multi-family units. The City's vision for the Center Downtown Area is to have a transition to mixed-use development in the Downtown Core,with higher density residential in the South Renton Area. The overall Dean Sherman Apartments File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 5 density to be achieved in the long-range plan to implement the Center Downtown concept is 100 dwelling units per acre,which can go up to 150 units per acre with Design Review and Administrative Site Plan Review, depending on the zone. The City is currently involved in the preparation of a sub-area plan for South Renton. Ms. Lind entered a memo from Gil Cerise of the City's Economic Development Division that explains the maximum density that is required to implement this Urban Center criteria, and a map that is the Planning Commission's recommendation. They have made a motion supporting the density shown on this map,which ranges from 35 to 150 dwelling units per acre. These are the densities that will be necessary to implement the long-range land use policy of the City in this area. Single family uses in the Center Downtown area are non- conforming uses at this time. There are other areas of the City that are reserved for single family development and mixed single-family, multi-family development. In response to a question from the Examiner about how the City goes about changing the existing uses in an area and allowing more density without unduly burdening those existing uses,Ms. Higgins replied that the City tries to spread the burden somewhat. The applicant could have submitted plans for a structure up to 95 feet tall and up to a density of 150 units per acre,but chose not to. The neighborhood, although primarily single-family,has been in transition for some time. The appellants have stated that they are accepting of change, although they are perhaps not prepared for the radical change that this project would introduce. What we ask developers to do in this situation is look at the design of the structure and examine ways that they can make it fit into the context of the neighborhood as well as possible. Quite a bit of effort was made in this regard with this particular project. There is articulation along the facades, significant landscaping, and common areas. The design of the building is not box-like, as was seen in so many of the multi-family structures from the `60s until fairly recently. Planners try to weigh all of the various factors,but since the City of Renton does not have architectural review, it comes down to whether the code requirements are met. This project does meet those code requirements. Regarding guidelines for upper level step backs,Ms. Higgins referred to the Urban Center Design Overlay District Guidelines,which includes both standards and guidelines. The relevant portion of the Transition to Surrounding Development,Minimum Standard section states that, "the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses." One of the items to be considered would be step backs on upper levels. Step backs on upper levels are not a requirement, but must be considered as a way of addressing transition to surrounding development. In response to questioning from Mr. Wilson,Ms. Lind stated that the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan was mandated under the Growth Management Act. The land use concept included in the Plan is part of the City's mandated requirement to accept certain targets for growth. The Urban Center designation was mandated by the City Council. Ms Higgins stated that the project was evaluated using all the current guidelines. Although the guidelines are at the end of the Staff Report,they were incorporated in the recommendations the staff made. The project certainly met all the required standards, and in addition,met many of the guidelines. In response to questioning from Mr. Hempelmann,Ms. Lind stated that the City's policy for accessing multi- family from alleys rather than streets is required in the RM-U Zone. In the Center Downtown Zone, alley access is encouraged through the Urban Center Design Guidelines. There has been an agreement with the Fire Department that alleys in the Center Downtown Zone will be expanded to 20 feet as development occurs. In the case of this particular alley,the additional 5 feet is anticipated on the other side at the time redevelopment occurs. Since that other side is in the RM-U Zone and alley access is required, it seems to be a reasonable Dean Sherman Apartments App„... File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 6 consideration. Single-family uses in both the Center Downtown Zone and the RM-U Zone are non-conforming uses and may continue, but currently are not allowed to be expanded or replaced. This is an expression of the City Council's intent for redevelopment to occur in those zones. In order to achieve the City's Urban Center target,there must be at least a 60%redevelopment. In response to questioning from Mr. See,Ms.Lind stated That alley access is a recommendation, not a requirement, in the Center Downtown Zone. Ms.Higgins read into the record an excerpt from Section 4-2-110F of the Zoning Code regarding RM-U standards for alley access. In response to questioning from Mr. Wilson, Ms. Higgins stated that primary emergency access to the project would be via Williams Avenue S. Regarding increased traffic from the project, Ms. Higgins stated that the report from the traffic engineers did not indicate there would be an inordinate negative impact on traffic in the area. Mr.Hempelmann stated that the burden is on the appellants to show clear error by the City,and deference is given to the conclusions of the Environmental Review Committee. Mr. Hempelmann reiterated previous testimony from City staff on relevant parts of the City's Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. He continued by giving a brief preview of testimony from the applicant and those representing the applicant. Bill Sherman, William Sherman&Co.,LLC, 2500 124th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98005 stated that his company chose Renton for this project because of the excellent downtown location. The project will be located next to a transit facility which the tenants will be able to take advantage of. Before acquiring this property,Mr. Sherman consulted the City's Comprehensive Plan,Zoning Code and Design Guidelines, and also hired the architect used by the City to assist them in reviewing the revitalization of the City. Mr. Sherman briefly reviewed some of the design aspects of the project and stated that the architect was directed to go beyond the minimum design requirements to make this building fit better into the transitional neighborhood. The project addresses the need for pedestrian-friendly interaction between the building and the street, and is within a 2 or 3 block walking distance to the downtown and the transit center. Mr. Sherman reiterated that his company has been sensitive to the impacts of downtown revitalization on single-family homeowners in the design of the project. Mark Jacobs, Transportation Planning&Engineering,2223 112th Avenue NE, Suite 101,Bellevue, WA 98004 gave a brief summary of this background and experience and submitted his resume. Mr. Jacobs stated that the transportation analysis for this project was prepared under his direction. The City of Renton requires that new projects prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis to determine localized impacts. This project will generate less than one trip a minute on the alley during the p.m. peak hour. The projected level of service when the project is completed will be level of service A,which is considered very good. When the alley is widened to 15 feet, it will provide sufficient access for the number of vehicles projected to use it to get to the parking garage. It is an unlikely scenario that cars will be queued up to either exit the alley onto South 5th or queued up waiting to enter the alley from South 5th. Mr. Jacobs stated that he visited the site three times and observed one car using . the alley during the three visits. Alleys are typically narrower than streets because they are designed to provide access to the abutting properties owners and services,whereas streets provide circulation for people who don't live in the neighborhood. Ideally, alleys would be designed to be 20 feet wide, which is the ultimate plan for this alley as the redevelopment of the neighborhood takes place. If a vehicle is blocking the alley in either direction, a motorist leaving the parking garage could proceed in the alternate direction, whereas Williams Street would force all motorists to proceed to the south. Responding to questioning from Mr. See,Mr. Jacobs stated that if a car on the north end of the alley had to pull over to let another car pass,they would need to pull over onto private property, but this is a common occurrence and should not cause undue problems. The narrowness of the alley should tend to keep driver speeds down. Dean Sherman Apartments Apia; File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 7 Jim Bodoia, Mathun Architects, 1201 Alaskan Way, Seattle, WA 98101 stated that the project is designed in such a way that connectivity to the street is emphasized with those units that face the street. Residents can come and go from that direction,whereas the courtyard on the west side is viewed as being more private, even though it has access directly from the units. There is a common corridor access inside both buildings on all floors. Mr. Jacobs continued by stating that projected number of trips per day did not take into account the projects proximity to the downtown and the transit center, a more suburban trip generation characteristic was presumed. In the new national data that is beginning to emerge,projects near transit centers and downtown commercial centers could generate 10% less traffic. Using the suburban trip generation rates on a project that is urban in nature is a conservative approach. Mr.Bodoia stated that bringing projects of this nature into neighborhoods with single-family homes requires design sensitivity. The City staff has placed a high priority on sensitivity and the fact that this is a transitional effort within this neighborhood. This type of project is more commonly developed as a five-story building with the parking lot above grade because it is more inexpensive to built it that way. The applicant did not want to do it that way because it would not have promoted the urban activity necessary to help in the downtown revitalization effort. Peak roof height from the average finish grade on the site is 56 feet. The average height of the roof is 50 feet. The height limit in this zone is 95 feet, which this project is well below. The height of the building allows for the roof design to be as it is,rather than a flat roof design. Mr.Bodoia explained how the pitched roof design helps to break up the massing and scale of the project. Mr.Bodoia explained how the building was designed beyond City requirements in respect to setbacks,modulation and articulation. Using photographs of the alleyway,Mr. Bodoia identified and pointed out the location of various structures and features. Mr. Bodoia stated that almost all of the urban projects he has designed in the past decade use alleys as access. In most municipalities if a project is in an urban zoning code and there is access to an alley that is not impaired by topography limitations, alley access is required. Mr. Bodoia stated it is his opinion that when this alley is improved to 15 feet and resurfaced it will provide adequate access to this project. Responding to a question from Mr. See concerning the ventilation system in the parking garage, Mr. Bodoia replied that a mechanical engineer had not been engaged at this point, but that the typical solution for a project such as this would be a roll-down grill at the garage opening that would be the source of intake air for the garage. The exhaust would most likely occur in the northwest and southwest corner via a vertical chase. These are usually on a sensor so that when the carbon dioxide reaches certain levels,the fans turn on. Karl Hamilton, Transportation Operations Manager, 1055 S Grady Way,Renton, WA 98055 responded to questioning from the Examiner by stating that the alley should function adequately. There will be occasions when cars will have to yield, but on the whole it should operate fairly well. In a situation with two cars in the narrowest part of the alley, one would have to back up to let the other pass. Using the alley for access would be preferable over using S Williams or 5th Street. In closing,Mr. Moran stated that the alley provides access to several garages and parking areas. He reiterated his concern about possible heavy traffic on the alley. Ben Wilson stated in closing that he supports the good that will come from the revitalization of downtown Renton. He reiterated his concern about the size of the project. He stated that those making these types of decisions on density, etc. are not the people who have to live next to these projects. Dean Sherman Apartments App;,u. - File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 8 Russ Wilson, City Attorney, stated in closing that the law disfavors non-conforming uses at this time, and they will slowly be phased out. The City has a mandate from the Growth Management Act, and has developed the Comprehensive Plan to carry it out. The applicant has worked with the City to minimize the impacts of this project. All the evidence shows that the alley is the best place to put the access to the parking garage. It will not cause the impacts that some people are afraid of. Mr.Hempelmann, in closing, stated that in the law a difference of opinion does not show clear error: At most, there is a difference of opinion about whether the alley will work. All of the professional analysis in the record states that the traffic in this alley will be very low and that the alley will work well for this project. If the • Growth Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan are going to work,there must be certainty as to rules. The applicant has met and exceeded everything the City has asked for. We must send a signal to our;cities that if a project is built to the plans and policies, it will not only be approved, it will be expedited. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to 'speak. The hearing closed at 1:03 p.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS &DECISION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The appellants,John H. and Donna L. See, Bob Moran and Ben and Kimberli Wilson, filed an appeal of a decision by the City's Development Services Director approving an Administrative Site Plan for an eighty-six(86)unit apartment building: The appeal was filed in a timely manner. 2. The subject site consists of four side-by-side parcels located at 415,419,423 and 435 Williams Avenue South. The site is located at the corner of Williams Ave South and South 5th Street. An alley runs along the western edge of the subject site. Burnett Avenue South is the next major street located west of the alley. 1. 3. A medical clinic building is located on the southernmost parcel portion of the property,while an older single family home is located in the middle. The remainder of the subject site is used for parking or is vacant. 4. The property is a rectangular parcel of 0.925 acres or 40,276 square feet. The parcel is approximately 349 feet long(Williams frontage)by approximately 115 feet deep (5th frontage). 5. The subject site is located south of downtown Renton. • 6. The subject site is level. 7. The appellants are home owners who live immediately adjacent to the subject site or within the immediate vicinity, or the owners of property in the vicinity of the subject site. 8. One appellant lives immediately west of the subject site directly across the alley from the proposed development. Dean Sherman Apartments Api.. . File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 9 9. The appellants were concerned about the size, scale and shadowing view affects on their homes or the community, as well as the loss of privacy in yards and homes. They were also concerned about the impacts of traffic on the streets and particularly the alley that would serve the only vehicular access to the subject site. There were also concerns about odors from the garage and noise from any exhaust fan system. They did not believe there was sufficient parking,which would overflow onto neighboring streets. 10. The appellants note that the community is already a mix of multiple family and single family homes, but that the existing multifamily homes are sized more in keeping with the overall scale of the neighborhood. They also pointed out that the Planning Commission is currently reviewing changes to reduce the size and density for this area. The also noted that recent apartment additions have been in the downtown core. 11. Neighbors noted that Williams is a wide street, designed to handle higher levels of traffic then a 10 or 15 foot wide alley. They noted that turning into and out of the garage from a 15 foot wide alley will be constrained, whereas maneuvering to a street like Williams would be easier. 12. There was concern about vehicles backing up at the stop signs at 5th and Williams and Burnett, east and west of the alley. 13. Neighbors suspected that the taller building will generate reflections of sound off of I-405. 14. Neighbors cited the Comprehensive Plan for policies and provisions to avoid over-scale buildings in areas such as this where most of the development is low-rise in nature. 15. Neighbors complained that the density was determined by people who do not live in the neighborhood and are not affected by the proposed density of this project. 16. The applicant proposes constructing two, side-by-side, four-story apartment buildings over a lower level of parking. The two buildings would be aligned north to south with a central courtyard area between the buildings. They would be raised slightly above street level. 17. The applicant will be modulating the front and rear facades of the building along Williams and along the alley to provide visual texture and relief to the complex. 18. The buildings will have a minimum 10 foot front yard setback,which increases where modulations in the facade step it in(or back)from the street. 19. The buildings will have a minimum of a 20 foot setback from the alley,whereas only 15 feet is required. Modulations similar to those found in the front facade will be used in the rear facade, creating areas with greater than 20 foot setbacks. 20. The buildings will provide an approximately 14 foot north side yard although none is required in the CD Zone. Dean Sherman Apartments Appc File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 10 21. The buildings will be providing a 10 foot landscaped area in front of the building as required by code. The rear will have landscaping as part of the entries to the alley-facing units. 22. The buildings'highest point, at the peak of its roofs,will be approximately 56 feet above finished grade. The average height will be approximately 50 feet. The garage will not be a complete story underground, so that the building will probably be higher along the sidewalk and alley sides of the building. 23. The proposed project would have a density of 93 units per acre. This falls in the range permitted in the CD zone of up to 100 dwelling units per acre and 150 units with special approvals. 24. The project will provide underground parking for 113 vehicles or approximately 1.3 stalls per unit. 25. Exhaust from the garage has not been designed yet but the door would probably be an open grill design to allow air in. Expelling exhaust would possibly be accomplished at the southwest and northwest corners and be controlled by a sensor. 26. The alley is generally 10 feet wide along its entire length. The alley is narrowed at its northern end by a building. Staff believes that the building intrudes into the legal alley's width at that point. The applicant will be dedicating 5 feet along their western property line which will allow the alley to be widened 5 feet along its eastern edge. The alley would be 15 feet wide for the length of the buildings. 27. Exhibits#7 and#8,while not showing the actual project, do provide a reasonable perspective of a four story building next to one and one-and-one-half story single family homes. 28. The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject site as suitable for Center Downtown urban uses, which includes apartments, commercial and retail uses. The designation is intended to encourage redevelopment of the downtown area. 29. The Comprehensive Plan calls for new multifamily uses to be compatible with existing similar complexes but possibly scaled downward to be compatible with the existing development patterns: 30. The Comprehensive Plan calls for medium and low rise structures in the urban areas north and south of the immediate downtown area. 31. The City's Long Range Planning staff noted that in order for the City to maintain its "Urban Area" designation, it must provide for a certain level of density which matches urban densities. In order to do that the City has designated south Renton,the area in which the subject site and its neighboring sites are located, for higher density multiple family housing. 32. Current planning staff noted that the building could have been 95 feet tall and had closer to 150 units on this nearly acre site. The building has quite a bit of articulation to provided a varied facade and has a rear,western setback from the alley which provides the units located there yard space and provides the westerly neighbors additional distance from the rear walls of the apartment. 33. The City then explained the current planning processes and potential changes being reviewed by the Planning Commission, but those are irrelevant to the current review. Any changes discussed would be Dean Sherman Apartments File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 11 purely conjectural and cannot be used to determine the current proposal's appropriateness. Only current Comprehensive Plan policies and goals and current Zoning Code requirements are applicable. 34. The area contains a mix of uses that has been trending away from single family uses toward multifamily. 35. The majority of uses both multiple family and non-residential uses as well as the single family uses in the area generally south of the railroad right-of-way are limited to one or two-stories. The scale changes again south of Grady Way. 36. Development of the property should not have a negative impact on area-wide property values,with the exception of the single family residences located adjacent to it. It may not actually affect property values for the single family homes but would be expected to diminish the single family amenities. 37. Staff approved the proposal subject to the following conditions: 1. The Lot Line Adjustment,which would consolidate all separate tax parcels, shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan that demonstrates lighting levels would be kept to a minimum to meet security and safety needs and minimize light spillage to the adjacent neighborhood. Approval of said plan shall be received from the Development Services Division prior to building permits. 38. Alley access is required in the RM-U Zone but is not required in the CD Zone in which the subject site is located. The property west of the subject site is zoned RM-U. 39. The Fire Department has agreed that alleys in the Center Downtown Zone will eventually be widened to 20 feet. It is anticipated that the western properties, now single family along the south half of the block,would provide the additional five feet if they were redeveloped. 40. The traffic report submitted with the application found the traffic from the development will not overly tax the surrounding street system. City staff agreed. As indicated,the alley will be a constraint on access but not over all traffic. The traffic report and testimony regarding it showed that during peak hours,there would be approximately one(1)trip per minute in the alley. In order to accommodate maneuvering in the alley, vehicles might have to pull onto private property so vehicles can pass each other. 41. The project is defined as low-rise, at four stories but is two to three stories taller than any other structure in the immediate area. 42. The review criteria used by staff for this site plan include the following: 1. General Review Criteria: a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies; b. Conformance with existing land use regulations; c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses; Dean Sherman Apartments App. .: File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 12 d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site; e. Conservation of area wide property values; f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; g. Provision of adequate light and air; h. Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions; i. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; and j.Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight. F ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA FOR LEVEL I SITE PLANS: 1. Review of Impacts to Surrounding Properties and Uses a.; Mitigation of undesirable impacts of proposed structures and site layouts that could impair the use or enjoyment or potential use of surrounding uses and structures and of the community; b. Mitigation of undesirable impacts when an over scale structure, in terms of size, bulk,height, and intensity, or site layout is permitted that violates the spirit and/or intent of the Zoning Code and impairs the use, enjoyment or potential use of surrounding properties; c. Provision of a desirable transition and linkage between uses and to the street, utility, walkway, and trail systems in the surrounding area by the arrangement of landscaping, fencing and/or other buffering techniques, in order to prevent conflicts and to promote coordinated and planned benefit from, and access to, such elements d. Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over concentration of structures on a particular portion of a site such that they create a perception of greater height or bulk than intended under the spirit of the Zoning Code; e. Effective location, design and screening of parking and service areas in order to promote efficient function of such facilities,to provide integrated facilities between uses when beneficial,to promote "campus-like" or"park-like" layouts in appropriate zones, and to prevent unnecessary repetition and conflict between uses and service areas or facilities; f. Mitigation of the unnecessary and avoidable impacts of new construction on views from existing buildings and future developable sites,recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features and of promoting "campus-like" or "park-like" settings in appropriate zones; g.Provision of effective screening from public streets and residential uses for all permitted outdoor storage areas(except auto and truck sales),for surface mounted utility equipment, for rooftop equipment, and for all refuse and garbage containers, in order to promote a"campus-like" or"park-like" setting where appropriate and to preserve the effect and intent of screening 6r buffering otherwise required by the Zoning Code; h. Consideration of placement and design of exterior lighting in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. Dean Sherman Apartments App., - File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 13 2.Review of Impacts of a Proposed Site Plan to the Site: a.Building placement and spacing to provide for privacy and noise reduction; orientation to views and vistas and to site amenities,to sunlight and prevailing winds, and to pedestrian and vehicle needs; b. Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over concentration or the impression of oversized structures; c. Preservation of the desirable natural landscape through retention of existing vegetation and limited soil removal, insofar as the natural characteristics will enhance the proposed development; d. Use of existing topography to reduce undue cutting, filling and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary storm water runoff, and to preserve stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation; e. Limitation of paved or impervious surfaces,where feasible,to reduce runoff and increase natural infiltration; f.Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements; g. Consideration of building form and placement and landscaping to enhance year-round conditions of sun and shade both on-site and on adjacent properties and to promote energy conservation. 3. Review of Circulation and Access: a. Provision of adequate and safe vehicular access to and from all properties; b. Arrangement of the circulation pattern so that all ingress and egress movements may occur at as few points as possible along the public street,the points being capable of channelization for turning movements; c. Consolidation of access points with adjacent properties,when feasible; d. Coordination of access points on a superblock basis so that vehicle conflicts and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts are minimized; e. Orientation of access points to side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets,when feasible; f. Promotion of the safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking,turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways; g. Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas; h. Provisions for transit and carpool facilities and access where appropriate; and i. Provision for safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. 4. Review of Signage: a. Employment of signs primarily for the purpose of identification; b. Management of sign elements, such as size, location and arrangement so that signs complement the visual character of the surrounding area and appear in proportion Dean Sherman Apartments App ,u. File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 14 to the building and site to which they pertain; c. Limitation of the number of signs to avoid visual clutter and distraction; d. Moderation of surface brightness or lighting intensity except for that necessary for sign visibility; and e. Provision of an identification system to allow for quick location of buildings and addresses. (Ord. 3981,4-7-1986) CONCLUSIONS: 1. The appellant has the burden of demonstrating that the decision of the City Official was either in error, or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions, or was arbitrary and capricious (Section 4-8-110(E)(7)(b). The appellant has failed to demonstrate that the action of the Development Services Director should be modified or reversed. The decision is affirmed. 2. Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision, when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious (Northern Pacific Transport Co.v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 69 Wn. 2d 472,478 (1966). 3. An action is likewise clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing body, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Daly, 77 Wn. 2d 255, 259(1969). 4. The appellant has failed to demonstrate that the decision was founded upon anything but a fair review of facts and requirements of code as it pertains to the proposed complex. While reasonable people might disagree with the conclusions of the staff report, in the main, it has analyzed the proposal and recognized the impacts. The appellant has failed to demonstrate with cogent evidence that a mistake was made. 5. First,this decision has been very difficult. While it may appear cut and dried to some City staff,the fact is this is the first significant change to an area which had been designated for more intense development for a decade or longer. Be that as it may, it is still difficult to consign livable, affordable, well-kept single family homes to the impacts that will occur with this proposed change to their block and neighborhood. 6. Second,the criteria for site plan review are irrevocably irreconcilable. On the one hand,new developments are to blend harmoniously with existing development patterns. Over-scale buildings are to be reduced to blend with their neighbors. At the same time, fidelity to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code are required. There is no way to make a four-story, 86 unit apartment building harmonious with immediately adjacent one and two-story single family homes. It cannot be done. The building can be as well-designed as this one appears to be,but the impacts will nonetheless be profound. This is not merely an increase in density that allows smaller single family lots or even more single family lots in an already single family community. This will be a towering structure that will dominate the block and backyards of the surrounding single family homes. Exhibits 7 and 8 provide some perspective, and a tour of the new development on Burnett and South 4th from the rear will demonstrate the imposing nature of what staff has called low-rise, but is still a four story building adjacent to single family homes. Privacy will be all but ended. An alley minimally designed to handle Dean Sherman Apartments Apl File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 15 vehicles from single family homes will be dealing with nearly 400 vehicle trips per day. These trips will all be at the rear, normally private yards of the single family homes. 7. There is no doubt that the new building is well designed and will present a pleasant view to passersby. But that does not diminish the profound impacts that this large structure and its alley-oriented traffic will have on the small, detached single family homes located near it. Most of the newer buildings it has been compared with are not this intimately situated amongst single family or very low-scale multiple family homes. 8. At the same time,there is no way to provide for the changes envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations for this area without starting somewhere. Unfortunately,that means this larger development in the middle of this community. It is not as if this area is one solely devoted to single family uses. Intrusions to the single family fabric have existed in this area for years. The medical clinic has been there for a long time, and the St Anthony's Masonic building and another clinic are located south of this site. Small apartment buildings are scattered throughout the area, and the north end of the block on both sides of the street is developed with commercial uses. Again,though, the proposed project is much larger in scale than any of those other uses on this block. It cannot avoid having a deleterious affect on the single family homes no matter how well designed it may be, and one hopes that the execution is as good as the illustrative drawings. 9. But acknowledging those impacts does not mean that they are completely unacceptable, given the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations for not only the subject site,but for the parcels holding the single family homes. The designations are for urban scale office, retail and residential uses and not single family homes. 10. The irony is that if the construction of the proposed project encourages the changes envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code,the neighbors will sell or redevelop their properties into a similarly sized structure, blocking the views of the new residents as the current residents' views will be blocked. The new building's residents will have limited views looking into the rear windows of similar structures. 11. This office cannot find appropriate support for overturning the decision, since it is neither clearly erroneous nor arbitrary and capricious, but this office agrees with the appellants and others that the proposal is almost completely out of scale with anything in the immediate area and will have a profound and negative impact on surrounding uses--legal, albeit non-conforming, uses. The impacts of this proposal eclipse those that have changed other single family neighborhoods,that have merely increased the density while remaining true to single family uses. The commercial uses and apartments on the block are only one or two-story buildings. Even those uses closer to the downtown core are still low-rise. 12. This office also was not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the alley access will not function adequately. This office has to accept the testimony of Karl Hamilton, Transportation Operations Manager,that the parties will learn to deal with any limitations, including backing up to allow other vehicles to continue their maneuvers into or out of the garage, or at the north end of the alley which will remain 10 feet or less in width. At the same time,this office has to observe--human nature being what it is--most people will adapt, but this narrow alley will definitely create problems in the future. It may function from a technical perspective, but conflicts will occur with some regularity. Dean Sherman Apartments App—_ File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8,2001 Page 16 13. Similarly,the other traffic concerns do not appear to create any untenable situation to circulation along either Williams or S 5th Street. 14. Other issues raised on appeal were not supported by evidence. As with any development or redevelopment,there is no question that there will be changes in the neighborhood, including more noise and fumes and general hubbub. 15. 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 a mistake was made. 16. The appellants have failed to demonstrate that the decision was founded upon anything but a fair review of facts and requirements of code as it pertains to the use. The appellant has failed to demonstrate with cogent evidence that a mistake was made. 17. The appealing parties have a burden that was not met in the instant case. The decision of the City must be affirmed. DECISION: The decision is affirmed. ORDERED THIS 8th day of May,2001. FRED J. KAUF N HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 8th day of May, 2001 to the parties of record: Elizabeth Higgins John W. Hempelmann Nita Olson 1055 S Grady Way Cairncross&Hempelmann,P.S. 430 Burnett Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 524 Second Avenue, Ste. 500 Renton, WA 98055 Seattle, WA 98104 Russell Wilson Robert Moran Donna See 1055 S Grady Way 425 Wells Avenue S 438 Burnett Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Rebecca Lind John See Sales Samoun 1055 S Grady Way 438 Burnett Avenue S 426 Burnett Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Dean Sherman Apartments Apt__ File No.: LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD May 8, 2001 Page 17 Karl Hamilton Ben Wilson Katie Gilligan 1055 S Grady Way 424 Williams Avenue S 539 Whitworth Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Jim Bodoia Bill Sherman Mark Jacobs Mathun Architects William Sherman&Co.,LLC Transportation Planning&Eng. 1201 Alaskan Way 2500— 124t11 Avenue NE 2223 112th Avenue NE, Ste. 101 Seattle, WA 98101 Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue, WA 98004 TRANSMITTED THIS 8th day of May,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 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.,May 22,2001. 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. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,May 22,2001: 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. .r . • CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: April 2, 2001 TO: Fred Kaufman, Hearing Examiner COPY: Russell Wilson FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168 The following are corrections to the January 29, 2001, Administrative Land Use Action (Level I Site Plan Review): 1) Page 1; Existing building area: The existing 4,660 sf medical clinic/office is to be removed from the site. 2) Page 2 and Page 6; The building height is given as 56' and 50'. The architect has been asked to put the building height on the elevation. The architect has also been asked to submit a revised drawing, showing the entire building façade on the elevation. 3) Page 7; the entrance to the underground garage is an entry ramp, not a driveway. It is therefore not required that the Board of Public Works approve the grade in excess of 8 percent. CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 03, 2001 • 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. PROJECT NAME: APPEAL AAD-01-029 DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-00-168,ECF,SA-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Appeals of approval of an administrative site plan by the City of Renton for the Dean Sherman Apartment project(File No. LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF). Applicant proposes construction of a four-story, eighty-six unit apartment project. Location:415,419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue South. Agnda NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,Washington, on April 3, 2001, at 9:00 AM, to consider the following petition: APPEAL AAD-01-029 Dean Sherman Apartments Appeals of approval of an administrative site plan by the City of Renton for the Dean Sherman Apartment project(File No. LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF). Applicant proposes construction of a four-story, eighty-six unit apartment project. Location: 415, 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue So. All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing. Questions should be directed to the Senior Planner(425)430-7382. Publication Date: March 23,2001 Account No. 51067 Ifs aadpub II jNoncE I . . ' ..., . ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS I PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone(CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four-stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage.A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage.The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjusbnent has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels Into one.The proposal Is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. Location:415,419,423,and 435 Williams Avenue South. 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 either the environmental determination[RCW 43.21.0075(3),WAC 197-11.680]and/or the land use ' decision must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM February 12,2001.If no appeals are Tiled by this data,both actions will become final.Appeals must be filed In writing together with the required$75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner,City of Renton,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office,(425)-430-6510. ,1 h1'.16t�iitt4 ity 'fri4 •mom 1 am. r Trr�ri� r i :7t PE ]aq5 *Pegs =NEMXMIC ne,,•''jam!.-, (n1 , �tcs .5..7s;'� t it 7 . l--r_ih rc I• -G ta' vr1: 9 7;5)taw 1u1 o 1.11••rni C•••• 13C rA ,m ir. .a i lirm �v ./.S.3 73 Tti ITC.,1pli SL T.rHrnS 'ITN TC •E� Yet Srino,Oilofs :fY 3 7 '::II, .:31CGt=A 7! (ii f •L61a �� 3•�I`IOSi 1 Y 1, ttt Q r1� • £ jL 1112J 1lLtO t �;Iikil 1Y A G- al �t--�,,pW asku 9fiR i' • , 3: jj..Sr s !' tl c • Cit clue ¢ •r irg. �OL=t,zucrt '1• i a •• -. . �1 v..-a.i .� ':imams t5L 7 1..] , 44 r_v rm. ®. �`I•JLC '� 'n. .....1..10 W A r1_i. MUD 111 .' I , t hL'p i�=sC.-la�rr1 1 LI1LT, 1J9 : . )' • 2_p a 4 _ •ti 1 p•21UZ S.V.IrI• .may �.,-g•� :NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP' ,.,ee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION IPlease Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. I CERTIFICATION I, A A ifee Di2l3 tti1 , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me in conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on .rt��, . z� ! zoo( • Signed: ot,„,„4,0, A l'1'bST: Subcribed an orn before me,a Nortary Public,in and for the State of Washington residing iz ca , on the !?p) day of �7'1 1.€Pr i J F , . NOTARY PURL c f .� a1,� STATE(�YF WASHiNGTO� .;(F,,=x;",4,if 4,1( t,rF t ,1� +._ ' . =, ,� %/ M E 20 ioN PgIKES >-..ri`k: if uK::....^. ?22f:.mr .'u,• ,rear`„..- t . 3 03 4 . 4$ k 111 CIT OF RENTON .. c1 ... Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred'J.Kaufman • February 20, 2001 • • Robert and Lynn Moran John and Donna See Ben and Kimberli.Wilson 425.Wells Ave S 438 Burnett Ave S 425 Williams Ave S Renton, WA 9$055 . Renton, WA 98055 : Renton, WA 98055 Re: Appeal of,Site Plan Review for Dean Sherman Apartments . Appeal File No. LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,P01-029,AAD Dear Appellants:_ Your_letters of appeal in the above matter•have been received and a date and time for said hearing has now been established. The appeal hearing has been set for Tuesday,April 3,2001, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, at l055.S Grady Way in Renton: Should you be unable to attend, would you pleaseiappoint-a>representative to act on your behalf. . We appreciate your cooperation, and if you have any questions,please contact my secretary. Sincerely, Fred J. Kau an Hearing Examiner " . FJK:jt cc: Mayor-Jesse Tanner Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer" Larry Warren,"City Attorney. Neil Watts,Development Services Director Elizabeth Higgins Applicant Parties of Record ens h=�.: . 190t: 2001 1055."South Grady Way:;"Renton„.Washi'gton"98055 - (425) 430-6515 ~ F 6ti4Y °v City of Renton • Development Services Division ‘Nrro< 1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor Renton, WA 98055 Date: February 14,2001 TO: Steven McDonald FROM: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP/ASLA Mithun Partners Senior Planner Development Services Div. Development/Planning Phone: (206)971-5636 Phone: (425)430-7382 Fax:I (206) 623-7005 Fax Phone: (425)430-7300 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Number of pages including cover sheet: 5 Appeals REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ As ❑ Please ® For your review be mailed Requested Comment Appeals filed (3) No date has been set for the appeal hearing 1k1/4. 111.Vt�. Ahead of the curve 4,.... 1 Ben&Kimberli Wilson 12 February,2001 424 Williams Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments File Number: LUA-00-168,ECF, SA-A,LL^ The following is an appeal of the Level I Site Plan Review dated January 29, 2001. We feel that the proposed project is inappropriate in many ways, including the following: The proposed location is not suited for a development of this density. The surrounding residences are largely single family dwellings. A development of the density that is proposed is not compatible with the residential scale and character of the South Renton neighborhood, and will have detrimental effects I n the surrounding area. Incidentally, many changes currently being considered by the city planning commission for the South Renton neighborhood plan,would prevent exactly this sort of development. The proposed size of the buildings is excessive. The building height is not well related to surrounding uses. At a height at roughly twice that of any neighboring structures, the size,bulk, and height of the proposed development will have significant detrimental effects on the surrounding properties in terms of sunlight, views, and noise reflection from I405. The amount of proposed parking is insufficient. Available street parking will be greatly diminished if the proposed structure is completed as designed. The proposed project will have a detrimental eff.ct on neighboring property values. Nobody wants to live next door to a four story, 8'6 unit apartment complex.The pressures that an addtional 86 residences will pl4ce on the surrounding neighborhood will have a negative effect on surrounding property values. There is not a community need for this project in,the immediate area. There are several other large apartment complexes recently constructed to address any need for apartments, and that are located more appropri ely in the downtown core, rather than in a largely single family neighborhood. Please transfer our previously submitted $75 appeal fee for the withdrawn plan, to this appeal. MEO ' m Sincerely,�K,,,t, Gam.._ice' il E 2�C� FEB 12 2001 IP l Ben&Kimberli Wilson CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER CITY OFFENTnl\I CITY OF RENTON FEB 0 0 2001 Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM CITY RECEIVED K S OFFICE DATE: February 9, 2001 0 L ' f 9 t TO: Fred Kaufman j FEB 12 2001 J FROM: Elizabeth Higgins (@7382) COPY: Jennifer Henning, File CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal, LUA00-112, AAD As you are aware, there were three appeals filed (LUA00-112, AAD) against the Dean Sherman Apartments project (LUA00-085). The applicant, however, withdrew the application for the project prior to the appeal hearing so that the hearing was cancelled. The applicant subsequently filed a new application for the project (LUA00-168), on the same site. In order to avoid imposing a hardship on the appellants, it was determined that a credit for the appeal fee should be given in the event they wished to file new appeals for the resubmitted project. Attached to this memo is an appeal request from Mr. and Mrs. John See, original appellants of the project. Please file this appeal, using the credit that was offered to Mr. and Mrs. John See on their earlier appeal. Please note that Mr. See has been summoned for jury duty on February 21st. He has requested that I inform you of this in order to avoid a conflict if at all possible. If you have any questions please contact me. Thank you • • • • • KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER a� _ � — _r . 401 4TH AVE.N.,ROOM 2E �F�T7''te = '^ KENT,WA 98032-4429 • rU. .RG5tAGE K' FORWARDING SERVICE REQUESTED 7.'333 Q ® ? � • • - OFFICIAL BUSINESS —JURY pS58— • • • r-,. %!,1.!rtlII(rr::I:I,tI a-:,•1:.I I;+.,.I,r..•.,IN!.: ;! , .• •. . n' . .. JOHN SEE „AIF:3S..B.lJ13ALYl:A • >; hjury summons $ s}2 a, I „ rrr, I , , ,I j,I,i-dhl • • ilr1rlrrlr1►rthhhirfhiu rrhrrllrlrr/rrIlrrl • • . _ _, „_ ._ _______._ ________ „.._._ __ _ . BRING THIS UPPER SECTION ! WITH YOU WHEN YOU REPORT FOR JURY DUTY O 2.36.170:RCW IT IS A CRIME FOR ANY PERSON UMMONS TO JURY DUTY 'tea„xa aM. x:'`'''"y° '"+' ti:: . SUMMONED FOR JURY SERVICE TO YOU HAVE N RANDOMLY SELECTED {;°;THI,S,."BUS, TICKET`'MAY;INTENTIONALLY FAIL TO APPEAR AS DIRECTED. TO SERVE AS A TRIAL JUROR•IN THE �('~_ O 1jONLY $E, USED„;FO+R„_ SUPERIOR COURT OF KING COUNTY. : !_ ... • , .• -.- , ; BY ORDER OF THE COURT,YOU ARE . = TbA*Fti ORTATION FOR a '—'��--y---- HEREBY SUMMONED TO APPEAR AT: ( JURYN DUTYIrFxYOU 'ICE s ( ^QUESTYAN :EXEMPTION,111111111 KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT j F w a+ • REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER ?: ( �+FRAM .�URY,DUTY RE 11111111 401 4TH AVE.N.,ROOM 2E ;' i TIJRN'THIS"EI�TJREyF ?F�M '+ S ,� , a .- . KENT,WA 1111111111111111111 9803 2-44 2 :. 9 , c�, .; ,l ,µTO THE REGIONAL JUS.A 101013561 I ,T10E CENTE 401 TH KENT • 1 AVE i1V ROOIVf`2E KENT .'j REPORT ON AT " 1 w " 'Feb 21, -A: '�00� �8:OOam-- k=' f �WA�98032 4429 ��� � _ , �J _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - _3113 R Oft YOUR GROUP NUMBER IS: 06 �:" :,:;i - . z KING COUNTY YOUR SUMMONR""MBER IS:0263 * SUPERIOR COURT 'IS PERFORATION I • • _ - INSTRUCTIONS READ CAREFULLY ALL JURORS MUST COMPLETE LOWER HALF OF THIS FORM AND RETURN IN MAIL WITHIN 5 DAYS. 1. LENGTH OF JURY SERVICE: ONE TRIAL A. You are required to report for jury duty. You will be required to serve for the length of one trial. B. Most trials are completed in one week or less, although many trials are longer. IF YOU ARE SELECTED AS A JUROR IN A CASE,YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO SERVE AT THE REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER IN KENT FOR THE DURATION OF THE TRIAL. C. If you are not assigned to a courtroom within two days, you will be excused from this term of jury service. 2. QUALIFICATIONS OF JURORS A. Please complete Section A(lower half, opposite side)of this form. Detach at perforation and mail in lower half only. B. Under Washington State law, anyone convicted of a felony in any court is not eligible to serve as a juror until after civil rights are restored by court order. If this would affect you, please bring a copy of the order when you report for jury duty. 3. HARDSHIP A. Serving as a juror is a right, a privilege and a responsibility of citizenship. DETACH AT PERFORATION B. If appearing in response to this summons would cause you UNDUE HARDSHIP you must apply FOR BUS TICKET _ _ , . for an exemption. UNDUE HARDSHIP means more than inconvenience or difficulty serving. It P t'" T means circumstances which make it truly unfair to require you to serve at this time. 'lois I I[q u! Pasul C. If you must request an exemption from service or a change in the date of service,complete Sections A and B on the opposite side, AND RETURN THIS ENTIRE JURY SUMMONS FORM TO THE ADDRESS SHOWN BELOW. 4. THIS"BUS TICKET"IS TO BE USED FOR TRANSPORTATION TO THE REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER IN KENT ON YOUR FIRST DAY OF JURY SERVICE. ADDITIONAL FREE BUS TICKETS WILL BE PROVIDED ON YOUR FIRST DAY OF JURY SERVICE. 5. COMPENSATION $10 per day. 6. PARKING ParkingisavailableattheRegionalJustice r._.. - Center.DO NOT PARK AT KENT COMMONS.YOU WILL BE TOWED. 7. DISABILITIES If you have a physical condition that may require special accommodations, please immediately call(206)205-2590. JUROR 8. WEAPONS Absolutely no weapon,explosive,mace• BADGE ' type spray of any size or variety will be allowed in court buildings. •• 9. INFORMATION For further information, including directions to the REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER IN `• KENT, call (206) 205-JURY (5879). If outside local dialing area,call 1-800-325-6165. CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: January 31, 2001 TO: City Clerk FROM: Elizabeth Higgins (@7382) COPY: Jennifer Henning, File SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal, LUA00-112, MD As you are aware, there were three appeals filed (LUA00-112, AAD) against the Dean Sherman Apartments project (LUA00-085). The applicant, however, withdrew the application for the project prior to the appeal hearing so that the hearing was cancelled. The applicant subsequently filed a new application for the project (LUA00-168), on the same site. In order to avoid imposing a hardship onrthe appellants, it was determined that a credit for the appeal fee should be given in the event they wished to file new appeals for the resubmitted project. Attached to this memo is an appeal request from Mr. Bob Moran, one of the original appellants of the project. Please file this appeal, using the credit that was offered to Mr. Moran on his earlier appeal. • If you have any questions please contact me. Thank you CITAPF RENTON -U. :: Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 31, 2001 Mr. Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1201 Alaskan Way, Suite#200 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments, Project No. LUA-00-168,SA-A, ECF, LLA Lot Line Adjustment Request for Final Mylars Dear Steve: The City has finished reviewing your proposed lot line adjustment and is now ready to send the final version for recording, SUBJECT TO THE LUA NUMBER BEING CORRECTED FROM LUA00-085 TO LUA00-168 ON ALL SHEETS. You do not need to submit another set Of revised drawings for review, lust make the correction noted above and then submit two original signed mvlars and a check for$15.29, made out to CD&L(the courier), to my attention at the sixth.floor counter of City Hall. Please verify that the mylar has been signed byall owners of record and that the mylar has been notarized with an ink stamp (not embossed).:The,ink stamp must be legible so that King County will promptly record the lot line adjustment. If you have further questions regarding this project;please call me at(425)430-7382. Sincerely, . 1C/? . Elizabeth Higgins, AICP • Senior Planner cc: file • 190lcgOOl 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RI This paper contains 50%recycled material.20%post consumer CITY OF RENTON JAN 31 206 CITY OF RENTON RECEIVED CITY CLERK Planning/Building/Public Works S OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: January 31, 2001 TO: City Clor-k HE #ly esc./9itti�/�,� FROM: Elizabeth Higgins (@7382) COPY: Jennifer Henning, File SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal, LUA00-112, AAD As you are aware, there were three appeals filed (LUA00-112, AAD) against the Dean Sherman Apartments project (LUA00-085). The applicant, however, withdrew the application for the project prior to the appeal hearing so that the hearing was cancelled. The applicant subsequently filed a new application for the project (LUA00-168), on the same site. In order to avoid imposing a hardship on the appellants, it was determined that a credit for the appeal fee should be given in the event they wished to file new appeals for the resubmitted project. Attached to this memo is an appeal request from Mr. Bob Moran, one of the original appellants of the project. Please file this appeal, using the credit that was offered to Mr. Moran on his earlier appeal. If you have any questions please contact me. Thank you - � w dl January 30, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: I would like to resubmit my appeal concerning the Dean Sherman Apartment project proposed for the location between 4th and 5th on Williams Avenue South. After talking with neighbors and seeing the size of the apartment building on Burnett Avenue across from the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train, I believe a development of such density would destroy the livability of the single/multi family neighborhood that exists now. Driving around that complex, made it very apparent that this is not conducive to the neighborhoods everyone is speaking of. Windows of the new apartments look right down into the homes and yards of the people to the West. A complete loss of privacy. The alleyway between the houses and the apartment will become a thoroughfare for entrance into the apartments creating higher traffic, more noise and added loss of privacy. The zoning "Center Downtown" keeps moving south. There are numerous buildings in the actual downtown core that are beyond restoration. Let's keep a few historical buildings and demolish the unfixable buildings and put the high- rise apartments the City so desperately wants in the initial "center downtown". We are not adverse to change. We are not even averse to multi family housing. The tri-plexes built a few years back and the townhomes built over the last two years fit in nicely with the existing neighborhoods. They were a welcome addition. We appealed once because of the size of the building Dean Sherman had proposed. Now they come back with more units, now slated to be six stories and they have gone from one to two buildings. What didn't they understand? Have they met with the South Renton planning committee — because we neighbors are hearing and seeing two different stories. Therefore, I would like appeal their unacceptable plans. Sincerely, Bob Moran 425 Wells Ave. South Renton, WA 98055 425-255-7055 1 -9-10 TO CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER. WE WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL THE SITE ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN FOR THE DEAN SHERMAN APT. AT 415-435 WILLIAMS AV. S. FILE # LUA-00-168 . PLEASE TRANSFER THE $75. 00 WE PAID YOU FOR THE SITE PLAN APPEAL WHICH WE WITHDREW, AND APPLY IT TO THIS APPEAL. WE ARE CONCERNED WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE BLDG. IT OVER- SHADOWS EXISTING HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WILL RUIN THE HISTORICAL BEAUTY OF RENTON. PLUS IT WILL IMPAIR THE VIEW OF QUITE A FEW HOMES IN THE AREA. WE FEEL LIME IT SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN TWO STORIES TO FIT IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE AGAINST THE PARKING ENTRANCE AND EXIT COMING FROM THE ALLEY, WE FEEL THE ONLY SENSIBLE SALUTION IS THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT SHOULD BE ON WILLIAMS, BECEAUSE IT ' S A STREET AND WAS BUILT FOR HEAVY TRAFFIC, THE ALLEY IS NOT BUILT FOR SUCH HEAVY TRAFFIC, WE LIVE HERE AND CAN SEE WHAT GOES ON EVER DAY, THERE IS MUCH DANGER ALREADY, IF THEY ADD 400 MORE TRIPS A DAY TO THE EXISTING TRAFFIC IN THE ALLEY IT WILL BE A NIGHTMARE. - 2 WE FEEL THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES TO BE PROVIDED IN THE PARKING GARAGE IS INADEQUATE, AND THE APT. RESIDENCE WILL TAKE UP THE ON STREET PARKING. THANK YOU JOHN H AND DONNA L SEE 438 BURNETT AV. S. RENTON WA. 98055 111 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Barbara Alther, 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 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six DETERMINATION months prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW English language continuallyas a dailynewspaper in Kent KingCounty, COMMITTEE 9 Y RENTON,WASHINGTON Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a legal The Environmental Review newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King Committee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated for the County. following project under the authority of The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South the Renton Municipal Code. County Journal (and not in supplemental form) which was regularly distributed to DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS the subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a EUAroniECF Environmme8entaall r reveview for construction of an 86-unit apartment building in Dean Sherman Apartments the Center Downtown Zone. Location:415,419,423,435 Williams as published on: 1/29/01 Ave.So. Appeals of either the environmental deterThe full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of WAC 197-11-6801ion [RCW 43he land use WAC and/or the land use $56.25, charged to Acct. No. 8051067. decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM February 12, 2001. If Legal Number 8667 no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final.Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: 6/:./ Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, ei./G/_ 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are Legal Clerk, South County Journal governed by City of Renton Municipal . Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal Subscribed and sworn before me on this day of �, , 2001 process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430- ��11 M f 111111 11111, 6510. ESN Fy''�.� Journal JaPublishennuary 29,2001.8667 in the South County ;moo F �ac o TA q y •.im, —•• — Notary Public of the State of Washington % d+ 0 '°1JBL c °�• residing in Renton '%•• o' �` ?`� King County, Washington W A Sy` �`` l r - 4 CITY 1 ' RENTON C. BA. „: „A. Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 29, 2001 Mr. Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1291 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle,WA 98101 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apts. LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Dear Mr. McDonald: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that . . they have completed their review of the subject project. The.ERC, on January 23, 2001, issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed ,Mitigation Measures document. Also enclosed is the Administrative Report and Decision pertaining to the proposed Site Plan. 'Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW.43.21.0075(3), VVAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing'on or before 5:00 PM Februa y-12, 2001. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner,. City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to [exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire 'clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-7382. For the Environmental Review Committee, ,Elizabeth Higgins,AICP Senior Planner cc: Parties of Record S-D Renton LLC/Owner Enclosure dnsmletter 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four- stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton,Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415,419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue South MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The recommendations of the geotechnical,:report,. "Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 1999, shall be incorporated into the project design and construction. 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 4.62 average weekday trips per multi-family unit.The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to building permit. 3. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $388.00 per multi-family unit. The fee is due prior building permit. 4. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $354.51 per multi-family unit. The Parks Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. MITMEASURES CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four- stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415,419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue South Advisory Notes to Applicant The following notes are supplemental information provided in,:conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are-provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review—Sanitary Sewer 1. This project is outside of the Aquifer Protection Zones. 2. There is an existing 8"sanitary sewer main in Williams Avenue S. • 3. Parking garages shall require;floor drains and shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be directed through floor drains,that are installed in accordance with the UPC to an exterior oil/water separator. The separator shall be sized to meet a minimum 15-minute retention time for peak flows anticipated in the garage area,but in no case will be less than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of interceptor shall be as manufactured by Pipe Inc., Utility Vault Inc., or approved equal. 4. Due to the project being in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge(SDC)shall be at the current rate of$0.106 per square foot of property(40,276 sf x$0.106 =$4,269.26). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. A redevelopment credit may apply. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 4"water line in Williams Avenue S, and 8" lines in both S 4th and S 5th Streets. A 24"transmission line is located in Burnett Avenue S. 2. The derated fire flow in Williams Ave south is approximately 1200 gpm. 3. The static pressure is approximately 72 psi. 4. This site is located in the downtown 196 Pressure Zone. 5. There are two fire hydrants in the vicinity,four hydrants will be required for the project. 6. A 12-inch water main is to be installed in Williams fronting the property by the City of Renton.The developer's share for the project would be the cost of the new stub for fire sprinkler service and domestic service line and any additional hydrants needed for the project. • • Dean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 2 of 3 7. Due to the project location in the Center Downtown Zone,the System Development Charge shall be at the current rate of$0.154 per square foot of property. The fee has previously been partially paid, leaving a net square footage of 17,250 sf(17,250 sf x$0.154=$2,656.50). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. 8. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double detector check valve assembly for the fire sprinkler system. The applicant shall submit a copy of the mechanical plan showing location and installation, if backflow device is to be installed inside the building. 9. A domestic water meter backflow device is required when building height exceeds 30 feet, as has been proposed for the project. 10. The required irrigation system must have a state-approved backflow device installed. Plan Review-Stormwater 1. A storm drainage narrative and conceptual plan has been submitted and reviewed. It has been given preliminary approval. 2. Final storm drainage report and design shall comply with'the King County Surface Water Design Manual, 1990 Edition. • 3. No on-site detention is required. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion contraplan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be"submitted by the project Engineer of Record to the Public Works Inspector.,Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities is required prior to Temporary Certificate of, Occupancy. 5. The Surface Water System Development Charge, at the rate of$0.183 per square foot of new impervious surface, is applicable to this project($0.183 x 22,963-44,202.23). The System Development Charge will'becollected as part of the construction:permit. 6. Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained to the:satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project: Plan Review—Street Improvements " 1. Any substandard or damaged street improvements shall be replaced to City of Renton standards. 2. Alley design standards require a minimum of 20 feet of right-of-way,with 20 feet of pavement within the downtown area. An additional 5 foot dedication of alley right-of-way or access easement, the length of the property, is required to comply with City of Renton code. Plan Review—General 1. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. 2. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 3. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. 4. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 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 ADVISORYNOTES Dean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 3 of 3 (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. 5. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. 6. Construction hours shall be limited from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday for utility construction activities. Any changes to work hours shall require approval in advance by the Development Services Division. Construction Services 1. A demolition permit is required. 2. The 1997 Uniform Building Code and 1999 NEC are the governing codes. 3. Elevator lobbies are required. 4. Inspections are required as per geotechnical engineering report. 5. Electrical wiring must be in conduit.,.. Fire Prevention 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,750 gpm. 2. Four fire hydrants are required. One hydrant.ism required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 3. A looped water main is required. 4. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the.structure. 5. An approved fire sprinkler and standpipe system shall be installed throughout the structure. Two standpipe outlets shall be provided on the west side of the building;': 6. Separate plans and permit are required for the installation of,the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Parks 1. All landscaping outside of property lines is to be maintained by the applicant. Planning 1. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 2. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction 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. ADVISORYNOTES C REPORT City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works DECISION ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTION (LEVEL I SITE PLAN REVIEW) Decision Date: January 29, 2001 Project Name: Dean Sherman Apartments Applicant: Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1201 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 Owner: S-D Renton LLC 2100— 124th Avenue NE, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005 File Number: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA Planner: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Project Summary: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would be four- stories of residential units over an undergound parking garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee (ERC). A Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated was made by the ERC on January 23, 2001. A Lot Line Adjustment, to consolidate several separate tax parcels has also been requested. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. Project Location: 415, 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue S Exist. Bldg. Area SF: Existing single family Proposed residential area: 88,800 sf residential structure and garage to be removed. Proposed parking garage area: 34,200 sf Existing 4,660 sf medical Proposed new building total area: 123,000 sf clinic/office to remain. Proposed new building footprint: 22,400 sf Site Area: 40,276 (0.925 acre) Total buildingsf on site: 123 000 sf 9 , Project Location Map sitepinrev.doc Cify of Renton P/B/PW Department Au votive Site Plan Review Staff Report DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY29,'2001 — p— `,,�j S ` Page 2 of 25 um.feu04: W�11fI.,•�;� tti.s1E� " �1'I ,: Imo . 7.itF (d !! !in= ill omaST: . T • rails _P°"1 ;,,,S 4TH .„;e 1 4, 'Q t . L6 ; 1i;,, li O :• .'Q • ;y,aULVt M rc•T I • a EIS. ap: ® a '. LLD1 717'-J' A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION s;_ '. ` P` •'• 1- 1` The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment project. The project consists of two separate buildings of four stories each. The project is located on a 40,276 (0.925 acre) property on the west side of the 400 block of Williams Avenue South. The property consists of several parcels that would be consolidated by means of a Lot Line Adjustment, which is also a part of the current application. The property is within the Center Downtown Comprehensive Plan land use designation, the Center Downtown (CD) Zone, and the Urban Center Design Overlay District. Development standards and zoning regulations for the CD Zone would apply to the project. The property abuts CD Zoning on the north property line, but properties abutting to the west and adjacent to the south and east are within the Residential Multi-family— Urban Center Zone (RM-U). Although they are zoned multi-family residential, most developed properties are single family residential with some commercial and institutional uses. The property fronts on Williams Avenue South, between South 4th and South 5th Streets. An existing building, the Renton Family Practice Clinic/office, located at the northwest corner of South 5th Street and Williams, would be demolished. The following properties are being consolidated by means of a Lot Line Adjustment: 4XX Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2465 (vacant) 8,625 sf 0.20 A 415 Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2455 (vacant) 8,625 sf 0.20 A 419 Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2450 (garage) 5,750 sf 0.13 A 423-435 Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2430 (clinic/office, house) 23,000 sf 0.53 A One single family residence, once used as a laboratory by the medical clinic, but now occupied as a residence and a single-car garage would be demolished or moved from the site. An existing alley is located between Williams Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South. A 34,200 sf parking garage would be located underground. It would provide parking for 113 vehicles (63 standard stalls, 45 compact stalls, and 5 ADA stalls). Parking requirements are based on unit type. The required number of stalls, 113, would be provided by the project. Four stories of residential units, 88,800 sf, would be built above the parking level. The maximum building height would be 56'. Forty-six of the eighty-six units would be one bedroom apartments, twenty-four would be two bedroom units, and sixteen would be studios. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMANAPARTMENTS LUA=00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 3 of 25 The minimum density in the CD Zone, for properties larger than 0.5 acre, is 25 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The maximum density in the CD Zone is 100 dwelling units per net acre. An administrative approval would be available, but has not been requested by the applicant, for an increased density to a maximum of 150 du/a. The property size of 40,276 sf would be available for the density calculation. At eighty-six units proposed, the density would be 93.0 du/a. This number is within the required/allowed range.for the CD Zone. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee (ERC). The ERC made a Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated on January 23, 2001. The proposed project is subject to review under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21 C, 1971 as amended), on January 23, 2001, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated. C. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES The Environmental Review Committee placed the following mitigation conditions on the project as part of the Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated: 1. The recommendations of the geotechnical report, "Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 19.99, shall be incorporated into the project design and construction. 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 4.62 average weekday trips per multi-family unit. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to building permit. 3. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$388.00 per multi-family unit. The fee is due prior building permit. 4. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $354.51 per multi-family unit. The Parks Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. D. STAFF REPORT 1. Type of Land Use Action XX Site Plan Review—Level I Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Site Plan Review—Level ll Conditional Use Special Permit for Grade &Fill Administrative Code Determination sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad ;trative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMANAPARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 4 of 25 2. Exhibits The following exhibits were entered'into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing: application, proof of posting and publication, environmental review, and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Vicinity Map Exhibit No. 3: Drawing No. A1.0, Site Plan (dated 12/14/00) Exhibit No. 4: Drawing No. A2.0, Parking Level 1 (dated 12/14/00) Exhibit No. 5: Drawing No. A2.1, Residential Levels 1 & 2 (dated 12/14/00) Exhibit No. 6: Drawing No. A2.2, Residential Levels 3 & 4 (dated 12/14/00) Exhibit No. 7: Drawing No. A5.0, Exterior Elevations (dated 12/14/00 Exhibit No. 8: Drawing No. 1 of 3, Preliminary Grading and Storm Drainage Plan (dated 5/24/00, revised 12/15/00) Exhibit No. 9: Drawing No. 2 of 3, Preliminary Water Plan (dated 5/24/00, revised 12/15/00) Exhibit No.10: Drawing No. 3 of 3, Preliminary Sanitary Sewer and Underground Parking Plan (dated 5/24/00, revised 12/15/00) Exhibit No.11: Tree Inventory (dated 10/15/99) Exhibit No.12: Drawing No. L1.1, Landscape Plan (dated 6/14/00, rev. 12/15/00) Exhibit No.13: Zoning Map (dated 12/02/99) Exhibit No.14: Urban Center Design Overlay District Map (December 20, 1999) 3. Consistency with Site Plan Criteria In reviewing the proposal with respect to the Decision Criteria for Level I Site Plans as set forth in Section 4-9-200(E) of the Renton Municipal Code, the following issues have been identified by City Departmental Reviewers and Divisional Reviewers: A. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its objectives and policies The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation for the property is Center Downtown. The proposal is consistent with policies intended to guide development of the Center Downtown designation, and specifically the following applicable policies. Policy DT-1: There should be a mix of uses, including retail, office, light industrial and residential, which generate the demand for goods and services. The proposed residential use would increase the number of people who live within walking distance of downtown Renton and, therefore, increase the demand for goods and services in the downtown area. Policy DT-3: Development and redevelopment of the Center Downtown should strive for urban density and intensity of uses. The net density of the proposal is 93.0 dwelling units per acre is slightly lower than what is allowed (100 du/a) and is characterized as urban. This high density project would help the city of Renton meet its housing goals, without losing existing residential units. Policy DT-5: Redevelopment of the downtown area should be encouraged to maintain and revitalize the downtown core. Although not located within the downtown "core", it is expected that residents of the proposed project, which is within one block of the core, would travel by foot to the core in order to use the transit center during the day and patronize downtown businesses. sitepinrev.doc • City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 5 of 25 Policy DT-6: The redevelopment of downtown Renton as a multi-use Urban Center should be encouraged to create a center for the community. The proposed project would contribute to increasing the focus on the downtown area as a center for the community. Policy DT-8: Development in the Center Downtown designation should conform to the Downtown Renton Association's Vision. The proposed project is consistent with the Downtown Renton Association's Vision. Policy DT-15: Mixed use office and residential development may reach heights of six to ten (medium rise) stories depending on other applicable ordinances (Le. seismic considerations and airport flight patterns). The proposed project, at four stories, is considered low-rise (one to five stories, as defined within the Downtown Element of the Comprehensive Plan). Although the project could be a taller building, but is not, in order to provide better transition within the neighborhood context of existing one to two story buildings. Policy DT-22: Maximize the use of existing urban services and civic amenities and revitalize the City's downtown by promoting medium to high density residential development in the downtown area. Allowed densities will conform to the criteria for Urban Centers in the countywide policies. The proposed project would be more efficient than the current land use, but would not maximize the capacity of the land by taking advantage of density bonus opportunities. This is appropriate for the neighborhood context, which has not yet been redeveloped to "urban" standards in terms of density and land use. Policy DT-23 Mixed use development, where residential, commercial and office uses are allowed in the same building or on the same site should be encouraged in downtown areas that are suitable for residential development. Incentives should be developed to encourage future development or redevelopment projects that incorporate residential uses. The proposed project meets this policy. Policy DT-24. Net residential development densities in the downtown area should achieve a range of 25-100 dwelling units per acre. Where parcels are less than one half acre no minimum density is required. The property is more than 0.5 acre and exceeds the minimum density of 25 dwelling units per acre (du/a). The proposed density of 93.0 du/a is less than the allowable density in the zone of 100 du/a. Policy DT-27. Medium-rise residential(6-10) stories should be located within the urban center, primarily between the Cedar River and South 2nd, and between South 7th and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. The area between South 7th and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way should include a combination of low- (1-5 stories) and medium-rise residential to provide a transition between the employment area and the mixed use core. This 4-story project, which would be within the area between South 7th Street and the railroad right-of-way, would meet this policy. Policy DT-29. Parking should be structured whenever feasible and serve more than one use. The project proposes an underground, structured parking garage to accommodate all resident and guest parking. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad ;trative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 6 of 25 B. Conformance with existing land use regulations The following development standards (RMC 4-2-120B) apply in the Center Downtown Zone: Density: minimum 25 dwelling units per net acre (du/a), maximum 100 du/a The project, with a net density of 93.0 du/a, is considerably more dense than the surrounding neighborhood of existing homes, although the project is not as dense as is allowed by the zoning standards. The neighborhood is a well-established part of the original incorporation area (1901) of the City of Renton. The houses along Williams Avenue South were built in the first decades of the twentieth century, those along Burnett Avenue South were apparently built primarily in the 1920's and 30's. More recent construction or redevelopment in the area has been limited, partially because of existing lot size and the corresponding lack of opportunity for subdivision. Single family structures, unless existing, are non-conforming uses in the RM-U Zone. The higher density of the proposed project, which is allowed by the zoning, (in place since the mid-1990's), anticipates the increased growth in Renton's urban residential population. Much of this population will be housed within walking distance of the downtown transit center. Setbacks (minimums): front— 10 feet for buildings greater than 25 feet in height;rear— 15 feet The front building setback is a minimum of 10 feet, with greater distances at ground level unit entrances and building modulations. The front setback is landscaped with a combination of trees and other plants and "hardscape" elements (planters, low retaining walls, pavers, and benches). The rear setback is greater than the minimum, at 20 feet from the edge of the alley, at the narrowest point. Again, building modulations provide a greater setback along the west facade. Although no side setbacks are required in the Center Downtown Zone, the building would have a minimum 14 foot setback along the north property line sideyard.. Setbacks (maximum): front—25 feet for buildings greater than 25 feet in height The proposed project would be below the maximum setback as required. Height: 95 feet maximum allowed The proposed building would have four levels of residential units above one level of underground parking. The total height would be 50 feet. Building coverage (maximum): 75% when parking is provided within the building The proposed building and existing building would have approximately 57% coverage of the property. Landscaping: Ten feet of landscaping along streets is required. Landscaping has been proposed for all four sides of the proposed project. This landscaping would be a combination of trees and other plants and planters, pavers, and low retaining walls. There would be 17,176 sf of new landscaping. Parking Amount: Code requires 1.6 spaces per each attached residential unit having two bedrooms and 1.2 spaces for each studio.or one bedroom attached residential unit. Based on 24 two-bedroom units and 62 studio and one-bedroom units, the total required would be 112.8 spaces. There would be 113 spaces provided. Parking Space Dimensions: The parking stall standards for the City of Renton are 8'-4"by 16' for standard stalls (structured parking) and 7'6"by 13'for compact stalls (structured parking). Aisle widths are 24'for both types of cars when at 90 degrees. Compact spaces may not exceed 50 percent of the total provided. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad trative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 7 of 25 The proposed project meets the Code requirements for parking stall width and length, and the percentage of compact spaces allowed. Driveway Slope: A driveway sloped in excess of 8 percent may be allowed with Board of Public Works approval, but may not be sloped more than 15 percent. The underground parking garage driveway would be sloped 15 percent. It is a Renton Municipal Code requirement that approval by the Board of Public Works is required for all driveways sloped more than 8 percent. Garbage, Refuse or Dumpsters: Garbage, refuse or dumpsters must be screened, except for access points, by a sight-obscuring fence or landscaping or some combination thereof. Dumpster areas would be screened from view when not in use. They would be located abutting the alley. Center Downtown Overlay District Design Guidelines: Projects within the Center Downtown Overlay District are subject to review under the Center Downtown Overlay District Design Guidelines. The proposed project is within the Center Downtown Overlay District and, therefore, is subject to the Center Downtown Overlay District Design Guidelines. This review is included at the end of this report, following the section, "Advisory Notes to Applicant." The review includes an analysis of building siting and design; parking, access, and circulation; landscaping, recreation, and common space; and building architectural design. C. Review Criteria for Level I Site Plans: The Reviewing Official shall review and act upon site plans based upon comprehensive planning considerations and the following criteria: a. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses: 1) Mitigation of undesirable impacts of proposed structures and site layouts that could impair the use or enjoyment or potential use of surrounding uses and structures and of the community. The applicant states that the structure has been designed so that the impact on the surrounding neighborhood would be minimized. This has been done by concealing the parking underground and using a variety of different exterior finishes in order to reduce the visual mass of the building. Extensive elevated landscaped planters have been incorporated into the ground-level site design to soften the visual impact of the development. 2) Mitigation of undesirable impacts when an overscale structure, in terms of size, bulk, height, and intensity, or site layout is permitted that violates the spirit and/or intent of the zoning code and impairs the use, enjoyment or potential use of surrounding properties. The proposed development conforms with the intent of the zoning code, which allows structures of the proposed size in the Center Downtown Zone. The proposed project may be perceived as "overscale" in comparison with existing, non-conforming single family homes. In order to address this perception, the project has been designed with pitched roofs,, modulations, several exterior surface materials, and design details to "break up" the facades visually. 3) Provision of a desirable transition and linkage between uses and to the street, utility, walkway, and trail systems in the surrounding area by the arrangement of landscaping, fencing and/or other buffering techniques, in order to prevent conflicts and to promote coordinated and planned benefit from, and access to, such elements. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad trative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,.2001 Page 8 of25 The building is designed to be set back from Williams Avenue S with individual steps up to the lowest level of residences. These steps make the building engage the street at a regular interval, thereby visually reducing the size of the building as perceived by pedestrians. The main entrances to the buildings would be clearly marked with canopies clarifying the circulation pattern to the public. 4) Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over-concentration of structures on a particular portion of a site such that they create a perception of greater height or bulk than intended under the spirit of the zoning code. The building façades are broken up with a series of bays and steps to reduce the mass and enliven the elevations. The project is divided into two buildings, separated by an exterior courtyard, instead of a single building.. The roof has been designed to visually break up the building into multiple masses. 5) Effective location, design and screening of parking and service areas in order to promote efficient function of such facilities, to provide integrated facilities between uses when beneficial, to promote "campus-like"or"park-like"layouts in appropriate zones, and to prevent unnecessary repetition and conflict between uses and service areas or facilities. The parking garage has been placed underground to minimize, if not eliminate, any impact. 6) Mitigation of the unnecessary and avoidable impacts of new construction on views from existing buildings and future developable sites, recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features and of promoting "campus-like"or "park-like"settings in appropriate zones. Elevated planters, as well as street trees and plantings, would be provided at building perimeters to enhance the appearance to the public and residents. 7) Provision of effective screening from public streets and residential uses for all permitted outdoor storage areas, for surface mounted utility equipment, for rooftop equipment, and for all refuse and garbage containers, in order to promote a "campus-like"or"park-like" setting where appropriate and to preserve the effect and intent of screening or buffering otherwise required by the zoning code. All utilities would located within the garage. Mechanical equipment on the rooftop would be screened by the sloped roofs. Garbage dumpsters along the alley would be screened from view. 8) Consideration of placement and design of exterior lighting in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. Lighting levels would be kept to a minimum to meet security and safety needs and minimize light noise to the adjacent neighborhood. Staff recommends submittal of a lighting plan to demonstrate compliance with this criterion. b. Mitigation of Impacts of a Proposed Site Plan to the Site: 9) Building placement and spacing to provide for privacy and noise reduction; orientation to views and vistas and to site amenities, to sunlight and prevailing winds, and to pedestrian and vehicle needs. The building has been oriented to Williams Avenue S and the alley to the west. Landscaped courts have been provided at the base of both elevations to create visually appealing entrances for the residents and enhance the neighborhood. The main sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad, rrative Site Plan Review Staff Report • DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 9 of 25 pedestrian entrance has been located along Williams Avenue S and the garage access has been placed at the alley. 2) Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over concentration or the impression of oversized structures The site is a flat, previously developed urban site, with no natural characteristics to preserve that would improve the proposed development. 3) Preservation of the,desirable natural landscape through retention of existing vegetation and limited soil removal, insofar as the natural characteristics will enhance the proposed development. There is no natural landscape remaining. None of the existing landscape would be preserved in this urban development. 4) Use of existing topography to reduce undue cutting, filling and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary storm water runoff, and to preserve stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation. In an effort to minimize the impact of parking, the garage is being placed underground. The excavated soils would be removed from the site. 5) Limitation of paved or impervious surfaces, where feasible, to reduce runoff and increase natural infiltration The project site, following development would have over 95% impervious surface. Elevated concrete decks would be landscaped with planter areas and pavers to create an urban landscape and provide transition to the street and alley. 6) Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. All on site landscaping would be contained within elevated concrete planters and protected. Street plantings would be clearly defined by sidewalks. 7) Consideration of building form and placement and landscaping to enhance year-round conditions of sun and shade both on-site and on adjacent properties and to promote energy conservation. A combination of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, and groundcover would be used on the site. 'This would result in a landscape that would provide greenery year- round. The building would be oriented so that the primary exposure to the common spaces is toward the west and south. This would provide maximum light and warmth during winter months. Trees and shrubs would be planted in planters along the west perimeter of the common area to provide shade in summer months. c. Circulation and Access: 1) Provision of adequate and safe vehicular access to and from all.properties All vehicular access to the parking garage would be from the alley to minimize conflict between cars and pedestrians along Williams Avenue South. 2) Arrangement of the circulation pattern so that all ingress and egress movements may occur at as few points as possible along the public street, the points being capable of channelization for turning movements. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad.. arative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 10 of 25 The parking garage traffic would be limited to the alley, but could travel either north to S 4th Street or south to the intersection with S 5th Street. There is only one access to the garage along the alley. 3) Consolidation of access points with adjacent properties, when feasible Hazardous conflicts may exist between apartment residents in vehicles travelling in and out of the alley between the parking garage and S 4th Street or S 5th Street and vehicles and pedestrians using private garages located on the west side of the alley. The applicant will dedicate an additional 5 feet of right-of-way along the east side of the alley in order to alleviate this potential hazard. 4) Coordination of access points on a superblock basis so that vehicle conflicts and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts are minimized. All vehicular access would be to and from the alley to minimize conflict between cars and pedestrians. Interaction would be contained at the alley/street intersections to the north and south. As mentioned above, conflicts between new traffic from the proposed development and existing traffic using private garages and going to businesses at the north end of the alley may be created by the proposed project. 5) Orientation of access points to side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets, when feasible. The vehicular access points would be limited to the alley and S 4th Street, and S 5th Street, which are local access streets. 6) Promotion of the safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways. Internal vehicular circulation would occur exclusively within the parking garage along oval, double loaded parking aisles. 7) Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas. Loading area is provided within the garage. 8) Provisions for transit and carpool facilities and access where appropriate. Public transportation is available at S 2nd and S 3rd Streets to the north and Grady Way to the south. 9) Provision for safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. Pedestrian access from the parking garage would occur through the building. d. Signage: Signage would be limited to street signage, building identification, and parking information and would both comply with City of Renton Sign Code and, as feasible, be integrated within the architecture. XX Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad&. r'rative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY29,2001 Page 11 of 25 D. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now enters the following: A. Findings: 1) Request: The Applicant has requested Site Plan Approval for the Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA. 2) Environmental Review: The file containing the applicant's application, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation, the comments from various City departments, the public notices requesting citizen comment, and other pertinent documents was entered as Exhibit No. 1. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee made a Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated for the proposed project on January 23, 2001. 3) Site Plan Review: The applicant's site plan application complies with the requirements for information for Site Plan Review. The applicant's site plan, project drawings, and other maps are entered as Exhibits Nos. 2 through 14. 4) Comprehensive Plan: The subject proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Center Downtown. 5) Zoning: The use, as presented, complies with the zoning requirements and development standards of the Center Downtown Zoning designation. 6) Lot Line Adjustment: In a separate decision, the Lot Line Adjustment has been approved by the City of Renton, but must be recorded with the King County Tax Assessor. The recording of the LLA is a condition of approval. 7) An analysis of the proposed project and its compliance with the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations has been completed and the project has been found to comply with the regulations as noted in the section of this report following "Advisory Notes to Applicant." B. Conclusions: 1. The subject proposal complies with the policies and codes of the City of Renton. 2. The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Center Downtown; and the Zoning designation of Center Downtown. C. Decision: The Site Plan for Dean Sherman Apartments, File No. LUA-00-0168, is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The Lot Line Adjustment, which would consolidate all separate tax parcels, shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan that demonstrates lighting levels would be kept to a minimum to meet security and safety needs and minimize light spillage to the adjacent neighborhood. Approval of said plan shall be received from the Development Services Division prior to building permits. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad ,trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 12 of 25 EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURES: AV bus, vaqt, , Neil Watts,Development Services Director date TRANSMITTED this 29th day of January, 2001, to the applicant and owner: S-D Renton LLC 2100— 124th Avenue NE, Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98005 Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1201 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle,WA 98101 TRANSMITTED this 29th day of January, 2001, to the parties of record: Gary Klatt Barbara Horton Gary and Evelyn Downs Ted Niemi 411 Williams Avenue S 20613 SE 191st Place 407 Williams Avenue S 1917 Shattuck Ave S Renton WA 98055 Kent WA 98042-6880 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Katie Guligan Mr. and Mrs. Bert Olson John and Donna See Duryah Mohamath 434 Burnett Avenue S 430 Burnett Avenue S 438 Burnett Avenue S 426 Burnett Ave S Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Ben and Kimberli Wilson Bob Moran Jude Waller Louise Vittitow 424 Williams Avenue S 425 Wells Avenue S 410 Williams Avenue S 532 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 Mike Hilderman Mr. & Mrs. Rick Stone!! 504 Burnett Ave S 411 Williams Avenue S Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98055 TRANSMITTED this 29th day of January, 2001, to the following: Larry Meckling, Building Official Larry Rude, Fire Prevention Bureau Jennifer Henning, Development Services Division Kayren Kittrick, Public Works Division Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney South County Journal Administrative Land Use Decision Appeal Process Appeals of the administrative land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM February 12,2001. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department AdJ •'native Site Plan Review Staff Report • DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 13 of 25 • 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. This project is outside of the Aquifer Protection Zones. 2. There is an existing 8" sanitary sewer main in Williams Avenue S. 3. Parking garages shall require floor drains and shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be directed through floor drains that are installed in accordance with the UPC to an exterior oil/water separator. The separator shall be sized to meet a minimum 15-minute retention time for peak flows anticipated in the garage area, but in no case will be less than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of interceptor shall be as manufactured by Pipe Inc., Utility Vault Inc., or approved equal. 4. Due to the project being in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge (SDC) shall be at the current rate of$0.106 per square foot of property (40,276 sf x$0.106 = $4,269.26). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. A redevelopment credit may apply. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 4"water line in Williams Avenue S, and 8" lines in both S 4th and S 5th Streets. A 24"transmission line is located in Burnett Avenue S. 2. The derated fire flow in Williams Ave south is approximately 1200 gpm. 3. The static pressure is approximately 72 psi. 4. This site is located in the downtown 196 Pressure Zone. 5. There are two fire hydrants in the vicinity, four hydrants will be required for the project. 6. A 12-inch water main is to be installed in Williams fronting the property by the City of Renton. The developer's share for the project would be the cost of the new stub for fire sprinkler service and domestic service line and any additional hydrants needed for the project. 7. Due to the project location in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge shall be at the current rate of$0.154 per square foot of property. The fee has previously been partially paid, leaving a net square footage of 17,250 sf(17,250 sf x $0.154 = $2,656.50). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. 8. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double detector check valve assembly for the fire sprinkler system. The applicant shall submit a copy of the mechanical plan showing location and installation, if backflow device is to be installed inside the building. 9. A domestic water meter backflow device is required when building height exceeds 30 feet, as has been proposed for the project. 10. The required irrigation system must have a state-approved backflow device installed. Plan Review -Stormwater 1. A storm drainage narrative and conceptual plan has been submitted and reviewed. It has been given preliminary approval. 2. Final storm drainage report and design shall comply with the King County Surface Water Design sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad, rative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY29,2001 Page 14 of 25 • Manual, 1990 Edition. 3. No on-site detention is required. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of Record to the Public Works Inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities is required prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The Surface Water System Development Charge, at the rate of$0.183 per square foot of new impervious surface, is applicable to this project ($0.183 x 22,963=$4,202.23). The System Development Charge will be collected as part of the construction permit. 6. Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project. Plan Review—Street Improvements 1. Any substandard or damaged street improvements shall be replaced to City of Renton standards. 2. Alley design standards require a minimum of 20 feet of right-of-way, with 20 feet of pavement within the downtown area. An additional 5 foot dedication of alley right-of-way or access easement, the length of the property, is required to comply with City of Renton code. Plan Review—General 1. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. 2. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 3. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. 4. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 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. 5. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. 6. Construction hours shall be limited from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday for utility construction activities. Any changes to work hours shall require approval in advance by the Development Services Division. Construction Services 1. A demolition permit is required. 2. The 1997 Uniform Building Code and 1999 NEC are the governing codes. 3. Elevator lobbies are required. 4. 'Inspections are required as per geotechnical engineering report. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Adi, rative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY29,2001 Page 15 of 25 5. Electrical wiring must be in conduit. Fire Prevention 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,750 gpm. 2. Four fire hydrants are required. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 3. A looped water main is required. 4. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the structure. 5. An approved fire sprinkler and standpipe system shall be installed throughout the structure. Two standpipe outlets shall be provided on the west side of the building. 6. Separate plans and permit are required for the installation of the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Parks 1. All landscaping outside of property lines is to be maintained by the applicant. Planning 1. Retaining walls in excess of four (4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 2. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction 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. 3. The applicant must contact Steve Anton of Waste Management, Inc. at 206-243-4050, ext. 860, for approval of the dumpster location and configuration. URBAN CENTER DESIGN OVERLAY REGULATIONS In addition to the general objectives and policies of the Downtown Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the proposed project lies within the "Urban Center Design Overlay District" as defined by Ord. No. 4821. The purpose of the Urban Center Design Overlay Regulations is to establish design review in accordance with policies established in the Land Use and Downtown Elements of the Renton Comprehensive Plan. There are two categories of regulations, a) "minimum standards"which must be met unless modified as provided in Renton Municipal Code 4-9-250D, and b) "guidelines"which, although not mandatory, are considered by the Development Services Director in rendering a decision on a proposal. I. BUILDING SITING AND DESIGN A. Pedestrian Building Entries 1. Minimum Standards: a. Building Orientation Attached buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad,: rative Site Plan Review Staff Report , DEAN,SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 16 of 25 • The two, separate buildings have their primary façades facing Williams Avenue South. Pedestrian walkways, with stairs, connect the raised entry plaza level to the public sidewalk. b. Entrance Location A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the façade facing the street. Such entrances shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk and include human scale elements. There are two primary entrances to the two, separate buildings. Each ground level unit that faces Williams Avenue S has its own private entry from the plaza level. Human scale elements at the plaza level include landscape planters. 2. Guidelines: a. Entries from the street should be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street. The primary entry is prominently marked by a glass and metal canopy. Landscaping is contained within planting beds or architectural planters around the perimeter of the building. Exterior lighting, for security purposes, would be required. Pedestrian connections to the underground parking garage are within the building. b. Entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace or similar feature. The primary entrances to the buildings, and the individual entries for ground floor units, are accessed across a landscaped terrace, rather than directly from the public streets or sidewalks. c. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to the right-of- way; otherwise, screening or art features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof, should be incorporated into the street-oriented façade. The primary building entries and lobbies are oriented to Williams Avenue South. The largest space to be dedicated as common area is located on the west side of the building, between the apartment building and the alley. It is elevated above the grade of the alley and includes pavers, planters, a trellis, and steel and wood seating benches. Private entrances to ground floor units would be separated from the common area by screens and gates. The trellis has been proposed for the back façade, which faces the public alleyway, as a screening feature. The plaza level is landscaped throughout. Pavers of differing dimensions have been proposed for the plaza and common area surfacing materials. The smallest pavers would be used in the private outdoor areas. There are no art features, such as murals, or fountains, that have been proposed for the project. d. Pedestrian pathways from public sidewalks to primary entrances, or from parking lots to primary entrances should be accessible and should be clearly delineated. The pedestrian walkways to the primary building entrances are by means of either a stairway or a ramped walk. Pedestrian access to the underground parking garage would be by means sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Adn. wave Site Plan Review Staff Report • , DEAN,SHERMANAPARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY29,2001 Page 17 of 25 of either an elevator or stairway inside the building. Lighting would be incorporated into the construction at all exterior entries. e. Multiple buildings on the same site should incorporate elements such as plazas, walkways, and landscaping along pedestrian pathways to provide a clear view to destinations. The two buildings that comprise the Dean Sherman Apartments are separated and not connected as a single unit. A courtyard would be between the two structures. They are surrounded by a paved plaza, with architectural planters and landscaping. Clear distinctions would be made between private and semi-private or public spaces. These areas would be defined by the planters, landscaping, and gates. f. Ground floor units should be directly accessible from the street. All ground floor units would be accessible from either the plaza level at the exterior of the building or from the hallway within the building. The steps up from the street would enhance the sense of private space for these units. B. Transition to Surrounding Development 1. Minimum Standards: Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk, and scale. The following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: a. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards. Setbacks that exceed the minimum required would be provided. All setbacks have landscaping. The rear setback also has planters, seating benches, and a trellis. b. Building proportions, including step backs on upper levels. The four-story building as proposed is at a larger scale than the existing single family homes surrounding it, most of which are one and two story structures. The building has pitched roofs, modulations, and balconies, however, that reduce its bulk or the perception of being large scale within its context. c. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller pieces. The building has extensive vertical architectural articulation, awnings, and balconies that enliven the facade and create visual interest. The intention is that these elements, and creating two, separate buildings, rather than a single building, would make the structure appear smaller. d. Rooflines, pitches, and shapes. Rooflines are pitched. In addition to the canopies over the primary entrances, windows have mullions that define panes of glass in various sizes and shapes. Balconies have grillwork. 2. Guidelines (none required) sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad ;trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 18 of 25 • II. PARKING, ACCESS, AND CIRCULATION A. Location of Parking 1. Minimum Standards: No parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the street side yard of a corner lot. No such parking is proposed for the project. 2. Guidelines (none required) B. Design of Surface Parking (not applicable, all apartment parking is underground) C. Structure/Garage Parking 1. Minimum Standards (none required) 2. Guidelines: a. Parking garage entries should be designed and sited to complement, but not subordinate the pedestrian entry. If possible, locate the parking entry away from the street, to either the side or rear of the building. The vehicle entrance to the underground parking garage would be off the alley at the rear of the building. Pedestrians would enter and exit the garage from within the building. The vehicle ramp should be marked as "not for pedestrian use." b. Parking garage entries should not dominate the streetscape. There would be a single parking garage vehicle entrance/exit at the alley. c. The design of structured parking at finished grade under a building should minimize the apparent width of garage entries. The underground garage entry is visually minimized by its location as a ramped entry that runs perpendicular to the alley. d. Parking within the building should be enclosed or screened through any combination of walls, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. All garage parking would be out of view underground. e. Garage façades should be landscaped or bermed to reduce visual impacts. Most of the garage façade would be underground. f. Parking garages should be designed to be architecturally compatible with the residential portion of the building. Use similar forms, materials, and details to enhance garages. Most of the garage façade would be underground. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad' trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 19 of 25 g. Garage parking should be secured with electronic entries. The applicant has stated that a "drop down"automated garage door, with electronic security, would be activated during evening hours. h. The street side of parking garages should incorporate one of the following uses in street- facing façades: i. Retail or service commercial uses in the Center Downtown (CD) Zone. Not applicable for structures that are totally underground. ii. Facilities or services for residents, such as recreation rooms, or building lobbies. Not applicable for structures that are totally underground. iii. Residential units that have access directly to the street. Not applicable for structures that are totally underground. iv. Service and storage functions should be located away from the street edge and generally not be visible from the street or sidewalks. Service loading, mechanical equipment, and dumpsters would be either located within the underground garage or screened from view. D. Vehicular Access 1. Minimum Standards (none required) 2. Guidelines: • a. Parking lots and garages should be accessed from alleys or side streets. The underground garage would be accessed from the alley between Williams Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South. b. Driveways should be located to be visible from the right-of-way, but not impede pedestrian circulation on-site or to adjoining properties. Where possible, minimize the number of driveways and curb cuts. The driveway ramp that would provide underground parking garage access and egress would have limited visibility for vehicular traffic in the alley. The installation of mirrors to improve visibility may be necessary. Pedestrian traffic in the alley should be somewhat limited. There would be a single garage entry. E. Pedestrian Circulation 1. Minimum Standards (none required) sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad :trative Site Plan Review Staff Report DEAN,SHERMANAPARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 20 of 25 • 2. Guidelines: a. Developments should include an integrated pedestrian circulation system that connects buildings, open space, and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system. The on-site pedestrian circulation system appears to be well-coordinated with the adjacent public street and sidewalk system. b. Pedestrian pathways should be delineated separate from vehicle circulation by using a variation in paved texture and color, and/or landscaping. Pedestrian walkways, which are raised to a higher elevation than streets and public sidewalks, would be distinguished by use of decorative pavers. III. LANDSCAPING / RECREATION /COMMON SPACE A. Common Space 1. Minimum Standards a. Attached housing developments of 10 or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to 50 square feet per unit. The common space area should be aggregated to provide usable area(s) for residents. With 86 units, the project would require a minimum of 4,300 square feet of common space. The proposed common space areas total 5,900 sf, or 68.6 sf per unit. b. The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Development Services Director. The required common open space may be satisfied with one or more of the following elements: i. Courtyards, plazas, or multipurpose green spaces. All of the common area used to fulfill the requirement of the Overlay District is passive in nature and designed as exterior courtyard/plaza areas.. The largest space to be dedicated as common area is located on the west side between the apartment building and the alley. It is elevated above the grade of the alley and includes pavers, planters, a trellis, and steel and wood seating benches. Private entrances to ground floor units would be separated from the common area by screened, gated walls. Another common space is located at the main entry and between the two buildings. It features planters and landscaping, including a large, specimen tree as a focal point. ii. Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens. None proposed, however, the upper story units have private, outdoor balconies. iii. Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system. sitepinrev.doc 1 3 City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad „:'trative Site Plan Review Staff Report ' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 21 of25 • Pedestrian corridors are planned for portions of the building perimeter, but would be discontinuous in some areas due to private outdoor space associated with ground floor units. iv. Recreation facilities including, but not limited to tennis/sport courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities. None proposed. v. Children's play space. None proposed. 2. Guidelines: The location and layout of recreation and common space should be as follows: a. Common space areas should be centrally located so they are near a majority of units, accessible and usable to residents, and visible from surrounding dwelling units. Proposed common areas would be centrally located and accessible from the building entrances. The west common area would be ADA accessible through the building. The center common area would be somewhat secluded in nature, although it would be accessible to the public, while the west common area would be both more private in use, but highly visible from abutting units. b. Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances, significant landscaping, unique topography or architecture, and solar exposure. The west common area would have good solar exposure. Children's play space should be centrally located, visible from the dwellings, and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, streets, and parking areas. None proposed on site. A children's play area is located one-half block west at the Burnett Linear Park, a City of Renton public park. c. No required landscaping, driveways, parking, or other vehicular use areas should be counted toward the common space requirement or be located in dedicated outdoor recreation or common use areas. Common areas do not include required landscaping, driveways, etc.. d. Required yard setback areas should not count toward outdoor recreation and common space unless such areas are developed as courtyards, plazas, or passive use areas containing landscaping and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development. Common areas do not include setbacks. sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PWDepartment Ad ,trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • , DEAN,SHERMANAPARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OFJANUARY29,2001 Page 22 of 25 e. Decks, balconies, and private ground floor open space should not count toward the common space / recreation area requirement. Common areas do not include balconies or private open spaces. f. Other required landscaping, and sensitive area buffers without common access links such as pedestrian trails, should not be included toward the required recreation and common space requirement. Not included in common areas. B. Landscaping 1. Minimum Standards: The owner shall provide regular maintenance to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. Such maintenance is required by Code (RMC4-4-080H). 2. Guidelines: a. Landscaping should be used to soften and integrate the bulk of the building. Approximately 2,250 sf of the total(40,276 st), or 5.6% of the total site area, is pervious area. All pervious areas are landscaped with trees, shrubs, vines, perennial flowers, and groundcover. b. Use of low maintenance landscape material is encouraged. IV. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN A. Building Character and Massing 1. Minimum Standards: All building façades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than 40 feet. All façades are modulated at intervals of no more than 35 feet. The main entrance has articulation above the door(metal and glass canopy) which serves the purpose of façade modulation by creating added interest. 2. Guidelines: a. Building façades should be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. The facades of the building are modulated and further articulated with balcony overhangs, a glass and metal canopy over the main entrance, private balconies with grillwork railings on the second, third, and fourth levels and, grillwork gates at some ground floor unit entrances. b. Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. sitepinrev.doc • City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad _ . trative Site Plan Review Staff Report DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,.2001 Page 23 of 25 Articulation and modulation, as well as pitched roofs, are proposed to increase the sense of appropriate residential scale to the building. c. A variety of modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual interest and to reduce the bulk and scale of large projects. The perceived bulk of the building should be significantly reduced by the modulations, articulations, rooflines, and exterior surface treatments that have been proposed. d. The following methods of building modulation should be used such that the combination of features meets the intent of this provision: i. Building modulations should be a minimum of 2' in depth and 4' in width. Building modulations, and balconies, would be greater than the minimum. ii. Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved facade elements, offset planes, wing walls, and terracing, will be considered, provided that the intent of this section is met. The plaza level would be terraced above the public street/alley/sidewalk grade. e. Building Articulation The following methods of articulation should be used in combination to project a residential character: i. Articulation of each interval with features such as balcony, bay window, porch, patio, deck, or clearly defined entry. Each modulation of the façade would be further articulated with private balconies with grillwork railings and canopies over the main entrance. ii. Provision of pedestrian-scaled elements for each interval such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature. The primary façade, along Williams Avenue South, would have private entrances that connect the ground level units to the public sidewalk(across private open courtyards). Exterior lighting would be provided. The effect would be somewhat similar to "row houses"and would increase the sense of pedestrian scale. iii. Provide architectural features such as indentations, overhangs, projections, cornices bays, canopies, or awnings. Several of these features have been proposed. iv. Use of material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, or textural changes. Exterior materials and finishes would consist of asphalt roof shingles, horizontal lap siding (material unspecified), vinyl windows, painted wood window trim, stucco with sitepinrev.doc City of Renton P/B/PWDepartment Aa __,_'trative Site Plan Review Staff Report DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 24 of 25 acrylic topcoat, concrete planters, cast-in-place concrete walls, and metal grillwork on balconies and ground level unit entry gates. v. Use of artwork or building ornamentation (such as mosaics, murals, grillwork, sculptures, relief, etc.). Although no artwork, per se, has been proposed, the steel and wood benches, wood trellis with metal trim, and metal grillwork at various locations would be decorative in nature and meet the intent of this guideline. vi. Use of recessed building entries, plazas, or courtyards, or seating and planting areas. Several of these elements have been proposed for the project. B. Building Rooflines 1. Minimum Standards (none required) 2. Guidelines: a. Building rooflines should be varied by emphasizing dormers, chimneys, stepped roofs, gables, prominent cornice or fascia, or be broken or articulated to add visual interest to the buildings. The building roofline, as proposed, would be highly pitched and both create visual interest while reducing the sense of bulk of the buildings. b. Rooftop equipment screening should use materials that are architecturally compatible with the building. Mechanical equipment located on the roof would be screened by the sloped roof itself. C. Building Materials 1. Minimum Standards (none required) 2. Guidelines: a. All building exterior finishes should add visual interest and detail and be mode of material which is durable, high quality, and easily maintained. Materials that have an attractive texture, pattern, or quality of detailing are encouraged for all façades. The proposed exterior materials and finishes (see above) would appear to meet this guideline. b. Exterior finish materials should adhere to these guidelines: i. Siding texture and color should reflect typical Northwest building patterns using materials such as wood siding and shingles, brick, stone, and terra cotta tile. Limited use of wood has been proposed. "Lap siding"has been proposed, but the material has not been specified. No brick, stone, or terra cotta has been proposed. Stucco, which is not generally considered a vernacular building material in the Northwest, sitepinrev.doc 7 _Li ‹el 1-1-17g . . • .. . . • . . • . • • • • . . • • . . . • • • ._ . _,..j. 1 1 1 /...i 1 .7- .- f ----. ::ral• .. ''' • LY ,,.'1'' 111.N4 . • • In CO gt''' el. .._ zra I 2 LITT 88. it 10.112 ttilitan,,,,,-,: 114:.- Pili211.11,111.. °. PP. 111.1 Ja• -LA.. • 1 A...D.1.7- • •,-,9--I o ' ' MORRIS •••• - • .• • . tt ....-1 • AVE. .1. .. • S it... 601....4(1): .1.°46,‘•/:‘ f:F., ,s4): 6 onolti 4.- .iiiiraroAi gl';‘,.'!:'...1"";11.-L'A ...1(1 :74: Vim. g ra 0E3 .t?BW 03 .-. . . ,-,:, ... • °anis. ,i En — .iiiMgh Niii,ig 4.1„,,. •- ..-1 . . _ ,.•u ,- _.,,.4.. "' . ! lfc • a. mtba tiviu4r". 0 • m ar'ti; -az" .•= .01i i•-2 ts 7'0 45. . 1 • .. ._ ,,. - zr 1,-, ifill,z/PLA. — 11-1A4 Or t'l. 1- CM 4 El i 6 apt 01 . ..kz.;../iimiL • ... ,I1 Ed EL _ 1,.., , :r.,.., , .... EP (Iv i ,. • w - sym •so de . .-.. . -. .• - ... ,...• .61. •.....`• %. A . .0 • : ft SM/THERS .s• . •-• AVE• - • S tl ...-4, ---••••• - ' v.,:iiica '" 1 • .."-, i-ai. *1 -.1 -- rpi, mil." 2.....;.. -- • N. s.,1,7x1.4 n [i `t. 0 MEI '' 'ir-Ttx..-z. .' 0 111 . . b,1 st,,./ i?.j OF N,• . 1?•iir: t A 4.,CI . 6 .4.1 • •I . la tp• _ ,- . i •rki•,.. •r k- . ... - ' *.‘ • - 4'7 it .., •ed • TTI r - i ..,...4 ,,, g g fi - it- ii C3 . .1.5 '1. 4'4 . i'' -- • 199Ein - - 1 .V.1.7..a. e." 9i is A , ,7,44--1-4, ,..: • ‘.. v.% .4....1...„,",agili:r . • 13 • W4 NNW its ---I 6 .6 b.. . • • •ti t 12 . • • • V -7 ' . • 11 i 1 > Burnett • ‘J. akzonaggimmiguim . . \-' • '''17-ii F-4 I— ..AVE; .. . . Bilkil ETT .: • • - - :. . • §a. . . : . .,.....:._, • • so ... .;,1 , :::,' ES° -. 72 .E 0 A 1'4 „.1 MI iF; • .. fit 40 .• • •.4 . ft NI .1 .: t 888 W ,... ttr.N... 1 g.• -....,•. ii K e ;',..,' _ ..ca • it' . . . , . .. fu . Lc: \. , "4 ' __A._ _P—NnTh • 701 -CkliV11#4 .44 g • . _ 1 . > _ 17 . ' #= a. - sn. - 0 • -, • - 1 5,iF . e - 2L-12-J• 1.4..1 . -—AT, 60,,,,_ ::-.7'rii-gInannilligiV1 - • r- -‘r--s-'-- us .a .4 ' 1 ' 'PAT; WILUA M S -L 77-.'—f,i---AVE-. • -- ,,, , .. . . . .-. . .. ...... • th i .i...,,, t 6 llpigi • . ,E *_ 0 mammals % .. +1 cr. u.12,1 co....ruf-j-'" gb oR ' 1 ' ,,,,.'1:6•-icsCr.f...in G.' .e'." ...: .P.., I . iria II AVj lit . .11 W a' ". :.1 ..703 .1.-OV =hi I a r:Dag '&11 0" .r• Vt. ,z 1.1,1 i ,.. . . ws.g. ..0•4Z I, ,..‘ tn. iiliMii II im oist. ',..• „ m Li 0 .-.4 im 01 sD. • in 0-1 I -... . i• so • • ,.• •?, 8 I• . . WELLS. • • i AVE: • . . . -.9: ,„ • .. . '• • a)5:513s „go., th Zoo • • a a. • .. 88 8.,14.4,3r.' logigli,,... ..„,,,ilifi, . c....-c)."-- 41 11 .ff Eg 901 -="---:.--1 a ---- s ig --mi'.• 1- •w v 0 . __......__ •_•„,„. AD.."... 7, 7, . „...., sir_ 1 .4,1, .... i. *-- • -4. ... .... Z5s..,1•0 OOF ....8 • l• .49, ,171.40 4`..) , ,, ,..Ml!A 0 14 „,, • 14 °I O': , 1. x 446.111110..im: . - 'WI. II M mg -4. latk •='..i.-.5....V4V. - tiligr) W eal ....1 , - • "; e--- • ..i E. MinansbA: - • • il 919. 1 II.—.WO SO • 2 lot • . a• 10 . . "A . . n.• • MAIN ' • 21 • • AVE. a . -• tr„1 .. • lik/i-ED. ACCESS-I• • '01 .,t, • co . I. Z 4• ,>., • -\ 4 k.' 41' ".t.• . • - ' .- :•11 60 '' of.A.4.,:let.rt i. . . . . . . ":*:" ."."---------- .''----------:.-•----:-:-:4•.;•:,:--•----•-••••-- - •-• .-- ° , ... s.. e•-....4.....", --.. _, ' • • I ir -4. • 1 . . .' . . "------:-:-.-...... • '....:-. ' /.1141.- •.- -•.,, •-... • MiLL• .. . .,... ...l's) ;',.: 1444_9) 2,1 • • • • • •• . • • . sel 2N% AVE •• .. • • . . .. . . o ":1 • '' Ylg.v° i E.i -1 '_1_*7.e. • • —. i *. ILI ' t521TRIsoi . 1 - I - I -. i - -4 . . ...a . •I.. . : . .. .. . . '• • . . . • • • . ' . • - . . , ,„ City of Renton P/B/PW Department Ad trative Site Plan Review Staff Report • DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA • REPORT AND DECISION OF JANUARY 29,2001 Page 25 of 25 • would be the primary exterior material. Colors of materials have not been indicated by the applicant. ii. Metal siding should always have visible corner moldings and trim. No metal siding has specifically been proposed. iii. Concrete walls should be enhanced by texturing,.coloring with a concrete coating or admixture, or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces, mosaics, or artwork. Concrete walls have been proposed for retaining walls only, not as an exterior building material. iv. Concrete block walls should be enhanced with textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or incorporate other masonry materials. No concrete block walls have specifically been proposed. v. Stucco and similar troweled finishes should be trimmed in materials such as wood or masonry and should be sheltered from extreme weather by roof overhangs or other methods. Stucco would have an acrylic topcoat. sitepinrev.doc . • • ' • • . .. . r . • . . i .,.. ... . MITHUN• • • . SITE ANALYSIS DUILIDING ANALYSIS . T..A.••01141 LI, i P2220 ma Al•skan.y .. BUILI;IING HEIGHT- '211 ThIrt_ARPS IMPERVIOUS AREAS SPX.ago - PRISTING(7E)NIVMS qSaredl•WA,Stal • _ •NIT F..,.2.=AI =','''..1.s.-.PT •••=6 Eald344 a.•NW SP Lacass.e.seJESslawsmssl Fro22.Ara.24,1,21. . ....06 6414000 C..•SCO SP Istassi TIP*1 2.0424.pr.am-24100 at N.., •22400 V 10.42.•1010 IP El•nit.Ca*•W44 sP -• ;. ,.111:!"...'3000 =:0,.,'50' ""'""' ............--, 224,030=00 061•F100 Sr 2.1,213120101....21222.22200.2212.10121 p. •Prod s.......11 ba e•IS la,Po I.26 of PAO. 14.1 I•MOO at q Puff.0.4 .-ISO SE I SsAss-100.10 SP • wpq.It ft..wenn•N•- A... •We.•001. la.2-VMS ar replWU SP I.1 2•SC.at • . .1,26 4 0 041.22 see•TT le 422.42 244.1"Ona. I*4-AM sI r.....a.nue Ana•Sentil, PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE ' .IT 2 • wan,A •0100 SP per 1221.2.4•44400 4( SAP,11 -0101 SP PARKING_REOPUTMPNTS A 2 0.1022-MOO e . Como/ •MO re Lassain.lqa T.Cong• •MOO SF 4,1:40,..24.44:„...,417.afas.„,71.21.mtrof„......74.....„...,.,2•22000 .... ...0...A i 14............•N ape.••••••• T.LW 0.42.4-07X • • URN• • DEAN SHERMAN ...Le.. OPEN COMMON SPACP . LANDSCAPING a...,em.,,-m resee PS•P.q....44 224,21 Or•742 Lag.C.,.•'me 10 .....5 as•al....Do....a T 6.1.1 I•.....•ao.•••••••sp..4.•0 42.e.•4200 At • • PROJECT: QRS.SiS1 . I Pro..Ls Amneod[mem teen tpeee • • Dean Sherman Apts. WO st pre.rdex OA.2a 4.el OA.122, • . 24 LAY Id sow•SU.•p.WI I .rne to.na. . LOCUM OW.•O 242 0•41••malyard 0424,4 • • 5th&WIllarns,Renton I PRIPPJIMPOIS. .. IC,WOO ACCESS TO S./0 Be emcee°re 1022C0t0 MC2002220 CO PI.A.OZA FOR NO12 DSI LLC 2.7001,042.1.1.:0 71 - 14.02.10 21.1T OIAMAT . A A A • ...t X ALLEY . • ocr me) /111/111= •; ' , 13.25-E 49.94 .....•,•.,• ___ • /-rerma '10ir" 1_10-ik.11111•111111111111111114#4111110111111_*41111.10111111- -Initillilaillit 1 , . , 10,4111111111111141111WW11111-eSC 111111.1*. Atli_4 .. . ALIO ._ : r, L.. i --;-1. :1', '-',1 '__---.' iiikk L i L4.: ! , ,I .1 •• I I i $ 1:4$117' I.,/ 'TIP -rep clew- i ; -emir,' : 1 Two' : ! -'-wer, ; 1 1 1 ' ; ; : ! . ,,,,•/;./ __ ' i 1 01.0 C,OAC•GP* : 1 ' I I ; ' i i OPE•COMMONISPAgG ; ; ; I ; ; '. ' ' ' ± ..,.. ill_al ;•rtt7:c• •4". -.1 ....ff s/''.. . ' ' '--. . 1 . . , ! , i • . I . ------7_------..rilj...SINN NINAVIII*101/10M4C-91- 117$11111111019201111.1mmiE. , .11 I I RIMINNEMONOWN11110"'"1"111r~ WINVNI.1%.7 -411.11' I----"...:TT. ". .- - $4..,, ...?Ir- .,•• 4';': . e:qffmaim ,o.,,:-.}th: I ;r . -- • . at .,,,,t: ,Ir,1 X'.r," - I • ...,,::11_ 1 . •__ . , , .._. :. .• , 21,2 MR, skill .'01 I. ,. . ,• ___i . , • /4: • I''2", . i 1 1, .21 VIS ,4 „ 4,...4.,....,• I. BUILDING'A' i.(4[( .4iiii 46;4- .IW: '' .i A pyTt#0,, . - . BUILDING'B' r-i-; • / /,AL.....1-.12:Ar.• 43 UNITS 43 UNITS t 47, TOP OF WC.0002•M.27.t TOP OF COSC.OEM•EL.UP -- 41',•.:'11-11§i':i•- . 4: 11 •-- .224=6 - +WNW* PLAN APP ' 7% --...----...--.- W 1-- 'I" 'di 1 AIL'4• 111,,-..- ,....._ i -,,,.,, „At I, _ e,,,i. _________•_ 1 _ ourUm-e • ,... WM= 1111:14' . 411)11,0_._. ,,,•/;//•:. _______________ golk-„, ,,- • _ . , . 41, ....,... )„ ..._-,,4'!'2,..:1' . ""f I,r; ;.•,..'el-tx.11 ,...., ,SPACE 1 initial siii .........EFAR, -. . .;(_;..,in-.4 '13-H.-Ir!, eme .___-... I -.. anik'''.'"4A-""Rc-t-''---4-44+kV4i-71.7.. 1 7-r-.7- .- -fit' g L )1 L -1111---E*L.: 4.4-4r.',',,reatiex ..y...!}...1.,. -.4:..---,4'z7 , i,., WA ft.....4 .ffit,_„±„.„0 :,,,,,,i.p..... . ,,,..,,,, ......,......_. _ _ _ .. , __ . ,.. „,_,4„... , i,....„.„,,,,, „.4,..„„,___,_.:„5,„,,...„ ,...-._,. __. .,„„_,........„._„....., iii ..--: l'X'.A IPA......r_,tt,C..4...1Jet irre 4 e; -.. 1 i : ' . i 1 1 : -7----,-ntzt,,4,-4-- .4_-...,_1 .._,„t-,,.1 1 ..g, .- ,. tk _r•..---,.••• -.-sio_._ f SAW ra......1---' .:IlAtilligi EaMianik 0411E... ..i.'"E."-:.4.; t.,•13.•• •4'..;_'[.al.' - • -. ' VP'"''' : - •i-4.1,-2,-p,--,- 111 :``:ii-1 .1 1141r4 -- -Pt,-1 4-, ••.• JR11,,_SISK SAW ___ "SS ' '',..-- ---,77--.§,..7. •..1 .-'-'..-• -..........."-'," 1" - -- -1-r . r---- 'Ikia:--____ _,1wAII_b.-w_4a__AikMillx_P'TNIII.Nr--- -:rpk ,_..in . . ,....... ..... 40111111bfr. '-- - _ - , 1,iiiiiimul,.,1,__=---0 .ivii...41110.--__ kik,,,i1E7-4., i__b•_,.-- MPG IIIINIIIinginigliiiiNINIMPEMIIIMMOIVIM11114 I irk 1 gattnitliallimillildraiidillgrMilfth- --Niir--alloulii. ED W • I terrors. •. . '.. lig' MI I IPP:orrk e 0 • MUM . . WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH 1 . SO129.46.5 559.80' 142 ROADWAY/60'R.O.W.I V ,..., rrpim ) . . 4 .• • ..... °SITE PLAN . . ; _.__!._.”.12.-, 12/14/2:00 r.....-- 43 . . . , R.POOSSW,SVKAISA ..1 . ... . . A1.0 nra.g NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - 00142.2T0803 1.1200002C. • . • • 1---' - ---- — -- — — ----- -- • - - M 11'ICU N. Ard,lum.Dulpr++�uvi.n I 1 • i . DEAN SHERMAN I • • Dean Sherman Apts. LOME.: • 5th&Williams,Renton DSI LLC • • • I I I i lo I 14 il 4. I sti le N Nil IN Na Itil tu to.II- 1 O. 446 il 9116 D. 6P4 I 4116 KV MY 11014 *WU Ms i 1044 ill 1004 rIle 1014 I i ,k 4 i e. 1 a a I 21 1 ] ) V R - / ______%��� f/� I ...1 AI! I tA/IBW STEP/AN MP J 4 % a ! u raaiaiiaaiaaairr z u im MICA/ DING GARAGE I "'..- 34 x ) 1 l I a la::."..3 �r • I MA SAW i . ]R .. ! ! a a a �, IN 1107 ]] o 11116 ¢65 64 e! 1144 i 67 N w 1 ED • • 1 . • T • . . I -PARKINGi . . . . . . . LEVEL 1 33 OPARKING LEVEL 1 ? 4 I mor.r-o• OEM. I v14,12 -- sA+®wao]e]aMVsw]aaaxa w AA_AA WO SCIIEMATIC OFT G - • NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ,,,„„„„®,01,),,,,40. • -= -. -- - - - - - - - -,- - -- . MIT,HUN Am20xC•,DdiewTMgen,.,. Ismpt. NubnW/ - .. sae.no SYYILWASS1m - ' nSe66ry1341 . ' . w.e{r2})0o} • I • DEAN SHERMAN • . no¢a: Dean Sherman Apts. • • 5th&Williams,Renton • rwiwm rot DSI LLO • AMA...,..,m+WALL rmun A.m.AA,x". • ALLEY • _ is wise! ' V),L2B'2•9Z 349'94. - _ _ /—%! vii, 1 All' 10 TT -_ _� i i i i i i ... ,,aexwAce ; j ' I---_. i i. ' i I i I I o°•.4 ail wA, , I ' ' i 1 1 r I - - . nK e _ m 12 ICI P'nIl I. Irill.1=11.1.-1.121-La .YSi[i1 �' m n) .,IIII r Ineu e m%% _ ..\/ ,.1..1 - -./ -- M—...611E P1AN i,f — euODINo A "I45 UNITS ri -- `:. --------- 1 -I EeDR00Y a et9aa0Y - a Beca0011 •.,•• /j� -------- Li'*.'y'; _ P\. "I I li€RIC .... .corn wACe ,�3i 4Ti �1✓1\1 ,,.v.»�; ..... 1 1:A?i... 'Yr .,'-- f`•' , -i1�. ' --' _____ -----' ' I .�J.a. tL-.J11. ox-- ,,rJ:ar i�f-" __ ma+a•r----- �rc� •`LI —�—� J�' JT'.ri, zqn rey �,-,' Y' + t- cows SW ,�.� +'r";',',1`r,. V rr�r :t:r.M.; i.;a-i_�. 4,1 L I Je ri.v: -.. .4,.Y . A-/ 'G1;Inr4#4:.;+a y � 1 •.V" i i ; : , I ,,...'•IT-FT`s 1f�rtrriii�, " ):mt$ :�T`.rr=s.�.tTL1 r_Y ■ • \ �� I� a"= �i^f't<r'rrrbs �'_ --- -- i Ir._ .-r tir_r_:,447 rr4.r,rr.`'.,mil .... - --------- 1 ‘,4411 • -: •. •1 w E�ai�w>+IwiMi��I� >., a. iiii ,.., .. a .. ne )2, „a • ,2, „S x g .nee"T..weMAMA I 1- ® ''°0't 7 WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH )"'�''� S 10'SOADWAT/60'A0.W1 l z -- RESIDENTIAL .-- LEVELS I_&2_----- 43 ORESIDENTIAL LEVEL 1 - STREET LEVEL Y--~— 21,M0. M:OT➢M\00.AIS0N21AVA .II AG.I Willa NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m o,m,,,,,C. S _ �,00>� • 5:211 WA9RIm _ - - • - - - - u9 sob BAA95 J DEAN SHERMAN AIOIRCE . I - Dean Sherman Apts. • LOCATE& 5th&Williams,Renton MIBM®WR: DSI LLC !71—u.Rv4.019...u' ?Wm"we AMA amain was. : . I y I 1 I . I L , ..... , 1 ._ 1, , 11 a BEDROOM 1 RDROM I BEDROOM I IIEDROOY I BEDROOM I BEDROOM • 1 BEDROOM I BEDROOM I BEDROOM i DeDROOM ' 1 v ivnam sifEVlw_uw I . BTTIO — OTDID t I 1 1 m I • BUILDING'A' �X BUILDING D'43 UNITS I -- — __ I1 BEDROOM I BOMOM I BEDROOM $T00 1 BEDROOM 2 ROR001 STEW I BEDROOM I BEDROOM R BEDROOM I 1 I i 1 •I 1-- 4 I I • I SAW__oL BRIM 9.w FR _._J I .. L--_ I —_—. tra or Mmw9,n9. WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH • •. 1 7 RESIDENTIAL ' LEVELS 3 8 4= __ 1 0RESIDENTIAL LEVELS 3 81 4.33 _ one•ie wlmu r ,Iveo90 _ _ I &110RR9N1`0,1G0..S90R99.ONV A2.2 'D e __`-_- NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION A,an.a..o_lo,:..vl.,,... �� ass _ Utz zoo RGBID.LGKL 4 .-i--� • RMS.LEVEL 4 - _ I, I'l ,. ',~!_ __ �j1 --_ �-!Ii• _ _ Lill II I PRATED.om TRIM 1.1 .. �F/� _— ®I _ =�I- RGBID.LGKL iTilit---EillS = _ _ = _ II 1 _112 �1■ I!■ RlSID LGKL i ' I I .: 1 icil ll■I = --= - ---` :Ai I !' DEANMHO.at _® _ - = �r • RGBID.LlVlL; ' - c ' _.i == 'I I ` I -!■j-- _ a I =- =N' - = = III Ili I I �: ._ �petnxc..atnn------------.------------'---- _ Deers Sherman Apts. j ...._ ,l-1.... -cwerz ruxre. tnumre 5th DAam RAoe LGKL WV;a'14'RG .. \-�TO »s' . s � lliams,Renton ZT-- -------- OALLEY (WEST) ELEVATION I tm•r.o // ' • LI saEGr Ili. - • - • ir. 'i•� iil✓!ii ..�'r• , eobnw" ' �I1rJ . �� ■ 1i �. =I■■I®_ • �±._ _ :■.- !_- a� I;_I■■sal® _■._I�ll� SPACG .Iflll .■ .l.II■■� .■= E'�� tom— i =i -- wc'i°c ' - �_�_ EMI. ;�;®12115 -®;�s i -------- �f�_ _ _�- a �Iinamewig I•im n 1i in:-IGI■1 1 imais .i mik-si Iiiml=gym= !ii -:m-l®=1- Inii— 1 I i i_=�-_ __ - =�',�ii'Im ff 4a =L. rs�' wl -®_=__ i _ i '��lltie'_— art_� —Ti\,a -- , R _ _LIDEI i= ___ ' ___ _ — lima= ` --- - —l.■II�I im—_ _ LI �' ;1 � N 1� :051��0 1 V6- III ILA`  111■1- 1- r _ �i,AI♦IIAII�:_® @�■ �1-I■I::� ��_I■.''l � aJ■e'a,■ . Mil .,� 1- � II_ ���,: I �� era.MRS SRO RV • . I GI j ,Pn aas aTERAM AM j�. I D °WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH•IEAST) ELEVATION -------_ va••r-co —_--- --- ti4,...,,,,,,,,,,. 1 ,, ........ j J ... bk. ‘' , N _, � sAw 11SALLOW --- 461-1 A17 I 1111 _1■.! ! 1i m4I I_ ^vboulA AVENUE I _I� �`■Ir ,li � _ I Auer • _ — 1_1 ■ i_I �_—I —.___ ___.._._. ...-:.-.ram--Tye•."•t -�_ _ --__-__-.__••_ __ oert w. �P1"a RmMu -� ama. i e "1' R?oARry N° EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS :: N .. .: m° z:i:z::zi m+ei.a ammo 3 II SA1999,9D 60.50,5oAM 5TH STREET ELEVATION COU'TY RP •` ve,r.o•. - va•.L•o. — "5.0 'rib I __ -_ --._—__—_ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION_ cmo..,,,,,,,.„ • E ! a SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,IWP.23 N.ROE 5 E,W.M. I ;i s I STREET LEVEL (11: 2 In I PRELIMINARY GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN .•�°:MI y' ' ,10 .6� r a _ • 0. .II r. I m a I • �• r ; l. ! WILLIAMSAVENUE Q -- bow >mm Q e 6;cm»•xi,-n6r � EEC _ ., a 6,6 IX.WPM VIVA R D; o,c — �_ - ——• }II}--- O a<"; x r r pr.,. ,r Hy"; _ ¢_ evl x'n I fuLL _ e f 112 4 m. A W -�t- 0 — _ f -�y �.r _ f"•u.wg ri.1; \„• 6�` _ re C ....�6 �'r` 6.'L_� [`� spry cam-IY y'O '•rss_ �;` o �t f .}IIr��' H')r! �;1�, � d•a.+* n :r —� IX.6 1 i n��` is 6' '` � EL 6'•••0 : '�1 iico_'♦ /1� t „a.. . �. -- • r ..: �in� M fw I A ,M1c rm �a_� ' P -AIM,1A Y6 I :nn6 --r- ( En IIu) I yi,l,a �'n +. ,. �" y YlI ytSi I 6 . I k 'mod! , l><.i ttw til —ml _ t I iais @ ;ma .>h.I�YAIN ■ ���;�■iMUl�ilfCl = � � ..........1'4.81.884o I tLm _'"_ .... Ili I I�....1�', .,. r.. fii! 1 [ L'N m3s ra RAW s_ vuo pp 9 f• F 1 W I I I I )- BLDO B f __ _ �"�a woa " .__.rr.a-wW I ;ii BL DOAw O i1gI!ii 1 Y �w x1 I �� f 1 12 I NI ` `1 I iT 's; U D.'.. €' F I i I I rtrro P INS E sue/mr:c aV ■ rG tr LO ,' �, ...n:....��'li IDi TOM ` •I r66vasm MEl JI r I f C' G1O1 BI501 , I :ice ' Nils. : , 6 4 II E T : Ea"'i I -' �: _—�^_:m ti;!It, i� :et::!:ta. �, �I c.^ul rr I. fM i' i [ : —, �GM�� ' - xxce Mm3-P.5immagawn- a �Kmenu au —�F' • ri' -'1�A'III ' I CCC �,�r„m ■!�l6i�i e r RAH... k ;I - - _ 1i11alliu nm i o�ry +tt71k7n�RiBifil6°6...1ttaiD'El'IIECIIIIk-"", I,Yd,. 8`iDI.4uart1i 111111!IIM7: —�/` __ _ �.r it d4 .'i ii I .. :8S{IIRI:a"A2nn. ,,, .a •,Y r 15:. r ': .! Nlllld . ,�Tarinkl�x�.t E"II w r JBLM9s1@A'A44r- I pLx .' P I i e m x 50 - CI x- : higa I�g/1/044: i ' _ L'.'r!k !,W":,P : 6 6`�IN •1€ '5�S - 1 '''"'"°'° G10 ROVED- Gvia,tm. G,o°R�i a mr'S' Gro:a ALLEY F.rons,so 8 It f iiiI I I I I m r io ee R rw.tv„y I �.ac Ue i I I I . I 5 E I / I • I I ry I. I o £`£ d A i I I II I n T ,-C- i tic_ ' �mcw.�••;,.:;p=•_%4 ` • iiiii 6( �� LEDEND ' SHEET INDEX ' - OOP P 8 Vi. �r� Q ^ rem mow f'M OWNER 0GO"A.On%DAM PII,I +�I El7i�j _ —.—.-m ue P^it'<MEMO.AM Pmctv6 uvrA rs.arA erl.� �j Mr..HO NHO —-a_pp..." `�'° s ar y vauuwx suv.wn UN u Jmmw ONO ss ROMP E' Fir I I�' —rdsw¢ NANO MD Ivf r•,16Y COMET SR 1� N M _ Qn.®...n NA V 6 HAV Imo E iC�1'� A ni mimic ON • EMU r,ons x.oa sr roc our(,)> I .J:����� ® � o119.12/� o OWE TOW 4376Sr�m y ai � 7"la ® m aawn ?� meooe.0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION p, - 0, _or CS GPI - 33 LOry 11 D6101FM 17 II=EN A a TOM Cr AMON. '�_' F! R e ..- .uam.c ID w R a taw.1 6<ruts.P6cc - rn-nu as aw atv ."::27C:77 va[.,[ 6."IMG ODOM.LV WCION. i6i SON 65 VS DWC91R0.M[ISsa..a In DEMON¢COMM � a. A '.[row(1f0 µµmm�T� f}Cfyl THE•6,y MT Or S'D t01y.pMTp tp. (f)6PFAM6 YlG MELT TO MO..Yf tuVF1<Soro u n61E➢gID 1 F;:4¢tk',m....... AIM iV6IV56 R DEEDS RV WfD UNDER R601AXG 'NRfi.PJNII,iPG11elR I150 LE53 DVN M DEDMO PMpXO IOf ,�.• ,�,�, J NOS6100GyMOe10bt. DE UM&MO WEE a.=DETIOTISr0VO0D 41 1�� s�7 :�) `Mstms THE xsm ruMu EMS.twt COWED a v Ty e CITY OF RENTON `n DEPARTMENT OF FMSL IO WORKS 1 y. +rs %nmt wwt x. PG•H4(l °a muwc.6 rea6s P ' PRELMINARY GRADING AND Z ,� <6ss)a,-70]D D _ STDRM DRAINAGE PLAN OONONf:C1a sxlrxw �� A Yrtlbme Atenv.bwNr. m 0. zr t !, 601s,yMO 6MII6e 600M ' ,�. _ ,u /� g r/0611 l•F 6FM,Y r6n10 <r'•O a® LL`6_ '� W I WMRES 2/5/0 I (.�7-'Ia1 auto eNoa�`� �����MF,_�-P- m • i is SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,TWI'.23 N.ROE 5 E,WM , STREET LEVEL 1 .t.< � q 11 j11i __ D a.nRr�� En ' :mm w aoN. I I n __ ® __ F __ ;lainµ \` w a m�mwr 0. i J` • + _ WILLIAMS' • ® a.9.,,ti O. -- /�- -� -- _ y ' D 4 I Cv.#5D^ »• / ei Di _ ` ' iTrx _D �+D'�72,14.:271.1:11".7..vi' �) 1• aOws1 , M.v..M auras. .cur:.ra i�M a sores I ORrE t -■— '— a VT Y l '�! Dn ; a t �' n D —'nc mcr me nT c D�— 1 zs st ,-maim-,'s. � • .. , . 13_________ ,. ^ .y��" I;."°-=r�._.:.._ .sd nW I la1� ro �t. u� IOWi.ir �fP`t :. • i A��dr I D A I I IT" x m I I i j bI m tR t W . ' j BLDG B I I -'u`, BLDO A """"""`a I�• �°L. 4[11 ¢ i 20 I ! j 75 i ��; j 3 I 2-..°III' I = t r>~ 1 co tMI 111 I L� � oo a �I 1 ■ I I jl IFC ro 'I , °- t18 II b .,: PwDM OM 0 SsCO 7 ali I I RQ.Iu`r.'7":.::..,��.::`' c�. �.;. _'4x..'r .'• _i. 11 M EC MI NOri1 I' j �ii �l� H1 �,fit► �"1�A� .� e,'I 1 71 1 '�/�— --- I S ._�..m+Awr..+�;� 1�IL�' �nAnM � ■_ .' � . �+� �`--•--;-•• 0 =}7 E I I 9 m:,A"IANINIiIIi�fiPT"q{AEIi(@g11iCi1Ailelii�fiIliYhAl •�� � ■ � .rs w�i.s + Y -` — riia'!fA gB1�J„% a i ,�'d�tl8i 'L. .,AI rL otFi ',m197VA71.lUPIR57�@ fl�IpfAN 11Nrn, Pu.euunul, ,aaruutrlm�nno-C. wnw x �a..>7A 4 ! Ii,�!4I Y Ile'n d,40.�nra ? na-hiW351111511TNNtd8,i•8. '=5 W"1 -:_•....111151111555185155 Il l>;st M1 r„ § °' ALLEY _:.•EA � i P r {i '•i j 1 s Ia°1 I 2 I I I I I 8 I c I :0 1 i i } T�;�_ � I E £ @ 'e } I i I i vLVAv iv I v- REIN TON vi 8 8 1�8 8 j I von_. �E_I � I + I I I ► 1 I I j • � � j I I I :I - }--•---------•-1-•�_-___..___ cc B.... S LI R N E T T AVENUE S a -a_ y.___— _ �� END �. —... '. I — �- LED 1 wmanzeizai —, ,� _,—•i • Q ROAM I.V CUTER MN MD 1®l!6./ICU lr 11'OM=um.01A gel Utt I - i m om Don of m0.Tart m mom..P,nzm MD4 s•m A 1r uxc 1 ❑ m0 IDD •••Dam... RE0013 CT 1M SWIMS a DST MO Cr MAE AVdIR soNN -- ® ceolynaa ISR,7 PO - ee k m omoil DWI=DOM=WOE SUMDE(5 TODUCITY. REWON .1}l- `w mriw�.7 ,-.^D—i �.�„D�Em ®UmTuc rtaE mown m RUwa 11•i(•w oe�nwrwmvr�or,we wowce N. A nDxvWt Oq cam fWE wax i0 Er R[PLYSD MN NEW xIDRLVf. ` SDI uc D W Wu �' 2100 I1gN AV[Nift NC i a. WYMDD RDDE YY�TTm^^"a ®�R me xmw n. R bt 0 m ..ix �- i� r Sa.w fiI )oursmE uPDxa ` Y �.m s�u�oo 0 • ____B,l __••-• ® 5'COPCWD xE1M•11x YAW.erns AND POST MCA.R VALK I D&COLD. 01 11sC D• MIS MID PANIC SCUM �: iiii! OMu last �LORON DEKE ral DO.=.A1TR SEW= ' C��+y 16MI.Y ISDSE L`rl4D[.Ddi a o®3d>_ cues xrtRO .05 '4 Iii U f� j g ` .. xaD UE / ®Ea ND oW6f0 am sm.To R USED FOR momox.11M Saha I DANES ilsrol I (Ii2551Li--GR�2 rA ,,.2 a•3 e SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,TWP.23 N.R .5 E,W.M. EI ; I I� UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL N (n �,e VEI�U fi m• PnBda,� xb i � ��, f:n B u f ri, ,,,,o ¢� =;._..i=4,u,w„ILLIA Ay.u;,.�mmE, �m ® A.M. t __ _II I' 1 / MS S. ® ' vE+T�!��jyr_y...r' - �.,1. �awu i�wa 9 ._—.� �� -- I e9 } ` i tYwc7.m . sorn zWeY s— � - c-�! xhil;_N� r• EI N tYa _ Him mi n um em ,. •4 ��,s�� qucY-�- —1---,-- —- xOr • •-Min —11-c Z�':--e•rw �, I, �[y 9•.��:�-� d * I ' � _� —r— *,u xuci— xr_ E a I 'n W n y1\E:. Lsi, _ O `��. -- ;' so.. ® nW ( ...._ .nwr �� �� z �e rtucl-® e I (ti�[S .,s mc; F I e _- �►� n a Z —I / -i. _.� -�� l I�11'. R vow(Bd1 ' ' ,,...1114 G(KL(SEE e4ID1 PIA '� . I I I i o.Pax, I A ►�• _ I bl I W + ' TO SwF B I ,- ' A I II1.+IIC I W . Y. & 20 to 1 I I /14I I €: I .JI I��oo F m I I 1� 1 �i �p E111.4� Q ��4 `�' �dB J oF.;j;.. r E. s . W -- L)Cailll I uun� I/Hi. �, - U>1////H//_/Y// • I z a ¢ ; L';il�)/n �' L �I III } 0 :I,IIIII'I = S W R. VI,1 NIBS ��.:I� L b c.)% g CO, I I I I�, I •..� a Ila g 71 o I I I { }� r 2e J d 4 Z — '_ L �'.-- . 1 4.Co.ME I two a ro�[An BN xE • 4 1110, f f _ -- _-_� r B ? 1tif�ido mi171111�11AIfN15tHAlRIEdpN'IAl�41t1�[ nhNktNWY.LWtC1NkfA2W�tW m i'�',W'�iRiflf['4111N4dh]fiEfiiPPt111YJ'NIlIW713tIi d�+-,'S`t`tx�'Yn.'fik �'-.■ e ve,.J�. ` g I e : I I w:.m h !&I; N Iglu dN1L I ��. .NIN.1'IG,I4 7s i k_10-1 _ ' .n rn9w., .e, �e I 1 ALLEY I It11i. } i fji ' I I II I I I I i10 i =2 E I 5 @@ I I I II [ l.AI OF r_ Vs,I 0'A iV V I- ii _I i t i l - 1 1 i 1 iVOL. :� i .5a , I I I g5 i i __ T _1� — BURRNETT AVENUE S. — — -- • ' ' •'� r ' •- y ��— SANITARY SEWER KEYNOTED ='°t=° CITY OF RENTON gs Q[un,mural ran MEMO[[�¢PAwwc AMA TWINE ro wu¢rew enx[•MGM elw PPE As s�o.x. Mr' ➢Elmf� oE�n ov rueuc wowx:e gs ®GI ME Env wnE M Mr!MAT WPABY. �' s> xrol'i[mWFMIt x< GHAli ss ®PBNAIE exo,xn ww not B.DeSstft Bsowxe PPE mwzeba EB ES6MxB s•SIM RAW.s aprm ''x' • A nA woos P r Sty PRELIMINARY BANfiARY SEWER PLAN O ! 0 DE,d6 SEC SUR TO REI M MO BE USED.BOSO[M PA O.NS(%ME[RBx BBMBR PUMP. • ;r �"l 711 (35)a-Saxe - `1' urs 'hTICfM knMIP lonVn 4 xa m COMP Eat sxRWY M Z UNDERGROUND PARKWQ LEVEL 1 ® PW.nE 4�F.w4R ss TO P'Ro'w 6�N4RNC'sifiliCTURE D Mt CD10x TO 1¢.MUM 911En osmium(s,ow ;��e.f,,[,S, s MO.wnE wpm, •' Y' Y yam_1 dre fir+ _._ - AOIII [!S• !x5()33T-BtYlx fe,(r'SC FMBM4' �WRD- mt �P W 1 EnwnES xy7B2 1 (w)xs,-exex DI .®, 3 o.P3 V m • - V II -Li ca I - - - - - - _ _ >� - �j r--- I BURNETT AVENUE a —� ,�I' I I fIi I I I r- - -1- - -1 I I I I I ` J i en I I "_• • � c Rf. I �- 0 b g c 5 7::;''4 2-b i'k' Z7 z+ ai - r t-tr4 '4: t s•�..• - .spa�.6.x «,y h 3' Zaa „r1A,.. +-, -. �yy,-- -=r�''....' •r F3s' ', tom' ' ,.' - ,_• og w 17- lid ea �•�- �, 1 4 4.. .. ,,f ,�a1 sg+ ,.�t 5 Y,i �1,\\ zg"� s atx -.I� 4n; 1'I-i,t n �-�+y� ql '• \�l��q .CEll CP 1 j .OC a M14'r,1 rii, ler' '•y S 5 - ''*1- 1kffle �_ E gz4 7307. -94kliMi ; :71;41.V.71V,irtri, -- 1 *74. 1 - , 1 I j'. 41 IL 1 ...,.. .. ____,„.,,:, ...:.,___ ...._ _ „ il ,..... 1 , w231.F.,_ ii_k_.sy,172_1.tAw2.4. g .... , . ___...... .. ... , s. ,. 7.,..„.„,,.. ,........nmeommoonviniev„r..,..„.‘, v„... ...„.tiv„..„.,....,...,.,,,...„_____,_,,,..„.„...._ ... __„.,,,.._...._„..1e _ k,:L ‘._..;.,,4„1;_._:4,.-.. -,., .:... i 1 1Y i.)'..i3` °• "s__s c i -" E .e. i1.+` ,..i,g,..,,„, ...k T' - z3 � 4-a—•'�,° 1,Teams z LI °" •, P y {_ ':.� .. •3 - r. a.-r- ?+ 65: y,c •..0.nL__1-_„14.a,-.-0.._v;,,i,=_ - -T z77s 'JFi'$`-,�'i c 1-'. .i.. ,.----.E.-,_a,K, ,,,, c "711r� s -�� .3,._re-n- ... 7 .wF yi �'4^d}.l 16.g 4 �5'at ..,, ♦ .� • t, ,a. ma 's ~71F-a -y` t s+�sw .. t� `E',5 - �,. - :_, Yr 4. g • . • • , 1 dy o , g WILLdAM AVENUE a ; ; g.-C i g R`' RRa& -X' ®p®Pa%t0O0.0 . k 23 If2° . o 111 i11111I11 0- a ail ll� ,a Sy tt V. g J 'C) I•' i - V mP 33� �3 � m u •..,Pr g88x' PP " m 2. ac,0§Aa11 i rF ; ri ; :1 I 81 e aW.g �1 1A� l PI:!2. a 11 4 111111114 1gg! 2 1151 �Ryi Rys ' QQBy yiya � pyg ,a,Q:OP icy _ _ i a ^ N G A A R C N R L ill*m 5 1 9c-N gil { .-1 :m 6 i; 1 1,4 i F Qe> Ja ;� � ; , . la �3 � � % i €ggi ay 2_1/ 11 RI 1 ii; ,111 1 !I mil !: 0 /I 0% !il i lip ill 11; i! gll :IP: 1! ia ci 1 ;1 1 gg 11 glIig IA $1 b ri 412-m 101 4 ill i 1;4; g2' ; 6911 ; i P " h2 4 . 1 1 -< / n< R m..a. �GH4V� 18215 72NU AVENUE SOUTH °"^tl= For. Ma: 7251 KENT.wA 980.52 n... ..... SDI,LLC TKEB INVErtfa2cY F1m - �-` 42s)2s1-sz2z �_:� ,k ( mm,.,� r-m 2100 124th AVENUE NE p,r (425)251_8782 FAX •• : I I ' '" OM uxwlxwlc.WO w,; ftw•�� WA SUITE 112 `•1 „ 1 . `'.....„O. simtl..a Erwowlwsv-s cm 10/16/. BELLEVUE,WA 08005 It r.\ms.imw\m,\am!'\rn1,a12%C I*,.nm*._10n6/1999 I. S.. ' i m.rc 1 • MITHUN HVN •' L L . u�mAWbnWn_ . ' • ' It..` GriefWA 9ilen�. P I rM dR LPG Tr ! - maecixa.H r�W l0 R- • , /� _ •M--7 ti R MOW NO./ fa efi 61.)oq. = lii AD �•/.iCri.Wri.lYr �a,r�,it 411* N 14 or, J,iii* 03:Iii_Akt �ai,; 1. rin LIBi,:mr'• '�I ),�1 ,' ! ,� lu! ',ls 1 i \ I i DEANSHEHMAN l • >V, •Eels.: — Dean Sherman Apts. m I 5th&Williams,Renton � I • f nePu® i; �: 'w `f I•' DSI LLC fi ND l ld I111I1';.--i � •-: ; iiii-, 01- k , ew lu � 4_I 1 e CO I .':�.. ,. '„' - -: '1.,1It , �� v ,., I,�.rh i A .a� , a Nni3O p..:tliul.r„—i•.. , . , ,v, . , 1d...11.i.,.. LnuL.iu,u, Fir.- .. � iv . L . „,^ .. a '.. r MMi : wr _ .. _ .a���1-� rgr:: C�__ii r+� �� •® — . .. - 1N1A00 SIM PLAN A. .�./ \.� a111� • NB CP • - PLANT SCHEDULE �� • SLM • Fey Ott BOTM CON ON NABS CON NANG B@ COMMON SPACING RPLMAS >'F r NW. JAB,MASAW • M Azar m De.ra9 NopM ]'W D 1 D ¢alms PG W AY teMPOSv Yrs Nap, A-A N. B 1 B w.lard CB Cmywu.b1Ja.T¢kfmd w.Nrs Harr.. 1.a. B 4 B u Maas CO C oectlmaN Weal.. B'.w!R D l D v..Mri �"rrL N9 Nag.o gre.1Iara Bop¢ge Ctanaeara -0' IS ha 5&B as.Inr. SA MS.PAN... Japans....1 ''B-V ILL B 1 B ¢stn. PL Pr..eugan¢ •moos 1... D0•ht UV SWIM ' AG urea agaevgui Bea.er,F Tr,» SG. la li • Garnmu.grew.narvpevl. GIG ra¢•• gd Nchae hyenas Hyena Curry. 9d FMaaauaon Nara ARM ',v....,n¢¢Eiam 9a PA.ar.euv Oole.n Curs. gd F mor.• .. • R.:wny g3 Roam.. att... •aQYI GA GA 6m:am¢o A.A. 6rae¢rc9 b1N9a wlgaL LI¢. PS g„ • waram aarN..s Re..ar,spb w 9d LANDSCAPE PLAN OFOWOVPH 1,VVS.O N anon. • MablOptpA wawa R Claw. • Pad.arGr -].jT� CONiAanWM RIHRNOBNy 0000 AID v D 0A.yy mahp.a'OeW.,geeeu.' Oa.Oa* 1 ga. ii MIO1.01 X• a•'a¢Ne Bf'+nawan Oa.. 4 1 Ligr...vulgar.la. .. prh., - l pale gd Nand.a9»wlA Hew.,D.M» l gar • Pat.m1rN. PaWaN area.. 1 gal 1.1a ar(Nnw Cosmos Beg. V pa. N W.Paaea P'rpl.Weae O a.. 1 gar ' L1.1 SGNEIMT,C NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION art..,®AM.,C . :' E3•• 7:,,T23N'•R5E E 1/2 _ RM-I ii �R-to le - R-10�S cA IL(P)41 - M3-111 P 1. - :'_ -&_ :.� / ilpir • �`1 cP) — - - ` . : 0. - -- , - - . liht,..41411:=_o 4r.: - . Airport Way \IT A I iiii CA Mimi ;Ir �- —TobinA ti. dR-: - D RD 114111116MMI \*7.1114Ai . ict() I -- -_ `ail �' �� G -A --- _----- \.� �/10 _ 7 C D C P) a cn RM�u RJ, iti a'�' s C A ` •.. ..�__ \-f_ �b,-u y 3 _L_ •. . Il97dr S2ndSt.k z A` — CD �� CD _S 3rd St. c t --- -- - L.- 3rd Pl. — EMI I__ --ia3 i_c3; r N CD CP) e \ — � � D��� CD CD CD \ 7_,. \ C - CO=. -.._�y. CA C-D CD pp (D CD _- CD --- CD can�c — -_ — _— — /— CD rn= CD�2- a.) --'.-\ . tit\-1 ?‘• L.= --- — _ell -1- =-co- -m-i 655 may" , .A� t ' + + ++I+++�+ - -Q _ ' -a — •~ -FOCI - + +.+ + + + + + + a: — — St - -- - �:==a - 01 + + + + + + + + + + + =S of ++^ +++ +++++++++++++ -ice I CY -X //\-‘1:1---- C 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + I+ + + + 1+++++++++-+++ + + G3 • 19 T23N R5E E 1/2 - +�,+++++++++++++++ " -I'i F I T 13 + + r 0®0 0 _,• °., ZONING' Z.0 r l 67 i 11�oo F3 4F�,&Y.4. M ; .`, .. . 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 LONING MAP BO)K • . r '";-Iwo. 1t '<-t#'< r ---- "`=t•!'4,.❑P Valli :11;: "il iP,-., '''',.21, ift, ---:-:-&-s-:*4 41 .0.40 ., ,..04 6 -,,, ,A.„,„„„,,„„.„„,:„„E:0119 4. . .1! i' lill;',"1,..: " ,., 4 .4..U d. .. j i s • I' i B' 24�4 - Au •r.• R �. 1 rll '•', 26 T24N R5E, ii-\i t‘ill )' ":::712EFIAN re:111111107,11121 i 1 n� '464 .v: Iro.:.::::::::::::::::::::0:::::::::4- ---.:-.•• -------- -- ..- -: t. , r .ti , • 0 , _0 r� ,�, :v. r<=•::;:;= }; ",_ !r • ` I�I '' •,R T24N R5E 7 *TOR 'I 1 ,,.�� ��::;-:.;-:;:-;r:<:;:-� - =-<-:_max=<>>:. i ��� ®• - ' illll,�lgll�'\ ��, 11417,UMW•, Cl��_ .L- ,c.1 1 -I(III If I - _ �y • - 4. , ,,,..,,,,,,,,, �.1 II I, ,� rtA,\, � c �,t�, , r �!, �..--: Gil .r 1 ,, - -I�I� - I :,:mi es I �� '�„�U1 , \o�51S1�#' ::<.::?>-::-s3: �►t1�R1 4� '�� 2 T23N R�.,..„ „ii= -.:;.:._. 1 `., y q�,,-"- * �F'A If?'tgl• �i� ,�` �t i `J� 5. l Er 1`�, 1 •��t et SE wi 1' 0. 1 tEtj,Q I ( ' `. i 1.565 Pi i,l�r�.!� pre .er 4: ,\fp. ....... - ._.., vi:fr ,v..0 0.-ii .f. --,-, ..,, . • • IV - kt. 8 ._.\.„‘„ , 5 'k ,:P1 ! .'- . ' ih2;,'-1'6E f.I i , �■ i �� ' 3;5 1r a J. � )Jr, �- 371 81 "� .:-.,:it:` . ..- 0 + 7 11 , '.,, k.,„'-;.kg,,......-,...-. ..,--ANte,--..,,,,.., -,:N. '. i 4 ota. ,, ,,ifij . f(„:.,.,To I , ,) }Y •T2 N R'' li�l�l�_ lLrIfTaLT2 R -e�wa a+l�sd'r I::7 ks .?2 T23N R5�i 23 T23N RSE S), ,Bilb" 1 II� il' Arm fit 1 I i. _1■1r�': & i► 821 ' .4 . 'ft-vil , I tle. - ii/41 ,( ll I l It ��' illri Nadi`,: , ;t s -- gqi 511 __ 044 ‘'Itrup` ' ' — II . 1 j _ - 'm''' 111Pjle ;11 ,W,JL - 1°-' Eql zs TM .j i I,\ ) '' f._ I r i •i" ,.,. .L� a mil_. ' i (� n v , .1 , I ,. r -1,,,,,, - 1 '3• - _>I ir To' iP 3N R' '.1 72 R5E 1 3 it$E. a3. I' •,-;:,..',.1 �i •3NII 5E 135 T23N 36 3N Rol j i° _ a •�, 60: I -- 6 ziell 61'�li ` C 1`�'I�••; 'I1 833 g IP!'1 ' , ii „...„ , \ j v.....gin.Ei:.-..:_i_. F 11� N ,I 1 Y' 22NR4E -T212 6T2,f1 5E;f,� `M , ';E• r^.t .-.E^J 3T2 R. ... i 2T22NR5E : _ KROLL RC i Resource Conservation I—I Convenience Commercial eF) Publicly Owned ;., „ _,_, .. I—I Residential 1 du/ae kk 1-1 Center Neighborhood* Renton City Limits I-7 Residential 5 du/ac I� Center Suburban* '- Adjacent City Limits IR-D I Residential 8 du/ac I CD I Center Downtown* -• (Grey Text) Prezones SECT/TOWN/RANGE I RMH 1 Residential Manufactured Homes '®' Center Office Residential ����� �•� Automall District A I R-10 I Residential 10 du/ac ET Commercial Arterial I•.•:•:I Automall District B MI Residential 14 du/ac I CO I Commercial 0ffice • For additional regulations in overlay districts not shown on this map, please see RMC 4-3. 3 I RM-1 I Residential Multi-Family Infill I—I Industrial - Heavy a IRh-irt Residential Sfulti-FaYnily Neighborhood Center I1 Industrial - Medium PAGE z ' Y IRM-CI Residential Multi-Family Suburban Center - r•y,1 II- vinitia iaP--Light ' INDEX i =9 Residential Multi-Family Urban Center* P-1 .Public U8,e f, v Tel .. r 1 co pl 3 , . , . . • ,,, ., • • • • . . .SO •,. .i. I •S-- ', t -'-..tts'4 — -.• .Hardie.1,A0'e7it .iip..';'• . Har'die.;ky'd.Iltsilly•• .. .. • • • I !En • • i 11\-'''s •••. . .• . . . i , : '— ' 1 .• .• .• • .• ••••• . ... .. . • • .. • • . . • . • . , , . . . •• . •..: . • • . . i . . . . . .. •• • . ' . • •: '. % - •• \in\ . ' - I-.•.•• • • • ; ; i • 1,. •Le .,_ ; •. . ..-..,.•••• - • • - •••,,,•:i*I• ..' . ••• .. ' " '. ..zmi ' • ....'..i.r. . • '•' :. • • i., • lier Ave .5 " ••,*. • • ,,,- ' -:.•:-.1;,*.• . • !• • ; '61.. 1;04 • : IV) '1 ' • :1," ;... i 1;•.%• . - • :: i:...II .1 . . ... . •• • I: : .'• ': r;-.. ) ..."5. !•CL .I 1 i0 :1 • >:•• I !: I .1‘ '1 •. I -0 .; • .: •,a: • :--' il :IV) : . i. •i 5 : :i:3 CY ... • • . • • i di Shagqpki Ave \ , . l• • 11-7! : u) • (D. . __, i:.cn iv law) NUR II' 111111 r.) .. , . 11 II IMITI:t1-6. -111, cl- i -1i; •1 : ...c !c4 • • cumin i ii 11 IL-17: •gig a '12 I .. , i . • ti . 0 • \ \• .'. m111111 M11111111 \ 7orits: ra e an • • • . •. • (n • 1 . .. . -.. -•.\ \. • :' 113g11111 111111111111 LIE, I !Ramon All 1 ... ..• • r., . t : • , ,.. • Erg s:** •.•••.,!.:. mini! imummr-qJN "aIPM1111.0 Mao TtpneLtkverST in I •-/' ' . -••• 0 * - %.-••••••"..,..... 11 - 111111111111 .1.1111111, MMI117-1 Hi 1 1 < . CD NIL '1: 111H1111111 1111-111111. kielTj 11111111 e it-Mr ..- •••• - • - -•-• '-•• .••-.. • • .;"V-,.1. • t< ....."/ 1. . I I H4I 611 1 1,\Li I I 1 II— I_ (I 11U••• `..' 1 1 1 11_0 Av 1 -,s r-1 II 1 1 1— ilifilli .„.• ,.., ..., 1 ii r. . . .. .' - . • , e:i • 0 ./ .v;,•*1.1.1...,L lumen! .,,,Nopp,j ammo vi II milli zs•-..,......2/0 • • :...{ s.,,,,'IlL• ., r..1... - • \ ••••• . •1 p ILMIEll ii mum 111111111010-11nill li /......,...,...::::: -• ..\• „.. .s.::."-••• i.. 1 1. •‘q11 gclin Aver S 1 1 II 1 1 illrill V: rHi) #1 .:,........:...,.! .......i:i .;•!11..../1-;-...:L:.i; 4 • ,..••::•••:%,, ...)••;•iT.- •' •. • : o, . r . • • . . • \ Vx I I I I l f 'Npr ,...e::: •:;•• , "::,!ii,l:: Pellyj!A; 1•::11ve y:;... ''.1;3• . • ..• A \ I I ....(.: ;>;;;2; .!.:i.s.' . :. . ii milli icp118101.r.1 14f.yli4151:D.. :.:j.......;.. ri ....,,:.". •,. .. ..• "• ••;• ••••I - • :: • ; ::: 1, . .1 VIII 11111)••:;11(!.;1;:..... I) ." C••••••••....01.p.; ii .! ..,1--:; • 06!Ave S ! Ren'tOr)14‘1e.,-.S1 1 .1•••1"r .1 ' :•!:I. ••••••• I \\.%. .i •: '. Gardeni;•Ave N . . . • 6; .•.....:..".!• :;. . l•.;ri.. .1,•'•:,1::::!.1.1".11;.;i 1.i.•; • .• .1‘;.:: •••••'.%.-• • ::: ..,.1.1.1;1!••i• .! ; • . . 1 -' I II ,..!.• • i•;! ,•:i.1::411 ; !ti 1.•1: I -. : fi,,, . .s.- .. ; 1 , !! ! ! .!, • i•:!),/...(\/../ :. • t...4 •••Meddoii:r I Wiie!'N•iP. 7. • ;.• ••••••••• ••••• • it :•-• l, •• ,-.1..,•;; • ..,.;••;•• -•• •-•;-::- •••• . ;%.• : c.:•,.1,\•,,,-, .iii•,•,k•KT1. ... . . ••••• .. ..... . / il 4: '.. ..........z:.......... :. . . i PLU.91.• .S”.. .. .1 •Ave. :5 I :1: : .....- - ..:. v s. .- 4.. - '... ••• "..... i , ' '1'•`;:r.. !co .. i ..• . .•1• ! i.- VI: •••; . ! I ...,. 1 ; • ...- !Ave.•. i ! •.'/.. •• .., • .... .i : . : ..,, 1• . cslcs\-•' ...is 8• • ; ...• . ...... • .. . ......• .• .. . .. - . • • • • • - . . .. , . .. • • • , .. _ • City of Rent_ Department of Planning/Building/Public Wld ns ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ro1((z, COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story,86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage,and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 99 aniztuz.C(y GOMfi.t/'I-) o v c,€ d. B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS "w 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 -O / Signature of Director r authorized Representative Date devapp Rev.10/93 PROJECT LUA-00-168-, SA-A, ECF Dean Sherman Apartments City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL &DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET (Continuation) POLICE RELATED COMMENTS 79 Police Calls for Service Estimated Annually CONSTRUCTION PHASE Theft from construction sites is one of the most common reported crimes in the city. To protect materials and equipment it is recommended that all materials and tools be locked up when not in use. The site will need security lighting and any construction trailer should be completely fenced in with portable chain-link fencing. The fence will provide both a physical and psychological barrier to any prospective thief and will demonstrate that this area is private property. Construction trailers should be kept locked when not in use, and should also have a heavy-duty deadbolt installed with no less then a 1-1/2" throw when bolted. Glass windows in the trailer should be shatter-resistant. I also recommend the business post the appropriate"No Trespassing" signs on the property while it's under construction(flier attached). This will aid police in making arrests on the property after hours if suspects are observed vandalizing or stealing building materials. COMPLETED BUILDING Each unit should have solid core doors,preferably metal or metal over solid wood with peepholes and heavy-duty dead bolt locks. The bolts need to be at least 1-1/2"in length when extended and installed with 3"wood screws. Lower unit sliding windows, including glass patio doors,will need additional locks; these locks will need to secure the panes from being pried out of the frames vertically. This means the locks will need to be placed into the top or bottom of the frames, in addition to any lock that limits horizontal movement. Having access to private patio space from the street level is a concern for this project. Defining public and private space for the safety of the residents should be a priority. Alarm systems are recommended for each unit. Solid walls in any stairway or decking should be avoided; this would serve to limit the visibility and provide a place for a criminal to hide while waiting for a resident to return home. Each unit should have their individual unit numbers listed clearly with the numbers at least 6,1 in height of a color that contrasts with the color of the building and preferably placed under a light. In addition, there should be some directive outside the building for Page 1 of 2 PROJECT LUA-00-168-, SA-A, ECF Dean Sherman Apartments City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL &DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET (Continuation) visitors. This will also aid police or medics in finding the individual(s) that needs emergency assistance. Proper lighting in the parking area at this complex will be especially important. Having it constructed in a somewhat isolated manner will attract prowlers and thieves. The additional lighting, as well as security in the garage,will assist residents in feeling safer traveling to and from their vehicle and it will also help protect the vehicles that will be parked at these locations. Landscaping in and around the exterior of the property should not be too dense or high. It is important to allow visibility. Too much landscaping will give the property the look of a fortress and make the residents feel isolated, and could also possibly give a burglary sufficient coverage to break into an apartment. Page 2 of 2 Trespass It USINES Enforcement Quite often, business owners and managers are faced with crimes that occur on the property after the businesses are closed and the employees have gone home. Some of the crimes that occur are burglary, vandalism, graffiti, trespassing, drug dealing and robbery in the parking lots. There is a way for police and business owners to discourage these types of crimes from taking place on private property, and that is by enforcing the City of Renton's Municipal Trespass Code 6-18-10. In order for police to be able to make an arrest for Trespass, business owners or managers need to purchase signs and display them in conspicuous areas on the property. These signs need to include the following language: 1. Indicate that the subject property is privately owned and; 2. Uninvited presence on the specified property is not permitted during the hours the business is closed, and; 3. Violators will be subject to criminal sanctions pursuant to Renton City Code 6-18-10. MOST IMPORTANTLY-THE SIGNS SHOULD BE CONSPICUOUS FROM ALL POSSIBLE POINTS OF ENTRY TO THE PROPERTY, AND ALSO BE PLACED ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGS. This way when a suspect is arrested, he/she will not be able to claim as a defense that he/she did not know he or she was trespassing. EXAMPLES FOR TRESPASS SIGNS: NO TRESPASSING NO TRESPASSING This is private property. Persons without specific No Trespassing after business hours business are not authorized to be on the premises between (insert specific times). Anyone on the the hours of(insert the hours your business is closed). premises after business hours is subject to Violators are subject to arrest and/or citation for criminal arrest and/or citation for Criminal Trespass pursuant to Renton City Code#6-18-10.. Trespass and/or impoundment of vehicle. Per Renton City Code #6-18-10. By enforcing the Trespass Ordinance, business owners and police will be sending a message to criminals that they are not allowed to conduct criminal activity on the property. In making arrests for Trespass, police may be preventing the more serious crimes from taking place. r COURTESY OF RENTON POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION UNIT �"-i` 235- 2571 �y CITY C, _ RENTON Department Planning/Building/Public Works De 1211. P Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 24, 2001 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 January 23, 2001: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED DEAN.SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on.a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four-stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of'113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. Location: 415, 419, 423, and,435 Williams Avenue South. Appeals of either the environmental.determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM February 12, 2001. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. 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. For the Environmental Review Committee, Of/idia/Z-- i 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 Agency Lt<\ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer v _ , CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four- stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels.into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415,419,423, and 435 Williams Avenue South MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The recommendations of the geotechnical report,;"Geotechnical =Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments,,Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 1999, shall be incorporated into the project design and construction. 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 4.62 average weekday trips per multi-family unit.The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to building permit. 3. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $388.00 per multi-family unit. The fee is due prior building permit. 4. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $354.51 per multi-family unit. The Parks Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. MITMEASURES CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four- stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental.review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415, 419,423, and 435 Williams Avenue South Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in:conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review—Sanitary Sewer 1. This project is outside of the';Aquifer Protection Zones. 2. There is an existing 8"sanitary sewer main-in,Williams Avenue S. 3. Parking garages shall require'floor:drains and shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be directed through floor drains that are installed in accordance with-the UPC to an exterior oil/water separator. The separator shall`be sized to meet a minimum t5-minute retention time for peak flows anticipated in the garage area,,but in no case will beless:than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of interceptor shall be as manufactured by.Pipe Inc., Utility Vault Inc., or approved equal. 4. Due to the project being in the Center Downtown•Zone, the System Development Charge (SDC)shall be at the current rate of$0.106 per square foot of property(40,276 sf x$0.106 =$4,269.26). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. A redevelopment credit_may apply. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 4"water line in Williams Avenue S, and 8" lines in both S 4th and S 5th Streets. A • 24"transmission line is located in Burnett Avenue S. 2. The derated fire flow in Williams Ave south is approximately 1200 gpm. 3. The static pressure is approximately 72 psi. 4. This site is located in the downtown 196 Pressure Zone. 5. There are two fire hydrants in the vicinity,four hydrants will be required for the project. 6. A 12-inch water main is to be installed in Williams fronting the property by the City of Renton.The developer's share for the project would be the cost of the new stub for fire sprinkler service and domestic service line and any additional hydrants needed for the project. it Dean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page2of3 7. Due to the project location in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge shall be at the current rate of$0.154 per square foot of property. The fee has previously been partially paid, leaving a net square footage of 17,250 sf(17,250 sf x$0.154=$2,656.50). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. 8. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double detector check valve assembly for the fire sprinkler system. The applicant shall submit a copy of the mechanical plan showing location and installation, if backflow device is to be installed inside the building. 9. A domestic water meter backflow device is required when building height exceeds 30 feet, as has been proposed for the project. 10. The required irrigation system must have a state-approved backflow device installed. Plan Review -Stormwater 1. A storm drainage narrative and conceptual plan has been submitted and reviewed. It has been given preliminary approval. 2. Final storm drainage report and design shall comply with the.King County Surface Water Design Manual, 1990 Edition. 3. No on-site detention is required. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or.installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of Record to the Public Works Inspector:_.;Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper ropOccupancy.reremoval of the erosion control_faciilities;is required prior to Temporary Certificate of 5. The Surface Water System Development Charge,at the rate of$0.183:per square foot of new impervious surface, is applicable to this project($0.183"x 22,963=$4,202.23). The System Development Charge will be collected as part of the construction"permit. 6. Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project; Plan Review—Street Improvements 1. Any substandard or damaged street improvements shall be replaced to City of Renton standards. 2. Alley design standards require a minimum of 20 feet of right-of-way,with 20 feet of pavement within the downtown area. An additional 5 foot dedication of alley right-of-way or access easement, the length of the property, is required to comply with City of Renton code. • Plan Review—General 1. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. 2. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 3. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. 4. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 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 ADVISORYNOTES • Dean Sherman Apartments L UA-00-168,SA-A,EC F Advisory Notes(continued) Page 3 of 3 (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. 5. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. 6. Construction hours shall be limited from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday for utility construction activities. Any changes to work hours shall require approval in advance by the Development Services Division. Construction Services 1. A demolition permit is required. 2. The 1997 Uniform Building Code and 1999 NEC are the governing codes. 3. Elevator lobbies are required. 4. Inspections are required as per geotechnical engineering report. 5. Electrical wiring must be in conduit. Fire Prevention 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,750 gpm. 2. Four fire hydrants are required. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the,structure: 3. A looped water main is required. 4. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the structure. 5. An approved fire sprinkler and standpipe system shall be installed throughout the structure. Two standpipe outlets shall be provided.on the west side of the building. 6. Separate plans and permit are required for the installation of the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Parks 1. All landscaping outside of property lines is to be maintained by the applicant. Planning • 1. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 2. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction 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. ADVISORYNOTES CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four-stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415, 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue South LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton • Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM February 12,2001 (14 days from the date of publication). If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: January 29, 2001 DATE OF DECISION: January 23, 2001 SIGNATURES: 213Jeministr- tor DAT regg Z� er rf, De artr�e t of lannin /Buildin /Public Works p 9 9 ( 3 VC ( m p She herd, �tra I1Adminitor DATE Vim { ommunity Se ices Lee er, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department dnsmsign CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four- stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415, 419,423, and 435 Williams Avenue South MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The recommendations of the geotechnical report, "Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 1999, shall be incorporated into the project design and construction. 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 4.62 average weekday trips per multi-family unit. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to building permit. 3. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of $388.00 per multi-family unit. The fee is due prior building permit. 4. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $354.51 per multi-family unit. The Parks Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. MITMEASURES CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF APPLICANT: Mithun Partners, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four- stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 415, 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue South Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review—Sanitary Sewer 1. This project is outside of the Aquifer Protection Zones. 2. There is an existing 8"sanitary sewer main in Williams Avenue S. 3. Parking garages shall require floor drains and shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be directed through floor drains that are installed in accordance with the UPC to an exterior oil/water separator. The separator shall be sized to meet a minimum 15-minute retention time for peak flows anticipated in the garage area, but in no case will be less than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of interceptor shall be as manufactured by Pipe Inc., Utility Vault Inc., or approved equal. 4. Due to the project being in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge (SDC) shall be at the current rate of$0.106 per square foot of property(40,276 sf x$0.106 = $4,269.26). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. A redevelopment credit may apply. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 4"water line in Williams Avenue S, and 8"lines in both S 4th and S 5th Streets. A 24"transmission line is located in Burnett Avenue S. 2. The derated fire flow in Williams Ave south is approximately 1200 gpm. 3. The static pressure is approximately 72 psi. 4. This site is located in the downtown 196 Pressure Zone. 5. There are two fire hydrants in the vicinity,four hydrants will be required for the project. 6. A 12-inch water main is to be installed in Williams fronting the property by the City of Renton. The developer's share for the project would be the cost of the new stub for fire sprinkler service and domestic service line and any additional hydrants needed for the project. Dean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 2 of 3 7. Due to the project location in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge shall be at the current rate of$0.154 per square foot of property. The fee has previously been partially paid, leaving a net square footage of 17,250 sf(17,250 sf x$0.154 = $2,656.50). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. 8. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double detector check valve assembly for the fire sprinkler system. The applicant shall submit a copy of the mechanical plan showing location and installation, if backflow device is to be installed inside the building. 9. A domestic water meter backflow device is required when building height exceeds 30 feet, as has been proposed for the project. 10. The required irrigation system must have a state-approved backflow device installed. Plan Review-Stormwater 1. A storm drainage narrative and conceptual plan has been submitted and reviewed. It has been given preliminary approval. 2. Final storm drainage report and design shall comply with the King County Surface Water Design Manual, 1990 Edition. 3. No on-site detention is required. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of Record to the Public Works Inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities is required prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The Surface Water System Development Charge, at the rate of$0.183 per square foot of new impervious surface, is applicable to this project($0.183 x 22,963=$4,202.23). The System Development Charge will be collected as part of the construction permit. 6. Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project. Plan Review—Street Improvements 1. Any substandard or damaged street improvements shall be replaced to City of Renton standards. 2. Alley design standards require a minimum of 20 feet of right-of-way,with 20 feet of pavement within the downtown area. An additional 5 foot dedication of alley right-of-way or access easement, the length of the property, is required to comply with City of Renton code. Plan Review—General 1. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. 2. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 3. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. 4. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 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 ADVISORYNOTES ,bean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 3 of 3 (preliminary plat improvements), and the remainder when the construction permit is issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. 5. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. 6. Construction hours shall be limited from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday for utility construction activities. Any changes to work hours shall require approval in advance by the Development Services Division. Construction Services 1. A demolition permit is required. 2. The 1997 Uniform Building Code and 1999 NEC are the governing codes. 3. Elevator lobbies are required. 4. Inspections are required as per geotechnical engineering report. 5. Electrical wiring must be in conduit. Fire Prevention 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,750 gpm. 2. Four fire hydrants are required. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 3. A looped water main is required. 4. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the structure. 5. An approved fire sprinkler and standpipe system shall be installed throughout the structure. Two standpipe outlets shall be provided on the west side of the building. 6. Separate plans and permit are required for the installation of the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Parks 1. All landscaping outside of property lines is to be maintained by the applicant. Planning 1. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 2. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction 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. ADVISORYNOTES Staff City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Report ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ERC MEETING DATE: January 23, 2001 Project Name: Dean Sherman Apartments Applicant: Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1201 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 Owner: S-D Renton LLC 2100— 124th Avenue NE, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005 File Number: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA Planner: Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Project Summary: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for an eighty-six unit apartment building to be constructed on a 40,276 square foot property located in the Center Downtown Zone (CD). The project would consist of two separate structures of four-stories each of residential units over an undergound parking garage. A total of 113 parking spaces would be provided in the garage. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. A Lot Line Adjustment has been requested to consolidate several separate tax parcels into one. The proposal is subject to design guidelines under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. Project Location: 415, 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue S Exist. Bldg. Area SF: Existing 4,660 sf•medical Proposed new building GSF: 123,000 gsf clinic/office, single family residential structure, and Proposed new building footprint: 22,400 sf residential garage to be removed. Proposed driveway: 900 sf Site Area: 40,276 (0.925 acre) Project Location Map ercrpt.doc City rlfRenton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis e Site Plan Approval Staff Reports ,' DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA Page10 REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 i - — a +.�Z=.„—= _\�- '� 8 of i W!, Pt. 'j Waym ,` •0Rtte E, FI �F n �ce417, i 1 I L'i=$e• S LY'"'I!c •� �� " Cid WA %' ® SPA ' . - F.. 1•(. air • I "Ilire . �%"� W, 1 .I Mil M , ./. I' 417."4P. -4L1 Edl. aura J-kpor 5 ST: a iatmvoka;pakS 4TH FiH:e ...,: . .L-61k71.,..11:'' Mei EU itirEIIMIN , ": z. SCN l5 =c 1LS Fn� 1.1 y: aoi ® 4 ? = 'P i e ea• .a--a?,... f .I w y. mid m .® 1 .1a 4 n ER. r e� F/i%2 1 l��I tip ca :: 'i ls�, .® fig• L4 a . ti Zsr�F?S if.M® r k® ]o.'' t •R..-43 ' .1 3 ^a a tE-.- i .p:a a®. MI' • O y. 491 11 LPL- h.. *,y ar', o o-1 f n f,.,.70.4. _! m NEIGHBORHO0.D DETAIL MAP i PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND . The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review and Approval for a four-story, eighty-six unit apartment project. The project consists of two separate buildings. The project would be located on a 40,276 (0.925 acre) property on the west side of the 400 block of Williams Avenue South. The property consists of several parcels that would be consolidated by means of a Lot Line Adjustment, which is also a part of the current application. The property is within the Center Downtown Comprehensive Plan land use designation, the Center Downtown (CD) Zone, and the Urban Center Design Overlay District. Development standards and zoning regulations for the CD Zone would apply to the project. The property abuts CD Zoning on the north property line, but properties adjacent to the west, south, and east are within the Residential Multi-family— Urban Center Zone (RM-U). Although they are zoned multi-family residential, most developed properties are single family residential with some commercial and institutional uses. The property fronts on Williams Avenue South, between South 4th and South 5th Streets. An existing building on the property, the Renton Family Practice Clinic/office, located at the northwest corner of South 5th Street and Williams, would be demolished. One single family residence, which may have been used as a medical laboratory by the medical clinic, and a garage will be demolished or moved from the site. An existing alley is located between Williams Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South. The following properties are being consolidated by means of a Lot Line Adjustment: 4XX Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2465 (vacant) 8,625 sf 0.20 A 415 Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2455 (vacant) 8,625 sf 0.20 A 419 Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2450 (garage) 5,750 sf 0.13 A 423-435 Williams Avenue S tax no. 723150 2430 (clinic/office, house) 23,000 sf 0.53 A The southeast corner of an existing single family house,which is also used for a commercial business, at 411 Williams Avenue South, is approximately 2.5 feet from the north property line of the proposed project site. ercrpt.doc City 4f Renton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis a Site Plan Approval Staff Reports • DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA • REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 3 of 10 A 34,200 sf parking garage would be located underground. It would provide parking for 113 vehicles. Five ADA accessible parking spaces would be available in the garage. Four stories of residential units, 88,800 sf, would be built, in two buildings, above the parking level. The two buildings would have forty-three units each. The maximum building height would be approximately 56 feet. Twenty-four of the eighty-six units would be two bedroom apartments, forty- six would be one bedroom units, and sixteen would be studio units. The minimum density in the CD Zone, for properties larger than 0.5 acre, is 25 dwelling units per net acre (du/a). The maximum density in the CD Zone is 100 dwelling units per net acre. An administrative approval would be available, but has not been requested by the applicant, for an increased density to a maximum of 150.du/a. The property size of 40,276 sf would be available for the density calculation because there are no sensitive areas to be deducted for the net area calculation. At eight-six units proposed, the density would be 93.02 du/a. This number is within the required range for the CD Zone. The project requires environmental review and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. The proposed project would also be subject to review under the Urban Center Design Overlay District Regulations. PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21 C.240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that may not be adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The property is level, or nearly so, with an isolated slope of between ten and thirteen percent in the northeast corner of the property. A geotechnical report, "Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 1999, was submitted by the applicant. The field exploration by the geotechnical engineers indicates that the site is generally underlain by loose, compressible soils. In their opinion, the project can be built as planned, provided the recommendations of the report are incorporated into the project design and construction, particularly as those recommendations pertain to: • the use of an augercast pile foundation system, • dewatering in the event that groundwater seepage occurs during excavation, and • open cut and shoring recommendations Therefore, a condition of approval shall be that the recommendations of the geotechnical report be followed by the applicant. ercrpt.doc City Of Renton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis a Site Plan Approval Staff Reports DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 4 of 10 The underground parking garage, to be constructed following excavation of approximately 12 feet, would require construction of the north wall approximately 7.5 feet from the property line. Excavation would also be required 5' into the alley from the west property line. Approximately 10,000 cubic yards of material will be removed from the site. Approximately ninety percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces at project completion. A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan would be required to be submitted and approved prior to construction permits. Mitigation Measures: The recommendations of the geotechnical report, "Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 1999, shall be incorporated into the project design and construction. Policy Nexus: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) RCW 43.21 C.240 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 the building. 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 with water during construction as needed. Odor impacts from construction equipment are unavoidable, but 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. No further site specific mitigation for the identified impacts from exhaust are required. Mitigation Measures: None required. Nexus: Not applicable 3. Water and Stormwater Impacts: There are no known surface water bodies or wetlands on the site. According to the geotechnical report (referenced above) heavy groundwater seepage was encountered at 12' to 13.5' below existing grade. Recommendations were made in the geotechnical report regarding control of subsurface water during construction. "Preliminary Drainage Report Dean-Sherman," by Barghausen Engineers, Inc., dated June 14, 2000, was submitted by the applicant. Because it would be demolished, the existing medial clinic/office and its associated parking area would no longer continue to discharge stormwater into the City of Renton stormwater system. The parking garage will utilize a series of floor drains and discharge collected water into the sanitary sewer system. Runoff from sidewalks and roof drains will not require water quality treatment prior to discharge into the City stormwater system. A new curb and gutter with catch basins would be constructed in the widened alley. Discharge will be conveyed via a new connection to the existing stormwater system. ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis ,e Site Plan Approval Staff Reports DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS -' L UA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 5 of 10 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. Policy Nexus: N/A 4. Plants Impacts: There are nine fir trees, two cedar trees, two pine trees, and three deciduous trees on the property. Shrubs, grass, and weeds cover the remaining unpaved areas of the site. All of the existing vegetation would be removed. The project would be landscaped following building construction. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. Policy Nexus: N/A 5. Transportation Impacts: The applicant submitted a transportation study, "Multi-family Development at Fifth and Williams— Renton, Traffic Impact Analysis," by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated July 19, 2000. This report was subsequently revised in a letter from Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc. dated December 11, 2000, that addresses potential impacts due to changes to the proposed project. The Levels of Service (LOS) for streets and intersections in the vicinity of the property are currently at levels considered to be "good." Additional traffic generated by the proposed development would not be anticipated to lower these levels below current LOS. It is estimated that the proposed 86-unit project would generate approximately 570 trips during the average weekday, 44 trips during the AM peak hour, and 56 trips during the PM peak hour. The medical clinic/office, however, has been estimated to generate approximately 170 trips per day. Because this facility will be demolished, the net number of trips generated on the property would be 400. 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 City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee (Ord. No. 4527) requires payment of$75.00 for each new average weekday trip generated by the project. For purposes of fee calculation, the estimated number of trips per unit in a "mid-rise building"would be 4.62, for a total of 397.32 new trips. Therefore the fee for the proposed project would be $29,799 (397.32 trips x $75.00). The applicant would need to pay the Transportation Mitigation Fee prior to building permits. Based on current Code requirements for structured parking in the CD Zone, two bedroom multi-family units require 1.6 parking spaces per unit, one bedroom and studio units require 1.2 spaces per unit. The proposed project would require 113 parking spaces, which are being provided in the parking garage. Mitigation Measures: 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, based on 4.62 average weekday trips per new multi-family unit. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to building permits. Nexus: Environmental (SEPA) Ordinance (Code Section 4-6); Transportation Mitigation Fee Resolution and Adopting Ordinance ercrpt.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis 'e Site Plan Approval Staff Reports DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 6 of 10 6. Fire Protection Impacts: The proposal would result in the construction of an 87-unit apartment building. 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 project 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 in the City is subject. to a Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee is calculated on a per unit basis. The current fee is $388.00 per unit. The total fee for this proposed project would be $33,368.00 (86 x$388). Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay the Fire Mitigation Fee equal to $388.00 per new multi-family unit. The Fire Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. Nexus: Fire Mitigation Fee Resolution and Adopting Ordinance; Environmental (SEPA) Ordinance (Code Section 4-6). 7. Parks and Recreation Impacts: It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future residents that would utilize existing City park and recreation facilities and programs. A City of Renton park, Burnett Linear Park, is located one block west of the project. Burnett Park has picnic facilities and children's play equipment. Tonkin Park, an urban "pocket park" is located on the next block to the north. Tonkin Park has a picnic table. The City has adopted a Parks Mitigation Fee of$354.51 per multi-family unit to mitigate potential impacts. The total estimated fee for the proposed project would be $30,487.86 (86 x$354.51). Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $354.51 per multi-family unit. The Parks Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. Nexus: Parks Mitigation Fee Resolution and Adopting Ordinance; Environmental (SEPA) Ordinance (Code Section 4-6). B. Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommend 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 15 day Comment and Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with a Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. ercrpt.doc City'of Renton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminid 'e Site Plan Approval Staff Reports DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS L UA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 7 of 10 C. Mitigation Measures 1. The recommendations of the geotechnical report, "Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington," by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated November 11, 1999, shall be incorporated into the project design and construction. 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 4.62 average weekday trips per multi- family unit. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is due prior to building permit. 3. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$388.00 per multi-family unit. The fee is due prior building permit. 4. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $354.51 per multi-family unit. The Parks Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to building permit. 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. This project is outside of the Aquifer Protection Zones. 2. There is an existing 8" sanitary sewer main in Williams Avenue S. 3. Parking garages shall require floor drains and shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be directed through floor drains that are installed in accordance with the UPC to an exterior oil/water separator. The separator shall be sized to meet a minimum 15-minute retention time for peak flows anticipated in the garage area, but in no case will be less than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of interceptor shall be as manufactured by Pipe Inc., Utility Vault Inc., or approved equal. 4. Due to the project being in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge (SDC) shall be at the current rate of$0.106 per square foot of property (40,276 sf x $0.106 = $4,269.26). The SDC will be collected as part of the construction permit. A redevelopment credit may apply. Plan Review—Water 1. There is an existing 4"water line in Williams Avenue S, and 8" lines in both S 4th and S 5th Streets. A 24"transmission line is located in Burnett Avenue S. 2. The derated fire flow in Williams Ave south is approximately 1200 gpm. 3. The static pressure is approximately 72 psi. 4. This site is located in the downtown 196 Pressure Zone. 5. There are two fire hydrants in the vicinity, four hydrants will be required for the project. 6. A 12-inch water main is to be installed in Williams fronting the property by the City of Renton. The developer's share for the project would be the cost of the new stub for fire sprinkler service and domestic service line and any additional hydrants needed for the project. 7. Due to the project location in the Center Downtown Zone, the System Development Charge shall be at the current rate of$0.154 per square foot of property. The fee has previously been partially paid, leaving a net square footage of 17,250 sf(17,250 sf x $0.154 = $2,656.50). The SDC will be collected ercrpt.doc City'of Renton P/B/PWDepartment Environmental Review Committee and Adminis ,e Site Plan Approval Staff Reports DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 8 of 10 as part of the construction permit. 8. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double detector check valve assembly for the fire sprinkler system. The applicant shall submit a copy of the mechanical plan showing location and installation, if backflow device is to be installed inside the building. 9. A domestic water meter backflow device is required when building height exceeds 30 feet, as has been proposed for the project. 10. The required irrigation system must have a state-approved backflow device installed. Plan Review -Stormwater 1. A storm drainage narrative and conceptual plan has been submitted and reviewed. It has been given preliminary approval. 2. Final storm drainage report and design shall comply with the King County Surface Water Design Manual, 1990 Edition. 3. 'No on-site detention is required. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of Record to the Public Works Inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities is required prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The Surface Water System Development Charge, at the rate of$0.183 per square foot of new impervious surface, is applicable to this project ($0.183 x 22,963=$4,202.23). The System Development Charge will be collected as part of the construction permit. 6. Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project. Plan Review—Street Improvements 1. Any substandard or damaged street improvements shall be replaced to City of Renton standards. 2. Alley design standards require a minimum of 20 feet of right-of-way, with 20 feet of pavement within the downtown area. An additional 5 foot dedication of alley right-of-way or access easement, the length of the property, is required to comply with City of Renton code. Plan Review—General 1. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. 2. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 3. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. 4. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. 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. 5. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. ercrpt.doc City'of Renton P/B/PW Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis a Site Plan Approval Staff Reports • DEAN SHERMANAPARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA A,ECF,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 9 of 10 6. Construction hours shall be limited from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday for utility construction activities. Any changes to work hours shall require approval in advance by the Development Services Division. Construction Services 1. A demolition permit is required. 2. The 1997 Uniform Building Code and 1999 NEC are the governing codes. 3. Elevator lobbies are required. 4. Inspections are required as per geotechnical engineering report. 5. Electrical wiring must be in conduit. Fire Prevention 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,750 gpm. 2. Four fire hydrants are required.. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 3. A looped water main is required. 4. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the structure. 5. An approved fire sprinkler and standpipe system shall be installed throughout the structure. Two standpipe outlets shall be provided on the west side of the building. 6. Separate plans and permit are required for the installation of the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Parks 1. All landscaping outside of property lines is to be maintained by the applicant. Planning 1. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 2. Construction easements obtained from abutting property owners may be necessary prior to construction 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. XX Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. ercrpt.doc Citt•of Renton P/B/P W Department Environmental Review Committee and Adminis, e Site Plan Approval Staff Reports , • DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF,LLA REPORT OFJANUARY23,2001 Page 10 of 10 Environmental Determination and Land Use Decision Appeal Process Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM February 12, 2001 (14 days from the date of publication). If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. • ercrpt • t • • • • a - . I.ei• • �� . 1 •a1 . 1 . 1 rtOSi3L.�OC! . 1f •w w � •TaI 1�'� �Op a�I ', . 0 o VIts.:1. 1 �` os 60 _ ON, a. �i2 �•_ • s [ /fW . 4. •• s 3%1 V - iz N/L'!N . . 4 1 :K.,. 9(.' ligig, �` w a 4 qli ..-ri3 • o'• aVlJ� ,�. rY"S .:.}3,••� • IIi ,: �� N M L., 'ti�iaD~A� ..Cry^^ ,e} 1 .ate,CO ® • -- — .` is ® �' ® '�' ,.ai • .. ar 'ssl as ege .' P 2 2. 3'AV , �.• .S773,1 . • _ : �� �f riALiar `"��' `' a,r ® 6 ---- ,YI® El • .80 ®® ® l1 -®® ` b �" 1 \ I1 etaf.;11 Mill.ii,:a.eikom :. ..i iv.4.. ,..," .1,...:„ . . ,.... . , ugai . .. .i.. . ulk..--.--i gi4 toiggigi • FEM. ffanginal0. -- 2' . - i,. :. . -• - SSNd/-77//1 - " '' .--, • . , ,OCELI.1-i.. 1 • . HMI:-- ' -' -7;3, tt- • ' * if ' R"Ma I 144 111,1U, L' k Ili mow ...... . A \ c ly MIS k Illr.1 1 MC II .r,0 .iii II1 '' . :and 1,_111 ra ,, FM z� § • . • 34.E 1' . al :".,., -;: . • 113N8n�: i n !� 1,, i�euing • ._I �l ), irtu;",- I g41 IV, ..- • • --,-.,q..,-7,,r1E6-73 - jglig11:0 , .,„0, .10 .• , E Ilir ...„......... .1 - - .7!.,...x/l`! . t .$ ]7��,( 11C'�i'iiii111 1[LN.d1 T,, a t Pjli 1i ':G �i ` �y ^ T•(T}';I,f - i.�[• '�` iQ9� pp,�L:7® �1'Y P`a' 1 - 3'. " f"2 ' �'t • I+1 f i V.Ei 1,. l` ' il S. - 3/I tY =• S6/w�Hl/fills' : O. 4 GIs! Sul®�, ' y ,11 ''E' Ed ®® ..L. • # ry M C,'w JF. •(� ! �.. ag ti' ,o L�l 3t L1 ag 1( ott, • • COS t �,- OO Qi - L _, .e • . •' ! 13:. ® .a�V�jp oD, 0 a . 1ih E oP'.: ,� _ ay._-ri,.!::J , `-ifs, es- or - z 'til' .c./....4'ffi' Mcgioisiaktvrt!.. 14-1 . L: 1146. 0iii:,--.2.-:m, . *-,::41:1-..i.F; .ffl - \ ..... - - N-I 1T 2 • - --- - - -- MITkUN AIdIYa..edpa...K...a SITE ANALYSIS BUILDING ANALYSIS . u PPS/MI.1OOP I1 • EXISTING CONDITIONS BBUILI - BUILD1N9 ARPA4 IMPERVIOUS ARP. IONT S.SIA WA PM. - • �y•�'yy'L= O.MN•wrt eela.Imaa-M�d �uuecW�f.aur raao36sR.f Om KOSOO TII.I P.•.V pIT.a-NwOr .el.'Ara .nw0SP M.�..�• .M V.Po.I Y W't lrl'r..IP ..r u..11 e....p.a .mlt v ; C. — tool ew 4n . ....-mr .,II.. rr ar sr rw rvr ur.e.�t ;-mee� ees o... tw I PROPOSED LOT COMP!tor rr.4i.on rm.s•T.r aaa.r pope,ha a.� ry ,.,,,r • • PARCINA REOUIRPMPNT.1 r.uur•MOO u T.ran., •MOO tP pdremaws m.m.II Pr ,•/4•••••...... wM re..Md.roarer. ra.M..,•IT. ""+" "+��" �."'�.'•" DEAN SHERMAN .a1 I/PPN COMMON APACP • I ANDSCAPINS M..r.Ov•r.lw••.. ear.TM i0w.w r-....a..ia.r yoga..O ev.Cs**a®.P..a. C;w .r l.aa.p tSI i.neL e.�tew or. • . .lobe.. 0lDAII2 .,,,uw r .a..I. • Dean Sherman.pta, n••...n....POr a ( . • Isl..Sr1a Rom'"'""'•' bth 8 Wlllleme,Renton MOMI®Ics I n.vemllTO VTOSCOtwrfloTo ,,, , _ww DSILLO VI •' I1.t[T tu11C MOS UT 00 uo Gmu 6.— :MWrf . ALLEY a• — . N01'28'25' 49.94' • DO'WIDEI • i4 I �� �,�.•.v�. ,�� �IAtIIIJir �II1' �I !�`i ,/ r('. 11 I�I1 'lam/+ ' L .�/I�. A�iI.�I 1 1((T(.' L� ` '' — L �j �! J _ 1 �. L � '..L1 , J! 1 vas Ii.. , i I I I , *► Y� _, , T... ,,, t�l,I I"rP� 1� I��Y' i '�I 1 I >� il.i "Y'II I 1 1• • 1 _ I// ISC I �/ �l i�e ,t ! r OP 4 CO'tlMtl/PA�Bd i I-�I I i ' - , I 1 1 I i OPEC!COMMON;SPAR i ' i I j i •s�_�t 1_,� ��� 6!. �� -fal-'t •i±'�!3 g'RiI • 1 1 =L I ]I I. • ._' L �C,l7y�I���;I_ :h "� i. � �. �''. rw�w. 'Fr414, �oil� %/ • Rai-/.. 1f � uS� K t.•t L_.x�.ltAt'ig "?� � 1:; ' 61011..i., NJ Z pp :7' i . 1- ....L.11... 111,' . .:,,. 4 ., Tirol %FP *T L0 .- , L- ftiII I UILDINGA' ` ' BUILDING'B'I� ....*'` ;�•_ TOP o43 UNITS• su' ! �17� TOP OP wxc.UoNeatt SOP ti i-T I' �i, 1;i?' N _-1PA6r1?&IEPW/APP 0 I.61 1 • A pi Oillii• ill a.. wirJ1141 `IJ • I1 I1:01)4,traaati`..';„,F-....thr,g.'-'_,I.i.,-;.,; , j�et ��. r.a .p tail±-'.co I • f. di) -. i� -r r+r II�r3v� s feweIt'HIiAu� (-!' I r Pl. _ '++�{y If -t .. ,t'1 r•T' III. _ .-. Jram Y 11_i e: �� 'e4«>_+•-_;4 I :Y.+4!4 - rT_-ice-_ _a��/w//w//w//��J-_I - a i�1 ------ - I 11'.i. 1! ir.j_111II �'-- .... !•'2il I� s i.,„ ,. jYiV7� I I uA _ I I._, q ' f T:Y'71 i+I'•.:I!n � ,, 1` � 1� �:�U//MMM►1 Al�I, rlr-.. 11Ir-;M.44•Kr4 u,�'`_L��_'1 1` -¢r�l-�•!�'-- - --�-- I I - r�J.'+��� ,�+r� �. �iiiue ��ICiw1tIM�•�%i' "'' sr.are..eA__ �_- �- rw�r,-���'!wwirwi—'�� ��_I- �l.—i� I�r rw� ii> �.��•-NII L-'/ 0 - - � + iM, step . t a _ _i ' 1g • ''� MI r�� " '' !���'�! slier '!a; Ilona a • i • NEW 111, MI.WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH _ ' 1 S01'29'4611 559.60' 142'ROADWAY/0V R.0.W.1 ^ • • SIa^• =_= OSITE PLAN r.m,a,e. , 2lINOW __ —4 A1.0 °" Q NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION comeorr,®UM..PC MIT=H.UN • I S.am 7inu% i • . I • . f DEAN SHERMAN i Dean Sherman Apts. u,ume • • 6th&Williams,Renton WIEMBSFOIS DSI LLO • • I ' • • I} la ,. 3.11 bib . .�I .. fai .. Mee f. .... ... .« n. ill we .> 1w. 11. •.., .,. I.« I in. I I II �. .. » „ iw: I '•/ems// L {{i I % v {{ I I ,.nwo" n w iw CV n - :m,ACc / se C p vPA5 N5°A UG! a I '— . •« p r j IT TV • n u u r .hi « 1/0 ., I. « j se in I. ,. „ 1117 .. u GIu s 11/ « u m i8141.1.SAW T . . • . r • . • . • . PARKING LEVEL I • 133 °PARKING LEVEL 1 ! y ea.. aw81n. • end•.r•o• St1/2,°° e1,NW»,a,n.uywwunxo • I _ y A2.o .� NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION • • • MITWUN i AMIM.eaO.,Ip.rEEA4nO.R • WO N SW•Aso Sm6•WA NINA • L • • • • DEAN SHERMAN MUM Dean Sherman Apts. • • 5th&Williams,Renton • DSI LLD • AREA AvuumA.Au .,. AM SMUT a R • ALLEY 110'WIDel • - .. ..�..EE�.jR�.. .. Ems..—.ARw�AR.—AR.w�ws71 25 349.94. _ - W. •AR�ARw� ARARARnw .AR�ARAR�.AR _ • _ ' i I I i 1 ARE -I • n ' -- - -T , -L ��, I L—� -- -- 1-- I '- •- __------ --- - I----- ----- u ,,,, at,...... ... I 1 ' I I i - I i ; I i I 1 1 I I�.: r,• -- -- I i i'Mae Mal=oft i '~ ' i ; , + ' -- - "-. ! ' ' i ; I l r*44 1RY.L • ; ; I I (��' warsmi. .. t1 --W 3 .n N mm D; F LI' IlAlll� rilligtil WIN Val iClr I -- ASP N n mom I i 'II" -Id�ill.+� 1]niOD am RAN BUILDING'A' ' i •- BUILDING'D' ---=—_. 4S uNus 7 I.-, • _ 1 MORON 2 MORON S RRDR0a11 1 RlOROOY ------------- ._7 4$UNITS WAIL L�- _�_� � �� �w:M f:w ii SAW ar.H »fir +,_;•� I +,nt-. . --- ,�:lcc+{:'r':r:W`.' .: SAW • }[� ....,,iit� .��.�.IR��t�LK'1,2.}•y��I. r`.Mzr-li'C'' I ox ' i i 1 — e. :,1 I iii;r.,-!tntrr•iI 'ar,'dE.i',i!FC. fiY' i +if "1'F{TU i,.4rr, i" ., �-a:'a. i i ! i li'{IT'h`s' '.h+l t 7 _ Fa ._ ___' • � � 7,: ' imamI (11 ib YJ >,a >b m. „. „Y Y • RYAS' „.f Max, 1t ar WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH 7% 7,i,i I Abw Mr ROAOWAr/SP 2.O.W1 TRAM • RESIDENTIAL _ LEVELS t_&2__ _ 43 ORESIDENTIAL LEVEL I - STREET LEVEL ..,•—m_ 8.1112219R1R100N_V�UMV • % ••I A2.1 ' "eO L— NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Cra,,,E,,,,,,,, ADM MITilUN . A^d�Ou 1^w.N rmm� . AY,. ' Ise.AIYW Wrr 'lo° • DEAN SHERMAN •• MIST: • • : Dean Sherman Apts. MAIM • 5th&Williams,Renton DSI LLO • • • I • . i • • inwr UM. em rnw ine w Ym. w .iu moxi—/S.CA mx rI b I 1nu w. 1 i L ,;, i a NDMOY 111DROOY I KNOW 1.l OM 1 UDR= 1 1 MORON I OROIID011 I MUGU l'MOM wi i,,, . r, 1 . , ; /11010 SUMO 4 I --___--__— I m I • BUILDING'A':a��s BUILDING D UNITS i — --_-- I ,� c vi 191� rr I i11J!OInt11 I NOON 1MIMI MII= 1 ROOM a RDROOY NIURI I R19ROOY 1 MIIOOY a MUM i __----' 1 I 81.9.1 I C C C C 8YY NW _ i _ iipliflk --' .111.001421./ WILLIAM AVUNUO SOUTH • RESIDENTIAL_ LEVELS 384—____ O RESIDENTIAL LEVELS 3 & 4 —"— —' - - 013 ,. 99•101.01 — �_ ./1AC000 ---- OiIi 04l.1Oi\C 0IxAaQWO A2.2 DE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION rr®,m,ri,t • ----------- M 1 T If U N AIL- tam ASulanWn - Caen_ — --- -4. I■ '''�- ■■I a!■■I=• ■ ! =:�_1iIiu !J .. v — ' p -■ -mall_" I -1 I I_:■ 3� '_.� E1 '410 K II ' ■Reerv.eevee, _.1■�=- _ ■■I _.■I■I - =. 1■!=_ -- - -.■I■I_ -- IIM _. aQG.Il2lL—.-.. .__. _ _..- _ _ - _ _ - W noon ----m-- .-.,, .. ..ZED--. _� . _- _ -.__..___..._.-_.._._.- Y ! ]cjII II1 1 4E111111 E:■I■Ri -_l■I■ 1■ 0=1•111 all '�_ mil it I ^ DEAN SHEflMAN RlBID LlYGL! 0-- Ii� Init DEA-® _ __'_ •_- W M lt,,1l '- r�,�----•----------•--'--- ' �I � 1 .11� Dean Sherman Apts. `\ -7I-"'-I"`':' mane ru.rtn uzenme ouuoe I.e!L I MP 4.... '`ULM SIX - _ I 6th 8 VWltame,Renton ' 2gum wm o:r rpm=Pmt -- ea+w,%.------ ----... ------........ ..------------ -� DSI LLC QALLEY (WEST) ELEVATION yr.ra• , i _ kl siR{er ri „_-r—=!-E1 .11 •r - --' �.+L " 'r_.a'r._ -- couua i = -_milt—i -= iil i— 1111 . ■ m r�♦1_-_ _ ■ _-_ �._L� I .r=...,, • GOPGNN _. ,r ( •L■Ili:=_.OI - _■ iliE __= -1 _ ;1® _ - 474 _-- I�■ 3 EMI■:I . I.■II®EI.CI®r IMF-Sir ^.- ■ i . ■ !"i Ia • — I � I■ ■ � . 1 ` c _Er i1-. �' a -® = ab1 -*.+�_�_ .-.. � ( �i■II I=-■��■=■� / • `■i=��l���= Y■i I■ -lr i ce 1 ■i ire; IF r 11� kr,,,, � 1III�II• illy!> H=i'►�/ 11■i1=1 '3 1 �• II - ■r11i111®1-� r I =■II'i1 iir. I 3 ■■ ■ - 1'- r I it �(6 1rBIl91 1 ) - `�► � NAllI_® R ■i. Iil ! .�-1i '.‘1,2 '� i �i■ ! _fir l 11 ' .'''' . Ih1��� A '=% NI = II -I V 10, �.; . , - _ -- _ ---- -- - - — ----- —uim®_i, — =�—ems ---- ..._ ,- emory.me.e mn.ero.er II �^ _-- — I I sm+o oa II I —12/1e40 en wwivr s 4.. - ---.... ®WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH (EAST) ELEVATION �-= ue•.ro' J J ........ J. Ai 3 Y sew —. ,\ 43 rw..._...a:. `' aa,,,emmo. ,wae.u�ew L-n- -. �. ,&,...imislrin . .' .� .�. =� CIS .� r _____ 1 1iNS:=-; ALLCT - _ :1(.._ ______1_--------la moms - il T itVENUE —. I -1 BDDiX MIME = h '.. 1 I §__ —®_■ �dNik. '( - = ors' —_ : } r t I �-- ri rir� •� I 5:; 1 1]I ■ - - o=rE MOW .. _ • - MUM.70 - as .{° - d:'..:Rrl■ir ®rgni .unn.cram ■ - ■ �—ra m H ,ti -. EXT RIOR ELEVATIQNS I. Z1■ 1.. 1■ �l■ 'fe11h r.. nem^n - 1ee • _�� =1=1! I ` M VIM MO MT ..i rtrum[. IIIIJ^f ®m-e la 4 . ,�..TO .. • I ®®aye - — auue �LP�.� Wove ..__.__--im .vm.®.m __ 77 I s_uow,w�enohl[m,n SIMASODw 5TH STREET ELEVATION — --_—— — -- —.. . • O •. • - E . -___---------------------------- ---- ' O Ve••rat. 4 A5.0 -_._ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ev.rmaa>a..,,.,a • c SE 1/4 SEC110N 18 AND SW V4 SECTION Tl,TWP.23 N,ROE,5 E,WM. !1 i s I STREET LEVEL • �„ y PRELIMINARY GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN `Ir"S°'11 1 1 -- -- a WADY WO a + '"` mD«12. ua� i. . WILLIA $ AVnNUE te ®tf ® - I • ,° — W r_ _ ,E . 1111.11411100 J ,I . -i-• —1�` r—f� '�murax t i..— _.4 rrr 1[1-Ir t :, °-�mra. °wo 'L0:,,,,,:; W ° I a.L� Ftl. u'i , [0 I n°uws," »1 et rO:Oi„„--"Ifs-- 0.6- - sak",nysaut121.11.........11 .,�- I Ir�n�I -f , a 1_T �sarf cc r u. . r'' �."�3��I A 2 wa°O]w -ma w 91 nuc 'h°I I f r) I °'S' lw Y nw» ° r I � r:6' 7►b 's i y cm t i n 1 .• -- .,. !�e'S! T--y R o='��°°" ` R!_i •r��' 1 m ,'"',__. fr -ft� �; .' 1 `° ' Q # :._ � © "- „m; J�� �i/I/1�ilklYl■0�1■Yflr� k aoaun 0111/ i_ ,,,,-1 ?I■■■■■1s■■AIN�7�iY.) gtT. C I. u 7 r'�9 ���� RAP r • T ill W I I I ' j. I BLDG B I I ___ 1 �.`-.-POW°x J ,'!!ii1 : ' rr.uua _d 1 1 I .• BLDG A4�mv it • UQig F'i , I I Pi "� L1. �ramtoxwum .`I �: I' LItie 1 t. -- wac�m,p IID. ,ILe.w7 ._.■t�■l�� ;,ROS- me, I ` 6 I M t _ _ I d!d!I^^ll 1. Ia a e"v Vii IMAM I _ !"� MMIk �° i I _ traxuarae nanrnalrsuiwstaalaaormnlnunuuwrifeni Ina:,1 � " 'a�"i����i.1` u�1t ■ ;+• �� rM - p t4 3 f ern �i' #nL�nIH :iik°9n! u°,PI",",:, I"f, nGt�fans4dtiwilia ,islh;, xkr,reaa� unm ynLaluid;yr h Ipw:air:.:,,f.,iailnnn'nt7;�annrmGauhrc,imm�2,xfe7d'niiriii: ., C aHlll N,1M11N�411iE1f 4!sll!I'�Viflh!11i!�ri(li{{r!!E1�1���1�1�lUil NllyW�f�l,#E�'t N�krpkhCMIL F� Ad91 uNl�Iil l 111,IiIfGll'h i{'tIIS,!I!'I'�elf!1'I'I hI�HBif;li f '-„9;h�a�::fi I ..a. tv I I _... .0 _.--- Ai - — ...-----...... , 1 FIl41 ,61:11ilt9 , XMI I.11141 -n4n49,P'_EIT.1,Nr21 II ;ltl� zi lla1 Irr- :n.'' N�? f 1- #Tmi CP t t nvc, PS I- caai"a�vmc, i ALLEY r m t. -a1� I I I I K3b° ]z°" `pI wn sae CAM MIN I 1 'v_ 12; 1 1 TO a MOM m K Moo I At i II ti I I a I10 I TI C- a5`(6 6Q Vic- 1 rim_ ' �..c::�t--T/L- Hill I I C7� rT j��� I 'j `,��LIIGIn�r//ft l r , i-- = 7 ll r r r"r v " ^�.r 1. ,>'I�r�, .C� �� c $I r,� LEGEND SHEET INDEX v� � � � 4 >,iosoaw I l� 1w7sok Rowe FDA wMMD1� � �17J���p o m�il[ 2 w 7 PRELIMS WIT PLR �g.1@L6=6.mFd P7o WEE..+G I ,■in:`,J('� _® wan sal sow awe -M•r�—rapa�� twt rmawla SOS Fun Na.v �+j� �[w• eI/�1� _ , COe m.u. 31 —o—a:awn= ,a°n s r m o LOT ,amine v COCKS..w Is'r� � F=';i#'11 ^ A � Nos u moc e a 1v Q Sr w�MAY T��Ell_' K ® O ��°a an.s oxmc mw am s O KB moa LI�'M■IY G�.�E� ]LL1IA1�R1._ P` ��• ® y „� to.caaa LEGAL DESCRIPTION G 4�7. �u1��'��U�� e eer m •. gm.°a7 os ,m.oel vs 4� [f:'-� isrl// 4 Akill :� LOTS 11 rNNmNI)aVT wrOSIwI TOK. lummi.7 m rur MmMFe a we.¢I w ru,i wee rout x wow-oi,us-as ua-o.l ow ICS A Rxnlrt Pp —7:::i omrmommeeu ]S e1 FRO oounn�Wluern,: iEu TWO O.a SS SI�nID.nfuEl¢¢M°D[i[miG'I°¢xMmm � ,' . EMEE SCOT M VEST S 1¢r w SO LO15 CORM RR ((1�W WMR A"FA MKT TO M6VM ikAHl<!Om Si'MfSXQD I 11°r'� Ilia IUe4dS m Oma Kama/IIiOG RCM. iM1lq OVNef IWM.I 450 U3S 111.X M OOSRiO r«amm LO] _ .`. MEMECEMIZ e TM IC �� mS SIMS MT MOM TORKE.m Y,f„OLLWIY MOW IS KRIMO r gum(mXONAIaE DC IMO Mai NOS.ua MOM AS CRY OF RENTON �v! ��j m C !y.1.2'.+• i DEnrtnwePOr op weuo WORKS ARi4 V MO ISM AvisalE II ORE„: Q `r PRELNANARY GRADING AND g Q �i „ ses ; ""«u seaw 0114(/ ��';"_ �y STORM DRAINAGE PLAN m .-1 d a • RAM M°anrw Emsr�•m,i.�a �I�ule rno Ewa mum •s n,a l'' 1' rm® ILO s ,m 4 °u, e+' (xtxr.a 7em2 `t,� «a 0• ........ mow y r As�x°la ^„w•— W Itaajaai eia r.] o e«aR .®. ' wA U, .01 m 1 1: SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,TM..23 N.ROE.5 E,WA �-;I°°��;),°,_;� �,i I __ STREET LEVEL Q <<<=m���° I r n >° 0LIA %AVENUE S, • i ® r iv 0o 4 ,aoxm •_ + .._ .-- _- T. • � ..x , , NM w > I �1 � BnW7 lilt: 17 SSW 00 'Dxa ; ' • r t e¢�uo t — ° ° {1 �a • ° — _°a ° _0 I ° _piI �:� V I / °— -rt— - .B_'). staw: aa r7 t•— � tM _ r t .3:,.... _,,,,,__H_ , , _,.7_,-7=____ ligii* I: L itiZI 3 •. �11116'I'�.XilAitiitw vR--� o'e mil vw �^ c Nip taw Nmu "' ate it .MEIdrrf11d�l I I �, -I r1I. ' ' 1 �,IB � NM�.n:d .Mi��Nr�uw3Ilaasr ._ i R:)M"• v�� RaRBr yF I , _..F . _ ilt.. ..,•G ion =I•ImE =1 F' I tarn.'mg 1 al Oa 1 LU W I I :� I SLDOB I I i_S: BLDOA iA°Nww°wn ■ II. 'cI ¢ i I I - :� :II I "Y,,:� I d I I r y 1 ' iv , 19 • I i© Mi I, iE r.' I i.Px ' f'+': p� ' j W r vad at• ' i I I D ' a 1 1 __ :::::. I f ' :;a• :,,.• I • .. j [� I I srasoo n 1 dam*;I [� 1 1 L"a; ■ p as a I 71 @ y^ __ 9 m'_IVIpNIIIl0u7HG.�.�:iIIL41Y8i IPfiB 17I141Nn1.xJ W'01171nI1P .191NMPHIIdN'fIT',%iBftlhfi�l�'I 1IPIll I, ■ ■ � i�,.�• t•w°wYl„ x d I Iq R• I 9 fm14.1.;Agi Illl@MINI ,/vgij,v,,, IfI kuiItl1114h�.µ 1 1 •t911RL:,,,55FiNVL S ' i - - --- 1EI41Fdnl I_..1::. �I" F5(n�°y I IIII rd( rN uWlll!i4 sal I•.I m I I n f j I u�JNIINN191__Ir6�lt< YIENN�IIII'INN a19 I1111NF;INNIIlll�ieienfna�ul 111 6 III hjIIIIk118NFINIPFNL;�Niiltifll t� i �irn1Vb� y .• WW..I NN,HI,:II6t NgN� u µ J1•Iµifl s BwaR,at "9 ,i1M _I....._....---• -- IY_.I N9 11,,..iN eIN1111I@N�I!I!I�!IIN!�Igllt,l r11 c�ylp';,:�;'�'R'u�:Nlltl�t.l nll'fat a,.Iriµrl'NI NN- 1-wx,_Ir+ @ id* � I I ALLEY I s,,,ii H ' C fq j I Tv I I •1 t ? I 5 I I I a I a i lo I i I I I I I Mill @ }I 9¢'1 f 1 , v vv I a I vi �l��l a I vl 1 I ! t I I i I IVOL.. C� I I I f : � . } 1 I I I I I I I I a g 5a I I I I I I C_-` '"'/ '—' ° °.ao . �- SVRNETT AVENUE 8.• • 4 Rm O IBO.L ND U.•WIN•N,AM WW2•/NO U II.CUC,IL MII al1P 1.La exu m'°""'DD'"'"',arsc•.r.a,a.... . t•"A r,wc 1 I s Dq =e vm use RmgW{CI Ww soMvs a rAss sme or•wue A191UL swlu - - _ ® MOW Naas= ---m k Waal o°s,te o°Nmc OM)mna R>oD+1. �' t r m vYR =o noo°'woe° ®rm,n°rua MOW m ROM. CRY OF RENiON Wfil RYp NR 1.0 fiTNACIVT Or PUBLb WOHICB ® evwBs o•B olmti,Oa MPAx,,o a Rmum ON xn Mawrt. li•,s•r SO.ut •'• ....Novi r w xDo O m am vm,eox ' 6Hali a >a ' m•o•.)Rx IRfy ME x,DRar. .. w moI•c r.m ,aR c Li.=Dwal OEM VOA/MOT AND t 0) rla\v,IVI ova Rsut �i�'2 i " vsjwe i-)Nt „IulAu:.•Fy W PLAN Z roman ®BIINP.�RI3lII PDDY xRN Po°f UOtt\IDR IDIK Z Q (roc)cm.lumw+. PM Axo na[OARINpT cax¢nox �••. I Coma u vow ='' •tmD,•MnIIR Anw4nRbR CO 6 71 .� R xn,Rc wt -... u:I®xr ma•.0 ®,m,)•mIo°u..I¢,oI•mr vuu.RrrA))Arm ro)r tmr mR vu\[Aro wcmw 9'�r�iio�`6`� e)m AVIMUC aovnl S 4YI'l� Y `�` m 1_tn'�0° - ••�.. r"j y I �'t " I•I.,,.m nuwn ,ooa ml oms+c.nw su+vi ',rou ca°` mn.u ant `rr, F� ..� sue_ .°.I,.+wm ,...r•L_ La ... \ mRw J ®Bmw Dcx¢nD Will SUM A 616m MI BMW.•A,Ix SRAtt. (N!)SSII% •D R,ID+ M,,.2 a 3_-, V (xmlas,-e)m rAx m • • ~ a SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,TWP.23 N,R .5 E,WM I 1 III r UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL awn, , cn ridi =ate ® a -•__••__y • ' E mi+m m". . •_-.in.��,...e.d�w1 f.:Y. „�nn�L �^,,,�����„�..hw.� AP/ xre • WILLIAMS E�UE S. ® 1_ ° , —`;--0— °— --rr e.n» l�uxl Wnr V CLh r - ' q - M ' true so,. 11^ ' - �• lllfi ��l� x I -- d-. nwl I rrvcF-—,-mc) I rcuc>— I IDn nc�l-s-�? N�p$ t "•,,,•-,, d .—�•n f+.-:.•..,.. : �.. PT1rL .1LZr^� n n ma• II`� �� ' ' �jx.s.uv a .e 0-7 `1 Iifr- — ii„li ' 'fliiiPliaTi , ,,,,,, .......4 ___ . • , . ,,, aript.,71...,,,,_._ 1 i 1 • 1 lj--r i A <,, —I --/ i I p .aa(sailVol r> - 1 1- + R cc I a.,.r" I, .r.. �, i A j r•.I IC I W I e IIf_ 9 [r.z I F, 2v ;o I 19 mom;' ! "i "I � .1 w I I^ rlg I , lI I• nnnl IhII II N Q I�;„ I = e. U� y i I a �a I - - 1 .ni_ii l v�f„ ""IInr'n.; . � I ~ 6 R I P A I I I nlooaao naaaxk`s A . i -I41-i- 01tl h , I 2 �` ��I ¢ t a I I 'L 1 -f JId 4 -ZJ --L_— L.— , � .sxndxr d I e..°, 1ae.. .—, .f , I I , I' m nonx ,: n,°crm,[ iii I j j- !.I s 11 t - �/ -- 'm"!!h'gliir iPA7�:,rinln18iA1P'ull 11 HIS)rW,BIIgNIIIttNHlfllllfglftlgP IItl.711.'it&'ggmgN�OJII I4rldd{fiI1a,WLllfr _- 'r1 4 11 3 - .-. r,l �'�rdl����y ''��I{i1.w`l .T��bll�ll.i pq�dFf'�id�,ll c 5!Ll�f':Yk,rrzln(d!a�d'�;�;illtlll`ifl!I.i q IW- '"I. INMRIflh9AlllddLgllFY,I:FY,PIIIIIui1111111UIiiTC (i...-��,,nAYTO�.hgSk i.. •r �f F' 7-- I p. V4ktlMd.FddiGtc I dF'rt4N@lilfldilil ClldildlYddi lNlilil113d 2u �h rrbG7thLdd�ddfdliNMduJl dlvudNdNIIdIY IM3 adll!a�ill o7 II�II • I s II s - _ ...... ...__.....— — RIIn a u�dTUp!! l9 hfilNdd3"n.19 dr!d1'IN 191111111d11;1Nalidlmy°� u�j='•^I,phlhl TO } • ALLEY P if!! f I j i I I I I -__e1 I I I j I t x d I ., j = I 5 I 5 I I R I o ,u , I j j54d9 I ��_�i vi it �_ I {ep 11 ` G I I I I I I T� n., .-.r- -n I ON ! Y i l I 1 V`V"V,V j`/i h l_ V I I `/,V I I I. I. 4 i I I I I r j I � s ,„. - L,i- I I I I - ! j -- -- - ----; - i t ' BURRNETT AVENUE S. .- T 1 �— BANRARY SEWER KEYNOTE& -- —--- A, — ----m_nra2°=°� -- I w nna.xw,rat aurxnrt sass ruema axrw roc.ro Duce nor.nx a•ouene xw we u sm.. z+M1:. 1 orswrnxxZ,,,OFrRENNTON wow,cra rs '® CAST OOP MUTT es MT VW COMM. ,,pc a."xwy> sm its'0 '� Q�GHA`@ ■ ®ramrz onx°u nn.mm a•wmuu°euwaoc POT m,.e em°ro omrwo a•sa sea,a n,ox, d°/"� '�� enuwc a oe°m f PRELMINARY BANRARY BEWER PLAN O [ Q OQSm.S SC[SrJ101 m ImYel alBl BE Ibro. aamon PII.V10 a6CIW1at,._CnxWl NYp. I! e 7 1a)611-aeM _N1'J''i.. tiw m ('Jrocn IX s,muw 4 '• UPDEFiORWND PARKPIO LFVEI. ,,rrt`t/ II O.home f°°rbmpb o .33 ®vw n MOM maxlwr MI rtts "M10u.n�irp'�n�coaassnx 10 xn strum Nov olsosw[(a mnU ?rieisi•�,'c a rnm,awre noun, • M• y —°�moo••• liLo° 'S aroeai t�F uxr,u MOO .°f>,�a.x°ra`P avan r.0"s solm xmrms no. W - g I (aas)rs+sma x.xwe a,,... V (� (aa)rsl-nea na ... 0 3 m • • _ ALTA / ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY fl P4. American land 71Ue Association/American congress on Sure/Mg and YaPPN9 : rr§!I,,i'vI �,. and ' 1 ', National Society of Professional Surveyors • �a-ee..! HOUR !alaee 8.8.1123 1,1^1.P' '1. • irR •p roc• II +v 19]li L 'ao•. Aw a p 6� YV\ •E 17 s �'! ° °I yyy'� � ' a' 1;1. ,i14T 'LIq/,114II;�1'1 i '� -----------"---- ;m A I judR My,�N, ! LEGAL DESCRIPTION J {{{ i1' 17 SIRIS 11 TMOWN 17 N•OLOOT 27 Of TOWN M ROOM M on5 o TO PUT MOOR.°a WU.1 of •.I_, , �'t1- '1�• �1I�). ,5• IN!.PILE 1.a R.CONY..'A9YWIOk $ occur IM•a[ST s rrYr or'sAo non ammo FOR run wT9DSED In can IIaOROED OVER • • L 1 lll•Jlr tic4_._P o 0 I i rD + 1 • • o Iorocmoc AM.Dlww Awaoxa. 5I� < -rT G. 5 I:1'0. 1'p I i wwul r.no• • . h ,11 1,d+ • .' ��. `/c n`A j�� !y!'`t•mf' j SURVEYOR'S NOTES t - Is W I------------------r \ IRE i r '` '' �'I'I � I.Two'Mr MSN Wm TIRE 03 Fin 6 AN 1nmYP auxtt I A¢ownn[o M . 1f AA/ I s I. 'CASVYJoial fPECf1G1eNS wR f.1al9R•C SUR,1iY07 AS ApOPIm ED Ta NDRGN WO D L.A (7y�. I�I jI , IC! • I NNE ASS0.1w N0 ANEACM CONDR6a ON SURVEY.AND WPPING M IN7- �i _- N 'w �V r.• ry fir{ • }�I ••s•• �-- I1c+l�!!�r'BI' I <r we wim • D. es DOM*WITS• DO.Uaumo nWARDOONTS PRa� xmnu wo damn D 7,1`.' 1 I,.a.Vv1n 11 t �71y• afj.•t'1 L 1lir ly,ll�f' 115 01T 0L 000 a 1W 1Na/a1. 1aD POST.Of GM Of Im11ON SURVEY COM11 IZ I MJa-.L n N ,ivir} ,per „1nDI 3c41 .P)1'l MILL al�inr s w la N COMMONOS arr CRY a x m ROD.SAM�NTROL�a+ 1c01.71120 N6o.DIn • r-'N 14 : • • c If F,If IPr'I'1 11.1.11...a11 FLEE . > J ' '; Ili ,IK{�i��'t'l 11-•..•r•! LEGEND t....2.11.112 nsaxwnox ncvx oN Tws Iw Ma unr omR.nm Pao¢nMr MOWN ImA. J • P 'i V 1 11 n /0-�1•( exu1.0111 1011am 3<o%u i1°-o All,Pm Tiros NAP.s•wawwsw 5 r• 15 d• + -,,i.,I,11% .imq Prk+ sh?S'r`�RaNa W F ••, lIl'lLy • YAI 1 lI 1, r, COMM.EMMUS,MC.OS CODUCIID NO Rocs cerr TILL SEARCH NOR IS eDaalu SEN IA ;C;;:;IV BaIEUDe !! J;p 1 : , TANa.w.1w oa.nT CONSULTING paNOM.M. W AM TITIC 1E9.o MECUM T.SURnm PROVO.OTHER US G I �. 14••,., a E• 1 i • I O e.M ErGI DPD __.' `°°I'a MAN THOSE SAO.m ON T1. D DISCLOSED rN 116 ROPUNDEO FIRST NORM AN CO1RIrIwn. l,ffr, 1 11 1 o ® 2=waEDv.v Im DARMOSW CONSULT 0 Na HAS RNED Y ON FIRST, wfs EED CO W f-------- I l?�+ o II• I +�.'I I o:mIPE aerMSEMu11016•P THE mt s COMMON PREPARE im AND_- . O. . Q r11.t t Q sPw.0 ro[.N _ ,- CONSULT.o+mIMS.Na WN1N6 ME SMMUM.AND 0 ID THEREFORE O 1AZZ� N ¢ .:&r .. IIIIII,I;I,.'1f'7�I.I'`I ar I w� .OSro ME LN) -,W. awl.- OGMm1 a.PROPERTY MU -men'a sown TUT f 0223 a MRO). J Z. j . � - a'1c"''j `! E F`+ f Ii w +�r iS ul'1N1Yt 1li I ii Nm'°a N®1¢OW WAAL -ILO 17.2 1TOU'o"uw1s . s N10MarA 601.1118 " L c1.3 e "UNITED AO m""t.1waa :OR nurr U. ' -L 3p m I 'I jj] A ! 1♦A00.1a TMMOF.AS STIO.M a TIC WIVLT. Ur 6 /• Yt,I '.1 sl A��Rth!t iLl!'I�1 � � 1i``� Lnl}i t�'A u I_ ® mDr.¢aNa. O O I 1 A 1 1 R •`\ 1 mIm¢1R // 7.wADDIV•ICATION•wrm9dNs MC AS 1/w9JSm Ay SCM IMUS) mos PROPem1'ENE TO ovum CO p I�"I v t A. s,i!I�I�,,I(�'j,a�yTty� I j!1j��i' •j.' \. % ( ) N > itnI')l I it9lt �� - Ifj LS !a CORNERS�r,➢aSITWE NPWm. ulals5 9WM orlawM1Z i YYY4 19f LI111 y sux6l'NY111d!mom,MONY O.PROPERTY met.WaLaOS.co NnDLn •i r $I ItL i����'JcT a +I ; r' 1 .. sMCPnuLr sNo.N a.ILL sump naTmo. o W , IL' )ai It!1 3i,41I r If 7r N• I D.sm0m pJ,rll i 1�11I!,, i M,IC T '• 1jf' 1 JJ r MOM sTN19 Na Sa11 CIS7aam16 a170 00 110 ME As TMn/RC a.n oN TNe Fa m • i S�'"1'4IlPI r L� )E-VIl 1.cif 4 I I1:r tit• 4 GPaap amw RPM.OF NM SITE NOT IYmQD ARE ALSO USED FOR PN1aw WM. r-*_-__-___-__-__-__ 1 t NJ�4•�u!17dEE��''MMi1, j° 1 LL`IU,!a!'D•• •- 1a ammLS mlml THAN Two 5579 PO non oc Trm me ONLY nmE MLR.1nM EwvrC[a ai LY'" 1 .� TMER NSTALL..WOLF AT.Dxgam SURFACE ARE Sa lI MECCA 1.0.10 Po 11ICIrr U.00. • 7 e{ qq fi �y skfA��l r lµ��! /IV++sa nw{ x t Ii117P 1!jy 9I ' '�imm'1MA0 ms ''wr_ eras w �ioriNonl. sG' i¢MA.M.NOM RECORDS. �u m i .•••�• }r)"rDE 14�,I }I I R!a` 1 P h 71�n �K'fgSr' ��l lI ITS{ +fIISI}S wLncMSIM Nemn Mm oeTeelm oasavac rnNa aP i i N,�@NA4 ,IritN 1f�1�III y (��lh lljppl) ��,�1��sli� +1t)I �r nm'l i j .Lusam s<Dua D>.wm-N.ms.aawa.on s�Rau ox ra a -•` S l;4• pY T N 1 I 1$ J� 14 Ili I/1' l III ` PgEPpmT. ¢ :, ,ii '•014�11 .J YI Ilr ll'L•k;•4 iiR" v 'T Y.1,•11�/I1EN, 71 I II i Z 12 Tna samM1 xa4snm.•Aae1c ne9CA.L.nlaT4aNr cwnNlm6 oasmm w a.•Ioeu 1, ] _• ' ••aO°.c b1D ,, i4,y; t;l,!,s.-1 E II•,11 I. 'r I n/qI I'1L•1 F�ya!)'-19�; r-1 1--`'I+ 7 W iDM. NL SUmLY COIRROL Im As-NNW WAS RECOVERED. E011 THIS PxwO.T N aRD001 01 f a �1 I Iv,,II Ifik.h1)lint [}, .'{ lrP:z, �4iVi1 f„tins) 5 v, i I 1 wM¢j > L@ r-__-__-__ T Iw 111 illl, I .,L irr� L I.IItfo. 41 N•-•,, ! I - Pt-•,MI r Q TA ALL OIS A ROCESD N2mr0 (U.S.SORRY90r41). E F tJl 131W11,:l Ar'V�'I'P!fliulh�+I1 al,i>u!II),i`�'ItIHpL�)�yyr�'L�I 11 1 i _ 11 rT,h t, 1 FJ 4,,,,,"h J i�A'I I 1 L 'j •JI a. 1YFAWRC IS N,�Oww 'RalnoieL"19 SCTYtiN THE NoµNoxerwwrAT1•'�ax am m ---- -"- • 1Il$) (ICI LII O/ry�(! I t-k lk II !.1TI 11 S F 4 i s THESAM MAR N Of T1L R110 MET.1 OR nL.01 HE03 SPOONED N MC>ADON AS 1. • n ;j fIr 1 I 11 Ir I !i1 !1 1I Alt lain T !I�aII . • p T tit !I }! I' 11. (1 1!�!4 E ri.I�I rP itYj PI Y �I III yt! �' I Q `P0."`AoarNLa YFASURWO[EUPYaR ICMS sal riu.ILaED AT AN N.05.GsaN¢.m1YN as y } ii V ' VM OF ME GTE w TIOS sUMY. 1 14 4 9 i I A 1 1I q l 1i i' �i•flIglitiIt+Al 4 I r.1if! I ... ' J TAMS SURVEY DD SURLY WAS EPARTD,Wrat111t a 'I�115 USE 091 OF WS 00�wMM TO OBEY°G CA USE 113 HERM • Al �4ji x ItiIg.R ,5'Fp�tl 1 i�Ti�Ih�2��� p� 1 P� I �I 4l t 1 JTO .ai'... 1 .,l.r• j41 y+Y lI}� ' jd I P 1I ......1 j _ UT MIND tie IT M TM PROMO.,wm sMS ISCI NImE UN. 11.2 .i ° Itn �L ,L'!'Y� �3 I • " ur •• I Ir e �, y�FA Dlr��b1 S . EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS • tP'I 1 I ram A1m1vr1 NO.Sw1oP-u ----_-�lL l -- I i�i,�l;j,I I 1 E MOT MLCMI[TO 11.4170 EH ALTA D09V7 r�1 ,,G ' I'f� RPaWO 7¢m117 P7acflee CUI.lo I,, ,„ ,I. Tw3 PRa,01Y IS SUL¢R TO THE 10G3 NOS 00552 OF A P.160190 ra®ZN1 OVER . p f111. .c�`ii;,�{y moem R.IDea twrm xu0 SS g I- i I $ .�•� , A14.1 1 j�{�rI.1 FII7'fj'1 I • 1t.NOT ARUM.TO M.7.11 ON MTA MOOT. 1\` r.. r i r' „w 3llvv I{4•I • .DELETED er suPwcafNN ROOM. m £ ll KK n I .p. v Y ,'^'licit • 1.AN.a.1l Il 1185 PROPERTY 6 SUPER ro nit TDe1i NO monlDlm K A FaG1L5AE Ibi N.Rm1am AS n '--le-- - -•--- d+ s'I DrR R)e -. RECORDED OR.RECORD.NO.Pwavnoz RECORDS or MU m1mn.N.aeaTorL(wTm NuD G1 1� !! E - INI II�Ia °t' i -' gf85346 e+r-- - - -- I �til _-.- -_. �� -----'------ t r'1 x� I .Der wEm u.lws P1DPOTr Is 9+aacr TO THE IMPS ADO maws a•MOM v SM.As R1DOaDID UNDER .,-� 1 l lih',/ 1• REDMOND D.1 1 70700CSURVEY)1S.RECORDS of DO COUNTY,91010 CH)1110*.N TM . °'°• G .-11;111 p1� vI}I/A)! ^-� S/+++tll lliy� u eIe•¢.-uN .SURVEYOR'S CERRFlGTON �(�'t� D•�'ry4. \1 k.'� j =D� r 4 I7i 1 i E•NC.G1i /u� 4 � c. ,,(II' MP FM To s0.ue No MST MOO TmE Na IPICE COMM 'I Trte,ji7l JD it 1+ I I 141.IyNHI RG DI•,b..�O([I- P I �lY �y Y 11E {I'f 4i V S' ftI►fS MS TS 10 COO°r TNV OAS WP CR PUT MD T¢AMU a TOtDI D O MVD 11a¢MOE(1)N '•? M 1 rh,)1,1'lll,Ji kl S 4'1�1 aN },I AI} P , ! _ , MCOIDMCE NM SOO. 6...O 0.2.R 001102 3 SNt AM MSII WD NILE •s 1, u '' �s1 1hi11TS,1(I!i"AI t'il. II 1 !Y� I P1 a)IIf I?• 9xEW AOPmr ESMamm No NOM m ALTA No M.N fw7•NOS MU=IMO - 3 bz, - -. - - _ - ! '�� 1"4tIF I I�i '�'+ r'I"'ul ihl� T V"r(L th e'riu r m 0-11 N°fo°�mA1xT1NAw a�pN Nr�ToTNE AavAlrr sruaw-pr_�srI.e MwmN. GTE Tn11)Of.LP.62720. '• O • 1 -2-.6}2.,min,-Nor. J lw.....I.er a vl I r LFxf S¢��!._L 3 .tTi L,Y,le�,>. 7„ ! I M..r.' ,eT44Afw b V �s ` V .ern ..elite.. ILO _ n . k . anr,, r G II11II11''At• /III11 • F,1 HAL OF MI __ __ __ -- .M®ONO wm ••' -(oa1¢vo titaunAsscr.Pu \ lo��' •OCrrd'lq.� IR I�Ao • I n g .y a•A w SElal�•mx w ern -•79 • •• • M1tl1UN ANddirbe0.dp....W•so .Mr NttelYWwq 4, - I i i Ima,wA f„m flmRf1,•.uern , a pas.o'r'i NL OP t0 PI. , • , . . rof • 1 . .ow m m ti 6 mt1., • ,..4 ._ NIKkallirdi er Y� J. ,tt{1.111� . sti isso; ,r1 _._ am I �' IY; 1. .r 'C�1�' M� 1. 1 —� � i ; I i I __`_ J i_ I. 'I I i L'^Ja.l_w 111111111111' � li '- l j�—f-- . ] : . �L 4111.6111111111.10.0.1.111,I . _.�.. '�/ i , 7. I • tii4 / 1„01 r: 1 r m M9 ,1 rr 1•,,e, 1 r �i'. �._ 1 ! „�. � / � / uri _ rr„' �... u1 Y l� ( _ r:l:' lei` II".+�iMMMM.:,,r:, 1y I_ • '�Will e DEAN SHERMAN • Oil lig r � 1 .. - _ i ,n �'—I ,FORTPDean Sherman A ts. j _ LOOMS . 1 6th&WIIllame,Renton p ��OR 1 - �I �1 +, Dsl LLD 117,01 . �`�a I `ramJ�I ``IIII+ III d +�/J • ,.L.1 4 14 • • .....lilt ill cig- . " . • . , .:1;:f 4 I P. -i Hi.lc{ .i.,t , ,tl__411. _-__— 1= .. _ - • �ii�:',�, I+ -Ian lit _ _ ;:. t .. 11w ..,n i' I .:,,, .. • ir,...._ ,tA , li,,i innnr.iiii t,:,rur., .,. -I ,.I• ,. , , , , 1 ,1,i. I. 11,,,oili:•,.i-a: 1ill•11,'111.T,L.. ��1 1,,,1.,1,,..,,,"I Vim'- I I ', 1 1 lets,.:!.!,,,...,,. �I •'f I III 1� ' 1 ' , •—:.: — . , , _— �I „ ill h';. I�,;,.. ., Il ili pl i. ' � ; ;I I I, LJ..i!, 11 n•hl,'N; � , _ �,_ ---� , roe r- 1.�. ; � • fwrrww�':.r ' 1—_- I �P _— . rt - � � .�, _�I �IYII I ME'�r� I �I 1•I�MtiI1 1'1I IIW�F��H � tII wirAIMIMEiI9 i ww4tw.1.rM 1. ran L:w141 _ r«rT«NwwtwM.T,rrrw wwerz �aafw.it�riuw �•1wlw rs't Mwrw w--- .. _--E._ . 11/11A SIMPLY. 0 SPLY.AM VIA., CO e .. ---- • PLANT SCHEDULE I .. I shoi _ REY OTT BOTANICAL NAVE COWAN WE f@ COMMON SEAMS REMUfSAW TREES ®O 6.14 • • M Awe l.b,.n bM,aQ O..PU Ilsoio fed 0,0 as.1,..1 FO _ V I Per Oda.* W.N•Fr f-f Pt 0♦.0 m Awn " ce Corplo.,owla rnfpmr wrt.m Nt,y.a S e,e oe.,.n, CO Crd..0NNdl. -wrnm xu+f►m Er.rid 0 t 0 o tlw, �I' SG Meg*prodllwa Wanda Ormallscs • LC .,fa 1Vw.•• .Yqv.�Ow* • is-,f It 0\0 a.dam PI. 4rNr tiwpd OWN f,0•M •..� U. 1 • rpib IPIdosofssf r . rTS'> d�. A `Ir. rvwm NI4I. amoom um.,nnw,9e,.Am...• w.u.n floor}.., fd. f..e af..s oaro a'e1" µ ' fe.remV.nano. IW.nv, feria...r 11os oto �e.os..4 p'dd Ba.m.eeo,Nrfdla • r e"1r' f'^'1 S +Onn a LANDSCAPE PLAN OROa1DCOVCf I VISES .rots Lorne Crowson a.e,r. ,opt M.N��VpA...w,e. On.. I ad h.irya,./ a pm zosso r�i� CONT.NNI P ANTINOIMENNIA1! Oarbsa WOW.Yd .p..ird OOW Ilea Mdti. 1 ad w fc1f,.01 ozgolOa War. HlOmpl.Wide Cp W:.' IX • f'N!@J • IION.f,A.wlpen ILO...• Fnfn, • I 1 p 1 of Nv,0m 4eo.E.. roily,.Mr 1 pd . �V h.r.rNa mind. 001.1.,OraY I pd IOWA Ottbld0 Cannon Sop. .'pars N f�a odd.. f�.N..d.w�. I gal ' L1.1 "Rah NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION a,,,o,r,m„nA,i,W �a I E3 .. 7 T23N'R5E E 1/2 • ;;:. - cam" RM-I Q,� a-to -- E IA R-10 ^. _ CA IL(P) ' •.„, • 3-rd P . - -- , . , I-3r I-L= � -�I.- ,t ::ort • \ 1 I Way NR-8 . N-CO IC pr • çA �1---1111521: �ly I mtm .:� :I --1 ..ibl& • - bin( tI 11111 R-: - LD I;-j aj �] 1 I I I II2JI into 1,,, ,. _. _,_., ..--...---- \.,\ ai -A oO CD(P) y ----- RM- .gyp. ;LI . � I -- RM,-U y . _____ ... CD cm _ _C�- ' S 2nd St. S 2nd - n z eel �_ _ CD - � cD - CD CD CD _ o CA S 3rd St.- c iVill --- -- 71_ -�-- N _.„ I n [Dm rcpI Ird CI En I-- CD [cr. • _ — -- �\ �'-\\ co ep CD 0 CD CD CD ' ;'---' e ___ ,, ,, _._ - CD -..- . C A C-D _s t CD CD = CD --- CD C l• _ -- - /� CD x�: CD;n- - ad, ,I,Lt _z_ _ __T cpa5i C __ Ai. + / m _OCR - I _NI-1—00 + +•+ + + + + + + �' pe .� _I + + + + + + + + + + G I _t� + + + + + + + + rai _ _, r �-;� cap + _ _ + + + m 1 4- -- plc I re'— •�'C C 0 +++++++ ++,+ + .;.- , . c+,,,.,. f +++.++.+++ ++++ 1 + + + + + + + + + (\ .• . +,+++++++++++.+++++ + + + + + + + + + + + PA— + + +I + + + + + l+ + +� G3 . 19T23N R5E E1/2 P-�1I«;T i3 °� T ° ZONING z..oNIiil6-- 141300 t® F3 ®� P/B/PW TECHNICAL SERVICES • �,y . 1v •:• '; :. 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 • { **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R0100372 Amount : 240 . 51 01/18/01 11 : 59 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: SE RENTON# 1053 Init : JEJ Project #: LUA00-168 Type : LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 723150-2455 Site Address : 415 WILLIAMS AV S Total Fees : 1, 740 . 51 This Payment 240 . 51 Total ALL Pmts : 1, 740 . 51 Balance: . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 . 345 . 81 . 00 . 0012 Lot Line Adjustment 225 . 00 000 . 05 . 519 . 90 .42 . 1 Postage 15 . 51 • tufit.. 00 — /6. -tr,\04,12c Iiz • • a ----NZ. 1 t%Wm.Sham �=Y 'rL Co. [o 2100124th AM ME. I ,A N dr"r.• si r Suite 100 �`, ,� � • :, u. : Bellevue,WA 93005 5'�'" Elizabeth Higgins City of Renton Municipal Building, 6th Floor 1055 S. Grady Renton, WA 98055 saJgv G t •%.3 {[{[[ [sl[��[s[[l: [[Istsesll,s[Isl:[!Is[[isi[�[issj[�[[[ii[; r' RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON JAN 1 5 2001 MEMORANDUM CITY OFTILITTY RENTON DATE: January 15, 2001 TO: Sonja Fesser, Property Services (\JOT IAGKJ FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Development/Planning, x7382 I,,GS V b mdL SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments I Ait^) Lot Line Adjustment, File No. L A00-168, S -A, ECF, LLA Attached is the most recent version of the above-referenced lot line adjustment. If all Property Services concerns have been addressed and you are now able to recommend recording of the mylar, please initial this memo below.and return to me as soon as possible. However, if you have outstanding concerns or require additional information in order to recommend recording (re)recording, please let me know. Thank you. Property Services approval: tjAce-ri�� Q,. tnn60 ofi9/ol am Date cc: Yellow File 1-I4:71- ' AzP1=Rov06.L 160 6Ulei .ECT Tez, 'T'i-t>= cl-t .1C1= aff 71-4E u LVQ 1-1.1-4711E5—19 ©1-1 4.11.. 1=3.6..W11.- , ' off "cam-o85 `tt� 00-1 r8 . CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: October 11, 2000 TO: Neil Watts, Plan Review FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Development/Planning, x7382 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Lot Line Adjustment, File No. LUA00-085, SA-A, ECF, LLA Attached is the most recent version of the above-referenced lot line adjustment. If required improvements have been installed and/or deferred and any other Plan Review concerns have been addressed and you are able to recommend recording of this lot line adjustment, please initial this memo below and return to me as soon as possible. However, if you have outstanding concerns or require additional information in order to recommend recording, please send a written summary at your earliest convenience. Thank you. No o4j_L .ow►s o Yec,eva vvtq . Plan Review approval: la_ Na Date cc: Yellow File CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: January 15, 2001 TO: Gail Reed, Airport Manager FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, (425)430-7382 COPY: Jennifer Henning, File SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA00-168, SA-A, ECF Thank you for your "green file" comments on the above referenced proposed project. Please respond, as soon as possible, to the following: The map provided with the comments has the project indicated in the wrong location. I am returning it to you herewith with the correct project location marked. Please provide a corrected map with your revised comments for the project yellow file. You have marked both "minor impacts" and "major impacts" — Please clarify as to the nature and severity of the impacts anticipated. I will convey your comments regarding noise impacts and compatibility to the applicant, but your use of the term "should" indicates these studies are not required. Please advise me if this is incorrect. The building height is proposed at a maximum of 56'. Please advise me if there are airport-related height restrictions "other than the 179' above sea level Horizontal Surface." Or does your Code-related comment refer to non-airport height restrictions? Thank you for your assistance. MEMO to GReed.doc\ i City of Remora Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:f}IrpptIr COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 . APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story, 86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage, and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 X X Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources I Preservation Airport Environment ' 10,000 Feet (I" — 14,000 Feet The proposed site is located slightly east of the extended centerline of the Airport Runway. A review should be made to determine any noise impacts from the operation of aircraft in flight upon the intended use of the structure. A determination should be made as to the compatibility of the proposed use with the operation of the airport. B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS The proposed site should be reviewed to determine any height restrictions other than the 179' above sea level Horizontal Surface. We have reviewed this ..plication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas w e additional�.rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature: Director or Authorized Represents a UuK� Date 1 devapp Rev.10/93 - -nr..r.. JII .a . © Irfl }I ....,, '.1 i n S .n.,.., :01) '-' JF� R t T. 11 7 R / �� I Iglij.-4 11 . 1 ..-, v rvl tin M fk MIr� ' , ... ...„ ,,,, • t mla ' ,c1 — ziv UU _ '.� vMtf .-v oihil 1 ■vili 4C19 II CI) 1it� \,, M rk�ii rnna i IL 6111 �,,,4 Y a •cn a 1�I -� 1 ! !m: i aal .4F- ll -a - �i; t 1 r Z ,..ity-mot r� J ailigik ., " �1 ail 9 f � y a f ���' 'L / �/ �` 1-IDI ![ •��"-' by ` I] a] oa I ,ill Ir r 1-p � L ��/ ,_ � i D] D] q `! 1 \- 0'i ■Yeadli J iii iS.t\ valas>t...--4._. -ADv D q n r15...7__4-._-.._ R iR R-i11 iriff.41- 3- PljoAt'iE-•rM il„i 1.Iil1._g.g1,1l4i:EL D,A -,I r. - wr . .�f,,ram® 1-J 4 av y Iy 1.i- AIlle1o\,1, .2 -� °� toa 3z�� �11�®i � i r.. V,. " ON D+a sl 31/ 4i / Je 1.t1,i,,il.- _)lw_iiOK\Lk' (. n — H = loot •■ J® Lau-7[ ,,,' 2 1 --71....:i•41) [1]: t,1:44.4 ., 'IL- 7----71W .rail .11 Am et-Y n r.x31 I-. ®� p:. — „,,,i i3" go ' R.,-e„„....F.,, _ N-. Ire ,,REF ' t '� D] 1! �. n1.r flMa\ �_. Oi[i� �° o�:�� . II".� f :m _ I o 0li0OO tilIF.-v �-7i n7x t , Q �W��yihlno. LSOi nu �� � �:— D Li Era mum uu �: iCID jQ hw � �■ w-vaill_p_T11111,,,..i.54..ti� mil'v.-4 -a/ Ak , Igi._!XlialMjalitwu_ ir I-I ' aL ‘.E'r") iiit,,,,,, , At illi.iNtf 110 Iblasucic. . ' ii pi !sarittcli ":_-..C,_,it. 'Obi Djal V.,,,fri . -.."-::::ia:-.:•;_:-E-EF:E.:::-.::::',SEEEEEE:::::- :::--1E.K: 641%W7f0h4.) . N : 1111111.11 fel ,,... .1 141u 6 1110,1,.!HI \\ -7--:::..::-S':_:;::::E:::_::.-.K::::::-':::::::::E:E:_U_:_:':E::::::::__ --:::::::::::____N\‘_, 44.):&) (10 E q 11112.-. li-L,YA la i t1t; . _ ir .., rut &L.- liamil L,‘ ,o, ---. L , : rfi -::::_EE:_-__:_-_:_-_:_-_:_-_.: .....:.-__-:_f__-_:_-_:::-__E__E__E__E__Ea E::_is-:_:-:......-:....:.-a::::-.,;,-4.4:___ _:::::::::_::::::::::::_,__,.._::__ i jr)4.4..:, 4) w- a i -. 1 , Apr. kr9 .'" j , ittD. ar it • �! ====_===-=========_=- =========__� '-_=_=;__-_____- _ l\ x -_ *rn.--\--:likilk.--i: :,-,,...."- -,71,61p,:cw mi.t.-___.7,r-=__k,, N.,,__:E=3:3:3-Ef_EKTEEEEEEEEFEEEEEF.E.:KI.E:E:E.:E.:E::::E:E:-::::-::::::::::::::::::_::_:_--::::::_:::::_:E±:_::::-::::::::::::Es-___E:=K::::::::: C IA e ' - '-6 ' 3 L.X S .'• M ""."I I 41 I L RR OEIE 13 F.:7":i:::::-::::: ::17777:7-7:-.7.1:-.:::"Fr:"Fr::".:'.:-•:::::'-:-:::::: ::-.:,-:,-..%:-.:..:-.7..:-:-.7-11:-.:-.7.-:„:-.1.:..:,-i 9#,.. i--:.ffip,"Tritilt _..--t.r 4 ,f/lj i 3.411tair, ::::_11:7-:::::::::3:::_:::_:]:_:-_:::_::"7._::::::.:_717.-:::_:-:_:E_::-_-5.._::: tol)-":::::::::::::"_--7.-7.-.7-:-:-.7-.7-7.-.7-.7-_-_-_-_,_:_:..:_: [I 1 \,,liLfl !' �" ;li _____=_=_r ' =—_-____ =_:__ - N Lii. itairxi1. = '"4J NCI MA a \ AKA -.�f =. �/A ::=-S:J CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: January 15, 2001 TO: Sonja Fesser, Property Services FROM: Elizabeth Higgins, Development/Planning, x7382 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Lot Line Adjustment, File No. LUA00-168, SA-A, ECF, LLA Attached is the most recent version of the above-referenced lot line adjustment. If all Property Services concerns have been addressed and you are now able to recommend recording of the mylar, please initial this memo below and return to me as soon as possible. However, if you have outstanding concerns or require additional information in order to recommend recording (re)recording, please let me know. Thank you. Property Services approval: Name Date cc: Yellow File MITHUN TRANSMITTAL To: City of Renton Date: January iz,200r Project No.: 99161,gr Attn:Elizabeth Higgins Municipal Building,6th Floor r055 S.Grady Renton,Washington 98055 - From: 'Steven McDonald cc: file -Re: Lot Line Combination/ Site Plan Approval-Renton Project No.LUAoo-168, SA-A,ECF We are sending you the following: x Attached Under separate cover Other For your: x Information Review&comment As requested-- Elizabeth, Here are the documents for the lot line adjustment revised per the cities comments. I have induded.(4)copies fo your use. e call ' y ave any questions. Steven McDonald 1 CITY OP MOON R C IVE - JAN 11 2001 BUILDING DIVISION Mithun Pier 56, r20r Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle,WA 98r0r TEL(206) 623-3344 FAX(206) 623-7005 www.mithun.com _ _ .___ _ _ ____ 't 4:•Erosion Control: Install and maintain temporary erosion control measures for all stockpiled or disturbed areas.The -- '-Temporary Erosion Control Measures must be Installed and maintained throughout the duration of the project. • 5. Geotechnicai Engineering:Applicant shall follow the recommendations contained In the geotechnical engineering i Ul,Y \ report. c� Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Senior Planner,Development"• `P, Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 08055,by 5:00 PM on January 11,2001.If you have questions • about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record end receive additional notification by mail,contact the Planner. PERSONS • D OF RECORD FOR THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL FOR THIS SITE.DEAN SHERMAN NOTICE OF APPLICATION APARTMENTS LUA00-085S WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE MADE PARTIES F RECORD FOR THIS ROPOSED • AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- cPoRmOmJEenCtTs wAiN DautLatRcCyEmeaTpEN orecdA TIdO NwOFeP nOEC Tof ACIdOeN nA onny tohnie,,,,rho joecstsbmits written SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS-M) • CONTACT PERSON: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP,Senior Planner,(425)430.7382 • -- DATE: December 28,2000 LANDDATE: USE NUMBER: PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION LUA00-Ilia,SA-A,ECF APPLICATION NAME: Dean Sherman Apartments - PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review fora four. story,86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings,113 parking spaces in an • underground parking garage,and common open space.An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site.The property is within the Center Downtown(CD)Zone.Environmental Review will be required. 1 yy�1 �.(,,��a���II y 1,I!Iy�r1 PROJECT LOCATION: 415-427 Williams Avenue South 1 ��1w•« ,wka re E,••' �-.��RI tA}Iy(a��I■'• 51111R lM■r. sUSV. ,dLE �.' 41., OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M):As the Lead Agency.the City of t{Ifi A-0 2'6. ijk 4 ail I •• lilr"�ab"FIL. •MENNE \ Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts ere urdikely to result from the proposed project Therefore, 4 • 'sjsa. • r0 : �ni�l'1 '' � (�' ;�f • aONS-Ms permtled antler,,,RC W 43.21C.110,the c 5 o(Renlon is using the Optional NO A process to give notice Nat a ' T8/U 6%. r�y1�"a}�gFI��`' ti t! F' commons likely to be issued.Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated intoesingla �•� r� ��'a'f:asr • ��t period There will be no comment period fallowing the issuance of the Threshold Oelermmation of Non- ltipl f 8� '' 11n `�' ymly / -A . Significance Mitigated(ONS-M).A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M —�sine ! • •Yill UR MU PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 19,2000 l�II a 'fr�f-L�'S�I�11W1�b��1 <, 'I 5 N ®' is ® . t,e a t 11[Clli • W, '(�uw�:' 5 7`. �•NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 28,2000 •1� �. J �,�, �(�(, ,Ei i *”V.qq',1�}�411'Irl rt1 sail �r W Miy PermtslReview Re 7 •1 -�f-„ J�yQ `� ,NC lI J ,sail ow,. re''• Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Administrative Ste Plan Review 7 .l17_ - 7�' �� W 1`-'.1.<IQL';"„c ir.}Atl's{ter .. .�i�!!:SiQ,'ra�' Q•`x �\ l Q: I Other Permits which may be required ConslNpion permits,building permits ST. '' •@ 0e Tonkln�Perkk@lparks` •- '4TH I;,@ Requested Studies: Traffic Slutly,Geotechmcal8tudy.Slormwater Drainage Report '10 g, { ryag q•'� p- h�s'�' 'A. R 2 oIe Clo'"2 APSer •i.'e.n@. Location where apMicanon may :Q• C�'(K ,' •8 n -E^ a®• rl be reviewed: PlanningiBuiiding/Public Works Division,Development Services Deparlmenl,City I 11"11 '-1P � 4„ e I' •123,1J 18 .• ,,tm ! IB n 2 Hall,Sixth Floor,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 • 6 --•.�`A.�,.�b 's' ~ Rfia 1 ••c,. -11•,A--dam td hl '.® n.if,, .a • MA...Volga•• iv r CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: J' rt s•, .7 f tl.,� - • ,') y r,r'•1190 02., • 4Ip! •1' •I�, Analytical process / • �a � i��my.. "' p� I�.1 a + tN •,,Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations.or In '^/'._ IMP!!� 7. ,j�' .7 b�`' • 1 0 • , their absence,comprehensive plan potcles.RCW 36.708.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA)include 1C' ,, Y' Q• ! y• r 7 a statement of the preliminary determination of a projects consistency with Inc type of land use,level of development, a p)11A.pt;•, U • •� !' ::1 IfS ®•J, !ea D t•e. v. infrastructure,and character of development R one has been made at the kme of nonce.At a minimum,every NOA shall L, t"'v i-1'' � . ,® 1 \ ` v1 I t 97 7R include a determination of the project's consistency with the coning.comprehensive plan and development regulations. �'-b 21N '''Q �'t -NIL®•W' • '� NGe' r..r b eu7 ^B]iix10 �{ .11 yl1 as e Q Land Use: ':J1iJ. .�le..,I• LA1+'a .I F ifp tiY•7 T a 4 •.I.•' 5rN ... a I. —�-- 5I • 6 Environmental Documents that NIA•I y.T META .yam,Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental Checklist k '�•��- � @�Y.Iy +:u+" 8 f _.a'.., 'i® , aN1 1' a e ':Z..,,11hIn�`i•�,:r����I"�, 8rl-:a. I r 2.. Development Regulatlens '�Iaa�I ,� lUsed For Project Mitigation: City of Renton Municipal Code • �'! ale- ale 'a)L4l Ie x !, .1. --'e to d%f�EM: •'Y tit . __ IS Proposed Minganon Mseeurea: •®' to I ;'. II9 MA. E•® a��,l�1I q 4 8 el, 0.IA r. .g 1:•••• ..b (21 4:75®F y R ,I• 01 ,Tull•' ••a.• .6.®, : 1t. s :,c 1. Fire Mitigation Fee:Fire Mitigation Fee is$388.00 per new multi-amI •(�, ',sin I •rt.• y —� •'® Sim, •® y Y,''• r '- f ly residential unit. \+ 6 W ,�'g1i11• ®I�f•'=�; t. t' 2. Parks Mitigation Fee:Parks Mitigator Fee is$354.51 per new multi-family residential unM1 l: h' =,s ; •.®;8 D©. :Est.,6. 'ii' @ 3. Transportation Mitigation Fee:Transportation Mitigation Fee is$75.00 {®• II' a i II clkl iL'-�a�Iliy• 9 R®. ,1 j • � .Mutations are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Manual,Fifth Edition],tlady Trip Imp I '-. 4u P 4 17 D..0.h.4�`Q AIL,I�L1. tW."=1.e skill U J'k, A'�v\1'II=+.Lf'es caemaml _—'1I tl��I. �•'„•'e' �.110 .. ,,,".'-TTTjjJhhk'• rapz.•' V 9 Sin _ • --.___ ---.__--__'- - _ — — ._ r "+I _tI R+tiJ B—�'I'g'I`�. •ea:apll� 4:' rsr/r.�P'•.Ft gDt _. \IEIGH6ORHOO.D DETAIL MAP WiliF 7.200• CERTIFICATION I, A-m}c4/ee pp)g f.,,Bail , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on . . z , zoo • Signed: /12, _— ATleEST: Subcribed and ern before me,a Nortary Public,in and for the State of - Washington residing in g-A on the /D day o . �.®(j/ MARILYN KAMCHEFF r ..- NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF WASHINGTON MARILYN KAMCHEFF COMMISSION EXPIRES MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29'03 JUNE 29, 2003 ,i• w �i .w i \ t,w.\w•}:b> "•.wP}id...ti., ihd ,S y O `d w11S.�•QwhF.•r+ �wG: i • 4 . y � � w di G :24 •-0•i..h i` /.} G w}a n.w�..�+ {%:..r .t•a a . • ..:r”CL.NVw4b\b{FNtr.w:.PL§ mo.b'�Xw.1.idh{iw{:41:\PdrVG r .`dh1a1,•%%,,.4"I Af ..W i4 •wh+p'4.wb� : w+ •n.P.. {p 1 I.�Sa.i.Z.;y{wrsth, } {:::T3i•wi• S� ti•w•Sw•w•. <' GGwY �->.itg� wr'...: •leryw✓+,TR/J=•aw�%}� d++....r.•%•DP,�i•'{•d ti9r:pn•t{� 1d�}r.v P{�y.lw;:.: Mf.di.14:VI• �P� 9enc�} \ � y'•4a{n .i.•r+ww'}-0n4w.{+h.!r•CGd!nZ{w.dw+1PP.}v s + bG `A• F.§.•�Y.: K14 4rwrtzt.z}•i,• a +tiOO;ia'v1 . )G•:...S �Siwp1.:'.:.1+b.�Z• 3A+n.fvr}1,:iin{wyi>v ww:� .Y!•{OG�•M }�GY QGp.4,h"11 \rv7w}Al�9dd} whr•{• 'ia"v a}h }drw..w. .5aw.A{vPwwd ndP O�h ,{aryt. av,i b•••{•'M11Pw}\+•P CgeYF } AN}•w:Yr.YnewKbr�r wwa . � 4 • F + w .N`nyp • � n d d �:1%1,amr anm W y • i "?r 41, P %P _ '..±F b4..�{ •, h:vw4.. � S++�b4w • � � " jki+ {•;b a vPK{wn.r.•.YM:CbvvS aGd•w.W.: ••' {ttl tFP•r•S•Mr•RhVw;vpid wS b yV "1:rwaS•4.ti.- hr { TV/i t beV Itat+Itgt4 14::.� •4:1t ! :yw q}.•aG,v.M.vZ:=S b' w'vC•.41:;• Gbw b+�..pb Ib1 ".y)}XwPwryX irr:'} : •yvw y..r..n. • + Mv.Y •..w.w .P.-.•• •F Pa{ w•vv rw*• :ro . •• tii.�.ti w ` j ' PROJECT NAME: 6 _` Sk'* /W`°'--rl APPLICATION NO: LU W. 00 - I e 8 j SA- - A , EC . 1 . . 4 ' 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 • • ' i.• ,' ASSESSOR'S PARCEL _ NUMBER 1 OHNEMUS CHRISTOPHER J 500 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON • 98055 723150-1520-04 . 2 ROMANO RAUL R 604 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98066 I723160-1525-09 3 BOONE SQUIRE DANIEL 512 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1530-02 4 CASTELLANO GEORGE G&AMY E/HW 514 WILLIAMS AVE S • RENTON 98055 723150-1535-07 • 5 NALDER BRUCE 723150-1540-00 6 GAVIN MARK D 617 WELLS AVE S . RENTON 98065 723150-1696-04 • ' 7 SHREVE JERRY D • 515 WELLS AVE S • RENTON 98055 723150-1600-07 8 JOHNSON DOUGLAS&JENNIFER 507 WELLS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1605-02 9 SWANSON ETHEL 605 WELLS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1610-05 • 10 SMITH ROBERT C&.IRIS L 819 S 5TH ST RENTON . 98066 723150-1615-00 ' • 13. HOLT CURTIS G JR . 601 WELLS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1616-09 12 ' DE LANCEY ROBERT C&BEVERLY A 809 S 4TH ST RENTON 98055 723150-1620-03 13 . WALLER JUDITH I 410 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1625-08 14 JASSNY DAVID+CAMILLE+RAPHAE WILLIAMS AVE S 723150-1635-06 15 JASSNY DAVID+CAMILLE+RAPHAE 723150-1640-09-000 16 JASSNY DAVID+CAMILLE+RAPHAE 723150-1640-09-001 17 JASSNY DAVID+CAMILLE+RAPHAE 723150-1640-09-002 16 NIEMI THEODORE L&NANCY M 420 WILLIAMS AVE S • RENTON 98055 723150-1645-04 19 WILSON BEN A&KIMBERLI K 424 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1650-06 20 MORAN ROBERT R • 428 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1655-01 21 PALERMO NELSON D&RHODA R 432 WILLIAMS AVES RENTON 98055 723150-1660-04 22 HEADRIcK CHARLES R&MARY C • 438 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 •723150-1665-09 23 KIRKMAN MAGUERITE ' ' 431 WELLS AVE S RENTON'• : 98055 723150-1670-02 24 ROGERS REBECCA L 427 WELLS AVE S • RENTON 98055 723160-1675-07 25 MORAN ROBERT R 425 WELLS AVE S• RENTON . 98055 723150-1680-00 26 ROWE NEETA B 421 WELLS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1685-05 27 MENTAL HEALTH HOUSING FOUND 419 WELLS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-1690-08 28 SOOY JESSE JAMES 417 WELLS AVE S RENTON 98066 723150-1695.03 29 ' RAPHAEL ROBERT B&JENNIFER N/TC 415 WELLS AVE S RENTON - 98065 723150-1700-06 . 30 RAHAEL ROBERT ETAL WELLS AVE S • 723150-1706-00 31 SERVICE LINEN SUPPLY INC 801 HOUSER WAY 723150-1720-02 32 LOSH FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP/PT 339 WELLS AVE S RENTON • 98055 723150-1735-05 33 LOSH FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP/PT WELLS AVE S 723150-1740-08 34 KELSON ViIESLEY R/HW 332 BURNETT-AVE S RENTON •98055 723150-2300-08 35 DOBSON ELEANOR M TRUST 340 BURNETT AVE S S RENTON 98065 723150-2320-04 36 BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE OPERATING 723160-2325-09 37 ERICKSON ALICE REIMAN ' 323 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98056 723150-2330-02 38 HALSEN RON&ROSEMARY/HW 707-S4TH ST RENTON 98055 723150-2380-01 _• 39 _SENS GENE P.&HUONG T 406 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98066 723150-2385-06 40 SENS GENE P&HUONG T 410 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98065• 723150-2387-04 41 FRANK R VAISE POST 1263 416 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-2390-09 42 WALBURN JOHN A JR 426 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-2405-02 --. ,V,,,,.-R ovnw vv 6a Kuivll K 428 BURNETT AVE S • ' RENTON 98055 • 723150-2410-05 44 OLSON BERT&NITAIHW 430 BURNETT AVE S - • 4s GILLIGAN K A I.' ON 98055 723150.2415-00 434 BURNETT AVE S I-_:__'ON 98055 723150-2420-03 46 SEE JOHN HAYDEN 438 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-2425-08 47 STONELL RICK&LISA • 411 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-2466-08 ' 46 DOWNS GARY J&EVELYN M/HW 407 WILLIAMS AVE S •• 49 MCCORMICK TIMOTHY J&KIMBERUSE 711 S 4TH ST RENTON 98055 723150-2475-07 RENTON 98055 723150-2480-00 ' • so CARING NENA F&IRENE F • 500 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-2485-05 t Si. HILDERMAN MIKE 504 BURNETT AVE S ' RENTON 98055 723150-2490-08 52 • GALT THOMAS S&CHERYL 510 BURNETT AVE S RENTON, 98055 723150-2495.03 53. GRIFFIN DAWN N ' 514 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 723150 2500-06 34 HALVERSON KRISTINE L ' 518 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 723150-2605-01 - • • ss ST ANDREWS BLDG CORP " .WILLIAMS AVE S •56 ST ANDREWS BLDG CORP - WILLIAMS AVE S 723150-2560-03 57 ST ANDREWS BLDG CORP 723150-2570.01 __ WILLIAMS AVE S 723150-2575-06 ` se ST ANDREWS BLDG CORP •• 505 WILLIAMS AVE S RENTON 98055 723150.2580-09 • 59 CITY OF RENTON WILLIAMS AVE S so HOLT FON C&JACC4UELYN 505 BURNETT AVE S 723150-2585-04 61 HOLT MARK L&JOYCE E RENTON 98055 783930-0110-03 501 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 783930-0120-01 62 "•PRINCHETTA DAVID ' 421 BURNETT AVE S • •RENTON 98055 783930-0125-06 • 63 WHITE STEVEN M 621 HOUSER WAYS •RENTON 98055 783930-0130-09-000 64 WHITE STEVEN M 621 HOUSER WAYS RENTON . 98055 '783930-0130-09-001 • 65 WHITE STEVEN'M • 621 HOUSER WAYS •RENTON 98055 '783930-0130-09-002 :i 66 BARBOUR REFAT 445 BURNETT .1 67 BARBOUR REFAT AVE S RENTON 98055 783930-0200-04-000 445 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 783930-0200-04-001 68 BARBOUR REFAT • 610 S 6TH ST RENTON 98055 783930-0200-04-002 69 BRINK TRACY L&COLLEEN D . 441 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 •783930-0205-09 70 .MONELLI SYLVIA A • 437 BURNETT AVE S RENTON . s8055 783930-0210-02 • j • 7i •LEAHY RAYMOND C 431 BURNETT AVE S RENTON • 98056 783930.0215-07 72 WALLER LEONARD R 429 BURNETT AVE S RENTON 98055 783930-0220-00 ' 73 , WANLESS LINDA EUGENIA , 425 BURNETT AVE S ,RENTON 98055 783930-0225-05 • • • • p���1NG p vEG°Y of ra • DEC • • ; C5453' .. :I • ' • '(Continued) NAME ADDRESS i ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER • • • • • Applicant Certification , I, `R ,� ('�• � - ;hereby certify that the above lIst(s) of adjacent property (Print Name) • - owners and their addresses were obtained from: 167 Title Company Records 0 King County Assessors Records • signetll� �C °�,,. . Date� y �•—� ' e� . • • • • • (Applicant) .• —" t1.1S"VM �-'‘‘ NOTARY• a`( ATTESTED:. Sub - -n. sworn before e, a Notary Pyy��bile, In ancIO rtbe,S g Wa lhi�l��gton. residing at ' t/ Q vii .� on the / "day of ., y 20 �. ;:.; Signed / i.4 ., A�r Tar • - fri 7d•>.,Nolss�� .d bllo) k :n:. "••Iy.i•}.•, a:h?ik...y r/•.�>.> .Y ,X.: �'S{1�••ist(%^i,.1�.I•.;....:.• 4:.••• r •i••n•••::•'4'ivti,., ,.• ••n....F:: a•F�4.••�•' .4•,:[I.S.;Cn.•:V:a:.i4,5v•,• •yn,i{,V.:,r YV \i'•':a•r:W,•,:♦.•: ,.I'•CJr' ifar' f:fentoii';fUV^rp.{:x,,•.i,.. ,4,•:,.•b.•,}.i ,i•:;1, .:{ta ,:J:.�• „>:.:r„" •:...„11 ,...v1•. JV•'•.ab� .} ,;.• ..hY ..'w:C^.iY,.. .•,�..•,..h�••••••:W"t•....,.hyy: ,i•••.. '•::• ::4., L.idai.'n`?mJ•?Ci„.,F...'::"::3: ..:a:`�'i, ::•.a, {..::"4:a`v •V'''o-"z::i<Y'.,.::::we)`.S,t a'n,,: q; .F :•�".'::*y..,:n''.' '�`' :<( >,�• „•%i'':.L.•(, •••• nrtvYY••:'TM. •`,•uE•e ♦vY, :•{•••• �••0.`,4.y•:..t• •".rv;';':.^.'n.S...••.:4.:{.y{YS•,:Yn.:e:i•:if�'1...':y ...r.1.t•N,. Lb?'.::` . ,, ,..r.':..':. ,Y•w...:2.k•.}J<:}RV >.:tit' tP'sk:e,d'n:�4,4' a:'K'•::y7".:t•.�.rrotir'� R J��:� • �C:': k S r 4 :av : .a ar:irai ".,': "". .i hFi' ••• +••r•lv...K••riP•a,•:• i>.•...a;:•?.••CER IElt• :f'i ..., .r•S 1.A..�x 11; _ x. :. _ , �7t t,.>,n+•... }P „S:.^ ...4:h 4{.•..b,4•••,w•j 4a. y'?•.r i.: 0• ••, ! yy��> it .,.v ♦••in•v . n i`.• • �'•.; 4. .• `•• ••V,{Y r.;,..C.Ifv. ♦:^:iYi'`.M':.1: . • ♦ :♦t♦♦q \ P P .?n:•1: :Eh ..hta••..e'.'r• ».,..4.". ` R •>.. i..a;: 4n{ .,i£. ,o,tia ti ti•�•.' •s: .:C"."p ;"•..,5.v e:Y•i S.�:..v..r,•.,P•if'.i..,... •"Y•i. r + ,`r Y ^�•:,a,a,.i:: iv�....:;n,4. vt: V 'r b tic h'...S" .a.v,.•. rt. r•.. 11) ,y ",• Mqr' q�^ •a '��:. •'•h.•.•`{+t i a'vwa• ,,.t{��,j•�,wj'>4:, �• �,,.7� �Py�v�.2,7+i�C�!�,- �j'�' `��• f _ j s ��;, �' 'I▪ :. :S[,{�.4"."..: .. :?• err ,"+e .y tf:Ialn9t tft• : •y,` p....tij••, .k.•'J e a .A. • i" a 5=,.Ued t�iia ',St1:;�is, .� � .�r�•.��••V•vhL,:I.:.b.> PVv:•�Vv4i} . •'i" ,.I••^•'.y�S. i� ,�:Sp}.�-ti-• .+�.iv.,�.•,.f•1{•� '�4iS,t .�, ':::ki:.., .. ti.M..,EiYIpI,.e.. '•v:!wa:.i•:7. .ri': ;ice"'�„i:BTS. f.:. •..?:'ix1.:'•b.i..t4Z`',4•';�,Irvo.. . .re`�ar�T.t. •:: ",n`ti,„ •:h"•:i:>r ,t.•,n"e:: aTS. •a .,b Y •a,• }•� �•{�pi7wne �n `"' rCdh:'{. •..go.• • •i• ••••• *;• >F 1'q��g]�.•g�••: :4,4\'.••,•••:•••• •.}}•}i••, ..•.rt.k.,....:...-�i I�NI�r'ut�i�.. f Ail - .• ^ rt. v: „}/,,m i',..`:�.•'••n•..vv ,. i '•. ,....`•Si'4'.°a • - .•Yts....,Jbt,{•.t.,-'a ••' Yr•' •• :n�.,.• �` ..01, •i: ,. '..••Y::w•Y.....e.. ?•': `•r'v ' w♦ ,,i,•.....- -. •!`,'•i .•b... .••a. ✓ t t, ' t•„{v:.: �•.,y:• }ni'_ vt.' �• ,••r.. .}kn.v. .:••i/f�{t> • .... P44•:•ry••yyikdi Qti41:. •:•tV; t .••••ti'. •:•4 r r 4�vr' n1,.....,•:,,: ••Y e4.t:---~ 'i iw x.z.e.'":A4y:,.•K•.•.•v..•yY.4.,::,,:,Y•6 vf,. rrt ML,1••.V•:.. •' �•.. .•v r.b..i i�:Jb.y :•,�..LVG....V •. r• y�,,n.vvS..•y �wPY M•}••.n•..• yv ,�:. ti,inn. ....A ••. ,} 4..;74. . .>.••i':,. ..,, •A�}••L'1S.r •:'k�{;•,'• ♦F.i:v•i.,♦ ul'.:•:v.•x'.� v •' .,,.�a�e�tFslb•e rs�iK:w:f•. '^��'.r`f"^' ALr.••r}.:.<••:{:A:{:..:.r..y t Sig r`•'•:,;..:t a••{.:v,v • • •.•: „ }Nia.,.. ..4,4�`•'.t> gV 4♦ :4•i,.:.: .r.• 4 M:..:,...':•.ii:.:>v+!. ,oY•:.. :.. •' a.rt :�, '..Y.e. is r••••}v:::ti.Y',:•:SLr:t'"'•"�:•ti•r�•i•",•..:.`::�•. •ti;'n,.•,:i+•..i�.• �... ,Y•. :::.d.•i•::: :,.. .:•;•„ Ia. ...,J.,•.r.Y..4i:y::±•Y.y..:ii .y.•::.{••.. :.°.••''•..,:;a.. ,•�., ../rti'r "`:':'}° hf•::^Y.Y4 n5•P�S.,,•a?..'.,e•, .;:t.,ir• �.•a F..••.Y KS'• .,•:•y C:yO„ a}.•7;;•.;:..1't,.}. ' ,u..•.q•uV•,.:,.••v ••:. ••••.,--•••••• •>.M44}i•7:vw:•... o,4Ni,'.tf', ..:.........rt.;..,yty..:.,...,,:.. ,•p i,,,•Ayn>,t ▪{'4'' ♦4•'^'^ ,,ay. 'ai•'♦ •'•✓ :n•.4>, .:6V ••~••ar^ C ♦'•;M••4w• }:'P,i •'v 0.••••....•..•••:•,:4•. M.:•4,•,.P •n••••44:.., •....C• ,.}•�• a,, a`t ' :.•t.:•: :;r.n,.::NQT I Y: :,� �°. .4........FP.;:..::�.4::::s ,w.•a..h, ,': ,. R'•. •i ••;X.',i.♦ ,.a:.. t n:i'�'^ .4X:••.•yw. �„•yyY.,, •,•.'4'f'f. .Jb>:. ' yy vS,Fy$r.. },\', .'P• r... �,.:.:�.a ":F.'•iMb'•:h FJ:•.,'Y., •'t'F>vi"J•i. ..hh 4•i•4pP'v/:r<{, Y .>:il•Y Y ♦•'.:Mwiv.i::•v,,�:�:,>".: .,., y..”... Y':'3•,44::,%....:.1P:tJ .•an•.•.x'.a i.u:•4;..4,:1 ai.:1::::,14.i ..t:..>,•. '.14.1t::::I ti:{:{,. .F.t.,�F•Pnr.i:SV t r+,' i•v,,;, {•Y4..%. I�f• •61,,. ,,,_ ){... },.a. •:2:: •;a .W,,,•,,V4;::r•• •},f,,.F.,:....'.•:s:ra.w::.Yt:Y•4:•••,4`:::.:.a .•in«.::•?..{ l•• ::I.:2;:u•.3:i;.,C.":i •-1 .. .Ypr•., it.ii{: <di:.i:�:'v',:.::p•7• .:5�j r��• ,J,:•" :,a:'''.h'.:': a ••rr.u:•altitii... forl.• rfi' .,�r.. .,,}�,� ..�.. r°.,•.. ^•�.�. •e '' Nt�ta^ :�"�'bl� In iA�t3fot;tlz��Siaa€e.':of•11VatalrtJ�.vI���e'�t�rt :? 4-I: ':':;.r.si36sit.be>:1;.itriO on 0r•W R; :•.w., 5► .t•. 4.,... Y• {,.A.v,<v.a•. aY.•V,.in.4*• ,'M:•,iXp. :,'• ,i •yyyy���••y•�Y•f" r/.;a 4A ••P,• P ;.<u .A.>v, .z:::M t 1 nrµ r.a: .tiP .':u • •.. y ry4.,..Y ic�yi ,4 "> �F•i'ii'•'. ~+•�,:nv+: `a♦i't •• •`�•`:i:�:;:' ': �iJ.•Y!:a"'� `,7',i,.c��"•'.rt.{•:.•w?..i•:,b.}m'vY:.{.r.•a.:.♦';!fIJ:C!► f"••a•`.,'.dtiry•k4il.S•e,7}. JF�y.. .4iL•:.+1@"1. :.t.t...+y .i.4�.<•. r•>,,,.i.. ";x.. !-.7:.•:.,.,..., s}♦. •.7:•r.e.. 7•.�.A•,•,ati.,..�,.:::, •. ,.,5,•y;,`,•,:,+•;;ter ',d'•• .�, ,.rth•.i., .:'•F:,.+•.�"'q'f J.a:. :aiw:t. •••Ri •� "v<S•Yiin s�,:w ry.iP.:•:•q�+' .•.Y.t.r}.rtr!.i"::^' •'k:: :1+.. .S tt, ,:.$..h i..h.:i R ,y,"y .. , h„♦.�:h4:y•.••5•4 '•v (� ,.r,} a•:.r.. ..b••,. ...t.: ••v:..>.4'.;b.V4.•e::i: }P .,i;g♦. ^.••>1.• v:TP:S..',rti.:•/•at•••.I"..1.+�e•' V : Y• 't•,,,?:•I,.:•4%••• •4•„ ..•4?„.^J.41:4:,vww"•.Y••4.::hv:a H•:.;.•h•ha•,•••01. v.}.:{.h• :.A•..,,.„•.,.ar••5:�;1,.,:r}}, :Z� 'i: tii.: • a' { Yvr,aw.:•F K,... Z.i rf•♦ ••"..4.:v♦•...•.O}^^:i.':.•.:.•::+`.:,"Y: •�,{+))r>•�.�•• ••(• L Y �"��J:•Y.•�:�i,ax ai.,.• t••ti4 • :a..}, ...»>�` ..•,„ti.. .T+lS� �+,•�'•'i'fv^Y!a..,:i. '. . •:•,: i• A•.il •itji♦•'.;,..�'...,♦. J' � ,. • ^•'Y4�•:.vnf.:i.PP::•n r•wvi:. ... _ , "♦ DEVELOPMENT PLANNING • listprop.doo MARILYN i, CITY OF RENTON REV 03/00 - MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29 3 . - • Ppf 9 Q ?nruti 2 .:' . to ' ` - JAIL. " .3 CITY .a. RENTON ti y- will. ..s, ',' " -. . Planning/Building/Public Works Department "• : SUPERINT [-if," - '" Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator, : ...., Jesse Tanner,Mayor• ' - ENpF;,, , , December 29, 2000 : RSD 403 ; Su. per. intendent's Office-, .. . - �: JAN'"O 9 2001' ., Renton.School"District #403: 300 SW"7�'"Street E. C'" •;I . . , ,Renton,.WA, "98055=2307 ',-,-,• CAPITAL'P Subject:, ' ' Dean Sherman Apartment's '_ , LUA 00 1.68 SA A,ECF'.. . The City'of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a four-story 86-unit apartment . - compiex. :The property is located at.415-427'Will ams AvenueSouth.; ' : " - " In"order to process'this application;the Development Services Division needs.to know which:Renton schools would '. " beattended: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"980'55.;'. _, , " - - -- Elementary"School ;Bryn Mawr Middle School: Dimmitt " .., , High-School" 'i: ,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 , ,A'riy."Corriments: , . , ' ' .. , - . Thank you for,providing this important information.„:If.you have any questions regarding this project, please contact - -w," me at:(425)430-7382. ; -- Sincerely; • " , Elizabeth';Higgins,.AICP' • .OpMENT P • Project Manager •- , ., NTONN • ' RE ING :. JAN 1"6 2000 school/=/kac -, 1055 South.Grady'.Way Renton,=Washington"98055, '. :: This paper contains 50%.recycled material„20/post consumer L C1:3.c�u -1(O 6 r Elizabeth Higgins-SouthyRenton Plan _ �� age 1; From: Ben Wilson <bw68@yahoo.com> To: <gcerise@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 1/3/01 2:38PM Subject: South Renton Plan Dear Mr. Cerise, I read with interest your packet of materials for the January 3rd Planning Commission meeting.As I have previously mentioned, it appears that the intention of of the Commission is to draft a plan that is in agreement with the wishes and best interests of the residents of the affected neighborhoods, and I appreciate this. My interest in the Planning Commission and the work of your office was sparked by the application last year,for the Dean Sherman Apartments, a proposal that would have significant detrimental effects on those of us who live in the surrounding properties.As you may know, I and others from the neighborhood filed appeals against this project,for a variety of reasons. attended a meeting sponsored by the developers, and was besieged by expensively dressed men with salesmen's smiles and statements of how their project would improve the neighborhood.When I expressed concern to one of them about the large size of the complex, his smile quickly disappeared, and he growled: "we can make it even bigger if we want". It appears that they have done just that, submitting a new plan for an even more immense complex.This really seems to me to be the equivalent of an obscene gesture directed at Renton and its residents. I strongly believe that this sort of predatory development is wrong, and treats the neighborhoods of average citizens as mere raw resources to be mined by wealthy developers. If this is the contempt that the property owners hold for the neighborhood in the planning stage, I'm not looking forward to what will come when it is finally developed. So my concern is that projects like this are being proposed at the very time that the South Renton Neighborhood Plan is being put together, and that the wishes of the residents, and the apparent intent • of many of the proposed changes to the plan,seem to me to be in direct opposition to this type of large apartment complex. I believe that the work on the South Renton Neighborhood plan so far, as well as the regulations already in effect, support me and my neighbors in our opposition to this project. I like living in Renton, and believe that it is ultimately in the City's best interests to keep these neighborhoods livable to families like mine.Thank you for your time. I look forward to further dialogue on this subject. Elizabeth Higgins-South Renton Plan Page 2 Sincerely, Ben Wilson 424 Williams Avenue South Renton,WA CC: Elizabeth Higgins Ben Wilson -bw68@yahoo.com Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos-Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/ CC: <ehiggins@ci.renton.wa.us> 4, - CITY ( ' RENTON =' „IL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator December 29, 2000 Superintendent's Office Renton School District #403 300 SW 7th Street Renton, WA 98055-2307 Subject: Dean Sherman Apartments LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF The City of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a four-story, 86-unit apartment complex. The property is located at 415-427 Williams Avenue South. 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, —~ �I ii„..b ef(1 91 r4s sS Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Project Manager • school/ /kac 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 .n4 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer City of R ton Department of Planning/Building/Public�D'orl ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET �. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: r boy rvi(G D&j COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story, 86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage,and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown(CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 w. Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS 3 La- fie) N© -0 a C-( I S S u L�� . ��s�-- 3-(4 L9'Zc lc_--.. {e C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have JeViewed lication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas her di' ion is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of 'ector or A orized Representative Date devapp Rev. CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: January 10,2001 TO: Eliz. - h Higgins FROM: 0 .h .son SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments (LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF) The parcel is designated Center Downtown in the Comprehensive Plan and zoned CD. The proposal is consistent with policies intended to guide development of the Center Downtown designation, and specifically the following applicable policies. Policy DT-1. There should be a mix of uses, including retail, office, light industrial and residential, which generate the demand for goods and services. Policy DT-3. Development and redevelopment of the Center Downtown should strive for urban density and intensity of uses. Policy DT-5. Redevelopment of the downtown area should be encouraged to maintain and revitalize the downtown core. Policy DT-22. Maximize the use of existing urban services and civic amenities and revitalize the City's downtown by promoting medium to high density residential development in the downtown area. Allowed densities will conform to the criteria for Urban Centers in the countywide policies. Policy DT-24. Net residential development densities in the downtown area should achieve a range of 25-100 dwelling units per acre. Where parcels are less than one half acre no minimum density is required. Policy DT-27. Medium-rise residential (6-10) stories should be located within the urban center, primarily between the Cedar River and South 2nd and between South 76 and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. The area between South 7`" and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way should include a combination of low- (1-5 stories) and medium-rise residential to provide a transition between the employment area and the mixed use core. Policy DT-29. Parking should be structured whenever feasible and serve more than one use. Objective DT-F. Improve the visual, physical and experiential quality, lighting and safety, especially for pedestrians, along downtown streets. cc: Sue Carlson \\CENTRAL\SYS2\DEPTS\FINANCE\ECON_DEV\EconomicDevelopment\STRATPLN\PLANNING\GREEN- F\DeanSherman.doc\od I City of I.:...:an Department of Planning/Building/Public works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET . �. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: CO hs--wdoI' S{%VVI£ COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 . APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 0 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins 03Op41 PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 0.4, LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South 4<> '9!ia? SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. � u��ti�� SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story,86-unit rt enf complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage,and comm. I: :n space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone.` Environmental Review 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 _ '__" — 60,e)X ore.,‘" ILV7 661,4,-- 6xv-e—z-' Fc 7/(&-c, ._. te,,,,,teacW,%.,-(- 1-'-‘-t-7 ?"--'4-`" 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 whe. additional information is ne ed to properly assess this proposal. /4' ,/a/o/ Si ature of Dir r or Autho lied Represerf alive Dat devapp Rev.10/93 V i 0 CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: January 8, 2001 TO: Elizabeth Higgins FROM: Jan Illian X7216 SUBJECT: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA 00 9B 415—427 WILLIAMS AVE SE I have reviewed the application for this 86-unit apartment complex at 415 — 427 Williams Ave SE and have the following comments: WATER 1. There is an existing 4-inch water main in Williams Avenue South and an 8-inch water main in South 4' and 5'h Street. A 24-inch transmission main is located in Burnett Av fcue /,/ South.The derated fire flow in Williams Ave South is approximately 1200 gpm. Static �/ pressure is approximately 72-psi. 2. The estimated fire flow requirement is 3,750 gpm. Applicant will require four fire hydrants to serve this site. / 3. A 12-inch water main is to be installed in Williams fronting the property by the City of .�/ Renton. J 4. The proposed project is located in the 196-water pressure zone. The project is located" outside the Aquifer Protection Zone. ` 5. The Water System Development Charge (SDC) will be 2,656.50 This site may be subject ? to a redevelopment credit. --� 5. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double detector check valve assembly for the fire sprinkler system. Applicant shall submit a copy of the mechanical plan showing location and installation, if backflow device is to be installed inside the building. 6. If the building exceeds 30 feet in height, a backflow device will be required to be installed on domestic water meters. I 7. Landscape irrigation system will require a State "approved" backflow device to be installed. Dean Sherman Apartments SANITARY SEWER 1. There is an existing 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer in Williams Avenue South. t✓ 2. The Sewer System Development Charge (SDC) will be $4,269.26. A redevelopment credit may apply. . 3. Parking garages shall require floor drains and shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be directed through floor drains that are installed in accordance with the UPC to an exterior oil/water separator. The separator shall be sized to meet a minimum 15-minute retention time for peak flows anticipated in the garage area, but in no case will be less than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of interceptor shall be as manufactured by Pipe Inc., Utility Vault Inc., or approved equal. SURFACE WATER 1. A limited level one drainage study has been submitted and reviewed. No detention or water quality treatment is required for this project. 2. The Surface Water System Development Charge will be $4,202.23. ? E,r' 3. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan shall be submitted by the project engineer of record to the Public Works Inspector. Changes to maintenance schedules or installations shall also be submitted. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities is required prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. TRANSPORTATION 1. Traffic mitigation fees of $30,000.00 will be assessed and are payable at the time of issue of permit 2. Five feet of right of way in the alley shall be dedicated to the City 3. Full street improvements including, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb & gutter, street signs and streetlights are required if not already in place. 4. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Under grounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all R/ existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. It appears that a utility pole on NE 16'h Street may need to be relocated. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards, which are attached for reference. Also attached for general information are a fee reference sheet and the King County Storm Water Standards (1990) as adopted by the City of Renton? 2. All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals 100/ prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 3. Separate permits for side sewers, driveway cuts, water meters and backflow device will be required. When plans are complete three copies of the drawings, two copies of the drainage report, a construction estimate and application fee shall be submitted at the sixth floor counter. A fee worksheet is attached for your use, but prior to preparing a check it is recommended to call 425-430-7266 for a fee estimate as generated by the permit system. • ''".Dean Sherman Apartments 4. Cut and capping of existing utilities to existing structures on site will be required as part of the demolition permit. cc: Kayren Kittrick ' F •'Y SERVICES FEE REVIEW #200 OP f di DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET 0 PLAN REVIEW ROUTING SLIP ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ❑ • APPLICANT: Sill/ L Le /��i¢yi1 5 QM1V c73i'/OtJl�RECEIVED FROM J i OTHER ^� �`��/0 � JOB ADDRESS: y/s--I/Z'7 (.v/Lc(Avr/S 14rjj S WO# NATURE OF WORK: g(o (/J/q ANIR ‘," GREEN# [1 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND CONNECTION FEES APPLIED NEED MORE INFORMATION: 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ❑ SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND CONNECTION FEES ESTIMATED 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE 0 VICINITY MAP ❑ NOT APPROVED FOR APPLICATION OF FEES 0 FRONT FOOTAGE 0 OTHER ❑ VESTED 0 NOT VESTED ❑ This fee review supersedes and cancels fee review#2000--2S dated 7////2mw . SUBJECT PROPERTY PID# 23at>- / VS()/2 5Zyc 0 PARENT PID#(subject change)_ 7 Zy ^� 2 Y 0 King Co.TaxxAcct#(new) 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 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 #OF UNITS/ SDC FEE ❑ Pd Prey. E Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) 0 Never Pd SQ. FTG. Single family residential$1,105/unit x M ig.#2. [n75 /1--/Y Mobile home dwelling unit$885/unit in t ark Apartment, Condo$665/unit not i irlor COR zones x Commercial/Industrial, $0.154/sq. t. of property(not less than$1105.00)X /725-0 $ 2,&S -a. .5V Boeing,by Special Agreement/Footprint of Bldg plus 15 ft perimeter(2,800 GPM threshold) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WASTEWATER ❑ Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd(Ltd Exemption) Never Pd Single family residential dwelling unit$760/unit x Mobile home dwelling unit$610/unit x Apartment, Condo$455/unit not ' D r COR zones x Commercial/Industrial, $0.106/sq. . of property (not less than$760.00)X g027& c-� ir V,2 ,9.�v REDEVELOPMENT CREDIT: (New-Old Flow)/New Flow X Above Fees (R��Pi S{�Nt17 y 0,0•E y SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-SURFACEWATER - ❑ Pd Prey. El Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) 11 Never Pd Single family residential and mobile home dwelling unit$525/unit x All other properties$0.183/sq ft of new impervious area of property x ' ,/ 7-0z 23 (not less than$525.00) ZZ g(o 3 / - 1//�/ PRELIMINARY TOTAL $ 1 J I Z �9 Signature of Reviewing A ority r DATE (D o *If subject property is within an LID, it is developers responsibility to check with the Finance Dept. for paid/un-paid status. ►i ~ **The square footage figures used are taken from the King County Assessor's map and are approximate only. ' EFFECTIVE January 4,2001 i P. to p 1110 el + jiliR + • O . } sr : mv.? .r:..:.1 r n ly:i\Ynr.{S{> :i}v. y ..{t.\ : ? v^?:}i.].r§.:..n.{!;;,:v. n.}•.:^:.!..^{.Y.:n :o u \:.;.a....:. .:.i..Y..:'..g..:'.tit.y...nv ... n....._...v.... m1101.0111614 NPO RIM 10.� lIT A. •�rSv } .... : .x.. .. :/:....•}.^i.!nrN::}' ?::...:..5}. .Y:i!?Yn•:-0.h.{i ;..v..m h : .r ::!!r}}sna?+v 4r`xt`r ^ :.:?;}a . Project Name llERAI Slit-gin/U T7 7J rs Project Address Or— 4?7 WitthaPLC ,4v S . Contact Person 6T8V61/ fl4C/ oA.A143 Address Pee S6 Aa01 ALASKAA) W47 Sui1E acrD Phone Number DOlo-99 7/— 5(03(0 Permit Number 4 UA• £ o-/(o 5 Project Description SO V N tr AicA moo fik.D6).5 12E13ufa00)() GYAST1 .3( M t CAC.- •FACAuT/. 0/700 53() Land Use Type: _ Method of Calculation: 0 Residential ITE Trip Generation Manual ❑ Retail gr Traffic Study rittesffiatis A,pr arOplu-r Caac) ❑ Non-retail 0 Other TI'E Avl3uD6t. Repolit Calculation: M!Ii / o NFTs :. • Qjlo x b.b3 - . 57O• .I S- - . C ITS .aao. , - . • Pl_ titeb cutJtc t 4.7 x - 9 kpa , 8I� C.« 7ao> -------- Bic.'3 L.{00. 37 Y\e* -\'v.PS '4OO. X 1' .''O - 3O,000 Transportation Mitigation Fee: * , 000. °�— . Calculated by: r \ c.k_, Date: 1 JU_-)et.3-01 Account Number: Date of Payment • City of,c,ton Department of Planning/Building/Publiorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ....: REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: PLitri Reuiew t o.r COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 — APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 CITY OF RENT®N LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South lenr.r mcn SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. JAN n ?flI'l SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story,86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking gars d VIIPASION RrtdO space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Dowt' ne. Environmental Review 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 thorized Representative Date //7A-71 devapp Rev.10193 . City of eton Department of Planning/Building/Public orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ..:. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: IliviAs01 �1 COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECFC DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story,86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage,and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown(CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 jee,_ 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. r AO- ///fc.i //,/q Signature o ' cto�'br Authorize. Representative Date devapp Rev.10/93 +e• City of r<w,iion Department of Planning/Building/Public orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET _.;:.. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: S C) (A)cLOCLUGL -COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,EC DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story, 86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage,and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 .. - .418,C(/‘/4.#.1 ._.... 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 addition I information is needed to properly assess this proposal. "It�r—to-� //�/ryi Signature of ID' tor or"It Representative Date devapp // Rev.10/93 • City of R r,t'on Department of Planning/Building/Public` HP ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET .-..:. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: (cots COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS` WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story,86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage, and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 w. 14,000 Feet CbdadVC4 5/1-e- • B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS � Cat/t ,( n�" / ! 0''69 C_ ese4O_ • C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ffit 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 whe additional information is eded to properly secs this proposal Signature o erector or ut ri d Represen five Date 7 /f devapp Rev.10/93 SD 4111 A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS "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$354.51 per each new multi family unit to address these potential impacts." Street tree species to be approved by the Parks Dept. prior to installation. All landscaping outside the property line to be maintained by the applicant. 4t City of I to Department of Planning/Building/Public�o7 ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:f}jv^b0V COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 28,2000 APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Higgins PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South • SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-story,86-unit apartment complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground parking garage, and common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 I Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health X - Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources _Preservation _ Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 1.246 14,000 Feet The proposed site is located slightly east of the extended centerline of the Airport Runway.: A review should be made to determine any noise impacts from the-operation of aircraft in flight upon the- intended use of the structure. A determination should be made as to the compatibility of the proposed use with the operation of the:.airport. : :• B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS The proposed site should be reviewed to determine any height restrictions other than the 179' above sea level Horizontal Surface. We have reviewed this -•plication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or Iareas w'e : additional •rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal. 4 0 I .� 5/ 4001 Signature • Director or Authorized Represent6LpJ41r Date devapp Rev.10/93 A—N(II N -,7C 1,. I 1-5-.:E:E:E:E:E:E7C-7::-:::.:E::-.7f.- / c 3 : %'•:b e i,Ifwt°) 0)_wA5jAt., ‘ n-'21 A E )1,et., 2.,.. ,5 763r4 ,._,,!‘ ii::...:::F...:.::::".....:-.E::::..E.]]EEEEEF:::::::::::!--:-..:::::::: . ifiil ! . .......-------..-.............. kr'f -.Ili laic: ----::::::::::::::::::::::::_:_:-_-__ lir J pim ... *-,,,--:•-=-:-:-:-:-:-:-•:-:_-H--:=_-_-:::::-:-:-.7-:.-:-_-_ __41-E-EEEE-3-72:-::::-:::.-:::::::-:::-::::::-::::::::-...:717"::::::::::::::::--f- .1_11191E17 t izi I,t. ..,:,___LeINt :::-31.----EEE::-Eit-:::_-E,_---;•::::-E.-:::_:::6-16.::--_--_--7.t:_c•ErEffEEE-.E..-EEE:131-.ELE:::E.:-:::::::.::::fLtEEEEE:_::_ty_LIK:E:E::::E.E::::::_tEf_ 4-w/4 -.13 .7 'n-Jj iiim s , , '1=-_--:::::4:-----H-1-:::::_-- -----------7•-•:-:-:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-.7-7.-.:-:.-:-:-.7-H-H-H-.:-:.-:.-::::::::::::.::::::::.-_- ; -. __ 4 1 WI • D MINIM ` ee ' Ira K G='z===_-__ _ = = - === - _ , 1 �:■ v � � e € � - _=____ -- - -- -- -==_=__-__=�=___ am __=_=-� 1, = hvalj lifip.. -ilim 1 ...-.,„ ,_.____,_1 N-liiiim_.„ -11,1 --- ._ ...: i14- _____ ___ _ 1 ,1..1- r millal .: v., 0 / n N 11117-7„1.--- --::T::::::=-:-:-:::-:"*:::::::::::::::::::::::::;--::::::::.:::::::::::-:-:-: :-:-.7-:-:-.7-._, . i . 'i 1 i 0 .1,-.1. 03 • i:mai 4, ; _.- .-r ,13 1 • 4 T.A, N.:"-:E.1:.---3:3:E:..-__:.-:':.:T...331F.:-EEE.E.EEEEEEEEEEEE:3:EMEE7.:-::-::::_ ,-:::-::-:::-:::-::-,-:,-,_ ni „iv- 6-Api ILI" -Au 0.1 m ft BIE , I i g, ar. il,,,,P _.171 ' 0,1)t..S:;'.,‘„zc ;.., •,-...-_-_:_:_:_:__ -_:_:_:_-:_:_:_:_z_:_:_:_:_z_:-_::_:_:_:_:_:_:__ ______ . i i 1 r _,2, • .-.1&, C Ntlitarc Jm 0 1- ©..a:A7 m� =_ -== T== eI ul (kIf-L ®!� ;jVT1o,. ME'amn o ��, rl I 1 1g r. ,\I ,./,,,.-i.;.s.)!iu3i i iI,ni i. 1 tall%,I!II\ 0 j mg ,;„. . " ... o . DE-VDO _all, l_Il 'r`�:;_etelik (1-1,0 ,, I I..1. 1 �i 1 � 1 w w r LLllZV Fi.;::-40g, / \p n, G'{e IQ l w w-I IL AllellSEPt r' u 1iu ! , : • Leo ), f WI VA .1 : ;! / Q f l o.�r ,� �® / I _ , lo lest. .r1, P `-� u T-1 ._•7 ; --. ww._ lih . , 1 . p_, filjb4419,,,[3,.0,,,„ - - .., -4 ,,,f,tit7=7).*vi'llaDr„ -i,)- dififT-Pie-si. N ...q,..„.yz„.,.. ,011P1-9P-11711 .5_,Iiti-'e 1141- **-- ----- '. amn '" Army; — I ""*.MI- __if., .,_,4117,4111,, '17,:iir IM O1 RiLLVi _ i•I„' ®® psi ii Q.. 81 I i ��� .. Y .-\ .41%311 4.4101r zyi IT r-{;.� � +c• ➢u 1 . _, • ,.. .„4161-41,-, d . was 704(0t. lk r-1 ollja Va. �Yu itt5 _ • ;E I� IFAN411Z.4 ,,, 111 meal D2-n1 :„Wir...4 0 'ail \ \ \ ill . 4)6.6 ),i ;;;$•A Di cirl.c 6 # . co a .P/ ,14:64)/-. co co co . a. il 4111 ' P T. 1 i J . (, mil_' - •ficzei0'�LA110114 4 Q I _ .4, • \,, k ‘ .... 1 - /-7-, - (7'1 P IN• 1.. ,ii, [![1 �..� I 1 1 •Fai w- I �tls Ica III• !■ ! $1 11 St 1 a�` p ® ' a vv.:! 'P ' ,-1 I M■ t II,N A I I !MS� `` 3'. ''y' V Pp • �l` — ■M M _ b.( Ply + `1I 4+ 1I }1 IliECJ ���(�\\\1[iM f n�I iA. . N40 �_� M 1NRS , 1 --jr-I�-�" � � 1-10 I Ti JY+ . b1,5z .1c. iii L31 j k• .1119..) J. 11' c; ,Z4 ralka1=-1;jek,,A„rx 0, '•*4- ••-WU .,, ,,, MIXIIIMIPpw" • • •MN ... ... s • ;.D .13 iii. 8 0 . . E2 13 our wt.t, . . .,.. 1 , 10%.A.04. Liam Imo q7 .., •,.. . 5.. c).4.01 , evoial im 14 5411,..* p .i.-` t tgrimprou- ; tlooP ' 's kti - ; • ' laSt 141%,. 13 5 8 • tP., LL.i ni ...... :., . < 4., .,. ,., • 112§14,E7 16-lamo -:. liki .15 XL"' • • ' ..ht g' •,,,,_...20 t kiii• , .• .!: 1,e.,„: 1-1- I 73 , EN19 A IINLI ME,ms . r. 114 • -.4. an Wirdekli 1111.11Millint 547:: . •• .. s' .1010.1 Lt 1 7 z . .. . .. Tonkin Parke. p• k s TH .4 ,. .. i,...,07- ,,, :. ., • ki OPEN'4' '• ...'i A mitscl".. lob ' . . -•.. :. .408., .-Ppqa 11:1 to [-- so - . ...,. .- .5110.111q .• MiEll /0' `' 1605° ii.4aPO'n—„. . i i:': ii:' . li AK. a 1 74;00400000". .... 1 • JD • 1.9,1F-44. • 19•5g. :, ,. mho 19 fa. , '2`.1.2- zis , '' .:. •:. WM,'V ' .--tt. 5, ;.0, • • 410 . UM i . .0"..., 3 i8 . . ,.in 3 18 — , ...En estii - ..-a..................... .....i.- .....,.... - it..viminie* • .. -— :•44 • -, . . r-' .„-- 2 ags 4.,:ir-.4;;;--.y, • • . alsVinou ' . . lastix21:11 .00000001PP iii0.0000,01.- 00000.000.00000"- „atii 70 I-I' /176 or,Apc-NA-P pi .709/N ..ONATio ::.,,', .. •• . lin'i.... ill do41-54'‘A'1640.410 9AP0111.2) -#6W. . . lrat.;111 I I Clk8C‘ • • E-6111 -, El mu ,. .t 0.....\ •• to . olf ,,, • ' Li E:1 8 IIIMI twi . rati 8 :,...4%7 , fs 8 6..„ 1g, (1).3 6' 7 75 ) 4.51 In 9 MEM . , , v-. .e• FRI .tcc .. ... 6 -15/Z1. . rflal Valtrep. ',0 - M 10 • ,All gl -I '''- . 75 . •°.'• - • li s' LI /20 I 11 /0 ' k•-: . • 5TH k ST. -.. ' - 5TH . • 0 1 gr. I )14 tp Ellg 24 It--1.s.4',7 1,(1 ;Or ' r 0 ‘ -4 .z..(6.,. agliti, .• I.. ,otiaid 6,.. .. ., . :.„ :. tt-J1 • , gti1E1 A1473 • . 133 2 73 . : EN._ ,Ig , :se .-., i im • • . 7 . [E] ? •• rt • I ---1" • . E '3•Ir 72' ."'"i ' gss .3 ' 221k-'''--4" * "C .. - • • - , gi 40 n?) iza, :.wi v go . „_- ,,._ -n 3 i8 t,.• FM 3 18 DI. 1:11. °31111Xejti1 te,), • :.: ..... • 'A kot -rnal A 'n 1.4 fili • •:: 4 El 4t ZO IVO. ; 1111111-141 20 pi , ... • '.v •-i - ii kt 4 ,. tit 4 17 Eg , .7,r 4. 1ffir . • 1 • • ... Pin 6 19 1E5.. to iF.:M. t9 . 4.„16 .. CO •n V`k...)., ;'Z EELtT2.'r...s o98 ., .,1la1a6 CEHE3a I,t.•.cL1kl,-.i. mCIOFKoMaA4R 3i ll1 :''''•-11'6'Aat•12'83 -l''4%,rw .-I C e 1vopl '.. i.i•s6i-mI Dg.v• •`-. ';• ',...20[.Ei .••5761111654 11t31, •152(S5.1:'70 1 11P . °)L-: :.?••:.'ij : a1° 15 PM 13n , t807 -IIM '. „,. MO. i 9 ill sta . . 9 12 533 • ' Mr j if. st& l , NSW 52 sc M•41:1 12 13 :1 (4 14, 12. Aas.0.9 40 a 441 10 .11 al• 00, 4?St :•.161.1•:.: e•O 'ig?f4tS1 .. 60 r r AP` ' R . 1 tr:Tb,533 : 'II :' 6° !coil Si- . . . -,,,, - 24-h.ri9 ,..._ ,:. 66 ied p.m:eL. • i 9 . ::., 1/4i • A.5.- ,„ ... /5 ;771.S1 e:•••11 i, .A.A •-. .., ... .', , . 20 1 r5 . •!,.,' rt,20z ‘d; . ,,,, Nv -, •. Igi LI 45a- -1 • 7.7..zi A.,9„r•,,,)o.„,1. IP'....jr;-61 .,. ... ... ... IGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP NORTH l'=200' 4y - - 4/14E t&1 O�CY O� t t • 1. f.�/ < : " ><> ::._ �`. :: .. '� • . :•..- - • x } `:Ca.,,.,•,-`%,IA�c,..:%}i:Ygt: �i>:ay . 4 Kav: : s A - h. 4Q 4 : ; 1K- 9a $ua#a: oY ,n n�Viw� a� { 0 , v ,:Y, btxMN . oaMa.• , . "�+ r; r^ t<} ro ' w iV h l,l > ^ LtiE�. „iT a\ l Project Name GP,J 614t-gin4 ) i f42rx167vrs Project Address V/S —4?7 GUicuiliPtS 4v S . Contact Person 5T.VGA/ A4c6o,u41.4•3 Address Rea S( /02o/ AuASKAiu wA/ cs'inix iacro Phone Number DOG_q 71— 6-(03( Permit Number LOA- Co-l&?) Project Description SG Ui. tt ArPA-W P1 QL 6y5 Rep c C WC� I GC1ST1N(.) RCN O S, fiNGLI'Ry. C:g7o0 540 Land Use Type: Method of Calculation: j 51 Residential ITE Trip Generation Manual j 0 Retail g Traffic Study ApA204 rr (au') O Non-retail 0 Other \--,� TP5 A flGb 2EpoR-T • Calculation: (2I1i / 0 ?vs :. alo x b,b3 = . 5--7O• .I Pj C ors aao. C 1 col , 81) C-16 7ao� e� C�.t�tt, 14" x ' 36.13 y dp. '57 Y\e. -V.,Ps yOO. ' —15.a0 - ' 3O,000 Transportation Mitigation Fee: ' ,Ooo. 99--Calculated by: • �TtP--Ve., Date: l it)a-1 1 Account Number: Date of Payment 0•ft /" • NAP . .......... • I 0 NEM ITIOACIII:PVNIFERNmoned .............; . .. .............. . .:........ .:::.:,:.:. Project Name P& I4 514e✓wlav1 A?colt!sue or, Project Address y 15 ()r t hein45 Ave5 - Contact Person Sttve'4 /1 (L b©tia I c( 11(I l rttvj A✓cl r. Address Phone Number 206 q-71 - 563 Permit Number Li)4 - DC' - 0 85 Project Description • 6'7 r]t7 i 7- ap4v-t ko-c, )h Land Use Type: . Method of Calculation: S-ee # 2 $� 0 Residential 0 ITE Trip Generation Manual 0 Retail 0 Traffic Study Rcs/dr./64j A(,r,{{'- �rcr ❑ Non-retail 0 Other 4.62 irys LAir t Calculation: Nietc) .txvev r da",kj tv„s > (67) ,�2 C ) - 30g. 54 , s • . • • Ott $75 1 darlr :tvip • • ( 17 )( 309•1q ) 215. 56 Transportation Mitigation Fee: 23 i 2 l5 Calculated by: e"Riatti Date: z7/oo • Date of Payment V City of R n Department of Planning/Building/Public WorKs ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ....,. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ` -,re lore A4fi,--,,, COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 11, 2001 APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: DECE APPLICANT: S-D Renton LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Eliza -i n '1 y tit PROJECT TITLE: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS WORK ORDER NO: 78772 1 LOCATION: 415—427 Williams Avenue South DEC 2 9 2000 SITE AREA: 40,276 sq.ft. (0.93 acre) I 123,000 SQ.FT. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant has requested an Administrative Site Plan Review for a four-sto itr tlF i�ENTON ent PP q �Cl R iER:TONT ' complex. The project would consist of two buildings, 113 parking spaces in an underground park arage,and-common open space. An existing medical clinic would be demolished on the site. The property is within the Center Downtown (CD)Zone. Environmental Review 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 ..— 4 14,000 Feet ,, im-QG7S AO to l — , • B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS v / . . .--..- ..... C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS /�D _4 ---We have revi:wed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or l areas where,a dditional inform i/ is needed to properly assess this proposal. - /1/a af 1/ 7 - Signa - of irector or Authorized resentative Date devapp Rev.10/93 �SY o CITY OF RENTON a az FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU �P,t7 MEMORANDUM DATE: January 2, 2001 TO: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector SUBJECT: Comments for Dean Sherman Multifamily Environmental Impact Comments: 1. The fire mitigation fees are applicable at the rate of $388 per multi-family unit: 86 multi-family units x $388.00 = $33,368.00 Code-Related Comments: 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,750 gpm. Four fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150-feet of the structure and ✓ the secondary hydrants are required within 300-fee,t/ef the structure. A looped I/ water main is required. 2. An approved fire sprinkler and standpipe system shall be installed throughout the ✓ structure. 3. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the structure. V . 4. Fire department apparatus access is required within 150-feet of all points on the building. Proposal as shown does not provide this required access on the • 0P west side of the building. Access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20-feet wide. The Renton Fire Department had previously agreed for the applicant to provide an additional 5-feet of width in the alley for a total of 15-feet width. The understanding being that eventually the additional 5-feet of width will be dedicated from the adjoining property if and when it was redeveloped and that two standpipe outlets will be provided on the west exterior side of the building. Applicant has shown compliance with the additional width requirements. CT:ct deansher 40. CITY C RENTON ..It Planning/Building/Public Works Department J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator December 28, 2000 Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. 1291 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apts. LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF Dear Mr. McDonald: 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 January 23, 2001. 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 Project Manager cc: S-D Renton LLC/Owner 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer .. .. ............................. v,.:._:n.:.:•::::::-::.:,..�:•:::::: ;{:::.}.:.::;::}}}-.yi}:}:�:.r•}i}yy:.:t.;..;:{<i;.}}}};.y};•.}:.}>::a:•`r•:;?•}}:•}::•}{.}>}}:.:i .. ,.n....r.:...........:... ..........:........r...,.....,.r:.....:.........:.. ... . '.}: ' :;.'�+..},� :::::::::.:r:.,.:::::..::...,,:.} :.i}};:..a:?..::'.y:.i:.} :;::.<;.;::.}y:.}:.};}<}r•}:-<:{;.;::.y;:{.}::.:i.,}}i:.i:.}:.}:;.}:.}::.; ...•:`.:�:::•:{•}}:{a::'•:.i::.::.:r.:::r:.2.y..:. .y};:;:n;.;?:.}i:•}:;.:?a}::.:n•::::....:.r}:::.• ................... ........ .. $1 ...s......:...,.,...n::•.•• .r-n...•:..:......:..................r4,..�::::.:.::,,..... :::::}:.,:'i..'••.sr:::::.�:.,..;.};.}•::•::.,•.,:??:.;.;{{..:•}:non•....,,..... ,..r::::}:::.�::??}:V .:�f:`•:•:F.1 ................:..................n... :.................................ti.,.., :.rr::..............,...n.::.::::::,t•:.�::.,:•:•:.::•:}}:•}::•: :.......,.......}:..:....., ,s}r,:,v... ..,?...:.,....,....:•r:::nr,i:•£•:.:::::.�:•::::•::.�:} :. .. .....:. .,.:...................:....:.....r.....:..................:.:...,.,.... ,............r.....n.........,....................:....nt.......... .....:,...-�_ rf t..�}rn:..... :....:....r..r..,.....r:....... :�:..:.�::..., :............ .. .. ..:.. ?...�::•:.?•:{.i;•i: ?.i:{.}y :<{•}}»:•::}:•}:a`.•}}••}:{•::{•:i.•}:•}:•s:i•>::. :. �.� �. ,• �:% .,.: .,E _...s...r.:.:.:..:.t•::y';};:>:•x•}:•}:c:•x r... :..::.:::...:....r:n.,.:,.}:::;.•}.{t.:}:•::::?•::.,• ::�:: •:•: s}: :: �:.::•::•::.{., .: ,.;,.. .. .:::. 1�.. •:Qk- ..1:� I:Y•;::s:•.,:}::}?^.y:}:.;n..::••n/, .....,,r....:,. ..... .. ................................n.........,...............:.............:......... :.. ......: .. .....:. ...: :... .,:..,::.:• ;..::..:f.:r.it � ..:{: ,.::::.:. igiamiliim .......:. ...................:.....,..:.r..................r.............................r......:..........,:...r....:.......:.:.......:. ...:....:.... .....: ... .r.yr ,........ • .i;::?..-:.n,v.,:::-v:::::::::;.•::nv:n'.•}:::::n..gi A::::::;:•r:...::::'..v'i,v:•}:•i•:i: y,.: .. ..... Cv. .....:'., }}fSy}}.. ...}ni... fr.... .:... .r. .:... .: :..,. ....,..,.. ... .... .: ...,.. .....v.N?p};?4'•}:i?{%?iC}{.}i.,.......,..:.. n, :::::;:.;r..v,}{vi: .:ti:(i:r j}}�::i:•:ti}:i$ii^'vr:?{�ii?r}i::i'%i:%ij%i:�:i>}'•t••.:•..:::.::.:..'..,.t:•?..••:::v: v::nw:.....r...r r....• :. ... ...... ... •. ::. ::n .... ::... :}. .. ... :::::.:::::n..v.:•:v.::.:r..:.•r.:iii'r'ii'ri:'ry'::i:�i::i}:'}{'+,.};•i.'•i+i}}i}}:ii.'•:%:%. ............ :?}:q;•:::::v:..v:v,•:•. �:}nv::r::n:::.§i•iu:i:.ipi:.::i. :i:i:Kf•:{•}:•}} ':f ... .: :::::: ... :. .. : ......:.. ..... .... r:.",;i v •::.:.v::::::::§K •::.w:::. :•:::::;•:}•:::::::�r: ..5...........................................r■■■—� ..�►•.�.... :i• ::::•nv v•:::::.}y:NvS::yyi}iy:{.}i:{•}}:{{b}}i'•}:•}in:v:::•:v:.:v.r:::::}i'.ii:.pY.v•.:';. ::Yv. • :v: ±i :�'}�:•n:{xvin{:y}; 4 ::: iw::%i:•j.v:{::i: :% $ .;: >n{ : : : .:i.i:•::i.y.i•..:n. ::: APPLjcA1iQN ..:.. {} ::.}:•:•:+%::•.: may .: : +%h?::+::'?:+:~' +%v lnLs•? pri{:..:; . ; ::y,• ii{%v:}�,•''{;i:?%{ ^r ^:: : n} } �y ; ^ } t } v . - ti{:i;:;iri.s%' {S;G l ff ii •: ::v:: •: .... .... ...:n::.n.:{: x %.':':;:%r}::i:y:?}::i::::?v:v%,:{.i:`.';:. jF: v . .w.. mY }i.::} 4 : ^ ..:.,. .. : .. .. . .. ... . . ' . :. . . . .. .. . . . ... :..p;;vn:• .. y>P`i:<::<.�t?i:,y:<;':'>< '}:>:`eFi'•�'�•��� > <....::::{::.:. r R��> T iN ATE. . ............... e??;.�>`;::: ::.::...,.::a?:...;:.;;•>} :�.y:.a;:>.,:.�:.�.}t.,:;':.`ea'��13>�s � a a� ti� a Ho�a,�;;;I�..zF�•.re:fry,�:na��::l�t,.rt:oae:1..:.�..E}t��nr�e:ry�l.::n:�}-}:..�.::h:.}.r�}}.. ..4 a� E:: . ota xe r t n ac .a:`':is+�':`;<<<>' < '€<'<>:':>�>>'<€��>>> << .n...,•:r.,. .3V..f „;l�.;:Appk�. .4,..:f..r. ,.,.f�..,lN,, ,C „ ,....... .. , ,... . ... PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: ' •" • NAME: /7 L.JN L..L.LG... _ .. . Dow �-1 L'r"Iii AsPrr7 (ex/•0NIT�) . • • PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: : • '• • ADDRESS: • Nam- UF" (ls'trAzS>c.Tcr-1 DV. 54'e-sr. Sarn1 lat1p it DO- (Z4 ' aVa N. 401TE l CITY: f1 • ZIP: KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT.NUMBER(S): • .�U L) -. .l~4A* 41 72 3150-2gf30, az- 602. -2-41‘55 c.24715- TELEPHONE NUMBER: • EXISTING LAND USE(S): OFF VESCE.l4^I-ID4.... 4-25 .(0,02. eo :`.y.,•:' ;:isi::}'s.`•i ?; :<i''iii;;S':'%2%;ii%i:<.`;'isi`'i•':;:i'i;<:`.;%Ef,>.adri::ik: �-1 PROPOSED LAND USES:. `D Iy�D-`- NAME: `Y�! l �fA • COMPANY(if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: • t o ( j c cE2- tool -1 ADDRESS: I 1701 614`` PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): � 3 rE. 2. 1 -#t — . CITY: • ‘7 €TrL E. / IdAer ZIP: 611Br6 ( EXISTING ZONING: •CCI.) DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGTELEPHONE NUMBER: ie*.g11 e—�(o3Cp . PROPOSED ZONING'(if'applicable): CITY OF FiENTOIV .i � 1 DE C 9 2 NT.. .T>P�E`R. . .N...... 000 SITE AREA (SQi. FT. OR ACREAGE): NAME 1 r ��� `V ED ►tikifl . .'. 40 M(o • AFT t ;' COMPANY(if applicable): 11C4,l PROJECT—VALUE: . g 5 Ml-i.iof - ADDRESS: INA, �w A�T, IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? F�T�* IvD ` CITY: ZIP: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? TELEPHONE NUMBER and E-MAIL ADDRESS: lvO .:L:•:i:•ii:{.:ter::{.ii:::.::Lifti4r;Ji}'h?::::::v::::: :::::::»:•:. :.:::»»:::::::............'. �...,,•..,....�............. .........., ._. • • v:::::::::wn.::::}vn...,.....:..::....:r....v.r..w;n......:..n., ♦.............»;•::;:::..v:M::::r:.v:»::.::::nw:::::::::::nw::::•:::v::;v•::r::.. ......,.... :.:::::.:::v:::::.v:::.::::::::::.....: .-�.��,.,..... .-rr.--��n•.� •.v:::::::{,v{J+.i'i::::�:•i;•i:{{?{4:•is : {'':n{ ., .; ` .. , :...,: ..�Y(v,: .:: ., � v v�.;.v:+•::;{..�::::.n.{.} /.•.i:.;:p'. �...r.:{ �::':?;•:i:i:::i� ::5:.'{:i%:.:1[ :v,{•;•y;•:,vn c•+yi.•i:ti4ii:^i}:•iJ:?,v«v:;:•t:l:::t.•A.:^:: • • .SSE A--t'l"AC 2 • • ::}:i'•}i:{bii:{ +j::#::?v:n : ii:ii-n'ti +;f.•'-�ii-:{4:>}}:{{?:-0i}):: . :: ? :•}}: • • - _ANNEXATION • $ SUBDIVISION: • • . • _ COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ • I _ REZONE $• . lc LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ Z, .d(� . _ SPECIAL PERMIT $ _ SHORT•PLAT • • $.• • . _TEMPORARY PERMIT • $ . _TENTATIVE PLAT $ CONDITIONAL USE•PERMIT $ _ PRELIMINARY PLAT ' $ XSITE PLAN APPROVAL ' • $ d�.mv • _.FINAL PLAT ' . • $_ I. _GRADE*& FILL PERMIT •$ • , • (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 •. ' . $ , EXEMPTION. . $No Charge X ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ' $ t3.0.0a • REVISION •• , $• . . . «>AFFIDAVI O`F'!01111117E-RSI-tP'' €<v< >' >:<€> iiimi < t igiii ti N I, (Print Name)1,0I!,J I6a'lfi WI In , declare that I am(please check one)_the owner of the property Involved in this application,itflie • authorized representative to act for the property owner ease‘attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted a e t'vbsepstVtrwue and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 1 l •.��f R.), • 04TTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public,in and 1I1 �vl. • / for the State.of L�JA residing at• (Name of Owner/Represent tive) % /} LiG• , I = o •5//--1I1+)-Q ,on the /S day of Iil�� Sr , 2o�. (Signature of Owy er/Repr•sentat' ) �% �WAS`� ...— ,•L. ` (Signat re of'No y.Pu lic) {is''section':o b:co I ted Ciit` 45 f>:Thl : o e m d::b`'. .t f �':' < '> �`� <`><'><�`«<<'s�<r< .................. ........ ..... ............. ............ .. :Ci1:<Fife>:Nuaer> >t>... .>:':. •111 /A`: AA .... BSP . ...S *301g .,CU.... ...H . :::, ;• ::M.E P:::.;:-.E.Is.0?:{?{{.I✓P{:.PP::.P.:.;>:: uM,1 ::.:SAxA.::.:.;SA»k :::»::>S:FtPLyA,{.:::.S IRL::H:.:. P.:{:.SM...... ME.....'I'E .....V.A.......:. .....U. .H::.,.......... :r:g::>' {� r . MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 03/00 IS.57 I • MI _J U N Archhects+Designers.Planners Pier 56 1201 Macklin Way . Suite zoo Seattle,WA germ PROPERTY 1.11M.TYP.. to 206 623.3144 Al 20 PL- EXISTIN6 H -o5 6 H PL MI MN i ,_ .� y ' a',PM!! a L 'may `tom `T `7R FE�, •- 'T -• R 111) . r ,I .0 fT. I % DEAN SHERMAN ''' .1= ..,,..f:=Fi.... .,‘ v j;:=1 \ s ,_tro PRBIECI: -' '"' INC) Dean Sherman Apts. LOCATOR: r = 5th&Williams,Renton _. ..,,„„ . . . 1 ,, 1 v.- I PREPARED FOR r ,....„. (pi DSI LLC 1 fi . \ cdo . ,.:., _ ,..., _...,1, 4,,,i„. , -4.4 a vm ,fill, 1 t 14 ' 1 iLl II GO • A. I .; _ 4 ‘,.,,.., IMINDI ' iy ,,,,\L 101. 0 ,.__:•----_-----..IgM... a_.I.PAOIrW IIII IP1111 ._I . . 1 fr.41111 -111-1.1 1'1.1.1•1 1.1111.-0 1 1-4FNI_ i► [ _ -- - SLOPE -^ -•�......,/�> raW ���, ,, 1^ 111 IL.ta0-------—• . I lirr ‘1- gr--"lIllIllIll1=IP F- 41111111111r-411111 IrM ___ ___ __ _ __ __ L'4111111111.__ __. _,--.---41111_1_111 ,-.-_-_ 71911111.---: -- 0111A‘..---- 111.1•r. Ellaik Ul III M 1 I I r I. '. AT... iiirdom mw 111/01 Ami r 11IIII�g M Mlll��i NNr Men 11�I n MNiI� i_2110R� " "' WINIIOQIIIIM�II ------ it 5 MIIF . MIIIF MI. Mil. ,, W . 11111V SJ 6 CD WILLIAM AVENUE 5 6 CD 12/14W0 SITE PLAN APP . <= 0101111011 1'•10'-0' • PLANT SCHEDULE sum KEY OTT BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING REMARKS SAW ,- TREES AS,SLIM,SAW AD Aar rubrum'Boo/hall' 6ow0d1 Mople 2'sal &B oe ohown FE VM Ac.r cireinoturn Vine Maple 6'-S'ht. &B as/shown CB Campine batulue'Paengiata' Western Hornbeam 2'cal &D ae shown CO Cords occidental. Wastern Hornbeam 6'•8 ht. &B as/shown "0'ec`a^ MS Magnolia grandtloro Magnolia Orcndiflora 10'-12'M. &B ae/shown SJ Styr..Japon.. Japan.Snowball 6'-10'M &B cis/shown PL Prunus Iuehanico Portogal Laurrl 30'ht. 11Vln PA, SHRUBS / UGC C Arbutus wads'Oktoberfaet' Strawberry Tree 5 gal. ' v Caenottuo grieve horizontal. Wild Lilac 5 gal. I • Fuchsia hybrid. Hybrid Fuchsia 2 gal, it Rhododendron'Dora Amato.' Western Rhododerdron 5 gal. M.=L.T. MOM', Ribaa aureum Golden Carrant 2 gal. e64Rn Roematinue humilie Rosemary 1 gal war Roemarinus oftlelnolis Rosemary 2 gal. Sarcococca n»cifolio Sarcococca 2 gal Syringe vulgar. Lilacs 5 gal. Viburnum cariwll Koran Spice Vlbur en 5 gal. LANDSCAPE PLAN GROUNDCOVYR 8 VINES Clamatb armandll Evrgra.n Clematle 1 gel Arcloetaphylos uva-wei Kinnmick 1 gal. Pachysandra terminal's Pachysandra 4'pole II! CONTAINER PLANTINGS/PERENNIALS "ear Bam inlaid.,'Golden goddeee' Golden Goddess Bamboo 2 gal. ./9161.06 Coraopeis auriculato Nano' Cavopsie 4'pots °" 1�14�2000 H•mrocallle hybrid. D.ydlys 1 gal Liguetrum valgare'Loden. Privet 2 gal .ear a.a...• Nomdlrw domeetica Heavenly Bamboo 2 gal Pennisetum oriantda Fountain Grose 1 gal Salvia oKlcindb Common Sage 4'pots _ 10 O 8OW NM. Stipa pulclra Purple Needle Graee 1 Sol LV -/C 1 5 A L1.1 � > VVV''' NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION a,,,,,,,,Duos,,,ADA wc. fY AA ''�1, 0• Nops 0N4° • C�I -OF�:R EN TON. 4S q : :WorksDeP:--. ' :'.; Plannin "11) /Buildn /PublicDepartment g g Gregg• immerman P.E. Administrator •" . --, .. . 7esse Tanner;Mayor . .... ... •� _ . . -. .. .. r 19,r"2000 •"- Decembe • - •f, Mr:Steven McDonald Mithuri Partners 'I nc . 1201 iAlaskan Way, Suite.#200, the""WA''98101'._ . SUBJ,ECT; Dean Sherman Apartments,.'Project.No', LUA-00-085, SA-A, ECF,LLA Dear Steven' L'aureen Nicolay has informed_me thatthere is'a'questiion about the status of the..Lot Line Adjustment for,the above referenced project,which has.been withdrawn'.at your request:;, In a letter dated.August 28;2000;and another dated-October 24;2000,,you were provided with • comments on the proposed Lot Line Adjustment. These°comments were instructions to you • - . .regarding corrections that need to,be;made to the Lot Line Adjustment drawing ._';At the time the ' application was withdrawn we had not"received responses'from you demonstrating,that these • 'corrections had been made;.theref ore,:the•proposed Lot Line Adjustment was:not.approved by:• • the.City of Renton,prior to the withdrawal of the application::�`••-• - Isu est ou.incorporate the'comments of the`;above._referenced.-letters';,(included;herewith) in — : 99 Y. your.new.Lot Line Adjustment:submittal."-Following submittal of.corrected•drawings,the,City of Renton Property Services,Diivision;will.`either=approve the'drawings.or"provide additional • .comments. We will"notify you when the drawings have been approved and.•request mylars and a • . - check for the courier to, msend the to Icing County for recording: You will subsequently be"notifi• ed when there•cording has been completed:• Please contact"me, at(425)430 7382,'if you,have"anyquestions: • Sincerely, ` Elizabeth`Higgins,:AICP , , Senior Planner Enclosures' r. • - • Ca N'. - Nicola` Lauree n • • -cc:� ' O E , Jennifer.Mennin_ a�, F • file - • , G. E r.. . d - Wa • `Reriton =Wasliin• on 95 � ��' • Gra 805• .- .. .: n.t�:.�:.e.r,.:.�c.,�FnoG.o,•.,�io, .n�od�i �n i.,.;�f�.,..�,,.,,or' .. r . . . - .. :.. CITY. -JF.RENTON - . . .. . . , .. • ..t�.: Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor • Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator • October 24, 2000. Mr. Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc.,. ' .1201. Alaskan Way, Suite#200 ._ . Seattle,WA 98101 . SUBJECT: , Dean Sherman Apartments, Project No. LUA-00-085, SA-A, ECF, LLA • Property Services Comments . • Dear Steve " • " The purpose of this letter is to provide you with additional comments, as they relate to the'above- referenced project, received by planning staff from the City of Renton Property Services Division. These comments address the Lot Line Adjustment you applied for simultaneously with the Site Plan Review and are in addition to the comments we forwarded to you in our letter of August 28,2000. . i The address for the adjusted parcel is 415 Williams Ave S. A previous address (given to you) I was 435 Williams Ave S. Please ignore the 435 address, but do note the first address (415) on the lot line adjustment drawing: The adjusted parcel should.have a designated name, such as"Parcel A"or"Lot A"to better identify the property in future legal descriptions.. • ,;,' If you have questions, please:call me at 425-430-7382. Sincerely, - • Elizabeth Higgins,AICP - • . Senior Planner cc:file 5 . • • - . : • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 • .C .• • 1/4 CIT1 JF RENTON ..� Planning/Building/Public Works Department • • ' • Jesse Tanner,.Mayoc` Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator - August 28, 2000 • • • • Mr.Steven McDonald • - Mithun Partners, Inc. 1201 Alaskan Way,Suite#200 Seattle,WA 98101 SUBJECT:: Dean Sherman Apartments, Project No. LUA-00-085, SA-A, ECF, LLA • Property Services Comments.. Dear Steve • The purpose of this letter is to provide you with comments, as they relate to the above-referenced project, 'received by planning.staff from the City of Renton Property Services Division. These comments address the Lot Line Adjustment you applied for.simultaneously with the Site Plan Review. Lot Line Adjustment Comments to Applicant: Note the land use action number and land record number, LUA-00-085-LLA and LND-30=0211, respectively, on the drawing. - • . Show ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. • • The indexing information is incorrect(for all drawing Sheets). A portion of the subject property is located in the SE%of Section 18 (not Section 17). Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corner of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. Note that the adjoining property to the north is platted (show lot number). The City of Renton no longer requires legal descriptions for new lots;therefore said legal description (Sheet 1 of 3)was not reviewed. • Note that if there are new restrictive covenants, agreements or easements (to the City of Renton or other third party),they can be recorded concurrently with the lot line adjustment.=For. easements,indicate on the drawing to whom the easement:is granted...The lot line adjustment and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The lot , ' line adjustment should have the first recording number. The recording numbers)for the associated document(s) should be referenced on the lot line adjustment document in the appropriate location(s). The city will provide an address for the proposed lot When available, note the address on the .drawing: Lots within or affected by the lot line adjustment are subject to the city's special charges,;if. applicable. • • • • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 ...h . . • Mr. Steven McDonald Seattle,WA 98101 " August 28,2000 , Page 2 • Please contact Sonja Fesser, at(425)430-7312, if you have any questions. - Sincerely, Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner • cc:file • (cY °'et Cityofflenton Development Services Division • ,e NTo< 1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor Renton, WA 98055 Date: December 19, 2000 TO: Steven McDonald FROM: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP/ASLA Mithun Partners Senior Planner Development Services Div. Development/Planning Phone: (206) 971-5636 Phone: (425) 430-7382 Fax: (206) 623-7005 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Number of pages including cover sheet: 5 Lot Line Adjustment REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ As ❑ Please ® For your review be mailed Requested Comment Lot Line Adjustment status letter (Dec 19, 2000) Lot Line Adjustment comment letters (August 28, and October 24, 2000) t 41 fall A. Ahead of the curve 1, a. 1 Dean Sherman Apartments PROJECT NARRATIVE Project Site & Conditions The subject property is located within CD zoning at the Northwest corner of the intersection of South 5th street and Williams Ave. South. It is bordered entirely by CD zoning that consists of primarily single-family houses to the north and west. Currently there is an existing office building and a single-family house on the site. The property dimensions are 115'x 350'. The site is relatively flat with some existing vegetation around the clinic and the house. Subsurface conditions vary consisting primarily of a surficial layer of fill over loose silty sands and gravel. Groundwater exists under the site about 12 to 13 feet below grade. Building Concept The proposed project will remove the existing buildings and construct two new 43 unit multifamily apartment buildings. The new buildings will be four stories of type V-lhour construction(88,800 sf.)over a common concrete parking structure(34,200 sf.)buried approximately seven feet below grade(10,000 cy excavation.) Seventy percent of the 86 units will be either one bedroom or studio units and the remaining 30%will be two bedroom units. The parking garage will provide parking for 112 cars. There is parking for approximately 22 cars on the street frontage on Williams and 5th Ave. Trash storage for both buildings will be within the parking garage. Trash pick-up would occur within the alley and a screened enclosure will be provided. Estimated construction cost to be approximately 8.5 million dollars. Part of the concept on this development was to create a pedestrian friendly environment at the street level by hiding the parking below grade and giving the ground related units on Williams an individual front door character by having access to a private patio space from the street. The ground level of the project will be elevated approximately 30"above the sidewalk grade to provide a degree of privacy for these ground units. Also by doing a basement parking garage we can utilize the 50' allowable by the UBC for this construction type to provide a higher floor to floor elevation and sloped roofs with a steeper pitch to match the residential character of the neighborhood. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 19 2O9 RECEIVED Site Improvements Anticipated street improvements to the site include new sidewalk and street landscaping along Williams Avenue and 5th Street. A 5' strip along the alley will be dedicated to the city to increase the alley width to 15'. Water requirements for the site require installation of a new 8" main from South 4`h street to the site. The city is requesting a 12"main to accommodate future growth and will share the cost differences associated with the"oversizing." Power poles along Williams Ave.will need to be raised to 30' to allow standard street light poles for a collector arterial. This project has been reviewed by the City Council and the Planning commission and is being looked at as a demonstration project for development in this area of the downtown Renton district. Both the Council and the Planning Commission have given preliminary approval to the concept regarding the building layout and the parking ratios. Sue Carlson and Rebecca Lind are very familiar with this project and can assist with any questions. TO BE COMPLETED BY AP CANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 C RCW. requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help ybu and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This Environmental Checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not Know" or"does not apply." complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS Complete this checklist for non-project proposals even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project, "applicant," and "property or site," should be read as "Proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 19 2000 • RECEWED • TO BE COMPLETED BY AP "ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Dean Sherman Apartments • • 2. Name of Applicant: c/o Mithun Partners, Inc. • Steve McDonald 3.. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 1201 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 206-971-5636 4. Date checklist prepared: 5/30/00 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton Development Services Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Permit Submittal, March 2000; Construction Start, Summer 2001 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? if yes, explain. No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal if known. Site Plan Approval and Building Permit from City of Renton • TO BE COMPLETED BY AP CANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • 11. Give a 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. Construction of 86 residential units over 112 parking stalls. Residential construction to be 4 levels of wood framing over a concrete, subterranean parking garage. The gross area of the residential units will be approximately 89,000 SF and the garage about 34,000 SF. 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. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). NWC of the intersection of S. 5th Street&William Ave. S. in Renton, Washington • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountains, other: Flat b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? . 10% at the N.E. corner of the site c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Soil consists of a layer of surficial fill comprised of loose silty sand and silty gravel over similar native soils. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. There will be approximately 10,000 yards of excavation f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. None known TO BE COMPLETED BY AP CANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 90% • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: A temporary erosion and sedimentary controls plan will be prepared during the building permit phase. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the • proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood • smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Minor airborne dust may occur as a result of soil excavation b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts, if any: None 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface waterbody on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetland)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described water? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No • 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that TO BE COMPLETED BY AP :,ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY would be affected. Indicate the source of the fill material. 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. No • 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of water materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of water and anticipated volume of discharge. No b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose and approximate quantities if • known. No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals..., agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None TO BE COMPLETED BY API ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • c. Water runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other water? If so describe. Stormwater runoff will be collected in roof drains, catch basins and conveyed in underground pipes to the existing storm drainage system located at the southeast corner of the site. The proposed storm drainage system will connect to an existing on- site storm drainage pipe that drains to the • City's underground storm drainage system in South 5th Street. A Preliminary Drainage Report and preliminary grading and storm drainage plan have been prepared to graphically depict the proposed drainage system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface • waters? If so, generally describe. The stormwater runoff on paved areas may include residue from petroleum-based products associated with vehicular travel. The project is ekempt from water quality treatment requirements per the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Please refer to the Preliminary Drainage Report for details. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The complete storm drainage system will be constructed to City of Renton standards. The project is exempt from on-site peak rate runoff control per the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Please refer to the Preliminary Drainage Report for details. Surface water will be controlled with roof drains and catch basins to collect stormwater and convey it in underground pipes. Footing drains will be provided according to soils engineer's recommendations. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alter, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain TO BE COMPLETED BY AP CANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 10 fir and cedar trees c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Elevated planters within urban courtyards will encompass approximately 40% of the'site. An additional 5% will be landscaping on grade. • 5. Animals a. Underline any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: None birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None 6. Energy and Natural Resources • a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed TO BE COMPLETED BY AP ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating; manufacturing, etc. Electricity will be used primarily for lighting, power and heating. Natural gas may be used as a heat • source as well. • b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. None known c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy • impacts, if any: Insulated windows 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemical, risk of fire and explosions, 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. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None required b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other?) None known - 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. Heavy excavation equipment will be used for the initial excavation. Beyond that normal building construction noise can be expected from 7 a.m. —8 p.m. weekdays and 9 a.m. —8 p.m. on Saturdays. TO BE COMPLETED BY AP_ 3ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction proposed to occur on weekdays only. Weekends will be used only as necessary. • 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Single family residential and office/clinic uses • b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so describe. • Not known c. Describe any structures on the site. One 4,000 +/-SF clinic and a single residence with a detached garage d. Will any structures be demolished? If so what? All existing structures will be removed. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Center downtown f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Center downtown g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? 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 completed project? There will be approximately 24—2 bedroom units and 62 - 1 bedroom and studio units (approximately 110 residents). j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Approximately 5 people in a SF residence used as an office TO BE COMPLETED BY API ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None • I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Extensive correspondence has occurred with the City of Renton to ensure a collaborative effort in developing this site. 9. Housing • a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low income housing. 86 market rate units 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: None other than the addition of 86 units of housing 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas: what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. Approximately 50' b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Immediate views of the surrounding urban areas may be obstructed by the addition of a 4-story building. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts if any: Elevated courtyards with heavy plantings will be used to soften building in new"urban" environment. TO BE COMPLETED BY AP "ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? • None b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with view? None known of c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None 12. ( Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There is a large city park 1 block to the west in the median along Burnett Ave. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. None 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No b. General describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known TO BE COMPLETED BY API :ANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 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. Site is bordered by S. 5th Street and Williams Ave. S. which allows street parking. Access to the garage is from an alley off S. 5th Street on the west side of the site.• • b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. Approximately one block. • c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The proposed project would provide 112 +/- off- street parking spaces. It would eliminate 22 off- street spaces dedicated to the remaining clinic and 9 to the single-family office to be removed. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing road or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The alley to the west of the site will be widened by 5' as required by the Renton Fire Department by taking a 5' easement along the alley and the length of the project. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? if known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. See traffic study g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: See traffic study r TO BE COMPLETED BY API ANT , EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public • services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, school, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes. The addition of 86 living units will require services typical of multi-family development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. Utilities • • a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Power— Puget Sound Energy; Natural Gas— Puget Sound Energy; Cable TV—AT&T Cable; Telephone — US West; Water and Sewer—City'of Renton. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. ' Signature of Proponent/Applicant: 4SA `71B.IFN tic-V-27064-P — t1l"C 3r1 Date Submitted: (2.,(4 po Receipt# Filing Fee $ O • • • • • After Recording, Return to: :5 Paul W. Houser, Jr. ORIGINAL DOBSON, HOUSER & DOBSON P. O. Dox 59 Renton, IAA 90057-ooSAGREEMENT ACKNOWLEDGING PERMISSIVE USE `:3 THIS AGREEMENT Is entered Into this day between PAUL W. a HOUSER. SR. and LILA V. HOUSER, husband and wife, hereafter referred to .41 as "HOUSER." and DAVID H. SWAYNE and PAULA SWAYNE, husband and • :4 wife, hereafter referred to as "SWAYNE." WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Houser is the owner of: The North half of Lot 17. Block 27. Plat of the town of Renton as laid out by E.M. Smithers, I.B. Morris and C.B. 4 Shattuck, according to the plat recorded In Volume 1 of Plats. page 135 in King County. Washington. hereafter referred to as "the Property;" and d WHEREAS. Swayne is the owner of: Lot 18, Block 27, Plat of the town of Renton as Iaid out by • E.M. Smithers, LB. Morris and C.B. Shattuck, according to ;; :•' 1 the plat recorded In Volume 1 of Plats, page 135 In King ; County. Washington, hereafter referred to as "Swayne's Property." am•. WHEREAS, Swayne has been using a portion of the North half of the ;•; Property for a period of time for parking of vehicles and yard purposes;and E; • WHEREAS, the parties wish to formally define that Swayne's continued h' use of the Property Is permissive use, and as a result thereof, has not and • will not acquire any rights by adverse possession or otherwise. • NOW. THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the benefits to both parties. it is hereby agreed as follows: I. Swayne and their successors In interest to Swayne's Property 0EV LOPME PLANNING ITY OF R; NTON may continue to use the Property for the parking of vehicles and yard purposes. DEC 4 ' 20C3 ECE[ ED -I- • t :'!�.''P.4, •`bra •p' 'V� •. _, '.•'.= ..• �){ ? tD L • w ' t i • 1i , 2. Swayne or their successors In Interest to Swayne's Property shall 1 not and have not acquired any right, title or Interest to the Property byf. . adverse possession, prescriptive easement or otherwise, and hereby waives any claim thereto. `1 3. Swayne acknowledges that their use of the Property Is :` permissive and terminable at any time by the owners of the Property. .j 4 provided that Swayne or their successors in interest shall be entitled to ) i . sixty (60) day's written notice prior to termination of their use of the Property. t Dated this /:; day of ///;,:;, 1992. a / .CLCL�iL /�/'c(.� 1 / / f Paul-)W.rHouser,Sr. Lila V. Houser f ..-j. . s (l/1 h i' • , . . , r- ,-.-EY . 6,-(671(A /7_ :.:. . N •4d H. Swaljme--• Paula Swayne / .,,• it 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) •. ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) On this d•I ay of May, 1992, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, • personally appeared PAUL W. HOUSER, SR. and LILA V. HOUSER to me • known to be the individuals described In and who executed the foregoing Instrument, and acknowledged to me that they signed and sealed the said • instrument as their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and ' purposes therein mentioned. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year In this certificate above written O _ NOTARY PUBLIC In and for a State' it: 1 of Washington, residing at L'v%. t My commission expires: 3 h-5 9 - • -2- t • • 1111 .1 . is • • • STATE OF WASIENGTON ) COUNTY OF SING ) ss ); `o; On this /5-day of May, 1992, before me. the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared DAVID H. SWAYNE and PAULA SWAYNE to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the foregoing Instrument. and acknowledged to me that they signed and sealed the said instrument as r their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein • • mentioned. • WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year in this certificate above-written. • N ARY PUB IC in d for a St to of ashington, resld ng at ' Ii My commission expires:-t-74J-91 is • K • 1 - . -3- 5:49 FAX 206 448 6248 UNIT 5 _ -► FATBELL 4 003 ti SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE f f5:e-110 ON-1 ORDER NO. 813778-C3 SCHEDULE A THE ASSURANCES REFERRED TO ON THE FACE PAGE ARE: A. TITLE IS VESTED IN: S-D RENTON, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY • B. THAT ACCORDING TO TEE 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 I"I'I LE 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: I. 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: 1 LOTS 11 THROUGH 17 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS AT PAGE(S) 135, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 5 FEET OF SAID LOTS CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 910203 AND 910204_ RECORD MATTERS: 1. DELETED 2. GENERAL TAXES. THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30TH. THE SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31ST. YEAR: 2000 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 603.35 AMOUNT PAID: $ 301.68 • AMOUNT DUE: $ 301.67, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, IF DELINQUENT TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 723150-2430-01 ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND: $46,000.00 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT: $ 0.00 CITY ME REPTON 3. DELETED. DEC 1 ,9 2`'71 Page 2 RECEIVED • Dean Sherman Apartments URBAN CENTER DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICT REPORT Pedestrian Building Entries • The proposed building is set back from the street approximately 12 feet. This setback area is elevated from the sidewalk from 12"to 30"and will have an"urban landscape"consisting of paved areas surrounded by fixed and movable planters. Each street level unit along Williams will have an individual court and entrance off the sidewalk providing a pedestrian buffer from the building to the street. The primary entrance to the buildings will be marked by an overhead canopy and a widened stair and ramp area down to the street. Transition to Surrounding Development The nature of the surrounding properties is anticipated to change significantly in the near future. The use of steep sloped roofs,window bays and a careful manipulation of surfaces will offset the mass of the building initially. As similar development surrounds the site the building will integrate well. The alley side of the site has been set back from the property to allow a landscaped courtyard to screen the building • and address the alley rather than ignore it. Location of Parking,Vehicular Access & Pedestrian Circulation All the required parking for the site will be accommodated in a subterranean garage below the building. The access to the garage will be off the alley side of the development routing cars to a mid block access on south 5th street or north to south 4th street. There are no curb cuts required that would interfere with pedestrian circulation on site. The top of the parking garage will be completely landscaped offering little indication that there is a parking garage on site. There will be no loss of street parking in development of the site. Common Space & Landscaping The entire top of the garage will be landscaped with a combination of elevated planters and concrete pavers. The planters are integrated with the rhythm of the building walls. Along Williams avenue the paved courtyards are private and intended for the use of the first floor street facing apartments. At the alley side,the elevated.courtyards are semiprivate with open common space provided along the alley. Between the buildings open common space is provided within the common court. Circulation allowing access between the common plantings along the alley and between the buildings will be provided. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 19 2"" RECEIVED t Building Character and Massing One of the greatest challenges of this project was to design a 4-story building which is sympathetic to the lower single-family context. In this regard,the building is composed of a series of intersecting gables which,mimic the adjacent structures,and are joined by a flat roof element at the center. The building massing is further articulated by a variety of modulation widths,some of which are accentuated by shed roofs which allude again to the"house"vernacular. The façade treatment combines the use of two siding widths and stucco. The stucco is used on elements which are closer to the ground plane,and which protrude from the principal structure creating an undulation of light and shadow. Attention is drawn to these lower elements by the use of an accent color on the stucco. The color of the siding is intended to recede into the background diminishing the apparent mass of the building. The buildings are set upon an elevated landscaped base,which creates privacy and a further layering, which will also help to focus attention to the lower levels. The lower units have private stairs,which lead to individual entrances alluding to the"townhouse"or a continuation of the single-family porch front house typologies. CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION • Proposed construction dates (begin and end dates): Construction will begin as soon as building permits are issued approximately November 2000. Construction will be completed within approximately one year. • Hours of operation: Construction hours of operation will comply with City of Renton requirements, which are between the hours of 7:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and between the hours of 9:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays and holidays. No work will be done on Sundays. Work within City right-of-way will generally be within the hours of 8:30 a.m.to 3:30 pm.on weekdays,except the final design and permit requirements may require some work on Saturdays or late nights to avoid traffic impacts or work within City right-of-way. • Proposed hauling/transportation routes: The main hauling/transportation route to and from the site will be via South Grady Way, an arterial street located two blocks from the site. Access to the site from South Grady Way will most likely be via South 5th Street. Construction traffic leaving the site will access South Grady Way via South 5th Street for northbound traffic or via Williams Avenue South for southbound traffic. • Measure to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts,erosion,mud,noise, and other noxious characteristics: Dust will be controlled by watering. Traffic and transportation impacts will be controlled by hours of operation,traffic control flaggers,and traffic control devices. A temporary erosion control plan will be prepared during the final engineering phase. The site is relatively flat,and will be excavated below street level,so erosion should not be a problem. However, shoring may be required per the geotechnical engineering study by Earth Consultants Inc. dated November 11, 1999. Mud will be controlled by a temporary rock construction and washing of truck tires prior to leaving the site onto City streets. Cleaning of City streets by sweeping will be done as necessary to keep the streets clean. Noise impacts will be normal construction noises from equipment and building construction, and will be temporary in nature. • Any specialty hours proposed for construction or hauling (i.e., weekends, late nights): Hours of construction have been described above. Final design and permit requirements may require some specialty hours of construction for work on Saturdays or late nights to avoid traffic impacts or work within City right-of-way. No work will be done on Sundays. • Preliminary traffic control plan: Traffic control will be provided during work within City right-of- way and as necessary for trucks entering and leaving the site. Traffic control will be provided using flaggers, signs,barricades,flashing warning lights, and channelizing devices according to WSDOT Standard Plans K-2 and K-5. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 19 2000 RECEIVED 7251.005[RJA/kn] ti` Y °� City of Renton • hbu ® • Development Services Division ,4>N,-v0 1.55 South Grady Way, 6th Floor Renton, WA 98055 Date: November 21, 2000 TO: Steven McDonald FROM: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP/ASLA Mithun Partners Senior Planner Development Services Div. Development/Planning Phone: (206) 971-5636 Phone: (425) 430-7382 Fax: (206) 623-7005 Fax Phone: (425)430-7300 SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments Number of pages including cover sheet: 5 Submittal materials& fees REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ As ❑ Please ® For your review be mailed Requested Comment Waiver List (my initials indicate waived items) Fee schedule ($1500, plus postage for notice of application) DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 19 20fl RECEIVED Ahead of the curve ai(""'t .. EV'E'LO'P_MENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS .FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS lf.....................................................`<>al AIVED < NtE CIS l l7i <<><<<< <>< >>:>: ><«<<»>:»<<<:>>>< >> ><<>I> >»>><»<> Calculations, Surveyi t [L v De��[.' ::>Wot.she..ir. ................................... Drainage Control Plan 2 �O r D n :: Elevations,Architectural 3 AND 4 "la) 1=1eva Ian ..Gr • Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy)4 Exts... .Easeme s. l���ol'..ed..�: �.::.::.:.:.::::::::::.:::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::.::::::::::..::..:.....::.:...:.: ................................................................................................. Flood Plain Map, if applicable 4 Floor#�ta�is��wu�» >< <:>> ::>:>::>�>> ..... . . . ... .. .................................................. ............................................................... ................................... .... ...... ................................. .............................. Geotechnical Report 2 AND 3 VEc� �{GOW0� "t4 Grading Plan, Detailed 2 Landscaping Plan, Conceptual 4 ti L................. ............................................. ........................................ .................... List of Surrounding Property Owners 4 ({eS Map of Existing Site Conditions 4 4 ee— I; Oa -O 1 Monument Cards (one per monument) , Apr' L., L.Q ( fret/ • Plan Reductions (PMTs)4 es Preapplication Meeting Summary 4 0/A Publ[c:Worlis:A. .roval:Letter2 # »':>>':<:::>:':<:>:'>:«::::<::«::«<:::::>:::::>::> Rehabilitation Plan 4 N/6 This requirement may be waived by: 1 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: V � �Q,f'i�c!`S 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: N OV 9-4 I 20 O 4. Development Planning Section DEVELOPMENT CITY FF PLAN RENTON DEC 19 2000 RECEIVEDh:\division.s\develop.ser\dev.pian.ing\waiver.xls REVISED 5/17/00 • e. ..VELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION • WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS :::: ::�...:...............L�.....:... .:..:.......M.:.:::.:Ut3�111.:..:..:.::�:. ......... ..HIV:AI.y.�E7.........IGIQ�1�]...[�.::.:::::::::::.........:::::...:.:: . ;:.;:;;;:�lf•tE/.�U11R�ItllEftl't' .:...:.:::................................:.::.:. ::.:::::::::::..:::::::::::.�y..:.::::::.�:::..::::(SI44t#p5zl ::::::::::::.::::::::..:::::.:..::.::..:::................... .... Screening Detail a C(h R-- • ................................................................................................ Title Report or Plat Certificate 4 ()014441".—. . Traffic Study 2 k r' b :.::, : Urban Center Design Overlay District Reps Wetlands Delineation Map a �1Veflards<Plan in .Plar�. .......................................................... ..................................................................:........::::.:::::::..:::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::.:::::::::::::::::.::.�.::::::::::::. Wetlands Study a it e t :»::>:::::<:tnvenxQ:..>of:EXistin .St as. . .................................................. ...... ...... . , .:::::.:::::::::..::.::_:::::::.:::.:.....:.:.........:... ......... ............ This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: +J_ A 'T 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: NOY 2.( 1 2,00 c) 4. Development Planning Section • leArizafi 1/1di mothrtit C e-'41'5h 4Ljbw - • DEVELOPMENT CITY Y p OF RENT pN►N, DEC• 19 2On.) i\ • h:\division.s\develop.ser\dev.pian.ing\waiver.xis • REVISED 5/17/00 CITY OF RENTON LAND USE REVIEW. FEE SCHEDULE �EE�s'AM:.��� .................................. • • > ::.�:APPtI`Ceti :����1\I'> >PI= >'» .........:::::.:::::::::.�::::::>:::::::::::,:::::::::::::::::::::...:...................�U........�................:..:: ..............:.....::.::::::::::::::.:;:..... ANNEXATION . Expense for postage APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION OR $75.00 ADMINISTRATIVE OR ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS BINDING SITE PLAN APPROVAL $1,000.00 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT $1,000.00 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL PERMIT: Hearing Examiner Review $500.00 Administrative Review $250.00 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Hearing Examiner Review $2,000.00 Administrative Review • $1,000.00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/DRAFT AND FINAL 100% of costs of coordination, review and appeals ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: Less than $100,000 project value $400.00 $100,000 or more project value $1,000.00 0'pD Environmental Review/sensitive lands or lands covered by water, 2' except minor residential additions or modifications $1,000.00 - GRADING AND FILLING PERMITS $2,000.00 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $450.00 MOBILE HOME PARKS: • Tentative $500.00 Preliminary $2,000.00 Final $1,000.00 PLATS: Short Plat $1,000.00 Preliminary Plat $2,000.00 Final Plat $1,000.00 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: Tentative Plan $500.00 INNING Preliminary Plan $2,000.00 ®I�E�pps` c;�ji�j Final Plan 0 $1,000.00 REZONE: DEC I cd� Less than 10 acres R€CE V D $2,000.00 10 to 20 acres $3,000.00 More than 20 acres $4,000.00 h:div.sldev.serldev.plan'Jn:feetabl.doc CITY OF RENTON LAND USE REVIEW FEE SCHEDULE .................... ANNEXATION Expense for postage APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION OR $75.00 ADMINISTRATIVE OR ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS BINDING SITE PLAN APPROVAL $1,000.00 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT $1,000.00 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL PERMIT: Hearing...Examiner Review $500.00 r Administrative Review $250.00 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Hearing Examiner Review $2,000.00 Administrative Review $1,000.00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/DRAFT AND FINAL 100% of costs of coordination, review and appeals ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: Less than $100,000 project value • $400.00 $100,000 or more project value $1,000.00 Environmental Review/sensitive lands or lands covered by water, except minor residential additions or modifications $1,000.00 GRADING AND FILLING PERMITS $2,000.00 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $450.00 MOBILE HOME PARKS: . Tentative $500.00 Preliminary $2,000.00 Final $1,000.00 PLATS: Short Plat $1,000.00 Preliminary Plat $2,000.00 Final Plat $1,000.00 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: Tentative Plan $500.00 Preliminary Plan $2,000.00 . • Final Plan • $1,000.00 REZONE: Less than 10 acres $2,000.00 10 to 20 acres $3,000.00 More than 20 acres $4,000.00 h:div.sldev.serldev.planUn:feetabl.doc . CITY OF RENTON - LAND USE REVIEW FEE SCHEDULE ..P CA: a. .hl:::>.>:;p ::::::;::::: ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT $75.00 SHORELINE FILING FEE: Under$100,000 value $500.00 $100,000 or more value $1,000.00 SITE PLAN APPROVAL: • Hearing Examiner Review $2,000.00 Administrative Review $1,000.00< ,t SPECIAL PERMIT $2,000.00 TEMPORARY PERMIT $100.00 TEMPORARY PERMIT SIGN DEPOSIT(refundable) $25.00 VARIANCE-Administrative $100.00 VARIANCE-Board of Adjustment or Hearing Examiner $500.00 WAIVER $100.00 g01N7'€:cANta`:USEAPP:LICATt...f)I...:.::. .:..........................:............:...:....:::::::::::::::.::::.:::. c ar. i::fannd:use a . ftcatiol.s.:a . licant:shall: :a .fuli. `ee fetthe;.most:exendue::.me or)app1 ation and one.�tiatff�relatiiap:l�eatlo.::::.:::<.::.: ............................................. ...... EXTRA FEES: , Whenever any application is to be handled under the terms of any portion of the City's land use codes, , adopted codes, or the Uniform Building Code, and that application is so large, complicated or technically 1- complex that it cannot be handled with existing city staff,then an additional fee can be chaNikktki8h is. equivalent to the extra costs incurred by the City of Renton to pay: CRY � o��/�G a. overtime costs, ®EC ' b. the pro-rated costs of additional employees necessary to handle the application, - - 9 20 c. the costs expended to-retain the qualified consultants to handle the project, and .' ram 00 d. any general administrative costs when directly attributable to the project. ���0/ED 1 Such fees shall be charged only to the extent incurred beyond that normally incurred for processing an application. • When the application or development plans are modified so as to require additional review by the City beyond the review of normally required for like projects, at the discretion of the Development Services Director, an additional fee may be charged at$75.00:per hour. UNIFORM CODE FEES: Fees charged per the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and related separate.codes shall be available for enforcement of those regulations, and are separate from the• provisions in this ordinance. REFUNDS: 80%of the applicable fee will be refundable if the application is withdrawn prior to circulation by the Planning Staff. After circulation (and review has begun) no refund of base fees will be authorized. h:div.s\dev.serldev.plan\ln:feetabl.doc 12/15/2000 15:49 FAX 206 448 6246 UNIT 5 -, FATBELL 4 002 • may.` r24 k1c �` { C • /! FirstAmerican Title Insurance Company AMENDED SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE ORDER NO. 813778-C3 LIABILITY: $2,000.00 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 S-D RENTON, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 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 MATTER 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. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 19 20 DECEIVED 12/15/2000 15:49 FAX 206 448 6248 UNIT 5 _ -► FATBELL 0 003 SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE ORDER NO. 813778-C3 SCHEDULE A THE ASSURANCES REFERRED TO ON THE FACE PAGE ARE: A. TITLE IS VESTED TN: S-D RENTON, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY • 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 1"1'1'LE TO SAID REAL PROPERTY OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN BELOW UNDER RECORD MATTERS. THE FOLLOWING MATTERS ARE EXCLUDED FROM TILE COVERAGE OF THIS GUARANTEE: I. 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: LOTS 11 THROUGH 17 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS AT PAGE(S) 135, 1N KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 5 FEET OF SAID LOTS CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 910203 AND 910204_ RECORD MATTERS: 1. DELETED 2. GENERAL TAXES. THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30TH. THE SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31 ST. YEAR: 2000 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 603.35 AMOUNT PAID; $ 301.68 AMOUNT DUE: $ 301.67, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, IF DELINQUENT TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 723150-2430-01 ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND: $46,000.00 ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT: $ 0.00 3. DELETED. Page 2 12/15/2000 15:49 FAX 206 448 6248, UNIT 5 FATBELL a1004 • • ORDER NO. 813778-C3 4. DELETED. 5. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENTER, A PARTNERSHIP COMPRISED OF MANFRED M.LABAND AND KAREN E. LABAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND HOWARD B. MILLER AND CATHERINE E.MILLER, HUSBAND AND WIFE TRUSTEE: RAINIER NATIONAL BANK BENEFICIARY: GREAT NORTHWEST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, A CORPORATION AMOUNT: $648,000.00 DATED: SEPTEMBER 25, 1986 RECORDED: OCTOBER 23, 1986 RECORDING NO.: 8610230732 (AS TO LOTS I THROUGH 14) 6. ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES AND/OR RENTS AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSIGNOR: RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENTER, A PARTNERSHIP COMPRISED ON MANFRED M. LABAND AND KAREN LABAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND HOWARD B.MILLER AND CATHERINE E. MILLER, HUSBAND AND WIFE ASSIGNEE: GREAT NORTHWEST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION DATED: SEPTEMBER 25, 1986 RECORDED: OCTOBER 23, 1986 RECORDING NO.: 8610230733 7. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENTER, A PARTNERSHIP COMPRISED ON MANFRED M. LABAND AND KAREN LABAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND HOWARD B. MILLER AND CATHERINE E. MILLER, HUSBAND AND WIFE TRUSTEE: CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY BENEFICIARY: PAUL W. HOUSER, SR. AND LILA V. HOUSER AMOUNT: $90,000.00 DATED: SEPTEMBER 9, 1992 RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 9, 1992 RECORDING NO.: 9209090762 (AS TO LOTS 16 AND 17) 8. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: S-D RENTON, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TRUSTEE: TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY BENEFICIARY: RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENTER, A WASHINGTON GENERAL PARTNERSHIP AMOUNT: SECURITY FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF AN AGREEMENT DATED: SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 RECORDING NO.: 19990930002453 Page 3 12/15/2000 15:50 FAX 206 448 6248 _. UNIT 5 -►TATBELL 4005 ORDER NO. 813778-C3 9. PERMISSIVE USE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: PAUL W. HOUSER, SR. AND LILA V. HOUSER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND: DAVID H. SWAYNE AND PAULA SWAYNE, HUSBAND AND WIFE RECORDED: MAY 22, 1992 RECORDING NO.: 9205222702 (AS TO THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 17) 10. A RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED JULY 7, 1999 UNDER RECORDING NO. 199907079000018, SAID SURVEY DISCLOSES THE FOLLOWING MATTERS: CITY OF RENTON DOWNTOWN MONUMENTATION PROJECT - ANY SKETCH ATTACHED HERETO IS DONE SO AS A COURTESY ONLY AND IS NOT PART OF ANY TITLE COMMITMENT OR POLICY_ IT IS FURNISHED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING IN LOCATING THE PREMISES AND FIRST AMERICAN EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY LIABILITY WHICH MAY RESULT FROM RELIANCE MADE UPON IT. DATED: DECEMBER 11, 2000 AT 8:00 A.M. 4,// / r j°7-,'. RICHARD BOOTH TITLE OFFICER RB/KLK Page 4 { **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Reprinted: 12/19/00 09 :34 Receipt ****************************************************************., Receipt Number: R0007183 Amount : 1, 500 . 00 12/19/00 09 :33 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: #1051 S-D RENTON Init : LN Project #: LUA00-168 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 723150-2455 Site Address : 415 WILLIAMS AV S Total Fees : 1, 500 . 00 This Payment 1, 500 . 00 Total ALL Pmts : 1, 500 . 00 Balance : . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 .345 . 81 . 00 . 0007 Environmental Review 500 . 00 000 .345 . 81 . 00 . 0017 Site Plan Approval 1, 000 . 00 p EVEL ;.RE1TON ING G September 11,2000 Renton City Council Minutes Page 320 transportation tasks and processes associated with the I-405/NE 44th St. Interchange project. Council concur. Executive: Centennial Executive Department requested approval of a$6,000 budget increase to cover Celebration Budget additional costs related to planning 2001 Centennial Celebration activities,and requested approval to budget$.106,000 in 2001 to fund activities,events,and materials. Refer to Community Services Committee. Finance: Action Aviation Fuel - Finanee&Information Services Department reported that Action Aviation has Spill Cleanup Debt not paid$8,511.45 that remains due for the cleanup cost of a fuel spill at the Renton.Municipal Airport. Refer'to Transportation Committee. Finance: Airport Lease Debt, Finance&Information Services Department reported that John Lien is in John Lien(LAG-86-003) arrears in the amount of$9,408.68 for land and building rental and leasehold tax on property rented at the Renton Municipal Airport(LAG-86-003). Refer to Transportation Committee. Finance: 2000 Solid Waste Finance&Information Services Department recommended approval of an Ordinance ordinance that implements 2000 solid waste service changes as reflected in the contract with Waste Management,Inc.,executed in 2000. Refer to Utilities Committee. Technical Services: Oakesdale Technical Services Division recommended acceptance of a deed of dedication Ave SW Extension Project, for property owned by Longacres Park,Inc.,which is needed for the Oakesdale Deed of Dedication Ave. SW Extension Project,extending Oakesdale from SW 27th to SW 31st St. (Longacres Park) Council concur. Latecomer Agreement: • Technical Services Division requested final approval of latecomer agreement • Gelvezon(SW 12th St), submitted by Elvis Gelvezon for waterline improvements on SW 12th St.,and Waterline Improvements,LA- •. requested approval to extend the preliminary approval time for a period of four 99-002 months,approve the agreement,and direct the City Clerk to mail final notification to the affected property owners. -Council concur. Technical Services: Oakesda le_ Technical Services Division requested approval of an easement with Puget Ave SW Extension Project, - Sound Energy,Inc.,to accommodate underground vaults necessary to feed Puget Sound Energy Easement traffic signaling and street lighting for the extension of Oakesdale Ave. SW. Council concur. Utility: Stoneway Concrete • Utilities Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with Plant Regulated Substances AnMarCo and Stoneway Concrete in the amount of$70,000 to assist in their Removal,AnMarCo& efforts to reduce the quantity of regulated substances on the Stoneway Concrete Stoneway Concrete Batch Plant site as partof the relocation of the Stoneway Concrete Plant which must relocate by 10/14/02 to comply with the Aquifer Protection Ordinance. Refer to;Utilities Committee. Special Assessment District: Utilities Division requested authorization to add two additional lots to the Aberdeen Ave NE(Addition Aberdeen Ave.NE Sanitary Sewer Special Assessment District which was of 2 Lots) approved by Council on 7/24/00. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from John and Donna See,438 Burnett Ave. S., Citizen Comment: See—Dean Renton, 98055,requesting that the entrance to the parking garage to the Sherman Apartments proposed Dean Sherman Apartments be located on Williams Ave. S.,rather (Williams Ave S) than from the alley. Mr.and Mrs. See also requested that a moratorium be Lt T�n_o0-161 imposed on building construction in the area until the sewer pipeline repair is completed. CITY OF RENTON A U G 2 9 2000 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE /� 8-29-2000 TO RANDY CORMAN - L•oP�e� �{ �O `.� � y COUNC I LMEMBER, C6(;2 /r U1di V;CL� 4 ` Mr/ REGARDING THE DEAN SHERMAN APTS. PROJECT NO. LUA-OO-085, SA-A,V-B, ECF, LLA WE FEEL THE ENTRANCE & EXIT TO THE PARKING GARAGE SHOULD BE ON WALLIAMS ST. NOT THE ALLEY. BECEAUSE 67 UNITS WILL ADD 444 TRIPS A DAY TO THE EXISTING TRAFFIC, THAT IS TO MUCH FOR A 15 FOOT ALLEY, PLUS ADDING POLUTION. & DANGER. AND WE FEEL LIKE A FOUR STORIE BLDG. IS TOO LARGE FOR THIS NIIGHBORHOOD. THE APTS. ARE NOT PROVIDING ENOUGH PARKING. WE THINK THERE SHOULD BE A MORITORIAM ON BLDG. CONSTRUCTION IN THIS AREA UNTILL AFTER THE SEWER PIPE LINE REPAIR IS DONE, THE NOISE FROM THAT WILL BE BAD ENOUGH . WITH OUT THE APT. PROJECT AS WELL. PLUS THE TRUCKS FROM BOTH PROJECTS AT THE SAME TIME WILL BE A NUISANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU JOHN & DONNA SEE 438 BURNETT AV S RENTON, WA 98055 Cam, : ?X.1 Lt.4.a.011110-"' VI l4- tiw .v1 . 0e ., 1,2c, • _ . Eastside Interceptor Sewer ,riqw. t Improvement Project KING COUNTY June 2000 Public Meeting King County will host a public meeting on Thursday,June wastewater flow,the original 22 at Renton City Hall,Council Chambers to discuss details capacity ofthe pipeline must ` '' <;,•�'%. for a planned sewer improvement project. An open house be restored. ..`M" '`` ,,,„, .. begins at 6 p.m.The meeting is from 7:00 to 8:30 p.m. King County selected a preferred alternative for The Eastside Interceptor is a large sewer pipeline that restoring lost capacity. The alternative involves the . carries wastewater from much of eastern urban King construction of a bypass pipeline,that will combine County to the South Plant in Renton. An earthquake with the existing flow and restore original capacity. damaged the interceptor in 1965. To repair the damage, The new bypass pipeline will be constructed by portions of the bottom of the pipe were paved. However, tunneling beneath Houser Way South between the paving resulted in a loss of about 20 percent of the Burnett Ave.and Morris Ave.,and beneath Morris pipeline capacity. Due to growth and increases in Avenue South between Houser Way and Seventh Street. ♦ } NY 2 f: > ;_ ? » E JACKING ♦ . }{ > }vrti {:Lvrk '40 ti{ ;:.: ytC� Rfw { { {m:�:t•:{-:k5is : , PIT �C : . � " l t t . C tfor :;:il c � , iS!.g.+c..:.c:r{ `< : r.,1.. ; . :` � Y s <a♦♦- JACKING oa •♦ . > " ' ati f ; . ; .; <£ > - � • PIT .. rx ;t rs nst. « %{^•;},.:,;:.•:::{L} ••• `- • 'n-KK:vr • aini+t4v,'{:fin •4.,:i}Mtii:fq;}{}�ivii,ji:ri{}�iv,,:4r ..r<E • nn•' #3 `:`:'< S. 5th Street ..•:xr.•:{.::n.r.. d-. ,.�? .�$S� ,r •{':r{h:;}}}•.ti}ti}:L}:;L-:14'i'^`f:o.:;vi si••:J{l{#.v.^+rriJt}.{a`.,{:,.}•i}{:ti:.,i :..v}vi ca.. v.0 . r< ;}>::%.{�:::;ri(}}:y{::. }?�wF: €:w:?d?t•}}:1<.L�<?ii i:° Keodm BYPASS > s>> iika wizip ><»»%: :,:i i{>: :: A:.0i.t nii:,{{{ PIPELINE 0 .,;,: ..v.,+:{Lyiti{}\;'{{{}"k?#::{fi{M1ti:;r:;:{ii{{•, i{{::'<}}}??yk 0 = tier �\{�:�v'i{r}'• �?.4y}::4}:{. :� ii� [:i*t t{{{ti{4:;n'+x''^Krn<{',o :fi.2i th ..e•: 5 i�: ^ vi..... .... w;;{+};..::.:.:.:;}:..v..r...n.•v:4:•.:w:.. r.r.:r.r .:::..�::.:.,..:�:.........:. .....::::::v..v::.::-....j}i::,..}�.,-. iiil!I if.:\' :¢::•...:':tii}}::{:rj22q.:,;.{:,.••{.v.:{}�.;:g•5v:.}h}•r,Y•::a:: • • >�v: : : a:{. :::Y}:�.}w:.> JACKING i?':%?{{:;vyr{:{rii•{�r4t.%1;..•'r••:: '^':4:v:{::�::{{{+4::}{i;i:y}}}:'�S L.., ,t„t{?t i,tf,ttt..ri;3�?•� L•>. tt.,.::,:::,>Ls::...t:...,i PIT : !!! ..,::::.i..E:i!ii:: isa: :#):-:{-}•:•:.::-::: •}}:.;.r., King County Coordinates ::;...:: ::.::::::::.:>.:_::_:::.:::.:::::::::: :::: : ::. : .:::.. S.7th Street with City of Renton King County is working with the City of Renton as well as the City's Fire Department to coordinate details of access around the area during construction. Also,the County may obtain work-area easements from Burlington Northern Santa Fe(BNSF)for use of space between Houser Way South and the railroad tracks. Plans would include restoring impacted landscaping that that might be removed or damaged due to construction activities. 6 KING COUNTY Department of Natural Resources , Eastside Interceptor Section 1 Capacity Restoration Project Traffic Plan 1 Intersection of Burnett and Houser: — Closure of the southbound lane of Burnett — Two-way traffic, no parking, in northbound lane of Burnett — Closure of east outlet of Houser — Closure of north two parking lots osinboulevard and partial removal/replacement of landscaping — Construction traffic through north parking lot and south in southbound lane . of Burnett_ — Dinner Train pedestrian traffic: • to east sidewalk of Burnett • across Burnett at the 4th intersection • add traffic barrier and track improvements at intersection * Duration - approximately 5-7 months Intersection of Morris and Houser: — Closure of Morris between 5th and Houser — Closure of Houser east and west of Morris — One-way westbound traffic on 5th between Houser and the alley between Morris and Smithers — No parking on north side of 5th between Houser and the alley between Morris and Smithers — Possible no parking on Morris south of 5th — Restricted access to residences � Houseruser t5hand Burnett orris — Construction traffic routed Shattuck, * Duration - approximately 6-9 months Intersection of Morris and 7th: — Closure of Morris between 7th and 6th — Periodic closure of 7th during critical operations: = installation of shoring = excavation for structure = backfilling of structure = removal of shoring — No parking on north side of 7th between Whitworth and Smithers — Possible restriction on accessdriveway on 7t o property opposite orris — Temporary bridge acrossexcavation — Construction traffic routed on 7th - LEGEND ; Truck Traffic X ��l�l�l l�! Street Closed ���/ — F,`,,`,`,y Traffic Restrictions ��A V///// Two-Way Traffic ,������ S.4TH STREET F 'il One-Way Traffic tV -'1 Shaft ,,,,,,�� P ���. r�� / S.5TH STREET *$ w C 01L** z (.6 w w w z z ¢ ¢ ? . 0 A p w w w � ,� Q \� 1% a > ) ] -§ 0 D Q A 2 cn / r././ c'.)-1' S. 7TH H STREET _ _ „ , „ „•,t —"' rr••.:>" = (9 4 • riTLI Tetra Tech TRAFFIC KCM, Inc. • 1917FirstAvenue PLAN- Seattle, Washington 98101 . . „sr 1/41 CITY JF RENTON lL ti . . City.Clerk Jesse Tanner,Mayor Marilyn J.Petersen • • September 13, 2000 John and Donna See • 438 Burnett Avenue S. Renton,WA 98055 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments; LUA-00-085 Dear Mr. and Mrs. See: Your letter to Mayor Tanner and members of the Renton City Council was entered into the record at the Renton City Council meeting of September 11, 2000. As you know, this matter is currently being reviewed through the City's land use approval process. Please contact Elizabeth Higgins if you have questions regarding this development. If additional assistance is needed,please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 'AO , /Manly I. ersen City Clerk/Cable Manager . . cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner . Council President Randy Corman Elizabeth Higgins,Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055_-.(425)430-6510 /FAX(425)430-6516 July 24,2000 Renton City Council Minutes U Page 267 *MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Tanner pointed out that there is still time to review the ordinance prior to its second and final reading at the next Council meeting. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and advanced for second and final reading: Planning: Commercial Office An ordinance was read amending Section 4-8-120.D.19 of Chapter 8,Permits Residential Zoned Properties and Decisions,of Title IV,Development Regulations, of City Code by clarifying the requirements for application for Site Plan Level II for property zone COR, and declaring an emergency. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. City Attorney Larry Warren explained that the language does appear in Section 4-2-120B of City Code but it is not reflected in the Site Plan Level II definition, thus the need for the clarification. Ordinance#4850 Following second and final reading of the above-reference ordinance,it was Planning: Commercial Office MOVED BY KEOKLER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL Residential Zoned Properties ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler announced that a community open house Development Services: will be held on August 1, in the Council Chambers, from 6:30 to 8:30,to Dean/Sherman Apartments discuss the Dean/Sherman Apartment Project on Williams Ave. S. and S. 5th (Williams Ave S) St. MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:55 p.m. MARIL J. TERSEN, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann July 24,2000 July 17,2000 Renton City Council Minutes Page 253 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 2000 and beyond. Items noted included: • Renton staff and members of the Kennydale neighborhood will testify before the Sound Transit Executive Committee on Friday, July 21st, regarding including a flyer stop at I-405/N. 30th St.when Sound Transit route#560 is implemented. * The Pipeline Safety Consortium, of which Renton is a member,has agreed to put together a scope of work and enter into a consultant contract with a pipeline internal inspection expert to review the Olympic Pipeline internal inspection"pig test"results currently being evaluated. * Over 550 children participated in the Creative Kids Fair held at Liberty Park on July 13th. Transportation:Public Transit Councilman Persson reported that the Eastside Transportation Partnership in Kennydale Neighborhood voted unanimously to forward the City's letter supporting a bus stop in Kennydale to the Sound Transit Board. AUDIENCE COMMENT John See,438 Burnett Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, said he wanted to clarify Citizen Comment: See—Dean information that was reported at last week's Council meeting regarding the Sherman Apartments proposed Dean Sherman Apaitments on Williams Ave. S. He advised that the (Williams Ave S) area in question consists of.92 acres and the proposed parking garage will Lu r - provide parking for 93 cars with space for approximately 22 cars on the street frontage. Mr. See questioned why the street parking is being counted towards the required parking for the apartment complex. He also expressed concern regarding the density of the zoning which allows 100 dwelling,units per acre, and emphasized that the entrance to the apai taaient complex should be from Williams Ave. S and not from the adjacent alley. Mayor Tanner announced that a community meeting will be held later this month by the developer to address these questions. He encouraged residents to attend the meeting and voice their concerns. Citizen Comment: Olson— Nita Olson,430 Burnett Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, expressed concern regarding Dean Sherman Apartments the availability of street parking for the existing residents once the Dean (Williams Ave S) Sherman Apartments are constructed and she stressed that the developer should provide adequate parking in the garage. She encouraged Council to think of the resident's concerns,not the developer who will not even be living in the complex. Responding to Ms. Olson's inquiry, Sue Carlson, Economic Development Administrator, said the meeting is tentatively planned for July 31st. She stated that the residents will receive information in the mail regarding the meeting. Citizen Comment:Downs— Gary Downs,407 Williams Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, expressed his opposition to Dean Sherman Apartments the Dean Sherman Apaitments project. He said that the apartments pose too (Williams Ave S) high of an impact on a mostly single family residential area. Mr.Downs detailed his concerns regarding congestion of the proposed alley entrance to the apartments,the impacts to street parking, and the combined use of parking facilities with a nearby medical clinic. Citizen Comment: Klatt— Gary Klatt,411 Williams Ave., S., Renton, 98055, stated that not only does he Dean Sherman Apai tinents live in the area but he also runs a business out of his house and expressed (Williams Ave S) concern that the Dean Sherman Apartments will have a large impact on the availability of street parking. He described the difficulty he had in meeting July 17,2000 Renton City Council Minutes Page 254 ' City requirements to construct a garage off of the alley and voiced his concerns regarding how the garage will be constructed for the apartment complex. In addition,Mr.Klatt said he was worried about the effect of the proposed apaitaient development on traffic congestion and noise levels. Citizen Comment: Moran— Bob Moran, 425 Wells Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, expressed his opposition to the Dean Sherman Apartments proposed Dean Sherman Apartments and echoed previously stated concerns (Williams Ave S) regarding the impact the proposal will have on parking. Council President Corman commented that the current zoning was put in place with the intention of providing a more urban character to the South Renton neighborhood. However,he suggested that the zoning issue be revisited so that the City and the neighborhood are in agreement as to the direction on which the neighborhood wants to go. Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler said the Planning&Development Committee is considering recommending to Council that a sub-area plan be developed for the South Renton neighborhood. She felt the neighborhood had not transitioned as the City had envisioned when zoning changes were implemented in the early 1990s. Ms. Keolker-Wheeler emphasized that it is important for the City to fully understand the effects and implications any Zoning Code changes may have. Councilman Clawson remarked that the Planning&Development Committee has had many discussions regarding the South Renton neighborhood and the City's parking requirements. Explaining that there are advantages to increasing density in that it will bring vitality to the City,he asserted that it needs to be approached in a way as to not greatly impact the neighborhood. Responding to Councilman Persson's question about the possibility of imposing a building moratorium in the area, City Attorney Larry Warren said that although a moratorium is an option to provide interim protection until the matter is resolved,that option should be used sparingly and only in the direst of cases. Mayor Tanner said he's sympathetic to the neighborhood's concerns but noted that it is also important to revitalize the downtown area and make it a vibrant center of the City. He expressed concern that if a moratorium were implemented,it would deter the progress of the downtown revitalization efforts. Citizen Comment:Miller— Pat Miller, 1st Vice President of Renton Employees Local 2170, commented Local 2170 Concerns re: that the City is losing employees at an alarming rate and closing dates on job Employee Turnover applications are being extended due to the lack of qualified applicants. He stated that discussions with terminated employees reveal that money is a significant factor in the decision to leave the City's employment. Mr.Miller said that during past contract negotiations Local 2170 has been aware that Council deems the 60%rule appropriate for the union. Indicating that although the labor contract does not expire until 2003, Mr.Miller said Local 2170 feels that the City should act now to start looking at ways to recruit and maintain a top-notch work force,including offering a more competitive wage and other incentives. Mayor Tanner explained that City employees are compensated at or above a 60th percentile rate compared to all public employees. He explained that there is a difference between 60%and 60th percentile. For example, compared to all other public employees, 60%of them make less than City of Renton employees. Jay Covington, Chief Executive Officer, added that the City pays July 10,2000 Renton City Council Minutes Page 244 Councilman Corman recommended that a staff member attend the Sound Transit Meeting. Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler suggested that Ms. Retzloff accompany the staff member to the meeting. Citizen Comment: See—Dean John See,438 Burnett Ave. S.,Renton, 98055,reported that he received a letter Sherman Apartments from the City informing him of a proposal to build a 67-unit apartment building (Williams Ave S) on Williams Ave. S.between S.4th and S. 5th Streets(Dean Sherman Apartments). Mr. See expressed concern regarding the impact of the apartment building on the surrounding area's density,traffic and parking. He said he was especially concerned about access on the one-way alley located behind his house. He asked Council to consider reducing the zoning density in the subject area. Responding to Council President Corman,Principal Planner Rebecca Lind said that the application is currently undergoing administrative review. Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler said the Planning&Development Committee is currently reviewing the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments, one of which addresses the South Renton area. She felt that until now,a plan has not been developed that specifically focuses on the needs and vision of this neighborhood. Mayor Tanner asserted that the administration is proposing to reduce the current density in South Renton. Economic Development Administrator Sue Carlson confirmed that the zoning density in this area is 100 dwelling units per acre. However,the development proposal is far less dense. She noted that staff will be in contact with Mr. See to discuss the proposal. Citizen Comment: Olson— Nita Olson,430 Burnett Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, inquired if the apartments are Dean Sherman Apartments going to be senior housing and asked to be a party-of-record regarding this (Williams Ave S) , matter. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Appointment: Human Rights Mayor Tanner appointed Sandel Demastus, 1137 Harrington Ave.NE,Renton, &Affairs Commission 98056,to the.Human Rights&Affairs Commission to fill an unexpired two- year term vacated by David Fox; term to expire 9/19/00. Refer to Community Services Committee. CAG: 00-073,Rolling Hills City Clerk reported bid opening on 6/29/00 for CAG-00-073,Rolling Hills Reservoir&Booster Pump Reservoir&Booster Pump Station,and Talbot Booster Pump Station Station, Seaboard Construction Modifications; six bids;project estimate$3,135,820; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, Seaboard Construction,Inc.,in the amount of$2,562,608.14. Council concur. CAG: 00-092, 2000 Street City Clerk reported bid opening on 6/26/00 for CAG-00-092,2000 Street Overlay,Western Asphalt Overlay project; three bids; project estimate$518,724.42; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder,Western Asphalt, Inc., in the amount of$438,262.16. Council concur. CRT: 00-005,Holiday Inn Court Case filed by Ronald C.Mattson, 321 Burnett Ave. S.,Renton, 98055, on Select v Renton behalf of the Holiday Inn Select of Renton, seeking a review of the granting by the City to the Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT) of a variance to Renton's noise level regulations for repaving of State Route 167. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services. Development Services: Budget Development Services Division requested approval of a$30,000 budget Increase for Increased increase to meet projected expenditures for structural consultants utilized in the FACT SHEET FOR DEAN/SHERMAN PROJECT 5TH AND WILLIAMS,SOUTH RENTON • Application Status Vested under existing zoning Administrative review proceeding • Review Process Site Plan Review,Administrative no public hearing Design Review,Administrative Environmental Review,Administrative Appeal to Hearing Examiner,then Council • Mixed use project including existing clinic/office and 67 multi-family units 40 one bedroom 20 two bedroom 7 studio • Zoning Center Downtown Multi-family allowed up to 100 du/ac Office,retail also allowed. • Height Up to 95 feet allowed Proposed Height 56 feet • Parcel Size .93 acres including clinic • Density 100 du/ac allowed Dwelling units allowed 67 units proposed is 72.4 du/ac including existing clinic • Parking Requirements 93 spaces are proposed in a garage under the building The development proposal will not be allowed to count street parking to meet its parking requirements. One bedroom/studio units @1.2 spaces/unit requires 57 spaces(47 resident and 10 unassigned) Two bedroom units @1.6 spaces/unit require 32 spaces(20 resident and 12 unassigned) Office Clinic Use 4,000 sq. ft. 12 spaces required for office or 20 spaces required for medical/dental 4 spaces dedicated for commercial use 8-16 spaces spaces require modification for shared parking with residential • Project Manager: Elizabeth Higgins Telephone Number 430-7382 • Community Open House on the Proposed Project: August ts`6:30 to 8:30 PM Renton City Hall Council Chambers FACT SHEET FOR DEAN\ MEMO TO FILE: This appeal was withdrawn by the appellants and later re-filed as File No. 00-168,SA-A,ECF, PO 1-029,AAD • 11/08/2000 14:25 FAX 1 206 587 2308 CAIRNCRUSS W..1VV1 Cairncross o' Hempelrann, P.S. CONFIDENTIAL FACSIMILE November 8, 2000 Original to Follow Via: U.S. Mail To: Fred Kaufman, City of Renton, Hearing Examiner Facsimile: (425) 430-6523 Elizabeth Higgins, City of Renton, Senior Planner Facsimile: (425) 430-7300 From: James Maiocco Number of pages, including this cover: 2 Please call Gail at(206) 587-0700 if you do not receive all pages. Re: Dean Sherman Apartments File No.: 2196-15 Remarks: Please see attached letter. Confidentiality Notice: This facsimile communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this cover page is not the addressee, or the employee or agent of the addressee, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you receive this facsimile in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, and mail this facsimile to us at the address below. Thank you. Law Offices 70'h Floor, Bank of America Tower 701 Fifth Avenue • Seattle, Washington 98104-7016 Phone:206-587-0700 • Fax: 206-587-2308 K City of Renton November 15, 2000 Page 2 Based on conversations and assurances from several City Officials, Sherman Homes would like to withdraw its current application to construct the Dean Sherman Apartments in the City of Renton, subject to the following reservations: 1. It is our understanding that the City of Renton does not have any proposed ordinances or regulations pending, that would significantly alter the regulatory environment, zoning or land use of the intended project site, specifically including a downzone of the subject property in the coming months. 2. It is our understanding that the City of Renton is not contemplating a building moratorium, which would preclude the filing a subsequent application. 3. It is our understanding that the City of Renton is not intending to alter its mitigation fee schedule, or associated permit and review fees, which could dramatically increase the costs of future development. As you know, Sherman Homes intends to submit a subsequent, complete application in early December, 2000 for another development on the project site (in conformance with existing land use regulations). We have pursued this specific course of action relying upon representations from City officials that are consistent with the foregoing reservations. If the City changes its position on these matters subsequent to the withdrawal of its application, or if Sherman Homes fails to vest its completed application in December, 2000, then we will seek reinstatement of the original application for the Dean Sherman Apartments. In addition, we intend to rely on the original SEPA review and documentation for the Dean Sherman Apartments to the greatest extent possible. Based on the similarities of the two projects, we anticipate that the City will be able to either adopt the original SEPA determination for the new proposal, or revise it through the addendum process. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, Nancy Bainbridge Rogers JNM:gjg cc: Bill Sherman, Sherman Homes Steve McDonald, Mithun John Hempelmann, Cairncross &Hempelmann James Maiocco, Cairncross &Hempelmann {00061840.DOC;1} 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 NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING months prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON W SH NGTONER English language continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, An Appeal Hearing will be held by the Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a legal Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for Kingmeeting in the CoCity Hall, Renton, County. Washington, on November 7, 2000 at 1:30 The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South PM to consider the following petition: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS County Journal (and not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to AAD-00-112 the subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Appeal of administrative site plan approval for the Dean Sherman Apartments (File No. LUA-00-085,ECF,SA-A) for Dean Sherman Apartments construction of a 67 unit apartment building. Appellants feel proposed as published on: 10/27/00 construction is inappropriate for the residential area. Location: 415-435 Williams Ave.So. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of Legal descriptions of the files noted $34.50, charged to Acct. No. 8051067. above are on file in the Development Services Division, sixth floor, Renton City Hall.All interested persons to said petitions Legal Number 8335 are invited to be present at the Public Hearing. / ' vt/ Published in the South County Journal n // October 27,2000.8335 �" Legal Jerk, South County Journal Subscribed and sworn before me on this day of iv art-- , 2000 • % ..4* (-) 1- Yh---;.• 6-1/k/Lie-40-----(— • NOTAA _� - Notary Public of the State of Washington • — residing in Renton Sis w�o j uB' ' �f King County, Washington Cairncross e'r Hempelmann, P.S. November 8, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL City of Renton Attn: Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner Renton City Hall, 6th Floor 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal File No. LUA-00-112, AAD To The Hearing Examiner: The Applicant, Sherman Homes, requests a continuance of the Hearing Examiner's review of the site administrative approval on the above-referenced project. We appreciate the City's assistance in delaying this hearing to allow us to make additional preparations for the hearing and to further study issues associated with this project. It is our understanding the hearing will be rescheduled from November 6, 2000 until November 21, 2000, at 1:30 pm. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, • ?":4 James N. Maiocco JNM:gjg EMEOVE cc: Elizabeth Higgins Sherman Homes LUUU NOV — 9 Steve McDonald John Hempelmann CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER 09(1 i 12,19.1 XX.':21 Law Offices .jrrr;.rracx:9.1,41/tRK:-.g,F e gotil.. 70th Floor,Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue.Seattle,Washington 98104-7016 Phone:206-587-0700-Fax:206-587-2308 d$ 11/08/2000 14:25 FAX 1 206 587 2308 CA1KNCKUbb w., Cairncross e' Henrpelmann, P.S. CONFIDENTIAL FACSIMILE November 8, 2000 Original to Follow Via: U.S. Mail To: Fred Kaufman, City of Renton, Hearing Examiner Facsimile: (425) 430-6523 Elizabeth Higgins, City of Renton, Senior Planner Facsimile: (425) 430-7300 From: James Maiocco Number of pages, including this cover: 2 Please call Gail at(206) 587-0700 if you do not receive all pages. Re: Dean Sherman Apartments File No.: 2196-15 Remarks: Please see attached letter. Confidentiality Notice: This facsimile communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this cover page is not the addressee, or the employee or agent of the addressee, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you receive this facsimile in error, please notify us immediately by telephone,and mail this facsimile to us at the address below. Thank you. Law Offices 70th Floor, Bank of America Tower 701 Fifth Avenue • Seattle, Washington 98104-7016 Phone:206-587-0700 • Fax: 206-587-2308 11/08/2000 14:25 FAX 1 206 587 2308 CAIRNCROSS 'EJuvA Cairncross &Hempelmann, P.S. November 8, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S.MAIL City of Renton Attn: Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner Renton City Hall, 6th Floor 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal File No. LUA-00-112, AAD To The Hearing Examiner: The Applicant, Sherman Homes, requests a continuance of the Hearing Examiner's review of the site administrative approval on the above-referenced project. We appreciate the City's assistance in delaying this hearing to allow us to make additional preparations for the hearing and to further study issues associated with this project. It is our understanding the hearing will be rescheduled from November 6, 2000 until November 21, 2000, at 1:30 pm. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, James N. Maiocco JNM:gj g cc: Elizabeth Higgins Sherman Homes Steve McDonald John Hempelmann Law Offices { :'r: �iiL;7,1,?.]S_4•v-,_?Il 70111 Floor,Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98104-7016 c, . .•,n,s-s,7.n7nn-Fur:206-587.230R DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS LUA-00-085 &AAD,00-112 NOTE TO FILE: Tuesday,November 7,2000, 1:30 p.m. The Hearing Examiner opened the hearing by stating that item AAD,00-112,an administrative appeal of an administrative determination in file number LUA-00-085,an administrative site plan for the construction of a 67-unit apartment building. There were three separate appellants in the matter. The property is located at 415 through 435 Williams Ave S,and includes a number of separate legal lots. The applicant for the apartment building has asked that the matter be continued. Apparently they are re-assessing their plans. The only people in attendance at this hearing are City staff. The applicant and appellants have been informed in advance that the hearing would be continued to Tuesday,November 21,2000 at 1:30 p.m. At that time we will either hear the appeal,or the applicant will have changed the project sufficiently that the appeal may be dismissed. The applicant did not give us any information that they wanted this hearing continued other than the verbal confirmation this office received. This office would appreciate knowing as soon as possible, in writing,that the applicant has either withdrawn their plans so we can dismiss the appeal and let the parties know that the project has been changed. They will obviously have to watch the postings on the site or in the newspapers to find out if the project is coming back in some other form that they may object to,or at that point,agree with. • NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING • RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON An Appeal Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on November 7, 2000 at 1:30 PM to consider the following petition: DEAN SHERMAN APARTMENTS AAD-00-112 Appeal of administrative site plan approval for the Dean Sherman Apartments (File No. LUA-00-085,ECF,SA-A) for construction of a 67 unit apartment building. Appellants feel proposed construction is inappropriate for the residential area. Location: 415-435 Williams Ave. So. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Development Services Division, sixth floor, Renton City Hall. All interested persons to said petitions are invited to be present at the Public Hearing. Publication Date: October 27, 2000 Account No. 51067 NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING OF RENTON isiL Hearing Examiner • • Fred J.Kaufman Jesse Tanner,Mayor , • September 28, 2000 Robert and Lynn Moran John and Donna See Ben and kimberli Wilson 425 Wells Ave S 438 Burnett Ave S 425 Williams Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Re: Appeal of Site Administrative Plan for Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal File No. LUA-004.12,AAD Dear Appellants: - Your letters of appeal in the above matter have been received and a,date and time for said hearing has now been established. The appeal hearing has been set fOr:tuesdayNOVeMilietr7,2000,, at 1i30 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City.171a11,-.4,,105.5,'S:Oody Way in Renton: Should you be unable to attend,would you please appoint a representative to act on your behalf We appreciate your cooperation, and if you have any questions,please contact my secretary. Sincerely, if-red J. ftnan Hearing Examiner • FJK:jt cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer • Larry Warren, City Attorney Neil Watts,Development Services Director S . Elizabeth Higgins' - Applicant. Parties of Record • 1055 Sdtith Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430.76515 • :Mt rrioz. oncv_ September 20, 2000 11111 SEP 2 6 2000 Appellant: Robert R. Moran CITY OF RENTON 425 Wells Avenue South HEARING EXAMINER Renton, WA 98055 Project Name: Dean Sherman Apartments #LUA-00-085, ECF, SA-A. LLA Location: 415, 419, 423, 435 Williams Ave. South 1. The appellant in this matter and several neighbors feel that the four-story structure is too large for the neighborhood. This neighborhood is a well- established part of the original incorporated area of the City of Renton built primarily between 1900 and 1930. 2. The undesirable impacts of a structure of this size are: Impairs the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties by blocking views and destroying privacy of yards and homes. Changes the visual appearance of a single-family home neighborhood. 3. The appellant in this matter and neighbors feel the"alley only access" is an unsafe and hazardous way to enter and exit this structure. Hazard conflicts between proposed development and existing traffic using private garages and going to existing businesses at the north end of the alley. I.e., VFW which has a through driveway to alley. Alleys were not designed for general travel or for the proposed additional vehicles of 400+ trips a day. There are THREE accesses to the alley— how will they insure South 5 Street only ingress and egress, when accesses are currently available on 4th Avenue South, North/South of the VFW and North/South of the medical clinic. These are PRIVATE individuals who will not be required to change their accesses. The site plan concurs that hazardous conditions may arise because of the alley use for apartment traffic. 4. The appellant in this matter and neighbors feel the parking is inadequate. Apartment residents will take up street parting. 5. Excessive lighting from the apartments would impact the surrounding homes. No lighting plan to demonstrate the need to minimize light or noise to the adjacent neighborhood has been seen. Sincerely, Zfle-771a-0-"--1 Robert R. Moran 425 Wells Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 425-255-7055 CI1 , vr=RENTON Y:,3c1 CM^ SEP 2 6 2000 RECEIVED • L11 \ CLERKS OFFICE Ben& Kimberli Wilson 26 September,2000 424 Williams Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments File Number: LUA-00-085,ECF, SA-A,LLA The following is an appeal of the Level I Site Plan Review dated September 12, 2000. We feel that the proposed construction is inappropriate in many ways, including the following: The proposed location is not suited for a development of this density.The surrounding residences are largely single family dwellings. A development of the density that is proposed is not compatible with the residential scale and character of the neighborhood, and will have a detrimental effect on the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed size of the building,is excessive. At a height at roughly twice that of any neighboring structures, the proposed development will have significant detrimental effects on the surrounding properties in terms of sunlight,views, and noise reflection from I405. The amount of proposed parking is insufficient. Available street parking will be greatly diminished if the proposed structure is completed as designed. The proposed project will have a detrimental effect on neighboring property values. Nobody wants to live next door to a 56 foot, 92 unit apartment complex.The pressures that an addtional 92 residences will place on the surrounding neighborhood will have a negative effect on surrounding property values. There is not a community need for this project in the immediate area.There are several other large apartment complexes recently constructed to address any need for apartments, and that are located more appropriately in the downtown core,rather than in a largely single family neighborhood. Sincerely, Ben&Kimberli Wilson .•sue 2 _ 121EDWED SEP 18 2000 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER 9-16-2000 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER WE WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL THE SITE ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN FOR THE DEAN SHERMAN APTS. AT 415-435 WILLIAMS AV. S. FIL-E # LUA-00-085, ECF, SA-A,LLA PLEASE TRANSFER THE $75. 00 WE PAID YOU FOR. THE ENVRONMENTAL APPEAL, WHICH WE HAVE WITHDRAWN, TO PAY FOR THIS APPEAL. WE ARE CONCERNED WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE BLDG. IT OVER SHADOWS EXISTING HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WILL RUIN THE HISTORICAL BEAUTY OF RENTON. PLUS IT WILL IMPAIR THE VIEW OF QUITE A FEW HOMES ON WILLIAMS, THEY WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO SEE THE SUNSET. WE FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD BE NO MORE THEN TWO STORIES TO FIT IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE AGAINST THE PARKING ENTRANCE AND EXIT COMING IN FROM THE ALLEY OFF 5TH STREET, WE FEEL THE ONLY SENSIBLE SALUTION IS THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT SHOULD BE ON WILLIAMS BECEAUSE IT ' S A STREET AND WAS BUILT FOR HEAVY TRAFFIC, THE ALLEY IS NOT BUILT FOR SUCH HEAVY TRAFFIC, WE LIVE HERE AND CAN SEE WHAT GOES ON EVERY DAY. THERE IS MUCH DANGER ALRREADY, IF THEY ADD 444 MORE TRIPS TO THE EXISTING TRAFFIC IT WILL BE A NIGHTMARE. PAGE 1 OF PAGE L OF 2 AT THE SOUTH END OF THE APT. BLDG. THERE WILL BE A 26 FOOT OPEN COMMON SPACE AREA, THAT IS NOW THE PARKING LOT FOR THE CLINIC, THE ENTRENCE & EXIT IS FROM WILLIAMS, AND WE FEEL THEY COULD USE THAT SAME ENTRENCE & EXIT OFF OF WILLIAMS & PUT THE RAMP TO THE PARKING GARAGE ON THAT SIDE OF THE APT. BUILDING. IT WOULD CUT DOWN THE OPEN COMMON SPACE AREA A LITTLE, HOWEVER IT WILL NOT CHANGE THE LOOKS OF THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, WHICH WE UNDERSTAND IS THE REASONING BEHIND THEM PUTTING THE PARKING ENTRENCE & EXIT IN THE ALLEY IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE VIEW FROM OUR BACK YARD OF THE TALL TREES IS PLEASING, THE VIEW OF THE BACK OF A HUGE APT. BLDG. IS NOT A PLEASENT THOUGHT. THANK YOU JOHN H & DONNA L SEE 438 BURNETT AV 5 RENTON WA. 98055 425 235 1226 idZe- oL CITY OF RENTON galL HEARING EXAMINER MEMORANDUM Date: September 28, 2000 To: File From: Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner Re: Parties of Record on Petition We have mailed notice of appeal hearing on November 7, 2000 to all parties of record listed on the 4-page petition whose names and addresses were legible. FJK/jt September 20, 2000 SEP 2 6 2000 Appellant: Robert R. Moran CITY OF RENTON 425 Wells Avenue South HEARING EXAMINER Renton, WA 98055 Project Name: Dean Sherman Apartments #LUA-00-085, ECF, SA-A. LIA Location: 415, 419, 423, 435 Williams Ave. South 1. The appellant in this matter and several neighbors feel that the four-story structure is too large for the neighborhood. This neighborhood is a well- established part of the original incorporated area of the City of Renton built primarily between 1900 and 1930. 2. The undesirable impacts of a structure of this size are: Impairs the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties by blocking views and destroying privacy of yards and homes. Changes the visual appearance of a single-family home neighborhood. 3. The appellant in this matter and neighbors feel the"alley only access" is an unsafe and hazardous way to enter and exit this structure. Hazard conflicts between proposed development and existing traffic using private garages and going to existing businesses at the north end of the alley. I.e., VFW which has a through driveway to alley. Alleys were not designed for general travel or for the proposed additional vehicles of 400+ trips a day. There are THREE accesses to the alley— how will they insure South 5th Street only ingress and egress, when accesses are currently available on 4th Avenue South, North/South of the VFW and North/South of the medical clinic. These are PRIVATE individuals who will not be required to change their accesses. The site plan concurs that hazardous conditions may arise because of the alley use for apartment traffic. 4. The appellant in this matter and neighbors feel the parking is inadequate. Apartment residents will take up street parting. 5. Excessive lighting from the apartments would impact the surrounding homes. No lighting plan to demonstrate the need to minimize light or noise to the adjacent neighborhood has been seen. Sincerely, ZI-7Z 1/477a2.40 ,-} Robert R. Moran 425 Wells Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 425-255-7055 September, 18, 2000 PETITION I, the undersigned object to the proposed over-scale structure designed for 415, 419, 423 and 435 Williams Avenue South (67 units). This proposed apartment would ruin the views from existing buildings and future developable sites, overlook the homes and yards of current homes, decreasing privacy, would promote increased traffic, use an existing alley way as a thoroughfare and lower the value of current homes. NAME (Please print) SIGNATURE ADDRESS Mt ,Mbays V Fiu P< -r 120 yr6 04rNe-Nr Ata s ps.C' Wiilav(I ( CecfrgP r 0 7z7 SE 18(t4 )7 A C 6id/e L ce/S..6'/A t-/C4 j4-iLi! 4s ; /44600 -S'c /7�Rs/, 4-Ir rd -St" j4 VA- e 6/. Q -2,/5-xi cc//9 , <4',i 2(i,40 s . s ,,..,0,.S �., ,cocA\ - 14044) Sv - -'ci` Cr ,,ti.9 °-" "ia-r,�ic/if-4. 4._yids/. &" o a,4.>2/3 tcP� ,0 1'4 vs 1 -5%-s e,..,J T&-f vs 1cc. ...a AO 6 ox I �.13 i- 'q-T6'1 -T r • L- 5.9 f_ Ltlo-ram A-u-e_•S. i5toi Ra55 ex-) cos f xibq-4a 14ife, GP dt U 9, 9g si 4 /7>`if0,/e —0e- -lew ."1-- i1 .0 E L-cc,(,.,e.c_) 0-- - \Vz-C - t\ h =._ • day . , p . ` is Sic .. ...- •?"1 /M 3 -SP,2419,"°)/ krd- -DI,n't i2aeF1/Ft2j)s AY MI 02.1/3 P.A1fl 4.0F4,L ') '- ,Al. k- -- t,1 4 4/,,,gam- 4J . Z.W,,. 6- '..;t . 1 -C1-g� 616A DA-2 Al- 1 M7A47- i o/ ,. 17.F' (--/v.4„a�/1cJ /`l ./i/rI�s or� „,„,) /4 3,2 7///J i,j,5,C, Qle/(p.�/7/67" L� �( c�cl%a rc�Q2�td �err���vJZ�— ee `> i Ia.c Corct,d-- J.b�% .�ne762h/'ti�,re fie_ fit^ _l$c� .el C4,2 A' ,4//�ri=p4 _ - kc-,T CA/ /9-S� �a� ROC4 .S N i C f\- /l9/•e" / 70 /1 4 /s . /, -ell - (776 /04 / / ---- 77 j/20 /c /�l�V rS� g f5 _� �1 s. I' wsd p gi_ a 3 5 5 4- /`/C l elP(2'1/ rOJv,,,a)6L,� 4 t,,e. /2/, e? S;E/jY 1'_I g¢ ��rr R Ekri pQ I�i l_-A ° .) J 9)G ,5f°. 2A� PI V6 it co 5 9. 5 I Zjy gg0.5 r 0 0 /C's 4,1,v J o_ii„ /g/oo /07 E vP. .I F, `v p /-c° . ,, .6 September, 18, 2000 • PETITION I, the undersigned object to the proposed over-scale structure designed for 415, 419, 423 and 435 Williams Avenue South (67 units). This proposed apartment would ruin the views from existing buildings and future developable sites, overlook the homes and yards of current homes, decreasing privacy, would promote increased traffic, use an existing alley way as a thoroughfare and lower the value of current homes. NAME (Please print) SIGNATURE ADDRESS ' o k A/ H. SEL- )1, 2/3 9 o-o- Scr 4,4t, teR, - 2 Do/viW I-, SEE �-e-i -rtez_ 5 e e, 43 acLznz:Y c-0-e.e So (1'c i✓Iov;L%/,{,, �— 3_,4 50,(c.-`4 /4-77E Ca t L4 fC74:0, 539 W(4-lYtjVOETcf5 T??r' q'F'05,_ - /a l," e-eJ c2 eC07 02(44 c -u5 o 4. el 5'S` - //r' �_/�2v-12/� ral . /,/' Dow Al S "71[7 60,' 1/ ,l�NL's fqv PP1 0 -055 - 2fe. n r5 Sza4,&,-- ,o 4 a Ah / 4(-47—c-71,?°3-5 a/a 6a2wS iMi r. . gig. £.ur f 4../C, 5). ?fin qic Tkncr ,8/r/i-iK 441 ;3vizaiT / S '127N av d';; /G • 0 ka-L 5.0, p q �� o C.TL, 1 ri (--- G^5 ►'�- . / --,:. . • 0 ) p , )642,e_z. -0_ y drC 52S 15vc� 7—,4-r/ s �r�Js� )61144,4 ii;(4,,o4_ 2ku_k_ ( t sl M A /Wrier" , . �f C2/ to nnfi k'eS. I -i /_ ;L 1l4N j,P/✓k-4/iq -e "; £3tA-11,•P � S lfe2g6- % • 1illlAA / A �{ r7 ^ GZr�2 �5�— i G LC j) g- d --- gss-5- G ?rut C 0/ q 5- 9,u.,it ems- 04, --9r<-0.65 5bear' Ouinha -1- ) ( 2-I bu► -112f}- ' �.55 S. c • / r> ? i//S OL s ,3o S • ks dy_I '6.5" 9 '! jer .� U (Soo e 3- cf 80S-S- : .,l <; d 1/``J' f-I %1 nd/-E /Litc.. 60-7 Ea-,-0 'Ate gu4 dc7` /9 llL S. 5'le,s— hp,izi i'�JGr42�i.: i L'? %' ,Jev.v,y 5 Zie..�sek 117 ��,a/ravi eA �.t. ei -358 Rey.. L6� j1 `/C ,' 9/A22IF-/ i rayr0, ?.9 ./b-sbyze;/td"aeo,f-evs- Le / T1,44a-Pd ea /cp S� .s ' .eai ST / ec--c September, 18, 2000 PETITION I, the undersigned object to the proposed over-scale structure designed for 415, 419, 423 and 435 Williams Avenue South (67 units). This proposed apartment would ruin the views from existing buildings and future developable sites, overlook the homes and yards of current homes, decreasing privacy, would promote increased traffic, use an existing alley way as a thoroughfare and lower the value of current homes. NAME (Please print) SIGNATURE ADDRESS rilegAZ -/�s 4Jedi guts 9`0 e- 4 Al(a LACS 2�a.4.5 /iv •Z`re /e) ),///4 5 U e"g1AS6 rt LI'24.I IA];11 iam5 �hiS. e$'t1 1 v / 42t4 Ave5 2 September, 18, 2000 PETITION I, the undersigned object to the proposed over-scale structure designed for 415, 419, 423 and 435 Williams Avenue South (67 units). This proposed apartment would ruin the views from existing buildings and future developable sites, overlook the homes and yards of current homes, decreasing privacy, would promote increased traffic, use an existing alley way as a thoroughfare and lower the value of current homes. NAME (Please print) SIGNATUR ADDRESS ,7 4' 9"4 4,7 `1'1 ; -, c1rd `70-1 $b5`l ` df ALL ti�,f1 {-/i 4 7 -e-e_P / _/ . 00/6 // -4- tecT elite/ ' - ' ' ' ' ' ' . ''' D ' 2000 • . - CITY OF RENTON . ,.:;,;`1 • . , - ' ' HEARING EXAMINER ...'.• ' 9.-16-2.000' CITY.,,OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINEP ' - WE .WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL THE SITE ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN : ' . ' FOR 'THE DEAN ,.SHERMAN -APTS.: .AT"' 4 15-435 WILLIAMS. Ay. . S. ' FILE #.. LUA-00-085;1OF, SA-"A; LLA. . PLEASE TRANSFER THE: $75:Q0 WE PAID YOU FOR. THE . ' ENVRONMENTAL APPEAL, .WHICH WE HAVE WITHDRAWN, TO PAY FOR ' THIS'. APPEAL: . . ' WE -ARE: CONCERNED WITH. THE HEIGHT OF THE. BLDG. IT OVER , SHADOWS EXISTING HOMES IN THE .',:NEIGHBORHOOD: AND WILL RUIN' . ' THE HISTORICAL BEAUTY, OF RENTON PLUS IT WILL IMPAIR, THE . VIEW •OF• QUITE .A FEW . HOMES.' ON. WILLIAMS, THEY WILL NO . ' LONGER BE ABLE TO SEE; THE :SUNSET.. WE FEEL LIKE. IT SHOULD - , BE NO. MORE THEN TWO STORIES, TO FIT IN WITH- THE '. ` ' NEIGHBORHOOD. - WE ARE AGAINST THE 'PARK I NG ENTRANCE. AND EXIT, COMING .IN ' FROM THE ALLEY ,OFF ,STH STREET; WE FEEL THE ONLY : SENSIBLE SALUT I ON IS THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT SHOULD BE ON WILLIAMS • - BEGEAU•5E IT ' S A, STREET AND WAS' BUILT FOR HEAVY TRAFFIC, : ' . ' THE ALLEY IS NOT BUILT 4OR SUCH HEAVY 'TRAFFIC, ' WE LIVE ' .. ' HERE AND CAN SEE. WHAT..GOES ON EVERY DAY'. THERE IS MUCH . DANGER ALRREADY, IF :THEY ADD 444 ;MORE TRIPS' TO THE, - „ ' ' EXISTING TRAFFIC IT WILL . BE A NIGHTMARE. ' - . PAGE 1 OF o • PAGE 2 OF AT THE SOUTH END OF THE APT. BLDG. THERE WILL BE A 26 FOOT OPEN COMMON SPACE AREA, THAT IS NOW THE PARKING LOT FOR THE CLINIC, THE ENTRENCE & EXIT IS FROM WILLIAMS, AND WE FEEL THEY COULD USE THAT SAME ENTRENCE & EXIT OFF OF WILLIAMS & PUT THE RAMP TO THE PARKING GARAGE ON THAT SIDE OF THE APT . BUILDING. IT WOULD CUT DOWN THE OPEN COMMON SPACE AREA A LITTLE, HOWEVER IT WILL NOT CHANGE THE LOOKS OF THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, WHICH WE UNDERSTAND IS THE REASONING BEHIND THEM PUTTING THE PARKING ENTRENCE & EXIT IN THE ALLEY IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE VIEW FROM OUR BACK YARD OF THE TALL TREES IS PLEASING, THE VIEW OF THE BACK OF A HUGE APT. BLDG. IS NOT A PLEASENT THOUGHT. THANK YOU JOHN H & DONNA L SEE 438 BURNETT AV S RENTON WA. 98055 425 235 1226 711 4 A p 5 CMr RENTON Y:3 SEP 2 6 2000 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Ben&Kimberli Wilson 26 September, 2000 424 Williams Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments File Number: LUA-00-085,ECF, SA-A,LLA The following is an appeal of the Level I Site Plan Review dated September 12, 2000. We feel that the proposed construction is inappropriate in many ways, including the following: The proposed location is not suited for a development of this density.The surrounding - -- - --- residences are largely single family dwellings. A development of the density that is proposed is not compatible with the residential scale and character of the neighborhood, and will have a detrimental effect on the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed size of the building is excessive. At a height at roughly twice that of any neighboring structures, the proposed development will have significant detrimental effects on the surrounding properties in terms of sunlight, views, and noise reflection from I405. The amount of proposed parking is insufficient. Available street parking will be greatly diminished if the proposed structure is completed as designed. The proposed project will have a detrimental effect on neighboring property values. Nobody wants to live next door to a 56 foot, 92 unit apartment complex.The pressures that an addtional 92 residences will place on the surrounding neighborhood will have a negative effect on surrounding property values. There is not a community need for this project in the immediate area. There are several other large apartment complexes recently constructed to address any need for apartments, and that are located more appropriately in the downtown core,rather than in a largely single family neighborhood. Sincerely, Ben&Kimberli Wilson --- , , • • , . • . • . • . • • . . • , • • • • • . -•- , •. •. ' ....-•.-7","1"7""""rs•----:.;'•-•7:-'-',•:".-7.7.7,77,7-7,1":77;.:-•7•rs-77,7,1-;,.-mrtl,1"."-117,47.‘1,:r7..„.'_"'77'n.r'....-:77-7 ,=, 1.` .-. • -:•.1,' :•.-..1 .:- 46.111. ,F-454144""g'"17.'':'f M, '-.--.. .:: -'...'• . ' ' '-' ;- •' ,-,''''-- -./•.:!--:-.,7; -,.;:.4,..''-VAir I'kr' r :•'-;..Ben Wilson:-.-:.....:,''...'''':'17::::::1".1...11.-:,....' : :.:: ' . ,' ... Detail of The Doges Palace and the `-.....-, .,.....,,,_,-.;,...,,,11 Iinnb- ern wilson,,,,i;,,,,-F,:::-.:.'....,,,...g,:,,,i.' :.••,,. tWIL.S..0BA-324P. Wil:o' t1t•''''..3''.43'. o.'ci'.. ..:-• 1 , ..,,. ......:..:....:1:7,..!•::;,";-., : :, _vogsm................,,, ,a.n.d..... ,at.v, .ice,.:7A,,,,ca„... . .!,!..:.......i:; ,,...,0.,....i..)::9. ,0y,,fiT1.1.,;.1 ',..424 Williams Ave•South .425-204-8470'''. •l'•-•'- . -•--t.:t-,., •'.t r','figh: 1 Z'G':- cit.) Rentcq,.)Y4,.9.8955 ::: ;',.',..:-!Z. -''.1.'•.::.r,'..':.'..: .;s.'.:.;:;:',.J..:,i....':' :,-,;-_-'•;",-;:r.:',':.:',:;..-..:.:;.'',:!:-: ..", '''''j,'V,. .;;;-.1f!,' ., , , • i ...:,i.1!"::;'.-•:.;':'.:,',".,:.-::::,,.',i,;:::,[;;.::::;-):4.-,-.:.' ;',7--,:-.1:,-:!:,;,"1:::::ir_:..4''!-,t:i;- :'...7.-','',-'!',1-,-;': .,:,'-. .,,--'..:';'.4.:r,s,-1 ...'..-,.r,''.,'' '•-,l';'4;,1::02,1.4,,,, - ,1,''''''''-."---1• : .':• 1 .. ,.,!,,,..,,,::.,i,,..',.,;-',;In.iii.,it;,•,....i.- -, ,- .,-..1-4,„,,,,,,„,,,eAr. • : • ,,,, ,..., . • —• ii F -7_.c. i.wo . •, .,•i ,v W.!',1,:'1 ',;',A 4.5",,,,,,r;"-f '.".,:r.'1"2-.::0.‘'a-.;,i A,,-.'Fi;.'.-;':.:' '. " ' ....;:,..1r.--,'.. .y.,::-.;:,...,, ,.•,-,-.—,t______-.•....„,_,....„,,,„,..,-,,,,,,:, 7 ; .;;;. .;:. ;;,, ,.I I, . 4•'.?,,—...,.:.,.:i.,%:,,,,1- 0,4",:',,IVIIiie,MnrWi'"';'•"' v... ....„,,-,..,„„;- .,,... . '..-...,.,-. .,,-.,r.,-....i.,.,., ,.,,Vtt•:',I,',1/40'4'1 •''''I'''•"•V•"t''44''!"r 1'4':-,'k''''A 11,1":',1'''''';ti-si . -,,fq:;'---.,d,T,',3'""'-.':•'- .,.'..li'St:11!0,VIA, it;'-,.. ATi: 7Lt; .0: (' Vreil-'4q;k..4;3'1:1,•.44:,,. '.4:‘,:01*-°:;1";v:Y-S;44ik4;11.1e'V*111411?(k y...,..11.1•:','.„..'n...' ,.. .. ." ,,, , ,I.,1.;0;;KR•AMr..,'4G4-N: .',OCIFirirliaAA4/9ffarifr:'-P.':',7 ,,• lic,s;kk,"4---.,,:i'',„.I,V,V-',.A.-.'0,'"i'i.'7,,,,';--1:! 2F.,,TI., j}:11,•!,,,ACtiqii, . . ,. ', ....;•••,.,..4-q,•!•i' k.7..•1.;;.•,,-••:•-•.-0,q.••,-,.t'1,•.t.•""•;..;,,,f.,1 ' ",•••-•,,,,,py.i,.4-„,;i,,1".,-74,,,,,e;„,,,,-,.....1,71;,f.p.,..,,, ,-,!:-: !:.),,,,.. 1,v4,,,,o,,,,11::,;;t 'TS.-'",..1';'W'';fi.Bellqvue.:1-NA 9007‘,S;,.1 9iii 2-540,41.•?.•'4,;;'•.;”,•:.1-f, .• ,',", ,ty,;,...,,•.r..3,.:•,e4.12,,!••,.,•,.......1.„ ..• ta-,::;;.,!••,.,..• ,•,!,:. /::•;e2,,,,:r(4.'.,.:1";-,„;;•,,,,,,,-.1-.:-•,,,,:•,411*-4,-1•44:`;•4;:-.';‘,;.(4,: . --.1:6 ?i'VT'••S•44,-"=_!..+1.14r^4034:'•-'"--•.-V,-41.41.1n17•V•. 'IL'••p ::':-,-C?e) -.••,.;;)rri;.3.. ''••'',F'f.'1'''.' '''" .' • •," ----=:iih'.4"'',/Aff;:AT.i.;i'tk,•-:,;••::.r ;,..,„w,:,....4...,:&,,r4-,,y,,,I..,. vtii.1.,,,,tz--,,,,. ...-:_o,.,..::,.,,,,,,.....,,*?,v,ii,,1, A.,si:;.0,-;,-,.!4 ....1,,.;;.4.,• . - .- , ..,.--,,,,4,,,!,.1.,,t,,,),.:;:4- '-',...-,;, . . ' 'r'It''''Zitlf-I.F.-,%'4427341.1-1,1!}!....,1,4;gt*.I....,21`;t'4',...-.4.-,''-';',..;,y4 r.,';:b,;-•: ,1'1,,:; '1.,,,,;',"...-,,,,.--. - . • , ''•:r.,..;,1-4',,:,,iW'if.•;;.'2,' ,9'11.P••.11,' , .-."';';:),'•'H•-•‘;;;•CiT' ''•,'''''',;',;;;'''''.7:':';•; ''-''Pi''''''''CI- • !-:,,r'ii.'•;:.''r•.,'''• ;•4.---;•,'-" •'",''• ;."..'t::--. •'•'-'--'-'-'•-; '. •. ' ';• :'-••`-',•r•••-. ".---•:. ..2".-;„:1:+1. , ,1 0 0 0 0 21.11: i3"2 ?' .01-9 7 ii• -.'.77- .50 5 9 • . . ...• - • -,. _ --'.,:-.---.:,''''.' . -- ' .:...-. ,O, .... . ..._....44„..4, ,, ,..4,,,,„,,=_,........, ,4,••—••71.,V ,e, . 71 .4 " .. . • • . . ' . . .. . • . '.. . . .. . . . . , . . • . • __ . . -• -- . - . . • • ; - . 1 • 0732 i . _ DATE___114.___' _______.NO. 14 4.7i ES RECEIPT . . • , • _. 1. 1 .. RECEIVIED FR Itot _ • ..1. >-• 6 EF - ADDRESS, W ' 1 $_ il i , qeds-s-' MI-0-3 ZS .7" 1 • A -....ch-A--.1 1,' . =.0.aS •': ' 1 1 / f„ / FOR 'Li_A.,_ 5c,r si,P 11fi = I ---------7- W =63 ,- ,'X:Of(1.ACCOUNT41,,?•,-.4„• , iiiiiii , 0 0 .t. •AmT.OF.'111111111 - ---------------------------- 1 • . I-1-• = LC,), • ACCOUNT O c2 -- : 11611IMINIC=IIM° ...jegz _. BALANCE Mill MONEY,•IIIIIIII BY 01996 11...4171FORMG 6L602 '1'ORDER ' 'DUE-' .-.--..--,...-----------...--, . —............—...... ' ' - -------------------.7---,..- . . _. . . . . • . . , ' • . ' . . . • . . . . . " • • ' . . I. . • • • • . . • • ' . . • . . • . . , . , . . . • ' ' ' . i r„°P � � 7 �� ,0 2 6 20u� " _ OF RENTON___.___ __�/_-_..,g5,I-do v Liii4 HEARING EXAMINER /0-61(4) 21- 25,SdeLeot2_ — _ _ - ri&&44,66 - 2_.Q- /' � agv)t -----a,/}i".- -__ _ ___ Sci_Ac.& 461,6if.taiol jet . a A e__. 4Attezzei — — �'�-c=�-��'- - getitykL G%f — __ -_ 1. 4 6e't . A-e-- Ar it, / V-ii-i-el -A, - _____r_6( ' ./6& ice.,z- "ti .,‘Z, 1 i__/ o_e_ p,ytezed te,& .614,ef,o, _, - _ - - _11) , _,b-- -dj4t-pc 1 - Ale`(,-/L- 1)--- ; :4.- 7 • r-r"-per • �y CITS_ )F RENTON Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman August 29, 2000 John and Donna See 438 Burnett Ave S Renton, WA 98055. Re: Appeal of Environmental Review Committee's Determination re Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal File No.LUA00-112,AAD Dear Mr. and Mrs. See: This office has reviewed your letter regarding the appeal Before dismissing your:appeal, this office wants to be sure that;it did riot inappropriately influence your decision. While there are legal requirements in order to prevail,they are not intended to thwart citizen appeals of environmental decisions. Again, as our initial letter indicated, some:of your;issues could be'construed to be matters more relating to the ultimate site plan and could be handled as comments to staff to, consider when they review the site plan.' .They could also be used as an appeal of the site plan depending on staffs decision, or the points you made could be-used in a SEPA appeal. Please fmd enclosed a decision on a SEPA appeal where a:citizen appellant did prevail. This example should not be read to mean that all citizen appeals succeed, but it is possible using lay testimony to show that the City actions were flawed. If this office can be of further assistance please feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J. Kaufman " Hearing Examiner cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney. . Jennifer Henning, Development Services . Elizabeth Higgins, Development Services . - Robert Moran 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 9805:5 - (425)430-6515 This oaoer contains 50%recycled material.20%bast consumer" - ' CITX JF RENTON +•�. ' Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman August 24, 2000 Mr: Robert Moran 425 Wells Avenue Renton,WA 98055 Re: Appeal of Environmental Review Committee's Determination re Dean Sherman Apartments - Appeal File No. LUA00-112,AAD Dear Mr.Moran: Pursuant to your phone call today,this,office would appreciate your clarifying in writing your withdrawal of the environmental appeal. The appeal letter you submitted may be considered as public comment for staff when they review the,,administrative site plan. As a party of record you will be receiving a copy of the staff report on the administrative site plan. It appears you may want to:file an'appeal of that plan: You may reaffirm that when the report is issued. A public hearing is not scheduled for the site plan; however, an appeal of the site plan would'-necessitate a public hearing. If this office can provide any'further assistance,please feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J. K a Hearing Examiner cc: • Larry Warren, City Attorney Jennifer Henning,Development Services Elizabeth Higgins, Development Services John:and Donna See 1055 South Grady Way-'-Renton,Washington 98055 -2(425)43.0-6515 CITI )F RENTON NIL Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman August 21, 2000 Robert and Lynn Moran John and Donna See 425 Wells Avenue S 438 Burnett -Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Re: Appeal of Environmental Review Committee's Determination re Dean Sherman Apartments Appeal File No. LUA00-112,AAD Dear Appellants: This office received your appeals dated August 11 and-August;13, 2000, and would like to clarify that both parties are appealing the environmental'determination. The nature of your statements could also be read as directed to the actual°"development or its site plan. At this point City staff has not issued a decisionon.the site plat. Comments regarding the proposed site plan may rbe submitted and may affect the City's determination on the site plan. This letter is merely seeking clarification that an environmental appeal was intended and is not intended to dissuade the various parties from any available appeal. Please see the enclosed reference sheet regarding environmental appeals. After reviewing that information you may want to supplement your original letters or modify your approach to the appeal process. We would appreciate a written response to this letter not later than September 1, 2000. If this office can provide any further assistance;please feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner - cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Jennifer Henning, Development Services Elizabeth.Higgins, Devlepment Services 1055 South Grady Way:- Renton, Washington 98055:-.(425)430-6515 .o :.; This. paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer . / 1 , CITY OF RENTON 1%<8 .m, AUG 1 1 2000 RECEWED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 8-1 1 -2 0 0 0 TO - CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER FROM - JOHN H SEE DONNA L SEE 438 BURNETT AV. S. RENTON, WA. 98055 425 235 1226 THIS LETTER IS TO APPEAL THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ' S DETERMINATION ON THE DEAN SHERMAN APTS. FILE # LUA-00-085, EOF, SA-A, LLA, V LOCATION -415-435 WILLIAMS AV. S. RENTON, WA. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A MODIFICATION FROM THE CITY PARKING REQUIREMENTS. WE FEEL THIS SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED. CITY CODE REQUIRES 1 . 5 SPACES PER ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND 1 SPACE FOR EVERY 4 UNITS FOR GUEST PARKING BASED ON 67 UNITS, THIS TOTAL WOULD BE 118 SPACES. IN ADDITION, THE CLINIC WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS, BASED ON USE. ALL EXISTING PARKING ON THE SITE WOULD BE REMOVED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT. THE PROPOSED PROJECT PLAN DOES NOT SHOW A DUMPSTER STORAGE AREA FOR THE APTS. OR THE CLINIC, WHICH MIGHT TAKE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES. PLEASE DO NOT AMEND THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW THEM TO PROVIDE LESS THAN '1 '18 PARKING SPACES FOR THE APTS. AND ONLY -1 PARKING SPACE FOR THE CLINIC. CITY CODES ARE THERE TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS, AND SHOULD BE INFORCED. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW A SET BACK IN THE PARKING GARAGE. THE DEVELOPER SHOULD DESIGN THE BUILDING TO FIT THE PROPERTY, THE CITY SHOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE CONCESSIONS TO THE BUILDER. THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT TO THE PARKING GARAGE SHOULD BE OFF OF WILLIAMS ST. NOT THE ALLEY. THE 67 UNITS WILL GENERATE ABOUT 444 TRIPS A DAY IN ADDITION TO EXISTING ALLEY TRAFFIC. THAT IS TOO MUCH TRAFFIC FOR A '15 FOOT WIDE ALLEY. AND HOW WILL THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC EFFICT THE AIR QUALITY IN OUR BACK YARD? AND WILL IT ALSO MAKE THE ALLEY DANGERIOUS? IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO CUT DOWN THE LARGE FIR AND CEDAR TREES ON THE PROPERTY, THEY ARE NATIVE TO THE AREA AND BELONG HERE. WE THINK THERE SHOULD BE A MORITORIAM ON CONSTRUCTION IN THIS AREA UNTILL AFTER THE SEWER PIPE LINE REPAIR IS COMPLETED, THE NOISE FROM THE SEWER REPAIR WILL BE BAD tr3 ENOUGH WITHOUT THE APT. PROJECT GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME, TRUCKS HAULING DIRT PAST THE FROUNT OF OUR HOUSE FOR THE SEWER REPAIR PROJECT AND THE TRUCKS AND EQUIPMENT OPERATING DIRECTLY BEHIND OUR HOME. AT THE SAME TIME WILL BE A TERRIBLE NUISANCE. THANK- CITY OF RENTO.N /0:0/Q.41. AUG 1 4 2000 - ---g- / T RECEIVED CITY-CLERK'S OFFICE- -- _ 4-.W/L (S,-66 //ii-7/i/064/ Ce/e/ae/il 44 . zoi -- at- u se,v5-_- -- -l .) s.2 Ae (/(71. % -_07,/7_ aice-5- A/17 7,e_ a deleSI ar� k � r l/ �7 7/ __ /ol/ 6477)--©Gem cle/� ' 4r. z.) dAr z7_ 7/7be-ci ccM ( %? !/4 ao 41 G1, 6,/ - rile /;-j/,fr/ ti 1I/0 -7 -if/6 a('‘./. cfree-* -1"e te'24ce_ 1701-60-e-- Ou4 = _ /64.0‘,4_*_ - _41,tAz_ G�/; ��� � Zibfi oo -o ,511 E2 . . KIDTES ' Y - 1 49(') 0709 RECEIPT DATE NO _ LLJ _J - cip (7_,) (...) RECEIVED FROM 41 , , ›,-, I—-0 ADDRESS - 1 0 °3 ›aft? 75'641 $ •LJJ DS 13 Co FOR &red- EA.C --" L /1-00-Ogc 1-7c-F 5114 41/1,,v 1--33 0 ca 0 -.5 , ,ACCOUNT .. How RAID ,,I-1-1 = 63,-g AMT.OF • " ' , 1 '-' 0 , 0 ACCOUNT CASH , . 1-1- a) -.5-, a) CHECK 75-°O • . PAID BALANCE MONEY By 67.466/ . _ ORDEFt ©1998 REDIFORMO 8L802 - .) _ ..._______.,--, . —.:...:1h. - . . . • oOTES RECEIPT , . . ./ /r 0 NO. 0-710 ) ccATE U RECEIVED FROM £94i41 )2ta- -- _l ADDRESS e U ec1/ f 2 fro.. ,err- 't LI Cs $ 7.�W p 1: LO' _ 2 V 5/14 _ 19 —(j5'6' �-- �� FOR , O 3, ACCOUNT HOW PAID ' W (� 5 AMT.OF CASH •w.. V O ACCOUNT N Lem .AMT. CHECK 75-,4 9 aA f Jj ®� _Le,a) PAID BALANCE MONEY BY & t, LL/ `w. J ,-, i DUE ORDER ©1998, REDIFORM®8L802 !' q3H-t/r-t-1,4\-1-.) f UA 490 -160 !I if:-7444;1 iT S :f I) A72ipe-A-0_, p l .) I'ii0j-e- - f) ft. 113- Ur 'n Li,‘ L,UA ,, 7) 1\112-(-54,4-Y-i,e.).--a--e7,-4_, frtt17 . '1 4)c34.--, t-, f-2 ,,,,.02.2 ‘,1,- n >4. i( 11)CV—D Ch. 6r/P I,ki CP(4,11 )(11 i'-) ([75) ,i if k,,ItiV.11:5C/PM Z-eq\1 r), AA, r !I 7) \;'1,14 (---o ( I- 5-6v9 &tit- Gif SI frioi It. ( et--( ( .e-c tAf.1,t,- -6,,,_., P2viryL4- A-vc-S --- ki i (I 14iiviks Atiy__9 kiiir(aAws Airt---C — 1/0-i) k-Adl ku-rtli) . : t)‘) fft-re. iu lo hi(t.n V\klub 11) I-0W (ti2fc,, 2- a-r‘ ( ) dcttik iyk/00 rti- il sii\e/yriv, — ' it (0 i! D OLEA.retv-ro vr....0.-A- --.6.---Fevortetivek '! i 14) i (N1 - 1 (1 1 U 1 r If Hi ) ' ZMC 1 4- -eo- 0 6,Q 6,- - I-1 " Ai(6/ 611041,44c6L . Id I to) revn/aVAAm/Le.-- V l'ea) (4 [36)1.-n-eA sliuco),\-, 44,....tr2T-6,,,:j.-- i-i) Ledt;te...4 --lre,y‘N.0 a -4' .e..d 't•3,44-Ae---ro,.--v--- 4.-cfti-04— (1 i 01 • i ) ,Aerrt a- fiKet-ovAti.-- plitaiJ -1-wf6.c.- IDAdtz-ki,,, 1 t ct-i4 CeA-te ,e,. A ._:: ‘,(, yalloi () NA N1,99 6-g 7 e 9 ?IA/N.. tionA- Oct, 1441 .i 1 .---'' MAW it' t't-'60 12S 1 j40,e-- .1 A. horirv9 /4 1- ( .- I ' ...,;.1 -- --- -- ---i- -- :. i i - [ -- -- -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - .‘.: R,.::_,..) :V'( . . . • � _4-I ••-r -I • I' • . .. . . . ...6„:71 7,,,r,:,,Li.:,,,_:,[:7,__,.,:.7....,,,,7,L.,,IC,,,,ill?.ni: . . . ... . ..• . . . . • . - • .. . • V.7• •-• i 77- •17a4- • ...‘ • -11• 1(4,.,_ A- Lii.,.,.....___ . . . ni Nit .. 1; .,,,,..f.0,,,,• : : flimME11.4•410yr,in.-1PN- .:-.A. \• a . ..• e..1.•.:'''' 01--11 • l- • • • MORR/S $ s . AVE . • • - . . I. " in f ,: IN;iI n t't -.- i`'LO® ® i -e'er 0• .ri5. ...;:,-,•,4 - 6::1:s-'4,-4-1i,_i'1FE0i.pli.tFisa CP N r► - S e1 P " ® mac, yt il"'itr• L. i3 •o CO ' • • • -'=....- P - erai.,...T,54_,„ ,„,..,....- .. &;3 . ir;7 IC i: • ►• . . I• e .�i 4- _ 7 ..11. :° .• ' -• .• by ui• •O ,5A1/• TH• ERS AVE. S s - .-- • !-. -ko .4 - r•-.1. .,,,!11,. .: 7,_;_42 . k :• N ,...5,..ilin E.77-41 .1^,;-2 . .7:,-..11 : , it . !4' MUNI • Ci gs 1. • .. ''filt.i q.c... . ° lr. - .11°:Ij1- : ...,1 .,,, mi ,..7.,-.-,... .• \\• .,. . . • w�/Y■oL?isi` ;-1-1-1411 3[f� • kt D t-� Burnett . `1•• 0- . '' . .. tr-itLipt F-8 "4. 4 4 t s I" • - I ra 1 TA VI:* - ', ', 1,..,tzi.n.5-iyi34 , ,. Km 0.4 • • �, • • L • BURNETT - _ AVE; • - - ��t, • 1..i;' •....‘. s•:.-':' • : '... ' •gifillir115111nklhq4111a: ;1• - '2%7" • '' -N.;-rtir,.-1.1":•71..•••I'v • > ::.inni!100 C14311ME-11/11 •. IIII . . "13 . I VFW'-• t F. 6.1iNSIEM . Ili Milig''= ° 1.- :. —3---— -• '— ---- - - - -- - WaL•teWS : •k ....--- ci. AVE\ .4 . • . I .• -. 07 :_ ,�, �, il . doe 1,.,. � ■ I - A. ,'XS* Co' �i oy.ps--1 CO -N : a .-. a•.. o I • ..'ige7' ••• m M .0% . ? � ;-A .�1■ .., al ' % li iti; \„ • - Efig II. rg WELLS. - ••�. • ' AVE. . •.. • .52P,.: .....7" N th t...._:. fig .. .. yg -* .. _. ‹),...- --.4-- yi 0 nE, , ......1 k SONO& - "" AstwAres=0>as 73 !" ..% t., ill ,.,. iggi,„ la 1.1 • .%.,.. 4.....; -1.• .M1.274'• 45...'0,..40).4-4 .... 7--•' • 11:1 Ea 1"-_ '414-ab-:-P.M. - 1 • :..,--,. - m .1.• . :..iisii t ,... ....i . IF, st , . .... i !! - . 7.411:), tt. ;.`4ill E i-7-4.i. • '". . %. . MAIN •• •• i' • AVE. t s �� \\ti UM%�EG.ACCESS ;� •• o� .•�4 g • : '° i • a s 4• • v N• `I\ c • . •, of so ..�,� �., '�' ``��; • • • • • Al it.L. n A VE - Time,1'®I 'I 'I• 1 • IeI . tg.i.cni,o1 i i �'� .,.. . . - . ._ At • . • . • . W • • . . . • • .• . . • i r - I -----------— M I T H U N I.' AA,rrnp4"..'wwn • SITE ANALYSIS SUILD1NG ANALYSIS I mw� IPW TWISTING CONDITIONS I'IIL ING HPIGHT• MUILDING AREAS IMPERVIOUS ARPAS .1"~i4 AA Mr r♦.df1s rti•prt • ...r.1 lAK NIO^-• SOW wM..r..M Pr .....a.a.--, G..pINN...Yapp r�•paV ,��/W T•em I Mai P.T am'.ppa✓ e.11.00 GP m.v ,a..•W.v - •.4..•n...a AaV^M VJ AA.f Ipf rr S.•I^..r H1•V60 GP i • fiee p.m ear sr n,..• ..Vr..P1....AA p.•....M V✓.✓.r T.�,p eA.. • .v I A.A1.MIv • IVV..Yp.r.✓ ....wi✓w.r..4•,r.yN..RT I.11•NW �' PROPO4P0 LOT f,01(fJSSGP• Sari, a POO..w...••I.a....rr.n.. 1.m✓. r..Ate. -.-,:.__ .M r• Twnr • �A PARKING RPOUIRIMPYTa .A✓.y.•u.m m.oIV.' Ow a... •umr A l...es . YI..•N A+p..R.r M✓.Ar A..'1.•....•. • DEAN SHERMAN nmi COMMON SPAT,. LANDSCAPING tomoriSsurs .....,......•Al AAA.Dr.rn am...Arm,a,nl o..rr........,. sp......Rr.11 ....1... T.IAr.1 ...V Nis,OJr.pp J. MACS Nate 1 ......J Dean Sherman Apts. p✓^rtl A.p.pA... An 1• A....A .0 -^1.1..1. • MAME • P6660 e . Y-^-�'--� • 5th&WIlllame,Renton ROAM,AR .�..mH TV IT T.Si wp•40 TO ro. ro�.plc..l�11D,1 DSI IIC 1 wlee.n CPS. u.mrt'^r.p • • !►��I :ter: : :aiiiiaw:t: I 111411'�'i_'"!+ ��' '*L I ll �� ,__I_ITIO,1°"-`.sraiiii i, �� 11/14.. +rnr Ti fiK ieilli :_- fi IMIIIIIF . • I4II4 I I 1 ' ' I . .'� Y� w .— A�I_ A7 '>A I >T 1 , �1 1 1 I A.V I i , >N '. I I 1 ' , , .— � 1 ' . . . trV >•7 — -- �I I I I I cm OGIIYOttI MAPiE I , 1 I I � I � /// it Ii �•riiu I I -' 1 I { I , I r., � M �� ii }i �Oa-lap P±N irie r:____. :irm*_. t. a lwir J1 •_I L� �yPI' w 't>M Mw ;..,,+M i j ` .I ' C ""^ t,,.-^�. I710t •J)• !:'L W I�>sl lq:��'�-Alp pale„ ..,✓. �� :� I nmua+ • TM"•_ i�'. �. m • ll • !al m _,AAalp l�►.,I,. + BUILDING'A' fr B43 UNITS 'B' J . .— 74 �,Uq 11 T+`.• 4S UNITS A I��J\ UNITS 1 TV V! T.OVA•0.VS 0I'�`� CONC.OVA•!.HI ()I ', R ' --Maw ears PIN!APP Oririp4. - .. • -Mall �� P V.P. Ihs-I .� ---- ail 1. .. '-•..,, 1;i, f 1-,r,'•`' liNaJ :ipl 1 aPAEG_ L'I I �th,:I f l.' P I '.+�,..r . '101.11001 .I ,I` I'.--1 ij$1�" - 77• - «.,'�4 ;.'_Tye _— - JYII1_-1_..Ci; .. r.. IC I,.+ _' • J WY h .� fial#=sue';- I� 1,.tA.t _n� - _. � l -- .. _1—lam__ .� -I ME:t '- 1 ras.f r..f'1R�''� .`2W>✓---'------ 1 I vgyr �Iltd_' +�rt .i l .. o,u ,I :'_ _I_ — a .".4r -- T. , e`Yrx...1"4"` 4.:i:�.L, .,1; !a, ' r"'''1 n�1 ot,w%.rv:flf � I '�„ • ll� // i'. t. r. r.,,11. a _i ._ t K. — J ii3q/=ry-W•I `�fRIC 1_ r.' / pr .s.lu.wv Q \ �;I� ► liiJR_____ ►.II=-1 -wt� . �I - �:—I i ir?l !t'' M •I!• i -I�_t_►s_1 'i a �_' ' v11► �► �•,ler�e r •�+IlalWA +++.nrrw� Willy •�r,,, ■� �------- Z fl�.ii 'gl Ili-��rVie iteale—r ia I�wweeltsa r—Z. it �I0.gf ? I ..Iifiilli 4111.1�111.11 C.I�we ` e. Mil,IMP IMF � t' It'd' MIT�. .�r. a • ' WiLLIAM AVENUE SOUTH - 501'29'161V 559.60' 111'ROADWAY-AO'RO.WJ10 • �� OSITE PLAN T -aIfi • .®. -- ��V - • RII.IpPIW0.Y'ID.C,OA.a II III • +� --- - — —--- m Al Ep i ! - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m,...R..•maw.. - ---- MITHUN • . • • • .4..,. . ._.«.-.. • r _ .1.�. I' - ill ■! =!■I■�--_--' I■!■■ -IlM- ■!■■lg _ 1■l■■_ ■ 2— IT...R.._.� a.o«.7., - $ I0"----- ,�_ _-, _ _=" Ems= =® _ -�irl = = .� _-ld - - __- = ®? =!■lil=- E!■ _ _ l■ = = _ illi■ .i : 7 _ -�* DEAN HHERMAN _ Gai • Iit R.N.LEVEL 7 — . _ H _.....___•_ ......... _ 1 i�enm.Leva, !� ` ft° ".. �I I =!■�= _ - - ■■.= m in I R --I... Dk. ire shermanApts. auuee Level., u:v a WAY - N..51l , --'--. ...._.-- I 4 em,.NO Mt - DSI LLC IIeme.Renton Sth R _ci °ALLEY (WEST) ELEVATION yr•t-0' ./411 ...'AC=Wk_ • .i.er j-1-1..* . _i � `ri■r • II=�? .-ae- I ■ II�i „_ _� = ■I�11• EI _I.■Ili � 1 fni=�■vv = `e� 1■i Ali _ I�.k:211 !:�- ■■_ • POPEN ACE �:IIII`_:■- ■■ '�■_ =® _ i { -- li■II■<E.!®l !■i h "ri:--I ■'! {■G '- I,I 1■. ii . / lip�u i■ !ri-LII =G■-h��� 111■il - 1 Aid _ -- =I■I■.i.. IN1 _�■-■ __= _ _r,_.P.�■■ .:--�_�_ am. E- "=�== . 1_ _I -�■' 1 C" hI�11=■It<< 1 =i'►�/ ��- 111■■I �� i ,i��■■IIII` =-tl i■ia�■I __ ■■_�■:�(1 fill■■ . ■i_I��I =�j�r� rI I:__ - - _ �lil@��IBi ►, '`/ 1 LQRC1-..>j-�•, � �tlo,� "- c� E _ r,�i �i. - —-_=._ i\,.:•.#ir =__�:�,,- - - =®'--44/ �' — _ tih"� :� c Its li� �.. is ... n,' II .�I. L . I �. ■I ! ry�l;�I �■■ . iv �{ 1 -Icr/ - r pi `' i ,,,.• _���aIlle =i®sue_ - • , hurt uow� I oumww li ia. 0 _�=rm. ruw;w . Ian -----_ -'.-_-----.-_.1...-IDeC_ - °WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH1EASTI ELEVATION vr.,-0 • --— ----- ' • I . ,,, ,.,.,______ i ____ 1 _ m _.r— 1 ...., .k dam- .11111 ii 91 uLer I 111E! i■ ! 1 11�==eB�i=- .i �. � AVENUE � I �•,. 111....-,..;, , �� _ uLer ...� .... - coo _►' -•_ mom .ou,x RI = ® IN ice= d� ►. ...n...,..=1 - ---- -----._..._.. I� — m = _ I '•- ".;ta�.•.:ru46e `fir !\? �:� • I.a ..y ,uc. _ ._ .�.,._;. _ �- .___.._.-_ .__p.. - ._ __. + %T�RIQRg }(ATIQNS 1 I Mall .�, w._ .i' 1=1 11 !—�■�■I ...fi---I emnour E -. — ■.��I�,I7�- won pw _■.--Imo'_.._■ qa mir .tr,Kafir i • n r�i.Y}.s .nw raup I •_ - -- S eallee:01,04Ael u�boWO.0. I _ yyll II it OSTH STREET ELEVATION Q COURTY•RC ELEVATION - v,•.,-01. us.r.0 A5.Q Ic ,R NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION •••••balleep • I E3 •:7 .T23N R5E E 1/2 , 4. RM-I L (_ J f R-ioI L •A � I L C P) -- pm. R-�o " -GD- _a)I �� Pi. -- _ - 1 i - L. bar ILrt P-�1 . , =Ct-CO _i. -- 1(P) — -1rf- pc . Airport Way 1.. rR-8 =:.� — __ . _ i @LPL. omer I; r g• ma 11111R -8 rtr `D iM-U r; il 1123111[3011 NMI > A 1Ctp �� w _ �, - — ---- am RM-U RM S .t Bi -;lo CD(P) i _ .11 N r] - (�/� —lie - i LI • .41 =II _Li-__:_. ....3 — �= S 2nd St. 5 , S 2nd . z g ' -- I Idl` CD AIL CD_ CD= _u �o CA S 3rd St. `'-' t0 ----- -T f- -Ti--•- N 9 _ i I MEIb rd -o — CD CD(P) -1 • ., \ , _ 4 t a 1 � �� 6_ CD CD 26 C A ED i CD Xipip CD -- CD --- CD can ' . ✓• — ii.,1 CD = CD lS —r- -�y y nth Pl. c? = cDa.) ,C" __j -CR,:,.,,c' ------- 1------ .....„, ___ _ + + + + + x _ • _ix — St r — + + + + + + + + + __ T* U • • Ni, a a + + + +{ . . 4 + I+ + + + + + + + 1 + + + + + .+ + + --_,I a+ + +'+ + + + + +++a+ l H- a+ + +1a+ + + + + I+ + +� G3 • 19 T23N R5E E 1/2 4q (Pao T', tiTTo ® 3 cozy ZONING Z.D I. 1�( (�--- 114000 '.F �►�. M ;.. • 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 • . • .• . .. • . . .i. 1 •'5-- ., %• •'••.. ts*4 -' ...• flordie IA.-il -;:3. •':'• . Hor'die!kid'NW.'. . • . • iTi,Sty i:'...... , . : .1 . :.. • • ..• I !cil • , •% 0.... •••. , . . . • .•, : '— • ' ' •• • • ' • ' • • ' • - • .. : .:. i .. . •• ,. .. • • .. .... ... ' ..• .-, : • • ... , - • I -_._.. • 1 , . •.',..:'. •,.0)\ .•'•.• •• (:••.'•.... . : '.; : I , 1. ... • , ' • . . . , . D • • . . . , • - _.: . • '....;.P. . : ';7 ' . • i' , Laker Ave ,S •• • • • - 1 - •.;•,,j,,, ::t.A ----.1- , • • :; i i r:r. . .. ,•••••• . . . iv) .: • . • i I al. i:e,s, !... :II;...,— • ., . . ., ' 1: ' ' •:. t•",:', ' ',Iv' I, i:---i 1 • .. I• t :. I 0, \ •\-o i -0 !•;°- , •I I 110 •, ' S,- . . • j ;1i SnoOtfA;Met \ V— ,I :i LA • . i .;5" . 1 7 II : I ;II (A • • '0 ;;En ;1•i •-• 0. .. ... .....<r% Aim mina iflill _ r.) 1,..... :: — .. . . 0 ,-.• • , ,- . • --T'P-2:-Q 1111liffiL IT 17[1 tintinUCE, VI a :; ;... ,. . .,* .. .. i ! r. . minium 1 U. Iiillffin- 1_111 a --n- 1 .. , . . . • t:1 . I mIIIIII ililliiilli L iiii —'or ISII 12'e MI . .,.. •• .. • . , . . . ' co •. En -. . , • . i . .• . --. CPQ ' .\. :;..• : 114111111 tallilliill E, monimm II! i ..,= . ..... ,.. • • I' • ,.. ... ••••..,I.:. Minn 'minim FiA II IIEMITAM ri -"pi Acmtwer-E inn . •-i, .f. ....' 0 • . -•-•.-.... ., I — 111111111111 lUllak 1 ri__ Alm 1 :11, gloom Nam_ ....../••• ....... C • co -...Y: N::•• = 111111111ml 1i1IIII ,-, ti e',I-Agri .,. • -...,, ••• . P 1 I 11 I j .,"i 1 t- r. .. , ....<. - l 1 • . . •,sk, I 1.I Ira afl)P MIMI E\-g f-1 1i11111I1111 , • /•• ...*.f,11`1.1117/*1•1.r. . •A-.•:.-.. '•-" •‘••,-,N"••• .-1- • \ ....x , • IP Itaim wviii 11111111M lc,-il n 1 i II . ••• 1 \ ,.::•••••Z!,..:::1 ....x. . .• ..I, .--... , • ::........i.. I .X4111!) ..-----7 I I ri------RIU1 . Nits. in AveS 1 1 il 11 — A•-••••,••:11*•;' i•; '..•o'• 17-0 • 1' 4 • . . ... . ..e........6./.,,,,14.00. •. •,:;1,....„ • • P . - ' \ (tri I III I . .4',.:<:.%:;5/1V:'1 ilti!'PellYI i AVe iN•:.' 'P* • . .• \ 1 I f /••••"‘; cep\-- '• ••••• • . - , ,...••- -. - •• ., ./...) •• 1.0•,1 A 1 ;" ....,,, .,,y.s.,!;!..i; •=.:11., iwl. :+ :.:.11 : •• • -• , • - !,•1'1 1.11.1 Ave IS rz,...... n ../. ..cx•I •,.Por,k...,Ave,IN.k,... • • •'I I'1 I i.:•.*1?..CPdar.:).k)/q1.S.; ••.:•••••. ;. :7 . ..; • I.:•01. .., i 1 , 111111.1H.....-:Iirr.ei: ) z001,Ave 5.! fRen'tOr)IMie:-..SP,• ...1-1.• .1 . I' .1 ••>•. • N . fu;C.,.••.:.".111, I,:.s>1'...;:;*r I r;I f.1.• • • .. \•1.:•:.7?•:":".:, •i:1,: :!•Gar'din]:.Ave N ••.,', .., :• ;',..:.1.1i:Ii••1: .: i . . .• i :•;..-' , ii.,::4111 , 11.1 i..11 , .• pi., \••,..... ; .• 1. 1 . . • • • • ... .., • , . '.'z • .Meodcii;)!I'Aiiel'N11:. . . . . .. .ii..--.. ••••:-..•-•.. I, .. 1.. ! ii1.••1l,. 11••:i1;'•1!: . . • , .- . . • •li .;,,,...' • i 1 V' .,--, ‘.; / ;. . . . '-i •Ave.ve •J". . ! ;1: : i ....,• •— ' / /...•(1 ''...,_ '.'...7:.......".... • .: F:octoe.yt:lAve:NI!: / p, , .. i.g3. .. i ..• . . . .. . ..,: ; . 1- ri i ...": ' , I ' •I L/ ...... .,., ,, g••••• • i• •,. N:1://••••• • • ' , • ,..,• •. ,.. , . . •!,...,. • , I .... I• . vv. ..1%.-- .... • .., •.! ! ; ...• . ..., ... ....•••••• •• :64./.;.—..:\e• • •• . . .....• .• 2 • .• • • • • • • • . .. . • . . . . . • . . - . • SEE DRAWING(S) I 11 I , ;, • , . DEC 12 '00 11:21 T0-2066237005 FROM-TPE T-096 P.03/03 F-636 Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, LLC December 11, 2000 Page 2 As shown in the above table, replacing the existing 4,700 sq. ft. medical clinic with 19 apartment units is projected to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the subject project. Traffic Impact Mitigation The City of Renton has a traffic impact fee of$75 per average weekday trip. Our 7.19.00 report calculated a traffic fee of$33,300 based on the project generating 444 trips. Replacing the medical office clinic with 19 apartment units Is projected to reduce the average weekday trips by 44. Thus, the calculated traffic fee would be as follows: 400 average weekday trips X $75 per average weekday trip = $30,000 Operational Review No material changes to the LOS performed at the analysis intersections shown in Table 1 of our 07.19.00 report would be expected. The traffic generation is expected to be less than originally projected. Further, the revised alley access would allow residents to travel either north or south on the alley. Thus improving the disbursement of the traffic of the project. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations This letter has documented the traffic impact of the proposed replacement of a 4,700 sq. ft. medical office clinic with 19 apartment units. These units would be a part of the 67 apartment units Initially evaluated in Multi-family Development at 6`n &Williams — Renton Traffic Impact Analysis. The proposed changes would reduce traffic generated by the site by 44 trips a day. Therefore, the calculated traffic fee would be changed to $30,000. No other material changes to our initial analysis would occur. If you have any questions, please call me at 425.455.5320 or email me at miacobs@tranplaneng.com. Very truly yours, • JA t�� TRANSPORTATION PLANNING . • o0 • • & ENGINEERING, INC. • � ! t 2 , o '�F ctrrT"_� ��,.��1 .1111," /I. /2 " -fc-r II Mark J. Jacobs, P.E., P.T.O.E. Srot,�_�L- • Associate _ __- MJJ:mc FEXPIRES 4i$14 • C.\-Projects Folder\R0883a00 Plan MoQI(Ication.doc . • -.8,4,•• . . • , . •. • • •.•. •. • i . • • MITA‘kge•-• '•'.. • . . . . . • • .! .........:4,...”-.;: i4.,- • . • - • ...-1 I LI-- C./.i. '... . • •• roi/juln.W.y Sa.2.3 faelle.V/A Om ta ao4.4044 smao“.1.7.05 . . . • . 1 • . . . ' . 1 I . I . .. • . • • . . • I . I • 1 DEAN SHERMAN . • • Dean Sharman Apts. • i • ' • • • MAIM ' 6th&Williams,Renton • • IWAN311.0% 1 I DS!LW • . I . I 1 ,, • '-....s, K'D g• 1/167c, 0 " " .. . • . . . . WW1 6,6. 011.1.SOMA.1.4.1. . k... : y \ . . . . ......., . ALLEY • . 110 Mel I ...,..;.1. - a I •in./... ...lis a MMEI as•11=1•• •• •••116611•• =1•16,6 Y illSSMI ,6• 60.0 66, 10:',2="1 349 94. - — nommmyamme am . I lUl III IIII -. , • • l' • 1 .• / ; . i 1 ; , . •, , , • .! . -- ' ; • -- 2'r"—r— ; 1 ''' ''''', _....,___. _ I 0'L- / '' I ! ; 1 1 - • :mirth 1 1 i 1 , , , , I , 90...r.germ wile : ' ' , 1 i i 1 i [ , • , , -••- ! — f .... Sorri ..- 4 ft — ' 71:012=11115 41:7'. 11.1.."..,.- .-"A7F Iv; t.P.cr '.:'4,'•'' ' ..." ._ t R —.. • '- I . .. ._ ,,--.......... ....----- I MOWN N mem 1 MOM SUMO 1 UMW I MUM MOTO 1 SPAM I killaX41 1 MOM I 1 1 . I ,,i. •••.. c -; —•1 ming ipmc _ 1' MI: . r;_:it,;;;;;., IIPIETIM ' W.S111 1 10 KC .a ato : I .iingili Fur 11, i. MUM° ..,'.t 611.010 •••' .. . . 1-....1 -1..-1--- • . lEillitliti-14.._ .•'%.„ --H-n-"4--q3tt 1 I i I-- 1 l • -.. I MOM I MIMI BUILDING'A' ......... . • 1.01111T t WNW . 74-r77.7_ ..,, .N=0011 MIT BUILDING 1r Ta• Oft 6•6 KAY I t&mai a UMW VV. H. - .17, .T.6.1{1:1 - 7: .. ,,-.• • 121 la ...431mmmUNITG. ..451 sammUNITG .1h....,11:. 1,,,MtiMt• Willa liAMr'Li.W..,!I, . -1?,(.,-;.L I:1 SUM &WI ----::-.., ...-... .--.-......- .-.. . 4'mi.,7,32.4:11k 7,.....-..-...i: 0,..i •• .. "I • —_.;,T=7-...fii,2•.,...i,.: • 4 .....-- - j.--e-•r—, , , , . , .,..fl-•,-4-rx— ..,iii.1,!A.:I' eiv:!.0,:r cjw..•, •_. -.My''-'7rre‘i i4e.T,:.. ''.k....- "n*:"''' • i • 1 : 1 ' ' . I , , Ir-,r ••••1 r.4r1.....ief.vi.:4- i,„ " . .-' 1 _ i '' .-1„.•:. -11111[___6-- 0101.11111Millillil • . _ 1 !2...D.21..i I *.5iiiu.slaWaft"WdRhiffliniiiiiigelMillailelligillliiiklUMENIIIMIk7.:._,ugammumvisidirubiumiga,......- ,-----yz.., • " .t. . - Kfs,1 I 1 I ,1 t Nni • 6. • ." 1 . SY .‹ . . is, ati ...§ SY Yr ,,. . . 0 pi 00 t2- WILLIAM AVENUE SOUTH Ni'1,0.0WAIM 11.0.W.I 37.0 n SY VW -V- V! -.. - • ! • rgipENT-7&___-"—__ 1 LEVELS 1& ___. °RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 1 - STREET LEVEL . . CO , - . _ _ems_ - Nu•1,0' ar J....M."-.-ialatN696112.-q . . . . . , ••••••• . . A2.1 "416"a 0,--5,, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION I --WM 1•1141.1G. .-....-.-,... .--.--..- .-..----. 5• . J . . . ' . 7--;',,-----..--,r'-': '1 1-i-',,--.- - l''..1,-,! "- - _— ------- ----- — — M 1 U N • • IWO no..vWq If 5.. ....WA p m 1 J1I • • DEAN SHERMAN • WARM • • Dean Sherman Apts. •• LAM NN • 6th&Wllllarna,Renton • 'p-11. DSI LW • • • • Y N Y� N i._.' i Y _ i• W L E W W i W W mb 1IOU I, Ma LI 1 T 1 SOI1 • me..Q "1 a a N b i nMa;.. + a 1n , M Iri Y,,—.1N tb ,V W, �._.-- ...._ ' a , W W ,IY Q 4 ■196Qim — Q \7 _Y iaaiiiiirr I fl w N N I •- Y® ` I 3 & : T .N 1Y x aN e Q I N Itl MINION MILNI A PARKING GARAGE G7 TT�— N q M. I@ N•Yb N 9tl' I x o � — • i I N N ,10 N If 011 N L q NN 1/ NN Y N N tlN N YN Y Ml l I FP . I • srOvn • • i ?co)�i • I • PARKING LEVEL 1 OPARKING LEVEL 1 1 bHT•f.0 _ oNNAI N. ' ,�. t11NIIWINeiNWv.11.oDAv ,rr 2 ■/�■ son _____ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ....rt•®,I,,,,,,,, " 4-2-120B cc N DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS N a O g CD CO � y ���� CO R • � � LOT DIMENSIONS Minimum Lot Size None 25,000 sq. ft. None Minimum Lot Width None None None Minimum Lot Depth None None None LOT COVERAGE Maximum Lot Coverage None for properties located within the 65%29 of total lot area or 75%29 if parking 65% of total lot area or 75% if parking is for Buildings "Downtown Core Area".15 is provided within the building or within a provided within the building or within a For properties located outside the parking garage. parking garage. Downtown Core Area:65%of total lot area or 75% if parking is provided within the building or within a parking N garage. DENSITY (Net Density in Dwelling Units per Acre) Minimum Net Residential 25 dwelling units per net acre. NA Where a development involves a mix of Density The minimum density requirements uses then minimum residential density shall not apply to the subdivision, shall be 16 dwelling units per net acre. short plat and/or development of a When proposed development does not legal lot 1/2 acre or less in size as of involve a mix of uses, then minimum res- March 1, 1995. idential density shall be 5 dwelling units per net acre. The same area used for commercial and office development can also be used to calculate residential density. Where com- mercial and/or office areas are utilized in the calculation of density, the City may require restrictive covenants to ensure the maximum density is not exceeded should the property be subdivided or in another manner made available for sepa- rate lease or conveyance. Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS CDa. r 5'a -x4a arm."r' ar, tCO3,r K: X zt'r e ''' r ��R ,k 3 -dr k f � �,,.�_ �z, Y e_ DENSITY (Net Density in Dwelling Units per Acre) (Continued) Maximum Net Residential 100 dwelling units per net acre. NA COR 1 and 2: 25 dwelling units per net Density Density may be increased to 150 acre, without bonus. Bonus density may dwelling units per acre subject to i< be achieved subject to noted require- administrative conditional approval. ments.32 COR 3: 50 dwelling units per net acre. The same area used for commercial and office development can also be used to calculate residential density. Where com- mercial and/or office areas are utilized in the calculation of density, the City may require restrictive covenants to ensure the maximum density is not exceeded should the property be subdivided or in another manner made available for sepa- ciiin rate lease or conveyance. SETBACKS Minimum Front Yard/ Within Downtown Core Area15: 15 ft.29—buildings less than 25 ft. in None Street Setback25,26 None height. Where any front yard is Outside Downtown Core Area15: 20 ft.18'29—buildings 25 ft. to 80 ft. in required, no building shall height. be hereafter erected or 10 ft. —for the first 25 ft. of building 1s 2s_ altered so that any por- height, measured from street grade. 30 ft. buildings over 80 ft. in height. tion thereof shall be 15 ft. -for that portion of a building nearer the front property over 25 ft. in height, measured from line than the distance the street grade. indicated by the depth of the required front yard. Maximum Front Yard/ 15 ft. —buildings 25 ft. or less in On lots abutting more than 1 street the None Street Setback height. maximum setback shall only be applied to None—for that portion of a building the primary street as determined by the ry over 25 ft. in height, measured from Reviewing Official. street grade. m Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS N 1 - � .CO f � � • COR Mgt co SETBACKS (Continued) Minimum Arterial27/ 10 ft. landscaped setback from the 10 ft. landscaped setback from the street 10 ft. landscaped setback from the street Freeway Frontage street property line, or property line, or property line, or Setback 20 ft. landscaped setback from the 20 ft. landscaped setback from the back 20 ft. landscaped setback from the back back of the sidewalk,whichever is less. of the sidewalk, whichever is less. of the sidewalk, whichever is less. Minimum Rear Yard None, unless the CD lot is adjacent to None required,except, 15 ft. if abutting or NA a lot designated Residential on the adjacent to a residential zone.2 City Comprehensive Plan, then there shall be a 15 ft. landscaped strip or a 5 ft. wide sight-obscuring landscaped strip and a solid 6 ft. high barrier used along the common boundary. Minimum Side Yard23 NA None required, except 15 ft. if abutting or NA Where any specified side adjacent to a residential zone.2 yard is required no build- ing shall be hereafter erected or altered so that any portion thereof shall be nearer to the side lot line than the distance indicated by the width of the required side yard. Special Shoreline NA NA COR 1 and COR 2: Setback NA COR 3: In COR 3,where the applicable Shoreline Master Program setback is less than 50 ft., the City may increase the setback up to 100% if the City determines additional setback area is needed to assure ade- quate public access, emergency access or other site planning or environmental considerations. Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS , CDr e ON-SITE LANDSCAPING Minimum Landscape Within Downtown Core Area15: 10 ft., except where reduced through the NA Width—Street Frontage None site plan review process. Outside Downtown Core Area15: 10 ft.35 Minimum Landscape NA 15 ft. sight-obscuring landscaping. NA Width Required When a If the street is a designated arterial, non- Commercial Lot is sight-obscuring landscaping shall be pro- Adjacent to Property vided unless otherwise determined by the Zoned Residential2 Hearing Examiner through the site plan review process.3,3' Minimum Landscape 15 ft. landscaped strip consistent with 15 ft. wide landscaped visual barrier con- NA Width Required When a the definition of landscaped visual bar- sistent with the definition in RMC -• Commercial Lot is rier in RMC 4-11-120; or 5 ft. wide 4-11-120, when abutting a residentially cri Abutting9 to Property sight-obscuring landscaped strip and zoned property2. Zoned Residential a solid 6 ft. high barrier used along the A 10 ft. sight-obscuring landscape strip common boundary of residentially may be allowed through the site plan zoned property.4 review process.35 Minimum Landscape NA 15 ft. wide sight-obscuring landscape NA Width Required When a strip. Commercial Zoned Lot is Adjacentl°to Property Zoned Commercial, Office or Public/Quasi • N a O O g 00 Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS N CD • CO COR, ON-SITE LANDSCAPING (Continued) CO Special Requirements for NA In the Green River Valley, an additional NA Properties Located within 2%of natural landscaping shall be the Green River Valley required for developed sites as per the Planning Area11 Soil Conservation Service Environmental Mitigation Agreement. These areas should not be dispersed throughout a site, but should be aggregated in one por- tion of the property. Where possible, the required 2% landscaping for adjacent properties should be contiguous. HEIGHT Maximum Building 95 ft.8,13,28 250 ft.8.17'28 COR 114: 10 stories and/or 125 ft.8.19'28 Height, except for uses COR 2 and 316: 10 stories and/or 125 ft.; having a "Public Suffix" (P) provided, the master plan lan includes a bal- 03 designation30 ance of building height,bulk and density8; and provided, that in the COR 3 Zone only, buildings or portions of buildings which are within 100 ft. of the shoreline shall not exceed a maximum height of 75 ft. Maximum Building Height 20 ft. more than the maximum height 20 ft. more than the maximum height NA When a Building is allowed in the adjacent residential allowed in the adjacent residential zone.8 Adjacent to a Lot zone.8,22 Designated as Residential on the City Comprehensive Plan Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-140G. Wireless Communication Facilities Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. ' ' ����U�U ���U���� ���U���������� ����N������� ��������� ��� ������^ ^�~^� ��^~^^~� DESIGNATIONS S���������I���� �A None 'redexcept vvhonaCObd NA 88�n�nonm �o���ra�for required Outdoor Loading, Repair, abuts u' /u adjacent",Aresidential�nad � YNmlntanmnoaorW��rk � |6t2. then a fenne,or landscaping, ora ' barn�' or�r�mm ""'""^pp~~ ' therooftoach�na visual or 'acoustical screening ao determined bv the Reviewing Offiocd.» Surface—Mounted Utility Must be screened from public view. Must bm screened from pub|icview. Must be screened from public view. and Mechanical Equipment ' Roof Top Equipment ��� beencl � � as to enclosed Must be �d��� �� be.�� �dad �� beemd�� � �� bm �i�d� (Exceptfmr shielded�onn��em� from from view. m Telecommunication ' -^ Equipment) m ��rmml�m� ' u�d�mr W4uotbeooneen�dfnom adjacent or 'W4untbe screened fvornadjacent orabu� �NA—No outdoor storage impenni�ed. ~ Ou tdoor Storageabutting � ab tUnQ properties and public rights- dnu properties and public rights-of-way. of-wa' ]u ormtagauseoohsd|pnn- Outdoor storage uses shall provide N*no' vido fences, beming. and/or land- ing, bemninQ, and/or landscaping oo scaping as determined by the determined by the Reviewing Official to Reviewing Official to-achieveede- achieve adequate visual or acoustical ' uoteVioua| or acoustical screening. screening. Materials covered bv buildings vv�h y�atehe|ocovered bv buildings vv�hroofs � - roofs but vvithoutsides shall bm con- ' but without midenshoUbo considered out- midoredoutoideotonageandnuideot side storage and subject to the screening to the screening provisions of this provisions of this Section. Section. Garbage, Refuse or Must ba screened,except for access Must bo screened, except for access Must be screened, except for access DunpstsrmConto1ned points, bya sight-obscuring fencoor points,bya sight-obscuring fence orland- points,bya sight-obscuring fence or land-within Spmo[f|ed Areas landscaping or some combination ocapingor some combination thenaof/ 000pingor some conbinsdionthereof. thereof. � w ' a como�onn�osnen�c���on � . ` DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS ri3 iva4mtliaretymusw4,05:1 ;gv4"Amwtii-j;,:eogtovtn KzetAYovrofdb-ggtn:;oqa,p, 0 imp,s4negra4sere44 .:,,,,:046,2t Yre4, geaciv: ;,114„c6;,44;:itiva 03 PARKING General See RMC 4-4-080. • See RMC 4-4-080. Parking of vehicles See RMC 4-4-080. Direct arterial access related to commercial uses shall not be to individual structures shall occur only allowed on residential streets. when alternative access to local or collec- tor streets or consolidated access with adjacent uses is not feasible. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ." General NA A pedestrian connection shall be pro-. NA vided from a public entrance to the street, unless the Hearing Examiner determines that the requirement would unduly endan- ger the pedestrian. SIGNS General See RMC 4-4-100. See RMC 4-4-100. See RMC 4-4-100. 0 LOADING DOCKS Location NA Not permitted adjacent or abutting to a NA residential zone.2,3 DUMPSTER Location of Garbage, NA Shall not be located within 50 ft.of a res- NA Refuse or Dumpster idential zoned2 property, except by Areas approval by the Hearing Examiner through the site plan review process. In no case shall garbage, refuse, or dump- • ster areas be located within the required setback. RECYCLING COLLECTION STATION OR CENTER Location Shall not be located within any Shall,not be located within any required Shall not be located within any required• required landscape area. landscape area. landscape area. SENSITIVE AREAS General See RMC 4-3-050. See RMC 4-3-050. See RMC 4-3-050. Conflicts: See RMC 4-1-080. • • DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS ( �� .;� �} ,��::t� d!. _ +,,,:��<,•,:✓�;d°•d 1=&' ter: •,3ykyaxq,.+ti '#d'°4• C ,y{»'"J'<, te. , 1„ fb''`2a�pz "�.�� •e, :�'.,4;4e;.q:, -;?f Y<7..a; ,.t et:q x:g; 3; �„. :,; ',,'t ::?" .6';,,`i t.i%?s',:tp ..,,v.;.: + .,n. ''',rb��,"�:',J Pam.4, L"Si%.' �"r i^.�n€''s�"","s•$ yD,: r.e'-'.e ,r-- -x're ma; -"" ,r0;�:"a kVO.r� _art,,,y',3 ssw-o ;�€ '"gip% N O'1° t"`," : ^Y'. ,13J .. ke- �,. .-��zc^' nf: - r%un.`, x..o `'�."'%'R,t; 3.e 2u �.f 0, z�. ' ' `.�'wr'ati,.�.% .��.�>�,>': �i ��:�f�.z�'.°�•dvx-rdaaxF'�'k;�a9°�Y:Kg�,'o�r,„�„5�:>':,i;.�t`:v,,de�.r: ,,.r�'.•djxf;4'1`'.4`-�.,`,�%"�. r�z �•>,°��.i,..�r , � rP.� r'•`t .yy VIEW::PROCESS4.= :.tw •.�.., „ ,�_ , : ri ... <_�•� °:gin: r. .. . -'4.�a>r�� .... �-.,:� . ,.�• >..,., "�.... ,•, •< ,��$;cy�l=ca. .3` , ....tt'.:-rs ..,`{�. .r%f=",'?:.?:., ..r-M ..l's^":� ,,.., . .: ,. ., .:e.. .-.�:.�. ,. �i:-1•�eY::<:S4r�•b+c<.1\:'...i.t��.i.^n....w:xka'.. ..,. ..>.- r.S.. L':'�<„ Z��N�.• .4^• .,.... e � �w.<:�. t .. �,.a,...n,. , may... :.: .::.... '• :'.i.•.'..;:...:,.e' .. Y .^.`:.•,v .- , x ... .+.n. .,.. .. .....,.r ,...x General NA NA Because of the necessity of minimizing at- grade railroad crossings,predicting traffic volumes,and avoiding duplication of pub- lic infrastructure costs, all adjacent and • abutting properties with COR zoning shall be included in a Level II Site Plan for the entire Zone to be approved in accordance with requirements in RMC 4-9-200.Level I Site Plans for each phase of the project shall comply with the approved Level II - Site Plan. ECIAL.D EVE LOPMENT,.S xY ,..,.,_.,,.., ��>> <'ts.. .. ..�r'<....... . . . .. .... .... ... .. ..., . . ._,...,. . .......� ,. ...... . .... . .- . .. ., ... ` ro Modulation and For residential projects, NA COR 1 Zone: NA. Articulation : see RMC 4-3-100, Urban COR 2 Zone: NA. Center Design Overlay COR 3 Zone:To consider shade/shadow Regulations. effects and encourage compatibility,the following modulation/articulation require- • ments shall apply in the COR 3 Zone. Modulation/Articulation: Buildings that • are immediately adjacent to or abutting a public park, open space,or trail shall in- , corporate at least one of the features in items 1 through 3,and shall provide item 4: • 1. Incorporate building modulation to reduce the overall bulk and mass of build- ings;or 2. For each dwelling unit, provide at • least one architectural projection not less than 2 ft.from the wall plane and not less ry a than 4 ft.wide;or n, 8 03 Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. "�)' 7 2 c.J - . . . . . • . . . • . -,, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS • 4i' i T',:.6- '',7_0,11:0Aler. PiSari 1 0010:44,V:44P4t.dVAARe!Ni5r Vf 4S4i, '17/,',4o.',;b:titWe%7;9.0-0, RI CO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT..STANDARDS.(Continued)sv-i1V;;. ,-'V;;“ ,,s -Va--it -,,,,,, ,.,-61,,;Art14-0*.le,?k,64'',,i.,;A:vos,"--iitki(41.V —-• . SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT..,... . . . :. :..:.,:„...,....,::, .,,„•,,,.: ,.:. . Modulation and . 3. Vertical and horizontal modulation of ' . - Articulation • . - • roof lines and facades of aminirnum of 2 . •. (Continued) ft.at an interval of a minimum of 40 ft.on • . . . . . - a building face or an equivalent standard . - which adds interest and quality to the . . . project; and . . • • . . . . . - - . • • . 4. Provide building articulation and tex- . . . .. .. . • • . • tural variety. . • . . . . Upper Story Setbacks - NA . . NA COR 1 Zone: NA • - • COR 2 Zone: NA - . .. . . • . . . . COR.3 Zone:To consider shade/shadow • . . . •. . . effects and encourage compatibility,the ry - , • . • . following upper story setbacks shall apply . 8 in the COR 3 Zone. .. . . • . • • . . . ry . . . • ' • • • . Upper Story Setbacks: Buildings or por- tions of buildings which.exceed 50 ft. in . . • . • height which are 1Ocated within 100•It..of . . . .. . ., • • • • • the shoreline shall include upper story . .• • . . •. setbacks for the facade facing the.shore- . . • . - - line and for facades facing publicly•acces- sible plazas as follows:The minimum • . . • . setback for a fifth story and succeeding • • • stories shall be 10 ft. minimum from the • •• . • • .. - - . preceding story,applicable to each story. . .. • . . • .• • Also referto Building Height require- ments. • • - . . • . • • •. . . - • • . . • - • . . . • . . Projects not meeting the upper story set . • • • . • . . .. • . . : backs defined above may be approved , ----- . • • - .. . • . • . through a modification process.34 (Amd. Ord.4466, 8-22-1994;Ord.4631, 9-9-1996;Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4802, 10-25-1999; Ord.4854, 8-14-2000) . . . .. . . - • - , . • . . . . • . - Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. . . - • : • • . •. . . . . , . • , . •. . : . . • • . • . . . • . • • . . .. . . . • • - • • . . . . . , - • . . .• 4-2-120C CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLES FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1. As designated by the Transportation Ele- Talbot Hill to the east, and the Burlington ment of the Comprehensive Plan. Northern Railroad tracks on the north. 2. R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14, or RM-I. 12. RESERVED. (Amd. Ord.4802, 3. These provisions may be modified by the 10-25=1999) Hearing Examiner through the site plan 13. Heights may exceed the maximum height review process where the applicant can under Hearing Examiner conditional use show that the same or better result will permit. occur because of creative design solu- In consideration of a request for condi- tions, unique aspects or use, etc.,that can- tional use permit for a building height in not be fully anticipated at this time. excess of 95'the Hearing Examiner shall 4. R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14, RM-I or RM-U. consider the following factors in addition to 5. Provided that a solid 6'barrier wall is pro- the criteria in RMC 4-9-030, Conditional (j ' vided within the landscaped strip and a . Use Permits, among all other relevant _ maintenance agreement or easement for information: the landscape strip is secured. A solid bar- a. Location Criteria: Proximity of arterial. y rier wall shall riot be located closer than 5' streets which have sufficient capacity to an abutting residentially zoned2 lot. to accommodate traffic generated by 6. The Hearing Examiner may modify the the development. Developments are sight-obscuring provision in order to pro- encouraged to locate in areas served vide reasonable access to the property by transit. through the site plan review process. b. Comprehensive Plan:The proposed 7. On lots abutting more than 1 street, the use shall be compatible with the gen- maximum setback requirement shall only eral purpose, goals, objectives and • be applied to the primary street as deter- standards of the Comprehensive mined by the Reviewing Official. For addi- Plan, the zoning regulations and any tions to existing structures,the maximum other plan, program, map or regula- setback requirements shall only apply tion of the City. when the addition is subject to the site plan c. Effect on Adjacent Properties: Build- review. ings in excess of 95' in height at the 8. For uses located within the Federal Avia- proposed location shall not result in tion Administration Airport Zones desig • substantial or undue adverse effects • nated under RMC 4-3-020,Airport Related on adjacent property.When.a building Height and Use Restrictions, in no case in excess of 95' in height is adjacent shall building height exceed the maximum to a lot designated residential on the allowed by that Section. City Comprehensive Plan, then set- . backs shall be equivalent to the 9. Abutting is defined as"Lots sharing corn- requirements of the adjacent residen- mon property lines". tial zone. 10. Adjacent is defined as"Lots located across d. Bulk: Buildings near public open a street, railroad right-of-way, except lira- spaces should permit public access ited access roads". and, where feasible, physical access • 11. The boundaries of the Green River Valley to the public open space. Whenever for purposes of this Section are generally practicable, buildings should be on defined as the Green River on the west, ented to minimize the shadows they SW 43rd Street on the south,the base of cause on publicly accessible open space. 2 - 162.1 (Revised 12J99) 4-2-120C e. Light and Glare: Due consideration d. •Establishment of view corridors from shall be given to mitigation of light and upland boundaries of the site to the glare impacts upon streets, major shoreline; public facilities and major public open e. Water related uses. If the applicant spaces. wishes to reach these bonus objec- 14. COR 1 is applied to the property known as tives in a different manner,a system the Stoneway Concrete Site. ' of floor area ratios may be established 15. "Downtown core area"is that area for the property to be determined at bounded by the centerlines of Smithers the time of site plan review. Avenue South from South Fourth Place to Furthemiore,the master plan must South Third Avenue and along Avenue . address the impact of this height on neigh • South from South Third Street to South boring area and mitigate these impacts. Second Street, bounded on the north by 20. The maximum setback may be modified by the Cedar River, east to Mill Avenue the Reviewing Official through the site plan • South, south to South Fourth Street and review process if the applicant can demon- west to Smithers Avenue South.This area strate that the site plan meets the following shall also extend to the west property line criteria: • of those properties fronting along the west side of Logan Avenue South between a. Orient development to the pedestrian South Second and Airport Way, but in no through such measures as providing case shall the area extend more than 100' pedestrian walkways, encouraging west of the Logan Avenue South right-of- pedestrian amenities and supporting way. ' alternatives to single occupant vehicle 16. COR 2 is applied to the property known as (SOV)transportation; and the Port Quendall Site.COR 3 is applied to . b. . Create a low scale streetscape • the property known as the Shuffleton Site. through such measures as fostering (Amd. Ord.4802, 10-25-1999) ' distinctive architecture and mitigating 17. Heights may exceed the maximum height, the visual dominance of extensive by up to 50'with bonuses for plazas and and unbroken parking along the street other amenities, subject.to a Hearing front; and Examiner's conditional use permit. c. Promote safety and visibility through 18. A reduced minimum setback of no less • such measures as discouraging the than 15'may be allowed for structures in creation of hidden spaces, minimiz- excess of 25'in height through the site ing conflict between pedestrian and plan review process. traffic and ensuring adequate set- backs to accommodate required park- 19. Additional height may be allowed; pro- ing and/or access that could not be vided, the applicant can demonstrate pro- . provided otherwise. • vision of the following significant public The Reviewing Official may also modify benefits: the maximum setback requirement if the a. Provision of continuous pedestrian applicant can demonstrate that the preced- • access to the shoreline consistent ing criteria cannot be met;•however, those with requirements of the Shoreline criteria which can be'met shall be Management Act and fitting a circula- addressed in the site plan: tion pattern within the site; a. due to factors including but not limited b. Provision of 5 affordable units per 50 to the unique site design require- units,which.meet the provisions of the ments or physical site constraints housing element of the Comprehen- such as sensitive areas or utility ease- sive Plan; ments; or c. Provision of an additional.25'setback " b. one or more of the criteria would not from the shoreline above that required . . be furthered or would be impaired by by the Shoreline Management Act; (Revised 12/99) 2- 162.2 4-2-120C compliance with the maximum set- • possible,the required 2%landscaping for back;or • adjacent properties should be contiguous. c. any function of the use which serves 25. Eaves,cornices,steps,terraces,platforms the public health, safety or welfare and porches having no roof covering and - would be materially impaired by the being not over 42"high may be built within required setback. . . a front yard.Where below-grade structures 21. In consideration of a request for •condi- are permitted to have zero front yard/street tional use permit for additional building setbacks,structural footings may minimally height the Hearing Examiner or Zoning encroach into the public right-of-way,sub- Administrator shall consider the following ject to approval of the Board of Public factors in addition to the criteria in RMC Works (see chapter 2-3 RMC, Board of • 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, among • Public Works). (Amd. Ord.4854, all other relevant information. 8-14-2000) 26. Exception:When 40%or more,on front a. Location Criteria: Proximity of arterial foot basis, of all property on 1 side of a ^� • streets which have sufficient capacity street between 2 intersecting streets at the to accommodate traffic generated by time of the passage of this Code has been the development. Developments are . encouraged to locate in areas served built up with buildings having a minimum i by transit. front yard of more or less depth than that established by the Code, and provided, • b. Comprehensive Plan:The proposed that the majority of such front yards do not use shall be compatible with the gen- vary more than 6'in depth,no building eral purpose,goals,objectives and . , shall be built within or shall any portion, ts standards of the;Comprehensive save as above excepted, project into such Plan,the zoning regulations and any minimum front yard;provided,further,that other plan, program, map or regula- no new buildings be required to set back tion of the City. (Ord.4404, 6-7-1993) more than 35'from the street line in the c. Effect on Adjacent Properties: Build- R-2 or R-3 Residential Districts, nor more ings height shall not result in substan- than 2'farther than any building on an tial or undue adverse effects on • adjoining lot and that this regulation shall not be so interpreted as to reduce a adjacent property.When a building in required front yard to less than 10'in excess of the maximum height is pro- depth. (Ord. 1472, 2-18-1953) posed adjacent to Or abuts a lot desig- nated R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14 or . . 27. Includes major or secondary arterials as RM-I,then the setbacks shall be ' . defined in the arterial.street map of the equivalent to the requirements of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement adjacent residential zone if the set- • . Plan.Arterial Streets within the Central back standards exceed the require- Business District—'bounded by the Cedar ments of the Commercial Zone. (Ord.. .. River, FAI 405 Freeway;South 4th Street, 4593,4-1-1996) Shattuck Avenue South, South Second • 22. • Heights may exceed the maximum height Street,and Logari Avenue South—shall'be under Hearing Examiner conditional use exempt from this setback requirement. . permit. 28.. Exception for Community FaCilities:The following development standards shall 23. Exceptions:Eaves and cornices may. apply to all uses having.a°P"suffix desig- extend over the required side yard fora nation.Where these standards conflict distance of not more than 2'.Accessory with those generally applicable,these • buildings when erected so that the entire standards shall apply: building is within a distance of 30'from the rear lot line•may also occupy the side yard ' • a. Publicly owned structures housing of an inside lot line. (Ord. 1905,8-15-1961) such*uses shall be permitted an addi- 24: These areas should not be dispersed „ tional 15:in height above that other- • .` wise permitted in the Zone if"pitched throughout asite,but should be aggre roofs" as defined herein,are used for gated in one portion of the property.Where , 2- 162.3 (Revised 10/00) 4-2-120C at least 60%or more of the roof sur- lows, up to a maximum height of 75'to the face of both primary and accessory highest point of the building: structures. a. When abutting a public street, 1 addi- - b. In addition, in zones where the maxi- tional foot of height for each additional mum permitted building height is less 1-1/2'of perimeter building setback than 75', the maximum height of a beyond the minimum street setback publicly owned structure housing a required at street level unless such public use may be increased as fol- setbacks are otherwise discouraged lows, up to a maximum height of 75' . .. (e.g., inside the Downtown Core Area to the highest point of the building: in the.CD Zone); (i) When abutting a public street, b. When abutting a common property 1 additional foot of height for line,1 additional foot of height for each each additional 1-1/2'of additional 2'of perimeter building set- perimeter building setback back beyond the minimum required beyond the minimum street along a common property line; and setback required at street c. On lots 4 acres or greater,5 additional level unless such setbacks feet of height for every 1%reduction are otherwise discouraged below a 20%maximum lot area cover- (e.g., inside the Downtown Core Area in the CD Zone); age by buildings for public amenities such as recreational facilities, and/or (ii) When abutting a common landscaped open space areas, etc., property line, 1 additional foot . when these are open and accessible to of height for each additional .. the public during the day or week. 2'of perimeter building set- 31. Through the site plan review process,the back beyond the minimum Hearing Examiner may waive the sight- required along a common obscuring provision in order to provide rea- property line, and; sonable access to the property. (iii) On lots 4 acres or greater, 5 32. Where included, affordable units must additional feet of height for every 1% reduction below a meet the provisions of housing element of • 20%maximum lot area cover- the Comprehensive Plan. ForCOR 2, if a age by buildings for public significant public benefit above City Code amenities such as recre- requirements can be provided for a portion ational facilities, and/or land- of the property which may be contami- scaped open space areas, nated,a transfer of density may be allowed etc.,when these are open for other portions of the site. and accessible to the public Bonus in COR 1:A bonus density of not during the day or week. more than 5 dwelling units per acre may be 29. Except with approved master site plans. allowed;provided there is a balance of height, bulk and density established 30. All uses having a"Public Suffix"(P) desig- through a floor area ratio system and/or a nation are subject to the following:Height: master plan to be decided at the time of site Publicly owned structures housing such plan review. uses shall be permitted an additional 15'in height above that otherwise permitted in Bonus in COR 2:A bonus density of not the Zone if"pitched roofs", as defined more than 2 du/acre for each provision may herein, are used for at least 60%or more be allowed;provided there is a balance of of the roof surface of both primary and height,bulk and density established accessory structures. In addition,in zones addressing the following public benefits: where the maximum permitted building a. Provision of continuous pedestrian height is less than 75',the maximum access to the shoreline consistent with height of a publicly owned structure hous- requirements of the.Shoreline Man- ing a public use may be increased as fol- • agement Act and fitting a circulation pattern within the site, (Revised 10/00) 2- 162.4 . 4-2-120C b. Provision of an additional 25'setback from the shoreline above that required by the Shoreline Management Act, c. Establishment of view corridors from upland boundaries of the site to the shoreline, d. Water Related Uses. If the applicant wishes to reach these bonus objec- tives in a different system,a system of floor area ratios may be established for the property to be determined at the time of site plan review as approved by Council. (Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999) 33. Except for existing, legal administrative headquarters offices, pursuant to RMC 4-2-080A275. (Ord.4803, 10-25-1999) 34. COR 3 Zone Only:Application may be made for modification of the upper story setback standards when superior design is demonstrated pursuant to RMC 4-9-250D. For a modification to be granted,the project must also comply with the decision and design criteria stipulated in RMC 4-9-250D2 and D4. (Ord.4802, 10-25-1999) 35. Within the CD Zone, perimeter street land- scape strips may utilize a mix of hard sur- faces, brick, stone, textured/colored concrete, and natural landscape elements, groundcover,shrubs and trees,to provide a transition between the public streetscape and the private development, subject to Level I Site Plan Review, RMC 4-9-200B1, and the general and additional review cri- teria of RMC 4-9-200E1 and F1, F2, and F7. In no case shall living plant material comprise less than 30%of the required perimeter landscape strip. (Ord.4854, 8-14-2000) 2- 163 (Revised 10/00) • . This page left intentionally blank. - ,2 ../ • • . • (Revised 10/00) 2 - 164 • 4-2-110 F .1 I 1 d. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) R ( 0. <_<_? '' R-10 R=14 RM v bay DENSITY (Net Density in Dwelling Units Per Acre) Minimum Housing For parcels over 1/2 gross acre: 7 units 8 units per net acre.13 For any subdivision,short plat and/or Density per net acre for any subdivision,short plat Minimum density requirements shall not apply development:9,10 or development.9,t0 to:a)the renovation or conversion of an existing "U" suffix: 25 units per acre. For parcels 1/2 acre or less as of March 1, structure, orb)the subdivision,short plat and/or "C" suffix: 10 units per acre. 1995: None required. development on a legal lot 1/2 gross acre or less Minimum density requirements shall not in size as of March 1, 1995. "N" suffix: 10 units per acre. "I" suffix: 10 units per acre. apply to the renovation or conversion of an existing structure. Minimum density requirements shall not apply to: a)the renovation or con- version of an existing structure, or b) the subdivision, short plat and/or development on a legal lot 1/2 gross acre or less in size as of March 1, 1995. Maximum Housing 10 dwelling units per net acre. 14 dwelling units per net acre, except that den- For any subdivision, short plat and/or Density Bonus: The maximum housing density sity of up to 18 dwelling units per acre may be development: may be increased to 13 units per acre, permitted subject to conditions.14 "U" suffix: 25 units per acre with the provided that all units are detached. potential for up to 150 dwelling units per acre with design review. "C"suffix: 20 units per acre. "N" suffix: 15 units per acre. "I"suffix: 20 units per acre. Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. / / / ' DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) PLATS OR SHADOW PLATS General For the purposes of this subsection,"legal All Uses: NA . | lot" means a lot created through the sub- All permitted uses may be developed on either: � division process, or through another a\ properties which are platted through the uub- nneohaniorn'm/hioh creates individual title division process;orb) properties which are to for the residential building and any aoao- namanunplmtted. . cjated private yards. |f title iocreated For properties which are to remain unp|ettod. ' through anot her mechanism other than a the development application shall baaccompa' ' uubdiviaion'thedev�|opnlantappUca1ion niodbyaohadov« plat. For purposes ofthis shall bee000mpaniedbya shadow plat. Zone, "|ot^shall mean legal platted lot and/or | The applicant must demonstrate bzthe equivalent shadow platted land area. Reviewing Official that the proposed The applicant must demonstrate to the Review- development wiU: ing Official that the proposed development will: -- —be developedtoatand8»deequiva|entto _be developed to standards equiva|enttothoao -- those requirements established in this requirements established in this chapter for chapter for yards, land areas,vvidtho. set- yards, land areas, widths, setbacks andfron�' backaand frontages, and ` agea. an/ —provide oocooa and infrastructure to I- novidaacceuuand infrastructure to serve the serve the development, equivalent tm development, ' ' those naquinemanboeu�eb|iohedi»�ha established in the subdivision regulations. / subdivision nsgu|Rdona � ' Covenants shall be�|edaopad of �na| plat in . [|ovenantouhoUbafiie� aape�ofa�na| order ho address the density and unit mix ! plat in order to address the density and requirements of the Zone. unit mix requirements ofthe Zone. . | ' � -n � - ^ Conflicts:See RMC44-080 - . . . .. . . .. .: . . . . . • •• - - . .. • „. . . " • . . .. . . • • • • - . • . . .. • . . . . . . I • . . .• . . . . . • .. . . . . -.7. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS - . . .;-:* . • (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) . !-: ,:i,:!,'L4‘,--;-,iil,V,Wtiqi:j4iiiV4p.A.4:4%V.-Ni ONMPIPSfakerititiMpitIt7.W1:0:att4 .4.;1•t`i.4,,AjRp„F,•ipa 6 iii glyi.gtali.r"),::t 11 ,c ',,,--,,v:P:!.{-",Y44,•••6-,,•"••••,,7---4:;!,:g v.di s,,o,,,w,,w;-•Ii.w'4,4•44,, ...,m*-,i',„t•.,44,9-,....-A:•,,-,,1,7_i,,,,J..., . ?•:•.. , v,i41,;•\--,..,•11,A.,:t.. ,„4,,,,ff.0•,,,,,,c,,f, N,,,,,::3,;"4,%.,,t,,,,,,,q,..ft.zutivi,,,,g,:,4q0,4,x••'jk.6t144 .0,Wr;%:,A90.0..;4.0iO4•44*4:?±?tIAPOgir.tr.C.&.:Vg Ve"W'':• ;1§:).:AA.V'q-00,44,.:.5nkfn*AAV04:etr. .N.:!,t4f. .'''Tk!‘F;;(i,0414W;.k*-4:•4.4,;4"4M114%..4W4,iiq4C. • DWELLING UNIT MIX . • . , General • Existing development: None required. NA NA For parcels which are a maximum size . • • . of 1/2 acre as of the effective date . . hereof(3-13-1995): None required. . . Full subdivisions,excluding short • f plats: Each development of new subdivi- sions and existing parcels which are • greater than 1/2 acre:A minimum of 50% • to a maximum of 100%of detached or : 1 semi-attached dwelling units.A minimum • • i of one detached or semi-attached dwell- • . , N3 • ing unit must be provided for each ry attached dwelling unit(e.g.,townhouse or . . n.) flat) created within a proposed develop- ment.19 ' ' " • • NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES PER LOT. , . • • General • Only 1 residential building(e.g.,detached 1 residential structure and associated acces- NA dwelling, semi-attached dwelling, town-' sory buildings for that structure shall be permit- • houses, flats, etc.) with a maximum of 4 ted per lot, except for residential buildings , , 1 residential.units and associated acces- legally existing at the date of adoption of this sory structures for that building shall be . Section. • . . • . . , . • permitted on a legal lot except for residen- tial . . buildings legally existing at the effec- tive date hereof. For the purposes of this • . : subsection,"legal lot"means a lot created • • . . .„ . . • • through the subdivision process, or' • , through another mechanism which cre- • • 1 ates individual title for the residential building and any associated private yards • : i : , • (e.g., condominium). . .. _ . . . • . • Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. • . . . . . . • " . . • • • .. / / / DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS(Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) ` '- '-_---- - ' LOT DIMENS. IONS Nona Minimum Lot Size Where there iaa conflict between the Residential Uses: number of dwelling units permitted under. Primary Units: lot nvoa-utohdondaand thenumber of Detached oraeni-affoohad: 3'O08 sq. ft. | dwelling units permitted under the density Attached exterior:2.5UO sq. ft. standards the deve|oommnt shall be Attached interior:2.00O sq.ft. . required 1obe consistent with the density Secondary Units: limits. Attach�dextohuc2.UOO sq. h. A�aohedinterior orflats: 1.BU8 sq. ft. For parcels which exceed 1/2 acre inuize. Commercial or Civic Uses: None. Detached and semi-attached dwelling units:3.0U0 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. ' Attached townhouse dwelling units: . pa � 2.UOO sq. ft.per dwelling unit. . 2Uota:5'000 sq. ft. per structure. � 3 flats:7,500 sq. ft. per structure. . 4 flats: 1U,0UO sq. ft. per structure. ' Danubv requirementsshall take prece- dence over minimum lot size stan- dard's. . � � For parcels aoof March 1' i8U6. which � are 1/2 acre of less in size:None required. . Density requirementsuhoU apply. Minimum Lot Width For lots created after the effective date Residential5O��ams� � � ' Primaryhereof oum"x. . ' Detached ur semi-attached dwellings: Detached or semi-attached:3Oft. Interior lots: A�aohgdextehnc25�. ' A�aohed |ntahor2Of� e� Corner�to�4O�� ' '----- --- Unda | l��nhou�eo'2UfLo«�� Secondary ' ' Atta�hadaxtahonintahor20 �.Fla�' 5O�� | � ' - Flats:5Oft. r� W -^ -n ConfUct§:See RMC41-00o ' � DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL UDENTIAK ZONING DESIGNATIONS(Primary and Attached,Accessory Structures) �n Rd 0 ki L���' ��U�������������� ������K����Y ' DIMENSIONS (Continued) Minimum Lot Depth 55ft.20.21 Rmsidential Uses: 65ft. for lots created after the Primary Units: effective date hereof: Detached oroanni'attaohed:5Oft. Attached extmhoVlntehoc45ft. Secondary Units: Attached ax1ehoo1ntehoc4Oft. Fb*ts|3Gft. SETBACKSa . Ga��l NA No�mo�n�orp�knga�oa�r��uaaoa� NA / ' permitted within the setback areas. m Minimum Front Yand»* Along streets existing aecf September 1. Residential Uses: ^U^suffix: 5f�1,2 `^ kV��o�a/�,hnn�yao/ 1QQ5�2D�' Do��ohadandoerni-otb�hedphm�ry��nuotunea ^(�^au��x�2Oft. ^a required, /\front of �. ««ithparN»Q ����aapno«idedfrom�hef»on�or /anequ ..N"au| ix. 2O� / ' aha8behereafter may be�a||owedby the Development nida: 18�.' exceptonotraatavvithoutoidevva|b suffix: ' . -erected oralt setback may be 15ft' ''|^suffix:xopd�o Services '' 2Oft. that any portion setback.of primary structures onlots' Attached townhouses,stacked flats,over 3units thereof shall ba abutting-the side yards io less than 2O and their accessory structures with parking pro- nearer 1ha0ontpnop' ft. |n such case,the front yard setback vided from the front or side: 1Sft. edy line than the ois' shall not ba less than the a«6/aQeof A�ac |adaccessory structures vvithparking bynoe indicated bvthe the front aatbeokof the abutting ph- access provided from the front oroidy:2Uft. deo1hof the re required moD/structures;hovvave� innOcase - ' yooi ' oho|| ��nininlumsaUo��kof |��S�h8O D8tQ�h8d�Dd��n8i-��8�h8dphrn8Fy��ruu��rgS front ' ~ ' ' | ' 2U�. b8 allowed for garages vvh|ch �with pad�nQaccess provided�ornthe rear via ' access pubUostreet oraUay: 10�.. except when the lot ' . ' ' is adiaoen1to a lower intensity residentially KYodificoUonahothis requirement due ^ | � zoned property setback must be16ft. ' Uo site constraints of lot configuration may be approvedbv the Development / Services Division pursuant to the crite- ria ofRK8C4'8'2SOD. ' . Conflicts:See nMC 4-1-080 . 1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1 (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) .. .... ...... .... ..... ..... .n : .. 'G h .. ..>.,., .....,..t, 'a '"Y:'Y:,ti..A.�:>.:..:. k. 'xx ::e'i:. .... ....... .. .. ::.•: . .... ... ,.:=..i .r ,::, r,xe ....re.,,..,r<, ata;t`: ..'-ti:i; �cr ,s i i.C, "t;T••' ...... ... ........>.. .... ,.: ......,.. ..,-:..:.. ., ,� .�',,.,„ >:i-:, 'ate: .:£ .•;�.dr':'i„ �. „3_ .R., R-. .,;'n4, F. t.4�.:,w s. ����'sKr.✓:'f,. i?is ...... . ._....,. r,v.,•'.w ,.i'..': 3.v.>... r'.., .:.^...:33n, .:F_P: wF=:'�'E n. .,i'.:. �A .:'>„' .:;..•e,..::✓.4...�S'!<Y,)r in�• ''¢x,>"�w.. " c•y �.;. �:T.•rb.xY^M„SLr��.%. ,L'^^i„4✓.x, .. .<...,..., '•.. ..�.a2?:: a?`.",,..r. ..$ ,. . .... ... r; SETBACKS')(Continued) Minimum Front Yard24 Along streets created after September Attached townhouses, flats, over 3 units and See above (Continued) 1, 1995: , their accessory structures with parking provided 10 ft. for the primary structure and'a from the rear via public street or alley: 10 ft., minimum depth of 20 ft. for attached except when the lot is adjacent to a lower inten- garages which access from the front sity residentially zoned property setback must >• yard street(s). be 15 ft. , 1 Along private streets/access created Attached accessory structures with parking after September 1,1995: 10 ft.for the pri- access provided from the rear via public street • mary structure a minimum depth of 20 ft. or alley: 18 ft. for attached garages which access from Commercial or Civic Uses: ro the front yard street(s).If a sidewalk is pro- 15 ft.—abutting or adjacent to residential devel- vided along a private street/accessway, opment. .... • then the setbacks shall be measured from 10 ft.—for all other development (e.g., nonresi- "' the back of the sidewalk for private dential development). streets/access ways.Otherwise,setbacks shall be measured from the lot line. Maximum Front NA Residential Uses: None.- NA Yard24 Commercial or Civic Uses: • No maximum front setbacks are required for new structures. For additions to existing struc- • tures,the maximum setback requirements shall be consistent with setbacks provided in the existing structures. , 1 5• ri —. C A co Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. • • • 5-0 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS • • (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) 0. 0 -n : ' O'''Ii.r4.7.)!4"01414,6WasiM;',4i=iiii,'4 4. 4re? •;;4Vs.):,,.,( imw R u, jri-I if ,W;`,14.t !;*,q,,,;4;T):ANV.41,,,57 rinn,;,,,..wtpfretes&, SETBACKS8(Continued) Minimum Rear Yard 15 ft. However, if the lot abuts a lot zoned Residential Uses: "U"suffix: 5 ft.1•2 except when abut- • RC, R-1, R-5,or R-8,a 25 ft.setback shall Detached and semi-attached primary struc- ting a single family zone3 a 25 ft. set- be required of all attached dwelling units. tures: 15 ft. back shall be required along the Alley Access Garage: If there is an Attached townhouses, flats over 3 units and abutting sides of the property. attached garage with alley access, the their accessory structures: 15 ft. "C"suffix: 15 ft. • minimum setback is 3 ft.to the rear prop- Attached accessory structures: 15 ft. "N"suffix: 15 ft. erty line provided that the garage must be set back from the rear property lines a suf- Commercial or Civic Uses: "I"suffix: 15 ft.28 ficient distance to provide a minimum of 15 ft.15—abutting or adjacent to residential 24 ft. of back-out room, counting development. improved alley surface. If there is occupi- None—for all other development (e.g., nonresi- able space above an attached garage, dential development). the minimum setback for the occupiable a) space shall be consistent with the mini-. mum setback for the attached garage with alley access. • . . • •• • • • • • i• • Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. • • • DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) R-14 RMx X . SETBACKS8(Continued) Minimum Side Yard Interior Lots: Detached dwellings on lots Residential Uses: Minimum setbacks for side yards are Where any specified which do not have zero lot lines: 5 ft. on Detached and semi-attached primary struc- based on a minimum of 10%of the lot each side of the detached unit. tures: 5 ft. width or 5 ft.whichever is greater.28 If side yard is required 10%of lot width is not equal to a no building shall be Detached dwellings on lots with zero lot Attached townhouses, flats over 3 units and whole integer, the percentage shall hereafter erected or line on one side: 10 ft. on side with side their accessory structures:5 ft.on both sides. 10 be rounded up to determine the altered so that any yard. 5 ft. maintenance/no build ease- ft.when the lot is adjacent to a lower intensity required setback as generally fol- portion thereof shall ments on lots adjoining the zero lot line residentially zoned property. lows: be nearer to the side shall be required. Attached accessory structures: None required. Lot width: 40 ft. —Yard setback: 5 ft. i lot line than the dis- Attached Units22:A minimum depth of 5 ft. Commercial or Civic Uses: tance indicated by the for the unattached side(s)of the structure. 15 ft.ts—abutting or adjacent to residential Lot width: 50 ft. —Yard setback: 5 ft. N width of the required Abutting RC, R-1, R-5 or R-8: 25 ft. inte- development. Lot width: 55 ft.—Yard setback:6 ft. side yard. rior side setback for all structures yardNone—for all other development (e.g., nonresi- Lot width: 60 ft.—Yard setback: 6 ft. containing 3 or more attached dwelling dential development). Lot width: 70 ft.—Yard setback:7 ft. units on a lot. Lot width: 75 ft.—Yard setback: 8 ft. Lot width: 120+ft.—Yard setback: 12 ft. The entire structure shall be set back an additional 1 ft.for each story in . excess of 2 up to a maximum cumu- • lative setback of 20 ft. ; Special side yard setback for lots abutting single family residential• zones:3 25 ft.along the abutting sides of the property. El N A -n Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. -56 DEV ri ELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS N (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) 0 � , -n R-10 `" , R-14 , RM � , L x , SETBACKS8(Continued) Minimum Side Yard Corner Lots23: Residential Uses: 20 ft., except in the urban center Along a Street Along Public Streets: The side yard 10 ft. for preplatted lots less than 50 ft. wide. areas and on previously existing plat- Where any specified along a street shall not be less than 10 ft. ted lots which are 50 ft. or less in side yard is required in depth for a primary structure,and a min- width, in which case the side yard. no building shall be imum depth of 20 ft.for attached garages shall be no less than 10 ft. If a corner hereafter erected or which access from the side yard street. lot is less than the minimum width altered so that anyrequired by this Section, then for Along Private Streets/Access:The side each foot in excess of 50 ft. the portion thereof shall yard along a street shall not be less than required and shall be increased from be nearer to the side 10 ft. in depth for a primary structure, and q y lot line than the dis- a minimum of 10 ft. by 1 ft. up to a a minimum depth of 20 ft. for attached maximum of 20 ft. tance indicated by the garages which access from the side yard width of the required street. If a sidewalk is provided along a side yard. private street/accessway,then the set- co back shall be measured from the back of the sidewalk for private streets/access- ways. Otherwise, setbacks shall be mea- sured from the lot line. Minimum Arteria125/ 10 ft. landscaped setback from tale street 10 ft. landscaped setback from the street prop- 10 ft. landscaped setback from the Freeway Frontage property line, or erty line, or street property line, or Setback 20 ft. landscaped setback from the back 20 ft. landscaped setback from the back of the 20 ft. landscaped setback from the of the sidewalk,whichever is less. sidewalk, whichever is less. back of the sidewalk, whichever is less. BUILDING STANDARDS Maximum Building Limited to 2 stories and 30 ft. in height.7.26 Residential Uses: "U"suffix: 95 ft./10 stories.4,7•26 Height and Maximum Limited to 2 stories and 30 ft.14 "C" suffix: 35 ft./3 stories.45•7•26 Number of Stories, Commercial Uses: a"N"suffix: 30 ft./2 1/2 stories. s26 except for uses having Limited to 1 story and 20 ft. a"Public Suffix" (P) "I"suffix: 35 ft./2-1/2 stories.4.5.6.7•26 designation.27 Civic Uses: Limited to 2 stories. Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. rTh! . . •, i • ; • • •-__. . . . . , . . . . . . . . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS ' (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) Wili-'241SWAitribriglitegatiltp.ONICR:VWPIWiltialf4greAVIA.NEt7:0!RAVIi:_,Zt:Wati:titiPaP*00110 • .,,,,,r,,mv,4„,,,u,.„, , v„..,,,,,,A „,,r, 4",..:ftutivixe,i,e•.ffiFilve„..,,,,v.,,,s,v,,,vig,4 A ip,'4,,k4.•:::,.;trIgt,,:p4I4V;V: 44-'p," •,N,w&-ii:Ii446.A.., ov-,:,,,,,Aapi ffig, 14,4:.,,,,&,44*.t. „.:. ."1,v,Fw...TAiki. ...,,,,-.,,,t1.44r,,A..z10,.miAkiltt,if-a•E&I,Z -Agi„.,UM,A.<14,-,-,::It.:,,:sZi6.4.:N).• . 4,t t.;,..w.g.05,,,1*,,At-,,Av.mi.444.,,siv;&,-,,„.„,:k ile 4 A t BuILDINOSTANDARD$ (eohtiriOed)3n--:.,; s,-.*T.Rgiqtv,?•.,.,:tL,,Tmio.,Tgw,,Nmv..:i:::-z:y.;!vul,e,-:,Ew:.-.(-.!7:,.7-.,...•-•: •"•.:--..r.:•.---:•::'•• '.,•.:-•....... . . ,.:',; ',•,.'•'•-: -,:,:.•,-.. -,,A,•ilit-•,,..., „.,,,,, ,,.f.„,:.••••..,,,•;v,::., ,,,,,,,,..;:::1.,-,=., f,, ;.:.:.,A13;P-,A;:1;-:':::.'A. 1:''.', ..,•-: : •-'•• •--'. . : • ' ' '-.:''.,...' , I'.-•';::. -. :.;'-,:. '''!-',1`;'•!*-.!-:-': Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 44-140G. : .--..•1 : ••• ' Wireless . • Communication 1 Facilities • Building Location. NA Residential Uses: . NA . • Dwellings shall be arranged in a manner which creates a neighborhood environment. Residential units and any associated commer- cial development within an overall development shall be connected through organization of n) roads, blocks, yards, central places, pedestrian linkage and amenity features. . , , 1 n) CO Front facades of structures shall address the . . • • public street,private street or court by providing: —a landscaped pedestrian connection. an entry feature facing the front yard. • . - . . • • . • , • . . . . .. . • . .- • . . . ' . •. . .. . . . .- , • . ., . . .; . •. . .. , . .. . . , . . • : . 53 i 1 a . 4=. r-I. . ._. .-...: . 0. .........„., , __• ,C. %0 0 • p ,-n ,. ' Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. . . . • • • DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS N (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) o ;� mt �`. 'rx .fira egg Rrt+"ut •+y�''§'ta'•r csa::r-�;'%'t it' ;•R." xa a'a""'m', mxr n,;:.-nrUs ,r=_, a�, �s;:.;.: .,a -n �3���� .�=�V7. 3 4 ':S'��w*ilrr �Y2r�;,.�n"{,� �. Syr`. "`^. r�,Z�a� ,,� �`"'�S'C¢=2• ,nL ty ir' A ','��' k�j ��•1�r "�.i`�.�' .9: •1-' YYr�' e 4 sz; +- `" -W'W .:2 .:i ,1 "-• -.5 3' i &� r'`t =•,SAC'-`+:` 4+ "'.'t.- �� : ...��` �'�r� �{��.- �_:�- �, }. ��y �a 'R �,,c�. ,. �,_ �r � ��`�� ARM �-��i �� ,-.• . :41 .'.si8, * .eau'"'. . i..:fit^ ¢ ea"yyG''}. t:•.*x�f.'•"F�Ya kaiA�''*,.'v,?Y: if". et s .y ,1a . Ku'"-' ti''ju u� i w...,'- •a.•` r!� .` .-rx .if.,4°xi;•.,n.*t.>+.'t?h�7.z9�^5'�'"'L`i. tw'SYrt.�..�;f.�s..,i"'"-T-Ar". <t,.v�a3m`7:?.!''R�,f��F�r„�-.4� `,7•..��raii�a:-'�crd_n,:.��'d`is�-s�t�'rjr«�,:.�.rF.S7;:�a"3fK��"�'.�{,"�.'.ws��.rv�•s? F»3s�1,r�'. S'l�..fl� r�.,fi-'s;�^�,z'a•,v?•..�:.'ti:iudi{:a<r;.i:�-r .� u.{::a•. ..F✓; .t?i:r`".r;i. - ti • ;c k .y, , A AR .Co e 'r5is5.- T Building Design NA Residential Uses: "U" Suffix The development shall include the following fea- 1) Modulation of vertical and horizon- tures: tal facades is required at•a minimum Architectural design which incorporates: of 2 ft.at an interval of a minimum off- • ' a)Variation in vertical and horizontal modulation set of 40 ft. on each building face. of structural facades and roof lines among indi- See also RMC 4-3-100, vidual attached dwelling units (e.g., angular Urban Center Design 'Overlay design, modulation, multiple roof plans), and Regul a ti on s. •• b) Private entry features which are designed to provide individual ground floor connection tb the outside for primary uses and secondary use townhouses. Commercial or Civic Uses: 0 Shall provide pedestrian orientation through such measures as: pedestrian walkways, pedestrian amenities and improvements which support a variety of modes of transportation (e.g., bicycle racks). • • • Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. , :DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS .• • Acces sory Structures) -. , (Primary and Attached _,. .,-� -..c.. . :. �v�': ...7 ua y.... .<. x,ax ... .�:, �:'"" ,a.�n„�.e l<:: :'j;Fa tiY.}. $� -?Y'., �s1..h4^y .. ......:x.,:_ ..: a:. .. .:xY. an .a.. a .'..., z r ., -i�.'=4 .� ..t[ '^e:�'u .1 r.z4 °`.*..:. , aS.�l`. , .. ..,.�: �. � :.--'. ... ..:„ ,..... :. :3' x ^C' :,, .d'tA. ., n-e ::Yi''.4.-�4.�a'z'. •':a.:.+.•5/,r. ....... ..... ... ...a. .x.�.<ra ... ... �..... ..r.. r._.^'-=r ..a n - . '� x ., _,�: ..�u..,r.,. '$,. taw`>�<<":.i',. :.•.'x<. .. .. ., "� ..,.,. :.._ C W?, _..,« 5.;:b.. � .... ..%� ':x y:.ar., pPa. f� s'M': ti<�lr�'..c, .:R M<ya'.'r;,q... •�..., ..=..;,xa:.r n.Y .,..F,.v,,. n., .r.L..„:.:x::.�,ay ....: K}.�, .r.�. q. ..`.E'.. f�;�, .;S>. ..F��` .L�j :+'x : .... ..: >.,.< k5.s.�.. .0 f„z .... :........ ...._. .. t .. rou.n r-,-:i,wni �.: u 4: .��o „l.: r.'«.�. _ `:'.1r'..-'..'i s:x�r;<�?xi: ......,, ..,y x,t o ..„-'3., ....„ ,5 , a .A °_-..;+a• .r.< ,',' _ti-'•`.C4 :'i3.. q.;1 .rc; . .. : ..:.. .: ,�.y,,, x., ..,a:. O ... t �}. a:.:.K o-,:•: ._. _ ..a..r:.:. ..>> <:r"s: ...:j..= . .... '4x� .-Y• I ..{ ! yy .t. �+rv,5 ? x 'a? i .... f+y.'.z.}" ..>>.v.t�,c,�-•'.�F`L•.,w.SiHiy i�T.i-'�'F':'`:ti'35.`f w .s r ��3 'e:J�"r i'.a '..:., z} 6'T" 'T 4c�:..c..FZY�'.. '#'i` i t':�::,� "��+'=:b`:.;'�c•f:.r. ;-'^•`.YZ✓.r�•}�:-. _;r'4.^ixx•::".�.e�":ri;.� _ -,.... ... . .. . BUILDING STANDARDS (Continued) Project Size NA Civic Uses: NA The maximum lot area dedicated for civic uses shall be limited to 10%of the net developable 1 area of a property. Building size shall be limited to 3,000 sq.ft.of gross floor area except that by Hearing Examiner conditional use civic uses 1 may be allowed to be a maximum of 5,000 sq.ft. , for all uses. Commercial Uses: • The maximum area dedicated for all commercial uses shall be limited to 10%of the net develop- N able portion of a property. Building size shall be 1 limited to 3,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. j Occupancy permits for commercial uses shall not occur until 75%of the residential portion of a project is occupied. . . Maximum Building Flats or townhouses: 50% of the total lot 50%of the total lot area. "U"suffix: 75%. Coverage area. "C"suffix:45%. Detached or semi-attached units: 70%of "N"suffix:45%. • • the total lot area. "1"suffix: 35%—a maximum cover- age of 45%may be obtained through the Hearing Examiner process. ' ' Maximum Impervious Flats or townhouses: 60%of the total lot NA Shall not exceed a combined total, . ' Surface Area area. (building footprint, sidewalks,drive- ways, etc.) of 75%. Detached or semi-attached units: 75%of the total lot area. • N j 00. 0 - , ':' f. m • Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. .: • • ••, : . . , 41. 76 . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) ; ' „,,-.•, 0. 4, t sL • :,==:,.:,;t* ' 01,4,;,V;Vg6T '%- ''.'kl`'rs40140:1W i`'i4 fr ,::,: : , ,; •4:: :.riiilkiTlittitKOR4W1 0 Wigt***0-,W t,' AttgligtiAtz, "WsZOR*1 4,-,,;,,,,t,-ie V-.'It',,41-.J‘,<•64-: RNI lit,N;fi,rfAlf ,,x• ' '''ri,.U.,•71cticiP5.:trn,,t.p,5!. ORPO'P abYI;VArig9i,e'.A. *ow 9,-rei"r--1Pri5kw A, ',4;,4,:,,, :.1MleV,Vizh%i','''','' .::::g:,';4.i."' !:'1'' :' 7.4"';'-•:',16:1';',.: , ;4P;t4; .nrAti.v,04.v,114 : LANDSCAPING , General Setback areas shall be landscaped, Residential Uses: Setback areas and open space areas• excluding driveways and walkways. All landscaped areas shall be treated with pervi- shall be landscaped unless otherwise • ous surfacing and/or materials.The entire front determined through the site plan setback,excluding driveways and an entry walk- review process.If adjacent to a single way, shall be landscaped. family residentially zoned3 lot then a , Commercial or Civic Uses: 15 ft. landscape strip shall be ! : Lots abutting public streets shall be improved required along the adjacent street with a minimum 10 ft. wide landscaping strip.16 frontage. . „ Lots abutting residential property(ies) zoned RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 or R-14 shall be . . improved along the common boundary with a iv minimum 15 ft.wide landscaped setback and a Z.',..) sight-obscuring solid barrier wall.'" iv SCREENING Surface Mounted NA All on-site utility surface mounted equipment NA Equipment shall be screened from public view. Roof-Top Equipment NA All operating equipment located on the roof of NA - ' any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view, including telecommunica- tions equipment. • 1. Outdoor Storage • • NA • Outdoor storage, loading, repair, maintenance , NA . and work areas shall be screened by a sblid bar- rier fence or landscaping, or some combination 1 thereof as determined by the Reviewing Official, I ' through the site plan review process. S Recyclables S Attached flats: All recyclables collection Shall be screened, except for access points, by NA _ Collection & Storage, and storage, garbage, refuse and/or a fence or landscaping or some combination Garbage, Refuse dumpsters shall be screened, except for thereof. , • and/or Dumpsters access points, by a fence or landscaping or some combination thereof. - . Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. • „ 1 • _ • . . • •. •-••__ ,. . • , • . . . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) 1;t'i:•--,•e'-httH-'06-VFitgkriiivatkit•t;•,*to,zlfr;q*:,A 0,3,1p.vi.w?•,,,.Awiralomir,v,400,4,00;,:kawn,i.i::pg4,1,t.110,,,-,004:4;414001pgkilggirtt 7,4 :.,,,4, ,,„,,,zcaw,.„..y„tutim,N.44%,,v,,,Ass, p;p44.4 441.ctrl,t4,.,W:1.40W-: •V• ,,r;4 '-f:OiaRttlz-WW-vr.' ,,t(),4i.t.'••tin. "-Ar'410.V114,:6\ta,spnren,x,1:ks 4-,,,14,1;%-6•:• wi Wila•-g0E.1',c-7:4-M2iikOkkiW44.41&:",<:'1i-"irkk3 ia:;e4t.',44,;.4a-a, 4_::,"1,26:-.4;:-.!*.eW:WIS3:4:',Yi,WatiiterianeAeRVI6544 •010.4 AA DUMRSTEFURECYCLiNWCOLLECTiONAREAWAMI',..• 101-44M35MTERWM, V ,Rf.'W4.17f.*:: :': •-:‘,:11;;Z.:r!"'s '.,'i;''.:E.!-",!3-TIZ ;'' '':.;,'P ''r.-FO.'.:-'1M.;°‘-':1:: : . --,..,',,,,,,:-,A.,, ,,t.=.,,,,-4,,,,, ,,-,.?.,:•.-75,•rY,.-,..,,,.?).: ,,,l'•,,-•,v,•:',,- ,.--':,V:.,.-2,Wi',, A`.2,.e,,,:-'it',.'4•1=5:-',V,I; iS" -‘,,, ,qt,i,: i1;2,,fTli-P`41:.-"., ',4:-F.:::t.;:1-,4t';';',7,7::,.::,:'!; .":":'',.::: 1 rs.".7,i:','.t',:,; ,'",,, :'./.$ '.,z:,F 0,',C."'-':::'',",=.','=';',"r- ':':'' Location . NA All recyclables collection and storage, garbage, • NA refuse and/or dumpsters shall be contained within areas designated for such uses,and shall be located a minimum of 50 ft.from a lot devel- • • oped with residential uses. In no case shall the recyclables collection and storage, garbage, refuse and/or dumpsters be located within the required setback area. The Reviewing Official may modify the location provisions,through the site plan review process, . if necessary to provide reasonable access to the ' iv , property. co , , .,::::14,ww*,,o.,-4,,,,,t:,,,,,, ,,:;m1.,,..,.:,,:,,:.,, ,:,,,;,,,,;.,,,. .,,,,,„,,,,,,74,..,;},,I.;410:1: ',1*A04-r•'4.-.%:'?p, .sn...:.: ,,,,,,,.: ,:.-i:- :,..A::- .,!-i..,.:----:'f'.":, .:•:',,,i":4''..''''..-1.r....4',,,'?T':1,'•e6:-":f':',: f,A €': ';'4,1Y4 co , ,. ,, _ ,j,,,,„s.,, „4.,,;,,,t,: „,,i.,:i,,,-i,...r,,,,,-„,;,::::,,,,,,,,,„.:,n,.„(ii-.,::=;;,,..,:;,m-r •-:,,,,?,,!,;.Ty.z,,:;;,:n.--t,,,,,,, ,,;.- ,1 f.,1,:i,i,%::::. •:,r,-•,.,:;•,,„,,v,:,„*w 1,..:5, '...'.-..:7,!•;,* , : :-•',:! : :: :-, : :. ;,,, , •,,,:: •',,': .: :,. :: ''';'il''',;;;;-,,f".'i';' General See RMC 4-4-080. See RMC 4-4-080. All suffixes: See RMC 4-4-080. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked Parking areas abutting residential development on a single family property, including shall be screened with a solid barrier fence and/ those vehicles under repair and restora- or landscaping, tion. i , 1 . . , . • . . . . , ,,, ..,.. < 4 7,' • N .0LL : - - -n. Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. ` DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ���U��� ���U��������� � . ZONING—' _ DESIGNATIONS — '_''.~ . y^ � and Attached � � Accessory ' c� � 11 'n Location For any unit,required parking shall be pro- NA T"suffixes: Parking should be pro- vided in the rear yard area when alley ac- vided in either underground parking cess is available. For flats,when oaaoia not available, parking should — '--�`"-------' ~^~~~ ~^~~�' " ~ " the site plan review process it is located in the rear yard,side yard orun- determined that due to environmental' | - dero[ound unless dia determined through orphxyioa|o�a constraints aufacecv ' the modification process for m�a plan ex- under ' building parking should ze- ' ' emptpnopomo|anrUleahep|anrmvempro- allowed. oeam for non-exempt p ' that park- 'U" suffixes: For lots abutting oningn ^ baaUovedinthefoniyaodorthot alley, all parking shall be provided in parking (ground level of the rear porbonoftheyard' For|vtsremidgnba|mtnuotuoAohou|dbaponn�ted. not abutting an aUa8 no portion of -^ covered orunoo' nedparkinQohaU . � be |ocotod between the primary ' atruotunmand the front property line. Parking structures shall berecessed from the front facade of the phrnag/ structure anlininlunm of2ft. , "N"and"|""suffixes: Surface parking . is acceptable in the side and near yard areas. ' General See ""^°+-4-/vw SaeRmuC 4'4- UU See RK8C4-4- 08' � -SE General See RK8C4-3'05O' See RMC4'3'O5O. See RyWC 4-3'050. ' | / / Conflicts:See aMC*-1-0uu . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) .. , , .>3 ..-_ .. ,a:,>:.,,,.r,,.n, .?i ,mi'�s =em . .os^? 'S• i:';;F7..g;a^;r a<"rr'> .':Yr^6..'"�.4Y.. 4T-3'!?': <"':"�i'' •Xr, :;7„•s, .r•,h ... _:�. :.. .. �,,..s..:�••- ,;» <f ..4,:d.,'y ,.r:..., ,z,z'G,a ,. ,a.• .:>z.. yrr...x a",^• x.4`' ...,e '... �:5>:';� ,r..�a(5.. 8�'�.":�:i E.,<�.:5• r_,. ..1, �. ".. ,a'<k.•s sa;,,"�ytix,i a. :5:, c:e:.J,>.''�;„'.y:r7%:4`.` r#.'r'x.s.:;:.:m. :�:.;�•..Jy:�;. RM.��:":•,:��Li��€,.,.�:' 7.T<>F'b.",�:�•;ry �'<.. <...M .,,,. aR'�. •.:.. .'. .r• .,..:^...1.':�:.``.yy,�<-.<<^�v..�;. �r','. 't i' ��`�>u'�`' S*..:..�.,> .J.�, >t :.s2 ",i.�+•..:<x ark. v:4:.:':.:�.%'6�'i`..r, ..ss'>:<:'-'. "...:�=�s.ri� `"�;,a. ...... ..x 7 �..�:.,_.x> .:.x,..v,,aGF.,xu'N ra..9�: •I=:.•4 >..<:� .,.-:,.Sic:'�,.x•c,.��*�:;�. ... 'f a`� �}'k;+ o-..:,z,?.<�,�,w�j''wa�'�rr7:.>,A:y`�.?>.. ::.�>af,r,5.�: .. `.i�'" - .,s;, x"�:='�M-< 'ram..<:. ., ..:..a:....x..?t.,u�.•-ts:Y;.,,:s�...:::>�:•<.w'::f'fis:4::.,�,�,,mr�,.i�<...;,s§;.�.,r.5�x'.f+rE.-2+,..r�.''',�,,..�V.s;,..,x.s%.C,:;i'n�..<� ....r_.,r.,. EXCEPTIONS (Continued) Pre-Existing NA Residential structures that exist or that have NA Residential been vested for land use permits prior to the Structures effective date of this section (6-17-1996) shall be considered to be conforming structures. Such structures may be replaced, renovated, and/or expanded pursuant to the provisions of this Zone. (Amd. Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord.4773, 3-22-1999) • • N I W A , • 7c1 •A � N 0 • -n Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. • • • • • . i • This page left intentionally blank. • (Revised 4/99) 2- 134.2 ` � . \ | DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS ' (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) gg General Street Patterns: Nonnmeandehng'stnemt NA Properties abutting a less intense patterns and the provision of alleys (con- residential zone may be required to fined bJ side yard or rear yard incorporate special deoignotaDdaoda ' shall be the predominant street pattern in (m.g.. additional landscaping, larger any subdivision permitted within this setbacks, facade articulation, solar Zone; provided, that this does not cause access,fencing)through the site plan ' the need for lots with front and rear street review process. /Ond. 4549. frontages or dead-end streets. C|u|'de' 8'214995\ sacs ohaUbm allowed when required to ' Properties abutting adesignated provide public access.to lots where a 'local center"or"ocdmwoy". 00 through street cannot bm provided or defined |n the <�it-o ��onlpnehanuive where topognophyoramnodiveareas ' . P|an. moybe required provide apm- neoganitatedlern / -^ ' oia| deoigUfesdupeooinni|artothoog � m listed above through the site plan ' review process. / Pre-Existing Legal Nothing herein mha]|be determined ho Nothing herein shall ba determined boprohibit Nothing herein shall be determined to Lots prohibit the construction ofa single family the construction ofa dwelling structure and its prohibit the construction ofaduplex dwelling and its accessory buildings or accessory buildings on apno'ex|aUng |ago| lot and its accessory buildings on a pre- the existence ofo single family dwelling or provided that all development standards for this existing legal lot provided that all oet' _ dup|ax.eximtingaomfyWaooh1, 1S95'ona Zone can bmsatisfied. back, lot coverage, height limits and pre-existing legal lot provided that all set- parking requirements for this Zone back, lot coverage, height limits and park- can basatisfied. | inQ requirements for this Zone can bm ' � satisfied. .` ' � o ~ �n ' Conflicts:See RMC44'080' DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS N (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) {p '�? «".a;»•. •,= • ` ny. rt, .va m £ : . ; �. ? i „ ; '* � .x �� ��51?`t !AWN, � -f,A0, 0 .i'l.in � s-L ^t.��� : l �� ; �: v O w , . ....£',.4: ... ...F..t4:.'m`'t.p.Er>r:,«„ .:yv•�f:.' t{" :'9i:" `:S•lf`x ..1.,,E CE TIO f. Y . r.r .•ju Pre-Existing NA Residential structures that exist or that have NA Residential been vested for land use permits prior to the Structures effective date of this section (6-17-1996) shall be considered to be conforming structures. Such structures may be replaced, renovated, and/or expanded pursuant to the provisions of this Zone. (Amd. Ord.4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4788, 7-19-1999) ' it Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. . '\. i • ) . 4-2-110G • ,. . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1 (Detached12 Accessory Structures) ,Avotrivor A ItMptiVtirk-4,, „10410elitpealgrffinti•',:iftfit„,V4.:tgl:itfiik'tttZiltzKtV,i I'4S3* i*Piqt'Wt'OA4-.'-'e" A ' -A-0 '4:,io'kv..w0A.,414K-4041$* A MAXIMUIWNUMOKEVANDj$IZEV( *;,',YMYU'li-;*-4.1',Vg,',4S-n;:r .Z.i: ::.:;:: -.. .:-! .. ::,•.. :;:i:-:., . : :::: ..:::,„, 1,,,,,, >.,,, ,,:,.:,,::„..41 , General 2 detached nonresidential buildings and/or 1 per residential unit. NA structures, up to a maximum of 720 sq.ft. for Maximum of 400 sq.ft.and less than each building, or 1 detached building or struc- the floor area of the principal unit. ture up to a maximum of 1,000 sq.ft.for each building. • • The total floor area of all accessory buildings shall not be greater than the floor area of the res- idential uses. The lot coverage of the primary residential struc- • iv ture along with all accessory buildings shall not . exceed the maximum lot coverage of this Zoning co District. -., LOCATION '', ''• W.'' ' A'4.w'w., v. ..;,....:-. ..,,.4'3;;:.V,,4.%..,,,,'.4..': =''';',' '...4t..n,4C.4•:.- 4,P I General Accessory structures shall be associated with NA "U"Suffix and ancillary to residential dwelling units and Garages and carports shall only have located on the same lot as the residential dwell- access from the alley when lots abut an 1 ing unit. , 1 elley.When lots do not abut an alley, garages and carports shall be located in the rear yard or side yard. ,,„ 1,,,„tiu.ri i.:.:,,tiql,,,,,,,,,,,,,,y,Ft :niuri,l':,1e,,,,,,:r1j----,04-'4'-':''s _ .„,..,2„,,,,,v;„ :,.;,,,,,,,.7)-„,,,.-.;.,„-:,.,..,:i.,,,,;',,,,::',. % "'',", rf.:,',;4,4;. ..',-), ;-t^q ,y,' ,,, ',:''''1,,,,, ,,:,,35),,,,,,:;4,-,',.',M,'?-1,:•'',:`,...',f.j''':n,';',.,,,,;:,:i'',‘,,I,4.,.;;,.:-.:-.<-,,,•,: , . .. ,,,.n 0,.... .-,..F.„,•;;: , .::,,,,-..•- ,...• ,,....,..-;,:,...1 r, Maximum Building 1 story and 15 ft.26 15 ft.26 25 ft., except in the U District where the Height and Number maximum height shall be determined of Stories through the site plan review process.26 ;4. cb N . -.-- . . -.:,. .... .,. 0 0 Conflicts:See RMC 4-1-080. . , , , � DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL Z������� ���K��������� r _ — ���.~~..... .~~..� � ~� -`�%�e�xc�e�"u��c��s����tro�����s� -^ ' �z � �D � ININOMMO Minimum Front Yard Not allowed within the required front yards or 15 ft., if parking accmss is provided Not allowed within the required front � side yards along streets. from the front orside. yards orside yards along streets. . 1Dft'. if parking access ifprovided ' from the rear via public street or alley. � Minimum Side�Rear 3 ft.except those structures located between the Rear Yard:Minimum of3 ft.Garages 3 ft. except those structures located ' Yard rear of the house and the rear property line and carports must provide amini- between the rear of the house and the / 'which may bo located adjacent to the rear and mum of24 ft. ufbackoutroom. rear property line which may belocated' . side yard lot line; provided,that garages, car- Side Yard: None »oquinad_ adjacent to the rear and side yard lot|ine' podoand parking areas must ba set back from � provided, that garages, oarpodaand ' the rear pnopedylines a sufficient distance to parkjngaxeaornuotbaootbaokfnorhth` '� *a | . provdaa minimum of24 ft.ofbackoutroom, rear property lines a sufficient distance bo ' -^ either on-site or counting improved alley surface provide.a minimum of24ft. ofbankout J co or other improved hght-of-wavSurface." |nno room,either on-site or counting improved ! ! . case shall any structure be located within thd alley surface or other improved right-of- nequinadGhonm|inmK8aoterPpoQnamnegtbaok way ourfaoe'"'eu|nno case shall any � | area. structure be located within the required Shoreline Master Program setback anea'. Special Setbacks Bamns, stables and other animal otagricu|tun* NA Barna, abab|ao and other animal oragri- tor Animal or related structures shall bg located a minimum of culture related structures shall balocated ! Agricultural Related 5O ft.from any property line. a minimum of5O ft. from any property . Structures line. . . � / . ` / Conflicts:See RMC/w-080. � � \ � DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS. (Detached'"Accesmmry Structures) � ' gg ''—�------- ---- ----- ' — HIR ORONO -|;` Legal Nothing herein shall bo determined Uoprohibit Nothing herein shall bedetern��ed Nothing here� shall badatern��edto Lots the cone� U u� onofa single fan�ik/dweUingand topnohibd the conotruotinnofa prohibit the nono�ucUonofa duplex and �aaccessory buildings,or the eo�tenceofasin- dwelling��uotuneand its accessory doaccessory bui|dingaonapre-existing ||g family dwelling or duplex, existing as of buildings onapre-existing legal lot legal lot provided that all setback, lot oov' K8arch1. 1995, onapoo'oxiating |ego| |udpno- provided that 'all development aton- ensge' height limits and parking nequiny' ' nidodthcdaUoatbaok. |otcovenage. hmight|irnibo danda for this Zone can besatisfied. mnmntu for this Zone can besatisfied. ' and parking requirements for this Zone can be omtimf|md' Pre-Existing N8 Residential structures that,existor 0A Residential that have been vested for land use ru Structures permits prior to the effective date of ' this section /G-17-1S98\ shall bm -` considered to be conforming otruo- 9D -^ tunes. Such structures maybe replaced, renovated, and/or . . expanded pursuant 10 the provisions of this Zone. k4n�d. [�d'47�G, B-24- S9B� �n�478�.7- 3- QAQ\ . � / ' ' | / � . .. rp ' Conflicts:See gMC+1-0ou 4-2-110H - - - 4-2-110H. . CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1. Front and rear setbacks in the RM-U Zone lished by RMC 4-3-020,Airport Related maybe reduced to 0'by the Reviewing . Height and Use Restrictions. Official during the site plan review process provided the applicant demonstrates that 8. Allowed projection into setbacks: the project will provide a compensatory a. Fireplace structures, bay or garden amenity such as an entryway courtyard, windows, enclosed stair landings,and private balconies or enhanced landscap- similar structures as determined by ing..' the Zoning Administrator may project 2. If the structure located in the RM-U Zone 24' into any setback in the R-10,R-14 exceeds 4 stories in height, a 15'front set- and RM Zones and may project 30 back from the property line shall be into a street setback in the R-14 Zone, • required of all portions of the structure provided, such projection are: which-exceed 4 stories.This requirement (i) Limited to 2 per facade. • may be modified by the Reviewing Official (ii) Not wider than 10'. during the site plan review process to a uniform 5'front setback for the entire b. Fences, rockeries and retaining walls structure provided that the structure pro- with a height of 48"or less may be vides a textured or varied facade (e.g., constructed within any required set- multiple setbacks, brickwork and/or orna- back; provided,that they are located mentation)and consideration of the pedes- outside of the 20'clear vision area trian environment(e.g., extra sidewalk • specified in RMC 4-11-030,definition width,canopies, enhanced landscaping). of"clear vision area". Fences 6'or 3. RC, R-1, R-5, R-8,and R-10. less in height may be located within the rear and side yard setback areas 4. The environmental, aquifer,and airport but must be reduced to 42"to locate regulations and site plan review process within the front yard setback. may require a reduction in the allowable c. Uncovered porches and decks not height and/or number of stories for any exceeding 18"above the finished residential building. grade may project to the property line. 5. In all districts except the"U", more stories d. In the R-14 Zone only, uncovered and an additional 10'in height may be porches and decks 18"or higher obtained through the provision of addi- above grade at any point along outer tional amenities such as pitched roofs, edge of structure may project 24"into additional recreation facilities, under- an interior setback or 30"into a street ground parking,and/or additional land- • scaped open space areas, as determined setback. through the site plan review process. e. Eaves and cornices may not project 6. In the"I"District, additional height for a more than 24' into an interior or street residential dwelling structure may be setback in the R-10, R-14 and RM obtained through the site plan review pro- Zones. In the R-14 Zone only, eaves cess depending on the compatibility of the may project up to 30 into a street set- proposed buildings with adjacent existing back. residential development. In no case shall f. Eaves, cornices, steps,terraces, plat- the height of a residential structure exceed forms and porches having no roof 45'. covering and being not over 42"high 7. The height of any structure permitted in may be built within a front yard. this Zone shall not exceed the limits estab- 9. • Phasing,shadow platting or land reserves may be used to satisfy the minimum den- , (Revised 9/99) 2- 138.2 - - 4-2-110H • = - -- - sity requirements if the applicant can dem- - -design solutions that would occur with onstrate that these techniques would allow uses developed under standard criteria. the eventual satisfaction of minimum den- • Permitted Bonuses:The following bonuses sity requirements through future develop- may be achieved independently or in corn- ment. The applicant must demonstrate that bination: the current development would not pre- clude the provision of adequate access a. Bonus Densities:Dwelling unit density and infrastructure to future development. may be increased from 14 units per • Within the Urban Center, surface parking net acre to a range of 15 to 18 units • may be considered a land reserve. per net acre. Densities of greater than 10. In the event the applicant can show that 18 units per net acre are prohibited. minimum density cannot be achieved due b. .:Bonus Dwelling Unit Mix/Arrange- ' to lot configuration, lack of access or phys- •:Vment: Dwelling units permitted per • ical constraints, minimum density require- '-:structure maybe increased as fol- ments may be reduced by the Reviewing . .lows: - . • Official. (i) . Primary Uses: A maximum of 11. Except barns, stables and other animal or V 4 units per structure, with a agricultural related structures. maximum structure length of • 12. In order to be considered detached, a 100'. structure must be sited a minimum of 6' ' (ii) •Secondary Uses:A maximum from any residential structure. of 8 units per structure with a 13. In the. event the applicant show that mini- maximum structural height of maxi- mum density cannot be achieved due to lot 35 , or structural3 a lengthnd a configuration lack of access or physical mum of 115 . I constraints, minimum density require- • Bonus Criteria:To qualify for one or both ments may be reduced by the Reviewing bonuses the applicant shall provide either: 1 Official. .a. Alley and/or rear access and parking - Phasing,shadow platting or landreserves for 50%of-primary uses or secondary may be used to satisfy the minimum den- use townhouses, or sity requirements if the applicant can dem- b. Civic uses: onstrate that these techniques would allow the eventual satisfaction of minimum den- (i) Community meeting hall, sity requirements through future develop- a Senior center, ment.The applicant must demonstrate that ( ) the current development would not pre- (iii) Recreation center, or • dude the provision of adequate access (iv) Other similar uses as deter- arid infrastructure to future development. .mined by the Zoning Adminis- _--) 14. Density and Unit Size Bonus: trator, or Purpose:The bonus provisions are c. •A.minimum of 5%of the net develop- intended to allow greater flexibility in the able area of the project in aggregated implementation of the purpose of the R-14 common open space. Common open •designation. Bonus criteria encourage pro- space areas may be used for any of vision of aggregated open space and rear the following purposes: access parking in an effort to stimulate (I) Playgrounds, picnic shelters/ provision of higher amenity neighborhoods facilities and equipment, vil- and project designs which address meth- lage greens/square, trails, ods of reducing the size and bulk of strut- corridors or natural. tures. Applicants wishing such bonuses must (ii) Structures such as kiosks, benches,fountains and main demonstrate that the same or better tenance equipment storage results will occur as a result of creative facilities are permitted pro- 2- 139 (Revised 4/99) 4-2-110H - - . . _ _ ___vided that they serve and/or - -::from other parking-areas by landscap • - promote the use of the open ing with a minimum width of 15'. space. f. Site design incorporating a package • To qualify as common open space an of at least 3 amenities which enhance area must meet each of the following neighborhood character, such as conditions: coordinated lighting (street or build- ing), maijbox details, adess an :.(i) function as a focal point for nage details, and street t ees asd sig- . the development, approved by the Reviewing Official. - (ii) have a maximum slope of (Amd. Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999) 10%, 15. Subject to the landscaping provisions (of (iii) have a minimum width of 25', • the R-14 Zone). except for trails or corridors, 16. The Reviewing Official may modify this •i`(iv) be located outside the right- provision, through the site plan review pro- of-way, cess, where it is determined that specific portions of the required landscaping strip (v) be improved for passive and/ may be developed and maintained as a: or active recreational uses, usable public open space with an opening . (vi) be improved with landscaping directly to a public entrance. in public areas, and 17. The Reviewing Official may permit, -(vii) be maintained by the home- through the site plan review process,the _ . owners association if the substitution for the 15'wide landscaping • property is subdivided, or by strip, of a 10'wide landscaped setback the management organization and a sight-obscuring solid barrier wall as applied to the property if (e.g., landscaping or solid fence), in order • the property is not subdi- to provide reasonable access to the prop- vided. erty. Developments which qualify for a bonus The solid barrier wall shall be designated shall also incorporate a minimum of 3 fea- in accord with the Site Plan Review section tures selected from the improvements - and shall be located a minimum of 5'from options as described below: abutting property(ies) zoned and or desig- a. Architectural design which incorpo- nated for"residential"use. The Reviewing rates enhanced building entry fea- Official may also modify the sight-obscur- ing tures (e.g.,varied design materials, landscaping provision,through the site • arbors and/or trellises, cocheres, plan review process, if necessary to pro- gabled roofs). vide reasonable access to the property. - -7,.' A secured maintenance agreement or b. Active common recreation amenities such as picnic facilities,gazebos, easement for the landscape strip is sports courts,recreation center, pool, required. spa/jacuzzi. 18.. RESERVED. (Amd. Ord.4773, 3-22-1999) c. Enhanced ground plane texture or 19. The goal of the R-10 Zone is to permit a color(e.g., stamped patterned con- range of detached, semi-attached and crete, cobblestone, or brick at all attached dwelling units. Detached dwelling building entries, courtyards, trails or units include traditional detached single sidewalks). family houses as well as semi-attached d. Building or structures incorporating units. Attached residences include town- bonus units shall have no more than houses and flats. A maximum of 4 units 75%of the garages on a single may be consecutively attached. (Amd. facade. Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999) e. Surface parking lots containing no 20. For existing parcels which are a maximum more than 6 parking stalls separated size of 1/2 acre, as of the effective date • (Revised 4/99) 2- 140 - — - - 4-2-110H . :1.:-.. frorri_thi ,setback.requirement. (Amd. Ord.hereof, and which are proposed to be .. developed with townhouse development, 4773, 3-22-1999) an exemption from lot width or depth • 26. Exception for Community Facilities:The • requirements may be permitted if the following development standards shall Reviewing Official determines that pro- apply to all uses having a"P"suffix desig- posed alternative width standards are con- nation. Where these standards conflict sistent with Site Plan Review section with those generally applicable, these criteria. (Amd. Ord.4773, 3-22-1999) standards shall apply: • 21. Lots:Irregularly shaped lots,such as Z-lots a. Publicly owned structures housing and zipper lots, may be permitted;pro- . such uses shall be permitted an addi- vided,that the lots meet the development ' tional 15' in height above that other- - standards listed above and the applicant wise permitted in the Zone if"pitched provides typical layouts and elevations for roofs",as°defined herein, are used for • the homes that may be built of the pro- ' . .at least:6.0%or more of the roof sur- posed lots. „face'.of:both'primary and accessory 22. Semi-attached dwellings, townhouses, structures. flats, and attached accessory structures. ' b. In addition, in zones where the maxi- (Amd.Ord.4773, 3-22-1999) mum permitted building height is less 23. If a corner lot is less than the minimum than 75', the maximum height of a . width required by this Section but greater ' ..`publicly owned'structure housing a than 50'in width,then for every 2'in width public use may be increased as fol- in excess of 50'the required side yard lows, up to a maximum height of 75' shall be increased from a minimum of 10' to the highest point of the building: .by 1'up to a maximum of 15'. However, in (i) ;When abutting a public street, no case shall a structure over 42"in height • ' 1.additional foot of height for intrude into the 20'sight triangle. .each'additional 1-1/2'of 24. Exemption:When 40%or more,on front perimeter building setback and the minimum street foot basis, of all property on 1 side of a beyond street between 2 intersecting streets at the setback_required at street time of the passage of this Code has been level unless such setbacks are built up with buildings having a minimum otherwise discouraged (e.g., front yard of more or less depth than that inside the Downtown Core established by the Code, and provided, Area in the CD Zone); that the majority of such front yards do not . (ii) When abutting a common vary more than 6'in depth, no building property line, one additional shall be built within or shall any portion, :foot of height for each addi- ,) save as above excepted, project into such .tional 2'of perimeter building _ minimum front yard;provided,further,that setback beyond the minimum no new buildings be required to set back required along a common more than 35'from the street line in the property line; and , . R-2 or R-3 Residential Districts, nor more than 2'farther than any building on an (iii) On lots 4 acres or greater, 5 adjoining lot and that this regulation shall additional feet of height for not be so interpreted as to reduce a every 1%.reduction below a required front yard to less than 10'in 20% maximum lot area cover- depth. age by buildings for public amenities such as recre- 25. Includes principal or minor arterials as ational facilities, and/or land- . defined in the Arterial Street Plan. Arterial scaped open space areas, streets within the Central Business District etc.. when these are open -bounded by the Cedar River, FAI 405 and accessible to the public Freeway, South 4th Street, Shattuck Ave- during the day or week. nue South, South Second Street, and • Logan Avenue South-shall be exempt 2- 141 (Revised 4/99) 4-2-110H- - 27. All uses having a"Public Suffix"(P)desig- - :__:. __ :_:.__ • nation are subject to the following:Height: . Publicly owned structures housing such , uses shall be permitted an additional 15'in height above that otherwise permitted in the Zone if"pitched roofs", as defined herein, are used for at least 60%or more of the roof surface of both primary and accessory structures. In addition, in zones where the maximum permitted building height is less than 75', the maximum height of a publicly owned structure hous- ing a public use may be increased as fol- lows, up to a maximum height of 75'to the highest point of the building: a. ,When abutting a public street, 1 addi- • "'Ilona'foot of height for each additional 1-1/2'of perimeter building setback beyond the minimum street setback required at street level unless such setbacks are otherwise discouraged (e.g., inside the Downtown Core Area in the CD Zone); b. When abutting a common property line, 1 additional foot of height for -each additional 2'of perimeter build- ing setback beyond the minimum required along a common property line; and c. On lots 4 acres or greater, 5 addi- tional feet of height for every 1% - reduction below a 20% maximum lot area coverage by buildings for public amenities such as recreational facili- ties, and/or landscaped open space areas, etc.,when these are open and • accessible to the public during the day or week. 28. For self storage uses, rear and side yard setbacks shall comply with the Commer- • cial Arterial Zone (CA) development regu- lations in RMC 4-2-120A, Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Desig- nations. (Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998) • (Revised 4/99) 2 - 142 r' } 4-6-060G ' t Y.: ry ,- :s in the alignment of a street occurs, aIt r Y; .,. curare of reasonably long radius shall be dead end streets, when approved%b ' partment, are as follows: : p _ introduced, subject to review and ap err, proval of the Administrator. _' „i �. „ LENGTH OF `` '`` b. Vertical STREET F ="` 4' " ' Curves:All changes in TYPE O TURNARgd : , trn ' grade shall be connected by vertical For up to 150'in No turnaround : . ' `-1:;; curves of a minimum length of two hun length qu►t " , _.,,:..x dred feet(200') unless specified other From 150'to 300'in Dedicated h ",. �« wise by the Administrator. �' ` length turnaroundcut . • or;�cif:'�-_-r�-. ••�fi:r c. Tangents for Reverse Curves:A regwree- tangent of at least two hundred feet From 300'to 500'in Cul-de-sac;�e * '41 length quirad " is `: (200') in length shall be provided be- ri tween reverse curves for arterials;onecN .. From 500'to 700'in '" ! Cul " hundred fifty feet(150')for.collectors and length -de-sac requires," ;� ; Fire sprifiiueC y ;, one hundred feet(100')for residential ac , s- cess streets. required for ha ' Longer than 7�� a 00'in Two means of a °�, � . 9. Downtown Core Area—Special Stan-,.,,,,- length i : 9 fire sprinklers r "+ dards: Greater sidewalk widths may be re- all houses; x quired in the Downtown Core Area as part of beyo�, � ' `' 3.site plan review for specific projects. The Ad to Turnaround Design The h �4 .t'_'S ti i ministrator mayrequire that sidewalks be ex turnaround shall have a;des� . r,, ; ` �r•. q M ., u + ' r, tended from property line to the curb with the Administrator and"the;Burea ; F provisions made for street trees and other `'°'`'` uR� .' ' vention. M landscaping requirements, street lighting, a" ' and fire hydrants. 4. Cul-de-Sac Design:Cut=de;ga �y have a minimum paved radiu �� ' , right-of-way G. DEAD END STREETS: feet(45')with a ri 9 ay radius: s� �4 ,p;; feet(55') for the turnaround Ttir} '> r ,' �` 1• When Permitted: Dead end streets are turnaround shall have a desi n ;' , 4.*.-,: ,:a permitted where through streets are deter- the Administrator and the Bureau y '' '.: mined by the Department not to be feasible. vention. << a ' For circumstances, de :>�"��75 '� f ::::'-':,,4. ad end streets ec-:- fi may otherbe approved tbyo the, de Depart mentor streets r Hear 5• Secondary Access:Secondaa7f , - { i °r�,F ,,' ing Examiner as part of theplat a for emergency equipment is requl w°�"' j planapprovalppoval of development of three h �' SY�_ 5 site for a.proposed develop- (3)or more � . �. ,)yi t;_ located'more than two hundre'dIie . • `i s'Aiv _ :4 E t. from a public street. ;r• { a 2. Cul-de-Sacs and Turnarounds—Mini- ''a�ei mum Requirements:Minimum standards for :..: t ;.., 6. Waiver of Turnaround:.Tfie r ‘,- ,,,,,:;,,,!A R for aturnaround or cul-de-sac m rova!4t. ® by the Administrator with app ; reau of Fire Prevention when the . `, '' ,So, ment proposala will not create an;i _;,{"„ `` r. need for emergency operations ptit `w �t x;. `" '¢I — RMG 4-9-25OC_, Waiver Prot du -'1` "' k, r ) N: 1 H. r ALLEY STANDARDS: X 1. Access Purpose:Alleys may; ''' f for vehicular access to the adJa«" +" 1 " '+ : 0 are not to be considered:as pri `r r° , ' (y��,r I,4 for emergency or Fire De,. i ,.,�;. , 4 ".�» , —pis i IIPIPPIPPPP- are. i tt tital, , 4'1----;:---• -----10-„,„..,.......10,,,,,mi , . . , :, .........._.it i Pat , - .., , t win mot , . 41 Yr: + - �� kill # w �.. 0 { ill 1, . lip, s- . alle lupin 1 141 mil 1 �� rbfAiYM' Y Y II .. _.._ .._ _ .. _•.. .. _ _ I- 'KW' .c.+u. ++� Y� ' . ......00000„•07rfaikslhooloitootaioga ------: ' • } .. f i,�� . s,,: . . , P iiii. "!' f , �. . - . , r 0 . , �' - .111' 1,7,t - t/!r/ f i v. .. go or ,� ► 1 � • . ., , ,IL% . - r gyp, ....„..„ .. I _ r ii ill I -.. I 1 II ,.,: lerar Nu ,... .. . _ . ... _ .... rIN_ NI ail -so 7 _, .. .i... . -1__ A- , \ wit ...41 VI 4iii 111 ■! ■ s i ,- i r . . .., - --- ........ ... .- , ' s r • '..1.41,1A V .01,.... . alat. rIPIIIIIIIMI, . ,• 1 ft:'1 ... 1 dm ii Air' . dill \ 7 II 11111 . A t • II ,......--_ oz ZIF . MS 111 -- -:-: t ' . ,- :..' ,c. I RI ra k_ in 1 1 , . 1 ......„ IIII I I i h Alal 1 . .. . iis D i,v _ .. , 1. .. . , .....4 .. . .. . . • . _ , .. . . ...... ,...: „:„_,,,,„... ......... PI 1 L. 2 t -—• CD ZONING I RM- ZONING PREMED U ZO IN r matarea PR:saR127 i N,2 aL • OEDT . "-----------j) NeR! — . NTDRANT NTORNIT� 0 © ` 3 0 0 0 O8 9 0 0 T 0 T WILL AMS A ENUE -OUTN I - - E - - I - - - - - - - I 1 t I D.PAL eTl'GR or Access I L UV 0 - ATARKW TO e=RN I TO I RBIAN se c�A I nr�eT�eor. ADDED. mown' I I I TO� ♦'1 I6 VAL1•FAOI COE•RA EIIRAN� rS VA-4 . /'PdN3dD AT Arli LANTXCM ®•Etl DA OM QP•QIT FOR 24• PAAer6 AT MST FLOOR PECKS WZI I�/OI SWEET TIRES IOdaT BARAIC'CTT VB6TfiJd1lGR.lOE BELOW • TM. : Matta IAT EDfl LP CDG PN ND•••A MENG QrA1RK I F • TELECIREAL RA eL�ne I ® s m s s ©� �7��� ��®f���� , .16.„ i h . Ba+a '� 1 • _. - I.al_ - -L* n ri72'.. : 37;T,•r: NgACP < �'� ■ Ii�"�n 111����$$ ... &S3' i '•••�ice_._ r n , DABAD CF PAROO .. I .....�i: --o----_ •___=__ iimaLfi - .:ice.e1==5crC�- -'..Iv� 1 1 __ n ; I:: ter" r' —nn�ri - I -i2� = I�r :ri race ••:. r.nuum •------:..:'!;ESE_ -•------- .- . ---- - Ei X �� QEDETALLLDr'CR L_ ,�-g.RA��[1:1- :w� G — .------ T' "...�-. E�OEfAL Y/W iaR FEE OETAL LA-u f� lI� — — MEAL GATE COALS ..� T1PIC$fare OETIAD TTPIUL GATE[ETAS ORAMN: 811 AT FRET 6EJAl1O1 �:''' . • AT EAST HEVAMM AT EAST ElA'ATiCN11 1' .ar. 11-,411 CHECK: GP '126 -- - .'.ri,• �_� iJ-{ JOB NO: I."wa-2:L. -- - - zra. 27_,,,,,,....,, ,__. 11 • °°"""�ADTE I�� NORTN BU LDINCx ao■EE.. I ; --=aoBFs SO TN BU I L INC3 p 11 • _ :..3.4 `, F.F. = 3 .75' me. _ - rt _ in 42 UNIT • -- 43 UNITS %".---A- „, �114 1 Iy I X. ZONINCc - CD 1 1 FTJ 1 I EXZONING -1CD 1 1 .,..�� k _ _A8©A :-I- - - - �- - - - - - Ie v ''= u • 0 ExISTPG asp I TYPICAL GATE:era f��V T�ttrx PETAL DST EEE DEfdE.3/A•lR FOIi _- DEE DETAIL 3/A-L3 FOR TO RETLdI CO IM ATCBT EEVATIO1 AT LOOT ELEVATION --- E _- Al PEST ELEVA - N I I I I I I I I I PEPLAcE I z < sairim sAwr•.. ■o f ^.ter: ' 1 - _ i*iii.t f - , m I In r�J� I���'I: 13G�y"(iA. I�■.a:!_I7�`` _I � _ ..—..• _ Q _ I- Ci©: C�0 - ...,Ga©- - -, 11-1 .>v. —l: . <� IVY I w �t- - • e •• ,ter,:. _ _ ry�� 1.. • z _. ._.... __■ ,- r - ,s— c' r-I - E - ._ - >s..,,».-- s.r..n..— _......amp. eoaPAvr2fP2E• al 1 © M V. � lidijk) J R i ()PAWNS I L_ . — — — ,IL — :.,r. _ 1�1 Q 0"- r r_ - `�.II�TM•• COMER m — — ' : aNunrsxrmArworo+ 2 In I / T. . Q ®TTr /w 1/ o �4 NO'28'25"E ve+,.,• FOR /� Q_ s 2 _ - - , • .�' • ALLE I. N'3/fAT61 WWI fJ JEN TALLJ=T P: . �N30CATO12L1eO C PER CM. .. f�CML EfEeIN6O1® • DEE GEL=THI6 tlEE 3 .1. - DER TRELLIS BELOW THIS A SLEET. h.. _ - - - - • FOR TRELLIS LAYOUT FLAN - .. ��� _ Z r -4 - PDR if8'1Lb LAYOUT PLAN __'(ll Y _ • C) ZONImisecerrneDPERMNG RMU ZONING o LEGEND - -- LANDSGAPINIc z _._ TOTAL SS, SAT ER SITE PLAN N tt IA ee m a I ::::o::: •WVNIGRNRESED 02CRETE PAVERS. ALLEYLAMDOAr�E38P. IRS OP TOGLLANTJDG PIO 6F ` DMeF. \v 3/32"=1'-0" • i�ii�i •WV NTORI O7¢RIE PAVERS., , ' - -- - :uuE 24VA• y • a4 • 1ET _ - r.1- •f iEIEE1AeMrAZE - CDp. ��. • I • I _ 6. d-T L2• .'TLC STEEL 4X4 WELDED II / / im�li.sme 1 ' _ I WIRE MEN e- e n O� e . H. .: ; -- 1. SUPPORTS 3 T IYfS O c 6r er SHEET. OG- WELDED TIEEE01!"I'VI[fb • . • y_ �•14 Y•T y S'-E y ' E pLANTIN eTM DIE'IPDTER i 7� PLANTING STRIP Tre• i \ • ` , •, 4F) _- — OE1OU TRELLIS — — — ENCLOSURE — — — _ _ — — ` J — — — ,,- . U 74'3.94' N01r28'25"E TRELLIS 4E o ." — _ # f'••. - PARKING GARAGE - •is- ve4TILAna+FOR • 0 .... . TRELLIS-PLAN :,S •• - --- i / I CS 17471• • // c O © GI 4 0 O all O 10CI CO 14 0 0 . .CI 's I: - 374'-4• / ( TNOE .__ - - _ CUTO CO1506 FACE CP coNcREfE - WW.L3a - - 1a.3!(e' �.�. .- 26-0• m-er I 1' 7i�_7. �0'-6. 7D.,6• n'- n'-m• n.-. n-a. - --».-m. - - - - - - / ` -I r-I I ]0'-b• I n'-0• 76'-0' Y'-4' D'-!V4• Y 1 ! m-EP 41,6. 7T.0. D7,-6• •/ a-� 7Y-b• 5'45'4'-6 iV.C. 3'-m• WILLI' - AVENUE S••UTH 4'-1 ve• 7'-1,e• `°� OFFSET , COLU•N • coLu'M cali+ .. - i �' © CiP9ET OFF'..ET .•V.- IOTANCE OPrOET / • . 4 emswnilc PLPANTERIIIIIIIhl TO 1'-M olnn P18 TTerEt k . 4ID CUm e110W1 r =- :�� O POR 101 = E _ I \ 0 �d rr I - - zs - :,: ,�i r.- a Fr 1 7 4 '3 4 e l EIM7y� ppy®{� �I • WI"- ��"//// , D r=r?i' D 70i :: O7!pi1© d-b• D. e•-b• e'-b• D'-b' D'�' ' �• •0 �0 � 4_____.I SS o ..,L.WALLIM; OEM 1 �■ �. MI. r a io Leo LSE 0 6 ALY31 `-' `__� J `__� 1 L-i� L C..-. - �__� I C G c -� _ - r�- T,r - / _T L_ l0 '' O �I alr�+a„BD ag I 34 / OIIILlE OP - °FD. - I '� , 1\QIOX DO)( To GRID LlJE� ¢ 8• '1. b,0 / :losWLLDBYa AL4 I I �e a G'Ae° ' /7` i n a� I , / °Pp. © 4'-6 •® I 9 I ® �Q ! �-V \\ DRANK: DM \` /' f II D. ® CHECK: Gr m �► �O AL1BN r -1 :-, �-- �-1--- 7 - O °�� . mil roe No: 1041 _ ' _ ---- r�--- a - --- -- • — D��� 8 ^ r'O 1 / Qm a B' c ----� 0 3 --0�' I ` r , I �t %/////////.� _%;:% //.'/i.'' lam%% // I its :;/e'% % % � %/. O 1 I I 31 171'-a•` Pd'-Y __� �'_ET.:� j ;�F�Q' • KN ..� j ^ I 7 _L __ - - 1{epJ v 1 a.'-. 73-m ve• n. Q .- 6 a - - i 4; !i '�_-.� - Rxrf,i ; _, / `y `1I L001TRf 1{�,T,1,1 9 1 ;waa,4 �I �;j i/ I Ili _J i �� to 1 _... O-"-"IO`' 41 47 a -{`-- V IJ RD. � p O:• -�D.1 i� 4 I'ei OPFWT� ;I ,�j O� I °PD. ; ©` '/ '•./'O i I p0 '3f qqm , r 1 // - - - �/ 1 �� - D0 71 97 53 54 I © O I N 4 6 .i b I y r� I' �I�IIO r---_ I«, % 4_----' J r_ Q - rO I __. I I S z f�O 3 67 63 64 be bb I it 721 I1 AiZJ-�f: ba ,0 O I J,I'_ /Q 1 DARJ 114B / /,49 m O b . P' �i1 3 - o I- . obi 11 C- I , I O I 0% ` 1' 1 0 T 0 _3 m .1.t.a 11 i lO 1 / 1 ♦ }. w 44 OI I' Tim , ,a Bo B m e3 04 i 1711 ' \/ti1'1 I ' �D'- n E4 I 0'-0• I EQ e`,'-b T-611' ��i. / 1 `-- '--- Ill') .� �0'_b -'!1 �I1 I '" ® In _ �.�. _ r� I i f�11�O I I T-6' ,i 1 L% ��/// 1 �DLAD AGO.4 .. �� l'-B, l'��1 © �n I 1 e'-b• B''('- B'-b• 0'•b• B'-6• ALIGN I•' O - _ - --1 �����y/��,I 2Y1P - ' /�� - I • • L'�W`AG- CO"P/AT C till• �- • f Iid' Ill MI OI - -: rePncraPAgL�geuandr-souPnsT-Geew.. BMP. CO ' -- - - P. ,�l/.,. / iA�►� L -1 �• or�w+Lr�9wP�sr--se�.P �� 36 Vla • __ N I -, 3 B 1 ' ® ,i^1 14 �IL :P JV --- O� �- L_ - 3y{'� 0 = - i- p _ I N •�• - I �'� � " Tv (7a• B I ](FOLK.) 0� 1•'�•,Y �-�'I �� I l O �l U I �d� , �hff+ II • �a _ N UO • $ 35 1 t \ +ISI I \ l01 I / , u .1 q /o pEOp } �$r4 Imo'°' ! I I \ (♦— I IIrt L toI �\ _�-0- y F® `01�L.PG AEON __-k o\b-m•' f I - I r OURVE CF0.N!¢DRY.AmOvE °D. •'• I c ¢0 1 }oYdwoo'aovdrvoo ulv°ny'vawoo iordwa2�l�bdrvoo�vdnoo Llraw�li�rdnoo aoYdwoo L�VdWaJ;-'vdno� latldrvoo 1JYdYlO ■��- [ re L- 76 If 1_ __r----,_ . __I c Cill .., 6 � � � Q -- 1 0 �•1�bdrv0010 dW.]1 YdW ��dWO' . JJYdrvu 1�•YGw. lOtldw•] lOIdrvOO_1 Ydw00 1Jtldw0'�{IObd1v00 1�bd4100 LlbdY10�, Ot I I Lllitn W I 0// I I ° el" I Oz = B'-B• 0'-b• 'Jr!:D'-b• 0'-b•/ B'-b' CQ / 6'�r• EQ a,-6• e'-b• e'-6• EQ e'-6• !O. l'B• T-e• 7'-4 Ed ��., EC EQ ee• m. p•0'-6' !b. b-6• e'-b• 8'i' • Z © / / - ' 1 I 8e Bb BB 0! 90 31 a7 33 /a4 / 9e/96 /9'1 /ae / _..(� Ise 1mm ml mz 103 m4 ma mb 101 me 105 Im m ml ¶1 �• 4( p q Yy _,--)2 IN • bid — _— — — — — — — — — — _ _ — \ z Qvfl 0. _ vER Fr oPENere Ll l - au co a'wcrale © • 3 NO'28'25"E �cm�auTE uw +T-a' -• - - ` a TN1ooaee w'eTlelcr. • . . z. , • I I I I I I I �I ORAu0Ya0 • .. D,I ti.y_ PL . . • - • - - - - - - - _ _ I I I - I. �'� �p 7 • Qt— z i9K • PARKING REQUIREMENTS - _ z 12. Q t. = LEGEND KEYNOTES - 0 �t S• 7 BR APTe•16 ETA1J-6 PER WR 24 UST3 TOTAL. .. '3OA BTALLB _ __ _ OT ALE FER Ur1 I 6115P612 TO GE CQIO�7E TiLL7R F8t DEL'YA-U - - PAM WOB»OE CF LOU I BR APT&17 OTA1-5 PIER UST . • .-. �- _• AREAO UiFIN PAACNG GARAC$ 4l WITD TOTAL. - "D6A BTALLO O NOT um, • - i 811IDID APTE.UeTALLe PER LAST ,--- - j -"_ "" - - .. 14 USTe TOTAL. . PARKING GARAGE PLAN % D `"°"ANTED`uO WALL TYPES 'Mk DTALLD TOTAL O _ - I _ ` PARCW PROV77®, • 3/32"=I'-0" ! NOT ueED 10 PARCAG��PROVIDED -- Q 74'DLL TRDBN oN!COtRB1lOND - .© OIII . C D p. '__ ..es OTALLe_ FRR,FOURIH ILOOR COOFZDINATE W - - COTACT• - e7 OTALLB •- YV vF?mOTt PER OPE{FIG471QIe. WYDi0.6" D STALLS - ©B,CONC.WALL eau WALL - �.sx. .,�'Eati° - ,COIN emae ImFua`�rs Acco . . . SIC,NAGE NOTE: ,TAInmv a515DROir� - fiffinfi l% !/ % • SHEET: VEN LAT.ION CRITERIA: 1��� 0/•, 1r -- I: FiGJNDE METAL PPE JACKET I .. I. PROrpE DOOR er,HAGE AD 88331I®DT'CODE L MtNT' TIr7J WALL SE CAPADLE G EW1aWDTlYI �3O.N1L R �POR 3-In•MIL O11D0 PER eaw fJa�} 7.DEMARCATE ALL GARAGE MAN DOORS Wr'--. -• CA.0 CR'I �FOOT GP Cl20ee BOOR AREA ./ `- APPROPTB4TE 8vy.•.i !EC D077� - _ A 2 NOR WALL i Nan WALL. ' OPLUMBING DROP B'� WP°- I. � !6 .617 o IIII8 3.1� c3J 3 (52 CLJ 9.3 11.2 1 ILS - - 2 8 14.2 I5 0 ^� ':.' LOOROIVP._E PER B'-]' 34'fl =3 V4• CL ]D'_3• CL 2D'_3" GL b'_6' bL 36'-7 3/4• 36'-0° 36'-]3/4• ZL I6'-6• CL 23'-3` CL c .1�'•'� 9tR'ILiGRAL • / '( --- / / / __/-_-- ` 7D'-3' 'L 34'-3 V4• S,AE 040 4411 , 449 1 AI • 4'-6 CUISVE OP MOONS f p ID l - • i uwAec MIL DIION -63 �-63 ��� i I m } if / ]B'o• r ar. ar. or'.'ay. Iu'n' / F ! O L [.• �'� I t I ' T'-iLLiIIY M'-O• -R-D' "-a.. '-O' 9AlDRY y '• 73''O•z 1 I 1 I Ire r r / f / 0i 1'0• It o ��• I I H'a• / ' • 7' N'6• I Im' / • • I /e7 ,1 `3.. i ��■ Q e ® r E 9 I e bN - --- �- i--% -II i - ? - a}- _ e 2 -- '] n PIN -�ae®novel - 1 - I 'O _. .-. �__ i� ._,� .--. — -_ _ �,_ — St 2/414 �— 1 fI 9 3.2 r L _ +� TOO 13301204 .�y�� III` ® ,leminal D'' .3 avw PoltDal/IyNwm BOun1 I[mf 'Oe QIJ11°m B3 .nn--,. ® MANED 11.W w Pon=% run �_AI FE III PoRMMCm IlJp ® e1 m ® Po. OIL �' ® 7e: OW B1I�R/ll 034 MD i: 1 la_1.i- -�Tal raj LEI m j�� ��D[,' wcRmeamueera�- I [i. �(, ^ Al til \ - --gum �- I �- II 1. .. [� _�w� • o i p .:�1 ,. ©® ,ter. s3: : aI } oos- eo 1 , -"- hl. t ,�� I_�_ 1 18 0..� ��I: 1 • (( • I i1 _I I0;" 4 '�I I .�� I I V I q Q-Ilw -� olr No z i / 1 B G 1. L i. -4,:12c!• 1. EF' I:-•_; I x 1 r- w li L = W il !G'/i�N� I I y I } � - \�z ;� I 4 1 '' -u[J_I:: -I215 'I � -j 8 1�\7111 t a I � / J' u57:]s. ;�` er�;d o P I 01=•e9 ;�I_ ua.::. c i1" +- 3 0 ——— Q' ki ? ' ill• AEL 2• ait3 ae�woal Nelms ��..•rr avw N ® npl ae®Ilxl+ rwl •g'g Vw - PoRMAII•m -- �• PoRMA,I®nrll 11117 aVw PoEMAl109 0SVw Pell WOW 1 rl i PoE01DM�YmI ,®S �% ,„®` >b rl DRANN:.s (,. i''®' ' A-09 �• 'pSlYPoRSEE 64.13 M /WI I $ CHEOK: U® , _ - Q � _F Y -_. a � 9 -. JOB NO: 1041 rn .,4 LP4' 71'-0• ■'-9• 14'4• 'l0'-9• 14'4• 12•-00 D'-I• ID'-D. Q'-0• •-0 P-0'� Q'-0• / b'=B• I D'-P I Q'-0• 14'-6 10'-9• I4.6• 10'-9• 7P-O' I 14•-m• '- m I 146,-0• I u ---M 'f T f 4- - © - I -— 0Imo BARAx - / P - 1 I G]ORDINA1E PER �'-0' 3{'-9 V4° ]B'-3• 75'-3• ]l'-9 IR' 23'-3 IMP' 30'•06 213-3 V4• 21-9 V7° 29'-3. 23'-3• 34'-9 IMP lgCL GL CL CL GL CL :A CA O 13 CD 49 5.3 8 0 GOID 141OD • I �s 0 NORTH AND SOUTH BUILDING - FIRST FLOOR • W t ( 3/3211,1_0n r +r]. Ai . .4) - ever weir �� 3 3 �� 11061104172 WATCH 096100 TO Cr 40 FY1 Mlm. Ofr.Nlm. Q'R 160 �.HO. vzsy‘k Q — — — — — — — — — - — -- — — — - - - W d Ib'-0° 24'-0• HD'- W 0 § 3,-04'-e• II'4• 23,4• IT-9• 14'4• IOW 3P-0• ii 0' ' V{,-0• R-0• '-0• -2'-0• 2'-Oti W.-9. 4'-6. O Z Z / / M 1 / / / / y /r /)�-0/ IP-0' r FP-0' / 17'4• 14's• / I4'-6• 19'-9• 23`-0• / IP_6• z Z Q Iy I F -- 11 1 1 1 1 I I- • k I Z < tn7 'Fir mini 4 — r 4 e' cn _. it_re..,,i, -ia 11 ' e '2110 enonw' _ Ge-.ffy..g n' L _ ,) 21V B _'� 1�._�• • a - 03 VA7L �VA7D Ttl ii221�M Q• Z .. , Isle %iAx fF� H a Q(44T lUN a ?� �— e� �• ie! - ® _1 Q k r_Ef .. F _ "4 t- , m I C . w I u ■■ \ • ',y,r LL11Liffin _ I ' �- 1 - [T- Iwo • y, Q.� (L �- . '. ' I a,. •• ( 7II, IA�• I`.: QT,.`•:� -mot+ Y IS]ID : :D. IA+��F n i �. Q. - .c O Ili. a a _ •X 1- Q - i • •; 8�0!• I�' L—_ ,• . { }cop'sli,� �� �_ -I I © /w:� �/�ll p ❑ Ic•ii•• - . Ii i -i,' I — . — tr%AIM © 56,t .'f 9 F ' Q '�-rL@I��N� et :9%.3.3. El-Si •ailk - ,� © _ 1' Vim• �-4- C7 N d IL �� 1 r—i• I,' I T�I, -rr- 1 4.!Poll MM 0 oIR NO. rat ...tip•3.'��.I } 1' - • 0 8 [i\111 D GT.IN. - "' .] trim 0 .R r' �. .7.::: Oits3- - �I eD��u 9 9 uIT'ee IBC_ -- I. O u"i::: I!� c 1,�� c fll`,111 I �,., . ' ._ ,A. ■ ■IInuu r.z�..T-]'I ��1 in rin . 1 s - 1 I nl E� �� mm1 _ - '::57 . .•. ]CaGYG:m . it C 33 11�4�11 1. IpI I�1�.i ' li'u\1111 I E �z� I -- 0` 4 s -� m la■■ Al!? � t.m 47 - lJ '.]-IFw l� ..Q, ,� • 1 1 ® 1, - L— ———J -- - _ ... ... fYl ��PI' _ 14. ..�. B 'Pow __ • S 8 ae�7.anl Pat I,al _ RA —,c _. .• - - IICC .;-,-m r.. -ea sr 1 iv .�V�.' ;am.Bsl.yK ma T -, - . . _ .. _ __I.. .,� H'� - 1-0, 10'9• M-6• '10''Y W-6•�- Q-0• f.•D'_0' 3'-0 Q-0• IB-D° D'-I• Q_0• 14'i' 10'-9• 144° 10'_9. 21_ -_- µ•-0. _ , - SHEET:, - - / y Ib'.0• . -2.2 NQ TH AND SOUTH BUILDING - SECOND FLOOR c A� / Q BID SET •-. .-.....-.,a�. �......-.. • .-...�. ..I, ...,. .�.� I. 0 le1/41:>14> ti) ,i, S ,© , i1. ', �,a. , ..... , 1 I n'-6• 1,,-0- II"N• .1' % f 23.-m N• r ( .t 7T-e, ,`'•D•, 14'.7 N' r 7!'-m N�1 �6' 21-9• -m,r ., , jI �_ _ - _ �T - }f1 - G t. I ti) 0 Z g m O ¢1 O .. ' -te 4IJ L! 't ' 1--- � ' - w aq - u to 0 L. tiril .,y.»'•s 1 , aF.'1v+7'r>:« •<,.r • y :'t r�l tl u / A a - U . Z 'I M. m A:I ` 0 0 `z g m m § h1111[1. 1 ,,, p �- 's s DI ,,o q In. s sl I I4'., I 6 0 * 1 I a .• [r= ' ' `�D • B ��i/BA; -.• 0 �,I ). 1 ' i -'r�©'' �•FB�a .I�•I �' d y� z fl�al1 , 0 ■■ 1 q e a = a sai9 � 1 .■■ 0 1 r 1-I ni u y ; t-t1 ""»"'���(�� Wm, 4 r r,.i�•. Ire I11:11 'WI 1 -4-6 U ; ,.: ilii i[II :NIA mi [3]1 4 0 § ‘I li 1 11 CO Z a I+e I IIY� © �' rY l —4 Z R�—I IIYI 8 E' / 11 O L GI 1 D 1E . u,� .1w , q 'grill _ • I pryppD A fiai'l I't1 a;_� �1 4 1:$ _ -rift l lA 44 C ag rIgi 1p 1 -r'`- . N� I swill r i 1 I� -,�Ih7 ` I y 0 I$.;I1 , u11 i' • Z _ malirl. 1, .1 ' III-- , X —�1 :I� �1 -J i �� �$ _ 1I'__I Ip II y y$ b111:":11— oy� 1�..•-- j r EFi .1 I S. r..rr--7[1, y I E6 Ili .1 lA/ D a I 1AiI;■■ i nu istiD � �IC _ �- ;'■ - ;,�, _ i 13--- .,:".._ • T. I Lu v b 78'-9• 1 4'-0' ..) . M. V jj 71'-9' IL II 79'd•I '-m 11 ev> (!:)), . (C> i 1 (C> . 10,,6, , 0'40 23,9, 4.N `S M rawr 10'-4. ,•'-16, 7!'-3• j'42. r>: 1! 1 u 5, 1 1Y1 6 a �D 1 u !t' 1 `� MI m. 1�1i n it I_tl b © • �• " a m �1 n it©t11N-0 P' y p I 4 IJ ::gill. © 71, G M 1', - I, � .:ct^r ; I' M 1 -'4 LI o li.-4.i.e 34) I, 9 R 11/SD I .. 13 4 -� nf,l. 0 -1` pi L. b ke 4, I ©0" -1 n 1 I i Q �Q-.'m . ail 1E citibailiti 15 11 al Ili .12 _um'gel FiI gl i ' i ,m � I , a ' � I IIc:• MOMI (.1 I 'Milli si of ._m a @ O , e e E py - Sa cs_. ircl iII =Li ---sr d (10 e " 0 L E " . y e a a it b 1 '■■ 0 0 " miv % - ►a .ifs* :1 °I �> s I 1' I II I<« s) of a u q u r . __. _ imit-)ai'IT la iv. ,,.,,,m _.,„,,,i7,1 • • 0 r t .� I I,,6 I- 1 a f°;_ _` �,, �1 a -- 'I �I : n� 1 qg'p II 1 ---'I I ��0 i F I-- 1 1'1 O.ii 1 C 1 " ':�: d F y 51',i f! O a1 -1, 1 &fl 41. , ,... Q 0 g id 1 1 ♦ ; 1 NMI 1 — ' �. Lt'-7 N• 79'-O N• i•- 6'i•I 17'-L• le.-0. i1'-7 W. 23.42N• _i,-6•I 71'_G• 16'-O• ( . - / / 7 / r f ff r V MARK DATE DESCRIPTOR a. r; SHERMAN APARTMENT HOMES ° 1 4154 417 WILLIAMS AVENUE �/[ A1� , m 5 $I I A RENTON,"WA —_ r'�I'•�•'•1111 5D REEIITON LLG:' BUILDING PLANS 5RD AND 4TH FLOOR 1 1 ' • • . 4.44• . I I* 4 kt . . .. ft lit.:44 .• 4 i • ,,, .4". . • • 1 ti..; ,• 9> .• , I *, .. '11 :, .1401r1.,1% • .,'•• ...." • 4 , , • • , • .r `sq : r t .1:450krb.-1^ •** "41 . ''' ."1,,t4 4" 4'.4,4 .0- ,• ‘• •,.'" rk 50...,e- - -,.- • , i ,• -a 1,, ,,,,,arimparISIc1/44 , . ow.• .1 s ......'''V --w%... . ••• II • •,. r:Sr,--,P1 - .1_ i . •i). 1 ^ .: r` .4. - Is, , .t i'• I I 1 '-1:' , . - iv*•h i ,4,• 1 *4, .•. ,. I ' : It ,14 • -fr• I't :14_, ,.. ,‘ V' , :41‘" .., I,144Z , 4 / )S.' .1•1* 1, t' 4'' •-. I 4''' .'" ' ''' Are 0. • I ',4' , ' ." ':-...!' •' ' 4.-'7 ' 1.;-- • , 7 - • • . 4 :M.. ' •-'4' •••+• Pi, ...t' i'' •. _ _ •_, - .•,. NI \ "1111116 .. , • „.. .,I,l' :In , '.. I I . 4.. • ,..,4471,4.. i.,f ;. 190j1; .At 4 4 • C■ 4 "•1 /I f M T' 4 ■ !F r r"D� a 4 r YY'e/ ! ' '1 t/ , _-, I t Ini a, . II a . T 1. 71 my 1 1 11 i' A ! it r if , miumft..., _. • • ,:_. , , k ,, , :_ oi i '''..-4.'` .', ."'• ..,,'- , 1'l � }• r .. .'' . . . . an CITY OF RENTON. 0. • : 1:177.7. 17,C7/1-.......... - „. • .7,- • ...' 0,0_16,02.1" -a, Planning/Building/Public Works t-.1 •til ova .... ..., oft.NiNING1 7°.2 tryrif1:133E1: U.S. 5 POSTAGEIL ; • J.-r•.„ • DEI/ELOP::11T P 1055 South Grady Way - Renton WashingtOn 98055 . • ; _ . -.ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTEDik • „ . . . ,:• CITY OF RENTA • OCT 2 3.2002 , . , .. . . ._. :., ... Mr. & MrsrEftOlc...Storiell - " i RECEIVED- 00 -\ C") . .. . . .., . • . 411 Willierhe Avenue South- ... ..4, --.-F_, :, .Renton,Wtov_8055 - _ ,..:e..,-,,,:•:, \ . • ...., . . . • . .. . , •• . •. . •-• -- , • • . • __ j --1, ••• ..-.,:j10:, '''''' ': , :, • . ._-----„. p', •_. : ' - : ,•--- .-----;_i_.' - • , • - DD i... ,S"L: , . l'-':1 . .' • - • . . •' . -.- . :' . • ''''' Li N K h:: alititt.e&M,Seiis..-40-i. i. ; Ailr.giiiiillu'illdidibiliiiI•tididitillii!iiiiiiii6illii:. -:,,,-..:•.. ,..• - ..--_• s T ' I A CITY OF RENTON ..- .s. Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor • October 15, 2002 Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: • Request for Minor Modifications To An Approved Site Plan — Sherman Apartments (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Seth: We have received your letter dated October 7, 2002 requesting consideration and approval of additional. modifications to the approved site plan .for Sherman Apartments (approved 01/29/2001). The modifications are analyzed by comparing the approved site plan-with the submittals of October 7, 2002, not with the previous building:permit submittal. The.information, provided via a fax of October. 10,2002 providing various site square.footage calculations ,has also been incorporated where appropriate. Our response is outlined as follows. Summarization of the Requested Modifications:..:: :.. . .. 1: :Parking level:The,underground.parking'-garage -has,been expanded by 15 feet toward the south property line to.accommodate additional 'parking"stalls .A formal "Request=for ' - Parking -Modifications" has .been submitted and will: be addressed under separate cover. 2. Building: The footprints for both the north and south buildings have been enlarged to accommodate the proposed unit increase (see#8). 3. Unit Count: The number of units has increased from 86 units (approved site plan) to - 99 units. 4. Open Space and Landscaping: Common Open Space requirements have been revised due to the increase in the number of units. The required space is 4,950 square feet for 99 units. Landscaped areas include both the softscape (plantings) and hardscape areas (pavers, concrete areas). • 5. Exterior: The building exterior has been revised along the Williams Avenue South •elevation by provision of two story gabled roof elements to produce a "townhouse" effect. Development Regulations: According to Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:I allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N (.� AHEAD OF THE CURVE :.� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer A I Sherman Apts.-Request for Minor Modifications to an Approved Site Plan LUA 00-168,ECF,SA-A,LLA Page2of3 • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environment and facilities than the approved plan;or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. Analysis of Site Plan Modifications-letter of October 7, 2002: Item #1: The underground parking garage has been enlarged to allow space for additional parking spaces required by the increased number of residential units. Please refer to response to the request to parking modifications as provided under separate cover. Staff supports this modification. Item # 2: Both buildings have a larger footprint to accommodate the additional residential units. The extension of 7 feet in length for each building (14 feet total) has been located between the two buildings, as a consequence, the central common space is reduced to widths ranging from 11 feet at the narrowest to 19 feet,at the widest area. The approved site plan provided widths ranging from 25 to33,,2+fee ,,The.largei�footprints, as compared to the approved site plan, also result in the elimination of the'pedestriancirculation pattern that surrounded both buildings. ff A`.. • The approved site plan proposed a`total of 123,000 squad feetfor the two buildings. The requested modification ls7 proposed toy beo}\a otal of" 124;760.5 square feet including 87,997 square feet for the residential area and36;763�squar'e=feet.for the marking garage. This is a 1.4/o increase in total buildi"g squarepfootage =The,bi jlding footprintiof the approved site plan 0 was 22,400 square feet aria"the requestea mgdif ration is ?2,562 square feet. Staff is; in support of this modification. K y. V�r`esidentiale°� units£to 99 units changes the Item #3: The unit increasefrom.,the approved 86 '' � density from 93 du/ac to 197 duac:,:,The project is vesteci;%inderthe CD zone at the time of approval in January, 2001. Staff suppotts,thi_s modification`witt{the recommendation as a condition of approval that`'thesep'artme,,nt project ;can beAuilt up to 99 units and no additional requests for any increase tothenumb„er o u"pits would be permitted. - Item #4: Common open space, per Urban be igh Overlay District Guidelines, requires 4,950 square feet for 99 units (50 square feet per unit). The revised site plan will provide a total of 5,095 square feet. The total space requirement has been satisfied by outdoor elements (courtyard, terraces) comprising 3,737 sq. ft. and two interior spaces (exercise room, community room) comprising the remaining 1,358 sq.ft. Landscaping calculations indicate that 14,288 square feet of the site would be provided in either planted areas or hardscape. A breakdown of this number identifies 4,478 square feet of plantings (trees, plants, planters) and the remaining 9,810 square feet includes pavers and other concrete areas which are'terraces or courtyards. Both code requirements are met. Staff is in support of this modification. Item #5: The building exterior has been further articulated and modulated along the Williams Avenue South street frontage by the added elements typical of townhouse development. The elements include two-story building extensions covered with gable roofs. There are four "extensions" per building. Staff is in support of this modification. %o CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator October 15, 2002 Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: Request for Parking Modifications to the approved Sherman Apartment Site Plan (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Seth: Per your letter, dated October 7, 2002, requesting a parking modification (RMC4-9-250) to the parking requirements for the Sherman Apartment Homes project, the following is our response.: • -. Background: The Sherman Apartment Homes project was approved in January 2001. The approved site plan consisted of 86 residential units located on four stories within two structures and an underground parking garage providing 113 parking spaces. Concurrently submitted with this parking modification request is a request for minor modifications to an approved site plan. Requested Parking Modification: The site plan modification involves increasing the number of residential units from 86 to 99 units which consequently requires an increase in the number of parking stalls. Based on the unit mix, 125 stalls are required; however, only 121 parking stalls can be•accommodated on the garage level. The request is for four stalls less than the code requirement. Analysis of Modification: . The unit mix of the "revised" project is'15 two bedroom units (1.6 spaces per du), 63 one bedroom and 21 studios (1.2 spaces per du). A total of 125 parking spaces are required. Of those spaces, five are required to be ADA accessible; six ADA spaces are provided. . ... The enlarged floor area for the parking level does appear to use the space as efficiently as possible;-;The use of tandem spaces does provide additional parking spaces and the parking layout,rnaintains;the,-required fire lanes,;auto.maneuvering and_backup, and other space for bike storage,mechanical rooms; elevators.and stairwells. The tandem parking should be allowed and shall be required to follow the standards (RMC 4- 4-080F.8.d) of: A restrictive covenant or other device acceptable to the City will be required to assign tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. Enforcement of 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON 6Rt This Ember contains 50%recycled material_20%nest conc.mnr AHEAD OF THE CURVE Sherman Apts.—Request for Parking Modifications LUA 00-168 ECF,SA-A,LLA Page 2 of 2 tandem parking spaces shall be provided by the property owner, property manager, or homeowners' association as appropriate; and Tandem parking spaces shall not be counted towards guest parking spaces. The reduction by four parking stalls accounts for 3% of the 125 spaces required which does not appear to be a major reduction. However, the ratios for parking are identified for residents and guests. Typically, apartment complexes have leasing agents on site, maintenance and grounds personnel (either on staff or contracted) and deliveries (i.e. FedEx, UPS). Each of these requires parking space and/or loading-delivery areas. To reduce potential impacts of the reduced number of parking spaces, staff recommends as a condition of approval that parking spaces located in the underground garage are not to be leased spaces. No fees are to be. charged for the spaces. Staff strongly encourages the applicant to provide free Metro bus passes to both employees and residents as a Metro Transit Center is located less than four blocks away. .4! PJ V" The parking modification requested-''p youroOctober 7,'•2002 letter has been evaluated in relation to the approved site 'pian Bed "on this anaiysis -we have determined that the proposed reduction from 1,25 to' ,121;parking spacest.,is`` frith i the parameters defined by, Renton Municipal Code and is approved subject to the>following'-condition. • k..' s t rc';..,E`',k.u%;l . 1. Parking spaces loeatedtn the garage are not to be' leased spaces. No Yeesare to Oe charge'd'lorµtlhe;spaces, `M • I _ :• . , . 'It. ..-Y ��. ry i';>'a. :'ti . '"^„'yY?`�d;;,t` _ '} r ,�`. xy ,. .. . This 'administrative decision:Will:..become final if, not appealed irft :writing.'to the:__Hearing Examiner on or before 500'PM on October;_9; 2002 Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City.of Renton Municipal Co, 4-8-110.Add itiopaflnformation regarding the appeal process may be obtained`from the Renton City Clerk's gffice `(425) 430-6510. Appeals must. be filed in writing, togetheir'.with the required $75.00,a pplicationgfee, to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady VVay;`'Repton,kWA.98055 Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence please contact Susan.Fiala at (425)430-7382. Sincerely, ez,Q 0a/LA Neil Watts Development Services Director ' cc: Jennifer Henning - Parties of Record Sherman Apts.-Request for Minor Modifications to an Approved Site Plan LUA 00-168,ECF,SA-A,LLA Page3of3 The site plan modifications requested in your October 7,2002 letter have been evaluated in relation to the approved site plan. Based on this analysis, we have determined that all of the proposed revisions (garage, footprints, density, open space and exterior) are within the parameters defined by Renton Municipal Code and are approved subject to the following conditions. 1. The apartment project can be built up to a maximum of 99 residential units. No additional requests for any increase to the number of units would be permitted. 2. The applicant shall submit plan reductions, (8 1/2 x 11) PMT's, of all revised drawings including but not limited to the site plan, building elevations and landscaping plan prior to issuance of building permits. This administrative land use decision will become final if not appealed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 PM on October 29, 2002. 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. Appeals must be filed in writing, together with the required47.5.QO,application fee, to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South GradyhWay;:..Rentorf WA 98055. Should you have any questie, s.r.,egardin9„this,corrrespotidencelease contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. .: '"" Sincerely,: ;;. :, s 1 ,; ', , _ . . . ,. . a 1. -Het SY , max:.•• - ., Neil Watts ;;:. gF Development Services Directory 4. cc: Alex Pietsch � °' -`<_ h.:�; x,x,a Jennifer Henning Rebecca Lind Eric Wagner Bill Sherman Parties of Record -- —- ---- —-_ __ _______ ___ ___ _ _ . .. SF. E RMAN APARTMENT HOMES DRAWING INDEX RENTON, WASHINGTON RECONSIDERATION OF MINOR MODIFICATIONS FOR: SD RENTON LLC VICINITY MAP w AMR SITE iiirya._ =:.__.._...-�4:.:.::.._-..:.._ .,_:-: .. _ _ I■uIQI ®nu"111 •i��il1 •r- •1I=1®1®1 n.u- allgI - 6-1g 1{�1-I-- . ,=1I,i i■ 1�F`l 1i_v.Ea_s..1 l"i® Iomi «* — m i IIli111®®ea®o = I 'o®IM11l1- i-11—,= 1. I"iiol 6=■■ ■i-li■11 ng� ■■Ilia N ■;iii i long B o1 1 =i•=1� ili J_II■i Cril I■■ a limi s, 31=1FN4 ■"s`aY; •� 04a1'ISi•E®'T" it ?., �l- ±"�'. sl®I'■'bas ,;> E9 _ li rfI- ' VICINITY11AP f"pi!ilffig ♦ht,iiiIlewiiii'III Ui fillPI @Il_Ui�e�li•i@1si=:- o-_r;I@1!i 7gigoloi/a'Epl!alziiii im iiii■ 11 1Ia11i N 1 KU' L J • WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH ELEVATION . _CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O ....=........„_ . .t..._ = RENTON, WASHINGTON • • APYIT1.111.41M101.1.1 TO WI 1.10•001, WAR HIV r r r r r r r r Tea r' r / 111111111111. U1.111111111.5111►1111111D,.F111►11111 n{11.111111111.UIIIW11111111.511111111111111$111.111111111.5111►111111111.51ele111111111.. •.111111111.N11N1111N11111 4 iUME i1101:i iiii�i.i II..NIiiueee!leein.IIiii Ii.. U•IleaemA102.ii iuicliiueeeleeeiiiiouu I!UU NUu ii.ia11I111111111111151 W W ' W W W W W W '' ►a9e%.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 13 © O w(n)uu' 401111•, • WILL A115 A NUE -OUTI-I .4. �, III— ..J I I I „�I I I I .. I I I I I I .♦ I AM �._ -� /_ MIL AM, ~�e�--iAiilaian\gE RsreaesniEQ9anRwRSveasilRRilcapuQcusppniAURLLaWRQa:siri-•.1 pi 9RBR9nlplIl p@RIfi9Q11yQlp9p1fea@eypS6pn lesna6n6 ._e_R_g_RYpIfA l ENtE6YpMID R�..Um' lOS ltlY FCe.(7 A ---- ..■ aaasmnsaiJsieeinamtitifaM9 ' atee: 'mIi:ce' AGJs'IKQau av%aweleOsa Dae'We6Q=� O¢ P �iQg9 — ppgLG9asdlies/LCEddcR!a�`��aeiaad eaeR mns5m! lareca i NNIMUaRvsmwnaWRoaiMie s � � pY _ 7 11 OsaeaRRAmiilCillill AualaaRneBBLMI6 qfI a .a"esR m s-_L 1M- eer r LLIIM ApaR0 -NIi:T=3;1illeb69ev iGNmal1011 � ,..,f ! simm ��I �WLCMMIII ESMINI ( — WM I �a.tteI \ i u � r � cor I. ' :a 511511 aill �_ egjial:: ....e,+,1 ..,...... ... .... —ii . . _ —�E :....�... -r_! e -..-:...—:r-.... . aagiit AladaliIn I — C .I� J ! ..oIe _ ! i L 'i r !air3 w ... ffir 1 - � - -L - _L- - -__ - — I- - - �N ' � cA esmIcse w NORTH BUIfWINC SO - BUILDING � —z1 la ' S '•I In 50 UN5 1 UNITS • lli i f PX. ZONNo - CD EXI. ZONING 7 CD 71'' 0 F- _ � i ' i _'_ . - - 1 ucar'I m1 .. �W WHOM . 0 - 0m -- � 1 [ l-�-- n s@Qi -1 �*e seaa© EIM__!--- w- '�, — s II: s ,r1-.- I *; f VI I _ I I I .1 � I I ,R • .,- — — 1 — �niu I — + 1-' 33- — 40'28.25"E . rt T0 ALLEY • . „....___, AMC. I�LC.,-ORR.i.... - - - - 7 - - - — — — — — — - Fm .il.M e e.cd Zni . ..,."—.-o-.Q... SITE PLAN ..,s,,.,.,,.m 3r32•.P-0" rOFr.AwrtawwQ. ur.Rn I •.ano-a TRwe Wee=OPM.Ms ;al Or Cr a. pa.TO TOTAL OM MUM NM e OP e MTV LMa.nO gigat .COMM.M MOM SW i,a7e. TOTAL SITE LMH.C.11'NY W... ��C i SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O a.� .—_ RENTON, WASHINGTON • ;: 01 0 ---, Q O 0 O O ® O9 I1 12 ® 14 15 I, , _ ........... _w r�r nrr w.r s..• I a•-.• n-r we ' n,• ax ar-a su• no My ••r ra w• ti WILLIAFB,AYENUE SOUTH - • / 9 1 ,t - .. _ _ _ 349Eb' ' 80179'46'W _ — 1`f"/! u . o a 'a a r . n • w s a w a0 n a e r a a 9. i r- r--- r--7 I---, rl- r---I 7---1 r- 1" Tau. B .,__I____ -I --4-FA - - r_71- - —Ell —I--- t: 1'..j:-1—'Ri .LJ�.i.' ;- EC-' -E iE---I >* I I- „ w - O I J L____ L_. L-•J L _J t. _�1 -II I / [ \ L-J ._.L-J •__L_J L- a c111 M I I tal, '4j L ii. , , ' [w] . . - ---&-- v a w s I,. r _.Z::1]. I. '- w w n j,I t:"_.•t_I-� w w r r 11 ill .L �~/ I I I I I / I Ala 1 ni ue — J--- --s -i_ 1 I r_s :N..._r&t__s=z -O :�s , 1*aor-a ycran n,.d�Sr*o-n+aur-6r !vaW=..w u,4 i 1 p - �+:= 1. , uu �. v ymv 4 ars•.a,1kaw.m. ...i - I s I -€ l --- I I I C 1r1 Mai w lea. . NI ro- I.iw .. WI — ..1I. ' �.. .. • n 1.. u I• ,t " -- 0 : • I I I I I I I I I-... . : I I I . I I I I r I PARKING REQUIREMENTS . 1 1•.I.a13 n,Moa Mwn l M1..1.Y R.I,.,C.Y.. I MINI.I WW1 Fas WM RL,'ML• L.V.L • LEGEND -- - ._._..._ • MVO rl.ium TOM• ...r•Ua '- 'M: 'one' . IS WALL Mad= .rMO9111 r•r• PARKING GARAGE PLAN - I m nw•r.Va.woMOD 3/31°•I'-0• V 4 w luami"'a' wu I wwoga. ••WAIL • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1O GARAGE ..•.-- .,- RENTON, WASHINGTON • .. . . • . „ • . T .._'.5) (i) cf) : w ci) ® 0 0 0 ® 0 0 T T T.. .. I I I I I I I I _ I I I I I I I I I i� N. ! V`� �� ' 1 ^ 1 "" • a Er n .. q J. _ I 1 ® igf,�7 I is J C. L�, � I�r IF�7p. m. 1 --._. '� CG:�■11 '� fg +• Ili..... ... OLI.:rrtl_a, "' I - [��' El -Aio -_n RV Ato i --75' Ss— 01.1 H.J.. 6 lii�I' �O�I II 1 �.� I .7 i.,;17. I -- I .L.,,,, :�.� •�.I I I• r p�© �Ii�7�iil Im�u�J11I j■j 5 In.uI 17 A Li^ Ng p_ _ —L J [_I�. =i 1 _ {■ `31_ � kF, r �I IVI I y i 1wr _ rrlW■ - — C.-. r� p__- ' zrmx O�.�r dC�. ' —�_ ' z . P rf/I cl 111I-� ,�r E...a=" np: i�i'�LI � ! � i V s 1 ;I�G roc. TI ID 'n `m ,•I I ■o". I - CI iyJo�S -,or`1�; I ...c■ II I -' m r1 Ik_o� mtr Min p324.111' • _� 1 n I I A 1 . 1 I 1 +� 1 --- 1 ( 1 1 [ 1 I ---1--1— — �— 1 - --r 11 � � --� — -- Ht I I ± L : I I I I I I I I Oib,FIRST FLOOR PLAN Op 3/32•.Ir_O• • Me Ord tdA mum Aldfm --- DCVO=0.1111,6Cla MT IF MEW.OM MAC. WOW TOTAL CAI"LAM a/.! TOTAL SCR LaimoMS Iwo CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD10 �==''� RENTON, WASHINGTON • • 0 0 O O O T G 0 ® © O O (-1) 4, . • • •• :A„,,:.,,:::„,„.:3„.::,,:.,:,...,:.:„:„..,:.:„,::„...4,.„,„•..„,.:.,:.::,,, . , .....,„.„-.,..........._. , [ :::: ...• -:;_�=:ir;::�,_r�:�r_ _;sir':._ :.:.:�`�:���:�;%�:: ....._ _ ;„,..„::, i ....._ II Ja"_f�::i�:�..:isii'�iiii :�ii: iff. •'=. \ , , oi(.. ,.=....m -_4 --- I 1 t 1 I 9®l=r� _Ili _ - IL ,-.;',,,-• ..3 ,4_ 11. mw.n.>E : �'dill I "v'sunx`r 0!!J4�RJ1 '-in 1";�L: xr --- Q - I • ::. .. = 1 ! J _ . � ----ram a Q PROPOSED NORTH 6UILDING: NORTH ELEVATION p PROPOSED SOUTH IUILDING: NORTH ELEVATION rrn asv+ O O O O O OG . O O O O O T e .. ...... ., ate— Awl__--- . ---- _ A� -- — — 7 ill] ,_,..1_. - - z--, ___ IL -- .i 1 etragm_ :___ iii =-..w- 1 -14 H :: . ...• . . , ,.., . =-2,...,..,,._ . _ , _ . �; �_- :_ di _ � SIC e.• ,. ! I 2 4122JB — n -i Q L NORTH BUILDING:NORTH ELEVATION a[I SOUTH BUILDING: NORTH ELEVATION �. GUiRRENT PERMIT APPLICATION ODURNT PERMIT APPLICATION C6- SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- i OELEV ��-- RENTON, WASHINGTON • • • 0 © 03 O 0 6 O 0 9 O 11 O O 14 © Ib O :i::; :::::'_>_ s: a i:-: s:: f 3:a:;:: i:::::::;s::= ;::s= ....�t,, igs.s n;_sz-;:x-:.-::.;_=_--.-_-=-_::-:;:::::-.-::•::::::::;a s:.:::::.-.....::.,-:.:_.:.::.:::_-:::.:.::::-:::: •::; -••• tom■ .: Iwo• "a 0,.�.- ............:....� -= � -�•--,--W"�i-,■�_w;:, '�s'■� _ __ ��\ : !3 -11• 1. SER. �i�l' ��!�1; =4. - _-i_iea i t=--,,bra = � - ■ _ - i-1 °I li ® OPn,ril- I -=ilifilur�l - _II nl■"uri 'I i a fil0 -_E ,1 ■fil w�.--�.,I -"137■L'3 , i�7■8"�,■■Iril�9, ] - t = a�mph s� 1=�!-`8 n■1. 11�=�-' v,o �_ r`' r j= i-_ L■It F ®_ =i`� _ ■.� ; ilk _Tt =ii=.. T i e=aI=oo 1!_ Ii ia■o: 8 ai-�,■— e■ =air :�■—io.!�1 ii !! Sri urn■ I - I@awl- a asa. bps- �' -f�r;•ru=n;.�➢ie�u m i�.duiu�- =im'c�n i41=HE�s -= li d ph [ 13:11 =9 mar,51 - ',,,ii1!� !- _,_=�i olVER:ALL■a, p:a = -■ =a�li= frl■,w,.-I w --- _ i I tial inla [■PtR �-- _STd dL411�- [wim0 a 94m dt�1 ^-�1 a -I �u � -e��.� r� n �J �+�-v�1e r�r ■�'-�'.��-...��—_ t I 3i•iiiiii Pii*iitiWi.aillilAliF I.'''''�i._ i- Umimi e� 'QMta■IS��rI�Oyvipr■i��Qi� ll���l:,�IV���I!11 ,RI���� �4 a�A. F �A C3��lly�� ��� I i!t was- �■�w ,ia-u..,■.rnr�w. _._._ f Y-ww' r.�'�� 11 is -� - - •)'_��S._t— —— — ---- ---- ---- -— — ———— ——— _� -- : I i -- I • PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY) rxr,amx� O © O O O• 0 O O 9 O II 12 O 14 O 16 27P� ,...........hw.,ww:wF•anv._........47:,.-4BE,....._.......r�wnai.R..L.:.....�..,.._...,.._.._......._BI 4 •• $-__yam=ate.. —_.,vr m:*-.:::�Q: u_:?:.r:�;::c- _ —— . L!il! l■ _�L, �e�_�'�!_ ■,- =�,�1 m■-�iiU!= ! .� •' : I I. _!�;� -- -a� =a`�i j! a� I �I- ! "4“— --=.l��b r ,_ �r - _ - 1,n: 'mg,I l -_,s HI ti` 1 • g ,iloo➢ i a 1_- IP _- 00 - 2 `I1�ral■ fi■�-� ■�!_ ��i= ;�I�!= ] �_� e1= r i •.._•. =ole �€ �-'_ ----_� �■� ' ■h i t�� __ 11.101�q .�tll ab„�ttd suet sil I a� ■ ■ I a iiLFl I r➢ - i3�b1 Wn�6 _r'I�u W➢ =13�-7 uE.d@ erg— --lf col■ ll _ 1= �- 1_ -■n. ',1_�. ors �i= �=o� E�1;■ =�■I■,� ■ ' j � a ■I - ;z —_ �I _ "Pa"— —: _I�I_i,,..: ,._ ^■, pl-`_ ■I .,„,�= 6 tit';➢ -, �IW.liui9i - 'I�rui Ammon EGitiwfd - rid- -- — —�_— r�---'� _ 6 _ - o■e.ec�o � n , fT—ryes--.,.§I�as'—rvel — : 1 s� - fy� e p pl s_ y � uapi1■ q �_ .,-- p i r �,i�I�"-'_`� •31■l■yllll■;�■. I�€7��t�-.a7■■� ■i�•-�■III®����4s�if.�1®�I��fe� �' . _■2E�JII1fi■1:61a4�1�f� : a:�al■ai■16L:■I�aleall®fia,■�"l;1iiil:■1_ ie( sr__--_• -I--- : t • .. • 'L1 r u,,ar WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY)- Gt1RREN F�T PERMIT APPLICATION • G DA- SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- i OELEV : ...... a�— -- RENTON, WASHINGTON • • ••• _•. •_. • _ _ • • T O ® T T T II O O 8 O O P T 0 PP .................................._.,=,„4::m.„,....„:„:::::„:::::::;.,:zs,§0::::::a mr-.7,---,- ----,....„..., .::::,,-,-.,-r.X----''...-Ns- ! IMIT1 19111l■,III ■:GIE �■ailli=a! .2R12.�L,I :l _ 11 2u.h' �i rah•-a litillinstinFill�11111:■i i lolNo i41.11ll dalalk II! 101 ■ Ildyal _ ii,tf4§ itiimk'r,0 ___Eir.11gY ■ .fi-ifi 31 'd.i1 Itllkiiin4 I I w■II�I_:�®■. ;■i, la11al■ ti■HUNII ■oii■lci 1,�1 I . 52111l .1111.4311ii1■: 1 1:■Ii :■ ':■: : of ii: I ivn del 16w mW/•/�r�e�`�\al�eo'o'in'0 y t loua.dV1 Y a�:_— >CORM L'mmiodl0 _ ��IDOsWi woJil \ �/� 9fi�mrQ I 1--1 mi -■e e 1 1 O t e 1 Kid ss- : r 1 g I F ■ g,_. .,a 1 I i I !►. �f`�1 �- 1 sI - a!I �I■1 ��,1_1■ a a — v T, :I�Ii: , qdt ixs41,•,-, iifinwim`L ..y?�. 1-aa`.kn,Fls j .�c�mrLC.,141 ki�K25a:r- —I'--MI W:I:.. iiiiir7�■Y +PJ ■�rrc iPwmg i ter'"- -^r-n.?l A�mn'i;i r I j oa` ll �1�0 01 A 14 LI e 1�I Dag 9i"+�— in..is h ll a Il, .i�.._1 0.1 eI- I i L • L pipiN PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUT raa H) ' ; ., ,®v� - — T 0O T O O II I , ... 0 O 8• O T T T O I _.. _......_......__................._. ... _..fit.. ..._.::.;; ..._..----• -- ...........:...::.:.:....,.............::•::;-:::r.:.:s.,�:::.>::::::_.._._....__._...__._._._......_..._... : :4.:7,:.;.,*12..._ I aim-�.. a.■_..—: _.�■ ,`" _ -`- - - _ Q '-. .r�z-� O l�__- —.�i4 ■�.-..._...... .rim— ��■i iiitio i�1.■EE RI,.. •• -j ,IR_r o«Ell` a •ir:■- 9I1=al■FiI .■1 :■elgi IoIm1= ow=_--_IC.m"'IP.111 - I�MmA p$ai tli: liG;lis] lalIMV1■IX!_ _ li�dM111 V" L Sold �_ ■DIL�II elYii=.�I`__ I�imi a --- # I =11- '=1l it i l ■: Ir■ii ■e ■i., .Ig . r.0p1= 1_ii e■ —1 :■ li -■ 'f i s • is e .. __ _,..w.dUl ...ini�� d.r.iuu = ,,, 1i.�1 _—-_1412114WL =__ . momElm a� l �'0luiu i _— II(!.moo_ ___ fd •' - „A vIy i . — -——.l"- "E6Q=�®rnor go' 411-1 02==•. . !11 v ',l'. — . Jm __ �.�e�'i I�.i,MI_�III—E.-uniennams —— O � �git�• EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUTH)- CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION' ILK svw••• • • I_ a • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1OELEV `= =. RENTON, WASHINGTON • I • • 11 • - - - - - —I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — "• O © O 0 ® 0 O O 0 Q 0 ® 0 " . ILL AM5 A NUE -OUT I — — —_ T___ — — - .__T -4-1 I I I I .,-I I ,. I I - i I I I I 1 1 _I 1 I _ I I I 9a� I _ 9•46%11 !IIMiiIIE�IIIR�l7!� I:.....—I�+��—Il�1l..= alyna 7,.., Tl�� —%%/,- - ,/iiD Ili Riri%/I.1� �,�1 r%/O////%�iaia _ �l I - — iit 01...._ 31m, . P 77 ,„ 0 , „7, 1;///71 ,/,../ A ./ lip._ 1, , 0117 ,.. -141, ,,,- _,. / ., ,,,,._ 0 W. -111.N.4101 e .,. 1- /7, LIN �i. lulu loom ` 1 lam l = O Ili _ � ' —iPl�- - EIM fr -ir=i - - Ir -4M mmu� q2q - � Skillit _ I vomit _ i r ; /i„%//%////%//////,�/. . , MN r. --- i 1m1M 111-17 . /�/�/�/%%%r�/i%��/.///�/��/�%'/i0�j/�% 1 j ����i,//.i ire/�/;:;;�%��/i''//////���ic�% �///��%%%//�//„ <�,v/.,,� jt OM F T�l I 1 1 t 1 1 t t 1 . 1 t t 1 tl i_ _S t -ri I I 1_ 1 I t 1 1 t t . t 1 1 O 349.94' N '38'35"E I � . ALLEY p�COMMON SPACE CALCULATIONS/AREAS 'm`�'��' • OD 3r32".1-0• r , , NYMANo ..a ' wum. 4...11,14110. • . a—K.OPRI M LC f AM 'MOOR armPrQ. R1.A • TOTAL 4fWWII.1 B CM 0. . O�.tne eBYfY- TOTAL arm LArpr.M.11 iv..! } . CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O =--- �- RENTON, WASHINGTON • 2' _ s ® ..CITY OF RENTON d a r r i" _ � .'u 11 01 ,� Planning/Building/Public Works o�mil .. * Way - Renton Washington 98055 CO.. OCT l 5'O 2 .Q` ; ®,g , 7 D5o mouth Grady g ll���m� PB METE ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 7i2383 U.S. POSTAGE ' O�en), ,OpM i � "FNT�N/W1.'G 1, Mr. Gary Klatt ACT 2 . - f�� 411 Williams Avenue South I /gam» Renton, WA 98055 . - c����►�► 0 :17 i ( - 1 , • i c "d ) ?� " a ii �... o� . ; ,Ra. r. =. lilt ii iissi:.( 3f(lii "'Haiti.'tt tit tfiifitt iitiii tiilti n .xI; • �= CITY OF RENTON ` Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor October 15, 2002 Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: Request for Parking Modifications to the approved Sherman Apartment Site Plan (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) • Dear Seth: • Per your letter, dated October 7, 2002, requesting a parking modification (RMC4-9-250) to the • parking requirements for the Sherman Apartment Homes project, the following, is our response. • Background: The 'Sherman Apartment Homes project was'approved in January 2001. Th.e approved site plan consisted of 86 residential'units located on four stories within two structures and an underground parking garage providing 113 parking spaces. Concurrently submitted with this parking modification request is a request for minor modifications to an approved site plan. Requested Parking Modification: The site plan modification involves increasing the number of residential units from 86 to 99 units which consequently requires an increase in the number of parking stalls. Based on the unit mix, 125 stalls are required; however, only 121 parking stalls can be accommodated on the garage level. The request is for four stalls less than the code requirement. Analysis of Modification: The unit mix of the "revised" project is 15 two bedroom units (1.6 spaces per du), 63 one bedroom and 21 studios (1.2 spaces per du). A total of 125 parking spaces are required. Of those spaces, five are required to be ADA accessible; six ADA spaces are provided. The enlarged floor area for the parking level does appear to use the space.as;efficiently as possible.-The use.of-tandem spaces does provide additional par`king,epaces''and`.the parking layout maintains the required'fire lanes; auto maneuvering and 'backup, and other space for • bike.storage, mechanical rooms, elevators and stairwells. The tandem parking should be allowed and shall be required to follow the standards (RMC 4- 4-080F.8.d) of: A.restrictive covenant or other device acceptable to the:City-will be required to assign tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. Enforcement of 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R. E N T O N IrA�. - AHEAD OF THE CURVE Sherman Apts.—Request for Parking Modifications LUA 00-168 ECF,SA-A,LLA Page 2 of 2 • tandem parking spaces shall be provided by the property owner, property manager, or homeowners' association as appropriate; and Tandem parking spaces shall not be counted towards guest parking spaces. The reduction by four parking stalls accounts for 3% of the 125 spaces required which does not appear to be a major reduction: However, the ratios for parking are identified for residents and guests. Typically, apartment complexes have leasing agents on site, maintenance and grounds personnel (either on staff or contracted) and deliveries (i.e. FedEx, UPS). Each of these requires parking space and/or loading-delivery areas. To reduce potential impacts of the reduced number of parking spaces, staff recommends as a condition of approval that parking spaces located in the underground garage are not to be leased spaces. No fees are to be charged for the spaces. Staff strongly encourages the applicant to provide free Metro bus passes to both employees and residents as a Metro Transit Center is loc ted less than four blocks away. ... The parking modification requested ip` your,October 7, c2002 letter has been evaluated in relation to the approved site:fplan Based on this arlaT'ysis;ewe have determined that the proposed reduction from 125 to121 parkingspaces'.,is withiit the parameters defined by Renton Municipal Code and is approved subject to the,f4ollpWing condition. 1. Parking spaces located,in t-fie-'undergfound garage are not to be leased • spaces. Noteeszare• to bear&d-l�-chor«te;spaees. 14 This_:administrative decision will becomqfinallif, not appealed inr.writing to_ the-.Hearing Examiner on-or before 5,:00 n O,PM ocfoberf29, 2{0.02. Appeals to the Examiner,are'governed by City of Renton Municipal Code;Section 4'-8-110:Additionalinjorrration regarding the appeal • process may be obtained rr 'the Renton City Clerk's Offioe (425:)430-6510.. Appeals must be filed in writing; together with the required $75.00°appliatjonjfee, to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady>Way,'Rento'n,OA'98055.°, Should you have any questions rega"rdirg;this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. Sincerely, Neil Watts Development Services Director • • cc: Jennifer Henning • Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON YJIW':'..ka, •�•��y;�_--- Planning/Building/PublicWor Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor October 15, 2002, Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: • Request for Minor Modifications To An Approved Site Plan — Sherman Apartments (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Seth: We have received your letter dated October 7, 2002 requesting consideration and approval of additional modifications to the 'approved site plan for Sherman Apartments (approved 01/29/2001). The modifications are analyzed by comparing the approved site plan with the submittals of October 7, 2002, not with the previous building permit submittal. The information provided via a fax of October 10,2002 providing various site square footage calculations has also been incorporated where appropriate. Our response is outlined as follows. Summarization of the Requested Modifications:. - • 1: _Parkinq level:The underground parking garage has been expanded by 15 feet toward the,south property line to;accommodate additional;parking stalls:_Aformal'Request-for;.: Parking Modifications"..,has-been submitted and will,be addressed under,separate -cover. .... .: .'-_, 2. Building:The footprints.for'both the north and south-buildings have been enlarged:to accommodate the proposed unit increase (see#8). • • - 3. Unit Count: The number of units has increased from 86 units (approved site plan) to • 99 units. 4. Open Space and Landscaping: Common Open Space requirements have been revised due to the increase in the number of units. The required space is 4,950 square feet for 99 units. Landscaped areas include both the softscape (plantings) and hardscape areas (pavers, concrete areas). 5. Exterior: The building exterior has been revised along the Williams Avenue South •elevation by provision of two story gabled roof elements to produce a "townhouse" effect. Development Regulations: According to Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:I allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE :: This paper contains 50%recycled material.30%post consumer Sherman Apts.-Request for Minor Modifications to an Approved Site Plan LUA 00-168,ECF,SA-A,LLA Page 2 of 3 • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environment and facilities than the approved plan; or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. Analysis of Site Plan Modifications-letter of October 7, 2002: Item #1: The underground parking garage has been enlarged to allow space for additional parking spaces required by the increased number of residential units. Please refer to response to the request to parking modifications as provided under separate cover. Staff supports this modification. /tem # 2: Both buildings have a larger footprint to accommodate the additional residential units. The extension of 7 feet in length for each building (14 feet total) has been located between the two buildings, as a consequence, the central common space is reduced to widths ranging from 11 feet at the narrowest tolgvfeelsat the widest area. The approved site plan provided widths ranging from 25 to 323feot,:the„larger'cfootprints, as compared to the approved site plan, also result in the eliminatioh of the circulation pattern that surrounded both buildings. '.,..,. .rk, 4, .x�y The approved site plan proposed `a`total of 123,000 square:feet,nfor the two buildings. The requested modification is"proposed to be a,totq,� of, 124;760.a,square feet including 87,997 square feet for the residential area andd36a763Fsquae feetfor the': arking garage. This is a 1.4% increase in total br ilding squakootage. The building 'footprint-Of the approved site plan was 22,400 square feet an Pthg requesteprioi feafion is 22;562 Square ,feet. Staff is in support of this modification. t Item #3: The unit increase,from'.,the approved 86 'r`esidential,unit °to 99 units changes the density from 93 du/ac to 197'du/ac:<,.The project is ves,te1 dnder t o CD zone at the time of approval in January, 2001. Staff suppgrts,�thisamodification'with the recommendation as a condition of approval that'the4rapartment project can-be;built up to 99 units and no additional requests for any increase to the,number Oil-mks would be permitted. • Item #4: Common open space, per Urban b' ii h``Overlay District Guidelines, requires 4,950 square feet for 99 units (50 square feet per unit). The revised site plan will provide a total of 5,095 square feet. The total space requirement has been satisfied by outdoor elements (courtyard, terraces) comprising 3,737 sq. ft. and two interior spaces (exercise- room, community room) comprising the remaining 1,358 sq. ft. Landscaping calculations indicate that 14,288 square feet of the site would be provided in either planted areas or hardscape. A breakdown of this number identifies 4,478 square feet of plantings (trees, plants, planters) and the remaining 9,810 square feet includes pavers and other concrete areas which are terraces or courtyards. Both code requirements are met. Staff is in support of this modification. Item #5: The building exterior has been further articulated and modulated along the Williams Avenue South street frontage by the added elements typical of townhouse development. The elements include two-story building extensions covered with gable roofs. There are four "extensions" per building. Staff is in support pf this modification. Sherman Apts.-Request for Minor Modifications to an Approved Site Plan LUA 00-168,ECF,SA-A,LLA - Page 3of3 The site plan modifications requested in your October 7,2002 letter have been evaluated in relation to the approved site plan. Based on this analysis, we have determined that all of the proposed revisions (garage, footprints, density, open space and exterior) are within the parameters defined by Renton Municipal Code and are approved subject to the following conditions. 1. The apartment project can be built up to a maximum of 99 residential units. No additional requests for any increase to the number of units would be permitted. 2. The applicant shall submit plan reductions, (8 1/2 x 11) PMT's, of all revised drawings including but not limited to the site plan, building elevations and landscaping plan prior to issuance of building permits. This administrative land use decision will become final if not appealed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 PM on October.29, 2002. 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. Appeals must be filed in writing, together with the required-r$75.p0,,application fee, to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady.Way;•<.Rentony,`WA 98055. Should you have any questions.regarding this>cor...respo tdenpe;=_please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. `- • \ A, ,'qqd:•" ,';`'s`xi?' 4 1=; s sal Ssi;u"t`'�� ; ;5`,,,ty, Sincerely5 , ;y , _- • _ . n ..._... .. _ _ • Neil Watts., Development Services Director ` h , \t; S • Ott•.. k VJ�r;v.i cc: Alex Pietsch Jennifer Henning Rebecca Lind Eric Wagner :Bill Sherman - . Parties of Record SF. ERMAN APARTMENT HOMES LyDRAWINGINDEX 454MRENTON, WASHINGTON �°�'°�'�`�° RECONSIDERATION OF MINOR MODIFICATIONS FOR: SD RENTON LLC VICINITY MAP R� w SITE aw. ■IQI , ■■ ■■� ■■6�■■1 ■■--�■�=1�®=a1���' =1��g glolele1■�=1a��iu1 III U■' 1 j�i■ �� ■■ Ia1 a* IE■ 1���1��1®■61 _�I' _ ■i i'I- °■ ®1�1�1 ■■o— ��_ ■!€=■i-1■■1 ■■r ■■1■j�� ■■��. I la�'g 8voI I3.0_in���ln■i '■■_ll■ii1=i■s ■ =i� 1,1 . 1 13 ice► _11 �q/ ®�— n ■i�i I_■�=A:kIp 7i�SJlrt al.���1�4�� ��=1L�08� 'q" 8= 3�g� i■ �l z� ■■gj>■IRIil i?>5pf �i�c � �■ • ;911-■ '4:y�iar=4 y►° 1 ,'yS9➢la i =n� ®! 5�� — ��511 'c VICINITY MAP d41d�7bp�i �i11wi1�'/1 �i 4�■!'I��_ ! ■i':'i:■!e1�l��0! 61n1 Ia!■� 6�,1■B'�1�■el1 .•,ep1■j11O�1■IiEi1°■, �,n■ ,--I N K.A � J • WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH ELEVATION • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O ��-- =- RENTON, WASHINGTON 1 . - .,-. • '.• -. I•Par•NO,4:111,Mia Cr•Avlimancam . I . ' • MOVvirliwril ObICYL rINNOR/a•OP woe. • . A.M..%Mief10,1171741TD NI Callmoil .. IN in7e16,10170•717.17111 MT al.1.777,01 I , . WA., . .r 1 .. . i . . . . .. .. T,s, , • , a Almada ine•••=mommommorabal ' au-NEINII MI momet mimmis • imommata • momments • IMEMEEMIllil • MMEEMINEMI • IIMEMIMEIMI • IMINIMENIIIIIIMM JEMPEEMEMI • I A NIIV NOV NW W INV.. -- ‘11, NIII. Mil.43 MIIII A:AnzinswV,..-,,, 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 ao 0 0 0 0 - ,x, • . WILL AMS A NUE -OUT-4 .4, .1,, ,,, , .,. / ......JI I I .....1 I I I I ... II ..... I I I* I ' 11 11m11. s. > .Ammoasarai1/4, -,-,I . E. 4.11111111.1111111141ft AM" AAA Ift, Ilk //r....woletermanoLl..... s'I-----'. aimassumairmaseillmovimpieiiiiiiiiitiiissimmasuciarnitliktinunnsmaniiiiintiraimmiginiiiii0gleiiinsnmeniaiiiiiii -7iiiirtriasWiieTiniis,-.1P,Leini.. lwarammakArnassram,,Jmunsumanirafamsonvagam,aniument.,,..licleglapp... EmpagraLLe. ..,„.: :jettaipai......nas..mmagsrmarm---.: otgmemommaimemmamonaMMEmmuftWagAgEROMPIghplEVAIRMSMNEVIsmtPumal.MANNAIRZEIAMMIRMAANNAMINRewman , _,.....r tedhi ..--)mq-- , AGEASSIS VS AMOS S.212ISSIELEASSIIMII flaffiliMMIN,. ' il#Nr...., Lw. —to A ____JillgE0111111111111111111- - -. , -, _1 , uji.,, . i .1101GWOMNI: .UPOWINSIM - 11411111E221 ?I-1=11_1-1M_ -----1.. .„..1 ..-..... :7:777.::: !C 7 - - - , EldWiir ® 1- Ma I •••••••-• ••••••••• •-•••••••• iiiiMIIMIL ' 1 gl.i .._.... ....11 ' I.......... I----.1I ---.5I 10a.rpm 2 ..• i010P 1-- - -:•111./ 111 : t o ,.„.„,.., _L____ _1_ ___L . ____L_ _______L_ I_ _ _ _ -• 01 :AA tf) NORTH I 15111:DING . 50rI-1 BUILDING vaill f_. 1 II.j,fi III FF. = 3 15' F. = 37.15' I d) I v 50 UNI 5 51 UNITS 1 i Ex_ ZONING - CD E)<1. ZONING 7 CD 1,.:F gat I- .N5 l'i2 Ile = i'-.'• . • . 4::,,,,. • 7,1 o-- 0 0 1-I„!IL 1 .... a.. 3, II "4"F'' 1._ , I , ._ . . _ LL.i...v.: ,., it 1: --1 I . I Z t...1 •II i 1 R " USN =MI RCM " FE:Mil EliEd " ,ill " fil01 " 1=-•L' .:••0§6 1.4 -st , IR' - -tiEft.t .--,-uz,.._•..ell ..,:. ..„.. 1 *4' t liFitILEMIIMIIMEM 1.157171'i V '. 0 kii Clai...,-= = =0,-,- __. .,0=. ..., ,_,..,__,_ _._,_,==,, — ' MI 1111E.1. ........ •—.—. - ..- ..- - — — - - —, • NO'2V25"E S ALLEYF . _. ..• _ — mm •FLO.1.71171W•0 COMM 14).• --. T--- . ..... . . :.. •MM am%0•Ace I •1.•••IIMIRMIMONID C001•T•110.11. %WM em SITE PLAN ov 3/32..1.-0" 9/111.1•MIMITICEDLNTS• ORIN NM . -- T7 •0.147.1110,10 man4,1••1 71..•• PITIDOOK CrI91 01,60[• ;ITV 72.•71. TOTAL C7•07•1•1.11. bAKI•41. 1..196 1.15217MENT!Pr 10 71. V..7:fl ...MR.1.401.11W7e • 143••Mr ,..", •17.20.M.INI7014111.01r KIIIIMI , , •, :- E : SHERMAN APARTMENTS CA sp_ i 0 ........._ . ,.........,. . ......_.... RENTON, WASHINGTON i MM... 4.•curt ,.,........ .. . '• . 0.... • -• I -.- - - - - - - - - - - - - J O1 _O O O O O O O' __ O9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 (pi _ _ - - - - �e i1 • - - - - - - - - r4rP -rV W IT.. r•r f'J' `r'Ar Inv 'HAP ' 1 IPA r•AP r••r• s+.• me. LV I IV, •Y VP WILLIAM.AVENUE 8011TN . . ._ 3498' 8m']9'46yO a[ 4 _ — I r 4 c �■ t ID IA 1' r wa.l r 2A r r AI rw ■ r Y --1 r--- r-- r--� r-- r- i r - r-�. O I IEt! -a --+ ii- Wit_ I- —= E- —�—is I 1 e iT! k; _ .. - I t_s_E—+- -:_�_P---I I-it;t— _ I J L_J_ L_ L_J L —J �'�; l J L_J - L_J ___L_J I y I I —► r u W q 1 I I I I i1 ,. . 11 I. I I I ., O 3 I y -.N . i I _ �11- f 1 _ %///,,.ii%/////%r '/// :.4r/////4 ._-, : .- % //////, :%%//%%!%/////////////%i _ j Ire / i%- i�u!/ —Lai---- is — Arm .9 ci j E �is�_ w w w w L - w %._ail'.A rii_ .. — �_ -- � /r ��1 a w w r II. n .I�R`' w p, fi w �' rL.� w r r o r D I '" - - --- ii!�I I -L_za % ' -_11-1;-j r �-.�*, car— A' O r r Q" IN 1 ? r .� 1 I I \ 7 I 1 ,,/�_ • - agg1 I I \ 7 I I I I" Fr O w g '� L I J-- -1 jI — r- -a —_ ~r 1 �vcnv $�i�+..u —nw*¢±y N na9 sv�m � .JJ.ov eo W�oy� v n w ° v«�oo n.wi , — I IT O /// r ■ r IRO MI, IA MA AI he NO Al :I AA NO r . ■ r n AO ' �'� NO— — —I— 1TLH — — — — — — — — — — • - I PARKING REQUIREMENTS -- • _ ,. - . nrrr MA• MA I&T •• u.mum r Lem M4• rn.WJ •I wrn A MAU Pa AA I. «rm,m..• ..ruu. LEGEND '- -- MOO AT. swo m MT as na« •.nw n�cur w I6innu n Zmr� - wrrwlrww..wr. MAO..wolc10• tl PARKING GARAGE PLAN /.>'` /: .. I' rmmo after.rwnra�W rrwu may/3/34°.I'-0' jj mo"'waza I 1 r CP.IIGT• '" RAJA • • - CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1 0 GARAGE "�p=.." RENTON, WASHINGTON • • • O Q Q Q Q Q Q Q O O II Q O Q Q O I I I I • I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 . - ,.., 1, , ,. .. MO 0 c_ © :a:ram use: ® _ S 1 L. .411 . I, Ait'61-1,' Ri - rj dr pi; _ _ 51.1 Hs•:G- 1 "I .1�11 11 p h LIfF., T';• �-1 �y -Lot ,�4 I I'��` , i III 7 t�llllu�'1 wr. .�' '��..' - 3. �ninn 17 Fs A L1' itio ql -ti \' 1 .1 1�e 11 uU■�■ _ JJ1] IU11111 f:l �1 I 11/1/�11� O y r ■ 1 r 1.� ��}_ ._slx_ �J,,_ 1 � i 11 111 F� �1■�1 sib:': O -— -G a,11 IC - '__ ' I���� �G�'u's�3: - :i[a-•..1— x�,_ , t�g_I 2 A� _ p s - 1 it � 41u a 1„I, a .o... ---, .RNjff. --o,:I� A—V.I -- mr IF 1 C-- 6. Gail dili TT. I . 1 1 1 -1 1 r 1 1 - • 1 ( I 1 I CI r - 1 • .,,,_, --1- 1 , , I()_ I 1 I ' 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 - 7 ---I .7 T 7 7 r” T 7 1 7 7 -r--7._.___ pin FIRST FLOOR PLAN .. . wp 3137'.I'-O• e mil .FR l • r�r lfi iewn. 4U041,I.0. COMM-rAOr. 11VT! FROWN CNN rlm Yrr TofLL OI■/rlOb 1A FT DIZZOF FtIO.IM rer we • FIR WOtMb . TOT/i FIR IIIOFfAPIN6 SUM F} - CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1O '`=-'- RENTON, WASHINGTON . . ..... . . .. ...................„,....„....„.:„....,....,..E,.„.„,.,„,,,,..„.„,,„„.„„_..,:„,„„,,_,„:... O Q O ® JL I -- O...„....„.......••..._.....................=„„=„.s.,„„ O Q-_ _„;;;;;;.F.E=1.11:ii: u etive, _ O O I I: i -rI — 9 --- -- u�I e — �t _ moo=--_ -_ _ .. _ __ ILIVETIM _ } — L - -nly =�eb- - 1 -— 1-- - I i.-2-91 i 1 : il i ®IMP; 60•'. L " - •,tlPlil - _ a°� - s p ,Iu _ 1- i - t I 2 1PROPOSED NORTH aUILPINCz:NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH BUILPINCs: NORTH ELEVATION rauar.re op O O O O O OC' '. O o O ® OC' r . , t .... ..._......_...._........._ .. . ..........,_ •........„..........„, ._...._.............._...............„... ,............... ............ ..•..• O �®_ �ky -. .isiii• iiiiii°::ii:�ii :::. • _ i I ] . 1_.... ----t : >i :I _ --- —ra1 =,_ t I -a a _= - a- : 11 - ' I tii -V tf:.,I' . -- �I I . :I- (Wm-- ,..._, • - `■ � • ��• I = _ - " • wain : ' laE -I Pill I= 1 tv - Z .. _ -• -- i} .v' ---- ' NORTH!BUILDING:NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH!BUILDING: NORTH ELEVATION •• — CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION :.. CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION • CDp SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1OELEV a_ RENTON, WASHINGTON . . • •. ... . , • -- .'- ,-.•., .•• . . ';•.- .:•_.i-..',,I•:_. • • - . . . '. . . 0 . TT T ® ::.:8„:, _ 0 . T T T 7 T . 0. . • . • _. • :::::::::::::.::::::::::::....x.....„„::::::,::::::.:.:.::::,:,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::„::::::,:,:,::,:„,:,,:,„,:3,:,:„,,:,:,.3„:„,:,,:,,,:.:,:„„„„,„„,„3„,„,„„„,:„,,,„„„„,„„,,,,„„„„ ,..=:.:,.:.:":„.,:„,.:.:.:•:.:.:::::,::::,:„:„..:„,:,..:,:::.:::::::,:„,:::::::::,:::::„:„:„,,„„,,..,:,:,„:„,:,:,„,:,,,„,,,,,„,,:,:,:,„:,,,,:„,,„„„„,,,„,„„,,,,,,„„,,,:„„:, ,_ „, „:,,,::::::.,,,:,,,:„:,:„:,:,:,:,,:„:„.,„,,,..E...,...,,..„.„.:.:.:.„.:.:.,:,.:.,:.:.„ :„..„,„:„,:,,:::,:„,:,„:,:,:,:,:„,:„,,:,:,:,„,,,:,:,:„:„.,:,:•:„....„,,:,,,,,:.,:,:,:,,:,:„,;:„::::,:,„,:,:„:„:.,:,:,,,.,..,.,.,.,„„,„..„„8.„::,„ . ..._ , .......1:. enfa-- - -..1411.1.."...''''-- ----:..E.i.ii:i...i....raiiiiaCzt.4.aFtEgaz _t=rep_.-.,Itt.„.:, „..,.. _=17.11: ••;L.= _i,...-5. 1.-.7 ,..._. . 11!rii...„„,1 k "iiiimmirglim --'.; wer-lr. haligryli. ImM-ligillii 1141 ilirl 411hisisi 141, Ili iml.----,N4Buirrodoir49 as ENEI ___-- „..„-.. _ _,„- 11.-11_ _tai'll ----:- , ,,_ .mm____. -_, IMMIN-m: —--- ,-,... ';;i1-1 -itatiii11- - .3911"—ft Tlii111;11i,'iiI4V-it1100-11111111.,...im in.VliAlill L.11__ 14111117,:,Ili_Ili Iklilliv-IV- 1 i!M-AtgllIli!r.n --MPINICIL 1.- '41 ' "INNIMM ---- eassem .- qiuseemh_LI._,7=-:P-- -L . -,--1 - i, .-....„? ::.....r.liv Ili wc,713134 -wpfig ill.Joni ll t I. l' •E ' ' I 1-1111-ii•1 r rialliglia 9.111 m 511€ ill - .411111 M.11 liE21 -Eta_'-'1 ' 1 Friniiilalnas ' -Iiigirde' 'rairtill ,I MEET E--a. ' :' •ITAM.1- • I M.- ,---- '-'-', 1;.--.1%,- --- - --4.-- --'-----",31 ii ._..... . ___ imilim/-----113...4 .1!. .__.... to.,:. .. -___,= -- 'ill- - -=-- =---,-- - - -'•- --- sr- 7-1 ASININE!" ' .I MP--- ------ - ---;'-'2--- -1.-----1g-- mle--•=m7--INa iti _-.E-.-s-atirmiii;:riliti LiWnigi I 1110.4-4141169011,tilEM.PI W.„...--LIRPFAifl eilrie,;_IiIMPRI.., -t,2- . .1 ip II.JWIONWINCIPIL/04.11AMIIIIIIR-4'.! M.R"'7"1,------" - ' ',"9-- ---2114A 3,77. •"' ' ____ ____ _——— ———— ——— — —— ti J ---. • 0 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY) . ,• IICJIISSIN-V .... . . ., • , 0 0 0 ,), . T c, ® T . 0 . ...„.„... ' ..„,..., s„ _ .._..... _.....•....,.._............ ? ::,A Amonsikmmtwaatz,::::„,imum ::.dggi 1 .,t:gtm,„...41„„,,--...., ..-,,,,, .1. „.:„,wagm:3K:f8ii:Kaggth,„_-:,0,,,:,:wiza,.. .„.„, :f. ,, „,„.....,.... .c_ en"— - I ,1-'=-=;•:-ii•iltg:Pfligg2:1, ..T5T,55,‘, ..,. ....,,,...„,„'fffmff, ...--,====::-,.:•,,,- ' ,, ---" ff:7:5::S1,_......z1MRZE:t,. .,.,;_-,E.,mi•f',_`4'2-W-ismom.7.; 1.'1- rilIR1TTh= lii' "wririLl 77. '1;-'' -'f'„21.„111111j11 19 r) 1111911111IICP.,.- -111 GEIM0111.1.WITLIIIIIIIII4r11 T'l.,311111-131IMII" -1 . = - H' ll'-'1- 'iliur4 .,11.,. ..,,iiiii trig=IretiivT.111 FE7 -1311iiii,fiAlltztrill01111 1 . , 1 1 ilillnre! Pt 4 @I 115„.k,i1111 .-----ila -•--;..._ •Iniiiiir -=_21 ' 1 =lig ilfd9 ._,L.= 10141I1o1-' . ' egram— -•• -a=:=Imin, ..—§‘;.*: Ir.-1.1,-&--lm: .ziole-i-laimil Tii;.7'ii,4:7111":74 ' gir•Eillr Eli Framitiremilifwmtvt.lit 1 Li.,__ _ _El--,,,. .71..A.5.119 .._1 ._I _ enuaL— -1 .r. 14;-'' '--- 1,16Vilictilliiliklilliiiirkiiiiiii•Viiiififtrialiiii.7,4,77.,ammeW•di;irliii.7,..:iii*M-1_ guriviir,gmii.1.1.-rf.,ix_rin-mi .• MNN-yer ' . : • J ! EMMA.. ' • . • c WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY)- CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION .•• -,.., SULIE.L7~ .• - , SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1 OELEV ------:---7---7--r----_.. RENTON, WASHINGTON ...-- - .__ A I� O 15 T T 12 II 0O 8O Ob 5 4 3 2I1 '� --- _:;:-s-;i:`:_;;-_ __:_::::::: _:::_ems=:•:-__ ::_:.:.::.:> — �.5.— "`'= ---,,,, _:•• _• - -- ue. ::_ : _ : :: i5 :` W=.:. -- : pail_:it .il■1lif0 ellailMi1=■I♦t=a n11milisil,41n_i I'VEill .�i Hip• ell i1 ®lI�irilliA♦I■pe■BI 15110 w7—__ !Rai ilkll•= ISkmmo`O ?Ildunu all �e (Iii°till----RI MINI-I-,I-- Riff1Fid =_UV,I' CTII d� 10uiuutalla iimainiipl 1ialF�Too _-_ I t' liallE: _■ ■■1l lil■11i■l1 ■■llama ■� ■■Iscl 111 Ire iI I "�ii itim—T■ 1.I. 9.I1i'1 11■lil '1■i 1n p lol■: ar ii —�I.ro 6a_ /,! 0,-.„,,,. -,I�� ll�n�.uClB PB uEB.nJlll _ i PoCIEl6 da io oinnamC �/\190xW unull /\ Ifd'ue nciO4 I?31'�mrii _ y��I�LI—■1�Q Ia 1 ■e ■e E .,. �IQ I1r ! ,a'' ;nl� 1 e■'14:1 Q ��j-,- a'�l(a I- e■ ` . .Ili .ri - Ulu: `�' r �uai�aaF` fiUm�g,si .a��rt�7in :E tli_2 2$'a::!�.�.� INLitix al r� .c,...-•n o Wl mdi :w• 1 I�'1 `'� P 1B ti 14 "WWII 1 EI 1 I-IMIi II !Ala � �o ��i�11��.11�1®A�IIIp��_�I����m ��n � g' �� ��a� �:.��� a�_.-�h a� �.'�illa L� 1: PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUTH),, •- 1 • ' Il , " O © 0 T Q II O O81O T TT T T _=i :'i'�. .... ................ .....__...._..._. ...__..........::::::::-:::::_._� I� =�iis�::' —ia;:�;-:�:_:Y;:�;;�:3:i;:r�'_:::::;;>'- ;i=�:iri-S���a:>i:_iZr,'��:a::�:_--_pis: Ra ---- ::__-;-sxa;:;111-:-a::-n:- - 5ass._z::•_-:s::.-_ - , _ e„,„,,,,=7:7 - ---..„,,..„,_41:E.Igtff:-::;.:.:::.==::-:---1:4111W- _-_ mai0fil a noall I Palinie !d"1 i_ a L Iilat NM _iii1iJh(1161 ➢ - ailiim Elu', & NI EI 1Eu E --- I I 1i1=-=1_i !I fii1= N1E6� _ni-ii 1 iim (., I t . I .n �1,1 =ii= ■ _ ;alarm_ i■-6 ■ 1s1 iirm_ I +yui!991 Wmaamu9l I Pima url = Eliil CCU LI11(WII _I-A'E_I@91 YWIlil Al Iimi und�J_ ICCmurdu I<_iaTeni - I M 151=-=ii♦ ■i 1a�� 6I■Iii ■ iiI!I 1_n al n lal�= Ili- I °ii�11■-i 1I■��-i I1' i�l■: • ---_4 _1_dl sil in�pa o'�ii...°a �dr n 1 vo wi i -_ liA tidrl� - _ _ d.i®elill ` 1,�I_Em S!!NE --_ . I = 1-1-I01■i- l-1 ■ - 11, n - 111((�l m, �=— °1 — _ III I 11f1 I P -�„■ ri; 'a • EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS;AVE SOUTH)- CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION arxaane: CDA 0ELEV SHERMAN APARTMENTS Z«�- m RENTON, WASHINGTON I 1 0I I 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WILL AM5 A NUE OUTI I I I I I ,. I I ,,., I -c---1. I , .• O I I I I I I 34-02e-I 1Svi A ml I I I _ — 1 Imo' rani—mini ». -r y. •»� I. �--- Im I 1 , I tA I I jj /A.n",;/ ',', I I 1-- ° - as, / r ° 1 Ili W I IF 7.1•-. -• - I - . ',, / In --, - '' ,,p„ - ME iily;, /,,i , .. .L'-'1\th i --16 iliac I �li� c z ' i i i F 1-!! ° I I I :r:7 I I I ° I I ii I /r r,i j %�i: //��/T..�/%, , �.4W o% /T/T//- '�ice/.'iG•i/ir e%�% �,;/.�% % T/'/%G i i/, %�////.;////rr�TT%/i,�i,.ii7/�/l%%//%///� /�/T T�T I Q �'/ � % T% �l -- deo I I Ilt I I I I I 1 ,. . Hi +IO. 349.94' NO'28'257E • ALLEY COMMON SPACE CALCULATIONS/AREAS COO am arA' - 3ld2°•I'-0° ' Ii.MN.wr O.mew°MO N AIWf�••Wi&. {MYISO. MMM#Clel IMAM M LU1- OWN oral MAft. ire: TOM.OM WM I OO. : MOODS RaM@BO Of I!! • TOTAL MIS ' — mom.. CDA APARTMENTS SHERMAN SD- 1O OT - --_ RENTON, WASHINGTON •9 t i CITY OF RENTON c. ``: Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg.Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 17, 2002 Mr. Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 • Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: REQUEST FOR MINOR MODIFICATION TO SHERMAN APARTMENT SITE PLAN APPROVAL (FILE NO. LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Mr. Hale: I am in receipt of your letter dated April30, 2002 requesting consideration and approval of five modifications to the.approved site plan for Sherman Apartments located at 415 Williams Ave. South. According to your letter, these 'changes are the result of the need to reduce overall construction costs and elements affecting building materials (e.g. environmental: moss build-up, structural: weight,of deck panels, aesthetics and longevity of material). The modifications that you are requesting are summarized below: 1. The roof has been modified from a gable type to mansard style with an overall roof height reduction of 5 feet 6 inches. 2. The landscaping at the alley has been revised. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley as will the metal trellis. Modulation of the planter has been eliminated. 3. The solid panels on the decks are replaced by horizontal metal railings. 4. The exterior free standing building panels have been removed. No exterior elements have replaced these panels. 5. The exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard while maintaining the coursing dimensions. Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:I allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: . • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent.(10%) increase in area • or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or • , The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environmental and facilities than the approved plan; or •',' The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 MT E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVE :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer „ 7 Page 2 of 3 Sherman Apts.Request for Modifications Analysis of Five Proposed Modifications: 1. The revised roof appears to give a similar look from the street level and the reduced height further minimizes the height of the structure. Staff is in support of this modification. 2. The alley landscaping, trellis and planters appear to maintain the intent of the visual screening through both hardscape and the soft edge produced by a variety of plant materials. Staff supports this modification. 3. The elimination of the deck panels and standardized size lessens the modulation and articulation of the buildings and creates a repetitive visual appearance of the facades. Staff does not support this modification. 4. The removal of the building panels (freestanding "L” shaped elements) from the facades lessens the modulation, articulation, bulk and scale of the buildings as the original design provided. The Urbane Center Design guidelines are specific about the addition of architecturalr'elements-to wilding facades to reduce the apparent size of new buildings, ,break ,up lohg walls, add visual interest and enhance the character of the neigtaboihoodStaf 'does nofr°suppo'rrtthis modification. 5. The revision of therexterior"materials from cementitiot,1*bevel siding to hardipanels and vinyl sidings>with the`same coursing andRof High•"quality commercial grade appears to meet°the'in ent of$the%;origital''design>Staff supports this revision with the recommendation as a condition of approval that the applicant submit a color Y' �' � f'ry'� �t i�' ys �lY and materials board f:for review and--approval r' The site plan modifications requester n your April 30, 2002 letter:have been evaluated in relation to the approvedrsite.,;:plart:,Based on this aiialysis,,we,.have determined that three of the proposed revisions`(toreduge the roof heightlandscaping modification and the revised building finishes) ar witt in the.:parameters•defined`by Renton Municipal Code and are approved subject to tiie following cor diit ons The applicant shall submit awcolor,,and,,exterior finish materials board to the Development Services Division Project Manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. > The applicant shall submit plan reductions, (8 '/z x 11) PMT's, of all, revised drawings including but not limited to the site plan, building elevations, landscaping plan, subsequent to the approval of Condition 1 listed above. Please take note that the proposed modifications to the deck panels and building panels, Items 3 and 4 as outlined in the section on Analysis of Five Proposed Modifications, do not maintain the intent of the approved original design and therefore are not approved. This determination will be final unless a written appeal of •this administrative determination-accompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee — is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision. 1 • Page3of3 Sherman Apts.Request for Modifications Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. ' • Sincerely, jid oat6. Neil Watts Development Services Director cc: Jennifer Henning Rebecca Lind• . Parties of Record - ``ar Y 4t .•.,j"'ram._.. n3.C�1�..,\ ' •.9 d� •�'''Y•>.^ .i BSI ����MM4. { (+{ rfir„ :'.4 7 z ri"�a..I'v.r'm 1 s;' d •r: s6 'L' • •a3 � t 'w':iiL'xx,,�°4 wt�s{. .*"�'.Y• q= '4 1.1 74G:l:Su.A..x9 z, • CDA ARCH I T ECT S INCORPORATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING April 30, 2002 CITY OF RENTON MAY 01 2002 City of Renton,Planning, Building,Public Works RECEIVED Attn: Susan Fiala,Senior Planner Renton City Hall,Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 • PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes V CDA# 01041 • SUBJECT: Exterior Revisions to Sherman Apartment Homes LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF,SA-A, LLA Dear Susan; • At your request listed below are those items that CDA Architects and Sherman Homes have submitted for revision. Item#1 —Roof Revsion. Intent of revision is to reduce overall roof structure and associated costs while minimizing the visual divergence from the Site Plan Approval Elevation. The roof has been revised from two full gables to mansards at the building perimeter. Roof pitches while reduced in overall height remain virtually the same minus the gables at Williams and the Alley. These have been reduced to coincide with the adjacent sheds. Majority of roof structure becomes flat which is hidden by the mansard and gable elements at the building perimeter. Overall height of structure has been reduced by approximately 5'- • 6". This revision has a significant impact on the overall construction costs, reduces the overall height of the structure and maintains the visual appearance similar to that of the site plan approval documents. Item#2—Landscaping at Alley Landscaping at alley has been slightly revised from the previous site plan approval but the intent has been maintained. Landscaping and a trellis are included adjacent to the alley very similar to that which was submitted for site plan approval. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley and will contain 18° of soil. A continuous metal trellis is attached to the alley side of the landscaping planter. Vines per the landscaping plan will be allowed to mature reaching the top of the trellis providing significant greenery and visual screening to adjacent neighbors. Ilcda011companyIJOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WplRenton1042402fialalet.doc Carl F.Pirscher.AlA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 • Seattle,Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 Item#3—Deck Panels Solid deck panel faces have been removed and an open horizontal rail has been provided in its place. Entire deck and rail will be constructed of metal for a durable pleasing appearance. Item#4—Exterior Building Panels Free standing exterior building panels have been removed. The intended effect of these panels was to reduce repetition and the vertical elements associated with the building. These free standing elements when viewed in three dimensions would not have created this intended effect. It would be obvious that these elements were separate from the building and would in fact detract from the building itself. It is our opinion that the building articulation, roof and material variation provide sufficient and pleasing visual appearance without the addition of these free standing elements. Item#5—Exterior Finish Materials Exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard. Hardiboard is a durable sheet good material that imitates the appearance of stucco with various textures. Proposed finish is yet unselected however it will not be a heavy texture. In addition hardiboard provides reveal joints similar to those in stucco. Commercial vinyl siding will be applied to imitate the appearance of a cementitious bevel siding. Coursing dimensions will be maintained as detailed on the site plan approval documents. The vinyl siding texture will be smooth to eliminate any •buildup of airborne material. The extended life of vinyl siding and it's color will maintain a pleasing aesthetic finish. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher Ilcda011compayVOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WptRenton1042402frala.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA • principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 • • Seattle,Washington 98155 • Tel: (206)-368 9668 Far:(206)-368-9558 %4 © CITY OF RENTON ea ., .,•- %,.2 51)911J4- sI1o‘c2I• • • -. ' .. .—n NWwa emo mom Planning/Building/Public Works m 1055 South-GradyWay - Renton Washington 98055 2002 03.m-o—ssz'2 W1 ADDRESS-SERVICE REQUESTED 1/ . 12371I.G POSTymA—ilG3l-rE -.. ..-.::. .,.. . . , , •• - • DEVELOPM !Tv ENT PLAN - C-— OF PIENTON •.--, - ,... .., . - • .''•;`-'4> l'Io• • JUN 0 3 2. 002 • Mr. Gary Klatt 411 Williams Avenue South REcevEn .._ ' Renton WA 98055 . . •, ' KLAT4.1.1 48055007 IN 34 O5/23/02 - -- - -.7 -: 7--------7 ---:7. 1- ,, --.-- , ... 1-.00? RETURN TO SENDER ill• - J i-. t,4 ------;?;--- , 7 c ." if A .0 VW . . NO FORWARD ORDER ON FILE UNABLE TO FORWARD ,:v. c6 . . , ..... . -. . RETURN TO: S„ulE N D..E. .R I i -RESSEF . . )A kd l- _t. iiti , ,4. ti t.p,.l it•t ,,,ttl r,l„O i.h. •,iil.0 f•, i ,...._ . .. . . CITA 3F RENTON tk Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator September 28, 2004 Ms. Valerie Kendall Downtown Action to Save Housing 11018 NE 11th Street Bellevue, WA 98004 Subject: 415 Williams Avenue South (Dean Sherman/5th &Williams Apartment Project), Renton, WA. Assessor's Account#723150-2430 Dear Ms. Kendall: This letter is in response to your request for zoning information concerning property commonly known as the Dean Sherman/5th &Williams Apartments that are to be constructed at 415 Williams Avenue South in Renton. The project site is currently zoned Residential Multi-Family Urban (RM-U), which is a higher density multifamily zoning district. The proposed use of the project site as a multi family dwelling is a permitted use under the City's RM-U zoning classification and is consistent with our Comprehensive Plan designation (Center Downtown (CD)). The project's proponents applied for and obtained City land use permit approval under City Land Use File#LUA00-168. Also, since the original site plan approval, several administrative modifications were also requested and granted for this proposal. Recently, application was made for building permit approval under City building permit application #B040523. While the City's parking standards and our RM-U Zoning have changed since the original land use approval was granted for this project, the proposal complied with all codes in effect at the time it received its site plan approval. The property is vested to the previously existing RM-U standards and densities and is eligible to obtain building based upon this preexisting site plan approval (and associated administrative modifications) provided the plans comply with the land use permit approval and any conditions associated with the approval. Sincerely, Jennifer Henning Principal Planner cc: File#LUA00-168 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON C�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE P This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer May 3,2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 139 Public comment was invited. Dennis Noland, 14326 SE 100th Pl.,Renton, 98059, said his property is located near the proposed annexation area, and indicated that he supports landowners' rights to develop their property. He expressed concerns pertaining to surface water drainage;access to the property via SE 100th Pl. (which needs. • resurfacing); the substandard entrance to SE 100th Pl. off of Duvall Ave.NE; and the lack of parks. Bob Blayden, 9933 143rd Ave. SE,Renton, 98059, supported the proposed annexation. He stated that his property is located on the west side of the proposed annexation area, and noted that he voluntarily installed a retention - pond on his property due to runoff from SE 100th Pl. Mr.Blayden indicated that if his property is developed, every consideration will be taken to maintain surface water and the wildlife habitat. There being no further public comment,it was MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE 50%DIRECT PETITION TO ANNEX FOR THE MERRITT II ANNEXATION, AND AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATION TO SUBMIT A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX PACKAGE TO THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Derek Todd,Assistant to the CAO,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 2004 and beyond. Items noted included: * The Recreation Division received an Award of Merit from the Washington State Recreation and Parks Association for its Winter/Spring Recreation Brochure. * The Regional Transportation Investment District Executive Board adopted a draft transportation plan for King, Snohomish and Pierce counties on April 29th. This plan provides $2.7 billion for the I-405 Corridor project, which includes$820 million for that portion south of SR-169 including the I-405/SR-167 interchange improvements. With the I-405 "nickel package" ($136 million), this amounts to$956 million for the portion of the project south of SR-169. AUDIENCE COMMENT John See,438 Burnett Ave. S., Renton„98055, stated that the Dean Sherman Citizen Comment: See -Dean apartment project, located at S. 5th St. and Williams Ave. S., has changed from Sherman Apartments high-end rental units to affordable housing, and he fears that the project will (Williams Ave S) become a low-income apartment complex. Mr. See indicated that he lives p0 across the alley from the proposed project and is concerned that his house will 511 1 be damaged during the construction of the apartment building. He also expressed concern about the noise,pointing out that construction is estimated to take one year. Councilwoman Nelson suggested that City staff meet with the affected neighboring residents to discuss what they can expect during the construction process. Councilwoman Briere commented that when construction occurred near her home a few years ago,the City's inspectors made sure the builders were mindful of its impact on the surrounding neighborhood. May 3,2004 Renton City Council Minutes f Page 140 Mr.Pietsch reviewed the finance method being used by the developers Sherman Homes and DASH(Downtown Action to Save Housing)for this project. He pointed out that although;this property exceeds the density levels adopted through the South Renton'Neighborhood Plan, the height, bulk and scale of the building comply with the plan. Councilman Persson expressed concern that while construction is not allowed prior to 7:00 a.m., suppliers make deliveries prior to that time. He also noted that suppliers may block the nearby alley when unloading supplies. Based on the type and location of the project,Mr. Persson emphasized the need for the City to closely monitor the building process. Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman stated that a pre-construction meeting will be established and some conditions may be placed on the construction and building permits for this project. He reviewed the times when construction is allowed, and indicated that City staff will diligently monitor erosion control and clean up. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler said she was impressed with the DASH projects she toured recently, and stressed that the proposed apartment building's quality has not been downgraded. Sherman Homes is just using a different financing mechanism. Councilwoman Nelson requested that a copy of the staff report regarding the DASH development proposal be sent to concerned parties John See and Bob Moran. In response to Councilman Corman's inquiry,Mayor Keolker-Wheeler explained the process by which the City came to adopt the South Renton Neighborhood Plan, noting that there was extensive public input. Mr. Corman stated for the record that it is important that the City do with that neighborhood what the neighborhood overall would like. He said he is cognizant of the Comprehensive Plan, but noted it is a difficult neighborhood to define due to its proximity to downtown and its history. Mr. Pietsch reported that this project has received site plan approval, and the builders are expected to come in for building permits. He stated that discussion has Occurred regarding a possible unit increase,however it is internal to the building. Mr.Pietsch noted that the modification is an appealable action. Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington assured that any modification • request and its impact on the neighborhood will be thoroughly reviewed. In response to Councilwoman Nelson's comments,Mr.Pietsch stated that staff is working with the developer and the proposal to ensure that the same quality project is produced as was promised over the past couple of years. RECESS MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Time: 8:52 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:58 p.m.; roll was called; all Councilmembers present. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At the request of Council President Persson, item 8.b. was removed for separate consideration. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of April 26, 2004. Council concur. April 26, 2004 April 5,2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 100 Community Services: Pavilion Community Services Department recommended approval to use City Center Building Fund Transfer from Parking garage project fund savings to increase the Pavilion Building project City Center Parking Savings budget by$130,000 to cover design irregularities ($108,135.84) and to restore a small contingency($21,864.16). The architect will reimburse the City for the design irregularities. Council concur. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS i Council President Pro Tern Briere presented a Committee of the Whole report Committee of the Whole regarding the DASH(Downtown Action to Save Housing)Fifth and Williams Human Services: Fifth& Apartments development proposal. The Committee discussed this proposed 92- Williams Apartments,DASH unit affordable housing project at its March 15th and April 5th meetings. Development Proposal DASH, a non-profit affordable housing developer, and Sherman Homes asked the City to communicate support for this project to the Renton Housing VvU/r00—1 L3 Authority(RHA), so that RHA will issue the tax-exempt bonds necessary to finance the project. The Committee recommended authorizing the Administration to send a letter to RHA indicating support for the project. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. • Planning &Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Committee regarding the City Center area roof signs. The Committee reviewed potential Development Services: City revisions to the City Center sign code regulations established in Title IV of City Center Area Roof Signs Code. Currently, City Code limits the ability to modify prohibited signs throughout the City. However, in an effort to allow a roof sign on the Pavilion Building, staff has proposed to amend the sign modification process section of Title IV. The Committee recommended that Council schedule a public hearing to discuss the sign code amendments on April 19, 2004. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safety Committee Public Safety Committee Chair Law presented a clean-up report for the Public Safety: Public Safety following six items listed on the Committee's referral list and recommended Committee Agenda Item that the referrals be closed: Clean-up Report • Referral 869 -Animal Ordinance Issues. The Committee recommended that no changes be made to the current ordinance at this time. • Referral 1790-Alarm Registration. The Committee recommended that no changes be made to the current ordinance at this time. • Referral 1804-Renton Transit Center Safety. Additional staffing and coordination with King County Metro has been discussed. The Regional Transit Committee has been apprised of the situation in Renton. Given that the police sub-station at the transit center is nearing completion with plans of deploying proactive units on a consistent basis, the Committee recommended that this item be removed from the active referral list but that a status briefing be given to the Committee in June, 2004. • Referral 1847 -Musicians Hall Safety Concerns. The hall was recently sold to a church and no further weekend rental agreements are planned. Therefore, the Committee recommended that no further action be taken on this issue at this time April 5,2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 99 Ms. Quesenberry pointed out that the City's website displays photographs of the convicted sex offenders from the time they were originally arrested; however, the photographs on the sex offender notifications distributed throughout the community are of when they were released from incarceration. Noting that the appearance of juvenile offenders change as they mature, she recommended that the website display the photographs of when the offenders were released. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler stated the Administration would investigate the matter. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of March 22, 2004. Council concur. March 22,2004 Appointment: Planning Mayor Keolker-Wheeler appointed Nancy G. Osborn,4635 Morris Ave. S.,#F, Commission Renton, 98055,to the Planning Commission to fill the unexpired term of Eric Cameron, who has resigned (term to expire 6/30/2006). Refer to Community Services Committee. Court Case: North Coast Court Case filed by Nancy K. Cary of Hershner,Hunter,Andrews,Neill& Electric Company, CRT-04- Smith,LLP,PO Box 1475,Eugene, OR, 97440,on behalf of North Coast 002 Electric Company,regarding alleged payments owed the plaintiff for various projects,including the Renton Fire Station#12 construction project(CAG-02- 177). Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services. CAG: 04-027, SW 7th St City Clerk reported bid opening on 3/30/2004 for CAG-04-027, SW 7th Street Drainage Improvement Phase Drainage Improvement Project Phase II(Lind Ave. SW to Morris Ave. S.); II,Frank Coluccio Const Co eight bids; engineer's estimate$2,931,000; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder,Frank Coluccio Construction Company, Inc., in the amount of$3,045,312. Council concur. CAG: 03-126,Wetland City Clerk reported bid opening on 3/30/2004 for CAG-03-126,Wetland Mitigation Bank Site Fence, Mitigation Bank Site Fence Project;four bids; engineer's estimate$56,642.37; Construct Co and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, Construct Co.,LLC, in the amount of$60,906.24. Council concur. Development Services: Development Services Division recommended approval to permit wireless Wireless Communication communication facilities in residential zones within public rights-of-way to Facilities in Residential Zones improve cellular phone service. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. EDNSP: 2003 Countywide Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Planning Policies Amendment recommended adoption of a resolution ratifying a 2003 amendment to the Growth Management Planning Council's Countywide Planning Policies concerning the designation of downtown Auburn as an Urban Center. Council concur. (See page 101 for resolution.) Annexation: Johnson, 142nd Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Ave SE recommended a public hearing be set on 4/19/2004 to consider the 60%Direct Petition to Annex and proposed R-8 prezoning for the proposed Johnson Annexation; 18.24 acres located east of 142nd Ave. SE, south of SE 118th St., and west of 144th Ave. SE. Council concur. Airport: FAA Lease,Portion Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a lease with the of Control Tower Federal Aviation Administration for a portion of the Airport control tower, extending the term of the original lease for another ten years. Revenue generated is $25,755 annually. Refer to Transportation(Aviation)Committee. APPROVED BY 1 CITY COUNCIL 1. . i ' COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Date ' 5-aaaq i COMMITTEE REPORT . . April 5,2004 5tt, and Williams DASH.Development Proposal . '.(Referred March 22, 2004) The Committee of the .Whole discussed this proposed 92-unit affordable housing project, during an Emerging Issues portion of the March 15, 2004_meeting...The non.-profit affordable housing developer, D.A.S.H. (Downtown Action to Save Housing).and Sherman Homes, has • asked the City to .communicate. support for this project to the Renton Housing Authority, (RHA) so RHA.will issue the:tax-exempt bonds-necessary to finance the project. . . . , • • r:: .<k3Yc`4 'The.Committee of the Whole,recommends aflthorizing:the administration to send a,letter to : . the Renton Housing Aiithorit3`indieating:snPISOrt`for,:the,pro„jecf::g, . • y„T' .. may'N ' , ., '; :Sy . 9 • Terri Bri e, Council President.Pi'o-Tetzi:, > : '-' :" W L�t� ..'g ti: r ... .. � rt: . .. . cc: Alex Pietsch s•. . ;<<.. . . Ben Wolters • H:Trans/admin/Director f IesMetromitigation.doe CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: April 5,2004 TO: Don Persson, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator STAFF CONTACT: Ben Wolters,Economic Development Director SUBJECT: Fifth&Williams Affordable Housing Development Proposal At the Mayor's request, Jay Covington and Ben Wolters briefed the City Council's Committee of the Whole on March 15th about a request from the Renton Housing Authority (RHA) for a letter from the Mayor supporting the Fifth & Williams affordable housing development proposed by Downtown Action to Save Housing (DASH) and Sherman Homes. DASH and Sherman Homes have requested RHA issue tax-exempt bonds to help finance the proposed development. In response to the briefing, Councilmembers had several questions about the management _- of the proposed development and the resident population it would serve. Below are detailed responses to the questions raised by Councilmembers. The responses are based on information collected by EDNSP staff and provided by RHA and DASH. Currently, we are scheduled to brief the Council again on this proposal at the April 5th COW. We are planning to have RHA, DASH, and Sherman Homes representatives as part of that briefing and to answer any questions you might have. In the meantime,if you have additional questions,please feel free to contact Ben Wolters or myself. Answers to Questions from the City Council on the proposed Fifth and Williams affordable housing development: 1)What criteria will be used to screen renters? The primary criteria for screening renters will be their ability to pay rent,which is expected to range from $650 to $787 for studios, $695 and$841 for one-bedroom units and$835 to $1,008 for two-bedroom units. The overall screening criteria will be: • Credit worthiness, i.e. good credit C:\Documents and Settings\repmand\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Filesl5th Williams Council QA final.doc • Past rental history • No past felonies, etc • Household size is appropriate for the unit, i.e.no over crowding Also,the development will give first consideration for selection to families meeting the basic criteria above who currently reside in greater east King County, are on Renton Housing Authority's (RHA) active waiting list for rental housing, and who meet the income targeting of the proposed development. RHA expects that only a limited number of residents on their active waiting list for housing will apply for residency at the 5th and Williams project. 2)How far below 50% of median income will renters be allowed to qualify? The development will target its market to residents who can afford the rent. The development team must charge the rents cited above due to the hard debt incurred from the tax exempt bond financing and must meet strict underwriting criteria established by the bond purchasers and the tax credit investors. Failure to meet these underwriting criteria may result in the investor"taking over the project"and subsequently operating it in a manner that meets the underwriting criteria established by the cited rents. Not everyone will be exactly at the targeted 50% or 60%median income. For the units targeted for families at 50%median income,the actual income will range in the high 40%'s median income range to a max of 50%; same for the 60%median income units, which will range from 55%up to 60%. Additionally, if someone actually earns less,but they have outside sources of verifiable income such as child support,assistance from family,trusts, etc.,they would qualify. As background,the annual income of an individual at 50%median income in King County is about$27,250 and for a family of four is about$ 38,950 according to the Washington State Housing Finance Commission. At 60%median income,the annual income for an individual is about$32,700 and for a family of four is about$46,740. The overall median income in King County in 2004 is $71,900. As noted earlier,the rents in this development that are targeted to these incomes are $695 and$841 for one-bedroom units and$835 to $1,008 for two-bedroom units. In comparison at nearby Metropolitan Place apartments,rent is$870 to $1,095 for one- bedroom units and$1,195 to $1,500 for two-bedroom units. 3) Can Section 8 qualified renters use these apartments? Fair housing law prohibits the development from discriminating against recipients of Section 8 housing vouchers. However,the reality is that historically, only a very small percentage of DASH's renters have rental assistance(about 5 percent). One reason is that most of the Section 8 housing voucher recipients are families that need two or more bedrooms while most of DASH's projects,including Fifth and Williams have more one- bedroom units than two-bedrooms. Also, affordable housing developments typically do C:\Documents and Settings\repmand\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\5th Williams Council QA final.doc not find themselves serving residents that combine Section 8 housing assistance with subsidized housing development. This is because Section 8 voucher recipients are often already finding housing in the existing housing market. Should Section 8 rental assistance recipients seek residency at the Fifth and Williams Apartments,past rental history and credit worthiness are the prime screening criteria, so most prospective tenants with Section 8 rental assistance already have stable jobs or are living on a fixed income due to disabilities, etc. Despite the low frequency of Section 8 rental,DASH reports that in its experience Section 8 renters are their most stable tenants. 4)What conditions,if any, are required for property managers? (tenure,etc.) How do we ensure the development will be well managed? DASH will select either Quantum Management Services or Allied Property Management to manage the Fifth and Williams Apartments. Both companies have extensive experience managing public and private financed housing with each having over 6,000 units under management. Both are well regarded by the Renton Police Department as effective and responsive building management companies. The selected management company will contract, schedule,and supervise all maintenance activities and ensure compliance with the development's regulatory agreements. An on-site resident manager and assistant manager for the development will be hired and supervised by the property management company. As the managing partner in this development,DASH, has a successful 10-year record developing, owning, and operating over 777 units of affordable and low-income housing. All of DASH's properties are within full regulatory compliance, are financially sound, and have an average occupancy level of 98 percent. Additionally,DASH has just completed the purchase of a 190-unit apartment complex in Redmond. This was the largest non-public housing authority real-estate transaction within King County in the past 20 years. DASH's acquisition of this property is welcomed by the City of Redmond due to its superior property management policies. DASH has a long-term interest in a well-managed and maintained development(they will own and operate the property for over 50 years). The low income tax credit equity investor who is a co-owner of the property(DASH is applying for Washington State Housing Finance Commission tax credits that it can sell to attract private equity investment in the development)will also strictly monitor property operations, as they must adhere to very strict Internal Revenue Service regulations on tax credits. The tax credit equity investor will have oversight as to the choice of the management entity and the annual operations. This is enforced though mandatory annual reports, inspections, etc. The development will face a tremendous amount of scrutiny from all private party entities involved with the development and they will have legal authority to "take over" the development if DASH is allowing the development to be mismanaged through its choice of management. This development will face far more "management" oversight by its financial partners than other typical "market rate" rental property. 5)What are the parking requirements for this project? C:\Documents and Settings\repmand\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\5th Williams Council QA final.doc Currently there are 121 parking stalls as per code for the 99-unit scenario. With the development slated to be reduced to 92 units,the parking count will be adjusted to approximately 113 stalls. The end result will provide parking as per code for the project's unit count and unit bedroom count. It should also be noted that: • It is in the best interest of the development from a marketing perspective that adequate parking is provided for the residents and their visitors. • The development's residents do not have excessive incomes and most will have one car per household. This has been borne out at other DASH properties. 6)Will all of the 92 units be required to be moderate income eligible for the project to qualify? Yes,the development's financing is based on Washington State Housing Finance Commission tax credits,Renton Housing Authority tax-exempt bond financing,below market King County financing, and the developer's own equity. This mix of financing requires that the units in the development be available to moderate incomes for the life of the financing(50 years). With this mix of both private and below market public financing for affordable housing,this will be the only project in the area that will offer general family type apartments where the rents will be stable at affordable levels over the long run term of 50 years or more. This is the strength of this proposal. Currently,the rents will be nearly at market for the 50%median income units and at market for the 60% median income units. These rates will remain stable while other market rate units in the area will likely increase over time. Additionally, one needs to look at the economy of scale with regards to the cost of the financial transaction. This project will be a modest bond-financed deal appropriately sized for the immediate neighborhood. Bond-financed deals with tax credits are typically in the 100-to 400-unit range- such as King County Housing Authority's Overlake Station at 400 units or DASH's new Summerwood in Redmond at 190 units. In many areas of the U.S.where land costs are not as high as they are here,bond projects with 4%credits are the major source of rental "market rate" housing. 7) Is there a time in the future when the development could be market rate? The long-term plan is to maintain this development,as affordable housing for moderate- income residents for the effective life of the property. That is the purpose of DASH's mission, development strategy, ownership intent, and long-term management policies for the development. cc: Jay Covington C:\Documents and Settings\repmand Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\5th Williams Council QA final.doc PROJECT SUMMARY FIFTH AND WILLIAMS APARTMENTS Organization Name: Downtown Action to Save Housing(DASH) Address: 11018 NE 11th Street,Bellevue,WA 98004 Unified Business Identifier: 605 355 675 Federal Tax I.D.Number: 94-3155152 Organization Type(check one): Local government Housing Authority Nonprofit Community Based Organization Indian Tribe X Regional Nonprofit Housing Assistance Organization Statewide Nonprofit Housing Assistance Organization Regional Support Network Qualified Tenant Organization Public Development Authority Community Housing Development Organization(CHDO) Community Based Development Organization(CBDO) Executive Director Name:Mark E.Thometz Phone:(425)646-9053 Fax Number(425)646-5981 E-mail:markt dashhousing.com Project Contact Name: Mark E.Thometz Organization: Downtown Action to Save Housing(DASH) Address: 11018 NE 11th Street, Bellevue,WA 98004 Phone: (425)646-9053 Fax Number(425)646-5981 E-mail:markt@dashhousing.com Application Contact Name(if different than Project Contact above): same Organization: Address: Phone: Fax Number: E-mail: Fifth and Williams Apartments -1- Project Description rev.1 Project Name: rIfth and Williams Apartments Project Address or Location: 5th and Williams,Renton,WA Project Tax Parcel Number: County: King State Legislative District: 11 th Federal Congressional District: 9th Housing Stock Status(check one) X Existing Privately Owned • Existing Publicly Owned Other(please specify) Project Activities(check all that apply) X Acquisition X Multi-family Rehabilitation Single Family X New Construction Emergency Shelter HUD/USDA Preservation Transitional Shelter Target Populations Populations(check all that apply) X Families X Individuals X Special Needs Number of Units/Beds ter S t ecial Needs Pot ulations: � � Mentall Ill Developmentall Disabled Domestic Violence Elderly Homeless HIV/AIDS Alcohol/Substance Abuse Farmworker Youth Under A.e 21 18 40.5 Other—Disabled as •er the Housing Finance Commission Fifth and Williams Apartments -1 - Project Description rev.1 Proposed Number of Units Per Size and Income Level �lmak $, '¢s 4 s ki " 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 4 40 24 136 68 60 2 14 8 47 24 Market TOTALS 6 54 32 183 92 Permanent Capital Funding Sources.and Total Development Cost Residential Housing Trust Fund HTF $1,175,000 $1,175,000 HTF Set-Aside s.eci LIHTC $3,512,604 $3,512,604 Cit of Renton ' $291,115 $291,115 Kin• Coun $1,475,000 $1,475,000 FHA D-4 $7,766,485 $7,766,485 Cash Flow Construction $179,245 $179,245 PSE/KCHA Eners Funds $ $ Deferred Develosment Fee $916,826 $916,826 Residential Develo'ment Cost $15,316,275 $15,316,275 Non-Residential hh _ €,, 4..t i....,.P a...,vitirat . °fit ° Y Non Residential 0 Develo i ment Cost Total Develo'ment Cost �e � � rs •s r =� _ — -•.-..,._ .71 etri- e a o ff ; sa 77 r. `.- c Yv TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST $15,316,275 15,316,275 Signature of Authorized Official Signature: Title: DASH Executive Director Name: Mark E.Thometz Date: Wednesday, February 04,2004 Fifth and Williams Apartments -1 - Project Description rev.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Describe the property to constructed. Include a physical description of the planned project that includes the size, number of stories, type of construction, layout of the buildings, and any other unique features of this particular project and target population. The project, 5th and Williams Apartments will be a new construction 92 unit apartment complex built near the center of Renton's newly revitalized city center. The complex will consist of two four(4)story residential structures built on top of an attractive landscaped shared below grade structured parking structure. The project's exterior building massing and façade modulation and use of materials will complement or exceed that of recently completed residential projects within the City's downtown core. Interior configurations and finishes will meet or exceed market standards for quality residential rental construction. All the units are well designed for family living and have self-contained laundry rooms, wood burning fireplaces and out door decks or patios with attractive views of the grounds. Amenities include a community center with several community-oriented rooms including a fitness center, computer center, generous open spaces and a large playground. The Fifth and Williams Apartments are conveniently located at the edge downtown Renton right on major bus lines. The project's landscaped podium is fenced off from arterial traffic with esthetic landscaping features giving the project a sense of safety for active children and young adult activities. The unit mix and approximate square footage of the units are: • Studios: 500 sf 6 units 3,000 sf • 1 bedroom: 750 sf 54 units 40,500 sf • 2 bedroom two bath 1,050 sf 32 units 33,600 sf • Community areas: 2,500 sf 2,500 sf Total 92 units 79,600 sf The current zoning for the property allows for multi-family. The project has received all of the required land use and; design approvals from the city and will be submitting its final Building Permit Application in June 2004. Construction for the project will commence January 2005. All typical public utilities are available to the site and in service. These include water,sanitary and storm sewer,garbage collection,electrical power,gas,telephone,and cable television. Fifth and Williams Housing Associates LLC of which DASH will be the managing member will develop the project jointly with Sherman Development. Total development cost will be $15,316,275. This project will be developed utilizing tax-exempt bonds issued through the Renton Housing Authority. The Renton Hosing Authority will work in full partnership with the development team to ensure that the project is integrated into the City's priorities for affordable housing goals and meets operational standards that will be beneficial to city of Renton residents. Provide a description of the type of household to be served, including information such as the number of tenants,the size and description of the households, and known special characteristics of tenants. The Fifth and Williams Apartments are in close proximity to the high paying manufacturing, computer and software industries. To support these industries,the demand for blue collar,service sector and beginning management jobs in East King County is rapidly increasing according to the King County Consolidated plan. The resident's incomes typically will come from blue collar, service sector and entry-level jobs for recent graduates. Approximately 29% of the jobs are from the retail trade and service industries. It is anticipated that the project will be home to 92 working family households with incomes at or below 50%and 60%of the King County area median incomes. Twenty of the units will be targeted to families and or persons with disabilities. All units will be individual dwelling units with one household per unit. Family sizes will range between 1 to 2 persons for a one-bedroom unit and 3 persons for a two-bedroom unit (WSHFC underwriting criteria allows 1.5 persons per bedroom). The unit rents will be set according to 2004 HUD income and household sizes. Utility allowances will be deducted from the 30% housing expense calculation in establishing the rent levels. Fifth and Williams Apartments -2- Project Description rev.1 Describe any design features or material specifications that accomplish the following: • Promote the health and safety or the residents. New construction will emphasize interior ventilation for mold control. Exterior grounds will be designed to eliminate falling and tripping hazards. • Make the project more durable/sustainable over its lifetime. New construction will emphasize'materials and assembly that will promote durability for active households. Additionally, replacement reserves will ensure that long-term capital maintenance projects are properly capitalized through cash flow to ensure long-term durability. • Minimize the use of resources in either construction or operation of the building. New construction will emphasize"build smart"practices and promote use of recycled construction materials. • Increase affordability for residents who will pay at least a portion of their utility bill: New construction will emphasize energy efficient ventilation, heating, lighting and appliances. This will assist the residents in maintaining their electricity consumption at affordable levels. How are the chosen design features are responsive to the housing needs of the target population. The project is unusual in that the project has common area amenities such as protected but expansive courtyard areas that are suitable for supervised outdoors play activities for the children of the complex. Additionally, all units have exterior decks or patios that are more suitable for active families with children. The landscaped podium,where children may play is safe area away from vehicle traffic. Al units have in unit washer and dryers along with fireplaces to promote a"sense of home". The project also has a safe and secure common area and manager's office. These common area amenities will be accessible for disabled residents. The new computer facility in the cabana will also be available to the residents. Describe the location of the project and its surrounding neighborhood. The immediate surrounding land uses are multifamily,single family and public facilities such as parks. Located at the edge downtown Renton, it provides easy access to grocery stores, shops, theaters, activities and restaurants, and public transportation. Nearby services include: • Library.Schools,police,fire station and social services • Grocery stores:Safeway,Thriftway, Fred Meyer. • Downtown retail stores:Wal-Mart, Fred Meyer. • Banks:Bank of America,Washington Mutual,KeyBank • Park and Ride and transportation hubs • Public Parks:Cedar River Park, Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park,and Liberty Park. • Recreation: Carco Theatre, Liberty Park Skatepark, Baseball Fields, Basketball Courts, a newly constructed Water Park,a Movie Theatre,and Video Rentals Stores. • The area offers fantastic employment opportunities in the manufacturing, hi-tech industries, computer software, and biotech. The project's location will offer a good variety of affordable and convenient transportation options to the residents the Fifth and Williams Apartments. These include close proximity to major convenient bus routes, vanpool, and biking distance to ample employment opportunities. Fifth and Williams Apartments -3- Project Description rev.1 MANAGEMENT TEAM AND MANAGEMENT PLAN Provide an outline showing basic elements of the existing or future management plan. Either Quantum Management Services or Allied Property Management will manage the Fifth and Williams Apartments. They will contract, schedule and supervise all maintenance activities and ensure compliance with the project's regulatory agreements. They are intimately familiar with the regulatory requirements of this proposed project. The following is the Management Plan Outline:_ • Role and responsibility of the owner and the relationship and delegations of authority of the management agent. • Personnel policy and staffing requirements/arrangements. • Plan and procedures for marketing units, achieving and maintaining full occupancy, and meeting AFM Plan requirements. • Procedures for determining tenant eligibility and for certifying and re-certifying incomes. • Leasing and occupancy requirements,rent collection policies and procedures,termination of leases and evictions. • Plans for carrying out an effective maintenance,repair and replacement program. • Plans for meeting LIHTC equity investor, WCRA permanent loan, WSHFC, WS OCD, King County, ARCH accounting,record keeping and reporting requirements. • Energy conversation measures and practices,security servicing. • Plan for management training programs,management agreement and compensation,on site management. Briefly describe your process for tenant selection including market strategy,management(both on- and off-site)and facility maintenance. For the general population: Due to the site's proximity to major employment, transportation corridors and public transportation,it is anticipated that the project will be home to 92 working families with incomes at or below 50%and 60%of the area median incomes and whose livelihoods are dependent upon the greater King County economy. In addition,20 of the units will target disabled households. • Primary emphasis for resident selection will be given to families who currently reside in greater east King County and are on Renton Housing Authority's (RHA) active waiting list for rental housing and who meet the income targeting of the proposed project. • In addition, DASH proposes to utilize RHA's waiting list and base the priority of initial occupancy for the project upon the date that the applicant has been on the RHA waiting list, i.e.: an applicant that has been on the RHA waiting list for 12 months would receive priority over an applicant that has been on the waiting list for 11 months, or any other applicant who is applying for residency (with the exception of the disabled set aside units). The RHA waiting list will be given priority for re-renting subsequent vacant units. Specifically describe how you will assure initial income eligibility of the residents of the proposed project. All residents for the 92 affordable units will be income qualified as per WA ST HFC LIHTC 2004 program guidelines. List key property management staff and their experience,including their experience managing this type of project. Quantum Management Services or Allied Property Management will be the property manager for the project and either currently manages over 6,000 affordable housing units. Properties currently under management by Quantum Management Services or Allied Property Management include Section 8, LIHTC, and other governmental financing. An on site resident manager and assistant manager for the project will be hired and supervised by the property management company. The property management company will contract, schedule and supervise all maintenance activities and ensure compliance with the project's regulatory agreements. • Fifth and Williams Apartments -4- Project Description rev.1 EXPERIENCE OF APPLICANT/DEVELOPMENT TEAM Describe your organization's experience and capacities to develop the type of housing you are proposing. A Limited Liability Company, Fifth and Williams Housing Associates LLC,will own the project. This LLC will have one managing member, Downtown Action to Save Housing (DASH). All existing DASH properties were acquired within the past ten (10) years, and to this date, house households at varied income levels all below 60%MI (with a few market rate units at Glendale and Plum Court Apartments). Each property's rental income has adequate cash flow to cover operating expenses,debt service and to pay DASH a modest asset management fee. All have been financed with a combination of LIHTC, tax-exempt bond, commercial bank, King County, ARCH, and local city and WA ST DCTED financing List key development team staff and their qualifications. Developer: DASH: DASH currently has developed, owns and operates over 605 units of affordable low-income rental housing that were completed on schedule and within budget. All of DASH's.properties are within full regulatory compliance,are financially sound and have an average occupancy level of 98%. DASH in the past,has worked with other private sector developers to develop several of its properties, with DASH taking the lead of developer and private developers such as Sherman Development acting as a financial guarantor and co-developer. Currently DASH subcontracts out all of its property management functions to outside sources. Developer; Sherman Development: Sherman Development and Sherman Homes has been a leader in the development of single-family neighborhoods, multi family residential complexes and site development and permitting throughout King County for the past 20 years. Jointly,both entities have developed over 3,000 units of housing,both for sale and rental. Bill Sherman is a past president of the King—Snohomish Counties Master Builders Association and is a recognized leader in Pacific Northwest residential real estate development. In addition, DASH has engaged the following consultants and professionals in the development of the Fifth and Williams Apartments: • Attorney: Kantor, Taylor, McCarthy and Britzmann. Mark Kantor is a regional leader in providing legal counsel for LIHTC projects. Mark Kantor has provided legal counsel to various completed LIHTC projects that were developed by DASH. • Haertl Development Co.: Roland Haertl has over 35 years of construction management expertise in providing construction management; defining rehab scopes of work and reviewing construction draws for accuracy and added quality assurance. Roland Haert has provided such expertise for five of DASH's developments. • Architect of Record: CDA Architects. CDA has designed or served as a design consultant on numerous affordable housing projects. CDA has provided architectural services to Sherman Development on several other multi family developments to date, two of them projects that are similar in nature and scope to the Fifth and Williams Apartments. • Contractor: Synergy Construction. This firm has successfully been the contractor on four major rehab and four major new construction projects for DASH developments. Synergy Construction has a long-term proven track record with DASH and previously with Mark. • Property Management Agent: Quantum. Quantum will be the property manager for the project during lease up and after. Quantum currently manages approximately 6,000 units of affordable housing with a financing structure similar to that proposed for the Fifth and Williams Apartments. This team has a proven track record in the development of over ten projects and nearly 800 units of housing in the past four years in which DASH was the lead developer. The development of this project has been incorporated into the all of the above's 2004-2006 workloads. This project is one of the next active projects on which DASH will concentrate its efforts for the 2004-2006 period. DASH, with its expanded active board, Housing Developer, Valerie Kendall and Executive Director, Mark E. Thometz, is capable of handling several projects. In addition, DASH employs a full time Accountant and Business Fifth and Williams Apartments -5- Project Description rev.1 Manager/Asset Manager and a full time Office Administrator, as well as a fund raising consultant and construction management consultant. This has allowed DASH's Housing Developer, Valerie Kendall to further assist Mark E. Thometz with the development of new projects. DASH has enlisted the services of an experienced team to assist DASH's staff with development specific tasks for the development of this proposed project. Currently, DASH is developing an additional 190 units of housing on the greater Eastside. DASH's executive director, Mark Thometz has developed close to $180,000,000 of real estate; both multi family rental and home ownership projects currently at DASH, previously while at Common Ground, and before, in the for profit private market rate sector. Mark Thometz, DASH Executive Director, will be the lead developer on behalf of DASH for this project and the primary contact during the development stages. Mark has over 18 years experience in multi-family and single family housing development. Mark has been Executive Director at DASH over four and a half years. Mark has developed close to $180,000,000 of real estate; both multi family rental and home ownership projects currently at DASH, previously while at Common Ground, and before, in the for profit private market rate sector. Mark brings to DASH the ability to leverage private and public sector funds in a manner that maximizes the efficiency of public sector financing. Eric Wagner, Senior Construction Manager, Sherman Development will be the lead developer on behalf of Sherman Development. Eric and Mark will work side by side during the permitting, construction and lease up phases of the project. Eric brings 20 years of commercial and heavy residential construction management along with consultant management expertise to the development team. Valerie Kendall, DASH Housing Developer will play a key role in assisting Mark with the day-to-day development activities, along with assisting in negotiating the various financing contracts. Valerie has successfully completed two major renovation projects along with two major new construction projects as lead housing developer. Valerie continues to refine her development expertise through continuing education programs such as NDC's Real Estate Development Certificate course and other development courses offered by LISC and the Master Builder's Association. Roland Haertl, DASH Construction Manager works closely with the DASH staff in determining the exact scope of work to be performed by Synergy, coordinating permitting and acting as the owner's rep during the renovation/construction process. Beth Schrader, DASH Office Administrator and development assistant will work with Quantum in all phases of both lease up and stabilization for the project. Beth will also provide day-to-day development administrative support. Millie Poulsen, DASH CPA and our construction draw consultant Marylyn Belter will handle all construction draw accounting. Millie also oversees the coordination of the various LIHTC placed in service requirements for each development and coordinates ongoing property accounting activities. The entire team has a proven track record with other recent projects that are similar in scope and nature. Fifth and Williams Apartments -6- Project Description rev.1 PROJECTS COMPLETED AND UNDER DEVELOPMENT Name of Organization: Downtown Action To Save Housing COMPLETED PROJECTS Name Location E #of Year Total Sources of I Units Completed Project Cost Financing Garden Grove Bellevue i 18 1993 $1,200,000 Tax Exempt Bonds, ARCH, King Co Wildwood Court Bellevue 136 1996 $2,900,000 Tax Exempt Bonds, ARCH,WS OCD Glendale I Bellevue 182 1995 $7,400,000 Tax Exempt Bonds, ARCH,WS OCD,KC Ashwood Court Bellevue ' 51 1999 $6,100,000 LIHTC,WCRA,WS OCD,ARCH Kenmore Senior Kenmore 51 2000 $5,300,000 LIHTC,WCRA,WS OCD,ARCH, KC Kenmore Family Kenmore 46 2002 $5,400,000 LIHTC,WCRA,WS OCD, KC Mountain View ( Tukwila 151 2002 $5,400,000 LIHTC,WCRA,WS OCD, KC Evergreen Court Bellevue 1 84 2003 $12,900,000 Tax Exempt Bonds, LIHTC,WCRA,WS OCD, KC,ARCH Greenbrier Senior Woodinville 50 2003 $5,311,000 LIHTC,WCRA,WS (Woodinview Senior) OCD, KC Greenbrier Homes* Woodinville 70 2003 $19,200,000 Conventional Bank TOTAL* 469 $51,911,000 *Totals do not include Greenbrier Homes,which were co developed with CamWest. DASH's primary role was in coordinating subdivision approval. PROJECTS UNDER DEVELOPMENT (Include all projects currently under construction or projects for which you plan to seek funding in the next 6 months or have received at least one funding commitment) Name Location #of Funding Begin Complete Key Staff Units Status Construction Construction Woodinview Family Woodinville 50 Fully 2002 02/27/04 DASH Plum Court Apartments Kirkland 66 Fully 2003 2004 DASH Summerwood Redmond 160 Pending 2003 2004 DASH 4 , TOTALS 276 Recommended categories for"Funding Status": partially funded;fully funded • Fifth and Williams Apartments -7- Project Description rev.1 FINANCIAL CAPACITY OF APPLICANT Describe the financial stability of the agency,including any recent audit findings and how your agency is resolving them. DASH is a financially stable organization. During the past five years, DASH has had no"findings"in any of its annual corporate and consolidated audits. In addition: • The project will be developed by DASH and financially guaranteed by DASH. • The proposed project will not affect DASH's financial or organizational capacity to successfully continue to operate other existing or ongoing development projects. • Please refer to DASH's recently completed Strategic Plan that was completed with the assistance from Impact Capital for DASH's long-term financial projections. • DASH, through Home Street Bank has secured a $200,000 operating line of credit secured by future development fees. What is the financial health of the applicant's other existing properties? All existing DASH properties have adequate cash flow from rental income to cover operating expenses, debt service and to pay DASH an asset management fee as targeted in the project's original Proforma. Recently, the Glendale Apartments has experienced modest negative cash flow due to an initial under capitalized rehab budget. With additional financing now in place from WA ST OCD, King Country and ARCH, the property has completed a $1,100,000 rehab and the project is now 100%occupied and beginning to build reserves through surplus cash flow. What effect will the project have on DASH's ability to successfully continue to operate their existing properties? The development of the Fifth and Williams Apartments is an integral element of DASH's Five Year Business Plan, which establishes an action plan that should lead DASH to complete corporate financial self-sufficiency through cash flow from its properties by 2006. Fifth and Williams Apartments -8- Project Description rev.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE ACTIVITY COMPLETED NAME/COMPANY DATE • Site Control (control of the site) - DASH/SD LLC done • Site Analysis Completed LLC done • Land Use and/or Zoning Approval LLC in place • Review Project with RHA/Board Approval DASH/RHA 02/04 • Review Project with Renton City Staff DASH/Renton 02/04 • Review Project with Renton City Council DASHIRenton 03/03 • Finalize Construction Scope of Work DASH/Synergy 04/04 • Begin ESA Review DASH 04104 • Obtain Bridge Financing Banner Application Submitted DASH 04/04 Commitment Obtained DASH 06/04 • Submit Final Application for Building Permit DASH,Synergy 06/04 • Renton Housing Authority Bond Application Submitted DASH/RHA 03/04 Bond Cap Allocation RHA 06/04 • WSHFC LIHTC Application Submitted DASH 04/04 Reservation of LIHTC WA ST HFC 06/04 10%LIHTC Carry Over Requirement DASH 12/04 • ESA No Effects Determination DASH 06/04 • Finalize Construction Contract/Pricing DASH/Synergy 08/04 • King County Loan Application Submitted DASH 10/04 Loan Commitment Obtained DASH 12/04 • WA ST OCD HFU Loan Application Submitted DASH 10/04 Commitment Obtained DASH 12/04 • Begin Signing Construction Sub-Contracts Synergy 10104 • Obtain Building Permit DASH/Synergy 11/04 • Close on LIHTC LP Equity Investor Partnership DASH 12104 • Closing of All Financing, (minus bank perm financing) DASH 12104 • Close on Property DASH 12/04 • Construction Begins Synergy 01/05 • Begin Marketing for Income Restricted Residents Quantum, DASH 10/05 • Construction Completed Synergy 12/05 • Occupancy Permit Secured For Last Unit Synergy 12105 • Project Placed-In-Service Date DASH 04/06 • Project Lease Up Completed Quantum, DASH 07/06 • Completion of LIHTC Form 8609 Accountant 09/06 • Funding of Permanent Loan DASH 10/06 • 2005 Tax Return,Final Equity Payment DASH 04/07 Fifth and Williams Apartments -9- Project Description rev.1 FINANACINIG PARTICIPATION REQUEST TO THE CITY OF RENTON DASH and Sherman Development will request that the City of Renton support the project through a local financial participation in the development of the Fifth and Williams Apartments. Local financing participation is important to the project because DASH will be leveraging regional, state and federal resources to develop the property, which will bring economic benefit to the local Renton community. Competition for such outside resources is intense from other local municipalities such as Seattle and the ARCH consortium of cities such as Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah, etc that currently have in place vehicles to assist in the financing of affordable housing projects. The development team, recognizing that general revenue funds are limited,and that the City's CDBG funds may be already dedicated to other non-housing public benefit projects is proposing that the City: • Waive all Building Permit Application Fees. • Waive all Building Permit processing fees that are performed in house by city personnel. • Waive all water and sewer connection fees. - • Waive any and all traffic and or road impact or improvement fees. • Waive any other impact fees that the project may be subject to and or assist in obtaining waivers from agencies outside of the City's jurisdiction that may make assessment on the project. The development team estimates that the value brought to the project through permitting and impact fee waives are approximately $291,115. These are not funds directly expended by the city, but rather revenue that the city would not receive if the project were a regular profit oriented market rate project. The following is the resources that will be leveraged by local financial participation in the project: Housing Trust Fund(HTF) $1,175,000 8% 4 to 1 HTF Set-Aside(specify) $ LIHTC $3,512,604 23% 12 to 1 City of Renton $291,115 2% King County $1,475,000 10% 5 to 1 FHA D-4 $7,766,485 50% 26.7 to 1 Cash Flow Construction $179,245 1% .62 to 1 PSE/KCHA Energy Funds $ Deferred Development Fee $916,826 6% 3.2 to 1 Residential Development Cost $15,316,275 100% The City's financial participation either through direct financing or indirectly, through permitting and impact fee waivers will be a prerequisite for the project to attract the above financing due to the extreme competition for these limited state wide resources by projects located in jurisdictions with a local financing match. It should be noted that the development team,will be re-investing nearly$1,000,000 of its own earned resources into the project at a 3.35 ratio to that what is requested from the City. Fifth and Williams Apartments -10- Project Description rev.1 I "' CITY OF RENTON d1 n:v't Plannin..tL g/Building/PublicWorks Department J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator November 21, 2002 11/aa( 0 a NA_ 6 Mr. Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: Request for Extension to Land Use Approval Sherman Apartments (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Mr. Hale: This letter is written in response to your request for an extension of the Administrative Site Plan Approval for the above referenced project. The Site Plan Approval issued for the project on January 29, 2001 is subject to an expiration period of two years from the date of approval, which would be January 29, 2003. Upon request, a one-time only extension of the permit may be granted for a maximum of two additional years pursuant to RMC 4-9-200.J. The requested extensions have been granted. Therefore, an expiration date of January 29, 2005 has been retroactively applied to the Administrative Site Plan Approval issued for the '‘ project. This will be the only extension granted for the project proposal and construction activities must commence within the specified timeframe (i.e., construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the two year period). If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. Sincerely, • \., ,- Nei Watts qDirector, Development Services cc: Frannd-Dse file Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner Susan Fiala, Senior Planner riEric Wagner • Bill Sherman, Jr. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N ®This paper contains50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE CDA ARCHITECTS IN C O R P , O RATED FAX • • TRANS M I T T A L''• DATE November 12, 2002 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY TO Neil R.Watts OF RENTON COMPANY City of Renton NOV 12 2002 FAX NUMBER 425.430.7300 RECEIVED SENT BY Seth Hale PROJECT NAME Sherman Apartments PROJECT NO. 1041 NUMBER OF PAGES (including this page): 2 REMARKS: Neil, It has come to our attention that the land use approval will expire in January. The attached letter is a request for an extension pursuant to the Renton Code. Should this be more than a formality please contact me to discuss prior to processing. Hard copy to follow. Please do not hesitate to call with any questions. Thank you. CDA ARCHITECTS, INC. ' Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner _ 11CDA011Compan AJOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments\Wp\Renton\111202watts,fax.doc IF YOU DID NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES PLEASE CALL 19529 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 VC' 12; 3 Seattle WA 98155 7 ", I 206-368-9668 Fax(206)368-9558 y` . CDA A R CHI TECTS INCORP OR A T E D • November 12, 2002 City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works Attn: Neil R. Watts, Director Development Services Division Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT:Sherman Apartments/SD Renton LLC CDA# 01041 LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA SUBJECT: Request for Extension Dear Neil; The purpose of this letter is to request a time extension to the current land use application. As you are well aware the current application has been modified on two occasions to allow for construction of a financially feasible project. Both revisions have allowed for extended review of the project creating not only an economically feasible but also more aesthetically appealing project therefore the necessity of the extension. The intention is to revise the current permit application in the very near future for submittal however with the land use expiration approximately 2-1/2 months away it is In everyone's best interest to obtain the extension as a safeguard against any unforeseen delays in permit resubmittal. Should you require any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC SAA..7(716 Seth Hale • cc: Bill Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner IICDA01 tCornpany'JOBSI/041 Dean Sherman Aparlmenrs1WpiPenron1110702wolrs.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher,A/A principal /9524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 r.. t ,CITY C RENTON 0,1ea/ Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department ' Tanner, Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tnner Mayor • November 4, 2002 Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 • SUBJECT: Minor Modifications to An Approved Site Plan and Parking Modifications for Sherman Apartments (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Seth: This letter is to inform you that the appeal period has ended for the above- referenced project modifications. No appeals were filed. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all Site Plan . Conditions of Approval and Parking Modification Conditions in accordance with City of Renton decisions dated October 15, 2002. All conditions of the approved site plan of January 29, 2001 are also to be complied with. If you have any questions, please call me at (425)430-1382. Sincerely, Susan Fiala, AICP Senior Planner cc: Jennifer Henning Eric Wagner Bill Sherman Land Use File FINAL.DOG •0 RENTON 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 AHEAD OF THE CURVE :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer c. Via'` ' CITY 0-10 RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor October 15, 2002 Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 • Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: Request for Parking Modifications to the approved Sherman Apartment Site Plan (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Seth: Per your letter, dated October 7, 2002, requesting a parking modification (RMC4-9-250) to the parking requirements for the Sherman Apartment Homes project, the following is our response. • Background: The Sherman Apartment Homes project was approved in January 2001. The approved site plan consisted of 86 residential units located on four stories within two structures and an underground parking garage providing 113 parking spaces. Concurrently submitted with this parking modification request is a request for minor modifications to an approved site plan. Requested Parking Modification: The site plan modification involves increasing the number of residential units from 86 to 99 units which consequently requires an increase in the number of parking stalls. Based on the unit mix, 125 stalls are required;-however, only 121 parking stalls can be accommodated on the garage level. The request is for four stalls less than the code requirement. Analysis of Modification: The unit mix of the "revised" project is 15 two bedroom units (1.6 spaces per du), 63 one bedroom and 21 studios (1.2 spaces per du). A total of 125 parking spaces are required. Of those spaces, five are required to be ADA accessible; six ADA spaces are provided. The enlarged floor area for the parking level does appear to use the space as efficiently as possible. The use of tandem spaces does provide additional parking spaces and the parking layout maintains the required fire lanes, auto maneuvering and backup, and other space for bike storage, mechanical rooms, elevators and stairwells. The tandem parking should be allowed and shall be required to follow the standards (RMC 4- 4-080F.8.d) of: A restrictive covenant or other device acceptable to the City will be required to assign tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. Enforcement of 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON Thie nanar rnntainc 50%recvrlari matrxial 30%foci nnncumar AHEAD OF THE CURVE Sherman Apts.—Request Modifications LUA 00-168 ECF,SA-A,LLA Page 2 of 2 tandem parking spaces shall be provided by the property owner, property manager, or homeowners' association as appropriate; and Tandem parking spaces shall not be counted towards guest parking spaces. The reduction by four parking stalls accounts for 3% of the 125 spaces required which does not appear to be a major reduction: However, the ratios for parking are identified for residents and guests. Typically, apartment complexes have leasing agents on site, maintenance and grounds personnel (either on staff or contracted) and deliveries (i.e. FedEx, UPS). Each of these requires parking space and/or loading-delivery areas. To reduce potential impacts of the reduced number of parking spaces, staff recommends as a condition of approval that parking spaces located in the underground garage are not to be leased spaces. No fees are to be Charged for the spaces. Staff strongly encourages the applicant to provide free Metro bus passes to both employees and residents as a Metro Transit Center is looted less than four blocks away. The parking modification requested-in-your,October 7, 2Q02 letter has been evaluated in relation to the approved site ' ,lan B4sed 6n this artplysip;' we have determined that the proposed reduction from 1,5 toy'<121 ,,parkingA spacesf:,is { ithiri;; the parameters defined by Renton Municipal Code and isapprpved subject to thefoll?wing condition. ee n•i'l4 j4`Yt�a. 1. Parking spaces Ioeatedin thee;5undergroun garage are not to be leased spaces. No feesis are::to tie charged irornthespaces. ry • ^;j:. w f..: . �1�t,s �z :t :?sd•:� .: ty.'^i.';i:.yx"� '}'�..`'»''l'.'i:;:? Y e7.� .�.:mt rx. . This administrative decision will become,firi60:1f not app aleti irt writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5`00 PM "on Octobet'29, 2002. Appeals to the Examiner are governed •by City of Renton Municipal Code;sect on 4 3-110.Additional' fprn)ation regarding the appeal process may be obtained'trom the Renton City Clerks Offiice, (4251 430-6510. Appeals must. be filed in writing, togetherwith the required $75;00-application;dfee, to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Vay;`Renton,EWA'98055.t Should you have any questions regard.ing;this'corresppndence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. Sincerely, IV � OCIA Neil Watts Development Services Director • cc: Jennifer Henning Parties of Record CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE.BY MAILING On the )5 day of DUI`v 6—e.h' , 2002, I deposited in the mails of the United State�/s, a sealed envelope containing Y L5t `�!i p/,�Y�.i J j'11 D� . v' documents._o This information was sent to: Name ' Representing SU m' 14tA • - MARILYN 6 cui , rr' (Signature of Sender) AT RY PUBLICSTAT STATE OF WASHINGTON M SOF ON EWASHIXPIRES ) COMMISSION /, ) SS JUNE 29, 2003 COUNTY OF KING " w I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that _ ' Gc rr u I signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and o untary act for he uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: (9cj • IS , `1'�'j (ti in Notary Publ and for the State ei ashington MARILYN KAIIRCHEFF Notary(Print) : as My appointment expires: Project Name: 1 d.1aM S\Mh OA /� �S Project Number: °y�'_ ( AAA — no_ 1 j �F, Si 41 1-Leq NOTARY.DOC Mr. Gary Klatt Ms. Barbara Horton Mr. & Mrs. Gary Down 411 Williams Avenue South 20613 SE 291st Place 407 Williams Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Kent, WA 98042-6880 Renton, WA 98055 Ms. Katie Gilligan Mr. & Mrs. Bert Olson Mr. & Mrs. John See 434 Burnett Avenue South 430 Burnett Avenue South 438 Burnett Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Mr. & Mrs. Ben Wilson Mr. Bob Moran Jude Waller 424 Williams Avenue South 425 Wells Avenue South 410 Williams Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Ted Niemi Ms. Louise Vittitow Mr. & Mrs. Rick Stone 1917 Shattuck Avenue South 532 Williams Avenue South 411 Williams Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Duryah Mohamath S-D Renton, LLC Mr. Steven McDonalc 426 Burnett Avenue South 2100 — 124th Ave. NE Suite 100 Mithun Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98005 1201 Alaskan Way, F Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 Mike Hilderman Von Martin Seth Hale 504 Burnett Ave. S. 4803 Pacific Hwy E #3 19524 Ballinger Way Renton, WA 98055 Tacoma, WA 98424 PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Eric S. Wagner Sherman Homes 2100 124th Ave. NE, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005 '' " .►.4. ;:: : CITY C RENTON �• h, ,- Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor • October 15, 2002 Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: • Request for Minor Modifications To An Approved Site Plan — Sherman Apartments (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Seth: We have received your letter dated October 7, 2002 requesting consideration and approval of additional modifications to the approved site plan for Sherman Apartments (approved 01/29/2001). The modifications are analyzed by comparing the approved site plan with the submittals of October 7, 2002, not with the previous building permit submittal. The information provided via a fax of October 10,2002 providing various site square footage calculations has also been incorporated where appropriate. Our response is outlined as follows. Summarization of the Requested Modifications: 1. Parking level:The underground parking garage has been expanded by 15 feet toward the south property line to accommodate additional parking stalls. A formal "Request for Parking Modifications" has been submitted and will be addressed under separate cover. 2. Building: The footprints for both the north and south buildings have been enlarged to accommodate the proposed unit increase (see#8). 3. Unit Count: The number of units has increased from 86 units (approved site plan) to • 99 units. 4. Open Space and Landscaping: Common Open Space requirements have been revised due to the increase in the number of units. The required space is 4,950 square feet for 99 units. Landscaped areas include both the softscape (plantings) and hardscape areas (pavers, concrete areas). 5. Exterior: The building exterior has been revised along the Williams Avenue South •elevation by provision of two story gabled roof elements to produce a "townhouse" effect. Development Regulations: According to Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:I allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent C10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE :.P This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer Sherman Apts.-Request for Minor Modifications to an Approved Site Plan LUA 00-168,ECF,SA-A,LLA Page 2 of 3 • • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environment and facilities than the approved plan;or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. Analysis of Site Plan Modifications-letter of October 7, 2002: Item #1: The underground parking garage has been enlarged to allow space for additional parking spaces required by the increased number of residential units. Please refer to response to the request to parking modifications as provided under separate cover. Staff supports this modification. Item # 2: Both buildings have a larger footprint to accommodate the additional residential units. The extension of 7 feet in length for each building (14 feet total) has been located between the two buildings, as a consequence, the central common space is reduced to widths ranging from 11 feet at the narrowest to:RAC,*g..feet,at the widest area. The approved site plan provided widths ranging from 25 to 3. ?fee#;;The,.larger400tprints, as compared to the approved site plan, also result in the elimination of tle' pedestrianctrculation pattern that surrounded both buildings. f.?%. The approved site plan pfoposed a°`total of 123,000 squar e4eet:for the two buildings. The requested modification is'proposed to bexa,tota.I,of 124g60 ,square feet including 87,997 square feet for the residential area and„36,763'`sgti e feettfor the parking garage. This is a r 1.4% increase in total building squarelcot.460:-1he=bu0 ling footprintsof the approved site plan was 22,400 square feet artth re:064ed;modife tion is 22,`562 ;Square feet. Staff is in support of this modification. Item #3: The unit increasefrgreCthe approved 86 resideritialhu"nits`to 99 units changes the density from 93 du/ac to 1;07'du/ac:; vet The project is ved i3tder,tiie CD zone at the time of approval in January, 2001. Staff supports,this modification`wijti the recommendation as a condition of approval that�'the-apartment project can ',be4built up to 99 units and no additional requests for any inc`i'ease to th'e,number of wolfs would be permitted. Item #4: Common open space, per Urbar t e dfi✓Overlay District Guidelines, requires 4,950 square feet for 99 units (50 square feet per unit). The revised site plan will provide a total of 5,095 square feet. The total space requirement has been satisfied by outdoor elements (courtyard, terraces) comprising 3,737 sq. ft. and two interior spaces (exercise room, community room) comprising the remaining 1,358 sq. ft. Landscaping calculations indicate that 14,288 square feet of the site would be provided in either planted areas or hardscape. A breakdown of this number identifies 4,478 square feet of plantings (trees, plants, planters) and the remaining 9,810 square feet includes pavers and other concrete areas which are terraces or courtyards. Both code requirements are met. Staff is in support of this modification. Item #5: The building exterior has been further articulated and modulated along the Williams Avenue South street frontage by the added elements typical of townhouse development. The elements include two-story building extensions covered with gable roofs. There are four "extensions" per building. Staff is in support of this modification. Sherman Apts.-Request for Minor Modifications to an Approved'Site Plan LUA 00-168,ECF,SA-A,LLA Page3of3 The site plan modifications requested in your October 7,2002 letter have been evaluated in relation to the approved site plan. Based on this analysis, we have determined that all of the proposed revisions (garage, footprints, density, open space and exterior) are within the parameters defined by Renton Municipal Code and are approved subject to the following conditions. 1. The apartment project can be built up to a maximum of 99 residential units. No additional requests for any increase to the number of units would be permitted. 2. The applicant shall submit plan reductions, (8 1/2 x 11) PMT's, of all revised drawings including but not limited to the site plan, building elevations and landscaping plan prior to issuance of building permits. This administrative land use decision will become final if not appealed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 PM on October 29, 2002. 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. Appeals must be filed in writing, together with the required$75,QQ oapplication fee, to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way,.I entori,WA 98055, er, Should you have any questions.regarding.ihis cor..respoftdertce;:please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. _.,. :xx i._,er yni. t}+L ka'21'YY, x':i` 'S sl4 Sincerely :. qq .li Q', .t1 rr:.Y`..;,?s°:6t"•f`:"�i.<Mi R.w tV �.. ... ♦.s. a^<.,_�5r,"' •3eY.A•:.•._ .�:i�.e i�55 ki! min`"• jt 'w " Neil Watts �< E=' : - Development Services Diregtor. cc: Alex Pietsch Jennifer Henning Rebecca Lind Eric Wagner Bill Sherman Parties of Record 4411 SHERMAN APARTMENT HOMES DRAWING INDEX eia-Lircrnicei RENTON, WASHINGTON RECONSIDERATION OF MINOR MODIFICATIONS FOR: SD RENTON LLC VICINITY MAP ▪ M. ▪ ONIM � — — — SITE !•■Ioc ■� ���1®e Ve■�i�=• d� ■m l®�a j ■ i�■olf_®.. Gi1� ■.li ■. j=m � IiI aVitale1101Nl1 l■ s.i =q l3 l•�.it® iii r Iw ■ n tlu iazirE ltltltll�l®m6 �1I •!®I I�Is e�rllof■e. � J 1lmmca'lec =m 1■ c is■i • ,'�ii 1_ A rl ■m�Sjlrt ■i's�oT�l�s-��i S�11Ei08��IG 9, Bi[.'�a� a J9 �� e�1 gya■2��1� �!j7�7t i■. ��i /�� w r ■� �4 a�i r A Oi� 1 a—• �1 $»I-` ®dj VICINITY MAP Id4!4IE:N �i�ii■11���=1i'III pia■■IIIE I�■il�G■! 'o13a1.1@!■�=0■=1�1���■�l �lEp1■I�I�i�a11■,�Ili�� ��lAi N KU' Ion.'■imi=■Ofii=maim •.rfav =aatYi�i�-7 -wr- .m..i+-=w.....= Em...iai WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH ELEVATION -cop` SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O =_� RENTON, WASHINGTON • i • I1 �14144.0.1ortil W.I. I ' ib- i '1 k 4...', , . i i . . 0 �_.�_ :_ O © © O © O O O O 0 0 0 0 O "� iii . • 2. WILL AMS A NUE -OUTI-1 .... �� x • .,-1 I I I ..-1 I I 1 .- I I I I .... I Err> I .1 All • -.aREaS@iiMI i ilatlii5@il'=.& ,liliill)1 P1111611➢i it • a'• 1i tasalaW,NIi RIi119RiR1iii �ilSaiiluiliI i�iI6mrr11+lint azl-irQIGk�66I11i1! '�IN� i9"^ il6 iiiiiiiiii SlY�1iRE--91fMA61nla3Si 7,�, \-- �` - ,•;. 1 � ® illiESt©Tell€aIlliti ialZin.ad.MUM`• lrallia� IIi "'::81111111aRPe0s11112 , .' irang��k tzaR iifi���� l ' 7aDr H6SGEao LIaf. v g' a f' G111E:ndiY E - .. 9 •9iiii�.,L, •••eHEa c�i1li� oc Ea II _ NO -*. — ... - -. 'ii_ui1 I. r i rJ iu�ii a rw, s... esaaapc�zlasi : 'Ni::•. liiim ti ilia �_ :a= c_ 14x7 NE iN� �9d!' IA J:6•, Epuii i S •--•••••• •• I;• •• I ew C;6E4' o _ --- _---_. ... _..__. �. : �I 1 -... I I I I' I I I I Ii ail J`1} • t ��`yy "` �OR3U7WNG - - SOUTH !BUILDING _ '; :" F.F. = 5 .15' :: 4 ,p '50 UIrS J 5I UNITS =_ gx. ZONIN� - CD E>4 ZONING / CD .4 F_ i >'a - 1 : i t. M ; . ar,, . • • � 11 _ � { I I I � -�- � � L ml 1 Lte`O : maw n- r _r_ m6-� — _t = - - I I �9.4' NO7 '39"E � air�LLEY ----h H • m •....11TVIMAITIMIPCOMMIWIM -1-- . _..._n SW --- •1•+'M � a OD SITE PLAN mual3r32".P-0' r.r.awr...wn• 400.1aa I-1 .mwaww.r onm 0.1 .a .lioecOPEN CO.!, ; - lb_ ! MAL wfl.4.r clu e. 11 lmuimvlr v a!,,l ..aamerRarmown IZiR[ifLl .0„m!a„0.a..,,,.,,u,-„ URAL WM uw.r r.e 1w. IrsoiisE • - ' CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O RENTON, WASHINGTON I • O O O O O O O ® ® CI 0 II 013 14 15 16 11 - - - - a - - - - - - - - a-•aY1 _rV JOY I Iro ry 1 sW avo INT I 1340. n•o ax s••v s'... Fa rV I rw W LW I,M. . WILLIAMS AVENUE BOOTH O de • • r . • 34988' s S01'29'46'W I r • • • I • r r ■ ■ w n • 's a a w sa s a r a s s �� IY -� r--- r--- r---i r---� I -� r-- r-- �J� 8 I 1 -I �i;- -+F� y —Fill- --E�ii1 lit--- 'it IIMVAL [Pi . . --�- ',A— -[jO I I-; _ _J L- __ L-.. L_J L -� \ I I i _L_J L-J L_J L a " 'F. 7 „s7:17„, an...!.........1.... / 1 1 [ \-wanar \ 7-‘ -. F I /1.. r W OI I I I I i -. i,/i i/i 0 I I I I Ititi �' 'El ,A�/',�j mg 1 %49 I jar 1 „RAI_ ��Y s Y M Y %%/%/ / • -- ! ••liaPiqir ,_ !///////M r Y M r -T II• ( 1 D D lr 1 Ia T 13 R w I.' j Y % 0. .I mase en a a it I �" 1 .i,,.�... m.'T, '-'''. ►, I 9 } II I I I \~/ I I I w 41 I I \ I I , I •' °rn a 3Y _ I ,• � " q OURMSAar■arf/ i7,11 1 �_-� __f 8 ® uui -J___ 'a"`� _'s- -_s _�-'-_ z O — i n.arvr w a ny u aarvw�$�yaw a.�I.� g - `—�'v r 'uv. d.o Ll'. a u., ..",- I - I\ an ►; o w3 ° �o hcrnwtyr waai I O � NI r r rr V. � 11► r I o r w �r n s a 1i - a1 - - - - - - - - h 3�93' - - N0'28'2S'E - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r I PARKING REQUIREMENTS I 14.0l1NMI@ awn• e r•n•r 0.0I•1a11.I •wmwlK. ..TALL. Ian.rlru dawn TOTAL• .......... LEGEND mob rIr w um m••I rl.lYR®rtrr awm•na.. au Rru =eapa ' IS.OR a R.wL MAL "ea a 4.4.41.0011r '~ PARKING GARAGE PLAN I ir w o aa•rwes 3/32•.I'-0' 4J -Ra#a mww 1 CAfNLT. ODROMA ~C.M •RILL• SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1O GARAGE -�-- RENTON, WASHINGTON . . 0 ::, ,0 0 T ? ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 ® ® I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I 0_..___ ,.. .. .... ie. 6.-i-1.4. r— •••• ---R-- 0.• Ipe ••• we • yr* ••••••• t... ow smote. •••• ii ••• Ir.. •••,...1 WO ———— NL=--. ) 11 1 �—— I I 1Er I ' 1 cm 4 4 �. f ff5��q �_ ® ir7Li� >'�wavAIEiii12:� �- 1 - rY' ___ Clt 11 p ID "1�'1 /6101wa no r liT l:MI*1U al 11 :E, tit = ' -3M LLlLLI j' u ono ono© O y LI — It'nil, F'?� , . 1 n� .G s Fii 4. 1 phi'. �,�Fci�.\' 11 '��.' _� '.11 1T - I 1 - wl.::«� i�� .1�� I 1 �M.i DDE� I MI�I�111' �i�.f'1 ' - I �Ill�r/rl yli �y ry LI' �111"11� r/y I1111111 0 J 1 �. I► of _ `3f'- m LI I tf� 43 Tit Ali u c m .tp 7=,•i.•. - -— ---11— I -G c I .�a • _ ' 11 ' Ic 11 . —�- z211- , . �M1- t 5• mq _ Mpg�_�lp� or-17 ;-.... 4 I i Fcrr. I ,f T. - I TAT! Q 1 ., IF 1 11 T�1 I , a I 1 I I 1 41 1 t I 1 I ____ 1 rTT Tfl 1 1 1 1 T TTT TT Apr I 7 - - -7 1 -7-- - r-T 7- 1 --I--7-------1-- -- pin FIRST FLOOR PLAN , Czp 3/324.I'-0' r11�° Mf r# wn. w41.i COOM01.O1 woes, .91eNIC.2211 am IF.11CIS W., .. TOTAL OAI.IACO .A.!! MOS*1lIawtsrtn wIP in L4101GM1b TOM NM 1.40C'.11. Wr! CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1O ems=-a-�- RENTON, WASHINGTON • Q O Q O O Or 0 0 O O O TT i elao-- = I .. . . .................................................f . .... . .Eiiifigi.:.:.:.i.'": :;-- ,,..I. .7 i I ev$61— ---—13-'.--Ar-2------ffla [47-.11 I ... ... -- .3 E. ..--- 12,_ , ----LI- r IC-- -------- '-1,1 :. I 1 ,..41,- - --- - -14 ] eNBi!'v- J mar ---- PROPOSED NORTH BUILDING= NORTH ELEVATION a L? PROPOSED SOUTH BUILDING:NORTH ELEVATION .u,::mr: OD ru�enr. O ® O Q ® O �' O O O O O O G e .......................... :,..-T- i 1_ ena-- 1.1 i Eii• -- ____w__ Imi mE..14 ilni 1- arms- --1: Iglld� - iMl� I II _ _ - - — ir Rye•` I . -- —__oiG�. — i � �{k� ---- � 71:111:::::.! ��_ i --- �r J - ---- • DING:NORTH ELEVATION• • NORTH BUIL p IL SC BUILDINGPEIIT: NORTH ELEVATIONLICATION\UJ CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION C UR.RENT Rh — .war� • •• _ CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1OELEV , .........---,...... RENTON, WASHINGTON .. . . ". 0 OI 0 3 4 T O6 0 ® T II O 13 14 O Ib Ib - i; iiasiiii ?iii:iiif`:isrir:riiif ": :`. :I:a' s`.€fii»:i`:a ':i: r_ - ■_I ! 11. al■ ■��_ 1 1': n�E 1; 1 qn.■ Idl`! III■ ■ne.; 1•_ - !■rm: 1 e� 1 ����� ■iI 1 E .I�IN �1 _■�._ ■L1,1._ ! Ii al a a1■ �._= III L�■= _ �■ �l Lllil.t _ Lt�. 1 111-.__ ! .nn7l Illfiiiwll- IR�'I■iiill f_I■e1�1 -411 I1LCI aumrvllftJla _- . ll] - 9a NT— 911C.i 1111 I_ -- --- t i1€`lu1nl■ �1 �°9= �E=�■c _j'I!• ra�l9=-. V I�:-I_Ii=r"i t; IE'=i1 00- 1 €I- I.E =■11 �■ =1 1—= 'ol■ ■ill 1 - E Mummaw-- _ ' �■.__ _ -- ,,. al- • 30;t----J If lain tus^J� __ ;_I- -te a,_ ,'1 a.,..19Lpz:7„, ;■.1ui Ali ., = ter.1 .1 1/11111 -- - i 1%�i,__.1,' r[ � .a=iu&-l■' uI!': �■s:ilk !r !o iii e3=i• I Lei_ _ �i= -a� L�lit. 1I I =o�., I r 1■� 1 ■■� 1 a■ oilr� 1 1 - - =�imlu f- 7 61nu.fl31 tlIBE l -e 21-9t I-- I HART -- — m•&,., - licm®3 - 9".i iVM410 l_a1J Vi.. 16:f1,11IL-- -.-�rl�f➢ ---'-'-:r="- -ti:g1MI I•NCIP-V=r7ikOkW1-G■1�"I iel=�■ Rgl _ ��B,- -- -- _a�III�a7 IQ G �1! -- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- - `zT_ = •---- --- ---- ---- —=-- ---- --- __ er 1rir.v----— J ePROPOSED WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O T 0 II ® 0 0 0 0 7 - :`::'-: %.:iiiizitii-al:riz fig; z` €:--__s::{ ';: �i_ iii;. ---- __ _ _ --= - -- _-_-_---- _ _ /I� :;...,_.�■_.._..a._.v_�■_:':;:%:.......�._Sit' — --=0�- ten-_--.'-aiwzmEls.0 _=:a■� - ■■�=\ !t■���nl■ 1 ■�� ■111_�■c '■'II � ln ■II_:1I_alla■I11:: �11�'m E __ =9 e■ • L9■ ii escam'_ _ u�Lll '999 II no�9 II lfinr nnr99 Flagla910 ' _•Ilr l.kp!■�I IR Gl IB4l.rdli l91BWMB-- 11 nBP 16��eolP �l:i"aA[?! = - t t t■��� Ir— nl■ ■lei_ !_•1= != 1- 1 Plan: I� }_! n =! r e■i=! I—= ■�a ao IE °°i — •Ila„il10atil __,, Idnthtii0=■I� =pll....00�_■11 _i➢ 1011I■11 = .�ha1.1ill='�1� ki ISd 1�=� 1ud9�. I■1VR�l�lo'u'od9= �:■ f9hr`rE'IR- II■ N1�:�slf 1�II�9tixiil9;®=3 _ z !ail��r.,l j1 =i'Ir I I I!= .I�o I!�!_ !I ! =�i= - '_1l=a1� alli -� _!�"I_. =!�'I_- Il-gEn L __pate — ■tull4 i�mtEV - �m�ll91 R11m and Xf r ii-i But-- _Y9 CIE 91?du 7 � OIUao 891 (71wni •oal➢ 9n of nn lk �R9aun LJ — • r . . —� i elm _ - - � �Y iW.���E "' — ! ! • __ �i■I�bI1L�al �� �,11®I�i,■e% ■iii Iln rii■4 filial =—,4. -1■ �iilra . .i in,■ ui■ ■sld:■il rli du®®1,■ ■linf■l ! • w -- : I J� • WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY)-CURRENT P Rh1IT APPLICATION • • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1OELEV ��- -.. RENTON, WASHINGTON .. . . . . „, . • .. I O 15 14 O P ® O Q 8 O O 5 PP PP ............................................................................................................................................. _............. .............. _. • ■ aaaaaa._O-. !■ .:�::.._:::::::� �„!SL_'�:•a:_r. _ i!■Inl=immi!■�®I�morifo 11=l�i=a� 11 iill In i 7 i—A ; In- a _-15 2 _g.. - ■I�Z! 1-- : III■- im,mil'�II— flb m l( mlim i.�11 a ommiIII;i'ilm—=116iifllll4l- NOII°IMiml— [linlaSl e Ifl' ill� i(asonBl 1 II_Nrn t t !!■lol If■.11imi li■ ■l ■■i■im ■: i■uffl 1 § t !IIL■i v® .i,al!�i■9■i 11■lii !■ lr�II■■ : aol■6 RI, Jbau'Va /� �r Iatz.il o Im ilpragmm — iAl6711111 u illi �Ea inlig�� I)��Iru.iamip I rcJImm` :r : I :0110 5 : _�tll-■�-1E AIW I AI: 1 I ' I._EC"ilEieiV11..!11lil i1M11.iWR I v1 3 ". -- a.. 2_55 ,'(tr7:1„,r i N ...,. � -iimg8:k 1ii .L . mktAi,I - �i :.raliniA -- tl. l�k , :H IT44, —_ •u' Ia� � =o ■W*IMIAia# iAAID ! � j !lWo a— � t � lAa il"P �ll liha� mnli 1 L_ PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUTH) rxs,m.a. PI I6 15 ® -, ® o o Oe To O 5 T Q ri) L ......................................_.........................._..................................... irri`� ,.„..„..7„,._ _ _ _..",".:.,:.....",...:.:.z.."...........:.:.::.,....,.:...,....,,,„.v......,.....„,..............„.:.:„..:..,.._....,,,,.,..„.,.,.,.. krunim _. —I i ......................... ......................::::................... ............................... ................................. .......... 7,2 :_ I p_i ilt— —ill MEN 1 1 111 !ONE E!� i�ull�IIAf_i — - LIES i loll Ii II':I =_i n em i mo,° ia` i— ' raw- __ a _ t : IBiro ilifil it ■r Ie=lr! e1iI 1: r., t vim, - n 1l ■ ri1l i■ ■i l�i■e- - I ii.aa=!!IL}I( _ _E1,0i`,m, 91 famuibl of JfilL ail. _—_ 110 mild I _ Anmiiiotl ��i• luni'uom11' �a!VIII— ___ : Il�iOnseilly e _ ■i I!liI �� iV!! 1ia o 1 of L ��=.■=1Eii1�l■M-. ■--�'1!1I �■ �i=' �iii_ =�-.mine_- aa+ an.ao ir„.v..a. id sii so II sImo m¢I mmim!.��_ I M1I-6o6.miiha Et iwm'n t Mil III i e�NKIPMI�• _li.. 11111 .1 li iliLliil .'' - .4 1 1 . Nil I " 1 -- -n. 5 - _ —L J EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUTH)- CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION ..4"."4. 0. CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1OELEV - RENTON, WASHINGTON ' 1 . . ... . 1.; • • • , . 1 "'' • 1 •• 0 L 0 0 - —t - 0 0 0 0 WILL AMS A NUETOUTI-1 _ 1 1 1 _. ..... i . 34z.ace i c•-•,,,-- .119 --1 1— --i i.... .A.mmai...=111§1ram.ai..... ..----1 -...Lhommomul..• i 6t2)-.1T4IIPV i _ 1 Th. 'PIM I 7•21M.PM anyie.10111=111WIIIIIIMMEMIEMI 111. I". . 1111r!' /7 , i Kr,,r--) ® j7 I , / , rr3T L / 'Wel vfte. I . 7/ ,. ,/2 7 / 7 • , fr- 1 , T 1. L ,AZA %- 1447 ii k ‘,- / -3 • to ///- cf) ® Li '— '-- ' .-4616,-- • -.4 41.11. M.111 /. *Pi 4,Li - - . --- Liiii ' ' / ../',/ A . . 16' ir . .I 1 r KO ith yr .1 rii/A ' — r. i- . 2 III ■I•IIIIIM •./2,,, , 221 • 1--irti 1 4,131p 'ICC 111 ,-Rik Atum , 14 Frew Nem i - _ ... 1 1 2- i IIIIIIN Ili . thil . kr II IN I r mum 1 _ , , __o ___, I Pill --- —wale: 11 - fr ..-= -- ---. - 74r. -. -iii I z = - I _ . . :. di , , . 1 r I' I = I • ---- _ . _ ' I I I I I b i ..- o ' 0 L mit" wftvic fl -- r"/;;3',/,'',/,:z.,1, ••,,ip, ,,,, ,/,‘,/,,a,, 1--- 11 _ [...0 [ i [. 1 [ I__ ird r,,,r,rwi:•2,://';w,/ / _ _ - , -14e//r,-M-7f;W'/;*' - "7/4/g'//' / • /,/,'/ '4,4;, /f, -,1 ': ii' 0 El I 1 4' t 1 t _ __ t t t t 1 1 1 .,,, ..t . r ,ss II 349.94 NO"28,75°E ALLEY .• 110..21.1•14.1 teak commort SPACE CALCULATIONS/AREAS ' ! WI 3/32°•1'-0° '7 ,4 roarer cora wait ! . LUMV.21rflal•WITI• 4.00.1.1•41. .• 10.mrsowerm IMAM WI 40. 1.5,1=COM Cr.. DC.,MP TOTAL OM•PKII. law .212.01102111.12•IMIrr NO N. • : MI l•Nale../..12 • TOTAL WTI 1.00.41.16 KM.I. • - :':t i-:: - CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS , _... .„...._ ..J.= RENTON, WASHINGTON '•'.:'. r.- :-. . . CDA ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED F A X T R A'' N ':S' M I T T ,A...L • ' S FLEET DATE Octobet 10, 2002 TO Susan Fiala COMPANY City of Renton FAX NUMBER 425.430.7231 SENT BY Seth Hale PROJECT NAME Sherman Apartments PROJECT NO. 1041 NUMBER OF PAGES (including this page): • REMARKS: Susan, For your use. Please do not hesitate to call with any questions. Thank you. CDA ARCHITECTS, INC. . .....e).,\A,.\., Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner 11CDA01\Compan/JOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments\Wp\Renton1100202susan.fax.doc IF YOU DID NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES PLEASE CALL 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle WA 98165 206-368-9668 Fax(206)368-9558 • { SHERMAN APARTMENT HOMES DRAWING INDEX ARCHITECTURAL OUR. w•wn •womM4 RENTON, WASHINGTON RECONSIDERATION OF MINOR MODIFICATIONS FOR: SD RENTON LLC VICINITY MAP o• f In) w mac SITE .1112 ■�Inl_® ■����� ■�l���1 '■� =���1=1 �i� •-- g nl 7 ■_u© 1 a�■a 1�■���a l�l■� ■e® h� �.. ■m tl�}1 613�®�i!®I�i v6tn• '� =1��i��■�le�, 1 m a■ n�, sa' ■Inl U. ■■1'•.Bi■!A ■.€a.S■I0i® ■��G■ "q=i'. 4��nl IIBL■�I �� ®1�!■��G�s1!■I�1 ■II!■■!i■s� n■i �a t���®! _B%t+.��®y v®p■gym o 11� m ®fry ���s + =�` I pia s ■�I I° �e l ■� S ■._ c 1 I� S• rei1i,9 +Br :14'1-=aI� f - � ' " ■ aY� .9 �It_ ■ :� ■� 'y:��t ,m :94 9 _ gym eta ��mE y!:vv VICINITY MAP d�inl[■ ' U. '.lUU A.ai'U9�Pu llpl _ I A j+[�■!u 1= oi' �n.Tpls�■il l B' 'II■�■Y j_ �1■I�l ii h Uill�is■ I�In■e rara � J WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH ELEVATION - CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- i 0 RENTON, WASHINGTON rr .■� ■ r r r��� rr�� r� r r��11� r ���� r����� r\�11\1111111111R./ �� 11111111nualllinummossi1;;����munti ;��mmus limm�� ;sid-- ���������;;Ma .om iiii- ������ unT m��nualu um�uninimun u:: I \/1MIU yy.. AM yy.. yy.. MIME WI.Y..I. ...IY..I. If..Y..Q II..Y..p Q..Y..p.......p..11l13111111111111. _ II..Y..If .II..Y..If II..Y I 11..Y..1. ll.. WL- 0 0 . • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 {,�►� dni � WILL AMS A NUE -OUTN -+ lPPL1 . .,,. IIIII I ,. I I I I I Im `'I'I . ' .�eeita�a� r .> :. II_ �. �� I_ Ask �, a'3<I°legrasibm i.L- z_ .C_QO.3_Q__l_1fi ■.I�Q.Ci_IL..�_R. ____@Q_■■__ _NI m .__W■_. IQGIC_.■7.9rim Rii.Q...IIQ�19a '.a_R.lIVRaaus iag6taa.6N11i! Qall.gpE...l ig nine;;; iim"o Qigin95Lkeg .Iflrl.■.■.17...f'.J .... ...!■LIES.■6.E■�R.!.AI..EE■■MIRS,-- arMr513■@■.Ii■Ct--.J,a IKE=SC.�IC.Ii■■NO.W112.,-Q.'6m9I.7.If.ilt 6,-114r3a6Q■a MI?R�61VNs.a.■6'af(a., .8rM..QpiG>i■ ,._____,,,,m,,,..tn._a.'G....alpi9 2".x.3ns.Q...r .W.OR@uLi Ma.gIT6yr•Q■l.Q.■.ilfiiB■7Q®l6QDy.O.t IlQ07.'.CQIM.fiVf3I1frRf!■7.OQa'a�sa:l97.QYi...■OMROl:#fl10R..QQf2A41RR0%`3;laF IIGN.6SRlFR7dV.Riw.@SR `V f jtriF; FQ✓NI@RRpMaMa.Y�tl1 Ma I'ALIGIV.:NI.7.7.OP.. 21f _______111 O 1I.QtYJ..aiilG.11P..rgpy■iiRtRB161►X'9®Y/kpLi4liIgYR46SiL@®1!E.R■R■iARiOT�CU/.apA51f�YR21}bU10...16951.71!{fYpldOfA.smsQ1:665.Ai66.LaR1fSfEI'��_.3.IL'.5�.910@_A_iIMIIMa .a !E1l6Ef.@.6.1. a.9H.01Blffltl i■■a@R?IllmY.pl(:..�. ____ I ,� �Nopm2i� � lCf:f�\— S Ip_�y ; L-----------�, _....EST �— di _ an �li1111111 .■.71.I - '=� �anem=l� '"''� �CU6f99 � Q'7Y i •�■1 �Liiiii I—� ` - e mn»»mm1 v I MOB ....,.I �:.- .--�■CI9 ..CIF-C:.... 9..67C.af ....�....�''•: ••• .I■�L�I.1 �.....1 C I7 S"' ■.f:JJ.f I .._ ••••� ::FsS•'::: W'�°;":: .J.{1p..6.t1�.... ......... _ Min.!:... •-'. I' I ...........IY11_ _ f _ — .ra.w�aa. O "HIM L.......ii 1 _ I L..-... 1L I I J_ - f I I i L i�i hi a°m°so • ORTI-I BUIILDING SOUTI-I BUILDING ! N"tri ti F.P. = 3�.15' Jr'_' F.F. = 31.15' •<'. ' '`;'li 1�11N pi' 50 UNIRRS 51 UNITS - p■tet" I gX. ZONIN�x - CD I I I EXF ZONING 7 CD I I W( s .. — -- — , I EMI WI J 'itII!! .. L,, _ . .:,,.. " .- .. „ 1..m. col■ N0 2825E c I I • 'I I M � pos. - ' CA: 1i 1 • • 1 \-1M.LIS f • .• ALLEY .u....u� •�11IC111rItMm Oap.if MSC. T - — • . Wail I M 'w ® """ "+°""" ° " e' Q�SITE PLAN 21A211,C4222 Op 3/32".ILO" DO OP MR um:wwn. uo41.l.n •MOW.TOMO IIXITIOM O'■I lnm WI V TOOL arN ark. fP"10. t: .m�L YN d 01"1L71 GC=Ilb�m1f PT I.! maw •mnan.24r CCM Ma Iwl.» TOTAL Mr weer v.ls IIL.s CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O •- - RENTON, WASHINGTON 1 I1 • .r 1T.:. 2T O3 O T O O S® O9 10 0 12 13 14 15 16 1, .JNv .rtr `I 2840 • 'rt-a wm I SW I (arr• R-T w.r we ax I S'-r 281-11• Ire l.'r Y4• EH LW N- . WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH l` i r " a a n w a 349E8' r 801'29'46' a m — N m Y L T Y w N me T -I r_ _,I—_—, r--� r -- r1 I - r- r-= r r �"� - 8 1 a —� i —_f_ — iE- --I t: 1'i+-1-- R [pi I [L'a,,...,...._ C_i- —I-- ia_i—T i_i I i i I-: n » JI L—J _ L— L—�J L —J \fin/ I I ��r J L—J L—J L—J L— p A m I Il /�� i I I I / -It. lo_ I I I I I I 1 m n O - r-i. _ — • — i i — ► t ; f- 3 , . , r • - -- - ii ` I I RN la c I- R 5 rt r < o a w ,. --�- N r 11 n r r m r r�w nl rr I O I IKmN . ,. dT Ig.a ,".Zei...,-IN... Id4-;, ,,ri3." ,x«�"�em I— , li.< J .',."a">n. ywoU..o aw n< i — WI �� I 51921 Ir Ci I 1 h /irrN 3�9a' a 'H5'E a I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r PARKING REQUIREMENTS I rAmam NNN.ma rwr I f OR AR.,lb RAW ra•uR .mK. ..R.„ im.inru u WS mrK. v..uua LEGEND =MO AM.m RAIL PIN WI 1&181 "MY aa.n Tom• a.a.'" rv�i`"'u�lSefv Ole R.OR20 8800 TOM,o w...nmaweaAar. na.am RON . en PARKING GARAGE PLAN_ I 211018013 roenocokar 3/32".P_0" jjj/ oao.swar iec 81819 OMI MONO. •RAJA av�Aci. rRAW NYm1oM •RAW CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD1O GARAGE = RENTON, WASHINGTON • O :':'O O 0 0 O O O O O II ® O O O Q I I I' I I I I I _ I I I I I I I I . ....w „ 1 p p IM I173 iI.JL1 .. iu I I I" I or I 1� I .Q. I _ ___ M C - �J C�. L� _.-_- Ir H• M ;ia - bt.:llp I I•s, _NN r.r.¢I Bk pII 5+11112 AZ \=TO' lag"S11!- 1M. L� SI N ©�ncl —� LI�cI --I—�. 18 -� _ -1i� .11 HsJ!3, ■I ni O N r• '�' 1 I I c��r� , -' r I N tom- r two 1 ■1�11 �I �N.'./ M ��,- ��. - ��! ^�l , � 1 '■ �' "'R� 1� �N I'I�11 41.■. �■"■„ t-i�tt,J: 5 Mina N LIi R cl- �P'1011� Z '°-� I ,7 .!. NI Ot 7.� OI �3}.'- 111��11� �., .0 .-�J/ - - _ r 111���IY■��}}fll .tF '�LL't - L1: - -—----i- GC ��' � � n ='m � -line'ice_ .'o��� � m� � fli.�..��� :.a+a !!Y 4l A it ■oJ , I Lo. .I I ., • ,_, pl - 8 m;F� ��m ii .anvil IICI III- r I r i -1-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I *- FIRST I --- —± -T 1 -T-T [ 1 T 1 -7 —r-FLOOR PLAN 332°.I'-0° e°le mem comae e,ue,A0DMm Ike O rot urr..r WITS. A¢OP Ma • COMMA ORM DRICO. AMU OP Damon O 4 WON YIP TOTAL COPOI!rACb DOS P pf°'®O Rall@BR Of MA OP .• OMIJACACMb TOTAL DO! MISS P • • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD10 ��— RENTON, WASHINGTON -- - . ._ . , ,__,... . ., •' • •,.., _ = ® - . . . OT ® T Tr' t ® OT ....................._ . . ... .,. .,....„, I .. ... . .. ..,:..:.:.:....r.,_-_ rr. 1,..., :a„::::11lx•x•F*:•:::::•:::::4::::k•-:- ": ] 1 I 1 "E"--- - -E...--E 7-s. 71 1 _ t __ „.._,....."....r........i az_li • __,. a -ilms- — , _ ,.. . wpm_ _---- 1. - 1 F- T 1 -�� %.:- �� -.= te a®�� _ _ - - i � VI -- � _. ._ cel -aam -- i- 4 _ A E A is e. - --- p 0111 DI) PROPOSED NORTH BUILDING: NORTH ELEVATION H B PROPOSED SOUTH NORTH ELEVATION rnarrro rxa anr� OA OB QC OD OE F G O O OC OD EO Tt t .„,:,,,„i„„.,,,,,::,,,,,,,,o,s.„..,,,,,yr,,,,_,:..:...:,, eitim-- - j,11\11r-_=042111MiNigigg I- 010- atit„.:,..74-ixia;!::;iiiisriEll 1 IMM-15.: It:- 1'. i 1 1�■�� — #: I .mil — I �_ • I � #= I -1� - LjE11tIj 21iIM .— O lilli:EYSIil: . l,� m £ t ��I�,III; 1_• ME ..r.r:� r � --- • 1 — G 9 ——uur .- i ice.. k-v' • al Elk NORTH BUILDING:NORTH ELEVATION 6 SOUTH BUILDING: NORTH ELEVATION :.. CURRENT41 PERMIT APPLICATION .a CCUURLRENT PERMIT APPLICATION • • • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1OELEV E� '-_- RENTON, WASHINGTON ,.. . .._ . : _ . O © 3 4 5 6 O O8 .. (i) ..„3:::::... II 12 13 14 ® ® 16 ;. s' iri:i ii: ::azai'%?:'•':as'u+s :=:iq :`•'•'.?:.::`:`%':` :; ti:ra rti tr ri:if::�..v.:?sii:a±%3..i:_. iiY .r'r:� r :„t.:„..�..„.:_.'i i ifi'.:i tki :ii: 2:::„§st%V s:%ii�t+i. i i:o- riis�:: -:;:.;—_ �� _____ •::asp:;:t__ Ell I .■ 11� ■_ ■I■6 =■1e ■ rl 1 . n 1 11� R tl 1 �.■ I♦■ k' I♦ �In _ i a n m6� Vgna no:�— I�liuwailll Otl:�91ue ianndl dt .&.® i pi ®C.u%,�— Varti iiiMil 1115nHiiild i mu. _My a = _____ I I !ail 1 '::-JI =i� _il.! = nil-'ii�! !��ar., �i_? T I' =1I =��1 lib aor., `liha _I�■ OAP it _a�11!l1! �. _ I� anll 4VV — Vtli.iia 11 IVIwl..l gRlq!gl u ,A 1,...h I. — m.gpi .— Iomaualq!CIII IIIb .111 61,,,MI _ Ilimu lV,�= : !Iil ■' Iii lI!- �e =iII!B- I�iilii ii, r.:,a li_<a _ii II€_1 1■1, =`!!Ili _i1iifill a� Iniiil7! ��„m — ,� old Epp•_ OVl A; Vn n u111- CV'IV!11 i.MI bliLl9V — NIAiY 9 x 1g411!I N pen 9Zilnn IIVi %NE = IP 1_,�II!I/1 P I.I. ? .: ' T -5 E.=,ianlr�,l�m/ 11/311!!•1 I q 'i1i ai— 0!! na ll�! PROPOSED WEST ELEvATION (ALLEY) O © 3 T 5 T .: ..® ® 9 Im II T T la ® ® . .:::::.:.,.... .......... t f�afx::: fs_::::_:::::::::i::::=::::::::::: :::::;:::::::::::Ss;i?:;::sa>.::::rs:'t?{st;;:iss:;::: s:::;toli::;::;;:;:::': ®® .............................. :;l •Ara.._.._�f�sw�sw................ ; u........__._.:_! Gffi5sn�.:a — •�d:�#.as;. :::::,�$:�::.m:::.$ ®.®. I 111111111101 1 — nl■1 1 ■P I !■;8 E i in l_�I palno j ■snle i!fl ! i .r�llio 9 r :,■ 1 ■ g o iln 1 •1 `I■11n(a6 l,,,,,,14.__ 111 IIV. ■I, _IIE r1111 ■, 6q tgl11Vtl.-- '■-_ if lniE.,.■,._ Iltl �,■IPnh 4�, — ,■IgIIi_i MOM-11l■ IAU in 1016- ,I—�JM4m"oi WO Po'I,�-mild l4?!n■�'_ e i I !Milli Pig ili1 ■q4 ■IU! e� ■i! ■Isla■ili_II r.(aln=�1= T i I =ni a ����� __■n_ 1 _ -l_Lnor 6191E ii ISM VZ n VII ow lnmi - i,tI.H 911 liltl II�..IliII fiV um olf' 'L VI.— IMAUIi UI 1 ` fli 1H Unip.. — : 9ail��,l ®jig fez_■I�! a e� ■,�i In ■�!_�� III,=li= _-nl� -1i i Hn li I 1. °Ill_ L 1!II !: mugs_ _ lanlo intlVtl —�.Illo n maadltl o mai,,,u 111u nBmu, , loi' Ip III lla_6udl� • ffillil ha `lTili nat iili in Vil.. tnri !_im — I 19� -:III ul�e='il�_�ui._E aT�__ .. ,. -, -e. o JIIgII■■4_l:-U�Ill�ll:-i ME� s iiim =emu■�nIf:■ =.1I.1 ■I�4.MBIOI 3I•J■ I ow_L ;-I• 0 WEST ELEVATION (ALLEY)- CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION • • • • • CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1OELEV .-�--- -,-. RENTON, WASHINGTON • . . . .. .. 1( 1 16 IS 14 13 12 0 0 O ® O O T T T T Rommmammomis :smmimm........ /__ _- -::::::.:a:::::;::s:::s;;;;:;nr;;tz;;;x::aW::::�s::�:::;s;:e:ss;r:;:�ass:;; ::•rz<::rxa:a•�. •:.::::•�.:::::::::::�:.:::�.::-::::::,___ „:„::„,:„:„,:az,:mga::::,:::::,::::,::::::::,::::::,:„:::::::,„::::::::,:::::4„,„:::,::,:::,:,::,:;:,:,:,::„:,:::,:::„„:„:„,:„:,:„::::,:,::::::::,::::::::,::::s2:::2 ........_._•.:::�::::;:may..,;.:::.;;::;;:...�.:,::,4 i�i� � ;?M�■}..._,_.,;_yeee■ :_.e�e.o� . gip_�Y\ -'"�� Q_ le.�_�. � --�1cr ®sifSE"�;_:: a �::_ _'.I..� : h■Inr�:��� �Ii�!moo®lid!==■e =71�!=i�E nl il l Flll�_ -1 -nl li 47 ®!®i=!lli=e' 1�iB�.� 1�■Is.p : Irii•o en,-- Yus+iL�l'= 1Cm.-c15 lllllii iodl e�e • I1C-J an ,u'u.' - ].!Ya111�—L1c+i918 l� IU:riooY71� 11a,Tiuk7 _;1 LlI4 muu i 3 liniiI 2-.1_:IMIli001211111IMMEINIIIille ■e EI III t °n1 Fi!l;■G 'ems■ ®9!®i®!■J� 'sue■ YI■lil n■ 1■i Fail u im1 7XYmiW11 gnigwolm mug liia:.nMl Iu i 1 'E1_h ff L'�iShcll aa Ida"riuigli ,, ICfun_u41`-1 11 ail___ erg— : I T■Te T■o T�E ��E'_I n EE� a■��a �j ■ITT a /� �I■i "0Illif! i I alY_l 1E i �. �tiI.B � k �,y l MPIPIl■r10 1i9�`�tRA e■ �; „. en._ - ._ai al.. _MS' .�p>ri-.41MAalE iu.":'.'3�+Y M7.i oiuttli� _u_,.a�a tNoi :c.7 l' IEwu-u . ..� - 101."FYu.r.L. • 4n"niuoildl YGw''�:�=-��i� nc xrdiluu iu, . _ �i_=..1-4111firi.-- ;a . !�►11.1 ,,-® 0�IIq hi! se Ca IOW (I 1 iiii ,�l datir -r.�� 1i11fi IA�� 1� ��1�retip �1i1 11lh ®a lnhc —� I L— , _J 6NPROPOSED EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUTH) 101.6 YAW i ® T PP P P0PP O P PP PP -:::: . ____ N�ers:-tssass;an;ar,•x•s:::ar::; .- - . ____„-, ____J-ITT .�,• _ -<� ........... .........._T ._......:�::�;:in:::-i:::�s%=.i.i.L. F 1 /'��i��_:r;���;;.:;;:%__:•:::::::_�•_r.: 7_�. -_:___:_��. -.,_ z-- O Q�- �� _ 71F: . ::�rif �-- .__ r.tcn?._ I :ii6:'—i ■a iU I■c6 1i� _! ,i ii !, T nn ro ii �� i,_.1� ®r,■�1' . iii_ira i e= u rail -I) iu 1Iln.1IT tl111 a rdll= f :111kd;I IMEIII 11111 I tltlll.l ill FI, I idol im ITI 1u1 I ud dead v■Inl ■■ _■o c ® 111a1 n n e■ 1 -Milief= aim 5 Y _- I o u in IAinuo tli iun r$11 le�llii�JXXDLI I111INI�.I tltlllul nioutl IMn¢ieooi� - I �uu iTcY99 Eu uo-'iko"i c -_ t milowm-=i Meil loeimin Eli Inman 17 nl Ili vma llii!II■-1 'i 'l11■��■ Ifii r.�l■:= . ii MI 0 irRii ni itll meiffiiii' almu1 L!I_Ilttl CR it dIL ital �Nmiieui tllmu algid -1?Ulm M.. ,, : I`�!nl B i �i 1 ® _ THE- 1E - ,1---_n -- m mmm !ii iI !I! I!!�in mE i JIli.m—.—= — •_1_ J EAST ELEVATION (WILLIAMS AVE SOUTH)- CURRENT PERMIT APPLICATION YN15995f4Q CM SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- i OELEV ... - ... RENTON, WASHINGTON - I 1 1 1 _ i .j O © T_ __ _• •O 5 O 0 O O n © 0 ® Q T WILL AMS A NUE OUTN I I I .....1 I I I ,. I I I I „. I I I --rti. a 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i-,v4a.•w I 1 11°r4 A �;. ri- f---1 - I.-I -' T-�I - 1«a�ai.,..._..--,—I - ��-ram -._�a_-u� i111 ■�Ilfii "N !"�/. ,MmMs ■■©■■ �■L,: - it 9-Boa/o� ■7..�I %i ��M7■�„�� �s�� �■ _l III , Pi r ,L j �� / ' lk 4 1/ ' F' '411 , Ill 1,1 1 %%/ /, ___!-- 3I1A % _ - i ,ii a f 1„,, J ` umli - umm _i J� III+III iiiiiii 1- 1111�II�I��I �ril'inri III�P,911J _ ��`I,III� r �� Loma n II -MW---Ti- ill ill gain -sEll , I'—. i i I M I O I , , 1r — IEM _WI i1 /O%�//��/� i�ii/,r c /�/ �//%;�_ _ LW �I LE I �1-- I ;r%%//%%%/,w-; )/" %///J%% // I I� /,r,%%//%% %///��/ / am/���/ �/��%�o%i// % l � F � ■I . ►� �� 1 i %ji i i i i i \I i , L ,_ - - mut 349.94' N0'28'25"E `TPd.- . ALLEY • COMMON SPACE CALCULATIONS/AREAS "-O9 1." • • J7 3/32".I'-0" 1il.w-..om.o.1%.1 • W lTRIM.wItNI. 1¢OWpro. • C1rm:na.MACE. tm M NfpPICR Wd Wa. LW 4 TOTAL W-1 MKI. .P-! O(059I WI IIM OY W CP • • •III LINACJIIb TOTAL WI LNLICM+1 Tyr! CDA SHERMAN APARTMENTS SD- 1O = RENTON, WASHINGTON CDA A R CHI E CT S INCORP OR A TED October 10, 2002 City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes CDA# 01041 SUBJECT: Request for Reconsideration of Minor Modifications to Sherman Apartments — Square Footage Calculation Criteria LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA • Dear Susan; At your request included for your review is a narrative of the exterior landscaping calculation. This calculation method or approach has been taken to be consistent with the Administrative Site Plan Review Staff Report and Decision of January 29`", 2001. Areas included in the landscaping calculation include trees and other plants and planters, pavers, and low retaining walls. This is inclusive of all exterior surfaces within the property lines excluding the building footprints, garbage enclosures adjacent to the alley and the ramp to the parking garage below. Exterior areas utilized for open space are also included in the landscape calculations. Below is the breakdown between landscaped planting areas, and paver/topping areas. Landscape Areas: 4,478 SF (Plantings) Hardscape Areas: 9,810 SF (Pavers, Concrete Topping) Total: 14,288 SF Attached is the square footage spread sheet also requested incorporating the Site Plan Approval, Building Permit and Revision Data. DF C rYPMk-NT oFrTMro NiNG OC 499CE/1 Fo Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions, Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC �. i au..,... Seth Hale cc: Neil Watts William Sherman Jr, - Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher II CDA011CompanyVDES11041 Dean Sherman Apartments&WplRenronl101002iala,let,doc Carl P.Pirscher,AM principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO sox 55d29 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel; (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 o I - -- PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGES 10/10/2002 SITE PLAN APPROVAL •, BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL BUILDING REVISION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AREA: 88,800 SF 80,170 SF 87,997 SF PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE: 34,200 SF 35,137 SF 36,763 SF PROPOSED BUILD'G TOTAL AREA: [ 123,000 SF 115,307 SF _ 124,760 SF PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 22,400 SF 20,124 SF 22,562 SF PROPOSED PARKING: 113 VEHICLES 112 VEHICLES 121 VEHICLES PROPOSED STORIES: 4 STORIES - . 4 STORIES 4 STORIES NUMBER OF UNITS: - 86 UNITS 1 85 UNITS 99 UNITS MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 50'-0"/56'-8" 45'-8"/53'-3" 45'-8"153'-3" OPEN SPACE: ) 5,900 SF/68.6 SF PER UNIT 4,867 SF/57.26 SF PER UNIT _ 5,095 SF 151.46 SF PER UNIT LANDSCAPING: ( 17,176 SF I 17,267 SF 14,288 SF CDA ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED October 7, 2002 City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes CDA# 01041 SUBJECT: Request for Parking Modification LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA Dear Susan; The purpose of this letter is to formally request a modification to the parking requirements for the Sherman Apartment Homes project. Based upon 99 units (15 two bedrooms, 63 one bedrooms and 21 studios) the site requires 125 stalls. The proposed below grade parking garage will contain 121 parking stalls or 4 stalls less than is currently required. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON Seth Hale oCT.0 $ 2002 cc: Neil Watts William Sherman Jr. RECEIVED, Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher CDA ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED October 7, 2002 DEyELOP�1E CITY OPT City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner OCT 0 8 2002 Renton City 1055 South Grady Sixth Floor y RE CEIV Renton,WA 98055 � PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes CDA# 01041 SUBJECT: Request for Reconsideration of Minor Modifications to Sherman Apartments LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA Dear Susan; At your request listed below are those items that CDA Architects and Sherman Homes have submitted for revision. Item#1 —Parking Garage Garage has been extended 15'-0" to the south to accommodate 7 tandem stalls dedicated to the 2 bedroom units. Other minor modifications in the parking garage have revised the parking count from 112 parking stalls to 121 parking stalls. Based on the revised 99 unit ratio the project is under parked by four stalls. This is addressed via a formal "Request for Parking Modification" submittal and has been made apparent with city staff on numerous occasions. The extension of the parking garage has also revised the transformer location at grade from the intersection of 5th and Williams to a location adjacent to the alley and landscaping has been added at the previous transformer location. Item#2—Building Both buildings have been "stretched" to accommodate the unit increase from 85 units to 99 units. Revised building length has been extended by 7'-0" however extension is made up between the buildings maintaining the setbacks at both the north and south ends of the site. Additional modulation and articulation is provided via the "townhouse" two story gabled elements at the Williams Avenue elevations to reduce bulk and scale and provide a pedestrian scale to the building facades. Additional open space is provided at the main floor via an enlarged Exercise Room and the addition of a Community Room in the south building. Both spaces also have direct access to exterior terraces. Townhome effect is further enhances via individual sidewalk entries to ground floor units facing Williams Avenue. Stairs, gates and landscaping are all incorporated to reduce the streetscape to a human scale. Item#3—Open Space The additional units require additional common space. At 50 SF per unit the current count of 99 units requires 4,950 SF of open space. A document titled "Common Space Calculations/Areas" indicating the locations and square footages of open space is included with this submittal for review purposes. Currently the project exceeds common space requirement by 145 SF. Item#4—Exterior All items included in the "Request for Reconsideration of Minor Modifications to Sherman Apartment Site Plan Approval" prepared by the City of Renton and dated June 3rd 2002 are incorporated in the current redesign and will be preserved. Prior to Building Permit issuance a color and exterior finish materials board will be submitted to the Development Services Division Project Manager for review and approval. Subsequent to color and exterior finish approval 8-1/2 x 11 plan reductions (PMT's) of all revised drawings will be submitted to the City of Renton. Documents Included with this Modification Reconsideration are the following documents... All schematic design plans are entitled SD-10. -Site Plan -Parking Garage Plan -Main Floor Plan -North and South Elevations, Proposed and Current Permit Application -West Elevations, Proposed and Current Permit Application -East Elevation, Proposed and Current Permit Application -Common Space Calculations/Areas Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC Seth Hale cc: Neil Watts William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher IICDA011CompanyVOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1Wp1Renton1100202fiala.let.doc . Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 L• • CDA ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED • September 26, 2002 City of Renton,Planning,Building,Public Works Attn: Neil R.Watts,Director Development Services Division Renton City Hall,Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Shemian Apartment Homes CDA# 1041 SUBJECT:Proposed Building Revisions Dear Neil; As you can imagine everyone is prepared to gear up again and revise the Sherman Apartment plans per the documents we presented at your offices on Thursday September 194}'. However,prior to proceeding CDA and Sherman Homes would like to have some form of approval in writing from your offices. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to facilitate this process. I will gladly draft a letter for your signature. Again,thank you very much for your support throughout all phases of this project, I have personally found the experience working with your jurisdiction to be a refreshing and reasonable approach to both the economic realities of a project and the aspirations of improving Renton's built environment. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC • Seth Hale enclosure cc A R CHI T ECT S 1 N C O R P ORATED July 11, 2002 City of Renton,Planning,Building,Public Works Attn: Neil R.Watts,Director Development Services Division Renton City Hall,Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Shcrrnan Apartment Homes C.D.A#1 1041 SUBJECT;Proposcd Building Revisions Dear Neil; After our meeting on June 24,we have re-evaluated the approach to the proposed building adjustments and taken a closer look at the codc provisions discussed. Provided below is a summary of the revised adjustments now requested. It is our hope that this summary will assist you in providing us with the guidelines necessary for preparation of all documentation. kS• 1. Additional Units: - � `�'��� Building revision from 85 units t 101 units.� is has been achieved by both interior unit revisions and minor exterior building footprint revisions. Each building would include 8 additional units. Total revised unit counts are as follows (both buildings): 22 studios, 55 one bedroom and 24 two bedroom units. 2. Parking: Based on thc parking ratios of 1.2 stalls per studio and one bedroom units and 1.6 stalls for 2 bedroom units the overall requirement for parking would be 131 stalls. To accommodate additional units at the above stated parking ratio 19 stalls or other parking alternatives arc required. 3. Additional Square rootage See attached for revised area calcs. The adjustments are being designed as minor modifications to the approved site plan. We are working to ensure that the adjustments will be within ten percent of the approved "area and scale" for the project, and will not constitute a "substantial change" in density or intensity from the approved site plan scale and dimensions. We do not anticipate "significantly greater" impacts on the environment from these changes. We arc contacting the project's traffic engineer to confirm this analysis. Another issue discusscd at our meeting was whether a public hearing would be required. Since we have scaled back the adjustments, we do not believe that we trigger any of the hearing standards. In addition, the code states that a minor modification is processed by "administrative determination" and that the only applications required to go to a public hearing are site plan review on projects that exceed certain standards. Read in context,the code requires a public hearing only for an independent site plan review project, and allows minor modifications to be processed without a hearing by administrative determination. Thank you again for your feedback at our meeting on June 24th. Once you have had a chance to digest the information we would like to meet at your offices next week to discuss thcsc revisions in detail. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to schedule a time that is convenient for you. If you have any additional questions or require additional material please do not hesitate to contact me. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC Seth Hale enclosure cc • • Ilcda011companyVOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WpV?enton1070302warts.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher.AM principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, FF'nshington 98155 Tel.• (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 i PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGES 7/10/2002 • SITE PLAN APPROVAL BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL REVISED FLOOR PLAN PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AREA: 88,800 SF • 80,170 SF _ 88,537 SF PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE: I 34,200 SF 35,137 SF . 35,137 SF PROPOSED BUILD'G TOTAL AREA: 123,000 SF 115,307 SF r 123,674 SF PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 22,400 SF 20,124 SF 22,168 SF PROPOSED PARKING: - 113 VEHICLES 112 VEHICLES 112 VEHICLES 19 OFFSITE PROPOSED STORIES: j— 4 STORIES I 4 STORIES 4 STORIES ---m"' NUMBER OF UNITS: 86 UNITS 85 UNITS 101 UNITS MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 50'-0"/56'-8" _ 45'-8"/53'-3" _ 45'-8"/53'-3" 41 OPEN SPACE: 5,900 SF 4,867 SF/57.26 SF PER UNIT 5,050 SF REQUIRED r t •—WA- LANDSCAPING: I 5,397 SF/63.49 PER UNIT 5,397 SF/63.49 PER UNIT '-:4;601 SF 145.55 PER UNIT. vaoti i o6I, ;; - CITY L_Zi' RENTON ..IL . Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator June 3,2002 • Mr. Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle,WA 98155 Subject: Request For Reconsideration Of Minor Modifications To Sherman Apartment Site Plan Approval (File No. LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Mr. Hale: Per our meeting held on May 30, 2002,with Bill Sherman Jr., Eric .Wagner, you and myself in attendance, it is our understanding that revisions to the decks and exterior panels have been designed and are requesting reconsideration of these.two items. We have received the letter, via fax, dated May 30, 2002 which outlines the revisions addressing Items 3 and 4 per our May 17, 2002 letter. Based on our.:meeting and further review of the submitted elevations depicting integrated building panels and the deck/railing design,the following is our response. To reiterate, all requested modifications per::CDA letters.of April 30, 2002 and May 30,2002 are summarized below: 1. The roof has been modified from a gable type to mansard style with.an overall roof height reduction of 5 feet 6 inches. (April 30) 2. The landscaping at the.alley has been revised. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley as will the'metal trellis. Modulation of the planter has been eliminated. (April 30) . 3. The solid deck panels have been removed and replaced with bolt on decks made of aluminum with a powder coated finish. The submitted photograph illustrates the railing design with vertical and horizontal elements of varied spacing and diameter. To address the concern regarding decks being utilized as a storage area and the panels providing screening, the building layout has incorporated four(4) internal storage areas per floor and bike racks in the parking garage. A covenant disallowing storage on the decks will also be incorporated by the project owner. (May 30) 4. The original exterior free standing building panels have been removed and replaced with panels integrated into the building facade. The panels are to create the same visual appearance as shown on the original approved drawings. Additional building articulation is to be provided by using a minimum of two colors for the hardi-panel material. (May 30) 5. The exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard while maintaining the coursing dimensions. (April 30) According to Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:l allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer 4 Page2of2 Sherman Apts.Request for Reconsideration of Modifications • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of. the development in the approved site plan;or • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environmental and facilities than the approved plan;or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. Analysis of Revised Modifications to Deck Panels and Exterior Building Panels: Item #3: The deck design as illustrated in the provided photographs appears to adequately address both the modulation and articulation of the building facades by providing horizontal and vertical railing elements of varied spacing and diameter. The incorporation and enforcement of a restrictive covenant prohibiting storage on the decks and the designation of four internal storage areas per floor and bike racks in the parking garage should appropriately address the original intent the deck panels by eliminating visual clutter on the decks. Staff supports the specific deck design as illustrated in the provided photographs.Any changes to the submitted design must be resubmitted for review. Item #4: The removal of the freestanding building,,panels and replacement with integrated building panels on all facades (in same/proximatelocations as:.original elevations) appears to convey the original intent of modulation, articulation,bulls and,scale of the'`buildings of as the original design. Staff supports this modification. . The site plan modifications requested fin"your April 30, 2002''andR May 30, 2002 letters have been evaluated in relation to the approved plan.rBased on this analys s,weehave determined that all five of the proposed revisions (to reduce:the rooft,4fdtivjONscapihg modification, deck design, exterior building panels and building finishes) are,within`the.parameters=,defined,",by Renton Municipal Code and are approved subject to:the following',conditions ? ` • 1. The applicant shall submit a`coloriaind•,exteriorr finish materials,board to the Development Services Division Project Manager:for review and approval,prior.:;to the issuance of building permits. q w 2. The applicant shall submit-'plan,,reductions, (8 '/z''"x:;.'11),,PMT's, of all revised drawings including but not limited to the:site-plan building elevations;~landscaping plan, subsequent to the approval of Condition.I listed above.; This determination will be final unless''a°,writter:vappeal of this administrative determination- accompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee — is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425) 430-7382. Sincerely, Ajd Neil Watts Development Services Director cc: Jennifer Henning Rebecca Lind • Parties of Record 111111500 -.. —____•,& i ._ . -• — i'- -- I gilialifi - .—. r ..,....._ • , , ."-- • "- - - r..._ _ . _ allo _ , Isis ligai ow 11 1 I 10: -.? -411 a . r....1.--1 - , IV, ! .. . , ,•1 . , I ,.. . ..._ ..14.,.t... .,...„.- ..........-.., , . , - .... .. 1 1.........----' ,. .. .. Itu . . , .. _ I : ! 1 7 \ I 1 ‘ ....,.... u_...i •.. i . , ., ._-...... , , • 41" • -:. r ' 0\ Lik Aiiiiiiir , $ afte vt — iikv_ • •. _. \ • . „---- v iv\ _. sift, iimA , ..,. .. .'NoN 1 --__ \ . X l'AN ISM MEM 113* a ems., lir V-"lil IlL ._.. , 11111,1.7 I Rti ig - ----.- i IAiim-7---, -\....___A, . flt,\, ! I /..,•'„iia 1,1\ villi : n „..-, Iii,, - 4 .' ' . i %it VIM II•'- . LIM 1 III I 1 • r • AK lirq 1 liMNNIMINIIMINIMIMINEt i 4oriiiimmimur,..„ .,..• .'''' r. t... . . ., .,. ,. , % t -. ....-. ....._ ,. , ..,. ,... .,,... I .., . ' --..,4,..r.•'' Im......L, .....' ,... • ,,.. . . _ ..... . ._ 1 ; . •V '11Mok \ . ii N l' EL • , MMIIIIIL ' MIMMIlli INEMMIllk\ 11111111111111.1111111, : Jammem—animm,— \ 1 , ,....amORMINVISTAIIIIS\ 41111011.1111.111111111111 1.11 * , ... ,,.. : - . ... . i ... . i ..... .-. ammennimi . • ......,\ ----- - _ '111.11.00......1.161•0110•11111. .\\, ,.. , .. ... \.. . . . .. ., ........-........u........-.....--- "..."-.... .... ...osia.-. . .....LT::::.... .........---....-- \ . \ * . \' A r.-- . . • '•,i -- i•---•-::-.' ,- , vsummit t—7"------------. -.71._ ,--- --. \ CITY ' F RENTON „LL $` � Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg.Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator - R-ENGE May17 2002 '�PrL A , r/t01I07 .1 AV )3- Ert oz. — Mr. Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: REQUEST FOR MINOR MODIFICATION TO SHERMAN APARTMENT SITE PLAN APPROVAL (FILE NO. LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Mr. Hale: I am in receipt of your letter dated April 30, 2002 requesting consideration and approval of five modifications to the approved site' plan for Sherman Apartments located at 415 Williams Ave. South. According to your letter, these changes are the result of the need to reduce overall construction costs and elements affecting building materials (e.g. environmental: moss build-up, structural: weight of deck panels, aesthetics and longevity of material). The modifications that you are requesting are summarized below: 1. The roof has been modified from a gable type to mansard style with an overall roof height reduction of 5 feet 6 inches. 2. The landscaping at the alley has been revised. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley as will the metal trellis. Modulation of the planter has been eliminated. 3. The solid panels on the decks are replaced by horizontal metal railings. 4. The exterior free standing building panels have been removed. No exterior elements have replaced these panels. 5. The exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard while maintaining the coursing dimensions. Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:l allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent.(10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environmental and facilities than the approved plan;or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE :.� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer CITY i', + RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg.Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 17, 2002 /ARA/� Mr. Seth Hale 5I74o2- 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: REQUEST FOR MINOR MODIFICATION TO SHERMAN APARTMENT SITE PLAN APPROVAL (FILE NO. LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Mr. Hale: - I am in receipt of your letter dated April 30, 2002 requesting consideration and approval of five modifications to the approved site plan for Sherman Apartments located at 415 Williams Ave. South. According to your letter, these changes are the result of the need to reduce overall construction costs and elements affecting building materials (e.g. environmental: moss build-up, structural: weight,of deck panels, aesthetics and longevity of material). The modifications that you are requesting are summarized below: 1. The roof has been modified from a gable type to mansard style with an overall roof height reduction of 5 feet 6 inches. 2. The landscaping at the alley has been revised. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley as will the metal trellis. Modulation of the planter has been eliminated. 3. The solid panels on the decks are replaced by horizontal metal railings. 4. The exterior free standing building panels have been removed. No exterior elements have replaced these panels. 5. The exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard while maintaining the coursing dimensions. Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:l allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent.(10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environmental and facilities than the approved plan; or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer Page2of3 Sherman Apts.Request for Modifications Analysis of Five Proposed Modifications: 1. The revised roof appears to give a similar Idok from the street level and the reduced height further minimizes the height of the structure. Staff is in support of this modification. 2. The alley landscaping, trellis and planters appear to maintain the intent of the visual screening through both hardscape and the soft edge produced by a variety of plant materials. Staff supports this modification. 3. The elimination of the deck panels and standardized size lessens the modulation and articulation of the buildings and creates a repetitive visual appearance of the facades. Staff does not support this modification. 4. The removal of the building panels (freestanding "L" shaped elements) from the facades lessens the modulation, articulation, bulk and scale of the buildings as the original design provided. The IJ.rbaruceriter Design guidelines are specific about the addition of architecturalr°elements-to building facades to reduce the apparent Fj3• . size of new buildings, ,break'xup long walls, ada rsual interest and enhance the character of the neighbothoodaStaf 'does nofsu port,this.modification. 5. The revision of the exteri*materials from cer erttitio4skbevel siding to hardipanels and vinyl siding with the same coursing and�`o iigh `quality commercial grade appears to meet' of°theo` T SO/ports this revision with the~intent :0 ri�irat�clesigri`'.:t Stafl the recommendation as aconditio o1`yapproyal that the applicant submit a color and materials board forrreviewjaiid approvdl' V.: . ,. . 0 The site plan modifications requested in.ryour Apr: 30, 2002 letter have been evaluated in relation to the approved site;=pl*a Based on this analysts, *e.have determined that three of the proposed revisions (to,reduce the roof height, la idscaping modification and the revised building finishes) are-withirt,.the,parameters" defne by Renton Municipal Code and are approved subject td4he,folio*ing;conditions:f • The applicant shall submit a'color;and-ext'erior finish materials board to the Development Services Division-Project Manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. > The applicant shall submit plan reductions, (8 1/2 x 11) PMT's, of all. revised drawings including but not limited to the site plan, building elevations, landscaping plan, subsequent to the approval of Condition I listed above. Please take note that the proposed modifications to the deck panels and building panels, Items 3 and 4 as outlined in the section on Analysis of Five Proposed Modifications, do not maintain the intent of the approved original design and therefore are not approved. This determination will be final unless a written appeal of •this administrative determination-accompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee — is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision. A Page3of3 Sherman Apts.Request for Modifications Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at(425)430-7382. Sincerely, Neil Watts Development Services Director cc: Jennifer Henning Rebecca Lind Parties of Recordz, ., • i, ..+,>> ckJv'` "::.,,a r.:a,;•Nye 't b> •',bF,E )" t" •,:x S S:✓,'tL•.xw:?e,`;:s:.,. V"v'>�.gip, <.? t , \ i gyp'Y ";'; S'F tea.• 1, 'SK S.' —"'s* fr s ,^,5- rd ..s• Y y CDA A R CHI T ECT S INCORPORATED DEVELOPMENT NINGTTY RENTON April30, 2002 MAY 01 2002 City of Renton,Planning,Building,Public Works RECEIVED Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner Renton City Hall,Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes CDA# 01041 • SUBJECT: Exterior Revisions to Sherman Apartment Homes LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF,SA-A, LLA Dear Susan; At your request listed 'below are those items that CDA Architects and Sherman Homes have submitted for revision. • Item#1 —Roof Revsion. Intent of revision is to reduce overall roof structure and associated costs while minimizing the visual divergence from the Site Plan Approval Elevation. The roof has been revised from two full gables to mansards at the building perimeter. Roof pitches while reduced in overall height remain virtually the same minus the gables at Williams and the Alley. These have been reduced to coincide with the adjacent sheds. Majority of roof structure becomes flat which is hidden by the mansard and gable elements at the building perimeter. Overall height of structure has been reduced by approximately 5'- 6". This revision has a significant impact on the overall construction costs, reduces the overall height of the structure and maintains the visual appearance similar to that of the site plan approval documents. Item#2—Landscaping at Alley Landscaping at alley has been slightly revised from the previous site plan approval but the intent has been maintained. Landscaping and a'trellis are included adjacent to the alley very similar to that which was submitted for site plan approval. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley and will contain 18" of soil. A continuous metal trellis is attached to the alley side of the landscaping planter. Vines per the landscaping plan will be allowed to mature reaching the top of the trellis providing significant greenery and visual screening to adjacent neighbors. Ilcda011companyIJOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WplRenton1042402flalaletdoc :arl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 • Seattle,Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)368 9558 Item#3—Deck Panels Solid deck panel faces have been removed and an open horizontal rail has been provided in its place. Entire deck and rail will be constructed of metal for a durable pleasing appearance. Item#4—Exterior Building Panels Free standing exterior building panels have been removed. The intended effect of these panels was to reduce repetition and the vertical elements associated with the building. These free standing elements when viewed in three dimensions would not have created this intended effect. It would be obvious that these elements were separate from the building and would in fact detract from the building itself. It is our opinion that the building articulation, roof and material variation provide sufficient and pleasing visual appearance without the addition of these free standing elements. Item#5—Exterior Finish Materials Exterior finish materials have• been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard. Hardiboard is a durable sheet good material that imitates the appearance of stucco with various textures. Proposed finish is yet unselected however it will not be a heavy texture. In addition hardiboard provides reveal joints similar to those in stucco. Commercial vinyl siding will be applied to imitate the appearance of a cementitious bevel siding. Coursing dimensions will be maintained as detailed on the site plan approval documents. The vinyl siding texture will be smooth to eliminate any •buildup of airborne material. The extended life of vinyl siding and it's color will maintain a pleasing aesthetic finish. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher • Ilcda011companyllOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WplRenton1042402fiala.ld.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA • principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX55429 • • Seattle,Washington 98155 • Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 APR-30-2002 17:00 CITY OF RENTON 425 430 7231 P.01 l. CDA ARCHITECTS INCORP ORATED F A X T R A N S M I T T A L SHEET' DATE April 30, 2002 TO Susan Fiala COMPANY City of Renton FAX NUMBER 425.430.7231 SENT BY Seth Hale PROJECT NAME Sherman Apartments PROJECT NO. 1041 NUMBER OF PAGES (including this page): 3 REMARKS: Susan, Letter per your request for incorporation into the building permit submittal and to proceed with the administrative review. Hard copy to follow via mail. Please do not hesitate to call with any questions. Thank you. CDA ARCHITECTS, INC. ar1/4) 1,1 Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner ‘\cda011companyLJOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments\Wp\Renton1043002susan.faX.doc IF YOU DID NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES PLEASE CALL 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle WA 98155 206-368-9668 Fsx(206)368-9558 APR-30-2002 17:00 CITY OF RENTON " 425 430 7231 P.02 CDA AR S I N C 0 R P O R A T E D April 30, 2002 City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes CDA# 01041 SUBJECT: Exterior Revisions to Sherman Apartment Homes LAND USE#: LUA-00-166, ECF, SA-A, LLA Dear Susan; At your request listed below are those items that CDA Architects and Sherman Homes have submitted for revision. Item#1 —Roof Revsion. Intent of revision is to reduce overall roof structure and associated costs while minimizing the visual divergence from the Site Plan Approval Elevation. The roof has been revised from two full gables to mansards at the building perimeter. Roof pitches while reduced in overall height remain virtually the same minus the gables at Williams and the Alley. These have been reduced to coincide with the adjacent sheds. Majority of roof structure becomes flat which is hidden by the mansard and gable elements at the building perimeter. Overall height of structure has been reduced by approximately 5'- 6". This revision has a significant impact on the overall construction costs, reduces the overall height of the structure and maintains the visual appearance similar to that of the site plan approval documents. Item #2—Landscaping at Alley Landscaping at alley has been slightly revised from the previous site plan approval but the intent has • been maintained. Landscaping and a trellis are included adjacent to the alley very similar to that which was submitted for site plan approval. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley and will contain 18" of soil. A continuous metal trellis Is attached to the alley side of the landscaping planter. Vines per the landscaping plan will be allowed to mature reaching the top of the trellis providing significant greenery and visual screening to adjacent neighbors. IIcda011eornpanyllOBS11091 Doan Sherman rlparrmenrslWplRenron1093402fioln.ler.doo Girl F PlrSeher,.l1A principal 19524 halhnger Wry NE PO BOX J5429 Seattle. Washrngron 98155 Tel. (206)-368-9668 Fax(206)-368.9558 APR-30-2002 17:01 CITY nF RENTON 425 430 7231 P.03 Item#3 -Deck Panels Solid deck panel faces have been removed and an open horizontal rail has been provided in its place. Entire deck and rail will be constructed of metal for a durable pleasing appearance. Item #4—Exterlor Building PanoI4 Free standing exterior building panels have been removed. The intended effect of these panels was to reduce repetition and the vertical elements associated with the building. These free standing elements when viewed in three dimensions would not have created this intended effect. It would be obvious that these elements wore separate from the building and would in fact detract from the building itself. II is our opinion that the building articulation, roof and material variation provide sufficient and pleasing visual appearance without the addition of these free standing elements. Item#5- Exterior Finish Materials Exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard. Hardiboard is a durable sheet good material that imitates the appearance of stucco with various textures. Proposed finish is yet unselected however it will not be a heavy texture. In addition hardiboard provides reveal Joints similar to those in stucco, Commercial vinyl siding will be applied to imitate the appearance of a cementitious bevel siding. Coursing dimensions will be maintained as detailed on the site plan approval documents. The vinyl siding texture will be smooth to eliminate any buildup of airborne material. The extended life of vinyl siding and it's color will maintain a pleasing aesthetic finish. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, • CDA ARCHITECTS,INC Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher lIcda01 icampanyl.1011311041 Dean Sherman'4prom,enulWplReneont042402fialn.let.doc Carl F.Pvscher,A14 principal 19524 Ballinger Way NB PO BOX SS429 Senate), Warhuigron 981JS TO: (206)466.9668 Frey. (206J-36.3-9:S58 TOTAL P.03 n y %rtio.„--N CITY F RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 1, 2002 Kris Nelson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72rld Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: Sherman Apts. Lot Line Adjustment File No. LUA-00-168, LLA Dear Mr. Nelson: The City of Renton has completed processing the above referenced lot line adjustment and has forwarded the final mylars to King County for recording. Please note the recording of the lot line adjustment map alone does not transfer ownership of property. If necessary, prepare and record a deed transferring ownership of the portion of land depicted in the lot line adjustment map. We recommend that the legal description for this document be prepared by a surveyor. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure this document is properly prepared and recorded with the County. If you have any further questions regarding this lot line adjustment, please contact me at(425) 430-7382. Sincerely, Susan Fiala,• ICP Senior Planner cc: Bill Sherman,Wm. Sherman &Co., Inc. Yellow file 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R'E°N T O N �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE :J This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer , CITY OF RENTON . Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM DATE: May 1,2002 TO: City Clerk's Office FROM: Susan Fiala, P/B/PW-Development/Planning,x7382 ` . SUBJECT: Sherman Apts. Lot Line Adjustment; File No. LUA-00-168, LLA Attached please find two sets of the above-referenced mylar and three copies for recording with King County. Please have Consolidated Delivery&Logistics, Inc. take these documents via: Priority service ($22.46) Rush service ($17.94) X Economy service ($15.29) Attached is a check for the amount of$15.29 for the fee to CD&L. According to Finance, the King County recording fees for this and all subsequent plat recordings should be charged to account #000/007.590.0060.49.000014. Please call me at x7382 if you have any questions. Thank you. cc: Yellow file Property Management Jan Conklin Kris Nelson, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. WENTRALISYSZDEPTSIPBPWIDMSION.SIDEVELOP.S ERIDEV&PLAN.INMSAFIProjects1LLA1CLERKM MO.doc CDA ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED • DEVELOPMENT PLANNING NTON April 30, 2002 MAY 0 1 2002 City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works RECEIVED Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Sherman Apartment Homes CDA# 01041 SUBJECT: Exterior Revisions to Sherman Apartment Homes LAND USE#: LUA-00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA Dear Susan; At your request listed below are 'those -items-that 'CDA Architects and Sherman Homes have submitted for revision. Item#1 —Roof Revsion. Intent of revision is to reduce overall roof structure and associated costs while minimizing the visual divergence from the Site Plan Approval Elevation. The roof has been revised from two full gables to mansards at the building perimeter. Roof pitches while reduced in overall height remain virtually the same minus the gables at Williams and the Alley. These have been reduced to coincide with the adjacent sheds. Majority of roof structure becomes flat which is hidden by the mansard and gable elements at the building perimeter. Overall height of structure has been reduced by approximately 5'- 6". This revision has a significant impact on the overall construction costs, reduces the overall height of the structure and maintains the visual appearance similar to that of the site plan approval documents. Item#2—Landscaping at Alley Landscaping at alley has been slightly revised from the previous site plan approval but the intent has • been maintained. Landscaping and a trellis are included adjacent to the alley very similar to that which was submitted for site plan approval. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley and will contain 18" of soil. A continuous metal trellis is attached to the alley side of the landscaping planter. Vines per the landscaping plan will be allowed to mature reaching the top of the trellis providing significant greenery and visual screening to adjacent neighbors. II cda011 companyJOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments)Wp\Renton1042402fiala.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 __ V Item#3—Deck Panels Solid deck panel faces have been removed and an open horizontal rail has been provided in its place. Entire deck and rail will be constructed of metal for a durable pleasing appearance. Item#4—Exterior Building Panels Free standing exterior building panels have been removed. The intended effect of these panels was to reduce repetition and the vertical elements associated with the building. These free standing elements when viewed in three dimensions would not have created this intended effect. It would be obvious that these elements were separate from the building and would in fact detract from the building itself. It is our opinion that the building articulation, roof and material variation provide sufficient and pleasing visual appearance without the addition of these free standing elements. Item#5—Exterior Finish Materials Exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard. Hardiboard is a durable sheet good material that imitates the appearance of stucco with various textures. Proposed finish is yet unselected however it will not be a heavy texture. In addition hardiboard provides reveal joints similar to those in stucco. Commercial vinyl siding will be applied to imitate the appearance of a cementitious bevel siding. Coursing dimensions will be maintained as detailed on the site plan approval documents. The vinyl siding texture will be smooth to eliminate any buildup of airborne material. The extended life of vinyl siding and it's color will maintain a pleasing aesthetic finish. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC --ait ju Seth Hale cc: William Sherman Jr. Eric Wagner Carl Pirscher Ilcda011companyIJOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WplRenton1042402fiala.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 CDA ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED March 14, 2002 City of Renton, Planning, Building, Public Works I�EV C N OF�nEh�TON�ING Attn: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor MAR 19 2002 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 ® C :I PROJECT:Sherman Apartments/Sorenton LLC CDA# 01041 SUBJECT: Potential Building Revisions. Dear Susan; At your request listed below are those items that CDA Architects and Sherman Homes would like f reviewed for potential revision. Prior to a formal submission for site plan re-approval we would appreciate your feedback with regard to adjacent neighbors and City of Renton concerns. Item#1 —Roof Revsion. Intent of revision is to reduce overall roof structure and associated costs while minimizing the visual divergence from the Site Plan Approval Elevation. The roof has been revised from two full gables to mansards at the building perimeter. Roof pitches while reduced-in overall height remain virtually the same minus the gables at Williams and the Alley. These have been reduced to coincide with the adjacent sheds. Majority of roof structure becomes flat which is hidden by the mansard and gable elements at the building perimeter. Overall height of structure is reduced by approximately 5'-6". In addition this revision has a large impact on the overall costs of the project. Flat roof area eliminates duplication of pitched roofs and eliminates sprinklering of the roof cavity. This revision has a significant impact on the overall construction costs, reduces the overall height of the structure and maintains the visual appearance similar to that of the site plan approval documents. Item#2—Landscaping at Allev Landscaping and a trellis per our discussion will be included adjacent to the alley very similar to that which was submitted for site plan approval. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley and will contain 18" of soil. A trellis will be incorporated similar to that which is included for your review however the mounting of and final material selections have not been determined. Visual screening for the adjacent neighbors will be via the trellis and plantings. The landscaping at the alley will be included per the site plan approval documents and well detailed via the trellis for both the adjacent neighbors and future tenants. Il cda011 company.JOBS11041 Dean Sherman Apartments1 WplRenton1031102fiala.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 Item#3—Deck Panels Elimination of the suggested solid deck panels at all deck faces. Panels are not well detailed on the Site Plan Approval documents, reduce view potential and are problematic from a constructability standpoint. Panels add significant weight to the face of the deck and create a water problem long term as moisture builds up in the cavity. Intention is to replace the deck panels with continuous horizontal rails as shown. This revision will open up potential views for residents and the integrity and visual appearance of the building long term will be maintained. Item#4—Exterior Building Panels These panels indicated on the drawings at the Williams and 5th Elevations are not well detailed, reduce view potential and are again problematic from a constructability standpoint. See attached elevation for panel locations. The panels as indicated stand proud of the building and will require extensive waterproofing to incorporate and have the potential to trap moisture over time. In addition the panels block views from the units behind. This revision again will open up potential views for residents and the integrity and visual appearance of the building long term will be maintained. Item#5—Exterior Finish Materials Consideration of building materials other than the specified cementitious bevel siding and acrylic stucco while maintaining visual appearance. Two materials mentioned are vinyl siding and hardipanel, however project ownership has not made a final decision and is requesting this revision to allow for material deviation if desired. Vinyl siding would maintain the same spacing as indicated on the Site Plan Approval Documents. Hardipanel incorporates the same texture as stucco and reveal joints are similar to stucco utilizing caulk joints. If alternative materials are selected overall appearance will be analogous to that represented in the Site Plan Approval Documents. Colors will be available during the permit process with approval from the City of Renton prior to issuance of a building permit. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA ARCHITECTS,INC 1./t/vc...(7,, Seth Hale cc: Ilcda011companyLtOBSI1041 Dean Sherman Apartments1WplRenton1031102fiala.let.doc Carl F.Pirscher,MA principal 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO BOX 55429 Seattle, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 ' 4" 30" / / • • 4x4 W.1JJ.M. / / ,4i 2"x2" TUBE STL t 45' a 4x4 TUBE STL 3/I6" 0 HOLE DRILLED FOR VENT THRU LOCATE a BOT. TYP. ANCHOR BOLT W/ NUT AND TOP OF STL ' WASHER EMBED PER STRUCT. 111-1 I I-1 I 1-111-111 111-111111= . 4r III—I 11-1 I 1 —111-111=1 — tt- �" IIIIII-1 9-- - 111-111=III- III=III=III—III=III=III—III—III—I III-11E111E111E111E111E1111 I • ELV.=3625' ° G T.O. FOUNDATION WALL PT SLAB PER STRUCTURAL WEEP HOLE TRELLIS SECTION SCALE:I/2"=I'-0" •• CITY. F RENTON t. ..LL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator March 13, 2002 • Gam ' Mr. Seth Hale CDA Architects Incorporated 4i 19524 Ballinger Way NE Seattle, WA 98155 • RE: Dean Sherman Apartments - LUA 00-168, SA-A, ECF, LLA Dear Mr. Hale: This letter is a follow-up to our phone conversation requesting a letter from your office , outlining the proposed revisions to Sherman Apartments. To date, we have not received any correspondence from you and am therefore sending this letter as a friendly reminder. The letter is required for us to review and process your revisions. Please provide a letter detailing all proposed revisions to the Sherman Apartments' elevations, site plan, etc. Several of the items proposed to change include the roof pitch, courtyard and landscaping along alley, building materials and the removal of stucco panels. Please outline in detail these and any other changes to the apartment structure and site in'the letter. As well, the drawings provided to us at the meeting, do not clearly indicate if all stucco panels are removed from the balconies and the locations where the balcony railing is shown varies from being opaque to transparent (where the window and door outlines are visible). This may be a drawing error but needs to be correctly drawn for our review. Lastly, please provide a material/color board to assist in our review. • You may fax us the letter and drop off the other items at your earliest convenience. Please feel free to call me at (425) 430-7382 with any questions. Sincerely Susan A. Fiala, AICP Senior Planner xc: Jennifer Henning Yellow File ' 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE •* This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer %�o - CITY I___ _ElRENTON owl I' Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator ,ry .{e, /.s .. r July 27, 2001 /S ft £ -A ot_ pA-t- ,-Z_ G-11,41 0 G' - d 8- 5 ( G ri,.a-, w, A iilf...d l/Gtlr?"d A A.0) Steven McDonald Mithun Partners, Inc. C '�- 1291 Alaskan Way, Suite 200 L UA UO Seattle, WA 98101 — / e` E" 6 {`e` 3 ` l" e(--c ae•C 2 h, oC. ,')/i.-c., Gt SUBJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF `-t g-t.c 6rru e Dear Mr. McDonald: 6, t�/ `-> We still, apparently, have not received the mylars for this lot line adjustment. We requested revisions and provided submittal requirements in a letter to you dated / L' 4* ./S January 31, 2001. We sent a reminder in June and have not received a response. Will you please do one of the following: t-e-,f f 1) submit the revisions as requested 2) request a withdrawal of the application for a Lot Line Adjustment so that the file can be closed 3) provide a status report including your intention to proceed with the requested action and an estimated submittal date Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please contact me, at 425-430-7382, if you have any questions. Sincerely, Elizabeth Higgins, AICP Senior Planner cc: S-D Renton LLC/Owner 4ntO 1901 2001 LLA Mtr.doc , 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 �{ :: This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer en to i AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Barbara Alther, 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 months prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a legal RENTON HEARING EXAMINER newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King RENTON,WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the County. Renton Hearing Examiner in the The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South Council Chambers on the seventh floor County Journal (and not in supplemental form) which was regularly distributed to of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on April 3. 2001, the subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a at 9:00 AM, to consider the following petition: Appeal AAD-01-029 APPEAL AAD-01-029 PP Dean Sherman Apartments Appeals of approval of an as published on: 3/23/01 administrative site plan by the City of Renton for the Dean Sherman The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of Apartment project (File No. LUA-00- 9 9 9 168,SA-A,ECF). Applicant proposes $40.63, charged to Acct. No. 8051067. construction of a four-story, eighty-six unit apartment project. Location: 415, Legal Number 8853 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue So. All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing. Questions should be directed to the � Senior Plannerih)430-7382.out l/l �_ L Published in the South County Lega Clerk, South County Journal Journal March 23,2001.8853 Nytti _Subscribed and sworn before me on this }} day of Ilt, 2001 \ `�• ��N tNir_t rFE���s, is 17 "P4:-. .- ‘\.. .,L.--i I Ar: x%0TA/7? . cn 61 —0— = Notary Public of the State of Washington o PUBL\G p:` residing in Renton 1 Ni• e. = - King County, Washington S : '.. 20,. .E V , )y-OO - ,Sri NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on April 3, 2001, at 9:00 AM, to consider the following petition: APPEAL AAD-01-029 Dean Sherman Apartments Appeals of approval of an administrative site plan by the City of Renton for the Dean Sherman Apartment project(File No. LUA-00-168,SA-A,ECF). Applicant proposes construction of a four-story, eighty-six unit apartment project. Location: 415, 419, 423, and 435 Williams Avenue So. All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing. Questions should be directed to the Senior Planner(425)430-7382. Publication Date: March 23, 2001 Account No. 51067 aadpub - - - —-,--t-4 - ,, -.-,.--,,- , ,g,,,,_,-,,i,:,,,,,,,s- ---,1;--:1; 2424":=AfZ-11,-f:EA'A*,''f--',i'-:'--:,---' , ±_:'t,:--- --.`_-2..- 4,, '.-'.:,-- --,:i_----:-• '' .7 J- --,--,-:.. ,---- a-rt;Z=- -' ,- .7-_- ii',1.--f- -:izi+:i- :- ,_.!•-_ _,,,- .=•=-,_ __ ,;:-_--rz_5-,,,_„,- Fz=;, --,_1_-±1,-V,i_--;.-. - -=I--_-z:- z, ,Z_±.4. '44,-,-:i4-7r-t, -7-,-"..---:_-E------1, ,,-_--_-_1!-_ -=7,-.-4---------x-----------,-- -7:-'- = ,L-m.--r--- __----=---- - -rn--74---±-4,-4_, -*-- ----- -='-'_-i----- -Zs'-'`5 , -=—: - 5-.---- - ,,.---uw,-*--.::--_--Lt-_, - .-=_=:,--- ..--ew,,,.. -.: ---''-:-'--- -- _------;-- -r4-=-.,- ---i-,-, Ez- ,,,,. ,:-.:,N_:= _nio„:"..„M-lx, ,,,,,-_;7:-_,.._-__.- -: W-174.-7- -z ---7=-.7—_---,7;-,1:-:=F =,,.'-s- 4- - : 77:,,L.±-_-- --,._71,-r_ , ,, ,14-•,,ri-"1--_,-,t_--__, _7,-r - --: =- =- ._ 11- 4-17tq. ---W-,---,,,- --r- . --1-----'-'--- 7'''r---t-g-OZ7-ir&---:: -.-.----4-:_ - ;- -• =1- 7-- '.- =-'-,1- --7.--7 -----,-- -- - --, -7 ,„.,--,:--, --7_----- „_. tF-,-' 14Vit -V-L%-1 1-7-----*J.- ''s- - I . I t -f----'--1. --.44.• 71 -L--=-- - _,-±, GEOTECHNICPARLEPNOGSIENDEERING STUDY i O I 1 I WILwLIAILMLIASmAsVEANVUEENLIE APARTMENTS souTH _ _-_-,i:_ _ _ I i I ,1 --=- !--,,,,,-'---_ - =-----z-_ === -- = I . : RENTON, WASHNGTON E-8890 :l lqqq .,_f-, - _-_:- ---, _r_7-=--:-:- i - Nov_ rnhr_11 I ---- I = _,--- _ __,,---,.f__-_--_= - -i ,,-------- 4fig-'--- - - - —- ---- ,-s_,_,=. .At4., r- --, . „ -S-_ , _, ,/ 'Fe' . .7'' ---,,L_- ./-' ., _, ,-... ,. s, , 4774:t- .0 --i''''' ' -.'=r -`r,,___ - - -- u '11 .'VI- , . 71 1- " - --. r _...r f "9" c = '''' ', ll' - ------ --,-, - ...-- --_„L k--' -=-- -,1 _ • =-'-- -7--- ' 410. , A- -_.--.,--_ &- - - = ,-- ---='-- --- —. - - c -!: 1 --- , A - _---_--,- A. c „-- , 4 -___ -- :,: __. -, -„ -__ -,- - -:--,,,.- c-,-- _ , =ciU_--_ ----'----__ ---,_--f=i-- .----7-------,at-A.-_-.,-;ff,_,:5 --.:---,!'-,r.----='--=-7=--- „ 1 DEC — ---r'=---------T'F-_--27-7--3 z *--- r------ i-'. _ ___-„,-,-_.--=- 1,-: --.!. -,,'t-_--- -_----7- :-. .• Lf Z------'- f-,-- =rl-''= -._,,., e„,=_,-,_ ,-, ,,_.-ieiWeAef W,7.4 --_,•-.- `-------.--L -- E-7 !;;',--.'';--ii-:_%;--- --=:.-7.-',-- - 7-,-- - .- ___ _ =-,,,-w--, .,,,.....'' v.,.,,s___'-ii7Xzr*z,Th titan is 11110.47 - -.' 'Earth Cons= -• '_-,--3--zis-- 1 - , - - -- --'--,=='=-_,--=---_---,------it,--f--7-H'=-:„-. :,--,-;,,tk,',1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED WILLIAMS AVENUE APARTMENTS WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, V-IAaHINGTON E-8890 November 11, 1999 PREPARED.FOR DEAN-DEILY COMPANY Mitchell G. McGinnis Staff Geologist v. Ft CA41/3 __4 W.AAsy `` • 44-11t2eal h(124 kl Kyle 'R. Campbell, P.E. Manager of Geotechnical Services Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT More construction problems are caused by site subsur- technical engineers who then render an opinion about face conditions than any other factor. As troublesome as overall subsurface conditions,•their likely reaction to subsurface problems can be,their frequency and extent proposed construction activity,and appropriate founda- have been lessened considerably in recent years.due in tion design. Even under optimal circumstances actual large measure to programs and publications of ASFE/ conditions may differ from those inferred to exist, The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how the Geosciences. qualified,and no subsurface exploration program, no matter how comprehensive,can reveal what is hidden by The following suggestions and observations are offered earth, rock and time.The actual interface between mate- to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays, rials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report cost-overruns and other costly headaches that can indicates.Actual conditions in areas not sampled may occur during a construction project. differ from predictions. Nothing can be done to prevent the unanticipated,but steps can be taken to help minimize their A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING impact. For this reason, most experienced owners retain their geotechnical consultants through the construction stage,to iden- REPORT IS BASED ON A UNIQUE SET tify variances,conduct additional tests which may be OF PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS needed,and to recommend solutions to problems encountered on site. A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur- face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS set of project-specific factors.These typically include: the general nature of the structure involved. its size and CAN CHANGE configuration;the location of the structure on the site Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly- and its orientation;physical concomitants such as changing natural forces. Because a geotechnical engi- access roads,parking lots,and underground utilities, veering report is based on conditions which existed at and the level of additional risk which the client assumed the time of subsurface exploration,construction decisions by virtue of limitations imposed upon the exploratory program.To help avoid costly problems,consult the should not be based on a geotechnical engineering report whose geotechnical engineer to determine how any factors adequacy may have been affected by time.Speak with the geo- technical consultant to learn if additional tests are which change subsequent to the date of the report may advisable before construction starts. affect its recommendations. Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and otherwise,your geotechnical engineering report should not natural events such as floods,earthquakes or ground- be used: water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions •When the nature of the proposed structure is and,thus,the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical changed. for example, if an office building will be report.The geotechnical engineer should be kept apprised of any such events,and should be consulted to erected instead of a parking garage, or if a refriger- ated warehouse will be built instead of an unre- determine if additional tests are necessary. frigerated one; •when the size or configuration of the proposed GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ARE structure is altered; PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES •when the location or orientation of the proposed AND PERSONS structure is modified; •when there is a change of ownership.or Geotechnical engineers' reports are prepared to meet •for application to an adjacent site. the specific needs of specific individuals.A report pre- Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility for problems pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade- which may develop if they are not consulted after factors consid- quate for a construction contractor,or even some other ered in their report's development have changed. consulting civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise. this report was prepared expressly for the client involved and expressly for purposes indicated by the client. Use MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS" by any other persons for any purpose,or by the client ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES for a different purpose, may result in problems. No indi- vidual other than the client should apply this report for its Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions intended purpose without first conferring with the geotechnical only at those points where samples are taken,when engineer. No person should apply this report for any purpose they are taken. Data derived through sampling and sub- other than that originally contemplated without first conferring sequent laboratory testing are extrapolated by geo- with the geotechnical engineer. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING der the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming re- REPORT IS SUBJECT TO sponsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability.Providing MISINTERPRETATION the best available information to contractors helps pre- Costly problems can occur when other design profes- vent costly construction problems and the adversarial sionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations attitudes which aggravate them to disproportionate of a geotechnical engineering report.lb help avoid scale. these problems,the geotechnical engineer should be READ RESPONSIBILITY retained to work with other appropriate design profes- • sionals to explain relevant geotechnical findings and to CLAUSES CLOSELY review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to geotechnical issues. Because geotechnical engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion,it is far less exact than other design disciplines.This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted daims being lodged against geotechnical BORING LOGS SHOULD NOT BE consultants.Tb help prevent this problem,geotechnical engineers have developed model dauses for use in writ- _ SEPARATED FROM THE ten transmittals.These are not exculpatory dauses ENGINEERING REPORT designed to foist geotechnical engineers' liabilities onto someone else. Rather,they are definitive clauses which Final boring logs are developed by geotechnical engi- identify where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities neers based upon their interpretation of field logs begin and end.Their use helps all parties involved rec- (assembled by site personnel)and laboratory evaluation ognize their individual responsibilities and take appro- of field samples.Only final boring logs customarily are priate action.Some of these definitive dauses are likely induded in geotechnical engineering reports.These logs to appear in your geotechnical engineering report,and should not under any circumstances be redrawn for indusion in you are encouraged to read them dosely.Your geo- architectural or other design drawings,because drafters technical engineer will be pleased to give full and frank may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. answers to your questions. Although photographic reproduction eliminates this problem,it does nothing to minimize the possibility of OTHER STEPS YOU CAN TAKE TO contractors misinterpreting the logs during bid prepara- tion.When this occurs,delays,disputes and unantici- REDUCE RISK pated costs are the all-too-frequent result. Your consulting geotechnical engineer will be pleased to To minimize the likelihood of boring log misinterpreta- discuss other techniques which can be employed to mit- tion,give contractors ready access to the complete geotechnical igate risk. In addition,ASFE has developed a variety of = engineering report prepared or authorized for their use. materials which may be beneficial.Contact ASFE for a Those who do not provide such access may proceed un- complimentary copy of its publications directory. • Published by ASFE THE ASSOCIATION OF ENGINEERING FIRMS PRACTICING IN THE GEOSCIENCES 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G 106/Silver Spring, Maryland 20910/(301) 565-2733 0788/3M )(ii1(�" Earth Consultants Inc. Pt/ %JY\ Geotechnical Engineers,Geologists&Environmental Scientists November 11, 1999 E-8890 Dean-Deily Company 16720 Northeast 116th Street Redmond, Washington 98052 Attention: Mr. Ed Dean Dear Mr. Dean: We are pleased to submit our report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Williams Avenue Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington." This report presents the results of our field exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analyses. The purpose and scope of our study was outlined in our August 3, 1999 proposal. Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion the site can be developed generally as planned. The proposed building and underground parking excavation can be accomplished using a combination of conventional open cuts with temporary slopes and shoring consisting of cantilever soldier piles. The site is underlain by loose, compressible soils. In our opinion, support for the proposed building should be provided using an augercast pile foundation system. The slab-on-grade floors may be supported on a minimum of twelve (12) inches of structural fill. We appreciate this opportunity to be service to you. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Manager of Geotechnical Services • MGM/KRC/bkm 1805-136th Place N.E.,Suite 201,Bellevue,Washington 98005 Bellevue(425)643-3780 FAX(425)746-0860 Toll Free(888)739-6670 TABLE OF CONTENTS E-8890 PAGE INTRODUCTION - 1 General 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 Surface 2 Subsurface 2 Groundwater 3 Laboratory Testing 4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 General 4 Shoring Recommendations 5 Cantilevered Soldier Piles and Lagging 6 Lagging Design 6 Lateral Resistance 6 Shoring Wall Drainage 7 Shoring Monitoring 7 Temporary Excavations 8 Construction Dewaterinq 8 Augercast Piles 9 Pile Installation 10 Pile Installation Monitoring 11 Subsurface Obstructions 11 Retaining Walls 11 Slab-on-Grade Floors 12 Seismic Design Considerations 12 ,Site Preparation and General Earthwork 13 Site Drainage 14 Utility Support and Backfill 15 LIMITATIONS 16 Additional Services 16 APPENDICES Appendix A Field Exploration Appendix B Laboratory Test Results TABLE OF CONTENTS, Continued E-8890 ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Boring and Test Pit Location Plan Plate 3 Cantilever Soldier Pile Shoring Plate 4 Shoring Wall Drainage Plate 5 Utility Trench Backfill Plate Al Legend Plates A2 through A9 Test Pit Logs Plates A10 through A16 Boring Logs Plates B1 and B2 Grain Size Analyses Plates B3 and B4 Atterberg Limits Test Data GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED WILLIAMS AVENUE APARTMENTS WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON E-8890 INTRODUCTION General This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study completed by Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) for the proposed Williams Avenue Apartments,Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington. The general location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1 . The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and based on the conditions encountered to develop geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site development. At the time our study was performed, the site, existing and proposed building locations, and our exploratory locations were approximately as shown on the Boring and Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. Project Description We understand it is planned to develop the site with a multi-level apartment building. Based on preliminary design information provided by the client, the proposed building will consist of four levels of living space above one level of below grade parking. The upper four floors will be constructed of relatively lightly-loaded wood frame construction and the parking level will consist of concrete frame construction with a slab-on-grade floor and post-tensioned slab above the garage level. Based on our experience with similar projects, we anticipate wall loads will be on the order of three to six kips per lineal foot, column loads on the order of two hundred fifty (250) to three hundred fifty (350) kips, and slab-on-grade floor loads will be about one hundred fifty (150) pounds per square foot. 0 The parking garage will be accessed from an alley along the western property line that extends in a north-south direction from South_5th Street to South 4th Street. In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, cuts of eight to twelve (12) feet below existing grade will be required. The excavation will extend to within two feet of a single- family residence and detached garage north of the site, to within ten (10) feet of a clinic to the south to the property line to the east side, and will extend five feet into an alley west of the site. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 2 If any of the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulted to review the recommendations contained in this report. In any case, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The subject site consists of a 40,250 square foot, rectangular shaped site located northwest of the intersection of South 5th Street and Williams Avenue South in Renton (see Plate 1, Vicinity Map). The planned building area is bordered to the north by a single-family residence, to the south by the Renton Family Practice Clinic, to the west by an alley and to the east by Williams Avenue. The proposed building area contains an asphalt paved parking area, a garage and a medical laboratory building that will be removed in order to make way for the proposed development. The subject property is essentially flat with less than five feet of elevation change along the north-south axis of the site. The original topography has been previously graded in order to provide level parking areas for existing buildings and for buildings that formerly occupied the site. Portions of the site are currently developed and are covered with existing buildings and pavements. The site vegetation consists primarily of grass, several large trees and brush. Subsurface Subsurface conditions were explored by excavating nine test pits and drilling three borings at the approximate locations shown on Plate 2. Please refer to the Test Pit Logs, Plates A2 through A9 and Boring Logs, Plates A10 through A16, for a detailed description of the conditions encountered at each location explored. A description of the field exploration methods is included in Appendix A. The following is a generalized description of the subsur- face conditions encountered. Earth Consultants, Inc. J GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 3 In all our borings, we encountered a surficial layer of fill. The fill ranged from a minimum of six to eight inches thick in Test Pit TP-6 to a maximum of four and one-half feet thick in Test Pit TP-2. The fill consists of loose silty sand and silty gravel (Unified Soil Classification SM and GM, respectively) and was similar to underlying native soils. The central portion of the site contained abundant concrete, wood and metal debris. Underlying the fill, we encountered interbedded sequences of silt (ML), elastic silt (MH) with organics, silty sand (SM), poorly graded gravel with silt and sand (GP-GM) and poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM). The soils in the southern portion of the site as encountered in Boring B-1 were very loose to loose to twenty-five and one half (25.5) feet below grade. The soils became very dense in Boring B-1 at thirty (30) feet below grade. The soils encountered in the northern portion of the site were typically very loose to medium dense to thirty-five (35) feet below grade. The soils became very dense at forty-three (43) feet below grade in Boring B-3. Groundwater Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage was encountered in Test Pit TP-4 and at all of our boring locations. The seepage level ranged from twelve (12) feet below grade as observed in Test Pit TP-4 to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet as encountered in Borings B-1 and B-2. With seepage at this depth, we do not anticipate groundwater seepage will result in significant construction issues; however, the contractor should be aware that groundwater is not static. There will likely be fluctuations in the level depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other factors. Generally, the water level is higher and seepage rate is greater in the wetter winter months (typically October through May). Earth Consultants, Inc. EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY ean-Deily Company - E-8890 ovember 11, 1999 Page 4 G D N Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples to verify or moy d soil classification and to evaluate the general physical properties and engineerin characteristics of the soil encountered. Visual field classifications were supplemented dif bythe grain size analyses and Atterberg Limits tests on representative soil samples. Moisture content tests were performed on all samples. The results of laboratory tests performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample depth on the individual boring and test pit logs or on a separate data sheet contained in Appendix B. It is important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test results and their use in guiding our engineering judgment. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. In accordance with our Standard Fee Schedule and General Conditions, the soil samples for this project will be discarded after a period of fifteen days following completion of this report unless we are otherwise directed in writing. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, a cut extending eight to twelve (12) feet below existing grade will be required. In our opinion, the excavation can be accomplished using a combination of conventional open cuts and temporary shoring. Where there is sufficient room on-site, or if permission can be obtained to extend cuts into public right-of- ways or adjacent properties, a conventional open cut can be used. The cut side slopes should not exceed 1 H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical). In areas where cuts of this inclination cannot be accomplished, we have included recommendations for temporary shoring consisting of cantilever soldier piles with timber lagging. Due to the presence of loose, compressible soils underlying the site, in our opinion, building support should be provided using an augercast pile foundation system extending through the fill and compressible soils and bearing in the underlying dense to very dense native soils. We have provided axial and lateral capacities for twelve (12) and fourteen (14) inch diameter augercast piles. We can provide additional capacities for other pile sizes if necessary. Slab- on-grade floors may be supported on a minimum of twelve (12) inches of structural fill. Earth Consultants, Inc. • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 5 Our test pits and borings indicate the fill underlying the site contains concrete rubble, milled lumber, and other miscellaneous debris. The pile contractor should be prepared to pre- excavate or pre-drill as needed in order to get through debris in the fill. A procedure should also be established between the geotechnical engineer, structural engineers and pile installation contractor to allow for adjusting the pile locations if the debris cannot be removed in a timely manner so as to minimize delays in the pile installation process. During our field exploration we encountered groundwater at twelve (12) to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet below grade. Based on anticipated cuts of eight (8) to twelve (12) feet, we do not anticipate seepage will be encountered in the building area excavation. However, groundwater levels and seepage rates will vary depending on seasonal fluctuations in precipitation. If seepage is encountered it should be collected inside the excavation by sloping the excavation in order to provide positive drainage to one or more sump locations, where the collected water can then be removed from the site. Depending on the amount of seepage actually encountered, it may be necessary to provide additional dewatering measures. We can provide recommendations for additional dewatering measures during construction as the actual groundwater conditions are revealed. This report has been prepared for specific application to this project only and in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area for the exclusive use of Dean-Deily Company and their representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report, in its entirety, should be included in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor. Shoring Recommendations In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, a-cut extending to a depth of eight to twelve (12) feet below grade is planned. Due to the depth of the cut and the proximity of the cut to property lines and adjacent structures, it appears shoring may be necessary to support a portion of the building excavation. Temporary shoring should consist of cantilevered soldier piles with wood lagging. Where there is sufficient room, a conventional open cut with temporary slopes may be used. Recommendations for temporary excavation slopes are provided below. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 6 Cantilevered Soldier Piles and Lagging Cantilevered soldier pile walls are typically most economical for wall heights of twelve (12) feet or less. Walls with a horizontal backfill condition can be designed to resist an equivalent fluid pressure of thirty-five (35) pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This value is based on a horizontal backfill condition and assumes that surcharges due to backfill slopes, construction equipment, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressure. We anticipate there will be surcharges from the existing buildings on the north and south sides of the planned excavation. We should provide surcharge loads from the adjacent structure during the shoring design process. Hydrostatic pressure should be alleviated by seepage between the lagging. A typical pressure distribution for cantilever wall design is included as Plate 3. Lagging Design For temporary shoring applications, the earth pressure between the soldier piles can be reduced by one-half to account for soil arching in the lagging design. Voids between the lagging and retained soil greater than one inch in width should be backfilled with sand or pea gravel. The void spaces should be backfilled progressively as the excavation deepens. The backfill material should not allow the potential for hydrostatic pressure to build up behind the walls. An impermeable backfill material such as lean-mix . • .concrete or control density fill should not be used. Lateral Resistance Lateral restraint at the bottom of the shoring walls will be provided by passive soil pressure against the embedded length of the soldier piles beneath the bottom of the excavation. A passive pressure equivalent to a fluid with a unit weight of three hundred fifty (350) pcf may be used for design. The passive resistance may be applied to twice the soldier pile diameter. The passive pressure should be neglected in the upper two feet of the excavation to allow for disturbance of the excavation surface. Mobilization of the full passive pressure assumes the ground surface inside the excavation will be horizontal for a distance of at least four times the depth of the soldier pile penetration. ECI should be contacted to provide revised design values if this is not the case. Earth Consultants. Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 7 Shoring Wall Drainage The joints between the lagging will allow water to seep through the shoring and reduce the potential for hydrostatic pressure to build up behind the shoring. However, the permanent basement walls or concrete facings applied directly to the shoring wall will block this drainage. In order to maintain drainage a continuous sheet drain incorporating a filter fabric such as Miradrain 6000, or approved equivalent should be applied to the shoring wall prior to constructing the finished wall. The Miradrain should extend the full height and width of the shored face. The Miradrain should be connected to a tightline drain installed along the base of the wall to collect and remove any seepage. A typical detail showing the sheet drain and tightline installation is included as Plate 4. Shoring Monitoring Whenever excavations are made adjacent to existing streets, utilities and structures, there is the potential for movement. A monitoring program should be established so that movements are detected early, to allow for remedial actions to be taken, if necessary. The monitoring program should include optical surveying of adjacent streets and buildings to detect any horizontal or vertical movement. Movement of the wall should be monitored by placing survey points on the top and bottom of each soldier pile. The survey for these points may be performed by the general contractor or surveyor, with the reduced survey data transmitted to ECI for review. The survey points should be monitored on a daily basis during excavation and weekly until the shoring loads are transferred to the permanent structure. All readings should be promptly provided to our office for review. A string-line should also be established along the top of the soldier piles to measure deflections at the.top of the piles. The string-line should be measured on a daily basis during the excavation and then twice-a-week until the shoring loads are transferred to the permanent structure. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 8 • Temporary Excavations If sufficient room is available on-site or if permission can be obtained to extend excavation slopes into public right-of-ways or adjacent properties, it should be possible to accomplish portions of the excavation using conventional open cuts with temporary slopes. The inclination of temporary slopes is dependent on several variables, including the height of the cut, the soil type and density, the presence of groundwater seepage, construction timing, weather, and surcharge loads from adjacent structures, roads and equipment. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state (WISHA) and Federal (OSHA) safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from our field exploration and laboratory testing, the native silty sand with gravel would be classified as Type B based on Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N. Temporary cuts greater than four feet in height in Type B soils should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1 H:1 V. Because of the many variables involved,the inclination of temporary excavation slopes should be evaluated during construction, as the actual soil conditions become more apparent. The preceding information has been provided solely as a service to our client. Under no circumstances should this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. Construction Dewaterinq In our borings and test pits, we encountered moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at twelve (12) to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet below existing grade. Based on anticipated cuts of eight (8) to twelve (12) feet, there will be a potential for seepage to be encountered in the excavation, especially if construction occurs during the wet season and when groundwater conditions are relatively high. If seepage is encountered in the building excavation, it should be controlled by sloping the base of the excavation and using pumps to collect and remove the seepage. Trenches may be necessary to direct seepage to the pump locations. If the seepage cannot be adequately controlled with these measures, then alternative dewatering measures may be necessary. We can provide additional dewatering recommendations during construction, as the actual groundwater conditions are realized. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company _ E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 9 The groundwater conditions may destabilize the excavation subgrade. In order to maintain a stable base for construction equipment and the pile installation equipment, it may be necessary to place a mat of quarry spalls or recycled concrete across the excavation. A contingency in the construction budget should be provided for stabilizing the excavation base. Augercast Piles Due to the presence of loose, moderately compressible soils underlying the site, building support should be provided using an augercast pile foundation extending through the loose and compressible soils and bearing in the underlying dense to very dense native soils. We are providing allowable axial, uplift, and lateral pile capacities for twelve (12) and fourteen (14) inch diameter augercast piles. We can provide load capacities for other pile diameters, if needed. Augercast piles should extend at least five feet into the dense to very dense native soils which were encountered at forty-five (45) feet below existing grade in Boring B-3. For twelve (12) and fourteen (14) inch augercast piles extending at least five feet into the bearing layer, the following axial and uplift capacities can be used. Pile Capacities Pile Diameter Axial Uplift 12 inch 30 tons 15 tons 14 inch 50 tons 20 tons These capacities may be increased by one-third for shortterm seismic loading conditions. iJo reduction in pile capacity is required if the piles are installed on a center-to-center spacing of three pile diameters. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 10 Lateral pile capacity is generally governed by deflections at the top of the pile which is dependent on pile stiffness with respect to the surrounding soil conditions in the upper portion of the pile, the pile length, and degree of fixity at the top of the pile. In our opinion, a lateral pile capacity of ten Lips may be used for design. Given a ten kip lateral load, maximum pile deflections are estimated to be 0.5 inch. Additional lateral resistance can also be provided using the passive pressure acting on grade beams. Provided gradebeams are backfilled with structural fill, an allowable passive resistance of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used. If sufficient lateral resistance cannot be achieved, batter piles may be used. If batter piles are necessary, ECI should be contacted to provide addition recommendations for maximum batter and lateral capacity. We estimate total settlement of single augercast piles will be on the order of one half inch. We estimate differential settlements should be less than one quarter inch. Pile Installation The piles should be installed by a contractor experienced in the successful installation of augercast piles. The piles should be installed with a continuous-flight hollow stem auger equipment specifically designed for installation of auger placed grout-injected piles. The grout injection point should be at the bottom of the auger bit below the cutting teeth. The contractor should supply sufficient auger length and drilling capacity to extend the piles an additional ten feet, if unanticipated conditions are encountered. Each pile should be drilled and completely filled with grout in an uninterrupted operation. The grout should be placed under a pressure of two hundred (200) psi in order to ensure adequate bonding with the bearing soils. The grout pump should have a visible grout pressure gauge to verify adequate pressure is being obtained. The pump should also have a counter so the volume of grout pumped for each pile can be calculated. -The auger hoisting equipment should be capable of withdrawing the auger smoothly, at a constant rate without jumps or stops. A positive grout head of at least ten feet should be maintained to prevent caving and voids. This can be accomplished by directing the contractor to slow up the auger withdrawal rate such that a column of grout extends at least ten feet above the auger tip. Earth Conaultanta, Inc. • • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 11 Pile Installation Monitoring As it is not possible to observe the completed pile below the ground,judgment and experience must be used as the basis for determining the acceptability of a pile. Therefore, all piles should be installed under the full-time observation of a representative of ECI. This will allow us to evaluate fully the contractor's operation, to collect and interpret the installation data, and to verify bearing stratum elevations. Furthermore, we will also understand the implications of variations from normal procedures with respect to the design criteria. The contractor's equipment and procedures should be reviewed by ECI before the start of construction. Subsurface Obstructions As previously discussed, localized areas within the site contain concrete, milled lumber, metal and other miscellaneous debris. The pile installation contractor should be aware of the potential for encountering obstructions and should be prepared to pre-excavate or pre-drill to get through obstructions. In our opinion, it would also be prudent to have an established procedure developed with the pile contractor, structural engineer and geotechnical engineer to resolve issues related to relocating piles during construction without delaying the installation. Retaining Walls Retaining walls constructed against temporary shoring should be designed for the same earth pressures as the shoring walls. Free-standing retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. Walls that are designed to yield can be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pcf. If walls are to be restrained at the top from free movement, the equivalent fluid weight should be increased to fifty (50) pcf. These values are based on horizontal backfill and that surcharges due to backfill slopes, hydrostatic pressures,traffic, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressure. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 12 In order to reduce the potential for hydrostatic forces building up behind the walls, free- standing retaining walls should be backfilled with a suitable free-draining material extending at least eighteen (18) inches-behind the wall. The remainder of the backfill should consist of structural fill. The free-draining backfill should conform to the WSDOT specification for gravel backfill for walls (WSDOT 9-03.12(2). A rigid, Schedule 40, perforated PVC drain pipe should be placed at the base of the wall and should be surrounded by a minimum of one cubic foot per lineal foot with three-eighths inch pea gravel. Retaining walls cast against the temporary shoring should utilize a continuous sheet drain as previously discussed in the preceding Shoring Drainage section. Slab-on-Grade Floors Slab-on-grade floors should be supported on at least twelve (12) inches of structural fill. Disturbed subgrade soil must either be compacted in place or overexcavated and replaced with structural fill. A woven geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 600X may be necessary to stabilize the excavation subgrade prior to placement of the twelve (12) inches of structural fill. Slab-on-grade floors should be designed by the structural engineer based on the anticipated loading and the subgrade support characteristics. A modulus of vertical subgrade reaction of two hundred fifty (250) pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for design. The slab should be provided with a minimum of six inches of free-draining sand or gravel. In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, a vapor barrier such as a 6-mil plastic membrane may be placed beneath the slab. Two inches of damp sand may be placed over the membrane for protection during construction and to aid in curing of the concrete. Seismic Design Considerations The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone 3 in the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with regularity, however, the majority of these events are of such low magnitude they are not felt without instruments. Large earthquakes do occur, as indicated by the 1949, 7.2 magnitude earthquake in the Olympia area and the 1965, 6.5 magnitude earthquake in the Midway area. Earth Consultants, Inc. ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company _ E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 13 There are three potential geologic hazards associated with a strong motion seismic event at this site: ground rupture, liquefaction, and ground motion response. Ground Rupture: The strongest earthquakes in the Puget Lowland are widespread, subcrustal events, ranging in depth from thirty (30) to fifty-five (55) miles. Surface faulting from these deep events has not been documented to date. Therefore, it is our opinion, that the risk of ground rupture at this site during a strong motion seismic event is negligible. Liquefaction: Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which soils lose all shear strength for short periods of time during an earthquake. Groundshaking of sufficient duration results in the loss of grain to grain contact and rapid increase in pore water pressure, causing the soil to behave as a fluid. To have a potential for liquefaction, a soil must be cohesionless with a grain size distribution of a specified range (generally sand and silt); it must be loose; it must be below the groundwater table; and it must be subject to sufficient magnitude and duration of groundshaking. The effects of liquefaction may be large total and/or differential settlement for structures founded in the liquefying soils. The loose sand underlying the site would be susceptible to liquefaction; however, the use of a pile supported foundation as recommended in this study should mitigate the effects of seismically induced settlement on the structure. Ground Motion Response: The 1997 UBC seismic design section provides a series of soil types that are used as a basis for seismic design of structures. Based on the encountered soil conditions, it is our opinion that soil type SE, Soft Soil Profile, from Table 16-J should be used for design. Site Preparation and General Earthwork In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, a cut extending to a depth of approximately eight to twelve (12) feet below existing grade will be required. The spoils from the excavation will be exported. After completion of the excavation, the excavation base should be observed by a representative from ECI. Soil in loose or soft areas, if recompacted and still yielding, should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill to a depth that will provide a stable base beneath the general structural fill: The optional use of a geotextile fabric placed directly on the overexcavated surface may help to bridge unstable areas. Earth Consultants, Inc. I GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 14 Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under buildings, slabs or other load-bearing areas. Structural fill under floor slabs and footings should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its laboratory maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near their optimum moisture content. Fill under pavements and walks should also be placed in horizontal lifts and compacted to 90 percent of maximum density except for the top twelve (12) inches which should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density. During dry weather, most soils which are compactible and non-organic can be used as structural fill. Based on the results of our laboratory tests, the on-site soils at the time of our exploration appear to be near the optimum moisture content and should be suitable for use in their present condition as structural fill, provided the grading operations are conducted during dry weather. However, the native soils contain more than five percent fines and will degrade if exposed to excessive moisture, and compaction and grading will be difficult if the soil moisture increases significantly above its optimum condition. If the on-site soil is exposed to moisture and cannot be adequately compacted then it may be necessary to import a soil which can be compacted. During dry weather, non-organic compactible soil with a maximum grain size of six inches can be used. Fill for use during wet weather should consist of a fairly well graded granular material having a maximum grain size of six inches and no more than 5 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction. A contingency in the earthwork budget should be included for this possibility. Site Drainage Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage was encountered at four of our subsurface exploration locations. Heavy groundwater seepage was encountered at twelve (12) to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet below existing grade. If seepage is encountered in the excavation, the bottom of the excavation should be sloped to one or more shallow sump pits. The collected water can then be pumped from these pits to a positive and permanent discharge, such as a nearby storm drain. Depending on the magnitude of seepage, it may be necessary to provide additional dewatering measures. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company _ E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 15 The appropriate locations of subsurface drains, if needed,should be established during grading operations by ECI's representative at which time the seepage areas, if present, may be more clearly defined. Water must not be allowed to stand in areas where foundations or slabs are to be constructed. Loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Final site grades must allow for drainage away from the building foundations. The ground should be sloped at a gradient of three percent for a distance of at least ten feet away from the building, except in paved areas, which can be sloped at a gradient of two percent. Perimeter drainage should be provided using the shoring wall drainage and retaining wall drains as previously discussed. • Utility Support and Backfill Based on the soil conditions encountered, the soils expected to be exposed by utility excavations should provide adequate support for utilities. However, the loose condition of some of the soils and the potential for a relatively high groundwater table may result in de- stabilizing of the trench bottom as the trench is excavated. Where loose soils or heavy groundwater seepage is encountered, remedial measures such as overexcavating soft soil or tamping quarry spalls into the trench bottom may be required. Caving of trench walls should be anticipated where the trenches encounter groundwater. Dewatering may also be required. Utility trench backfill is a primary concern in reducing the potential for settlement along utility alignments, particularly in pavement areas. It is important that each section of utility line be adequately supported in the bedding material. The material should be hand tamped to ensure support is provided around the pipe haunches. Fill should be carefully placed and hand tamped to about twelve inches above the crown of the pipe before heavy compaction equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than twelve inches. A typical trench backfill section and compaction requirements for load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on Plate 5. Earth Consultants, Inc. • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company _ E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 16 LIMITATIONS Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed, selective laboratory testing and engineering analyses, the design information provided us, and our experience and engineering judgment. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings and test pits. Soil and groundwater conditions between borings and test pits may vary from those encountered. The nature and extent of variations between our exploratory locations may not become evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations of this report and to modify or verify them in writing prior to proceeding with the construction. Additional Services As the geotechnical engineer of record, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the construction specifications. ECI should also be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts,specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. We do not accept responsibility for the performance of the foundation or earthwork unless we are retained to review the construction drawings and specifications, and to provide construction observation and testing services. Earth Consultants, Inc. • ' ii} ,..f \ s .,,, N ST E 1 • - . •: ,1 l Z 1 X;ir '.4 '' - '. ' i ?kkg. : „ • : . 4TH" .. 60 - IP! ti 1 11Q0 a wblei c V7i,.r.. C CJ RENTON}4 x: !!IA I 7sl1•rrr,w: - ...Al 12 17 qt Tt� ,,, _,.:t 19111 N 1 _.111 to ' 419 z ••• 'd or ',Ai/4k ,IPIjiis ,,-/,40, , ...,. ,,,,..‘ . . imem -.•:. vz•4 -_,178_ ow/ .:" ,,..`i„''....„,q:N"e„...,441.1 ,,,‘/.7,i i,-, .• '-•,,.-. . irk A lido' _ _ 900 ._ rats ," ..': 11 t ,t41 �/ 16. i♦ a•,jam S:'3RD:lg sr "v cr4' - 9 Ir �. s a�90D -'�.. i� i 0,S I TEE= ,, :3 . fi _ • RR, :CANERT:14I6I o7IU Lkti Iilm-jZi-lr-_ T,▪ S : T „ -F t -:•y - ' ' 5 F • . i.—. E—')-.=,2a.-.bW-.i r ,C F '-],,...,i�.rn•'ems•,j: <I.vaa�: :..y ._P R -_- ate , „ a YILi+!liE: • g y s�N._ •( • a• sy ,. - `, 'GATE et R R 4 r.gt.itw , :!`_-::I "-. -.5 :NM"VILLAGE'PL` _ '. . . • : :0,- .,pr. , IA11• a, Vital- r4 F: S • N • .,ti,, 4 ` '. '''' t 'rf Airiol ;sloor '�snisr • • .`3,15 pR 1 44("" '47°1 ti ST' ._3 ' "N'` Sr::4o. :,�s '' ' _...t . s. •. ` sr ,.. .. ,''a Cr fir ``7' 01 SE.151TN ST r�z. iRiEti < ~Q��1 ',: .+ PUGET ` ;,. -- cT 1 d�fi ay m: tiY fQ�• 4LT'\el.` 4. ,T ' 1a .,�tg •- ' W ni SE 1 A c S£'1&Td �j Eli.ST -41RD;I ST i: ........ 1 E. •= ao st_.__ -..ill .L4` E>>: 441 ii�� ,,i Earth Consultants, Inc. Reference: till,(�U I! \F Geotechnical Englneers•Geologists&Environmental Scientists King County/Map 656 By Thomas Brothers Maps Dated 1999 _ _ Vicinity Map Williams Avenue Apartments Renton, Washington NOTE:This plate may contain areas of color. ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent Drwn. GLS Date Sept. '99 Proj. No. 8890 misinterpretation of the information resulting Checked MGM Date 9/21/99 Plate 1 from black&white reproductions of this plate. Existing Residence& I I I I Garage I I I I I I Existing . I I I Residence T�-8— — — — — — B-31 —T—P-iri i L : _ff' _ i I I . I 1 _I_ I Approximate Scale 1 I TP-6 -2i 1 Uj 0 25 50 100ft. 1 TP-7 16 I Z I 75 .3°Aa.o i W c e4e i Y' 1 ' TP-5I 2°q;,�o. •o 1 Q 0 Existingl —r�SQ o.•.a co 4 Garage ITP-4 Existing' 4dQ _1 I 2 LEGEND r---- - _Concnete-Debris_ —17 Q I I B-1- -Approximate Location of 14 I f ECI Boring, Proj. No. I 1 Medical sb ' E-8890, Sept. & Oct. Q I I _ J o , TP-1-:-Approximate Location of ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. ` 13 ; E-8890, Aug. 1999 -_-_ - 1— - - — - - - - -- — I Subject Site -4,- I I i 1 B-1 12 I 1 ; Existing Building I � i — - — — - 1 — ; Proposed Building I — - - I + Ex�s6ng Medical Clinic I 16 Lot Number I 11 1 � I I - - _J Ic Earth Consultants, Inc. A% S. 5th STREET ��wry(�10,�1V��, Geotechnical Engineers.Geologists&Environmental Scientists Boring and Test Pit Location Plan Williams Avenue Apartments NOTE:This plate may contain areas of color. Renton, Washington ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black&white reproductions of this plate. Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '99 Proj. No. 8890 Checked MGM Cate 10/22/99 Plate 2 • • : Ground Surface - . . tSi/a9wpSs due b**cent *whims b b•evaluated on a ears B by cam basis) • • • Active Earth Pressure e 35 act • Passive Earth Pressure = H(ft) 350(D+2)psf • •: • ...: • -:" Base of Excavation Nacisct passive in • upper 2 led • f D(ft) Notes: • Embedment depth(D)must also be suffident to provide necessary vertical capacity. Minimum depth t of 1.6(l I). • • • -Passive Pressure assumed to ad over two pile diameters and includes factor-of-safety of 1.5. • .. See trod of study for a detailed discussion of shoring. • • • • • 1,I a" Earth Consultants, inc. writ \low�,jJJ Geotechnical Engineers,Geologists i Environmental Scientists • CANTILEVER SOLDIER PILE SHORING Williams Avenue Apartments Renton, Washington - Drwn. GLS Date Nov.'99 Proj.No. 8890 Checked MGM Date 11/10/99 Plate 3 i WOOD LAGGING 1\J �' ° CONCRETE FACING CONTINUOUS MIRADRP.IN 6000 _:%, ' ,, e OR EQUIVALENT 111-)11 . =111 /' IL ' .•. . NATIVE SOIL III . • SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOOR EXCAVATION ' • :_ =111�11 /• • ' 111-III • ill I►I \: ..i...-.... .. ,. . .-_• •._. . , . .• •_ : . . - o _ . . • - . . • 111I � I I i HTLINE o — ��, : •.. . STRUCTURAL , o FILL . �' FOUNDATION DRAIN! GRATE ' • o • . 0I. . • ll l-l1l l 1 NOTE: DRAIN THROUGH WALL SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT MIDDLE OF LAGGING. ip. SHORING WALL DRAINAGE �� Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartment • hfl iff NI GeaecMlol Engines.Geologists a Environmm'al8cim'Lsa Renton, Washington Proj. No. 8890 I Drwn. GLS [Date Nov. '99 Checked MGM [Date 11/10/99 1 Plate 4 Non-Load Supporting Floor Slab or Areas Roadway Areas A 17,...:.,.,...........: ........7...:....i;er 70.:0t..07.........„ Y o• qd • Varies .••••,...f.:•;.:.:•.,......'........•••....:•.,:........'.......:.:'..••,...•:.•..........•:.............‘„.•:....•.:••:::.":..':.........••••-...:•......'1.••••.: 0 ...y..."0-....i., 0 09 50 0 0• ';!.....;1-11..•:.•••...................11..,....:1....:•.....',.i'::.....•185'� - 1 Foot Minimum 95 0o u Ba ckfill kfill .„'.••...........•••••::......• 80 r Va ies ......1:...-.1•........1:.........:-.,. ....• .,... . . ...„ :,...: .... . . . ......• •••,•'......-:-.•.1*.l.'•[:•;:.--...' ••••••,;...,.,.,_,.,.....,...• .•-•••..-.....::•:•••••.••:..'c........1.:.i.:."'''' Bedding P• O:o:o .°�•�.• 4•,00° °°aQ®0':C Varies .0o....•ouoe•, oo0.• .°.oQ 000..oc.•( O. p;o•:,°••Q ,o.• �o• °t70 0.;. O•o O••0 O •0°g0.•,oC). ?• •.• S• ®O O. • oo®QoC 0'0 d. . O• obo.. O o'o0 .00 O O w ;n0l''o°'f.o•0.AQ46n•Uiio°.0°.Qod';Oa ob 9.0 LEGEND: ,', '' ' Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab y< p 0o.° t oc.• . o ° °... Base Material or Base Rock Backfill; Compacted On-Site Soil or Imported Select Fill Material as Described in the Site Preparation of the General Earthwork Section of the Attached Report Text. ' 95 Minimum Percentage of Maximum Laboratory Dry Density as Determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557-78 (Modified Proctor), Unless Otherwise Specified in the Attached Report Text. .• . .•o. _°-, Bedding Material; Material Type Depends on Type of Pipe and °,.!O'o p: Laying Conditions. Bedding Should Conform to the Manufacturers • Recommendations for the Type of Pipe Selected. ilV; • V ,I41\ TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL ‘Ifi - t�7I Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments lI \i� GrotectInical Fs 'Geoiogisss&Envimnmrma1S[irntsts Renton, Washington Proj. No. 8890 1Dm GLS 1 Date Nov.'99 Checked MGM I Date 11/15/99 biate 5 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION E-8818 Our initial field exploration was performed on August 30, 1999. At this time, subsurface conditions at the site were explored by excavating eight test pits to a maximum exploration depth of thirteen (13) feet below existing grade. The test pits were excavated by Northwest Excavating, subcontracted to ECI, using a rubber-tire backhoe. On September 15, 1999 we drilled two borings to a maximum depth of thirty-seven (37) feet below existing grade. We encountered refusal in Boring B-2 on a large log encountered at thirty-seven (37) feet below grade. These borings were drilled by Boretec using a B-24 trailer- mounted drill rig. A third boring was drilled to a depth of fifty-six and one half (56.5) below existing grade on October 20, 1999 to further evaluate subsurface conditions. This boring was drilled by Associated Drilling using a truck-mounted drill rig. Approximate boring and test pit locations were estimated by pacing from the site features depicted on a site plan provided by the client. The elevations were estimated based on the 1994 United States Geological Survey Renton Quadrangle Map. The locations and elevations of the borings and test pits should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. These approximate locations are shown on the Boring and Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. The field exploration was continuously monitored by a geologist from our firm who classified the soils encountered, maintained a log of each boring and test pit, obtained representative samples, measured groundwater levels, and observed pertinent site features. The samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified'Soil Classification System which is presented on Plate Al, Legend. Representative soil samples were placed in closed containers and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. Logs of the test..pits are presented on Plates A2 through A9, logs of the borings are presented on Plates Al 0 through A16. The final logs represent our interpretations'of the field logs and the results of the laboratory examination and tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual. The borings were drilled using hollow stem augers. In each boring, Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed at selected intervals in general accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1586. The split spoon samples were driven with a one hundred forty (140) pound hammer freely falling thirty (30) inches. The number of blows required to drive the last twelve (12) inches of penetration are called the "N-value". This value helps to characterize the site soils and is used in our engineering analyses. These results are recorded on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths. Earth Consultants, Inc. r . MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL SYMBOL 'C] b c GW Well-Graded Gravels,Gravel-Sand Gravel And Clean Gravels I Q o n Q o n a o n gw Mixtures, Little Or No Fines •Gravelly (little or no fines) M • • GP Poorly Graded Gravels,Gravel- Coarse Soils I I a I a $ • gp Sand Mixtures,Little Or No Fines Grained ` Soils More Than 1 F r gm I GM Silty lt Gravels,Gravel Sand- 50% Coarse Gravels With r Mixtures Fraction Fines(appreciable Retained On amount of fines) GC Clayey Gravels,Gravel-Sand- No.4 Sieve gc Clay Mixtures , Sano ' SW Well-Graded Sands. Gravelly Andd Clean Sand o 0 0 o o 0 SW Sands, Little Or No Fines Sandy (little or no fines) d. ,.+;. -:. ., . :� +c:•: •�:•: nun Poorly-Graded Sands, Gravelly More Than Soils lE:%:<' iii Cp?::::;: 50% Material r;..,gip:»•:•:ff::•;? Sp Sands, Little Or No Fines Larger Than > More Than r z No.200 Sieve 50% Coarse SM Silty Sands, Sand Silt Mixtures Size Fraction Sands With Sm Fines(appreciable ..• Passing No.4 amount of fines) SC SC Clayey Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures ML Inorganic Silts 8 Very Fine Sands,Rock Flot r,Silty rrtl Clayey Fine Sands;Clayey Silts WI Slight Plasticity Fine Silts �P ��i r Inorganic Clays Of Low To.Medium Plasticity, Liquid Limit CL Soils AridClays Less Than 50 � CI Gravelly Clays, Sandy Clays, Silty Clays, Lean 1 II II II II II OL Organic Silts And Organic I I I OI Silty Clays Of Low Plasticity • MH Inorganic Silts, Micaceous Or Diatomaceous Fire More Than mh Sand Or Silty Soils 50% Material Silts Liquid Limit Inor anic Clays Of High Smaller Than And Greater Than 50 CH g No.200 Sieve Clays Ch Plasticity, Fat Clays Size %/ OH Organic Clays Of Medium To High l ,�/� Oh Plasticity, Organic Silts ��4 E�4 .1%4 S PT Peat,'High Swamp Soils Highly Organic Soils IL J t, d r, J I, pt With High Organic Contents Topsoil -y 4,4,4',, Humus And Duff Layer • • •••••••••• �• Highly Variable Constituents Fill •�•�•�•�••� The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the material presented in the attached logs. DUAL SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderline loll classification. C TORVANE READING,tsf I 2'O.D.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER qu PENETROMETER READING,tsf W MOISTURE,%dry weight 11 24"I.D. RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER P SAMPLER PUSHED * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED i WATER OBSERVATION WELL pcf DRY DENSITY,lbs.per cubic ft. LL UOUID LIMIT,% 2 DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER PI PLASTIC INDEX DURING EXCAVATION t SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER LEVEL W/DATE 10►{ „� IA4fh I Earth Consultants Inc. LEGEND ` (i uxiulk:,l I9,git rs,C x iugia'&Iinvironmen.d Si.•kaubu ��UUYY!! Proj. No.8890 IDte Sept. '99 IPlate Al • Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 • Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-1 Excavation Contactor. Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' Notes: I t �, — Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4":grass General $ Notes (%) i >. p LL A > ;. �•�•� _ SM Brown silty SAND,loose, moist(Fill) ••i�i .•ii 1 •�•�• %% GP Gray poorly graded GRAVEL,loose, moist(Fill) •♦♦ • • •* 3 •�•�• 4 ML Mottled brown SILT with sand, loose,moist 32.2 5 -iron oxide staining 6 7 • MP▪ 1 coL. g GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt, loose,moist 5.4 11 1 1 .• 10 • • -iron oxide staining • ' fines 11 — -7°/a . S •'go . ' 12 Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater encountered during excavation. NOTE:Elevations estimated from 1994 U.S.G.S.Renton Quadrangle Topographic Map g c 0. U W s ,,n�:, p�, ,uq� Test Pit Log s I e l((- r` 1 f Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments ? writ if!, \\+Lll GeotechnkulFx, .c""'°/e"&Fa""'o""""al'c"''Is' Renton,Washington or Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A2 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log _ • Project:lame: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments - 1 1 . Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-2 Excavation Contactor. - Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' . Notes: o — L ® N Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4":grass General Notes % m E in it E u) E ��� - ML Brown sandy SILT, loose, moist(Fill) ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ 1 ♦♦•♦• ♦♦♦ •♦♦ 22.3 •♦�♦� • ••• 3 SP Brown poorly graded SAND, loose, moist(Possible Fill) ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ 4 ♦♦♦♦♦ 5 ML Mottled brown SILT with sand, loose, moist 6 - 7 -loose to medium dense 1 gm i GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt, medium dense, moist I • •.• 8 3.7 •'• • • • r g - �.•0 -iron oxide staining 5.4 i !�' 10 -8%fines •I• 11 Test pit terminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater encountered during excavation. c 0 o - 0 U w a. 8 idos.. p),. ,i41,1. Test Pit Log 2 (hill( i-� d�l/� Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments 8 W?It 1/1'�t� c '," lFnal .a."'og a.F""""'°"'"al`,c"""g' Renton,-Washington J W Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A3 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log . Project Name: Sheet of 1/1filliams Avenue Apartments . 1 1 .. Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-3 Excavation Contactor: _ Ground Surface Elevation: NW Emavating • .. 30' Notes'. = .5 .c..... nu) —2 Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil and Duff 8"-12" w General 7 Notes (%) 0 ei• im a D ei• . ••• ML Dark brown SILT with sand, loose, moist(Fill) •• • • • —• •_ •• ••• •• — ••• •• 2 ML Brown SILT with sand,loose,moist 3 22.1 • i: ii,•i.: SP-SM Brown poorly graded SAND with silt,loose, moist . ,:i,:c..:. - :iiiti:i , • :i:i:0: ',] 5 — : i:° •- / r 6 ML Mottled brown SILT, loose,moist „I . 7 . , i. GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose to medium dense, moist ti Illik 1 4.TN 8 • • . I liN 9 — • •:wi • I . lik 10 es. — t.IN •ii• 12 — 48.8 • • • TM 13 MH Mottled brown and gray elastic SILT,soft,wet,contains organics Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater encountered during excavation. 1 _ g . 0 u . ii! Test Pit Log 1 d"s-.‘ ' 'q41 Mil(.-/A.,,ii0 Earth Consultants illiams Avenue Apartments ifif N‘iw owlectinicatmioneets.Geologists i FrivIronmenral Sciesulgs Inc.. Renton,Washington ,- Prow j.No. 8890 Own. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A4 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-4 Excavation Contactor. - Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' Notes: _ m Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 6"-8":grass General . 2 W L _ a. rn . Notes (%) c9 p 2 rn ���� ML Dark brown SILT with sand, loose,moist(Fill Topsoil) .s. . ML Brown SILT, loose, moist 2 3 26.0 1 ` 4 SP-SM Brown poorly graded SAND with silt, loose,moist a. 5 -iron o)dde staining I ML Mottled brown SILT with sand, loose, moist -iron o)dde staining • c 6 Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose to medium dense, moist 1 2.5 ;l -very dark iron oxide staining from T to maximum depth explored I► Illb1 8 - IT el re° lb r 9 • •� • 10 - lb 3.9 rk sa _ -becomes wet at 11' lb It 12 -heavy seepage at 12' Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade.Groundwater seepage encountered at 12.0 feet during excavation. pq r G 0 U w 0. 4411. Test Pit Log iI _�( `a� I) Earth Consultants Inc.( . Williams Avenue Apartments \lw i\il, `tIf i ", alF, . °�"&Fl" o„"""' "al,"`"'ts' Renton,Washington ,- H _ O. Proj.Na. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MG:A Date 9/16/99 t Plate A5 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this ecloratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments _ 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-5 Excavation Contactor. Ground Surface Elevation: NW Eicavating 30' Notes: V — a, Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4" GeneraE. t Ti (6Notes) W) c • o " N D m SM Brown silty SAND with gravel,loose, moist(Fill) ML Brown SILT with sand, loose, moist 20.0 2 3 , 4 -becomes mottled 5 • 6 -dark iron oxide staining 8 -contains interbeds of poorly graded gravel and poorly graded sand 9.2 9 LL=60 PL=42 76.3 Ho: MH Gray elastic SILT,soft,wet,contains organics P1=18 Test pit terminated at 10.5 feet below existing grade due to excessive caving.No groundwater encountered during exa;avatron. r. c 0 a. W 0. ,• u ��`: +►�. Test Pit Log mo q11:� r`iJ�ffIf Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments J • if' VI \fir`// °��Fn �`*'8�"&F""'""" dlxw„ Renton,Washington H 0.• Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A6 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of - Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-6 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: . NW Ecavating 30' Notes: Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil/Fill 6"-8" General W 2 2 ...-4_'c ...; 1 cno 2 1:01- E GT is_ E ci) E Notes (96) 6 ul a a D a• .:4 SM Brown silty SAND,loose, moist 1. — -contains mottled silt interbeds 13.2 • ;li.-, , -33%fines : i'-'. , ' -mottled ..:.. — i•:.:, • • --.. -mottled 5 — • . . .. ::'i:• 6 — ;;:•Y • •:: •A • • • . GP Reddish brown poorly graded GRAVEL, loose, moist 6 III 1 a -dark iron oxide staining • • GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose to medium dense, moist II *A 3.1 ; ; 9 • • 111 . •P 0 • • • • 1 1 -becomes wet 70.5 MH Blue gray elastic SILT,soft,wet 12 -contains organics Test pit terminated at 12.5 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. ! g, •- 0 . u la s ii0 Is: l: 'A kl‘, ( Test Pit Log 00019 Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments 9, wo, ‘,up wiw Geolectinical FrIgneess.Geologists&Firiltvoniertrai scientiss Renton,Washington w Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A7 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of _ ..• Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-7 Excavation Contactor: _ Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' Notes: 0 — — Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4"-6" General W E" .8 -c °- 1,,,-i r.; Notes (I 6) g a• ca a D c). 0•••• •,•,A — SM Dark brown silty SAND, loose,moist(Fill) 0 .. • ••v4 SM Brown silty SAND, loose, moist . • 2 -interbeds of silt and poorly graded sand • 3 — 9.2 4 . • 5 • 6 30.0 ML Mottled SILT with sand, loose,moist 7 . 8 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt, loose to medium dense, moist il 6.1 i 1 I 10 — -1 1°/0 fines -dark iron oxide staining increase in gravel 11 -becomes wet at 10.5' - ; — 62.0 III k 12 — IIIIIII1 13 ML Blue gray elatsic SILT,soft,wet,contains organics Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater encountered during excavation. ,.. g ' 0 W. . O , 03 --) 0. O. Test Pit Log R., ,a14'':..1 ill: 4,111- I(kl 0 -)) ‘111 0 II Earth Consultants Inc. , , le viry Georechnical Engtneess.Groiopists&EnvIrortmerwal SclesubTs . Williams Avenue Apartments ..., Renton,Washington a. Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A8 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of - Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: " Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-8 Excavation Contactor . Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30.0 Notes: 2 2 Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4"-6":grass General W Notes (%) 6- d-,• a 17, D ,T-,. c • • • SM Dark brown silty SAND, loose,moist(Fill) ••• •.. . 2 II SM Brown silty SAND,loose,moist .. ... . .1.:: II -poorly graded sand interbeds : . 4 111 . .-• . 5 . •. •• • 6 -H.• • , 7 ML Mottled SILT with sand, loose, moist 24.6 8 -iron oxide stained sand interbeds 9 11 10 11 MH Blue gray elastic SILT with sand,soft,wet 51.7 -contains organics 12 Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. , - :q Q co 1- 0 (9. U La 2 Test Pit Log (hill( -/iVilli Earth Consultants Inc. , ( Williams Avenue Apartments § my)/ N lof viii, en:medulla:II Fn8Ineess.Gmhottlsis&Fxwl=mental Sclentlss Renton,Washington ,- u, Proj.No. 8890 Own. GLS Date Sept'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A9 t- Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-1 Drilling Contador. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Boretec HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite No. o o t m c Surface Conditions: Parking Lot General W Blows °E d it E N E Notes (96) Ft. c, rn 0 a m rn ~ice ML 2"-3"Asphalt,2"Base) ••t. Black sandy SILT,loose,moist(Fill) .w 1 ~• 2 — 17.9 -contains gravel •• -sample recovered from cuttings • 3 — • H�• 4 SM Mottled brown sandy SILT,very loose, moist 19.9 5 -iron oxide staining a -52%fines 6 . 7 — 22.4 3 1 • 8 i' 9. -becomes wet,blue gray E: 10 48.0 3 . 11 ML Blue gray SILT,very loose,wet 12 -organic stringers 104.8 13 -dark brown to black wood debris in silty sand matrbc,wet 2 7 14 MH Blue gray elastic SILT with organics,soft,water bearing 15 38.3 1 LL=39 PL=29 16 ML Blue gray SILT,very loose,water bearing PI=10 17 -6"-12"peat interbedded at 16.5' 28.8 -trace sand a 12 18 -becomes medium dense o 19 U W a. o s, '�(', 1 �l 14 Boring Log e1 f' ./0 Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments • i,��j����;��� GeoteclmkalFn(pacts Geologists 4flMronmentdlScknlbis Renton,Washington O Z m Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate A10 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name. Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 2 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-1 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Boretec HSA • SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite U N Notes General yb mows 'a° E io`i E E Ft. c9 wi• 0 v� Cr; 72.6 ML Blue gray SILT with sand,very loose,water bearing 5 ,`T PT Brown fibrous PEAT,soft,water bearing ML Brown SILT with organics,loose,water bearing 22 23 24 25 14.7 20 :: . SM Gray silty fine SAND with gravel, medium dense,water bearing 26 27 E: 26 A- 29 11.1 ... .. •;_ 30 SP Grades to gray poorly graded SAND with gravel,very dense,water 51 o u`° bearing 31 -1%fines R; :. '" -heaving sand flushed from augers prior to sampling,sand is \r•.narse grained Boring terminated at 32.0 feet below existing grade.Groundwater table encountered at 13.5 feet during drilling.Boring backfilled with cuttings. a 0 0 0. W i/0_ 1h: /I4 Boring Log i `:A�( �M`�,�/l Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments 8 \11�1i\\�l/ \ii 11 '°"�'F' Geologist;&Fi'""""""`a's"""�' Renton,Washington U Z m Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate Al 1 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this eicloratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 2 Job No. Logged by. Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: • 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-2 Drilling Contactor: _ Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Boretec HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Surface Conditions: Grass W No. . 2 L . n co 2 General Blows w E w E E Notes (%) Ft. 8' m 0 do D m � ••• SM Brown silty SAND,loose,moist(Fill) ♦-♦ •�N 1 ♦N ♦♦♦• • ♦-♦•• 2 — ♦♦♦• -trace gravel ♦1 • ♦~ 3 — • — SM Brown silty SAND, loose, moist 4 5 -iron oxide staining 12.9 5 • 7 18.4 8 -becomes very loose, iron oxide staining 2 -mottled 9. • 10 — 72.8 _ 1 11 MH Gray elastic SILT with organics,very soft,wet 12 71.3 '"' ''' PT Brown fibrous PEAT,soft,wet 4 ,, .% 0 13 - 14 ML Blue gray SILT,very loose,water bearing — 36.0 15 -6"interbeds of elastic silt with organics 3 16 LL=38 PL=26 P1=12 SM Blue gray silty SAND,very loose,water bearing • 17 — $ 1s -organic stringers — a 19 — W a Boring Log Ohl( 4, Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments O ► ( i ` tl1) <<�� �� \t1 cu, Foc+TM Geologists&Env"m^°r,ial' ^tlig' Renton,Washington O Z m Proj.No. 8890 Dun. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate A 12 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of infomration presented on this log. Boring Log . Sheet of Project Name: Williams Avenue Apartments 2 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-2 Drilling Contactor. _ Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Boretec HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite - m co o Notes General % cn Blows A E. m it A Ft. 6 0 rn D rn 29.6 SM Blue gray silty SAND, loose to medium dense,water bearing 10 : 21 j , -trace organic stringers 22 — 23 24 27.3 25 -6"elastic silt interbeds 7 26 SP-SM Gray poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel, loose to medium o — dense,water bearing :%, 28 — 10.1 30 -becomes medium dense 28 :'Q -5%fines 31 -flushed heaving sand from augers prior to sampling at 30'to 35' ':.v 32 o:a i::'° 33 — r .• . 34 r: c : 98.7 35 SM Grades to blue gray silty SAND,medium dense to dense,water bearing -slightly decomposed wood -high blow count due to wood,soils are medium dense to dense, 37 \refusal on apparent log at 37' r m Boring terminated at 37.0 feet below existing grade.Groundwater seepage encountered at 13.5 feet during drilling.Boring backfilled a with cuttings. p- 0 n U W O. Boring Log $ iRl''�I `'r.�iiii Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments p ` i\ a GrAted icalFnelneris,GcarkgLvsRFnvlrtxmxrnal!kit:Miss Renton,Washington O Z o Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS I Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate A13 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. ' Boring Log Project game: Sheet of s' Williams Avenue Apartments 1 3 • Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 10/20/99 10/20/99 B-3 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite No. s a -- o_ N n Surface Conditions: Grass Notes General o� Blows m E, w a E , E ) Ft. 6cn 0 DN ••�� SM Brown silty SAND, loose, moist(Fill) ♦♦ •�i�i 1 .• .. �•H 2 -trace gravel •�•�• �••• 3 ML Grades to mottled brown SILT, loose, moist 4 5 27.8 6 6 SP-SM Reddish brown poorly graded SAND with gravel, loose to medium r 0 . 7 — dense, moist : °.a 8 °:.a: 9 O ' 4.8 10 -dark iron oxide staining 16 ':.a — • 11 ':0 12 ° • f 13 - MH Gray elastic SILT,soft to medium stiff,saturated 14 -contains silt interbeds 37.5 15 -trace organics - 4 16 17 18 g 0 19 n U to o. co cAi an,_(hlid ��`: 44 . Boring Log ig i(-' ,41I Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments g / 1/ Nti 1 Yank'al Engineers.Geologists&FnNmn nxnral5cerirl�s Renton,Washington J 0 z m Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Oct.'99 Checked MGM Date 10/25/99 Plate Al Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of .r' Williams Avenue Apartments 3 3 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 10/20/99 10/20/99 B-3 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite General No. c t °r co c Notes Jo Blows ,% , E N T ( ) Ft. c9 m 0 m m m 4.5 7 ! GM Brown silty GRAVEL, medium dense,waterbearing 28 41 -comprised of rounded clasts _ 42 -interbeds of silty sand ' 43 -becomes dense to very dense(based on observations during ' 44— drilling) • fie 45 7.2 -becomes gray 69 • 46 -contains thin interbeds of slightly less dense soils �, • 47 — I ,I 48 _• I `1 49• • 1 • 50 17.9 r 69 • 51 e ji 52 - • 53 54 — 13.5 SP-SM Gray�oorl graded SAND with gravel and silt,very dense, Y 53 , . wate earing Boring terminated at 56.5 feet below existing grade.Groundwater seepage encountered at 13.0 feet during dnlling.Boring backfilled with cuttings. 2 S 0 0. w a. 00 /• Ps: .III; 44>!. Boring Log ..41((..1 �1 f�f Earth Consultants is Inc. . Williams Avenue Apartments • M J/ IV iu 'yink-alFnghxeas.Ccologty�&FnvlmnmesualScfe:n Renton,Washington J Z re o Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Oct.'99 Checked MGM Date 10/25/99 Plate Al 6 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. • APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS E-8890 Earth Consultants. Inc. SIEVE.ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS f—,—.0.1_--, r SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES I NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH.U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE-IN MM 00 10 M N s z N t0 a M N . --iiiiiiiiii.1IIi- I N cis O00 0 to O OO OOOSO Q100� t I 10 o - 90 ...." : /l[rn 20 R J /T m Bo m 3 m 30 70 O -•� �IlUiltiUll II 40 C) G r— m O ---. 2 � 50 D 7,1 17 - 50 N a W m (n \ 73 60 coN e — 40 Ii!1iuhi WI<. -G � lG • = 30 ► 70 m 0 IIIi !iIIII co 20 �` 80 x_ 0. 1011111111 90 I CD N 0 1 III I I I 11 1 l 1 I I 1 1 1 ! 1 ! I I III ! 100 �� 0 0 37 O O O co0 co0 0 0 0 O 0o tD a M N .- 0o tD v, M N .-• oo cfl a M N .- 00 t0 %f M N • 0 0 O O 0 0 00 0 0 0 O o m D_ M N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS • m C Z COARSE •I FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE FINES co £ m COBBLES GRAVEL SAND 1O Iv Ci N ut 0 m Moisture LL PL d a Z KEY Boring or DEPTH USCS DESCRIPTION Content (%) 00 w y Test Pit No. (ft.) o K imen o N p TP-1 9.5 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt 5.4 --- --- -0 0 rr to 8 ——_ TP-2 10.5 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt 5.4 --- ---- ed O TP-6 1.5 SM Brown silty SAND 13.2 --- --- A—•— TP-7 9.5 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt 6. 1 --- --- SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 3 SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES I NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH.U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM � 00 10 $ pi N v a O O O 00 Op O O q q N Q O O 0 8. C O 2 • ; N tD st M N N r- �-c— a O t�0 N M et 1A tD 00 O O O O O 0 Mo .. • 10 90 • I II �� 1�n FIIIiii!iiII1 200 ly 80 mm 30 L ^ z 70 cn v O -I II • z , 40 Z G 0 m 1• 50 > 0) a r+ 50 y d = CO m 60 W N 3 40 I ••' w b n m rr ii • G7 70 '.o v 130 ' m 0 80 I 0" 20 \ • cp X- 1. co0. 90 10 NE r.. N 0 I I I I I I I I 11 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • ^I •� t� loo 7[I F'• O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 co l0 a M N .- CD t0 a Cl N 7 O O O O O O O O O O O O -r 0 D O 0 0 00 f0 Cr Cl N , O• O• O• O• O• O M N `- GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0 rt u) 2 to 0 a COARSE I FINE COARSE 1 MEDIUM ) FINE FINES co .. C COBBLES GRAVEL SAND _ I o N G m Moisture � G G H. Z KEY Boring or DEPTH USCS DESCRIPTION Content (%) , LL PL 0'd D Test Pit No. (ft.) I.- r K 0 0 cn O B-1 5 ML Black sandy SILT 19.9 --- --- m m d 7 a) til p——— B-1 30 SP Gray poorly graded SAND with gravel 11. 1 - w N 0 -- B-2 30 SP-SM Gray poorly graded SAND with silt & gravel 10. 1 --- --- I 100 80 x 60 w F- 40 `--A-Line CD a. 20 CL-ML I _ 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Natural Key Boring/ Depth Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. I. Water Test Pit (ft) Content 0 TP-5 10 Gray elastic SILT Mi 60 42 18 76.3 Atterberg Limits Test Data ���� 1: d11� Williams Avenue Apartments ` 1((-. .,F Earth Consultants Inc. Renton, Washington wfj/ Ili/\ir ) Gmeclrical Writers.Geology.Environmental Sdan�s Proj. No.8890 IDate Sept. '99 I Plate B3 I• 100 80 X 60 W >-L H 40 v `'—A-Line a 20 • CL-ML 'C'M= 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Natura I Key Boring/ Depth Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. P I. Water Test Pit (ft) Content • B-1 16 Blue gray 'SILT MI 39 29 10 38.3 • B-2 15 Blue gray SILT ML 38 26 12 36 Atterberg Limits Test Data 1"' ��1: d11� Williams Avenue Apartments �, 0, I Earth Consultants InC. Renton, Washington nup1 <vju Geotectinkal Engineers.Geologists&Environmental Scientists Proj. No. 8890 I Date Sept. '99 !Plate B4 e DISTRIBUTION E-8890 4 Copies Dean-Deily Company 16720 Northeast 116th Street Redmond, Washington 98052 Attention: Mr. Ed Dean Earth Consultants. Inc. DEC 12 '00 11:20 T0-2066237005 FROH-TPE T-096 P.02/03 F-636 1 f I) s%. i _--_. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2223.112"AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 101-BELLEVUE.WASHINGTON 98004-2962 TELEPHONE(425)455.5320 V ran N.BISHOP.P.E.Resident DAVID H.ENGER.P,E.WA Pr.ident FACSIMILE(425)453.5759 December 11, 2000 Mr. Bill Sherman DEVELOPMENT PLANNING WILLIAM SHERMAN COMPANY, LLC CITY OF RENTON • 2500— 124t Ave. N.E., Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98005 DEC 19 2000 Re: Multi-family Development at 5th &Williams — Renton RECEIVE® Plan Modification 0 Dear Mr. Sherman: We understand that modest changes to the above identified project are being considered. The changes generally are an increase in the number of dwelling units from 67 to 86 and the removal of the exIstlnz4,700 sq. ft. medical office clinic located at the south end of the property. In addition, the access'oriel etion would be changed to be perpendicular to the alley. Originally, the access was to be parallel to the alley. The traffic impacts of the project were analyzed in our Multi-family Development at 5th &Williams— Renton dated July 19, 2000. Trip Generation Replacing the 4,700 sq. ft. medical clinic with 19 apartment units would change the amount of traffic generated by the project. The Trip Generation is used to project the changes in the site generated traffic volumes. The existing medical office clinic is classified under ITE land use code 720 Medical/Dental Office building. The trip generation changes are detailed in the following table: Time Period Trip Generation Trips Entering Trips Exiting Total Rate Apartment(ITE 220, 19 units Average Weekday T= 6.63X 63 (50%) 63 (50%) 126 , AM Peak Hour T = 0.51X 2 (16%) ___ 8 (84%) 10 PM Peak Hour T= 0.62X 8 (67%) 4933%) _ 12 Medical Office Clinic (ITE 720, 4,700 sq.ft.) Average Weekday T= 36.13X 85 (50%) 85 (50%) 170 AM Peak Hour T = 2,43X— 9 (80%) 2 (20%) 11 PM Peak Hour T= 3.66X 5 (27%) 12 (73%) 17 Net Trips, Apartments—Medical Office Clinic Average Weekday -- j22] [22] [441 AM Peak Hour -- [7] 6 11] PM Peak Hour -- 3 181 [5] X=#of units or 1,000 sq. ft. , T=Trips [xx] —values within brackets are negative. • CA—Projects Foldet1R0883a00 Plan Modificalion.doc DEC 12 '00 11:21 T0-2066237005 FROM-TPE T-096 P.03/03 F-636 A Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, LLC December 11, 2000 Page 2 As shown in the above table, replacing the existing 4,700 sq. ft. medical clinic with 19 apartment units is projected to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the subject project. Traffic Impact.Mitigation The City of Renton has a traffic impact fee of$75 per average weekday trip. Our 7.19.00 report calculated a traffic fee of$33,300 based on the project generating 444 trips. Replacing the medical office clinic with 19 apartment units Is projected to reduce the average weekday trips by 44. Thus, the calculated traffic fee would be as follows: 400 average weekday trips X$75 per average weekday trip = $30,000 Operational Review No material changes to the LOS performed at the analysis intersections shown in Table 1 of our 07.19.00 report would be expected. The traffic generation is expected to be less than originally projected. Further, the revised alley access would allow residents to travel either north or south on the alley. Thus improving the disbursement of the traffic of the project. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations This letter has documented the traffic impact of the proposed replacement of a 4,700 sq. ft. medical office clinic with 19 apartment units. These units would be a part of the 67 apartment units Initially evaluated in Multi-family Development at 6m&Williams— Renton Traffic Impact Analysis. The proposed changes would reduce traffic generated by the site by 44 trips a day. Therefore, the calculated traffic fee would be changed to $30,000. No other material changes to our initial analysis would occur. If you have any questions, please call me at 425.455.5320 or email me at miacobs( tranoIaneng.com. Very truly yours, �as4 C' • P of r�r•i;c lo TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. , 57'71` /1 i2-0o '� $FCC : . F.) Mark J. Jacobs, P.E., P.T.O.E. :'3.4t01,TAL,c,- ; _ Associate MJJ:mc !EXPIRES ua,ff 1 CA-Projects FoldenR0883a00 Plan Modlflcallon.doc MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT FIFTH & WILLIAMS - RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Prepared for WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. 2500 — 124th Ave. N.E., Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Transportation Planning & Engineering , Inc . 2223 - 112th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 Bellevue,Washington 98004-2952 Telephone: (425) 455-5320 Facsimile: (425) 453-5759 - �. MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT FIFTH & WILLIAMS - RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Prepared for WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. 2500 — 124th Ave. N.E., Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Prepared by TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2223 - 112th Ave. N.E., Suite 101 - Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone - (425) 455-5320 FAX - (425) 453-5759 July 19, 2000 3. JAco WAS4CA,s3if-. ..fi14 ftP • o *10) C�7�. 19• U ONAL ro !EXPIRES 4131 (9 Z 1 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2223-112'AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 101-BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 98004-2952 425 • VICTOR H.BISHOP,P.E.President TELEPHONE(425)455-5320 DAVID H.ENDER.P.E.Vice President FACSIMILE(425)453-5759 July 19, 2000 Mr. Bill Sherman - WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. 2500— 124th Avenue N.E, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005 Re: Multi-family Development at 5th &Williams— Renton Traffic Impact Analysis • Dear Mr. Sherman: • We are pleased to present this traffic analysis for the proposed Multi-family Development project at 5th &Williams, consisting of 67 apartment units. The site is located within the northwest quadrant of the Williams Avenue S./S. 5th Street intersection approximately 200 feet north of S. 5th Street in the City of Renton adjacent to the existing Renton Family Practice Clinic. Access is proposed via an existing alley on S. 5th Street presently serving the Renton Family Practice Clinic parking lot and adjacent residences. We have visited the project site and surrounding street network. It is our understanding that the City of Renton requested that the following intersections be analyzed: ➢ Williams Avenue South/South Grady Way ➢ Williams Avenue South/South 4th Street ➢ Site Access/South 5th Street. The summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page six of this report. 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 prepared by Barghausen, received June, 2000. The plan consists of four connected apartment style residential buildings over a parking garage. Planters and walkways surround the four-building complex. Access is proposed via an existing alley opening onto S. 5th Street. The site is bordered by an existing residence to the north, the Renton Family Practice Clinic to the south, Williams Avenue S. to the east, and the access alley to the west. C.1-Prolects I R068300IT/A.doc IR Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. July 19, 2000 Page 2 Full development of the Multifamily Development project is expected to occur by 2001. However, 2003 is used as the horizon year for the purposes of this study to ensure a conservative analysis. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS The project site presently is undeveloped. Street Facilities Figure 3 shows existing traffic control, number of street lanes, number of approach lanes at intersections, and other pertinent information. The surrounding street network is a grid system in southeast downtown Renton. The primary streets within the study area are classified in the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: ➢ S. Grady Way Principal Arterial ➢ Talbot Road S. Principal Arterial ➢ Main Avenue S. Principal Arterial ➢ Benson Road S. Principal Arterial ➢ Wells Avenue S. Principal Arterial ➢ S. 3`d Street Minor Arterial ➢ S. 4th Street Minor Arterial ➢ Williams Avenue S. Minor Arterial ➢ S. 7th Street Minor Arterial ➢ Shattuck Avenue S. Collector Arterial D Burnett Avenue S. Collector Arterial ➢ Whitworth Avenue S. Local Access ➢ Morris Avenue S. Local Access ➢ Smithers Avenue S. Local Access ➢ Houser Way S. Local Access ➢ S. 6'h Street Local Access ➢ S. 5th Street Local Access Transit Facilities Metro Transit is the transit agency which serves the study area as well as all of King County. The nearest bus stops are located at the S. Grady Way/Talbot Road S. intersection and the Burnett Ave. S./S. 3`d Street intersection. Route 101 provides express bus service to downtown Seattle at least three times per hour during the peak hours of 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM and twice per hour during the off peak. IlDavid slcl-Projecls1R0683001TIA.doc Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. July 19, 2000 Page 3 Routes 105 and 148 provide bus service to Fairwood and Kennydale twice per hour daily before 7:00 PM and once per hour between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Route 153 provides bus service to Kent at least once per hour during the peak hours (6:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) only. Route 167 provides service to Seattle's University District twice per hour during the AM peak hour (6:00 AM to 9:00 AM) only. Service to Auburn is provided once per hour during the PM hours of 1:00 PM to 6:00 PM. Please refer to the Metro timetables in the appendix for more detailed information on the above routes. The above routes as well as the following additional routes serve the Renton community from the Renton Park and Ride located at the S. Grady Way/Shattuck Ave. S. intersection. ➢ 106: Downtown Seattle, Rainier Beach > 107: Rainier Beach, Lake Ridge, Bryn Mawr ➢ 110: Free RUSH Shuttle around Renton > 143: Downtown Seattle, Maple Valley, Black Diamond > 149: Maple Valley, Black Diamond D. 163: Downtown Seattle, Tukwila, Kent > 169: Kent > 240: Bellevue ➢ 280: Night Owl Service to Downtown Seattle and Bellevue ➢ 340: Shoreline, Aurora, Lake Forest Park, Kenmore, Bellevue, Southcenter, SeaTac > 565: Sound Transit: Kent, Auburn, Federal Way > 908: Renton DART Service ➢ 909: Renton DART Service ➢ 970: Metro Boeing Custom Bus to Auburn EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing PM peak hour traffic volumes at the pertinent intersections affected by site-generated traffic. 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 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 IIDavid slcl-ProjectslR0683001TIA.doc Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. July 19, 2000 Page 4 worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate, and LOS E and F are low. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual - 3pecial Report 209 3rd Edition updated December, 1997. The LOS shown indicate overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. 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 Our LOS analysis, see Table 1, shows that the southbound movement of the Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way intersection currently operates at LOS B. Level of service B is considered to be good operation. The movements of the Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street intersection currently operate at LOS C or higher, also considered good during the PM peak hour. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows projected 2003 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the latest City of Renton traffic volume counts plus background growth. Historic traffic volume counts in the vicinity of the proposed project were studied between 1994 and 1999. Compounded annual growth rates as high as 3.2% were calculated. However, to ensure a conservative analysis, a 4% per year growth factor was used in this report. Also the area in the vicinity of the project site is generally developed thus limiting the potential for traffic growth induced by nearby development. Our level of service analysis shows that the southbound movement of the Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way intersection would continue to operate at LOS B in 2003. The movements of the Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street intersection are expected to operate at LOS C or higher in 2003. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Trip Generation: A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. 11David slcl-Projects1R0683001T1A.doc Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. _ July 19, 2000 Page 5 The proposed 67 unit Multi-family Development project is expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown in Table 2. The trip generation is calculated using the trip rates found in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, for apartment (ITE Land Use Code 220). The trip generation values above account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. This project is expected to generate approximately 444 trips during the average weekday, 34 trips during the AM peak hour, and 42 trips during the PM peak hour. Trip Distribution: Figure 6 shows the projected trip distribution and the 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 (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times and on information contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Traffic Volume Figure 7 shows the projected 2003 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site-generated PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. Level of Service Analysis The site access onto S. 5'" Street is expected to operate at LOS A, which is considered very good. Our analysis presumed that the through traffic volumes on S. 5th Street would be similar to those on S. 4th Street in 2003. This is conservative as S. 4th Street is a minor arterial while S. 5'" Street is a local access street. In addition to project generated traffic, the alley is expected to have traffic from the existing developments namely the residences and the Renton Family Practice Clinic. While the volumes generated by these developments is likely to be less than those generated by the proposed Multi-family development, the Multi-family development volumes were doubled to account for these additional developments. The LOS of the southbound movement at the Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way intersection is expected to continue to operate at LOS B in 2003 with the project. The movements of the Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street intersection are expected to continue to operate at LOS C or better. al-Projects 1R0683001 TIA.doc Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. July 19, 2000 Page 6 TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City's Comprehensive Plan establishes a citywide traffic impact mitigation fee rate of $75.00 per average weekday trip. The fee rate was developed as documented in the City's Transportation Mitigation Fee Support Document, and adopted with Resolution No. 3100 and Ordinance No. 4527. The fee rate is based on developers paying their fair share (9%) of a 20- year transportation improvement program costing $134,000,000. The project is expected to generate approximately 444 average weekday trips. At $75 per average weekday trip, the calculated fee would be: 444 Average Weekday Trips x$75.00 per average weekday trip = $33,300.00 The Comprehensive Plan states that in addition to the fee, there may be site-specific improvements required by the City to mitigate on-site and adjacent facility impacts. No specific traffic impacts are apparent based upon our analysis. Thus, the on-site and adjacent facility impacts mitigation should be limited to frontage improvements along Williams Street and the alley would need to be constructed in accordance to applicable City of Renton Code requirements. The Comprehensive Plan also states that a development may qualify for a reduction of the $75.00 per vehicle trip mitigation fee through certain credits for development incentives, construction of needed transportation improvements (arterial, HOV and transit), through public/private partnerships, and transportation demand management. Specific credits and the amount of the reduction in the mitigation trip rate fee that could result from such credits would be determined on a case by case basis during the development permitting process. Providing a bus kiosk, bike racks and pedestrian friendly facilities may qualify for consideration by City staff. No additional mitigation fees or street improvements should be necessary. SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report uses existing traffic data collected at the pertinent street intersections identified for analysis. Level of service analyses were performed for existing and projected future traffic volumes, using the collected traffic data, for the without project condition. The evaluation of the traffic impact of the proposed project, included adding project generated traffic to the future traffic volume projection and calculating the level of service. The "with" project traffic operations were then compared to the "without" project operations. The comparison of traffic operations "with" and "without" the project identified that the project would not cause a significant adverse affect on the operation of any of the study intersections. CA-Projecfs%R0683001TIA.doc Mr. Bill Sherman WILLIAM SHERMAN & COMPANY, INC. July 19, 2000 Page 7 Based on our analysis the Multi-family Development residential project should be approved with the following traffic mitigation measure: 1. Pay a traffic impact mitigation fee calculated as follows: ($75.00 per AWDT) X (444 AWDT) = $33,300.00. 2. Access and frontage improvements per City of Renton requirements. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions please call either David M. Schwegel, EIT or myself at 425-455- 5320 or email us at schwegel@tranplaneng.com or mjacobs@tranplaneng.com. Very truly yours, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Mark J. Jacob , .T.O.E. Associate DMS:sv IlDavid slcl-Projecls1R0683001T!A.doc TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 5th &WILLIAMS - RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS EXISTING PROJECTED PROJECTED INTERSECTION MOVEMENT CONDITIONS WITHOUT WITH (2000) PROJECT PROJECT (2003) (2003) Williams Ave. SJ SOUTHBOUND B (13.3) B (14.8) B(14.8) S. Grady Way Williams Ave. SJ SOUTHBOUND C(17.2) C(21.7) C (22.1) S.4th Street EASTBOUND B (13.0) B (14.5) B (14.7) WESTBOUND A(8.8) A(8.4) A(8.4) Site Access/ SOUTHBOUND _ A(9.8) S. 5th Street EASTBOUND A(7.5) The number shown in parentheses( ) is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the indicated approach movement. CA-Projects1R0683001TIATable.doc Multi-family Development at Table 2 - Calculated Trip Generation 7/19/00 5th & Williams - Renton Traffic Impact Analysis AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRIPS(T) AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS(T) PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS(T) Land Use Size(X) Units Rate Enter Exit Total Rate Enter Exit Total Rate Enter Exit Total Apartment(220) 67 Dwelling 6.63 222 222 444 0.51 6 28 34 0.62 29 13 42 Enter/Exit% 50% 50% 16% 84% 67% 33% Subtotal (driveway trips) 222 222 444 6 28 34 29 13 42 Net New Primary Trips 222 222 444 6 28 34 29 13 42 Prepared By Transportation Planning&Engineering, Inc. TGEN.xls . . . • r c - ---\ , ... K 4-4- . „ -----__, ,•• uV 2,-----__"___ /-- ....).' A) _____.---•Png ; 5 7•;• et) g' • / \ '., Powell Ave SW_ i I 4 rg. .,. ..... .. _. „, 1,,, .' 0, 1 con 1 1. ,.... ' ./ ---.7---44-tg_&i,,,R\ : --r-i / ' I -------b-• .1 - EllhAv > 1 imml CV \ ' • . ,...... r"1131--.._' 1 IS.,' i••----.... i / .44 Il .' • K 1 = I ; 1 cn ----i_____ R L) r- ., _ 1 ----1 . \ . ,.th I f- CA Iv •-•• fr-/., / *. i -------4 L ItO ''' / I ‘ kn ''.U) '. 4/ k 2` I. --____. ... .7 i ' Icn .. .*- '• Col \ 1••••--.. i Lind Ave SW '.,_ ,.G') ': 1. '''.....'i-.. --1------- / 1 lo iz Stevens Ave/NW, .1 , F .,, v.. ...... ._ i ---1 < R' ,.1 - ,„ ., r— I,„Lind Ave NW 7:1 M _ Ma.I- A v e't SW.cn -4..* ..,--, 0_ i---• lhr_e_EVA!...,..---'%, 1 > 1- 1 1-- . 'i -..., ' ! ce 1 I .,--- -n o : '.. r i Taylori,Aice o 11-07 , NW .., 1 .. 1 -,_ ,` /ro. ------,-'• %, ''. ______.. ,,....-----... , ---7..... Hardie I4ve NW i 1------ . env e!P -- '• - . '- z _ 7:1 —I K -- — \-\---1---- I .. ... .. .., : r \ • \ ,i - --I , \ . . , cri • ----s . • \ -13 co io Shattuck Ave S -_ Z ---> ce s. ".2.-.2 -13 ') ___s-tolir • . 1--- > trr- c„ I • 2 \Whitwor'h Ave S co cr. r i . -‹ (0 Morris Ave S S-- I 1 , 03 S _. --- ... • ,i---,.......c.) I I \ I! . _ _ < co ., Smithers Ave o. f- I '-•• ...,____I I ------- i .. lu) \ ci) Li ---- , grvtre / ....cii_j_i_________. > I I ---.. ; Williams A've-S 0) • •,b. ce ----- ---.. 1 , _ ,og,912 Ave iv _ , gle.L ,_:>------3-2'-j:C., !to' yililliarnfs Ave S _ ,.•:' r--------- /Burnett CI) Willie . to) c ----, inst N I Williams Ave NT; . . • I I '• Wells Ave S • i I. ------.... cn 71 \ 1 , . 1 i Wells Ave N .........._ , -....._ • XI I -, !z I Park Ave N --i 4--•-,-•-•:.---7: ! • a .--.‘,/ / 0,-* _ , . 1•CY i'-' J 1 L,.., .A m --. I . ..41 l __- 1 co /41 ---•-•- -______.— lq) lo- z -i •---, ---, -11Factoilly Ave NT —.-.-N \ ----.--- IN ,,.. --.... ----1==> l•Z ...:.:. . .71' •- \--,- ‘‘----------- ------.1 .-- . i - -5 • 1--,'...) ,___ 7--:- /•••,(? -Ice ' •- )\,, (' / • -. • -...4,,,, --- 'V •.....:"VibUSer Wa v /V -T1 /--- •''',*<>' H 'co .. . . ...___ .- . . .------7- 1 \-,/"--, 1-----------___ . r ..,.. .1. C 1---,---1*-----,,----.,7<•.).- if .' • 3 1 I \ l'--..." ,;ts / M ., 1 • — ... 1---• I \-. } • n r i ` 4 . - I ■ ■ea•24 2Ti i i1 _._ �,.c _.r '•j�-11 r" cry■ ■ ■ in ■�a■■mgmiii v / i R • R iltt lim -I:•_� +�II u •si 1 111:M ,r:..-� II LL ■/.a v ...it li t .■■AI w� " !1 ira , 11 1 [ Q E 6 din a. .. 0 1 LI rlMa=311 . : :kti,,k i, •;-7,......___ -.I1,..: FLEi /■ . iiM i It1 1 1 l,� riti 0) o V f . , u j r f 1 , yQ as• lyn■ ■ OR Lb 0 ON ill � 11. al ca .x-•�I .i a ■■ U1 I d ' '•IV ^ C ��. �'' Im Hui P': J` rn !!il I'M:11� •a ■■/■ , . Ii4 fR , 3. A , 111.1.1r8-..v,,____ f.+.1 .■■■■a■■ ■.■I `'� "4 ■a■. ■■.■INIMMEMB rJ al 1. ■■ ■ ■ milWill 411 i mum ;: II HE -- o :1: • «I'' �� 9 �• _::.• '. •II: Imo ili =■ u . 1 !f!'�� 2 .cr I 1r urn■ .. = ,1 Ir 1 Th1 Iair ;'I ... . ,7...., . .J..1 •MILIGN=2:71=laas• ' SITE PLAN (FIGURE '1[1 MULTI-FAMILY [- DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH & WILLIAMS - RENTON 2 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS I cn I 2L > N 25 mph a S 3rd St. U, not to scale a`) A 2L v) E v 25 mph 2L ai U 25 mph Q' T .17 _IL 0 in S 4th St.N �sv 4L cn > o a a 30 mph ¢ m EN _I E 2L cn cn Q s to �Site� 25 mph Y 3 6 N Q°'V N 9 > Q V r S 5th St. h F 2L N C - 3 ac t v 25 mph 3 m T Em AJ E cn n u) ,n r V — Q 7 /� 2L S 6th S . i �' 25 mph s C a v r NE NE `� ,n lib �Q v) 2L 2L N N N 5� CC 25 mph 4( 25 mph PIA o S7thSt. T c m LEGEND 0 Traffic Control Signal ���,� \I 41 Stop Sign A )44 ci Yield Sign c�Pr 6s XX mphPosted Speed Limit 5k 35 woy —. O.`�s —. Approach Lane & Direction S Groay la 30 XL Number of Roadway Lanes • ul 1 FIGURE EXISTING STREET CONDITIONS if_ MULTI—FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH & WILLIAMS — RENTON 3 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS r _ Wednesday 6/28/00 (;cri,_ c 4:00pm-5:00pm m .-78 Trafficountai 15 N 234— not to scale S 3rd St. ` a) s cn E ai en a M S 4th St.N en > a A via? c A ai a M en to en cn s Sites u ai ai Y `o Q > Q u c s S 5th St. Ti c c-n 3 c V c A Cl) 3n m ai > `/ V Q U, S 6th St. o 3 en v J ` 0 S 7th St. U' $1Rf Wednesday m 1,0\ 6/28/00 `9 9 • 4:15pm-5:15pm Trafficount o� LEGEND W ay °r S Gcady 19 [XXX] Average Weekday Traffic Volume kP X--N. PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction \ - - ( EXISTING AVERAGE WEEKDAY & PM � PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMESf,... FIGURE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH & WILLIAMS - RENTON 4 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS • ( (Z)::.- COCa CI) f-88 L .—» I 238-s not to scale S 3rd St. N s cn 'E— > a (" S4thSt.N r 0 `o A 0 6 a M v) Lf) C/3 I ' _c Site` o ¢� Q Q s S 5th St. " m c o j ^ vv 3A m m V >> n S 6th St. 0 cn JL i' o S7thSt. cnc r 0$-5 co9 000. `,L'S, c> LEGEND Way ar S G'ady -P (i~ [XXX] Average Weekday Traffic Volume X--•• PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction is FIGURE PROJECTED 2003 AVERAGE WEEKDAY & PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/O PROJECT ii_ MULTI—FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH & WILLIAMS — RENTON 5 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS N f gAA cn 10% `/ 25% > < > 5 < > N �-7 S 3rd St. CO2--► 1i N. 4--. �7 Y not to scale y N 4� I f e JI/ 6 cn 1:'En ��i IM N 25% cNi > '� Q .4--1 4--• �--7 S 4th St.` 3 N t A2ZV 2% in > N II ANlr' N In Q L 40% W/ 80% ! ite; , g) 3 12 ¢ .0 -10 ¢ Q .0 20--� s 3 S 5th St. a 70% 20% a 'v nv ^ K. Jl V e OR `9 �// 'n� o `lY N 20— I /� S 6th St. ��e .E / En 10% N \ 4e 1 ",(� fL N 3 '� S 7th St. {� ��'\\ems f� a) `9 \\,`sue f�,, TRIP GENERATION �Y Average Weekday. 444 a PM Peak Hour 1 Jr ��� Enter: 29 woy �0°�e `J\ 9.. Exit: 13 S GCody i 1)o Total: 42 PROJECT GENERATED AVERAGE WEEKDAY & PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE fi_ MULTI—FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH & WILLIAMS — RENTON 6 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS I 1 o�� N CO CO cn �j` .-88 as r 24 N a 38� not to scale S 3rd St. L. . a) s ( E ai U) a m S 4th St.N tf) 0 o V0 > M m v^ 6 cn a s Site< <O u a; ai Y O a a a o y S 5th St. w' �+ c .c 3 c V . °' 15 ^ ( ^ m . . V a i---\ S 6th St. o icc"D `183 a)J 4 '112 inn 1-b6 73 73 40--0 J 4 o S 7th St. 319 '� f c 9g� m .......2 050\ `9> 4, LEGEND Way c4. 5 G�oay 13 [XXX] Average Weekday Traffic Volume PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction I 111 FIGURE PROJECTED 2003 AVERAGE WEEKDAY & PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/ PROJECT MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH & WILLIAMS - RENTON ji 7 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS I King County Metro Bus Routes Metro Route 101 Map APPENDIX Metro Route 101 Weekday Schedule Metro Route 105/148 Map Metro Route 105/148 Weekday Schedule Metro Route 153 Map Metro Route 153 Weekday Schedule Metro Route 167 Map Metro Route 167 Weekday Schedule Vehicular PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Volume Counts Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street PM Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street Site Access/S. 5th Street Route 101 Map rage 1 01 .i • ® King County, Washington HOME031 COMMENTS ,.'.''aRa, Metro Route 101 Map , 11112fflaanall Return to Schedule Information Rorites 101, 106, 107 'g:2.'' , _<;-''-' MAP LEGEND DOWNTOWN tik::,,,, :; : F:,;:;: � ?;, ;s ROUTIN:��� TUNNEL SEATTLE ,s° ,,, r«:, :<., ,•: ,go-p ; r.a •�;:. ::, •:,. A Tunnel Station Ent F{�Al.y+ +t,� 1�YS,ry?;ti:.'i'' f•;ti.''X1.. ::>:. ;: (See detail maps) i yr' '''� ,PY.M.,',.:rt;�(: "Jf` �u; A'a g. �: :g. "'"'y;.--",,...6-'^ mom. M ekes all regular; t`"`:;-` fir',, ?� ;`;:. rrir rrrr Makeslimited or n Royal Brougham Way 'Y r ` >- ;;sY k.,' t 4,-,, 4', r}+3;{r'r,4; ,▪:°.':-,;; TIME POINT:Stre s . �;.�F';.;�a.. tim a schedul a reiE a "r' • "- '`, ;.•s to ottime columr 51 S Holgate St ,;,<.;:r.. ::;;..,; P 'i�F'-' 'ri * �5:,'.; • andtri times. i',k..,. '..ir}ru •ti.: ?' ::: :• 43`� TRANSFER POIN S Laufer St -: :. '14''-'5.s,;Y :t,� `• transferring to the� F OV A Y , ,;-4,.=: indicated. S Spokane St I- ••`��' "�' • •``'` 4�` TIME POINT/FRAI ilrr: ;, >;.;.i,;;,4..... FARE ZONE ;,w::L,; Additional fare req i.. ,1 =a-~ n PARK&RIDE:De: r..� ''•�"'' vdth direct bus ser C 5 ` ..` centers. A ❑ LANDMARK:Asic N ® 36 '' i'• • : reference point. o▪ S Graham St $ "- ,r �, HOLLY PARK MERCER 4▪ ��� Route1os L ;a., • ISLAND '. • a a :;,' .........,..":.:i:..,..:,:,„.,,: :i+ � �� �S Othello St 'rr;,:' ;: 36 .4 H a ,l E RAINIER:; FARE o 48 ZONE J. t` : • ' i7.aJ ;'. s.•;! y S Hencle s I J r g16 T r on St; i=Mk 5 7 39 Rat „ <:: .>;= `>..,.: ,:.�; WI ta42 Is ea w Route107 : ;c,;},,:. ;_„f '�i Routelos ��� LAKERIDGE" r" .. ''(vim S 114th St ~_.. '1'�'-•` 0 Route101 x ', SKYWAY S 115tli St S 115tliPl di �y044 (ZONE) s S 1221ic1 ENTON • S126thSt 1nIrCTa; aw ` 2N http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=101 7/14/00 Route 101 Map Page 2 of 3 Q _ y . . RENTON TRANSIT CENTER a o E sa m S 129tIt 0 , �0,+� F1° m i 100:9 1 06 R BAY 4 d s4�sa �-4ya s S 2nt1 s �ttl �101 a �$�,.�, RENT' Ron um pfit:, s TRANSIT • 1os 1a9 2ao sss 107 s 3t (See detail110 149 340 BAY 2, scam�a�na, _oe 143 133 9oe 101 6AY` tit sal. e.zae 101 169 909 S 3(tl —3. - �0 B 101 BAY 'Nab S 153 16240 9 $ Y R� 10 °' TiAt 0 107 m Bus stops served by routes . 101 . •�r 101,106,107 e S Grady Way 101 O Bus stops served only by other routes 71 5 ' Routes 101,106-DOWNTOWN SEAT TLE ROUTE 101 TO FA IRWOOD Whet Tunnel is Open u al 3s CQMJENiION 41 4110fr 4I;1t-e4 6.:1,44 +� 'G N B V:ay 0Il1i-k,i1 t41 ST,STION W ♦ 4Mr' t 1I: wTewsg)m4eatitaw Ioam-6 La. Clued Csaddi( F- 5E 4•1 1, CASCADE tr, -':4 VISTA 9E169thn W ''- \111.4111friAlik'11111V6t0111411\"'\`5 I ''. -. 16/10,1111i 110417*'..1101, •. 4 ..*Ik- '''- -• \ 3"...'' : .,-�._- . In ATION `f fit HI • " %"< Sir T ¢ 3 Routes 101,106-DOWNTOWN SEATTLE When Tunnel is Closed 'WV4rtf4-1 I AkAirellis. A 4 irstkvo, N 4:Ani 441 1,44 ,i i k$ Iii ,. SS♦i.� http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=101 7/14/00 Route 101 Map gage 3 013 Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page Updated Thu Apr 13 10:21:03 2000 Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=101 7/14/00 Metro Koule l u l l imetaole, w eekuay 1 4.46� • U L • 0King CountyOME , Washington H SERVICES COMMENTS SEARCH "° , Metro Route 101 Weekday I Effective May 27 thru Sept. 15, 2000 ZWit he hOfl1C' t / . Metro Holiday Information • Fare Information Select Another Route Number: Sf1„Q,v�!.59.10,,diaQ',s`~':Y: For service during snow Lnd ice, read the Adverse Weather Info for this route. wed<day saturday route map To RENTON (Weekday): 9th Av Convention University Busway ML King Jr On Shattuck Bu & Place Station & Way S & Av S at Olive Way Station Bay-C S Spokane S 129th S Grady Way Bay-C L --- 5:37am 5:41am 5:50am§ 5:59am§ 6:07am§ L --- 5:54am 5:58am 6:08am§ 6:19am§ 6:27am§ L --- 6:22am 6:26am 6:36am§ 6:47am§ 6:55am§ L --- 6:38am 6:42am 6:52am§ 7:03am§ 7:13am§ L --- 6:51am 6:55am 7:05am§ 7:16am§ 7:26am§ L --- 7:09am 7:13am 7:23am§ 7:34am§ 7:44am§ L --- 7:21am 7:25am 7:35am§ 7:46am§ 7:56am§ L --- 7:51am 7:55am 8:05am§ 8:16am§ 8:26am§ L --- 8:19am 8:23am 8:33am§ 8:44am§ 8:54am§ L --- 8:49am 8:53am 9:03am§ 9:14am§ 9:24am§ L --- 9:23am 9:27am 9:37am§ 9:48am§ 9:58am§ 1 L --- 9:52am 9:56am 10:06am§ 10:17am§ 10:27am§ 1 L --- 10:23am( 10:27am 10:37am§ 10:48am§ 10:58am§ 1 L --- 10:54am 10:58am 11:08am§ 11:19am§ 11:29am§ 1 L --- 11:23am 11:27am 11:37am§ 11:48am§ 11:58am§ 1 L --- 11:48am 11:52am 12:02pm§ 12:13pm§ 12:23pm§ 1 L --- 12:18pm 12:22pm 12:32pm§ 12:43pm§ 12:53pm§ L --- 12:48pm 12:52pm 1:02pm§ 1:13pm§ 1:23pm§ L --- 1:18pm 1:22pm 1:32pm§ 1:43pm§ 1:53pm§ L --- 1:47pm 1:51pm 2:01pm§ 2:13pm§ 2:23pm§ L --- 2:18pm 2:22pm 2:32pm§ 2:44pm§ 2:54pm§ L --- 2:48pm 2:52pm 3:02pm§ 3:14pm§ 3:24pm§ L --- 3:13pm 3:17pm 3:27pm§ 3:39pm§ 3:49pm§ L --- 3:25pm 3:29pm 3:39pm§ 3:51pm§ 4:01pm§ L --- 3:45pm 3:49pm 3:59pm§ 4:11pm§ 4:21pm§ L --- 3:55pm 3:59pm 4:09pm§ 4:21pm§ 4:31pm§ L --- 4:05pm 4:09pm 4:19pm§ 4:31pm§ 4:41pm§ L --- 4:15pm 4:19pm 4:29pm§ 4:41pm§ 4:51pm§ L --- 4:20pm 4:24pm 4:34pm§ 4:46pm§ 4 :56pm§ L --- 4:25pm 4:29pm 4:39pm§ 4:51pm§ 5:01pm§ L --- 4:35pm 4:39pm - 4:49pm§ 5:01pm§ 5:11pm§ L --- 4:45pm 4:49pm 4:59pm§ 5:11pm§ 5:21pm§ L --- 4:55pm 4:59pm 5:09pm§ 5:21pm§ 5:31pm§ L --- 5:00pm 5:04pm 5:14pm§ 5:26pm§ 5:36pm§ L --- 5:05pm 5:09pm 5:19pm§ 5:31pm§ 5:41pm§ http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s101_0_.html 7/13/00 Metro Route 101 Timetable, Weekday Page 2 of 3 L --- 5:10pm 5:14pm 5:24pm§ 5:36pm§ 5:46pm§ • L --- 5:15pm 5:19pm 5:29pm§ 5:41pm§ 5:51pm§ L --- 5:25pm 5:29pm 5:39pm§ 5:51pm§, 6:01pm§ L --- 5:35pm 5:39pm 5:49pm§ 6:01pm§ 6:11pm§ L --- 5:47pm 5:51pm 6:01pm§ 6:13pm§ 6:21pm§ L --- 6:03pm 6:07pm 6:17pm§ 6:29pm§ 6:37pm§ L --- 6:18pm 6:22pm 6:32pm§ 6:44pm§ 6:52pm§ L 6:54pm --- 6:59pmB 7:11pm§ 7:20pm§ 7:28pm§ L 7:22pm --- 7:27pmB 7:39pm§ 7:48pm§ 7:56pm§ L 7:52pm --- 7:57pmB 8:09pm§ 8:18pm§ 8:26pm§ L 8:22pm --- 8:27pmB 8:39pm§ 8:48pm§ 8:56pm§ s0101106.rtf To SEATTLE (Weekday): 140th Av SE 140th Av SE Edmonds Av Burnett Av S S Grady Wy ML King Jr & SE & SE & & & Way S & Fairwood Petrovitsky Puget Dr SE S 3rd Shattuck Av S 129th S L 4:58am 5:09am 5:18am --- 5:24am 5:34am L --- --- --- 5:33am 5:40am 5:50am L 5:26am 5:37am 5:46am --- 5:54am 6:04am L --- --- --- 5:58am 6:05am 6:15am L 5:45am 5:57am 6:07am --- 6:15am 6:25am L --- --- --- --- 6:25am 6:35am L --- --- --- 6:28am 6:35am 6:45am L --- --- --- --- 6:45am 6:55am L --- --- --- --- 6:50am 7:00am L 6:24am 6:37am 6:47am --- 6:55am 7:05am L --- --- --- 6:53am 7:00am 7:10am L --- --- --- --- 7:06am 7:16am L --- --- --- --- 7:17am 7:27am L 6:54am 7:07am 7:17am --- 7:25am 7:35am L --- --- --- 7:28am 7:35am 7:45am L --- --- --- 7:44am 7:51am 8:01am L --- --- --- 7:57am 8:04am 8:14am L --- --- --- 8:27am 8:34am 8:44am L --- --- --- 8:57am 9:04am 9:14am L --- --- --- 9:27am 9:34am 9:44am L --- --- --- 9:57am 10:04am 10:14am 1 L --- --- --- 10:27am 10:34am 10:44am 1 L --- --- --- 10:57am 11:04am 11:14am 1 L --- --- --- 11:27am 11:34am 11:44am 1 L --- --- --- 11:57am 12:04pm 12:14pm 1 L --- --- --- 12:27pm 12:34pm 12:44pm 1 L --- --- --- 12:57pm 1:04pm 1:14pm L --- --- --- 1:27pm 1:34pm 1:44pm L --- --- --- 1:57pm 2:04pm 2:14pm L --- --- --- 2:27pm 2:34pm 2:44pm L --- --- --- 2:54pm 3:01pm 3:11pm L --- --- --- 3:24pm 3:31pm 3:41pm L --- --- --- 3:54pm 4:01pm 4:11pm L --- --- --- --- 4:11pm 4:21pm L --- --- --- 4:24pm 4:31pm 4:41pm L --- --- --- --- 4:50pm 5:00pm L --- --- --- 4:54pm 5:01pm 5:11pm L --- --- --- 5:19pm 5:26pm 5:36pm L --- --- --- 6:00pm 6:07pm 6:17pm L --- --- --- 6:30pm 6:37pm 6:47pm http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s101_0_.html 7/13/00 Metro Route 101 Timetable, Weekday • rage i ul L --- --- --- 6:59pm 7:06pm 7:16pm L --- --- --- 7:29pm 7:36pm 7:46pm n0101106.rtf Timetable Symbols L -Accessible bus (wheelchair lift). § -This is an estimated time. Depending on traffic conditions, bus may arrive earlier than indicated. wScecluj'e;` ``"+ Select Another Route Number: i Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page King County I News I Services f Comments I Search Updated Thursday, 01-Jun-2000 07:13:30 PDT Unks to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s101_0_.html 7/13/00 Route 105 Map Page 1 of 2 • 0King County, Washington HOME MUM.. SERVICES ' COMMENTS '. ',a Rrd Metro Route 105 Map Biliiiihonie 1,47/ . Return to Schedule Information Routes 105, 148 N 33rd St KENNYDALE N 30th St ROUTE 0 A et, NE 27th St 105 id • 'Z'4 4's�f0 a' .w '� w 3 a z z m 15 -0 c C o ea MAP LEGEND Fen 2 immm.. Makes all regular stops. W •TIME POINT: Street intersection used for NE 16th Stl‘e time schedule reference point listed at the 5 ca top of time columns In estimate bus arrival {% and trip times. ,4% NN*, -..-4310 TIME POINT/TRANSFER POINT q)ttf F combined. f It PARK& RIDE: Designated free parking LV HI( area with direct bus service to downtown NE 7th St Seattle and other major commercial -5 centers. c w to 2 ❑ LANDMARK: A significant geographical el reference point. Y e c RENTON m TECHNICAL �G ,4 COLLEGE in DOWNTOWN ,b NE 4th St El - NE 4th St ,a RENTON $ ' <9' W NE 3rd St Z 0 la m S 2n d St $i� �"dr _ .._ MI= _ _ a � . http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=105 7/14/00 Route 105 Map • Page 2 of 2 105 QEoN T1 ��� ° � 148 S 3rd St 44$� W Renton N+° Transit Center 101 149 565 a) 106 153 908 ea 107 169 909 d l.Sou Renton 110 240 Park&Ride 143 340 c 101 240 2 ROYAL 153 340 167 565 HILLS 169 t` -A/DI St. Imo: PeR S 7th St Way o�0` E 5 Giesil \-- ROUTE W 0 Lake Youngs 148 Ili d .. a cU ? 4 ~ eati CASCADE ; •4SE e °�<)j VISTA ;� �� 444 f 4th FAIRWOOD SE p62ATOwtakJ SE 1771 Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page Updated Thu Apr 13 10:21:04 2000 Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=105 7/14/00 Metro Route 105, 148 Timetable, Weekday rage i of .s • , King County, Washington HOME COMMENTS "°at Metro Route 105, 148 Weekday k*.,i.:',a Effective May 27 thru Sept. 15, 2000 Wilithonie t ,> Metro Holiday Information • Fare Information '1N K 1 rrSt *§ced' a ', Select Another Route Number: Y 4lII,. r'1110 a:s For service during snow and ice, read the Adverse Weather Info for this route. Be sure to read the Special Service Info for this route. ,,eel;daV saturday sunday route map To RENTON, FAIRWOOD (Weekday): Park Av N NE 4th S Grady Wy 14 & & Burnett Av S & S 2nd & Royal N 30th Monroe NE Arrives Leaves Shattuck Av Hills S — - Rotate__1.45 - -- - - - — -- - - Route- 198.--- --- L 4:39am 4:52am 5:00am --- --- --- L 5:06am 5:19am 5:27am --- --- --- L 5:31am 5:44am 5:52am L 5:52am 5:58am 6:07am L 6:04am 6:17am 6:25am L 6:25am 6:31am 6:41am L 6:34am 6:47am 6:55am L 6:55am 7:01am 7:11am L 7:03am 7:16am 7:25am L 7:25am 7:31am 7:41am L 7:33am 7:46am 7:55am L 7:55am 8:01am 8:11am L 8:03am 8:16am 8:25am L 8:25am 8:31am 8:40am L 8:31am 8:44am 8:53am L 8:53am 8:59am 9:08am L 9:01am 9:14am 9:23am L 9:23am 9:29am 9:38am L 9:34am 9:47am 9:56am L 9:56am 10:02am 10:11am L 10:04am 10:17am 10:26am L 10:26am 10:32am 10:41am L 10:30am 10:43am 10:52am L 10:52am 10:58am 11:07am L 11:00am 11:13am 11:22am L 11:22am 11:28am 11:37am L 11:30am 11:43am 11:52am L 11:52am 11:58am 12:07pm L 12:00pm. 12:13pm 12:22pm L 12:22pm 12:28pm 12:37pm L 12:30pm 12:43pm 12:52pm L 12:52pm 12:58pm 1:07pm L 1:01pm 1:14pm 1:23pm L 1:23pm 1:29pm 1:38pm L 1:32pm 1:45pm 1:54pm L 1:54pm 2:00pm 2:09pm L 2:00pm 2:13pm 2:22pm L 2:22pm 2:28pm 2:37pm L 2:31pm 2:44pm 2:53pm L 2:53pm 2:59pm 3:08pm L 3:04pm 3:17pm 3:26pm L 3:26pm 3:32pm 3:41pm L 3:44pm 3:57pm 4:06pm L 4:06pm 4:12pm 4:21pm L 4:09pm 4:22pm 4:31pm L 4:31pm 4:37pm 4:46pm L 4:34pm 4:47pm 4:56pm L 4:56pm 5:02pm 5:11pm L 5:02pm 5:15pm 5:24pm L 5:24pm 5:30pm 5:39pm L 5:29pm 5:42pm 5:51pm L 5:51pm 5:57pm 6:06pm L 6:00pm 6:13pm -6:22pm L 6:22pm 6:28pm 6:37pm L 6:28pm 6:41pm 6:50pm L 6:50pm 6:56pm 7:05pm L --- --- --- L 8:06pm 8:12pm 8:21pm L --- --- L 9:08pm 9:14pm 9:23pm http://transit.metroke.gov/bus/sehedules/s148_0_.html 7/13/00 Metro Route 105, 148 Timetable, Weekday Page 2 of 3 s0105148.rtf To RENTON, KENNYDALE (Weekday): 140th Av SE S Grady Wy NE 4th F & Royal & Burnett Av S & S 2nd & SE 177th Hills Shattuck Av Arrives Leaves Monroe NE S Route 148 Route 105 'L 5:43am 5:53am 6:02am 6:09am L 6:09am 6:17am L 6:09am 6:19am 6:30am 6:37am L 6:37am 6:45am L 6:34am 6:44am 6:55am 7:02am L 7:02am 7:10am L 7:02am 7:13am 7:24am 7:31am L 7:31am 7:39am L 7:36am 7:47am 7:58am 8:05am L 8:05am 8:13am L 8:09am 8:19am 8:28am 8:35am L 8:35am 8:43am L 8:39am 8:49am 8:58am 9:05am L 9:05am 9:13am L 9:09am 9:19am 9:28am 9:35am L 9:35am 9:43am L 9:39am 9:49am 9:58am 10:05am L 10:05am 10:13am L 10:09am 10:19am 10:28am 10:35am L 10:35am 10:43am L 10:39am 10:49am 10:58am 11:05am L 11:05am 11:13am L 11:09am 11:19am 11:28am 11:35am L 11:35am 11:43am L 11:39am 11:49am 11:58am 12:05pm L 12:05pm 12:13pm L 12:09pm 12:19pm 12:28pm 12:35pm L 12:35pm 12:43pm L 12:39pm 12:49pm 12:58pm 1:05pm L 1:05pm 1:13pm L 1:09pm 1:19pm 1:28pm 1:35pm L 1:35pm 1:43pm L 1:39pm 1:49pm 1:58pm 2:05pm L 2:05pm 2:13pm L 2:09pm 2:19pm 2:28pm 2:35pm L 2:35pm 2:43pm L 2:36pm 2:46pm 2:55pm 3:02pm L 3:02pm 3:10pm L 3:06pm 3:16pm 3:25pm 3:32pm L 3:32pm 3:40pm L 3:35pm 3:46pm 3:55pm 4:02pm L 4:02pm 4:10pm L 4:05pm 4:16pm 4:25pm 4:32pm L 4:32pm 4:40pm L 4:35pm 4:46pm 4:55pm 5:02pm L 5:02pm 5:10pm L 5:05pm 5:16pm 5:25pm 5:32pm L 5:32pm 5:40pm L 5:40pm 5:51pm 6:00pm 6:07pm L 6:07pm 6:15pm L 6:10pm 6:21pm 6:30pm 6:37pm L 6:37pm 6:45pm L 6:40pm 6:51pm 7:00pm 7:06pm L 7:06pm 7:14pm L 7:36pm 7:46pm 7:55pm 8:01pm --- --- L 8:38pm 8:48pm 8:57pm 9:03pm • ,--- --- L 9:40pm 9:50pm 9:59pm 10:05pm --- --- n0105148.rtf Timetable Symbols L -Accessible bus (wheelchair lift). Special Service Info • Route 105 is through-routed with Route 148. Unless otherwise indicated on the schedule, when Route 105 to Renton arrives at Sunset Blvd NE & NE 3rd St, the bus destination sign will change to "148 to Fairwood" and upon arriving at Renton Transit Center, will continue as Route 148. When Route http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s148_0_.html 7/13/00 Metro Route 105, 148 Timetable, Weekday rage i of 148 to Renton arrives at Talbot Rd & S Grady Way (prior to arriving at the • S Renton Park & Ride) the bus destination sign will change to "105 To Kennydale" and upon arriving at Renton Transit Center, will continue as Route 105. Select Another Route Number:n 11s00SCIl4dtaig' Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page King County I News I Services I Comments I Search Updated Friday, 26-May-2000 13:01:36 PDT Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terns and conditions of the site. The details. http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s148_0_.html 7/13/00 Route 153 Map Page 1 of 2 • 0King County, Washington HOME EWS 11111MallEgall 111W3DEMMI ''a Q '= Metro Route 153 Map ul � ie 1�c,n�e Return to Schedule Information s°•r�' m RENT ON 101 108 149 565 S 2nd St < 106143 240 909 = 5 A s RYlrG7 107148 340 T� !V/'asoYVN N axaaxdo S 3rd St ,,a 101 148 247 105 167 340108 169 565 109 240 909 ~► S G1ad'!�IaY cb a SW 1 ith St w Je 5 r y C SW 43rd St 155 1ss T as v 160 S212tl1St 160— - 247 KENT TRANSIT CENTER W James St Bar 1■ ■em a A Bay 20 N Bar 4 Red- Q Park&Ride Bay 5. Lot KENT Malys 0 W James St 158 KVnr 164-► W Smith St 7tansrC9nat a01.731 ® 168 15416646 56635 m 21 ■ Bus stops for Route 150 158167 914 o- Smith (including other routes) 159 162 169 91668 z a Bus stop for Routes 164, 166, 168,163 0 Bus stop for Routes 153, 169 --- http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=153 7/14/00 Route 153 Map Page 2 of 2 MAP Ltlitnu TUNNEL ROUTING:serves all stations. TUNNEL STATION entrance. Makes all regular stops. • TIME POINT:Street intersedion used fortime schedule reference point listed at the top of time columnsto estimate bus arrival and trip times. ~420 TRANSFER POINT:Route intersection for transerring to the oonneding route or routes indicated. ~43`1j TIME POINT/rRANSFER POINT combined. FAREZONE Additional fare required. p M PARK&RIDE:Designated free parking area vath direct bus service to major commercial centers. ❑ LANDMARK:Asignilcart geographical reference point. Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page Updated Wed Aug 25 13:31:34 1999 Unks to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=153 7/14/00 Metro Route 153 Timetable, Weekday Page 1 of 2 0 King CountyOME , Washington H COMMENTS 111103012311111 "°Q j Metro Route 153 Weekday 4 Effective May 27 thru Sept. 15, 2000 ar«n( jJom , \, Metro Holiday Information • Fare Information Select Another Route Number: RMIt; .1ed,U.l� ].;;AII, weekday route map To KENT (Weekday): Burnett Av S S Grady Way Lind Av SW N Lincoln & & & Av & To S 3rd Shattuck Av SW 43rd W James Route S L 6:11am 6:16am 6:26am 6:44am 183 L 6:42am 6:47am 6:57am 7:15am 183 L 7:12am 7:17am 7:27am 7:45am 183 L 7:43am 7:48am 7:58am 8:15am L 8:12am 8:17am 8:27am 8:44am 183 L 2:44pm 2:49pm 3:02pm 3:21pm 183 L 3:10pm 3:16pm 3:29pm 3:50pm 183 L 3:45pm 3:51pm 4:03pm 4:25pm 183 L 4:16pm 4:22pm 4:34pm 4:56pm 183 L 4:53pm 4:59pm 5:11pm 5:33pm 183 L 5:31pm 5:37pm 5:47pm 6:05pm 183 L 6:02pm 6:08pm 6:18pm 6:36pm 183 s0153153.rtf To RENTON (Weekday): N Lincoln Lind Av SW S Grady Way Burnett Av S Av & & & & W James SW 43rd Shattuck Av S 3rd S L 5:55am 6:13am 6:23am 6:30am L 6:26am 6:44am 6:54am 7:01am L 6:55am 7:13am 7:23am 7:30am L 7:25am 7:43am 7:53am 8:00am L 7:55am 8:13am 8:23am 8:30am L 8:25am 8:43am 8:53am 9:00am L 2:58pm 3:15pm 3:25pm 3:32pm L 3:28pm 3:45pm 3:56pm 4':03pm L 4:05pm 4:23pm 4:34pm 4:41pm L 4:41pm 5:01pm 5:12pm 5:19pm L 5:11pm 5:31pm 5:42pm 5:49pm L 5:46pm 6:06pm 6:16pm 6:23pm L 6:18pm 6:36pm 6:46pm 6:53pm http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s 153_0_.html 7/13/00 • Metro Route 153 Timetable, Weekday Page 2 of 2 • n0153153.rif Timetable Symbols L -Accessible bus (wheelchair lift). Select Another Route Number:FT V-#106046444-10SI Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page King County I News I Services I Comments I Search Updated Friday, 26-May-2000 13:01:39 PDT Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. • • http://transitmetroke.gov/bus/schedules/s153_0_.htrn1 7/13/00 Route 167 Map • Page 1 of 2 Q King County, Washington HOME 1111111Malli SERVICES COMMENTS SEARCH • 1IO q ', _,,, Metro Route 167 Map 2 lin hco► w '4'*'-4 Return to Schedule Information • �, A d 44 72 ' 70 73 R:;;:;o..rc ;:`::' 242 261 N 71 74 243 :5,.; f 243 262 t'::i;; 250 263 IIE �i6th :::• 251 266 z UNtVE SITY ; s 252 267 68 DIST ICT �:k:; 255 271 — ,:. q lit '.: ,ia< '•, 256 272 ▪ d" , �HUSIIY`°'':`'= :;':.•�;:257 275 5- -rr V!',.,.::.,;, 258 276 0 iTMNllI: .:;r:.,.r, ' 259 311 UNIVERSITY a, ?.`"?•,,,+ y%` %rrai..f.,. 260 >• - r^i .,<, Cur NED SEINER 't ............. tiY'1 25 Y �I .e:D.ty 1°'— 24+tea • 4313 s' .i•• .+�r4p. 924 C 1s - . .. 253 su r 2 .72:4`''?n: ,273 0 232 271 • { Mt0 r:':;','' 233 340 Bellevue Transit Center j,;:-..;;>.:.- ?, • c NE 4th St ,, , ,r f- ; ?':al::,.' Wilburton NE 61h ab •^ ..,. .::;wi,?;.,.,, D.a r• r: t=' MERCER:; A....,,mn .. . S ., pair d R'di ii-c MI N ,`w.:; ISLAND 243 • 4�: , - ;. `- NE 4th ,i+;i` Bellevue • ;, Transit Center 1 •,,'; , 222 240 340 586 :.:.,,: •:'.,.,::,i.;d. ulp6) 230 243 530 920 t.. ' ? ,.�' �./ 232 249 531 921 ��S �.,',t n:''.'.:.•. • a:: 233 253 532 : '':'` �:?s:. ,: 234 281 535 : :r; ►ferpamats ya 237 271 550 ■ _,s:tf Park&.Z'd. V 2107 • 3•r•%. .;" 111 340 ! l� RENTON ,,,'','; ;.,, 219 , -'4tmac— tii: South Renton .4 K EMI YDALE:.r,..; .t, 1,i Parrlr&Ride �' �v_ RENTON�'` 105,�`�E` 101 163 d' N 1 110 340 Id) 2346 Q/A� BOENB 240 565 NT US �t SOUTHRENTON '� OD 1434 PARK&RDE d f (See Dalai Yap) �d�;e� at J Vp �3y; r' 3 S 0 rady Way 5 '( .! ��0 . to i lb ad1p ■ o io tI to • - ." 2 + MAP LEGEND 0 at ., NtakesaU regdarstops. $ . bAakeslimited or no stops. G Ur r�ry... 1 ! T'ME POINT S,t.im. http://transit.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show map.pl?BUS_ROUTE=167 7/14/00 Route 167 Map rage 2 01 2 s • KENT ` died0e refereroe paint J j 6eted at thetop Ka of e columnsto f bus iansir arrhal and sip hams. W Neeer Connie 07 130 166 +3-0 TRANSFER POINT:Route intersection fxrtransferring . Willis 133 168 'to the 4oryxeating route or 8' 154 169 rates indcated. 11 "isa 9 565 ' THE POINT1 RANSFER 'Jug-, — 162 914 0 combined. 164 916 I w zoN AdditionA tire required. cm m d ma RIDE:Deli rated a.ta:m fee parkhg area with direct axx 4 Role bus serdoeto rreja ""®0 150 154 corrmerdal centers. 15th S ii E 152 565 ❑ LANDMPRK Asigniloant geoQaphiaal Miriam poke. Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page Updated Thu Apr 27 9:26:07 2000 Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://transitmetrokc.gov/cgi-bin/show_map.pl?BUS ROUTE-167 7/14/00 Metro Route 167 Timetable, Weekday rage i el . • 0King County, Washington HOME �j SERVICES COMMENTS • SEARCH - a Metro Route 16Ts 'o Weekda • Effective May 27 j nC' 11U112C' 1 1,4p, Metro Holiday Information • Fare Information Select Another Route Number: ; zr�i§fro lsMY ej edti e ,,,,,kday route map To AUBURN (Weekday): NE 45th On Montlake 108th Av NE I-405 Park Av N S Grady Way N & Blvd at & & & & Univ Way NE SR-520 NE 6th 112th Av SE N 8th Shattuck Av S L 12:41pm 12:50pm 1:04pm 1:17pm§ 1:24pm§ 1:31pm§ L 1:37pm 1:46pm 2:00pm 2:13pm§ 2:20pm§ 2:27pm§ L 2:37pm 2:47pm 3:01pm 3:14pm§ 3:23pm§ 3:31pm§ L 3:37pm 3:48pm 4:04pm 4:20pm§ 4 :30pm§ 4:38pm§ L 4:07pm 4:18pm • 4:34pm 4:50pm§ 5:01pm§ 5:09pm§ L 4:37pm 4:48pm 5:04pm 5:20pm§ 5:31pm§ 5:38pm§ L 5:12pm 5:23pm 5:39pm 5:55pm§ 6:06pm§ 6:13pm§ s0167167.rtf To UNIVERSITY DISTRICT (Weekday): 15th St NE N Lincoln Av S Grady Wy Park Av N I-405 108th Av NE & & & & & & A St NE W James Shattuck Av N 8th 112th Av SE NE 6th S L 5:31am 5:40am 5:54am 6:04am 6:15am 6:26am L 5:56am 6:05am 6:19am 6:29am 6:40am 6:53am L 6:13am 6:26am 6:40am 6:50am 7:01am 7:16am L 6:31am 6:44am 6:59am 7:09am 7:22am 7:37am L 6:39am 6:52am 7:07am 7:17am 7:30am 7:45am L 7:09am 7:22am 7:37am 7:47am 8:00am 8:15am L 7:41am 7:54am 8:09am 8:19am 8:32am 8:47am n0167167.rtf http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s167 0_.html 7/13/00 Metro Koute t O/ 1 unetaoie, w eexuay Timetable Symbols L -Accessible bus (wheelchair lift). § -This is an estimated time. Depending on traffic conditions,bus may arrive/leave earlier than indicated. Select Another Route Number:n rt*Ke:,0 he, _ , >:,r Metro Online Home Page I Main Bus Page King County I News I Services I Comments I Search Updated Friday, 26-May-2000 13:01:40 PDT Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://transit.metrokc.gov/bus/schedules/s 1 67_0_.html 7/13/00 • TRAFFICOUNT . 4820 YELM HWY B-195 .ENTON, WASHINGTON LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 File Name :TPE18001P 'ILLIAMS AVE S " 360-491-8116 Site Code :00000001 GRADY WAY Start Date :06/28/2000 OC#1 PM TPE179M2 Page No : 1 Groups Printed-PRIMARY WILLIAMS AVE S S GRADY WAY WILLIAMS AVE S S GRADY WAY From North From East From South From West Murtha Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck App. Eaclu. Inclu. Int. Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00PM 134 0 6 5 140 0 152 0 7 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 185 0 4 185 16 477 493 04:15 PM 157 0 10 0 167 0 114 0 8 114 0 0 0 0 0 0 195 0 4 195 12 476 488 04:30 PM 135 0 16 2 151 0 136 0 4 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 224 0 6 224 12 511 523 04:45PM 107 0 2 0 109 0 210 0 7 210 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 3 207 10 526 536 Total 533 0 34 7 567 0 612 0 26 612 0 0 0 0 0 0 811 0 17 811 50 1990 2040 05:00 PM 78 0 5 0 83 0 193 0 5 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 2 248 7 524 531 05:15PM 68 0 2 1 70 0 186 0 2 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 191 0 5 191 8 447 455 05:30 PM 56 0 2 0 58 0 149 0 4 149 0 0 0 0 0 0 181 0 5 181 9 388 397 05:45PM 48 0 7 1 55 0 144 0 12 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 0 4 172 17 371 388 Total 25D 0 16 2 266 0 672 0 23 672 0 0 0 0 0 0 792 0 16 792 41 1730 1771 Grand Total 783 0 50 9 833 0 1284 0 49 1284 0 0 0 0 0 0 1603 0 33 1603 91 3720 3811 Apprch% 94.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Total% 21.0 0.0 1.3 22.4 0.0 34.5 0.0 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.1 0.0 43.1 2.4 97.6 WILLIAMS AVE S S GRADY WAY WILLIAMS AVE S S GRADY WAY From North From East From South From West StartTlme Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Right I Thou I Left I App.Total InLTotai 1 tak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 477 0 33 510 0 653 0 653 0 0 0 0 0 874 0 874 2037 Percent 93.5 0.0 6.5 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 04:45 Volume 107 . 0 2 109 0 210 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 207 526 Peak Factor 0.968 Highlnt. 04:15PM 04:45PM 3:45:00PM 05:00PM Volume 157 0 10 167 0 210 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 248 Peak Factor 0.763 0.777 0.881 tak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:00 PM 04:45 PM 04:00 PM 04:15 PM Volume 533 0 34 567 0 738 0 738 0 0 0 0 0 874 0 874 Percent 94.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 - - •- 0.0 100.0 0.0 High Int 04:15 PM 04:45 PM - 05:00 PM Volume 157 0 10 167 0 210 0 210 - - - - 0 248 0 248 Peak Factor 0.849 0.879 0.881 • TRAFFICOUNT 4820 YELM HWY B-195 NTON, WASHINGTON LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 File Name :TPE18001P ILLIAMS AVE S 360-491-8116 Site Code :00000001 GRADY WAY Start Date :06/28/2000 ►C#1 PM TPE179M2 Page No :2 WILLIAMS AVE S S GRADY WAY WILLIAMS AVE S S GRADY WAY From North From East From South From West Start Time Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Right I Thru I Lett I App.Total Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Int.Total 1 k Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 477 0 33 510 0 653 0 653 0 0 0 0 0 874 0 874 2037 Percent 93.5 0.0 6.5 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 04:45 Volume 107 0 2 109 0 210 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 207 526 Peak Factor 0.968 High Int 04:15 PM 04:45 PM 3:45:00 PM 05:00 PM Volume 157 0 10 167 0 210 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 248 Peak Factor 0.763 0.777 r' 0.881 WILLIAMS AVE S Out OJ I I,510I I T510I I 4771 10I J331 Ri9ht Thru Lq; o� 1 _O C }H �� North ^y } g—P 5/28/00 4:15:00 PM 4-2 6/28/00 5:00:00 PM -< CO 5 rn-, PRIMARY —I o— 4-1 T r :, r ,r iiii I o I NMI I o f Out In Total Wil 1 IAMS AVE S TRAFFICOUNT • 4820 YELM HWY B-195 ENTON, WASHINGTON LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 File Name :TPE180-2 'ILLIAMS AVE S 360-491-8116 Site Code :00000002 TH ST Start Date :06/28/2001 JC#2 PM TPE179M2 Page No : 1 Groups Printed-PRIMARY WILLIAMS AVE S 4TH WILLIAMS AVE S 4TH From North From East From South From West StattTime Right Thor Left Peds App. Right Thm Left Peds App. Right Thu Left Peds App. Right Thru Left Peds App. int.Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0- 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:OOPM 22 113 36 4 175 0 17 5 1 23 0 0 0 0 0 7 45 0 0 52 250 04:15 PM 28 141 46 2 217 0 16 4 1 21 0 0 0 0 0 7 54 0 1 62 300 04:30PM 29 142 41 2 214 0 20 3 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 10 71 0 1 82 319 04:45 PM 28 123 38 1 190 0 25 3 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 30 76 0 0 86 304 Total 107 519 161 9 796 0 78 15 2 95 0 0 0 0 0 34 246 0 2 282 1173 05:00 PM 18 61 25 1 105 0 21 12 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 5 78 0 0 83 221 05:15 PM 17 59 18 0 94 0 20 2 1 23 0 0 0 0 0 8 69 0 0 77 194 05:30PM 17 50 13 0 80 0 21 5 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 6 64 1 0 71 177 05:45 PM 15 55 12 1 83 0 13 4 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 6 72 0 1 79 179 Total 67 225 68 2 362 0 75 23 1 99 0 0 0 0 0 25 283 1 1 310 771 Grand Total 174 744 229 11 1158 0 153 38 3 194 0 0 0 0 0 59 529 1 3 592 1944 Apprch% 15.0 64.2 19.8 0.9 0.0 78.9 19.6 1,5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 89.4 0.2 0.5 Total% 9.0 38.3 11.8 0.6 59.6 0.0 7.9 2.0 0.2 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 27.2 0.1 0.2 30.5 WILLIAMS AVE S 4TH WILLIAMS AVE S 4TH From North From East From South From West Staff Right Thru Left Peds App. Right Thru or Left Peds App. Right Thru Left Peds App. Right Thru Left Peds App. nimeMt.Total Total Total Total Total eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 Intersec0on 04:00 PM Volume 107 519 161 9 796 0 78 .15 2 95 0 0 0 0 0 34 246 0 2 282 1173 Percent 13.4 65.2 20.2 1.1 0.0 82.1 15.8 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 87.2 0.0 0.7 04:30 Volume 29 142 41 2 214 0 20 3 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 10 71 0 1 82 319 Peak Factor 0.919 High la 04:15 PM 04:45 PM 3:45:00 PM 04:45 PM Volume 28 141 46 2 217 0 25 3 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 10 76 0 0 86 Peak Factor 0.917 0.848 0.820 eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:00 PM 04:45 PM 04:00 PM 04:30 PM Volume 107 519 161 9 796 0 87 22 1 110 0 0 0 0 0 33 294 0 1 328 Percent 13.4 65.2 20.2 1.1 0.0 79.1 20.0 0.9 - - - - 10.1 89.6 0.0 0.3 High Int. 04:15 PM 05:00 PM - - 04:45 PM Volume 28 141 46 '2 217 0 21 12 0 33 - - - - - 10 76 0 0 86 Peak Factor 0.917 0.833 - 0.953 TRAFFICOUNT 4820 YELM HWY B-195 ENTON, WASHINGTON LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 File Name :TPE180-2 'ILLIAMS AVE S 360-491-8116 Site Code :00000002 TH ST Start Date :06/28/2000 )C#2 PM TPE179M2 Page No :2 WILLIAMS AVE S 4TH WILLIAMS AVE S 4TH From North From East From South From West StartTlme Right Thru Left Peds App. Right Thru Left Peds App. Right Thru Left Peds App. Right Thru Left Peds App. mt.Total Total Total Total Total ak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:00 PM Volume 107 519 161 9 796 0 78 15 2 95 0 0 0 0 0 34 246 0 2 282 1173 Percent 13.4 65.2 20.2 1.1 0.0 82.1 15.8 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 87.2 0.0 0.7 04:30 Volume 29 142 41 2 214 0 20 3 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 10 71 0 1 82 319 Peak Factor 0.919 High Int. 04:15 PM 04:45 PM 3:45:00 PM 04:45 PM Volume 28 141 46 2 217 0 25 3 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 10 76 0 0 86 Peak Factor 0.917 0.848 0.820 WILLIAMS AVE STD I 7961 1071 5191 1611 9! Right Thru LVft Peds 4 TO CO 1 4 3 2 North .. V 6/28/00 4:00:00 PM 6/28/00 4:45:00 PM r� o i a O PRIMARY a a 41milimminma I �� Out In Total WILI IAMS AVF S HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b - TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS nalyst: David M. Schwegel htersection: Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way , ount Date: 2000 Existing ime Period: PM Peak ntersection Orientation: East-West Major St. ehicle Volume Data: (ovements: 2 5 10 12 'olume: 874 653 33 477 FR: 874 653 33 477 'HF: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 'HV: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 'edestrian Volume Data: lovements: 'low: ,ane width: Talk speed: Blockage: 4edian Type: TWLTL of vehicles: 3 Flared approach Movements: 4 of vehicles: Northbound 0 4 of vehicles: Southbound 0 Lane usage for movements 1,2&3 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N Y N N Y N N N N Channelized: N Grade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 4,5&6 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N Y N N Y N N N N Channelized: N Grade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 7,8&9 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N N N N N N N N N Channelized: N Grade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 10,11&12 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R Y N N N N Y N N Y •iannelized: N =ade: 0.00 .3ta for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles: Eastbound Westbound cared In volume, major th vehicles: 0 0 cared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 0 3t flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 1700 at flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 1700 amber of major street through lanes: 2 2 sngth of study period, hrs: 0.25 Drksheet 4 Critical Gap and Follow-up time calculation. ritical Gap Calculations: ovement 10 12 c,base 7.5 6.9 c,hv 2.0 2.0 hv 0.00 0.00 c,g 0.2 0.1 0.00 0.00 3,1t 0.7 0.0 c,T: 1 stage 0.00 0.00 2 stage 1.00 0.00 c 1 stage 6.8 6.9 2 stage 5.8 6.9 bllow Up Time Calculations: Iovement 10 12 f,base 3.5 3.3 f,HV 1.0 1.0 hv 0.00 0.00 f 3.5 3.3 lorksheet 6 Impedance and capacity equations ;tep 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 :onflicting Flows 327 'otential Capacity 675 'edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 lovement Capacity 675 ?robability of Queue free St. 0.29 /orksheet 7a - Computation of the effect of Two-stage gap acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 ?art 1- First Stage onflicting Flows 874 653 ?otential Capacity 370 467 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 370 467 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Part 2- Second Stage Conflicting Flows 653 874 Potential Capacity 467 370 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 :ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 ovement Capacity 467 370 'art 3- Single Stage :onflicting Flows 1527 1527 �'otential Capacity 119 119 'edestrian 'Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 :ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 lovement Capacity 119 119 lesult for 2 stage process: i 0.97 0.97 / 0.72 1.38 t 323 323 'robability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 4orksheet 7b - Computation of the effect of Two-stage gap acceptance Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Part 1- First Stage 2onflicting Flows 874 653 Potential Capacity 373 485 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 yovement Capacity 373 485 Part 2- Second Stage Conflicting Flows 327 437 Potential Capacity 709 624 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.29 1.00 Movement Capacity 208 624 Part 3- Single Stage Conflicting Flows 1201 1090 Potential Capacity 181 213 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.29 1.00 Movement Capacity 53 213 Result for 2 stage process: a 0.97 0.97 , y 2.06 0.66 C t 192 437 Worksheet 10 delay,queue length, and LOS Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I II I I II I I II I v(vph) 33 239 C m(vph) 437 675 v/c 0.08 0.35 95% queue length Control Delay 13.9 13.2 LOS B B Approach Delay 13.3 Approach LOS B • HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS .nalyst: David M. Schwegel htersection: Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way ,ount Date: 2003 w/o Project ime Period: PM Peak ntersection Orientation: East-West Major St. ehicle Volume Data: (ovements: 2 5 10 12 olume: 983 735 37 537 IFR: 983 735 37 537 HF: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 'HV: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 'edestrian Volume Data: lovements: 'low: ,ane width: lalk speed: Blockage: 9edian Type: TWLTL ► of vehicles: 3 Flared approach Movements: of vehicles: Northbound 0 4 of vehicles: Southbound 0 Lane usage for movements 1,2&3 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R . N Y N N Y N N N N Channelized: N Grade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 4,5&6 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N Y N N Y N N N N Channelized: N Grade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 7,8&9 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N N N N N N N N N Channelized: N Grade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 10,11&12 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R Y N N N N Y N N Y • nannelized: N rade: 0.00 .ata for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles: Eastbound Westbound hared In volume, major th vehicles: 0 0 hared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 0 at flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 1700 at flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 1700 umber of major street through lanes: 2 2 ength of study period, hrs: 0.25 orksheet 4 Critical Gap and Follow-up time calculation. ritical Gap Calculations: ovement 10 12 c,base 7.5 6.9 c,hv 2.0 2.0 hv 0.00 0.00 c,g 0.2 0.1 0.00 0.00 3,1t 0.7 0.0 c,T: 1 stage 0.00 0.00 2 stage 1.00 0.00 c 1 stage 6.8 6.9 2 stage 5.8 6.9 'ollow Up Time Calculations: lovement 10 12 f,base 3.5 3.3 f,HV 1.0 1.0 ' hv 0.00 0.00 f 3.5 3.3 lorksheet 6 Impedance and capacity equations step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 :onflicting Flows 368 ?otential Capacity 635 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 4ovement Capacity 635 ?robability of Queue free St. 0.15 lorksheet 7a - Computation of the effect of Two-stage gap acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 ?art 1- First Stage Conflicting Flows 983 735 Potential Capacity 329 428 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 329 428 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Part 2- Second Stage Conflicting Flows 735 983 Potential Capacity 428 329 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 -Dvement Capacity 428 329 art 3- Single Stage . Dnflicting Flows 1718 1716 Dtential Capacity 91 91 adestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 ovement Capacity 91 91 esult for 2 stage process: 0.97 0.97 0.71 1.41 t 287 287 robability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 orksheet 7b - Computation of the effect of Two-stage gap acceptance tep 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 art 1- First Stage onflicting Flows 983 735 otential Capacity 328 440 edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 ovement Capacity 328 440 'art 2- Second Stage :onflicting Flows 368 492 'otential Capacity 677 586 'edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 :ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.15 1.00 lovement Capacity 105 586 'art 3- Single Stage :onflicting Flows 1351 1227 ,otential Capacity 144 174 ,edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 laj. L, Min T Impedance factor 1.00 1.00 laj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 1.00 lap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.15 1.00 lovement Capacity 22 174 tesult for 2 stage process: s 0.97 0.97- 1 3.71 0.65 t 100 396 iorksheet 10 delay,queue length, and LOS 4ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I II I I II I I II I J(vph) 37 269 m(vph) 396 635 ,r/c 0.09 0.42 95% queue length :ontrol Delay 15.0 14.8 LOS C B Approach Delay 14.8 Approach LOS B HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS lalyst: David M. Schwegel itersection: Williams Ave. S./S. Grady Way .punt Date: 2003 w/Project ime Period: PM Peak :itersection Orientation: East-West Major St. chicle Volume Data: ovements: 2 5 10 12 plume: 983 736 38 539 FR: 983 736 38 539 HF: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 HV: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 edestrian Volume Data: ovements: low: ane width: alk speed: Blockage: edian Type: TWLTL of vehicles: 3 lared approach Movements: of vehicles: Northbound 0 of vehicles: Southbound 0 sane usage for movements 1,2&3 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N Y N N Y N N N N :hannelized: N ;rade: 0.00 Jane usage for movements 4,5&6 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N Y N N Y N N N N ;hannelized: N ;rade: 0.00 ,ane usage for movements 7,8&9 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N N N N N N N N N Thannelized: N 3rade: 0.00 Lane usage for movements 10,11&12 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R Y N N N N Y N N Y hannelized: N rade: 0.00 • ata for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles: Eastbound Westbound hared In volume, major th vehicles: 0 0 hared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 0 at flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 1700 at flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 1700 umber of major street through lanes: 2 2 ength of study period, hrs: 0.25 orksheet 4 Critical Gap and Follow-up time calculation. ritical Gap Calculations: ovement 10 12 c,base 7.5 6.9 c,hv 2.0 2.0 hv 0.00 0.00 c,g 0.2 0.1 0.00 0.00 3,1t 0.7 0.0 c,T: 1 stage 0.00 0.00 2 stage 1.00 0.00 c 1 stage 6.8 6.9 2 stage 5.8 6.9 Follow Up Time Calculations: ovement 10 12 f,base 3.5 3.3 f,HV 1.0 1.0 ? hv 0.00 0.00 f 3.5 3.3 slorksheet 6 Impedance and capacity equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 2onflicting Flows 368 Potential Capacity 635 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 lovement Capacity 635 Probability of Queue free St. 0.15 Worksheet 7a - Computation of the effect of Two-stage gap acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Part 1- First Stage Conflicting Flows 983 736 Potential Capacity 329 428 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 329 428 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Part 2- Second Stage Conflicting Flows 736 983 Potential Capacity 428 329 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 3p. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 svement Capacity 428 329 art 3- Single Stage .Dnflicting Flows 1719 1719 Dtential Capacity 91 91 adestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 sp. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Dvement Capacity 91 91 esult for 2 stage process: 0.97 0.97 0.71 1.41 t 286 286 robability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 orksheet 7b - Computation of the effect of Two-stage gap acceptance tep 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 art 1- First Stage onflicting Flows 983 736 otential Capacity 328 440 edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 ovement Capacity 328 440 art 2- Second Stage onflicting Flows 368 492 'otential Capacity 676 586 .edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 :ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.15 1.00 lovement Capacity 102 586 'art 3- Single Stage :onflicting Flows 1351 1228 'otential Capacity 144 173 'edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 laj. L, Min T Impedance factor 1.00 1.00 L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 1.00 ;ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.15 1.00 lovement Capacity 22 173 result for 2 stage process: 0.97 0.97 3.81 0.65 t 98 395 lorksheet 10 delay,queue length, and LOS - 4ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I II I I II I I II I i(vph) 38 270 m(vph) 395 635 7/c 0.10 0.42 35% queue length control Delay 15.1 14.8 LOS C B approach Delay 14.8 %pproach LOS B HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS • orksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information Analyst: David M. Schwegel . Intersection: Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street Count Date: 2000 Existing . Time Period: PM Peak orksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 . LT Volume: 161 0 0 15 . TH Volume: 170 349 - 246 78 • RT Volume: 0 107 34 0 . Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow Rate LT: 161 0 0 15 Flow Rate TH: 170 349 246 78 • Flow Rate RT: 0 107 34 0 t. Flow Rate Total: 331 456 280 93 ). Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. Subject Approach 2 2 1 1 1. Opposing Approach 0 0 1 1 _2. Conflicting Approach 1 1 2 2 .3. Geometry Group 5 5 2 2 .4. T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 iorksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 L. Flow Rate Total: 331 456 280 93 2. Flow Rate LT: 161 0 0 15 3. Flow Rate RT: 0 107 34 0 1. Prop LT in lane: 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.16 5. Prop RT in lane: 0.00 0.23 0.12 0.00 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7. Geometry Group 5 5 2 2 8. hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.50 0.50 0.20 0.20 9. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.70 -0.70 -0.60 -0.60 10. hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 11. hadj 0.24 -0.16 -0.07 0.03 Worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 Li L1 1. Total lane flow rate 331 456 280 93 2. hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.29 0.41 0.25 0.08 4. hd, final value 5.8 5.4 5.6 5.0 5. x, final value 0.53 0.68 0.44 0.13 6. Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.0 2.0 7. Service Time 3.5 3.1 3.6 3.0 Worksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 1. Total lane flow rate 331 456 280 93 2. Service Time 3.5 3.1 3.6 3.0 3. Degree Utilization, x 0.53 0.68 0.44 0.13 4. Departure headway, hd 5.8 5.4 5.6 5.0 5. Capacity 619 663 628 831 6. Delay 14.9 18.9 13.0 8.8 7. Level Of Service B C B A 8. Delay Approach 17.2 13.0 8.8 9. LOS, approach C B A 10. Delay, Intersection 15.5 11. LOS, Intersection C ' HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS •orksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information Analyst: David M. Schwegel .. Intersection: Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street . Count Date: 2003 w/o Project . Time Period: PM Peak orksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 . LT Volume: 181 0 0 17 . TH Volume: 200 384 277 88 . RT Volume: 0 120 38 0 . Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . Flow Rate LT: 181 0 0 17 . Flow Rate TH: 200 384 277 88 . Flow Rate RT: 0 120 38 0 . Flow Rate Total: 381 504 315 105 . Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. Subject Approach 2 2 1 1 1. Opposing Approach 0 0 1 1 2. Conflicting Approach 1 1 2 2 3. Geometry Group 5 5 2 2 4. T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 orksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 . Flow Rate Total: 381 504 315 105 . Flow Rate LT: 181 0 0 17 Flow Rate RT: 0 120 38 0 . Prop LT in lane: 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.16 . Prop RT in lane: 0.00 0.24 0.12 0.00 . Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . Geometry Group 5 5 2 2 . hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.50 0.50 0.20 0.20 1. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.70 -0.70 -0.60 -0.60 _0. hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 _1. hadj 0.24 -0.17 -0.07 0.03 ,]orksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 L. Total lane flow rate 381 504 315 105 ?. hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.34 0.45 0.28 0.09 1. hd, final value 5.9 5.5 5.8 4.6 5. x, final value 0.63 ' 0.77 0.51 0.14 5. Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.0 2.0 1. Service Time 3.6 3.2 3.8 2.6 +]orksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service South Bound East Bound West Bound Ll L2 L1 L1 1. Total lane flow rate 381 504 315 105 2. Service Time 3.6 3.2 3.8 2.6 3. Degree Utilization, x 0.63 0.77 0.51 0.14 4. Departure headway, hd 5.9 5.5 5.8 4.6 5. Capacity 608 650 621 1040 5. Delay 18.1 24.5 14.5 8.4 7. Level Of Service C C B A 3. Delay Approach 21.7 14.5 8.4 9. LOS, approach C B A 10. Delay, Intersection 18.9 11. LOS, Intersection C HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS lorksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information a. Analyst: David M. Schwegel . Intersection: Williams Ave. S./S. 4th Street Count Date: 2003 w/Project . Time Period: PM Peak forksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 . LT Volume: 181 0 0 24 .. TH Volume: 200 385 281 88 3. RT Volume: 0 120 38 0 1. Peak Hour Factor: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i. Flow Rate LT: 181 0 0 24 i. Flow Rate TH: 200 385 281 88 i. Flow Rate RT: 0 120 38 0 3. Flow Rate Total: - 381 505 319 112 3. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 _0. Subject Approach 2 2 1 1 -1. Opposing Approach 0 0 1 1 :2. Conflicting Approach 1 1 2 2 _3. Geometry Group 5 5 2 2 A. T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 iorksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 L. Flow Rate Total: 381 505 319 112 2. Flow Rate LT: 181 0 0 24 3. Flow Rate RT: 0 120 38 0 1. Prop LT in lane: 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.21 5. Prop RT in lane: 0.00 0.24 0.12 0.00 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7. Geometry Group 5 5 2 2 3. hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.50 0.50 0.20 0.20 3. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.70 -0.70 -0.60 -0.60 10. hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 11. hadj 0.24 -0.17 -0.07 0.04 dorksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 I. Total lane flow rate 381 505 319 112 2. hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.34 0.45 0.28 0.10 4. hd, final value 6.0 5.6 5.8 4.6 5. x, final value 0.63 0.78 0.51 0.14 6. Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.0 2.0 7. Service Time 3.7 3.3 3.8 2.6 Worksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L1 1. Total lane flow rate 381 505 319 112 2. Service Time 3.7 3.3 3.8 2.6 3. Degree Utilization, x 0.63 0.78 0.51 0.14 4. Departure headway, hd 6.0 5.6 5.8 4.6 5. Capacity 606 647 620 1052 6. Delay 18.3 25.0 14.7 8.4 7. Level Of Service C C B A 8. Delay Approach 22.1 14.7 8.4 9. LOS, approach C B A 10. Delay, Intersection 19.2 11. LOS, Intersection C HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 3.1b TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS r talyst: David M. Schwegel - 1ltersection: Site Access/S. 4th Street )unt Date: 2003 w/Project • _me Period: PM Peak ttersection Orientation: East-West Major St. Allele Volume Data: )vements: 1 2 5 6 10 12 )lume: 40 319 112 18 6 20 FR: 40 319 112 18 6 20 iF: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -V: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 :destrian Volume Data: Dvements: Low: ane width: slk speed: Blockage: sdian Type: None of vehicles: 0 lared approach Movements: of vehicles: Northbound 0 of vehicles: Southbound 0 ane usage for movements 1,2&3 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R Y Y N N N N N N N hannelized: N rade: 0.00 - ane usage for movements 4,5&6 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N Y Y N N N N N N hannelized: N rade: 0.00 ane usage for movements 7,8&9 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R N N N N N N N N N :hannelized: N ;rade: 0.00 sane usage for movements 10,11&12 approach: Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 L T R L T R L T R Y N Y N N N N N N :annelized: N rade: 0.00 iata for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles: Eastbound Westbound hared In volume, major th vehicles: 319 0 hared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 0 at flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 1700 at flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 1700 umber of major street through lanes: 1 1 ength of study period, hrs: 0.25 orksheet 4 Critical Gap and Follow-up time calculation. ritical Gap Calculations: ovement 1 10 12 c,base 4.1 7.1 6.2 c,hv 1.0 1.0 1.0 hv 0.00 0.00 0.00 c,g 0.2 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,1t 0.0 0.7 0.0 c,T: 1 stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 c 1 stage 4.1 6.4 6.2 'ollow Up Time Calculations: lovement 1 10 12 f,base 2.2 3.5 3.3 . f,HV 0.9 0.9 0.9 hv 0.00 .0.00 0.00 f 2.2 3.5 3.3 Vorksheet 6 Impedance and capacity equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 :onflicting Flows 121 Potential Capacity 936 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 Iovement Capacity 936 Probability of Queue free St. 0.98 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 Conflicting Flows 130 Potential Capacity 1468 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 4ovement Capacity 1468 ?robability of Queue free St. 0.97 4aj. L Shared ln. Prob. Queue Free St. 0.97 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 onflicting Flows 520 Potential Capacity 520 Pedestrian Impedance Factor - 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.97 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.97 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 Movement Capacity 507 frksheet 8 Shared Lane Calculations }`ared Lane Calculations jvement 7 8 9 10 11 12 * I II I II I I II , I vph) 6 20 ,vement Capacity 507 936 tared Lane Capacity 783 )rksheet 10 delay,queue length, and LOS )vement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I II I I II I I II I ;vph) 40 26 m(vph) 1468 783 'c 0.03 0.03 5% queue length )ntrol Delay 7.5 9.8 )S A A )proach Delay 9.8 pproach LOS A Drksheet 11 Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay ink 1 Delay Calculations ovement 2 5 of 0.97 1.00 it 319 0 12 0 0 it 1700 1700 i2 1700 1700 * 0j 0.97 1.00 maj left 7.5 0.0 number major st lanes 1 1 elay, rank 1 mints 0.3 0.0 iwy PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT Williams Avenue Apartments Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street Renton, Washington Prepared for: S-D I, LLC June 14, 2000 REVISED December 15, 2000 Our Job No. 7251 l r-7 r-. 12'I 5'DC7 VIP ,� � ARC.. } 1.Tj ,t 't�oF WASy, ELOPME►`R PIANNING • A.,DEv CITY - DEC 9 2000 j., 4' 41 4) 26016,40 4? 0A. GISTER REC tig E® FSSIONALEN' Y - r GHA V EXPIRES:2-05•d2 m (t ` CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING,SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH, KENT,WA 98032 . (425)251-6222 . (425)251-8782 FAX ° ssG MsG ` Aki �_ www.barghausen.com r <Nh6 errose►, PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed project is 0.9 acres in size located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street in Renton,Washington. The subject property has 115 feet of frontage along South 5th Street on its south side, approximately 350 feet of frontage along Williams Avenue South on its east side, and 350 feet of frontage along an alley along its west side. The subject property is bordered to the north by a single-family residence. The subject property is currently occupied by the Renton Family Practice Clinic,paved parking lots,an existing single-family residence that serves as a medical laboratory,a detached garage,and grass field area. There are ten fir trees,one cedar tree,two pine trees,and two ornamental trees on the subject property. Both Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street have existing curb,gutter, and sidewalk along the frontage of the property,with catchbasins and underground storm drainage system for stormwater collection. The existing parking lots have catch basins and underground storm drainage system that connects into the City of Renton's underground storm drainage system on South 5th Street. The Renton Family Practice Clinic building will remain with the development of the Dean-Sherman Apartments. The existing paved parking lots, medical laboratory/house, and garage will be removed. The subject property is essentially flat,with less than 5 feet of elevation change along the north-south axis of the site. The site will be developed by construction of 86 residential units over 113 parking stalls. Residential construction willbe four levels of wood-frame structure over a concrete subterranean parking garage. An average cut/excavation of 8 feet is planned to build the subterranean parking garage. A geotechnical engineering study prepared by Earth Consultants Inc. dated November 11, 1999,has confirmed that groundwater elevations are several feet below the proposed grade of the subterranean parking garage. Drainage in the subterranean parking garage will not be conveyed to the stormwater system because this is a covered parking area. Drainage in the subterranean parking garage will be collected by a series of floor drains, and discharged to the sanitary sewer system. Drainage runoff from the proposed buildings will consist mostly of rooftop drainage and sidewalk drainage, which is considered clean stormwater that does not require water quality treatment. There will be 5 feet of additional impervious area subject to vehicular travel along the west margin of the project resulting from the required alley widening. This is a reduction in impervious area subject to vehicular travel compared to the existing conditions,because the existing paved parking lots will be removed with the development of this project. The enclosed calculations show that the project meets the exemptions from detention and water quality treatment according to the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Storm drainage provisions for this project will consist of curb and gutter along the alley widening,with a series of catch basins and underground storm drainage pipes to collect drainage from the alley and building roof drains. The new storm drainage system will connect to the existing storm drainage stub out for the property. Please refer to the enclosed preliminary grading and storm drainage plan for a graphic depiction of the proposed storm drainage facilities. 7251.004 SUMMARY OF CORE REQUIREMENTS 1998 KING COUNTY SURFACE DESIGN MANUAL Section 1.2 Core Requirements Section 1.2.1: Core Requirement No. 1 - Discharge at the Natural Location Response: The proposed storm drainage system will connect to the existing 6-inch concrete storm drainage pipe that is the existing natural outlet for the subject property. Section 1.2.2: Core Requirement No. 2- Off-Site Analysis Response: The subject property does not receive off-site drainage from any upstream properties. A downstream analysis is contained within this Preliminary Drainage Report. Section 1.2.3: Core Requirement No. 3- Runoff Control Response: The enclosed calculations show that the project meets the exemption from on-site peak rate runoff control because the proposed project site post-developed peak runoff rate for the 100-year/24-hour duration design storm event is calculated to be less than 0.5 CFS more than the peak runoff rate for the existing site condition. The enclosed calculations that show that the existing 100-year/24-hour runoff is 0.69 CFS and the proposed 100-year/24-hour runoff is 0.84 CFS,a difference of 0.15 CFS. Section 1.2.4: Core Requirement No.4- Conveyance System Response: The proposed drainage system consists of a series of catch basins and tightlined drainage pipes that connect to an existing tightlined system. Pipe slopes and capacity calculations will be completed at the time of final engineering. Section 1.2.5: Core Requirement No.5-Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan Response: A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan will be prepared at the time of fmal engineering. Section 1.2.6: Core Requirement No. 6-Maintenance and Operation Response: A maintenance and operation manual for the private storm drainage system will be prepared at the time of final engineering. Section 1.2.7: Core Requirement No. 7-Bonds and Liability Response: Bonds and liability insurance will be provided at the time of building permit issuance and project approval. 7251.004 SUMMARY OF SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 1998 KING COUNTY SURFACE DESIGN MANUAL Section 1.3.Special Requirements Section 1.3.1: Special Requirement No. 1 - Critical Drainage Areas Response: The project is not located in a critical drainage area; therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.2: Special Requirement No. 2- Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan Response: The site is not located within an existing Master Drainage Plan;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.3: Special Requirement No. 3- Conditions Requiring a Master Drainage Plan Response: The site is not large enough to require a Master Drainage Plan;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.4: Special Requirement No. 4-Adopted Basin or Community Plan Areas Response: The site is not located in an adopted basin or community plan area;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.5: Special Requirement No. 5-Special Water Quality Controls Response: The proposed project does not contain more than 1 acre of new impervious surface that will be subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.6: Special Requirement No. 6- Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators Response: The proposed project will not construct more than 5 acres of impervious surface; therefore this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.7: Special Requirement No. 7- Closed Depressions Response: This project does not discharge runoff to an existing closed depression; therefore, this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.8: Special Requirement No. 8- Use of Lakes, Wetlands, or Closed Depressions for Peak Runoff Control Response: This project does not propose to use a lake,wetland,or closed depression for peak rate runoff control; therefore,this special requirement does not apply. 7251.004 Section 1.3.9: Special Requirement No. 9-Delineation of 100-Year Floodplain Response: The project does not contain or abut a stream,lake, wetland,or closed depression; therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.10: Special Requirement No. 10-Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 and 2 Streams Response: The project does not contain or abut a Class 1 or Class 2 stream;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.11: Special Requirement No. 11 -Geotechnical Analysis and Report Response: A geotechnical engineering study has been prepared by Earth Consultants Inc.dated November 11, 1999. Section 1.3.12: Special Requirement No. -Soils Analysis and Report Response: A geotechnical engineering study has been prepared by Earth Consultants Inc.dated November 11, 1999. 7251.004 EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 6,236 SF Rooftop 22,400 SF Rooftop 10,077 SF Paved Parking Lot 14,716 SF Concrete Walk 1,000 SF Concrete Walk 1,120 SF Planter Areas(1) 22,963 SF Grass 2,040 SF Paved Alley(2) 40,276 On-Site Total 40,276 On-Site Total Qloo = 0.69 CFS goo = 0.84 CFS 100-year increase in runoff = 0.84 CFS - 0.69 CFS = 0.15 CFS Less than 0.50 CFS threshold;therefore,no detention is required. (1) To be conservative,the raised planter areas were counted as concrete walks. (2) Impervious area subject to vehicular travel<5,000 SF threshold. Water quality treatment also less than the existing parking lot. Therefore,no water quality treatment is required. 7251.003 12/14/00 1:19:44 pm Shareware Release page : WILLIAMS AVENUE APARTMENTS BCE JOB#7251 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE ANALYSIS BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-100 NAME: 100YR/24HR PRE-DEVLOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 92 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0 .53 Acres 0 .39 Acrl TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 86. 00 98 . 00 TC • 10 . 00 min 10 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0. 69 cfs VOL: 0 .23 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: D-100 NAME: 100YR/24HR POST-DEVLOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0. 92 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs .2AINFALL TYPE • KC24HR PERV . IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0 . 02 Acres 0 . 90 Acri TIME INTERVAL • 10. 00 min CN • 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC • 10 . 00 min 10 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: .0 . 84 cfs VOL: 0 .28 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min A ito e - '?j.'.. ---i2 L ,...,. . . -.. I \iii....i —1 ,.., . ---T.Q. - on Niu II 'I6.C6=:1-' - `- 'L161 '.667_ . 17.66- • . • '. of b•i,l. 1ij� 16i•- n.. . .1 ■ . 17 C6• I 6,ChJ1 •6J6-N r - _ 16J46-1., •1 4y /A' '/ 1i. 1 I7J6-I' 7,16-10 17,5-9 7 , i: J ''. ."-, • ) -. ,•:.,, ' 0 . P.:,.•••-ii • • ddi a .. . was., • __,,. v : __ „ \ i „) r "7.-* R ; _ r, 1, • ,� ,\ _ /�` 1 v6'.' 16IcN• g I L �: I' .u-le'�— \ j I. 6,G6- - 0 r— �� 1 NL%! 1 7 A-1 17,C7-6 -. 1\\ N •--.,\ 16I7- 1. .:,.6 r 16 . 16N7-19- .N,-: cN7-1••. �" ` .-• •,1: • \ •� .._-_ I - / /�.H7-11`.r�7:rG • 17,C7- 1 1 f3 '•• r .. mi. .: la ., ,‘. .. "-., ,• • ..... .. , .. ,,,„,„, .. ..,.. r Ir1 ICJ - .,....,2, ‘ .,. ...... ., ..... ., . , .., ��� .! _ • lil.7-S •...\ •'16 -7 Y ./ I7- ' _ I 1i tiyl;y[a 6 r-r1 •Ili • 7.C7 S '• ., ICL7-0 \ I6I1-2•1• ;:'.1• OIi,G7 'yF'.( • !• _ •67�-17 'N ..�7r6- `�WM=1( ' - // M7-20 l ,`\\ ` i6L7-7 lc r7 Ii1�.• • �-�� J7 ; u16 \^6.1yaw 1 t`�`�i � ' t �f =-- MEI\N A� -p = _ 41_ Iii' .—%:i�jrT.sr. I \, •._.'s_� . .A,..11.1 in Mr.: !g, Minn p11111111 ..r. .) ,., aLe-19 ;i �Ls 1' \/ ,.._In ". �r'�I j '.; • ��, L,Ge-] 16W-e 16NB-S `tt79 L�Lii ��erill '1)is-1-r// ..r \;7.1 . n 6X0-1 l..\- , 3 6 e-, 6 6 J \ _„...„_. ____. _, ',I II I V"' 'ill �� I7,ee-!�1 \%\`I' r r� r. / _,, , 6 L GILL/•�, V) al IL v. ....f ' T / / .>� ��1 ti 16Le-] 16Ie-1] 16 a-19AL! C ,�� \ • IL a-] ., - ILLe-18 • 16Le-10 6Le- 16Ie-c� L Iwo -� '` Ir � '/ 17JeN '-] ry .•° ( "-y' Jill'_ ,.•u sJe-1e�— ME _ 1Fi0-a S -/th Sfi !ti S. .-...-.. .-- - Ilk Axe- - •.C6-2I 6 0- 6I0-0 •'— - ---------..._ •__ i!l _�� 1 . �� o-e I671!' �• \-__ 'ram 1cab 6•5•-6/ J2-1 S,.-�,.�:;: li K- __ ..... r -• 22.72 1 I ,I, '0 # t'n ` !1I!•7/ �..� % ' G tea' •IA ,1 / I'` _g • \• U Y G3 - 19 T23N R5E E 1/2 Q o 4 0 • • •' Q ) �: : • o ° UTILITIES DIVISION ---- Renton CityLimits i,�oo �+ 3 .. I: 41—�N�o 12/03✓99 Datums: � �8 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 listen OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Basin: Black River Basin Subbasin Name: Subbasin Number: Symbol :Drainage Componertvaprainag9;qcmp.ppep4IN.%,.v:,. Slope. Distance Existing Potential . Observations of Field Inspector Type.Name,and Size - • -. Description - from Site . Problems . Problems . Resource Reviewer, rResident F-gSfn5VAiSgif See Map Type:sheet flow,swale,stream, Drainage basin,vegetation,cover, Ft Constrictions,under capacity,ponding, Tributary area,likelihood of problem, channel,pipe,pond;size, depth,type of sensitive area,volume overtopping,flooding,habitat or organism overflow pathways,potential impacts diameter,surface area destruction,scouring,bank sloughing, sedimentation,incision,other erosion A Site Discharge Location 0' A-B 6-inch Concrete Under Alley 0.12% 0-130' No erosion exists B-C 8-inch Concrete Under South 5th Street 130'-260' Partially filled with leaves C-D 8-inch Concrete Under Intersection of South 260'-350' No erosion exists 5th Street and Burnett Avenue South D-E 18-inch CMP Under Park in Middle of 350'-720' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South E-F 18-inch CMP Under Park in Middle of 720-850' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South F-G 18-inch CMP Under Park/Under Burnett 2.11% 850-980' Possibly buried/Possibly labeled Avenue South as sewer G-H 24-inch CMP Under Park on East Side of 0.30% 980-1250' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South H-I 24-inch CMP Under Park on East Side of 0.30% 1250-1273' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South I-J 24-inch CMP Crossing Burnett Avenue 1.26% 1273'-1365' Four manholes at intersection. South Under South 7th Street Three labeled sewer;one labeled water. Assumed Type II storm manhole labeled as sewer. J-K 24-inch CMP Under South 7th Street 0.11% 1365'-1871' No erosion exists 7251.002[PCM/rb/kn] Ar FlIET1A11E, %REF: PLOT DATE PLOT SCALD PAPER SPACE, STA, JOB NO, COI - PPF'—" —TTTT mmilmm - AS NOTED ,"",—Z4''4' _ & CITY OF PRELIMINARY GRAD NO AND ,ma.�, /ilk • RENTON STORM DRAINAGE PLAN PP• Nqm 1 NEW ARCHITECT Sit PLAN MIS I2/18/W RJA aa'aa>r __ I { I DATUM i Planning/Building/Public Werke Dept. NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR .`",". ItN s" `�°a' • Renton Muryl-farm, s a �'- -w gyp. _r n(.8'WATER VI -M II1 T 11i 1 _ — sewn mw _ S. 4T_H STREET I eahox 2O®❑a0 i - - - - l I , i 0 it ' t 4 .::;:. ..1 N Z a ___________ git Jrir .i-i? __ _ Ili iii .),1,4 I Hill i __ • °It I Tu ' !99 .i ii II 1_ 1 I 1 1 • w .>K __ __ a Q IA p I 'F r� - I zi e 4 � ; Ai _ P • IAz 1 _ ''.-, -hIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIBIIIIIIAIOL ----V' Litli',..,... --w it.'.1: ''' 3i 01 -; lg. I : ' illt • --- 1E1 I . ,----------------,,,,, , ... ..:A iiiiiiiiiiiiiil gIAZ: I ) `V .1 I y I ;: i fa 1: ^''I MP ,• P I �.a. I< ■L -- -- __ __ �- — no it € 132 1 ts:;t : , ; . ........... II, _. r .. c.1 'm 1 111111 ba r �i P -Q .... gi7,.. - cn s a 6— mI g- I ' '^ >3` I. !illiiiii. ao .III■�. 11 `` l11 " _ ,C : . .... qti • 81 ei 19 pE -�a P $1 : : I ili U7 i ■. III' : r-------- --w 09 El 10 u .4 1 ikr.::;:iii: rm.. se a ;' ■ >m , 1 .164 pp ,11 ; r— - v ,„, ,.. Ili id"'76- “ IR ; Q. 51 1 >> 1ti ��■ Nm --� 1 g t' - g iii _1 ` it. • ■■Mil .- 6NE1111 !iiii•?- •raP � .1. ,5 a 0 Q ,7ir •• . i !III■ i airlift "g. 1 Pi t <� ■ lag N y° N 0 3A C r :t .r> a I I g :I p ay IE!$:ril '7.:....- 'ItaliaI� i i tt' I CO01--"7-- LA'''gild. --—____LSIT IM_____Urtra II_______"1'II St . ;',/,', - 'A 1 i 1 1 01 z- ---- „la . f sni. - Lpg , ,••••".7' III , .‘-'9' ..-4 , .• f!..4 I11. El . P III ; I--_... --- i __ r-20' II:.:S; j�;�• _. " ac ....... � 1 .11 • .,'^( �^. ra dix9 l ....I... �1 � tlw? r v 'alibi...,ER � 1,,, , , irtml _______________1*11-: drAfro roil . *1 .., 0\ rl .... 9,N� N�j rr' 71i, °► �1111 i ' <_ �dr' Iii• -4 k ' .. 'i.Ill .............. AUL f.4 '.....' 4....- '..!:...,. p 1 l�Mt�lRi�laa�� Is ■�� ..a fir_ p _� t: :.r ..-/ • m .1'...tt 1 � i, i�N kill 51:rigita ~) w �C■� �I� •A OMta �E■®®��i1 b`41'. : // �' a f�,- •.© ' 1 .:.�: .s•�� `-S' W.:R;K:At.f11R8mign� I p I ..-.._...- i O --•—'FA 1rC:ll..1 �� 4� • 1 IXE• ' • �'-'I'D4 in rain+:� 1 + ¶m t. ,,,�_-®—,tGg\4\\`If�� �al�� l)� 12 -1-`,,, pc.8�577 �l �'�f_ ICII 't mm, us Cm ----{�R'i'+� �sLY�tr�� ���1Ti! — —`44 ERiM .� a 1 '1Q..18f� efdf�.'f� �.`'` ><.� t 1 P!♦t AIS - l`\ .-"T ' I ..l .Iv —I �_— ti'lf•. `� �ry ITT [Q xIa M €� 1. VI�II m�s�; '.1. .l ¢ ern,; 0 Z Jaws) 11ll I :�; % tr CIE s S. 5 T H STREET �'�;� Q �' �� N,� ..�, �® ;ry ♦� F i� ' m --_ -- _ :� 4f'aR '4; a!• " •<•. '�°\yYte I•• g it �J�� r ye.- 1-- -CS er SYhii.R `� SASS ---•. SAY- f; 5: �,t ^e File:P:\SOSKPROJ\7251\preliminary\7251-p3.dwg Date/lime: 12/14/2000 10:28 Seale: 1=20 shnresse%refs: Z725108,27251PA22. 7251 B.C.E.JOB NO. PLOT BAT[: PLOT SCALE: SPILL STA JOB NCRtw IS—' 1 1 T %REF: FILENOLp NO ° .�. CITY OF PRELIMINARY WATER PLAN °.°� "rs RENTON STREET LEVEL [..... � ` dl uwulc1DRAM � l NCx DATUM I 1 NEW AITg1I1 DT SRE PIAN MTS 12/15/00 RIA aaa®'' RN ;Z.,N, I1` Planning/Building/Publtc Works Deptar 6; NO. REVISION HY DATE APPR ''''P. IIIA - Radon Multl-TamM 4- — --iv-Pc-CwAitil -r --w- 4- -vi-- 1-wl --1 _ _ _ I 1 i - _ _ _ _ _ S. 4TH STREET _ I i 1. _i i 1 O 1 r -- -- __ __ . _ 1 t it ,ii' 1 1 1). (1)183 sSrOO❑O0 i i to 1 co i �a • li_ ' • 1 Z uI • ::: *t1 1 N 1 Tj 1 a ; sa- _ ...._ _ - -- sa:•s4'z itsai I ilii l iaii": UM • r f t t'■ t gi4. ' i lik 1 i! li! 1 i 1 1 ill f — __ ___ _ , ,,,,,, E. ,„....„,.,Li r % 1 ref f; I: =':::' n�•.... w ES ■ I' g i au in NOVI r i rit Cp, g mt1 1 1,': 1 4 j, 1 • lq Li 1 <- U / :‘ lc ', te - OM di ---- ti: Y..E i—I 0 __ I !.:lczm 1 ---. rri 4 __ ,z . , : . 1 il g 1 T m -;... HE,i, ' iff '',1 _ 1 i'@ p ■ 1-. if— ! 1 ; .101 _..... imi:EjMill b.r. I (., ,.1 k yo,S� V; are;.:::;. 4 I e4W ICa i 4 in 4, e.... '.......— I—di I. 1 fq r 4::<;:t.wi i- ?�' ... g m Mc: , i',1 g imp in IrA ...I.. 1 w •-w1=i 1 �..i,,.:' : D .iiia ■ I7 i� a t: f 1 x a t't� g R NA l,r.<<::'! eat€ .:::.! 1�����,{ I �t' Rug -_ — } Yff to - - __ !;s Y - C ., m I 1.'.:. . 6 t 't. i<.>< :gel ; 3 ' >t T-20'wi l: 11. co _ 0.0 ita,„ I I i`' A v ' T• ~° ''�r �� a ::; fv y ,... ■? --t, t 4 1 • D - > 1�. a. r"r cn 'f .f: Z it' -- -- __ __ v'L e,.......: 1 iy =s k'v ym IfF 1 C I I tig -- -- Aill'i. ' 1 . \/ €t I1111 • li C) ..,... • 1.■ . � _ J tIkilt! '::::;1 1. -... 26„ -il-gi.',) "------1.. fi----; '—......1:. .' ill , ---11' ; `, ,..:- -- i g 5 ii in i o L ,„:_,...„.,::,::„,:,,„„„„„R„,„,..„., ,i,________„_„,"_______„,„___,_,,________:,,,,„„.., , ,,_ ..,...., „ ......,..........____......, ,,,, ,,,,..,\ Er vortre..k.MID a r pusfrni_k_i _L. --'s.,---• •a .o.pisimp 1- _ .... , i -'1 ; it5 : ! / TEL 1f11- Q �VAt...x`k o I 1---.• P � , ao.4:4 ',.. s ..,...l..- .' . 1.°... ' '''' - -. .."-.. '..";.."'".'"-'1u.'''''.." '-:' * C4 �' a 5TH STREET ' F�j111i - 1 : l; _..-__."_' •—__� . :.:i.:.1.1::1.:,,..::;';',::ii?::::i% 8<a'. m ai n .. ;^; Q a attA n.:'ryj .y°A 1 N il D T. tie- '�_�. 'w W itI- ti _ _ _�'w� a vi w • c'kj `i - w<o->^ 'a'3> �'' rile:P:\SDSK40J\7251\preliminary\7251-pi.Awg Oate/Time: 12/15/2000 11:09 Scale: 1.20 sharesse Orals: Z7251PA2,Z7251P0, B.C.E.JOB NO. 7251 s I SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,TWP.23 N,RGE 5 E,WM 1 I NEl— g g i UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL 4 — DI D•211.21 Et.MR I JII DI WQ8.21 E a°eIc s"�so1i(►DP PPE) -- IP' PAL x WV-- _ i1 :I -- __ IL ,'-�:�a�.:�r_�r�. ---■--- - ...:r#-;::::..v. ....-,�._.--_-.- � ILL �T mil a ,i aSSW R.a.3s.Do v ':w«.:::_�'^ .. ...... ._ .. :::.::..>:.<.::.........,.:., -.±.5..»;.+;+.-«..rw..::. „+,+.+w...e_y I \ E 1Y re E-29°0�,�_« M S �4 TJa N ca�E s :�:: » 10 wr.vim'%:/.:i:«w^��....ew>«<:��....wr:-<:�.,:,,.»sue.::.:<. _ G G D C Etc SSOI IaFa77.2D EX J vA.,F,.I"' -,..:.. ».�..-:;�„r,:� • ..-.,..�_ t'.::z:r , .: �y ---- # 1 1 1 1 !T/;e; ` SO!A?PR 7� _ _•�.,;3_?:���., -- ® l s' � Ell- Psc s.3a 2a c 1 C c I G ON 1-' J s +` I i t �1i --V y -1---- - aDta'4w ede? n f c c� c • :> i� R gnt'S fAY ----�� IX E'PVC s Ex.FK.:I ml"P8c N;�: ` ( .e. • O C {_' .CR•x"�b''aiN) Pt`DYER i'OLE i s 's7 ; C tw �� i SI.r rF T U �. I • (uc) , -T(Uc T(uc) I T uc I c ���� c �_'��s-Dc B'Pc :f _;1 t 4 IX e• -/ � IX e•_' = EX vx� z � �� ' — — ( ) r(uc) r(uc) i T(uc T c I !`,. .:., - -r(uc c) t r(uc) TOG �6� v sr t luu x Isn ER(uo c\ wo—� ucL- T 3; l o r I to s _ r(,.) a r(uc �� �1 �xx t'dr1 n 1 (uc N�.".Z,c u� x .r RC MS ,f,� T(UG ¢(U I-F>S1*i i a::,�.. � t I Nc r uc P.S41ON' 1::' '"^ t i I f—rtz.t#)cAv va:vts Ewa I r-a_ 'via T(us .119tx TOM T(u 1 I ' II 717.H 1------atikf....Ly. .r ' L �� i +��� ``�: EX J'T?E£T MN ir 1 "F` C= -� �-/ 1 El - 'tL :•tom__. s...;_T 1 g I 1 1 45 FTRE SPRDEDETE • I ° ' _ .T , 4• = Eirziai Root(sEE want Fwq' �— o W s 1 , :i :i • I W2V a - a la I IQ IU � I'w Qin 9 "r 5 i l III I Ijlllllll m' I =E. I I liii 'C7 . I U a g _ I al! iIj , ,� #1 ourUNE r- N �—I-- f — f -L - r- Z- -� S -I Q -I- —L' �- -I- -!- Inc ru+f NrajANr R e; 91 0 1 O>n>W 1 I I I .., — — SSCfl I I 1D RntAR1I , ; DCELNE ; i ' f Y 1 A. B a, 0 — v .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................--„:-..,„i„,„,...,,..„,„„:,„.,,:,„,„,,, ■r ,qp�� _ 11 — IF i -- IPF I v.. I ALLEYik I o 41 R I ,i I I Rg I I I fl7 _ fl $(E « , i 1 1 1 i 1 / 8 ' T 1 2 , 3 r 5 I I Q 1U = L �1 S S i , 9 9 a[ d I I I ' �J 1 n T i /1 r- T I I_- i i 1 8 1 L_/"\ I �J I I r L_ N Hill g g , Tn\A/A I iCF C)r-f\ I /"1f\ I I ' , i 1 �./ VVI V L_I V I �./I V E a 5 VOL. 1 �— A /ter-- 1 V �.JL_. I , i�/�\7L_ i Ii...1 ,I I I 1 i c g ' , i , , I I I I I a � � � I I i ' ' I , I r I ___ __ I L.__ .1 , I I 1 1 � , 1 ____ I __ I _ 1 _- I 1 I 1 I I .E 0 2,. .., • I I ' ' 9 I I N . _,..._ v s r W , ,, ..____.....____....... -w _..,_ -W. -. -W ............-.......... -.- . _ / BURRNETT AVENUE 3; r-- 1 w_ SANITARY EWER KEYNOTES CITY OF RENTON N 0 r•1_ooR DRAIN FDR e+Lsnlnrr LEVEL PARKING AREA 101111 IE TO GREASE TRAP WIN 4•DUCTILE IRON PIPE AS SHOW. - - - 1 Z I7'v' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSr. SDI LlC Q CREASE TRAP VAULT BY UTILITY VAULT COMPANY. p1 1USy • I 25<IIIE ii2 I AVENUE NE �GHa�I�, A PRWATE GRINDER PUMP xrnl 2'PRESSURE DISCHARGE PPE crowtasla+c TD EgSTWC B'snlE SEWER As SHOWN ••�. I� ,I mIEwE:WA 118D05 .lk PRE-NARY SANITARY SEWER PLAN O ,,, -' (UIT)041-339 Q ExtsrlNG SIDE SEVER m REYADI AND BE USED FOR BV'E11ENr PARKING DISCHARGE FROM GRINDER PUMP. 1,) 1= CONTACT:BCL SFERMAN A�;{sM .a. Mame Ammo UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL CO O F', QDOSING SIDE SEVA3t'ID RELNN.AND BE USED FDR COtd1ECRON TO NEW BIAIDINC SEWER DISCHARGE(3 TDUU q 26010 p 4Q U ?v im ►� O PROVIDE CLFANDUY 5 FEET FROM BUILDING SIRIICfUFtE. �S'P/OXA LTEEa6\y4. 115215 72t4D RAMIE w1 98032 SOUTH Z�`< �Pg• DRAWN ►� Dare 5/24/00 Fa.e No. _ 7 z e E7(PIRES 2/5/02 , (425)251-6222 FAX T�Nr'EN01N� RJA ex•.uP � �BDOK--PA� W APPROVED . Q 3 or 3 m SEE DRAWINGS) _......._ - - .- a...,.......,. 1.......-.,...;.;" . .^ i1. .- 7 .. .'. ... -.' ‘ Air ..;':' ' ,4..., C. ]-. •' ,--!.71 ....' 't;. ';'• !.: '...:: '.-: . .,.:,:.:•:,1*-^.- ;',---1 .....Cv 1.:$ ,.... • •• •-' •" "" -• ' -•-' - '' _,.. . . .... . ' '' .' ''', -:.. -....._• .., _,, .- 0'....,', • • .. - • •., -- .- , .F7,!-. .:::,; . :.... ,.. ........,. . ....._,,_. . , . . • .:. - . • :;:i• -.- f.: .. .. . . •.r.,-;*;.--..!• /., ;.- 7..• :,_ . ,. .. ... . ....._ - .. . -- •-.-...i...- .:., ' •1:iitio. otaitiLLi O. , . . ...?„,/ . \. ..- ,? -,,, m___ '.111:R-LsPJ( r— - . ....6())-1 fi N i CITY, OF RENTON i- 0 14 Planning/Building/Public VW s . .,: '~` h Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 RA 07 CITY Ot HLNI OY E RECEIVD Mr. Gary Klatt ' DEL 1 1 2006 411 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 BUILDING DIVISION 4pc';g semO i Ocx /00/05, RETURN TO SENDER ATTEMPTED - NOT KNOWN UNABLE TO FORWARD MC: 900573232.55 *2109-00157-00--17 9005773232`� 11,I1,1„1,111,1,ill,l„111,11,1,1,1,,11,,,1,),l,l„1,1,,,,lll .. .,..... _......... ...........a_.__ -____ �r ,nrw CV f omETcp !# 70500371 U.S. POSTAsL j: GtT'Y OF REN TUN RECEIVED Ms. Louise Vittitow . DEC 1 1 16 532 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 BUILDING DIVISION Nxxz DO 4. PQ 4.2/0Q/04 RETURN TO SENDER ATTEMPTED ._ NOT KNOWN UNABLE TO FORWARD MO: 590057323255 *2109-00353-00-17 c0 "t*' �3:�-. Il,l„1„1,1),,,,1,1,11„1„II,,,I,billn,1,I,I,1„l,l,,,,llI Il uraay way 1Rcur`vu ...........o---- - ---.. 0.. a.,, asal T.% (G',� W # ( IJMETER 7050037 U.J. POSTAGE]: CI I Y OF,itN,uN RECEIVED Ben and Kimberli Wilson . DEL 11 2006 424 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 BUILDING DIVISION NIXIE WAQ ; c 0, 12/00/05 RETURN TO SENDER A ATTEMPTED - NOT KNOWN UNABLE TO FORWARD 1 MC: 900!.',7323255 *2109-O0192-O0--17 100 :14;2 13& II,I„1„1,11,,,,1,I,1,,,1„1I,,,1,11,11,„I,iddnhlunill CITY" OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public V ;s h Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 V ;fEc 0 2.`0 6 e .., .-4 i • grz utIETEril CIIYOFNtNIuN RECEIVED DEC 11 '2006 Jude Waller 411 Williams Ave S BUILDING DIVISION Renton WA 98057 N 1X4g Bock 4; QIF Vl /ow(4% RETURN TO SENDER ATTEMPTED - NOT KNOWN UNABLE TO FORWARD F3C: 9k057323235 k21.e39-00±.58-00-1,7 400 oz.. 32 Se( II,I„I„I,11,,,,1,1,1,,,I-,,11,,,1,1„1(,,,1,1,1,1►,1,1►,,,)ll rady Way - Renton VVas'tington 1305J - nr;�� w cry :. ,.13Jis it / PE MEIER 7050037i Li,•S:—"CISTAG; 011YOFA6NIUN RECEIVED Mr.&Mrs. Rick Stone 411 Williams Ave S DEC 1 2006 Renton WA 98057 BUILDING DIVISION • -RATTETURN MPPTETO DKN D - NOT OWN UNABLE TO FORWARD II BC: 9E 05732232GS *2189-oA:L:33-oe3-17 3.1 Iyyr_I i),I„L,),11,,,,1,1,I,,,1„II„►I,1►,11,►,I,1►1,1„l,l,►„11! trvrua y._..a-7 phri mETE, 7050031 L u.S,V`.. „ 1 u Ire Off Y OF HEN i v,v RECEIVED • John and Donna See . DEC 1 -12006 438 Burnett Ave S Renton WA 98057 BUILDING DIVISION ci OD- 1.2,P 0Q106 RETURN TO SENDER ATTEMPTED _ NOT. KNOWN UNAE1LE TO FORWARD . • MC: 9805732325•5 • *.21.839-081.82-09-:L7 ' edit- *623 li,i„I„I II,,,,I,(,I,,,I„11,,.,1,)„J1„►1,i,l,l„I,I,,,,)II CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Vi s /''' " 3 w e T Yam- ' h -Grady Way Renton Washington 98055 ' DEC2.'C�a e rh N"4 In� (7/j en CITY OF FEN ION RE-C.EIVED Mr&Mrs Gary Downs DEC i ,,12006 • 407 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 BUILDING DIVISION RETURN TO SENDER, `ATTEMPTED' NOT KNOWN UNABLE TO FORWARD Bo: 980573232.55 *219S-00148-0>9-17 sd 21,3.32 ` -' • (I,)I.,(,,.(,)I,;,,);I;I,„'l;,I.I,,rl,(„()riil,),1,)„),),,,,))) ti�Y off' CIT T OF RENTON ,-. ... :mot . . ® .din " Planring%Build ing/PublicWorks Department Gregg- immerman P.E.,Administrator Kathy"Keolker,Mayor gg December 1, 2006 Mr. Carl P. Pirscher, AIA,Principal : - - - CDA:*Pirscher Architects - - P.O.Box 5542-9 I - Seattle 9$-155 - - Re: .. Fifth and Williams Apartments;,LUA00-178 " —— i Minor Modification Request-Response . .: - Dear Mr. Pirseher - • • • : .We'have.received your letter.dated November 13,2006, clarifying requested minor , . : modifications of the_previouslyapproved.(01/29/01) site plan of the:above-referencedi .• _ - - project. The requested modifications are summarized below. , Request • 1. Parkirxg-level: The initial:plan`hadtheparking.level:of.thebuilding below grade. _ - .The requested modification'raises'the.parking;level to'a:more'at-grade condition. - 2: ,First.floor.access: Raisin the arking garage to grade requires corresponding - " . revisioris:-to.the first floOf plan, ost notably elimination of individual unit.entries - , ' . • 'directly from the'sidewalk located along Williams Avenue•;South. r - , _ 3., Building height. Reduction of-floor plate height by'12•inches:for each floor"arid - ' elimination of loft units w04fd`,resul't in.an.average base-elevation-of.52 feet'6'."- - inches. The approved height.is,53 feet 7 inches:; ; :: - - . `, '• 4. Number of units: The number.of total units:has been reduced,from 99,(approved- `'„ . by modification.10/15/02) to 92:(building permit for 92'units'and 123'parking: . stalls approved 02/1.0/05).. ' "° . _ : ' 5. Number of parking stalls: T•he.iiumber of parking stalls,•approved at:121 (4 less; than required by code)by parking modification on 10/15/02, Would be increased - to 123. 6. Open space: 'The amount of open space on the site would be increased from.the • . approved amount of.7,497;sf•to:1`1',514,sf. • ' 7. Project name: The.phroject name would be changed from Sherman:. Apartments".and"5t and Williams.;Apartments"to "Smither's Place." . ' . . 1055 South Grady*ay=Renton,=Washington 98055. :N 1,E : •0 N - . �. ;,.. AHEAD OF THE CURVE' ,'.`, ,,' . , a« This papercontain�S 50%redycled material,30%post consumer . , . . " M :Carl F. rsc er, December l';2006 Page2of4 Site)flan Modification Criteria" Renfori;.:Mui is pal Code:4-9-200I, `Minor•Adjustments.to an-Approved Site' : ': . DevelopmentPlan,"allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan,':provided ;` ' 1. The modification does not involve-more than a ten percent(1,0%)increasejn:area:. or scale of the:development-iii.the approved'site plan. _ The proposed modif cations would not result in a more than ten percent increase . in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan: ' 2. . The modification doves not have a significantly greater impact on the environment ;and-facilities than the approved plan. The pro posed modifications`would:not.have°a significantly:greater-impact-an.the.: environment and/or acilities..than the a :roved`'.ran: f PP p. l - - �3:: The'rnodfcationTdoes not char e-.the boundaixes.of,the=`ori �riah app,roved. lan... g � Y - P.. ,The: ro osed. odi tcatlons:would not.chart ethe:.boundaries'o`..the on mall .• . ' _ •• _ P P f.• f g. y r5,' a roved l i .a PP. P.. - Anal sis of Modf ti©ri-Re ,uest ' : : 1. ..Raise the �arkin level to:a more':at= rade conilxtio : R`is'n:'the a r oved su n evel a or"ci rade condition a t g ,ppr b:grade�parkig:l q,am e �g `increase :ic •e . act. . d T t at , . ' ,, s th , ampac. of thegc�rageon'.the-surYoundirig:neighborhoo o m, g e .; � ,.' this impact,:the proponent has proposed a "contextually layered"landscape and ;;;:. ;: hardscape,deszgn, Street;trees would be planted"in:,sidewa/k cut-outs:along Williams Avenue South and South'Fifth Street Planter boxeslseating.ledges , • would be located the ground plane on the'property ,secondary layer of vertical.metal"trellises;planted with.vines, would:terminate:at a band of second floor planters, which would have both hanging andvertical lantin s These planters; trellises,:,and plants would:soften the facade and'reduce•the scale to be more:compatible With the surrounding one-and iwo-stoiy'single-family. residences. • • Openings,in the parking garage facade would have.a':curved,metal_screen assembly reflective of the second floor handrails and similar to'd European-style.. iron.balstrade. ,`=Mr..Carl F.Piischer,: ,. ; December-1,2006 Page°3 of 4.. 2: Eliminate individual first floor- unit entries:-along:Will ams,;Avenue South- T7ie elimination of individual f rst oor unit entries aloe"•Williams Avenue South would be mitigated by the.provision.of a central accessflobbyat each,building..: These:controlled accesses:would result in secure.entries. .> : 3 Reduction of budding height to 52,feet`6 inches:`: Reduction of the building height from.S3 feet,7_inches to52 feel,6 incheswould • result in a slightly lower building.' The currently proposed pitched roof would be. : - more attractavethanthe flat roof with-Mansard facade that was proposed:by a • previous.mod f cation request: , = : f lding,unitsto 92 units.'4 °Re Uct n:on Reduction o the tumber o buildin units �om the-pr�eviousl -a 'proved 99'un is fJ. f�. P; Y. hP to 92 units would result. ewer' arkin �spaces'bein .=re uired Here ae`ntimlier;of parking stoI s to,, 3 rev ousl n2•i � �- ar.9� 'Units)-as•' a An aiicrease�inthe. umber o �ark-ii` .stizlls:� :"0 12 ... .. r " nit to� _. a roved b arkin�".modfcatier to:'I23:Would result in.anaim oved unit :.S'. 4^' arkin s c :r tia - a e ,a gp l? • ncr e s o`; 4 6: ..I ease.the-a ui t of o spike 1-:S1 s �. P rn Eo3nbin"tionyitli'reducin" the=�nutttbei=°o�total� inits?- icreasiri �the`amounto s: 76 s f er unit_V to`1I S14's wou d nerease the amount o open:s p aee:available per' to 5 .f P P P .12 sf;;;: 7..: Chan'g�e.the-.project name to"Smither's`Place." ' Chang'ing.the project name to Sinither s Place''isProbablY an attemPt to • ingratiate the:project into the community: This..effort-,notwithstanding, the'correct: spelling would be "Sm_ithers'-Place"after Diana.S!nit hers and Erasmus Smithers: _ . }. (not ``Smither")� In addition Williams Avenue, the location of the project, :is located two blocks east of,Smithers Avenue, which-could cause.wayf nding con usion. -We su estyou rethink this modification f gg .f ''Decision.. Tlie proposedTmodifications to the LUA00-168 site plan:are approved:subject to the foliowirig.condition:: Mr. Carl F..;Prsclier;',. December 1,2006: r: The project proponent shall submit contact prints'(equ valent'to photomechanical transfer prints) of building plans'and:elevations to:the Development Services Division�prior-to obtaining building permits. This°administrative,determination will be final unless a written appeal is--filed within.14 : days'of this decision;_in_accordance with-RMC 4-8-110, "Appeals." .Such appeal shall be . filed:with the Hearing Examiner and accompanied,by the$7, .00-fee. "Should ou'have any.guestions regarding this determination or the requirements.: . discussed'in:this."letter,please contact Eli.zabeth,Higgins,Planner, at_425-430-7382: Sincerely N. eil:Watts;.Director: - Development der ices Division' '`:. C Jennifer Rennin' _ . :Mark antos'- o `-son• 114' EL'O?Y ,'t •A S Y`4 CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 1st day of December 2006, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Minor Modification Request Response documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Carl F Pirscher Contact/Applicant Parties of Record See Attached • (Signature of Sender): ]/j STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Elizabeth Higgins signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the Lkka��ndl purposes mentioned in the instrument. •.� „ At.tt Dated: to-i-Otp �c ` VV., Notary Public in a�anti for the State o �it gton_ y Notary (Print): IA wkb�-- L v`v\ -�o -i�a.r 4r,�'i�S �g�� ��= My appointment expires: 3-kg.-t p /i9'p' ; Il\m Project Name:,`. Fifth and Williams Apartments Project Number: LUA00-168, SA-A, LLA, ECF • John and Donna See Mike Hilderman Jude Waller 438 Burnett Ave S 504 Burnett Ave s 411 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 Renton WA 98057 Renton WA 98057 Ben and Kimberli Wilson Eric S Wagner Mr.&Mrs. Rick Stone 424 Williams Ave S Sherman Homes 411 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 2100— 124th Ave NE, Suite 100 Renton WA 98057 Bellevue WA 98005 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Moran Ms. Barbara Horton 425 Wells Avenue S 20613 SE 291st P1 Renton WA 98057 Kent WA 98042 Mr. Gary Klatt Mr. and Mrs. Bert Olson 411 Williams Ave S 430 Burnett Ave S Renton WA 98057 Renton WA 98057 Ms. Katie Gilligan Ms. Louise Vittitow 434 Burnett Ave S 532 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 Renton WA 98057 Mr. Ted Niemi Von Martin 1917 Shattuck Avenue S 4303 Pacific Hwy E#3 Renton WA 98057 Tacoma WA 98424 Duryah Mohamath Mr&Mrs Gary Downs 426 Burnett Ave S 407 Williams Ave S Renton WA 98057 Renton WA 98057 k tip.'o4 - ` ,-- ' CIT= ' OF RENTON, +. Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department , Kathy Keolker,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman:P:E.,Administrator. December 1, 2006 ' Mr. Carl F. Pirscher,AIA, Principal CDA+Pirscher Architects P.O.Box 55429' Seattle Washington 98155 ' Re Fifth and Williams Apartments; LUA0,0 168 - - Minor Modification Request Response- : Dear Mr. Pirscher We have.received your letter dated November.•13,.2006, clarifying requested=minor ' , . ' Modifications_ of the previously approved':(,0.1/29/01) site plan of.the:above-referenced project. The requested modifications are summarized ' `..Request - — . 1. Parking level: The initial:plan'had:the,parking level-:of.the building-,below grade. The requested modification raisestheparking,"level to a more at;gradecondition. 2 First floor access:,Raising the parking garage to grade requires'corresponding ` revisions-to the first.floor plan, most notably elimination of individual-unit entries • directly from the°sidewalk located along'Williams Avenue:South'..., - 3.. Building height: ;Reduction of floor plate height by 12 inches for:each floor and elimination of loft,unitsmould result in an average base elevation'of,52 feet 6 inches. The approved-height is 53 feet 7 inches. 4:'`Number of units:. The.•.number of total units'has been reduced'from".99(approved: •- - by modification 10/15/02) to 92 (building permit for 92 units and':123'parking - ,. • stalls'approved02/10/05): - ` = , 5. ,Number of parking stalls: The number of parking stalls, approvedat:121 4 less • than required by code):.bymodific ation on 10/'15/,02,would'be.increased' to123. ' 6, Open space: The aniotint of open space on:the site would be inc_reased from the approved amount of:7,497 sfto.;l`1,51`4.sf. 7: Project name: The t roject name would be,changed from Sherman - .- Apartments"and"Si and Williams,Apartments"to-"Smitlier's Place," -. - 1055 South Grady`:way.-Renton_,-Washington 98055 : ;..R:•E N" T 0'1V - : .AHEAD OF THE CURVE:- , a..* This paper contains50%recycled material,30%Post consumer '. - • Nri-:Cad'F.Pirscher; 0 Deceriiber 1,2 06 Ra ge Site Plan Modification.Criteria RentonMunicipal Code'.4-9-2.00I;.."Minor Adjustments.to an Approved Site : DevelopinentPlan,"allows minor adjustments to an':approved siteplan,;;provid'ed '.'" • 1. The modification does not involve morethan a ten percent(10%o),increas'e in area • "` or scale of tle.development in the approvedstte`plan. • The pro osedmodifications would not resultin a more_than.ten; ;ercent increase in area or scale of the development in the'approved site plan. The modification does;not have a significantly-greater impact.on the'environment • ;and facilities than the approved plan. The e ro posed modi leations would not.have a si ni icantl y - reater:impact on the P P .f .g-,..� Y�g P.. environment and/Or rf acilitiesthan theca "roved.^: an: 3 : The modification-does:.notz chart e:.the boundaries-of the;:oi i all -a proved "tan. ll Tlie ro osed mbdi�icationsiitiould.°nottehan -e:thJe.boundaries o':,the�ori : na P P .f g f g. Y' • r a• Poved - R P Anal`.sis'of Modification:Re uest ' 1.. .-:Raise the parkinete#ertO:a`•more-at:- rade'conditio# Raising the a roved`'sub rade P arkin level:toamore at- rode'condition - - ,--- -- g P.P. :. �'.,..... .g ." P g.�•---.:- - � --- increases the impact.of the garage on the,!,S ouitdilugneighborhood.,To;mitigate :': this impact, theproponent has proposed a.`contextually layered".landscape and ;'• • ::;; :: Irardscape deli n,>;Street trees would be :lanted:insidewalk:cut-Outs=:along g P Williams Avenue South.and South_Fifth,Street Planter boxes/seating;ledges would belocated'at.the ground plane on the j#operty:.A secondarydayer. of 'vertical metal trellises, sPlanted with vines,,.would.terminate'at-a.band: .f,o(second floor planters, which Would have both hanging and vertical plantings: These . • planters, trellises,;andplants would soften the facade and reduce:the scale to be ' . ,:more compatible with the surrounding one=,arid:two-story single fam ly." - ' ".residences:.. ,", Openings:intheparkinggarc e fa ade would.haeaurvedmealscreen _ •. assembly rejleetiVeOfthe second floor"handrails"ai d:similar:to:"a'European-style. iron balustrade.' - , -Mr:;Carl F.Pirscher; Decemb'er,1,,2006 : ; - Page.3_of.4 , 2. Eliminate individual first floor unit entries.along.Williams Avenue'South. :.� :: • The elimination of individual:f rst floor Unit entries.,along Williams-Avenue South would be mitigated'by the,provision of a.central.access lobby at each.building. . <: These_controlled accesses`would result inisecureentries. - "" :3.','Reduction of`building-height to"52 feet 6 inches:: ., _ Reduction ofld the luiin liei t rom'S3. eet 7 ruches to'S2 .eet'.6 inches;would e- 'height f _ . result in a slightly lower building The currently proposed'pitched roof would:be'. more attractive;than the flat roof withMansard facade that was proposed.by a ' , 'p.Yeviousmod fca•tion request: . .:-'4:''`Reduction of number of buildingf.anits:,to`92 units:' 'Reduction of the number:Of:building units from•the:p_ reviouslyyapproved.9,9'.units - ,�:: : 'to 92'. . . . . . , .:, ^ iswould result fewer:parking spaces,being required,.`: . - ;; = fir - - • - , . 5.�..;�Inerease".number>'of: arkin stalls to 123�' ',,,..<`A.':, An=increase•in.:the;number;,o.parkin stalls;= rom=<121 or 99 units as; reviousl °,approved by.parkingmodifi Cat ron,;to 123:`would:result'in anm.r proved,unit to . parking space ratio: : ':6. '-Increase the°am`.u'nt`'f Open p to 1'1�514 s ':-; ; , , _ Q 4 P space .. �.. � , • :- n-combination-with,reducing the number'o totalin ts; increasing the'-amount of . ' - ; open.space from 7;497'sf.(76 sf per unit)to 1:1 511 s,f would,increase'the.amount' iii : ':,`-• .... • of open space-available,per unit:to 125 sf ' :1;�; Change the-project,name'to"Smither's Place" ' ': .Clanging the project name to "Smithey s Place."is probably an attempt to=, , ,, : <' • :ingrat ate the'project into the communi' ,.Tl ise .ort..notwithstandin , the'cor'rect t1' ff g ' ,,..S15spellingwould:.be "Sin-ithers'Place";after�Diana,?Smithers and l✓ras_mus�Smithers ,. :t '-. ' not_"Smitlier'),..In addition;.Williams.Avenue:'the:location. the � ro ect, rs ' - � � of P .J. . located'two blocks east of Smither's Avenue, :which"could cause wayfinding'.: ..: confusion: We suggest.you rethink this.modification Decision Th'e ''o .os�d rriodificatons to.�Y e.LUA00 168' site lan e a roved s. liect..to li p. .,p h p ar pp u. � t e,;. .fol ow - ' - _c� d't'o 1 rt+ n � n:t � g. _ S' Mr. CarlwF:Pirscher„ : December l;20.0'6 Page 4 of 4 :1.^ The project,propo ient'shall submit contact'pr nts..(equivalent to:photomechanical transfer,prints) of building"plans and:elevations:to:theDevelopment Services Divisiori:prior to obtaining building permits: This administrative,deterrnination,will.be final unless a wntten appeal is filed within 14 days of this decision,'in accordance with.RMC 4-8`-'1;10, "Appeals." Such appeal`shallbe filed-.with the Hearing'Examiner and accompanied;by the$75,00 fee:. have any questions regarding this determination or;the requirements.: discussed in thus letter,please contact Elizabeth.Higgins,.Planner, at 425-430-7382:. Sincerely Neil Watts, Director • Development Services Division" • Cc: ;:Jeinifer:Henning;': _ Mark Santos-Jolihson - - -- a. ;:, PIR CHER CDA , ARCH I TECTS A R CHI TECT S I NTERIORS PLANNERS November 13, 2006 City of Renton—Planning/Building/Public Works Department ATTN: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP—Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA00-168, SA-A, ECF, AAD; Re-named 5th & Williams; Further Re-named SMITHER'S PLACE APARTMENTS(current). CDA# 6038 SUBJECT:Modification Request Dear Elizabeth: I believe following our last conversation that we were both heading off to our respective well deserved vacations. I am now back and my office has completed the documentation for the Smither's Place (previously referred to as 5th &Williams) resubmittal. This letter is intended to serve as a formal Request for Minor Modification Approval to the previously approved project plans and also as a response to your letter of October 6,2006. As noted in your letter of Oct. 6,this request for Modification approval is subsequent to an earlier approved modification to the original approved plan submittal. This request for Minor Modification Approval concerns the elevation of the largely subterranean parking garage to a more at-grade condition and the minor first floor plan changes needed to accommodate this revision. Prior to explaining the reasons that drove this request for Modification I want to thank you for your insights and design comments in the letter of Oct. 6`s. Your suggestions helped us shape the resulting proposal in a very positive and aesthetically pleasing fashion. The project as originally conceived was to develop 86 units of market rate housing in a two building concept located entirely over a single plate or podium of underground shared parking. That concept was modified in 2002(and approval was granted)to increase the unit count to approximately 98 units of market rate housing (this also included the approval of a parking modification) with the footprints of the two buildings slightly expanding in size (the parking garage was largely unchanged) and with the addition of loft units on the top floor of both buildings.Unfortunately, neither of these concepts was determined to be economically viable and remain so to this day. In early 2004 recognizing that a distinct need for means-tested affordable housing existed in the Center Downtown zone, Mr. William Sherman teamed up with D.A.S.H. and Mr. Mark Thometz to evaluate the possibility of developing an affordable housing project for this site. The concept has been enthusiastically support by the City of Renton as well as other agencies with an interest in affordable housing opportunities. As you know a great deal of time and effort has been spent by a large number of individuals in trying to bring this affordable housing project to fruition. The project reflected in the attached documents has been altered to respond to the programmatic as well as budgetary changes necessitated by the change from a market rate,general tenant apartment project to an affordable housing project. F:\JOBS\6038 5th and Williams Phase III\wp\LE'C'CER to Elizabeth Higgins on modiiication.dac Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19500 Ballinger Way NE Suite 200 PO BOX 55429 Shoreline, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 One of the prime considerations in evaluating the distinct change in tenancy from the previous applications independent, middle income (and generally young) occupants to one of lower income, affordable housing occupants was the issue of building access and access control.The prior approved application allowed great freedom of access to the units including the direct access from the street to many of the lower floor units. The plans submitted in support of this Request for Minor Modification reflect a more restricted building access system that we feel is an important element for this type of occupancy. We have accomplished this by raising the basement parking garage to a first story condition and thereby eliminating the direct access unit stairways. In addition,we have provided a defined and restricted lobby/reception access point that will further enhance security for the tenants. Raising the basement garage to a first story condition also had the added benefit of significantly reducing the project costs thereby enhancing the projects feasibility. The project proposed by this minor modification is a 92 unit affordable housing project that contains 123 parking stalls. Your comments regarding the façade treatment along the building frontages as a result of our proposed modifications were very constructive. As I noted above one of the prime reasons for proposing these modifications was the desire to achieve an enhanced feeling of security for the residents. Our goal was not only to provide a more secure environment for the tenants but also enhance the pedestrian experience at the ground plane. In order to achieve this we have established a landscape and hardscape design that is contextually layered. It starts at the ground plane by the introduction of planter boxes/seating ledges, extends to a secondary layer of vertical metal trellises that will feature vine plantings, and terminate at a band of second floor planters that will have both hanging and vertical plantings. This layered system of plantings will be further augmented by the street trees as originally proposed.The first residential level will have the planting boxes and larger plaza areas than originally proposed however they will be more available for general resident use and enjoyment than the prior proposal. Please note that the open space allocation has increased from 7,497 SF in the approved plan set to 11,514 SF in the attached plans. This is primarily due to the elimination of the long ramp to the basement parking level in the previous application. We noted your concern regarding the security screen at the garage openings and have developed a curved metal screen assembly that will reflect the handrail system at the second floor. This is detailed on drawing A-1.3, detail 7 and is intended to portray a more European style balustrade for a softer more flowing appearance. In your letter of Oct. 6th there seems to be some confusion as to the allowable building heights for the project. In the permitted set of plans dated 12/04/04 the maximum height of the building above the average base elevation was 53'-7" to the topmost ridge elevation. In the attached plans submitted for our modification request the maximum building height(top of highest ridge) above the average base elevation is 52'-6". We accomplished this by reducing the plate height by 12" on all stories above grade and, as I noted earlier, eliminating the lofts on the top floor. Lastly we have evaluated the "slot" between the two buildings as discussed in your letter. The space allocated to the plaza created by the proposed separation of buildings has not changed from our present proposal to that shown in the approved plans with the exception of its lengthening.The plaza created by the separation of the two buildings is almost 90' long in our proposed modification as opposed to 49' in the approved plans. It should also be noted that the width of the majority of the plaza is 19' and only a small portion at the mid point is at 11' in width. I hope this response assists you in your evaluation of this request for approval of a Minor Modification to the project. In order to expedite our design and engineering process we have retained almost all of the building placement,massing,materials and character of the approved building concept.The changes F:1.1O13S\6033 5th and Williams Phase ill wp1L,F:'1"Tlilt to 1?lizabeth lhggins on modification.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19500 Ballinger Way NE Suite 200 PO BOX 55429 Shoreline, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 proposed are relatively minor but will result in significant cost savings and a programmatically superior project for the intended residents.Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, CDA +PIRSCHER ARCHITECTS,INC. Carl F.Pirscher A.I.A. President enclosure cc Eric Wagner,Bill Sherman,Mark Thometz F:\JOI3S\6038 5th and Williams Phase III\wp\L EIl'ER to Elizabeth Higgins on modilication.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19500 Ballinger Way NE Suite 200 • PO BOX 55429 Shoreline, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 • • iPIF CHER CDA ARCHITECTS A R CHI TECTS I N T E R I O R S , PLANNERS November 13, 2006— City of Renton—Planning/Building/Public Works Department ATTN: Elizabeth Higgins,AICP—Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA00-168, SA-A, ECF, AAD; Re-named 5th & Williams; Further Re-named SMITHER'S PLACE APARTMENTS(current). CDA# 6038 SUBJECT:Modification Request Dear Elizabeth: This is a response to your letter of October 2, 2006 in reference to your initial'comments and requested items to our request for minor modifications to an approved site plan. Site plan- The revised garage plan along with site data for parking requirements can be seen on sheet A-2.1. The updated floor plans can be seen on sheets A-2.2-2.3 and unit type data can be seen on sheet A-2.1. Landscaping- Please refer to sheets Ll and L2 for revised landscape plans. Refuse/Recycle- The required refuse/recycle area standards of RMC 4-4090 have been met. Please refer to sheet A-2.1 for refuse/recycle requirement data. • The screening fence has been revised and dimensioned to be 6'high and 12' wide. Please refer to sheets A-5.1-5.2. • A recycle room has been located on the east side of the parking garage below the steps that lead to the plaza above. This recycle room is above the required square footage needed to service the building. Recycle requirement data can be seen on sheet A-2.1. • The two screened dumpsters near the parking garage entryway along with 2 trash compactors within the parking garage have been provided and are above the required square footage for refuse • requirements. Please refer to sheet A-2.1 for refuse requirement data. Sincerely, CDA+PIRSCHER ARCHITECTS,INC. Michael DeMarco Intern Architect ii:\.JOI3S160 38 5th and Williams Phase(II'nvp\f...l:'t"E'l.iR to Elizabeth I-figgens on modification pt2.doc Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19500 Ballinger Way NE Suite 200 PO BOX 55429 Shoreline, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 4 CDA+PIRSCHER P I R S,C H E R ARCHITECTS w, , ' ,... .'_".""' P.O.BOX55429 19500 BALLINGER WAY NE CDASTE 200 .' ARCHITECTS SEATTLE, WA98155, LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL November 14, 2006 �i �i a% r 06/1®A, Elizabeth Higgins (4/Vp • Senior Planner, City of Renton NOV j 1055 Grady Way J ,:qii Renton,WA 98055 elkOmiea, vraiON Project: Smithers' Place (5th&Williams Apartments) CDA#: 6038 Dear Elizabeth: WE ARE SENDING YOU THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: • Shop Drawings Prints x Plans Specifications Copy of Letter' Change Order Samples Computer Disks Qty. Date Description 3sets 11/14/06 permit resubmittal w/design modifications, sheets: A-0.1,0.2,1.1,1.3,1.4,2.1,2.2,2.3,5.1,5.2,L-1,L-2,survey 1 Storm drainage analysis (TIR) 1 ea Response letters from architect for letters dated Oct 2 and Oct 6, 2006 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED (as checked below) As requested For approval Approved as is Approved as noted For your use x For review Resubmit REMARKS: Attached is a permit resubmittal package for the above referenced project. If you have any questions, please call. CDA ARC TEGTS,INC. // / Michael De arco Intern Architect FF:\JOBS\60 8 sal and Williams Phase III\wpV Trans to Elizabeth I liggius(I I I4I06).doe 01::07, CITA 3F RENTON Planning/Bwilding/PublieWorks Department ' Kathy Keolker;Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P,E:,:Administrator Airy October 6, 2006 G� /u•./i,/0 � Mr. CartF. Pirscher,•AIA CDA=Pirscher Architects, Inc.19500 Ballinger Way NE, Suite 200 P.O. Box 55429 Shoreline WA 98155 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA00=168, SA-A, ECF,AAD. Modification Request Dear Mr. Pirscher This letter is sent:regarding your request for a Minor Modification of the above- referenced project as delineated in your letter to the City of Renton dated September14, 2006. As you are aware, this project was originally approved in 2001. In"April;and October of 2002,modifications of the approved:plan were requested by the project - .proponent. The recently requested-minor-modifications should remain largely consistent with the original site plan as approved, the previously modifiedmodified site plan, and the development standards were in place.for-the Center Downtown zone at the time the project was vested;including-the Urbar Center Design Overlay District Guidelines. Because your current request is for modifications of both the original,plan and the plan as', Modified,.this letter is sent to ensure that the City understands exactly what=the proposed structure would look like with these cumulative modifications. Based on that understanding, are providing herein some suggestions that we hope you will consider incorporating into•the.current plan. Summary of Minor Modifications Requested • You have asked to raise the sub-grade parking;component to an at-grade condition. • Instead of the entire parking area being primarily below grade, one half of the parking area will be 1 foot to 2.5 feet below grade,the remainder would be at grade. You have stated that the overall building height will,not increase above the approved height by making upper-story design changes including reducing the floor-to-floor heights of each floor by 12 inches and eliminating the lofts from the top story. .. In order to reduce the apparent height of the building you are,proposing lowering the • planter boxes along the street frontages that were above the parking garage SO,be flush with the parking garage lid and adding.additional at-grade planter:boxes at the'sidewalk plane: 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 . .N T ® N 60® 4HAD E OF THE CURVE .This paper contains 50%o recycled material,30%post consumer - ' Mr. Carl F.Pirscher,A - October 6,2006 • • : • - Page 2 of 3 . • '. Comments on Minor Modifications: • ;Raising the,Garage,to an Above Grade Condition • The elimination.of the underground garage has a significant effect on the.Williams . '[1.'Avenue South facade and the [previously]`.`ground floor"units: ;The.facade of the :-.approved plan is directly connected to the street by individual entries:to:ground floor ;units. The requested modification, in essence,replaces the ground-floor units.with"the . ':. parking garage. Inplace:of the ten connections to:the sidewalk the length of the project • along Williams Avenue S, there would be one building entry for each'building and a , stairway to the space between the two.buildings: The:2001 site plan,with significant.' ,articulation provided by the stairs/entries,/and planting areas at individual units along. ';the:facade had the effect of row.houses:: The requested modification would result in:a flat.,, . ,;facade-with ventilation openings abuttingthe sidewalk. Also, the building setback from the-property line has beenessentially eliminated:.Raised planters at courtyard level, which created semi-private spaces:attindividual unit'entries,would be lowered to be flush • , • with floor_ elevation.:. This situation would not be improved the:vertical bars at the:;ventilation:openings or ;the vertical bars on the,fences at,the:top of the garage.wall This;facade"should:have a ;more pedestrian-friendly treatment'such .S trellis,structures from sidewalk,planters to top . ;of wall with vines planted thereon,;grillwork at garage ventilation openings,"ornamental :fencing, decorative,lighting, and'benches' On the west side.of the;project,-the:floo"r-`level of first-floor:units,would:b.e 10 feet above` :the alley, compared:to 4fept ort the approved plan. The rampwhich-previously provided- a break between the twobuildirigs,would be replacedby:a.garage door,'thereby having a, "single facade the length:of the.building:,,The:vertical bars on>the ventilation openings of .the garage and the single color, Single Surface material'should be reconsidered given the , proximity of single-family residential..properties,on the opposite side of the alley. -:No elevations of the.north and south facades are shown in the modification request , ' ;drawings. From the plan, it appears the parking level facade is.without modulation or articulation on the north and.south. The design of the facade fronting.S 5t1'St Should • acknowledge pedestrian use of the sidewalk. • ' .' Building Height , -,: .The.hei t of the buildingwhen approved in 2001 was an of 50;.feet Hearin � ... pP average (Hearing g Examiner Report and:Decision of May 8, 2001). The 2002 modification the - building height by 5 feet;6.'inches(CDA letter April 30, 2002, approved;May 17, 2001). • 'The•current plans,however;indicate a building height of more th0:52 feet overall and 54.5 feet above the grade at S 5th St. In order to avoid changing the;overall building . • Mr:Carl F.Pirscher,AIti` October 6,2006..; ., • Wage 3 of 3 height,_as you intend,;it appears that the height of the building must be reduced by almost 10 feet: Please.clarify your intention in this'regard: Other Design Issues': • The 2002 modifications increased the total"'Umber:of units.from 86 (.approved:2001)to 99. The floor plans,you have been asked to provide(City:of Renton October 2,2006 ; • letter)should demonstrate that there are no more.than,99 units currently planned, and the • - required parking(as:approved with the 2002 Parking Modification)would be:provided With-the current:plan if;modified. The 2002 modifications,:m order to accomrnodateradditiorial units,`increased the overall size of the two buildings.,bymoving the buildings closer together at the,center courtyard: ; The two buildings are only•1-1:feet at their closest pointcreating;a canyon effect. The.".grand"staircase,you:have r:"ecently.proposed would be-more effective_if the center courtyard was wider,similar;to the.plan approved1in 2001 ..The open space at the south,. !over the parking garage,wouidbe more effective i f'the•spacewas consolidated with the central courtyard.:.This;wou`ld;increase the amount`of;natural,light in the space and. • improve the proportions of the courtyard. ,Therefore,'please considef shifting the.building ;: , at least 8 feet to the south over:the parking;level; ;;.< .. :ch • As an advisory note; I::will:be out:of"the-°off ce=fro rfOctober.I9t through November 3ra If you.would like to..discuss these comments my telephone number:is 425;430-7382. : : Sincerely :. Elizabeth Higgins,AICP ' Senior Planner - ti�Y p CITY. •)F RENTON ♦ .; +. , • PlanningBuilding/PublicWorks Department :Kathy Keolker,Mayor • Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator NtTO • October 2,2006 Mr.Carl F.Pirscher,AIA CDA=Pirscher Architects,'Inc.19500 Ballinger Way NE, Suite 200 P.O. Box 55429 Shoreline WA:98155 Re: Dean Sherman Apartments,LUA00-168,SA-A,ECF,AAD Modification Request • Dear Mr.-Pirscher At your request,the City of Renton is reviewing your request for Minor Modifications to an Approved Site.Plan(Dean Sherman Apartments, LUA00-168, SA-A,ECF,AAD). Initially;we have the following comments: • Site Plan o .Submit a plan of the parking level: • • o, Provide site data demonstrating:parking requirements would be met. o• Provide floor plans and total of each unit type(i.e.studio/one bedroom,2- bedroom). ■- Landscaping o, -Please submit a revised.landscape plan in accordance with Renton Municipal • Code 4-4.-070, "Landscaping,"*and.RMC 4-8-120,"Submittal Requirements:" - ■ Refuse/Recycle o The refuse/recycle area must'meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-090, "Refuse and.Recyclables Standards. o There is to be one deposit area/collect'ion:point for every 30 dwelling units. o The screening fence(although not.dimensioned on the elevation) seems,by scale measurement,to be less than the 6 foot minimum required height. o The gate width(10 feet)appears to be narrower than required(12 feet). o ' Verify that two dumpsters:at-.4'',x 6' x 4' ht will be adequate to service the . building. The requirement is 1:5 sf per dwelling unit(minimum). The review.of your requested modification will•conti'nue,but the above-requested items'should be submitted as soon as,possible to my attention. Thank you. If you have questions;you may reach me at 425-430-7382. Sincerely. ; . Elizabeth Higgins;AICP Senior Planner, . . Cc: Parties,of Record 1055 South Grady Way-Renton;Washington 98055 - RENTON • AHEAD OF THE CURVE This oaoercontains 50%recycled material.30"/cost ednsumer - PIRSCHER CDA Irj' ARCH I TECTS ARCHITECTS INTERIORS PLANNERS September 14, 2006 City of Renton,Planning,Building,Public Works ATTN: Jennifer Henning, Senior Planner Renton City Hall,Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 PROJECT: 5"'and Williams Senior Apartments CDA# 6038 SUBJECT: Request for Approval of Minor Modifications to the 5th&Williams Apaitnients (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A,LLA) Dear Jennifer: As the Architect of record for the above referenced project I have been asked by the applicant (5th & Williams L.L.C.) to prepare a Request for Approval for Minor Modifications to the 5th&Williams Senior Apartment project. Due to technical site issues and cost constraints outside of the applicants control the feasibility of constructing this project as previously approved is unachievable. Significant time, energy and resources have been invested in this project to date by a great many people, including you, and the applicant desires to commence the construction of this important project almost immediately. We are requesting that the City approve as a Minor Modification the raising of the sub-grade parking component of the overall structure to an at-grade condition (approximately '/z of the parking structure perimeter is still 1'-0" to 2'-6" below grade). This change is more easily understood by reviewing the attached proposed elevations and site plans. It should be noted that the overall building heights will not change.This is accomplished by reducing the floor-to-floor heights by 12"at each floor and eliminating the loft floor from the top story. In an effort to further reduce the apparent height of the building we have also lowered the planter boxes along the street frontages that were above the parking garage lid to be flush with the parking garage lid and added additional at-grade planter boxes at the sidewalk plane. Please also note that we have strengthened the connection of the building to the public way by incorporating a more defined pedestrian entry/reception area (an element that the approved plans did not incorporate) and a plaza accessed by a "grand" staircase (again, a new element). I hope when you review the plans that you will call me directly if you have any questions or concerns. F:1.1013S1603 8 5th and Williams Phase lIP..tvpll..l::'Cl'11;l requesting,plan revisions.doe Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19500 Ballinger Way NE Suite 200 PO BOX 55429 Shoreline, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 Sincerely, CDA PIRSCHER ARCHITECTS,INC. Carl F.Pirscher .I.A. President enclosure cc Bill Sherman,Mark Tometz,Eric Wagner F:U(13S\6033 5th and Williams Phase lI1\wp\LE'l'I'ER requesting plan revisions.doe Carl F.Pirscher,AIA principal 19500 Ballinger Way NE Suite 200 PO BOX 55429 Shoreline, Washington 98155 Tel: (206)-368-9668 Fax:(206)-368-9558 r , 0 , ti O . - • CIT' OF 'RENTON his =:o°: ; •:= • • ♦ # : • Plann-ing/Building/PublicWorks.Department " Kathy.Keolker,Mayor • Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator. No March 15,.2006. William A.Sherman,Jr. . - - Mark El Thometz " Sherman Development, LLC - . ,• . 2100 124`1;Avenue NE; Suite 100 , • • Bellevue,WA 58004-4502. •• SUBJECT: :- .FIFTH&WILLIAMS APARTMENTS BUILDING PERMIT 03040523) . . . Dear Mr. Sherman and Mr.Thometz, • The City'of Renton has received your requestfor a six-month extension:to your building permit _ . •B040523. The Building Official has approved an extension to the building:permit. -The new • permit expiration date is October.144 200.¢: - • , • . Please contact Larry:Meckling,.Building Official,at(425).430-7280 if you havefurther questions • . • regarding this:extension. ' _ Sincerely, . Jennifer Toth-:Henning;.A.ICP ' Principal Planner - • " cc: Neil Watts,,:Development Services Director... Lar:ry'Meckf ng,.Building Official • . • Alex?ietsoh;.ED/N/SP,Administrator :Ben Wolters;�l;cpnomia;DevelopmentDirector : . Eric Wagner,Sherman.Development,LLC . Mark R Gropper,-Renton Housing Authority - " • . • ,,_i;: 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,.Wash hgton 98055. . . � E 1V.,r;I O. N p , �c1.1L4 . - ., AI-tEAD;'.OF THE•CURVE rc li4l.."rz)::,, • . ,ThlsoaDercnntalns5O%recycled meterial:30%nnet cnnsumer. a, <<:':.:........ s .r` Fifth and Williams Housing Associates, LLC 11018 NE 11th Street Bellevue,WA 98004-4502 425-646-9053 Main 425-646-5981 Fax February 23,2006 City of Renton,Planning,Building,Public Works Attn: Neil R. Watts, Director Development Services Division Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for a Six-Month-Extension to the Existing Building Permit ft 1303 Fifth and Williams Apartments A1: 41$& 417 Williams Ave S Dear Neil: • As the City of Renton is aware our-project has recently received the necessary financing tax credits from the Sate and County. We arc currently finning up our bidding of the project and expect to break ground in May or June. Ourcurrent building permit expires on March 20,2006 and we need the extension to facilitate us in finalizing all of our pre-construction activities, Shertuan Development along with DASH (Downtown Action to Save Housing)is looking forward commencing construction on our long awaited project. • The sixth month extension will allow the permit to be extended to September 20,2006. We appreciate your consideration in our request to iss the a(tetitsion. • Vet truly c -~� t tin.A. Shcrrnan,Jr. Manager, Fifth and Williams Housing Associates, I,I.0 <74417/1/ Mark l?, Themetz ./ Member, Fifth and Williams,gousnig Associates, i.LC Cc: Ben Wolters, Alex Piet ch, Mark R. Gropper,Eric S. Wagner ..'�••a=.$,..a"L'ui��,.. _._. 4ri6 :s _-:._ .'Mr`��.i}. :"`��� ..___ _._. f ..`*.5 . Affsf•h, 114 . 01 • CITA_ F RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Greggimmerman P.E. Administrator Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor gg July 26, 2005 Fifth & Williams Housing.Assoc. LLC: 11018 1.1th St Bellevue, WA 98004 Subject: Building.Permit Expiration Date for Fifth & Williams Apartments 415 Williams Avenue S. #B040523 This letter is sent as a courtesy to notify you of the final expiration date for the above-referenced building permit;.application: ' A building permit for the development,of,a 92-unit apartment complex with:-123 . , parking stalls has beenapproved by the City, but not yet>issued. The permit,, will expire on=September2'0,2005, unless the required;permit.fees are paid and the permit;is obtained on'or'priorto this date:,:See attached . .. , permit chronology for further details On,previous permit extensions No further permit extensions are possible after.`this'-date: If the'building permit,does.expire, new land-use:and-building permit application'packages;'and additional fee payment would be required;in order to develop the site.-Additionally,the*project would'need to be developed under the zoning and development regulations now in.effect. . , Please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7294 if you any questions regarding what is needed in order to obtain your permit prior to its expiration. , `Sincerely, Laureen Nicolay Senior Planner • • cc: Jennifer Henning, Principal.Planner. Ben Wolters,-EDNSP Director William A. Sherman Jr., Sherman Homes 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 • R E N T O N �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE :., This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer • eb 111) 5th and Williams (Dean Sherman) Apartment Project Permit Chronology: 01/29/01 - Administrative approval of site plan for 86 units and 113 parking stalls subject to recording of a lot line adjustment prior to permit issuance. 01/20/01 - Several appeals of the project approval filed. 05/08/01 - Hearing Examiner denies appeals and upholds original approval. 05/22/01 - No appeals of the 05/08/01 Examiner decision were filed 04/30/02 - Applicant requested 5 modifications to original approved site plan 05/17/02 -Administrator approves 3 of the 5 requested modifications relating to roof height, landscaping, and building finishes. 07/11/02 -Applicant requests additional modifications to approved site plan to allow 101 units and 131 parking stalls. • The file contains no response to this request. 10/07/02 - Applicant submits a revised modification request to approved site plan to allow 99 units and 121 parking stalls. 10/15/02 - City approves a parking code modification to allow 121 stalls (4 less than code requires) and also approves the 10/07/02 site plan modification request to allow 99 units and 121 parking stalls. 10/29/02 - No appeals were filed regarding either modification approval. 11/12/02 -Applicant requests extension to 01-29-03 site plan approval expiration date. 11/21/02 - Administrator approves extension request granting maximum permissible Site Plan Approval time to 01/29/2005. 09/21/04 -Applicant submits building permit application B040523. 01/29/05 - Expiration date of final Site Plan Approval extension. This is not a problem provided building permit#B040523 remains active and valid. 02/10/05 - City approves building permit for 92 units and 123 parking stalls and notifies applicant that the permit is ready to be issued upon fee payment. 03/03/05 - Building Section extends building permit for the maximum allowable period of validity to September 20, 2005. This extends the permits validity beyond the standard 3/21/05 expiration date. 03/21/05 - Original building permit expiration date (extended). 07/29/05 -Applicant has not picked up permit as of 7-29-05. 09/20/05 - Date building permit is due to expire if permit not issued on or before this date. No additional extensions are permissible under the City code. The underlying site plan approval will also need to be redone if the building permit does expire. • PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: July 29, 2005 TO: File #LUA00-168, File #B040523 FROM: Laureen Nicolay for Susan Fiala SUBJECT: Administrative Site Plan Modification 5th and Williams Apartment project During the building permit review process during.early 2005, an administrative site plan modification was approved by Project Manager Susan Fiala. This approval allowed another modification to the revised site approval approved under file number LUA00-168. The final approved plan resulted in a reduction in the number of dwelling units (99 to 92) and an increase in the number of parking stalls (121 to 123) over the last modification approved by the City. All other conditions of the original approval and modifications still apply. 5th and Williams (Dean Sherman) Apartment Project Chronology: 01/29/01 -Administrative approval of site plan for 86 units and 113 parking stalls subject to recording of a lot line adjustment prior to permit issuance. 01/20/01 - Several appeals of the project approval filed. 05/08/01 - Hearing Examiner denies appeals and upholds original approval. 05/22/01 - No appeals of the 05/08/01 Examiner decision were filed 04/30/02 -Applicant requested 5 modifications to original approved site plan 05/17/02 -Administrator approves 3 of the 5 requested modifications relating to roof height, landscaping, and building finishes. 07/11/02 -Applicant requests additional modifications to approved site plan to allow 101 units and 131 parking stalls. • The file contains no response to this request. 10/07/02 -Applicant submits a revised modification request to approved site plan to allow 99 units and 121 parking stalls. 10/15/02 - City approves a parking code modification to allow 121 stalls (4 less than code requires) and also approves the 10/07/02 site plan modification request to allow 99 units and 121 parking stalls. 10/29/02 - No appeals were filed regarding either modification approval. . 11/12/02 -Applicant requests extension to 01-29-03 site plan approval expiration date. 11/21/02 -Administrator approves extension request granting maximum permissible time to 01/29/2005. 09/21/04 -Applicant submits building permit application B040523. 01/29/05 - Expiration date of final Site Plan Approval extension. This is not a problem provided building permit#B040523 remains active and valid. 02/10/05 - City approves building permit for 92 units and 123 parking stalls and notifies applicant that the permit is ready to be issued upon fee payment. P _ 03/03/05 - Building Section extends building permit for the maximum allowable period of validity to September 20, 2005. This extends the permits validity beyond the standard 3/21/05 expiration date. 03/21/05 - Original building permit expiration date (extended). 07/29/05 -Applicant has not yet picked up permit as of 7-29-05. 09/20/05 - Date building permit is due to expire if permit not issued on or before this date. No additional extensions are permissible under the City code. The underlying site plan approval will also need to be redone if the building permit does expire. 6 RENTON . riiaik. Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department , Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E., dipinistrator December 8, 2004 • William A. Sherman,Manager 'EC 8 2604 Mark E.Thometz,Member • Firth and Williams Housing Associates,LLC 11018 NE 11th Street Bellevue,WA 98094-4562 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL • (FILE NO:LUA 00-168, SA-S,LLA,ECF) Dear Mr. Sherman and Mr.Thometz: Thank you for your letter of November 3,2004,wherein you request an extension to the Site • 'Plan Review approval for the above-referenced land use file. The Site Plan Approval issued on January 29, 2001,was effective.through January 29, 2003. Subsequently, a two-year extension was requested and granted on November21,2002; extending the site plan approval to January 29, • 2005,subject to conditions. This letter siipercedes the previous correspondence;arid acknowledges changing cOnditiOns applicable to the proposal. As I understand it, Sherman Development and the Downtown Action to Save Housing(DASH) formed a new Limited Liability Corporation(LLC),Fifth and Williams Housing Associates, LLC. Application for a Building Permit was filed witfrthe City on September 21,2004. This complete building permit application(B040523)vested the Site Plan Approval for the Sherman • Apartments(LUA 00,-168,•SA-A). The building permit application expires on'Mardi 20, 2005, unless extended. A six-Month extension may be granted by the Building Official if requested prior to the expiration date before the building permit can be issued,building permit fees and • mitigation fees must be paid. Once issued,the Building-Permit is valid for six-months. A six- month extension may be grantedifrequested prior to expiration. The Building Permit will remain active if progress is being made and inspections conducted • • Please contact me at(425)430-7286 should you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Jennifer Toth Henning Principal Planner cc: Neil Watts Larry Meckling • „ Me?c Pietsch : Eric S.Wagner. 1055 South Grady:Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE , This paper contains 50%recycled matAl,AO%post consudieagAi4V4:.; . Fifth and Williams Housing Associates, LLC 11018 NE 11 th Street Bellevue, WA 98004-4502 425-646-9053 Main 425-646-5981 Fax November 3,2004 City of Renton,Planning,Building,Public Works Attn:Neil R.Watts,Director Development Services Division Renton City Hall, Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for Extension to Land Use Approval (LUA 00-168,ECF, SA-A,LLA) Sherman Apartments At: 415& 417 Williams Ave S Dear Neil: As the City of Renton is aware Sherman Development has formed a new LLC with DASH(Downtown Action to Save Housing)to establish,Fifth and Williams Housing Associates,LLC. This project has enjoyed continued support of the Mayor, city staff and the RHA and allowed us to proceed with the necessary pre-development design work we have submitted to the city. After working sessions and direct input from the cities Development Services Division we were able to submit building permit plans to the city in September. The City of Renton has just released comments back on the architectural,civil and structural drawings.All necessary asbestos abatement work has been completed and the site is ready for demolition,which will commence after receiving city permits and extension of our land use approval. This request for extension will allow us to proceed with our project in securing the needed tax credits and financing required for development and construction. Specifically, it will allow us to leverage$15,000,000 of resources for the public benefit that normally would not be brought to the city without our efforts and support from the city. t.`g.. • Enclosed is the estimated project schedule,which shows commencing construction on 7/05/05. The extension request is to allow the approval to run out to August of 2005. The continued support from the city is essential to bring this project to fruition. Past support you and your staff have given us surpasses any we have experienced from other municipalities. We appreciate your consideration in our request to issue the extension. Very truly yo s, z , William A. Sherman, . Manager,Fifth and Williams Housin Associates, LLC 14. T� Mark . Thometz ..72Lef, Member,Fifth and Williams Housing Associates, LLC Cc.igig_vairAt4 Alex Pietsch Mark R. Gropper Eric S. Wagner . :4v 1i4..i:D'�U\w:. <<:11:'. <::�kSrSi!?ice nilJi. ��nr .,. Form 4 PROJECT SCHEDULE List each task for the project in chronological order with a projected completion date and the responsible partly for each task. The list should include all major milestones for the project including, but not limited to, project funding status, the anticipated contract execution date for each funding source listed, and the project construction start and completion dates. ACTIVITY COMPLETED NAME/COMPANY DATE • Site Control (control of the site) DASH/SD LLC . done • Land Use and/or Zoning Approval LLC in place • Review Project with Renton City Staff/City Council DASH/Renton 04/04 • Review Project with RHA/Board Approval DASH/RHA 06/04 • City of Renton CDBG Loan Application Submitted DASH 06/04—04/05 Loan Commitment Obtained DASH 09/04—06/06 • Begin ESA Review DASH 06/04 • Obtain Bridge Financing Banner Application Submitted DASH 04/04 Commitment Obtained DASH 06/04 • Submit Final Application for Building Permit DASH, Synergy, CDA, SD 09/04 • King County Loan Application Submitted DASH 09/04 Loan Commitment Obtained DASH 12/04 • Obtain Building Permit .DASH/Synergy 12/04 • ESA No Effects Determination DASH 12/04 • Finalize Construction Contract/Pricing DASH/Synergy 02/05 • Renton Housing Authority Bond Application Submitted DASH/RHA 02/05 Bond Cap Allocation RHA 04/05 • WSHFC 4°/0 LIHTC Application Submitted DASH 02/05 Reservation of LIHTC WA ST HFC 04/05 10%LIHTC Carry Over Requirement DASH 12/05 • WA ST OCD HFU Loan • Application Submitted DASH 03/054 Commitment Obtained DASH 06/05 • Close on LIHTC LP Equity Investor Partnership DASH 06105 • Closing of All Financing, (minus bank perm financing) DASH 06/05 • Construction Begins Synergy 07/05 • Construction Completed Synergy 09/06 • Project Placed-In-Service Date DASH 09/06 • Project Lease Up Completed Quantum, DASH 02/07 • Funding of Permanent Loan DASH 05/07 • 2005 Tax Return, Final Equity Payment DASH 05/07 Describe any aspects of the project that may lead to delays (e.g. zoning, siting), and how the schedule will be adapted to respond. None. The project will receive an ESA "No Effects" determination due to the scope and nature of the building, site and the infrastructure already in place. Sheldon and Associates has produced a Biological Assessment that indicated an ESA"No Effects"analysis to the reviewing agencies. VK-KC Fall 04 A Renton. -12- DASH-Fifth&Williams . • . • i s, .•, y, 4'0f{T CITY OF RENTON AL r •,, PlanningBuilding/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator November 21, 2002 Mr. Seth Hale NOli 2 5 2002 • 19524 Ballinger Way NE • PO Box 55429 Seattle, WA 98155 Subject: Request for Extension to Land Use Approval Sherman Apartments (LUA 00-168, ECF, SA-A, LLA) Dear Mr. Hale: This letter is written in response to your request for an extension of the Administrative Site Plan Approval for the above referenced project. The Site Plan Approval issued for the project on January 29, 2001 is subject to an expiration period of two years from the date of approval, which would be January 29, 2003. Upon request, a one-time only extension of the permit may be granted for a maximum of two additional years pursuant to RMC 4-9-200.J. The requested extensions have been granted. Therefore, an expiration date of January 29. 2005 has been retroactively applied to the Administrative Site Plan Approval issued for the project. This will be the only extension granted for the project proposal and construction activities must commence within the specified timeframe (i.e., construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the two year period). If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425)430-7382. Sincerely, v -004/1 Nen Watts "\ Director, Development Services cc: Land Use file Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner Susan Fiala, Senior Planner • Eric Wagner • Bill Sherman, Jr. • :'`...,. • . .TOSS ;niith Grady Wav-Renton.\Alashinatnn' ()Rik .. RENTON - CITX -i.A, RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator • June 3,2002 • Mr.Seth Hale 19524 Ballinger Way NE PO Box 55429 Seattle,WA 98155 Subject: Request For Reconsideration Of Minor Modifications To Sherman Apartment Site Plan Approval(File No. LUA 00-168, ECF,SA-A,LLA) Dear Mr.Hale: Per our meeting held on May 30, 2002-with' Bill Sherman Jr., Eric .Wagner; you and myself in attendance, it is our understanding that revisions to the decks and exterior panels have been designed and are requesting reconsideration of these-two items.::.We have received the letter, via • fax, dated May 30, 2002 which outlines the revisions addressing Items 3 and 4 per our May 17, • 2002 letter. Based on our..,meeting and further review of the submitted elevations depicting integrated building panels and the deck/railing design,the following is.Our response. To reiterate, all requested modifications per:.CDA-letters:'of April 30, 2002 and May 30,2002 are summarized below: 1. The roof has been modified from a.gable.type.to-mansard style with.an overall roof height reduction of 5 feet 6 inches. (April 30) 2. The landscaping at the.:alley has been revised. Planters will be increased in size and continuous the full length of the alley,'as will the metal trellis. Modulation of the planter has been eliminated. (April 30). 3. The solid deck panels have been removed and replaced with bolt on decks made of aluminum with a powder coated finish. The submitted•photograph illustrates the railing design with vertical and horizontal elements of varied spacing and diameter. To address the concern regarding decks being utilized as a storage area and the panels providing screening, the building layout has incorporated four(4) internal storage areas per floor and bike racks in the parking garage. A covenant disallowing storage on the decks will also be incorporated by the project owner. (May 30) 4. The original exterior free standing building panels have been removed and replaced with • panels integrated into the building facade. The panels are to create the same visual appearance as shown on the original approved drawings. Additional building articulation is to be provided by using a minimum of two colors for the hardi-panel material. (May 30) . 5. The exterior finish materials have been revised to a commercial grade vinyl siding and hardiboard while maintaining the coursing dimensions.(April 30) • According to Renton Municipal Code Section 4a-9-200:I allows minor adjustments to an approved site plan provided: 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON e�. o ,,� ', AHEAD OF THE CURVE niMI ri,This Paper contains 50%recycled i-�n i r e�- :..• • Page2of2 Sherman Apts.Request for Reconsideration of Modifications • • • The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent(10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan;or • The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the environmental and facilities than the approved plan;or • The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. Analysis of Revised Modifications to Deck Panels and Exterior Building Panels: Item #3: The deck design as illustrated in the provided photographs appears to adequately address both the modulation and articulation of the building facades by providing horizontal and vertical railing elements of varied spacing and diameter. The incorporation and enforcement of a restrictive covenant prohibiting storage on the decks and the designation of four internal storage areas per floor and bike racks in the parking garage should appropriately address the original intent the deck panels by eliminating visual clutter on the decks. Staff supports the specific deck design as illustrated in the provided photographs.Any changes to the submitted design must be resubmitted for review. Item #4: The removal of the freestanding buildin• •anels and replacement with integrated building panels on all facades (in same/proxim •final elevations) appears to convey the original intent of modulation, articul- ullc a kale of th=''•,,ildings of as the original design.Staff supports this modification. The site plan modifications ,,gt.es your April30, a s 30, 2002 letters•have been evaluated in relation to the ;Ap •ved% e plan.Based on this a -1j.sus, M have determined that all five of the proposed revisions o re'r'a'•thea o t - cap',g m••i' -tion, deck design, exterior building panels and buildi finish-s) ae�vi r - � ete -I define• by Renton Municipal Code • and are approved subjec o t g f o II•4 �, • • • 1. The applicant shall s-bmit a ,of • e mish aerials•oard to the Development Services Division Pro ct Ma I,a erfor t-Jew an-ppr• al,,prior.o the issuance of building permits. 2. The applicant shall su' i a „eductions, (8 ': ; ;Rs's, of all revised drawings including but not limited hrtla •uiidi ova jo ,/andscaping plan,subsequent to the approval of Conditio rsted• a • e This determination will be final .p=`al of this administrative determination- accompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee — is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Susan Fiala at (425) 430.7382. Sincerely, ] • • 6; // 1Q 1 Neil Watts - Development Services Director _ cc: Jennifer Henning • Rebecca Lind Parties of Record • 'SdpternbWr'13;2000 i 1=1en1dri Repbltet+5 destroy High-density will neighborhoods - We all have seen enough of care about imaginary municipal porations, solely to keep the city residents. old, established residential lines,however. Guest Columnist county from meddling. with• At the same time, this pro- neighborhoods being carved up When you buy a house to David'Irons zoning that is unfeasible and de-' S posal- has inflamed rural resi- by new, 'high-density develop- raise your family in a medium- strnctive. . • ' dents, who live in ments. density residential' neighbor- King County Council, As the county council moves unincorporated areas specifi- District 12 That concept focuses on max- hood, you expect the toward :adoption : of the: cally:to get awayfroip the high imizing density at the expense of nei hborhood:;:across:the=street,,,,-:,, Comprehensive Plan revision in. .density of metropolitan areas. the'quality-of.life in our sub-<-;;dbwntlie=block br:being`theback =order to meet-the state goals. September, I will continue to Apartment and townhouse -urban neighborhoods. ,-,:,.f fnts to•condo ti withyour-won The Comprehensive Plan • push for keeping neighbor hood .complexes of up to 48.units=per But a proposal by King.>`- ;, e` f+kousin" =-.a::..::` tYP_..".. .,, . $ , • Zoning should'mesh with and character intact. •' `~• "acre'do not belong in rural/resi-. County Executive Ron Sims```�4'-Thai`"is°:what:zoning is all provide seamless transition from This move toward unuicorpo- :`dential areas. , would make it even easier to buy about grouping similar used one side.of the?city limits to the rated up-zoning has justifiably:'": Certainly the county must and bulldoze your neighbor's adjacent to each other,Just,like-a-' other side. ;'-° drawn the concern of the City of :plan for growth;but high-density house; then put up dozens of 'factory'=`isn't; allowed in::the Some areas may be appro- Issaquah and the City of Renton, -:development belongs in, estab- high-rise condos on the other ,middle_o€ a;neighborhood "of. priate for high-density housing, among others: - fished''."metropolitan centers; side of your fence. three=hedropm<;,=}omest>;_with -especially if.that zoning already Suburban cities•;have a great: where "utilities,'mass. transit, In the process of amending` 'lawns:;and i.edges;' you don't "exists inside the city limits. But interest in preventing their corn- :`parks, police.service and other the county's . Comprehensive plop down a block of high-den- mostly, county,planners need to munities form becoming ringed:, amenities already are available. Plan, Mr. Sims wants to build sity/high-rise condo there either, realize that their job is not just to with high-density',development Such high density should high-rise condos just outside city .just because it.is on the other move numbers and squares that does not benefit the city at- never be allowed in rural areas limits. side of the invisible city around on a flat map. all• already lstrangledhyAtraffidIand; Such areas could be rezoned boundary. Theymust accommodate real Such u -zonin would onlytax db-.`develgpiiient. to allow 24 or 48 residential KingCountyis required to p g This u q people'inreal houses in°long=es- '-exacerbate the traffic misery and This'up=zone policy proposal units per acre,which is double to provide for- growth under the tablished-neighborhoods. The environmental degradation in- is unfair,.divisive and detri- quadruple the current limit of 12 state Growth Management Act. tendency,of the county.to put side the city limits, while also mental'.to-neighborhoods and units. But King County does not have people last has: resulted in a straining the resources of the' should be:discarded: - Neighborhoods don't much to compromise neighborhoods in flood of annexations and incor- municipality, at,the'expense of 4 1 ' • • March 10, 2001 Charlie Bergemann 336 Smithers Ave. S. Renton, WA. 98055 To the citizens of Renton: I'm writing to voice my view regarding the city of Renton and the high- density building currently going on. Before the second of the Daly home project, I wrote to Mr. Peter Rosen, the project manager, Development Services Division with the city of Renton (copy of letter attached). I was assured that with the design and landscaping that the impact of this project would not interfere with the privacy issue I had. The attached photographs taken from my backyard will certainly assure all citizens in Renton, that the city is not interested in anything we have to say. At least 18 of the 58 units have a direct look into my backyard. Talk about privacy, I can no longer set out back without people looking right down upon me. The current construction has been going,on for some fifteen months. I've had to call the city on three occasions. 1. The trash was not picked up because construction equipment blocked the alley. 2. Construction equipment blocking my access to parking in the back of my home, as the front is limited two hour parking by permit six days a week, which with the Spirit of Washington Diner Train, the Renton Civic Theatre and Saint Anthony's Church make access to street parking almost impossible at various times of the day. 3. Parking construction equipment in the alley overnight. j My neighbors get ticketed when they park in the alley. The Renton Police did not ticket the Construction Company however. Who's in the hip pocket of the mayor? I've lived through the house shaking all day long with the use of heavy equipment. I've picked up nails, staples, tarpaper, siding, cigarette butts, soda cans, disposable lunch containers, from my parking area. I've had to pick garbage out of the yard-recycling container and put it in the garbage. Sunrise through my kitchen windows is a thing of the past, due to the height of this project. I've had to move plants because the lack of light available in the alley. I await the completion of the project so that I may contend with 50 to 100 cars entering and exiting the parking garage which so happens was designed with the entrance right in front of where I park my cars. I'm sure that parking and the garage ventilation system will make it necessary to continue dealing the mayor's office regularly in the future. Sincerely, harlie Bergeman w July 1, 1999 Charlie Bergemann 336 Smithers Ave. S. Renton, WA. 98055 Mr. Peter Rosen Project Manager Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA. 98055 Dear Mr. Rosen: I'm responding to the Notice of Application dated June 17, 1999, Land Use Number LUA-99-090,SA-A,ECF. I have lived at the above address for the past sixteen years, and I understand the changes to the zoning laws past a few years back to allow multi-family units mix with existing homes. I really don't have a problem with that. I have some concerns regarding this application as follows. 1. The height of the building (4 stories). This will limit the amount of natural light my yard receives. It will also destroy any privacy I have in my back yard. Unlike the first daly home project currently under construction it does not interfere with any single-family homes. Four stories will have window looking right into my yard and my home. 2. The proposed alley entrance to the parking for this project is obsured. We currently must have a permit to park in front of our own homes. We must content with parking from the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train, Saint Anthony's church, Renton Civic Theatre, the Roxy movie theatre and the multi-purpose hall located in the 300 block of Smithers Ave. South. The city now wants to add 50 to 100 more cars to this congestion and destroy the last tranquility the homeowners have. It would be my suggestion to limit the construction to TWO stories, no more! Parking accesses on fourth avenue for this project. I certainly hope the city will look at the total impact without having to force residents to resort to legal action and waste a lot of time and money on unnecessary legal issues. Sincerely, Charlie Bergeman .. „• _.„, ... -0,-," • .. „ 4.•• . - .. „.,..„. . . . ..,„:„. . i 1 V. . ,*. • 41. •I'• -—: ,,,, .. • :,- •-:. -,4tiyi.,-,,, ,,,,,,mk,_„„•,,,. „0.,,,',•,,.,-, .,-,„..., ... . •:,,,.-,,,,:,-..,-..,,,,,,- .:,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,„,,,,,,,,-,.,,- .. . .•... : ,,.„•,7,-,,z,,,,,. ,,,,,-, -...-.• „•,,z4:...,. -.s,k-.„‹. .. , .. ..,..,,,- •. „ . 'If ., ,,,.... -..:,': ,..',, ;--. ., . - ,,,,,,,,,,,..k. • ,,,,,„ ,...—.„....,,,,,:,..5,-,••• ,, ••••••..--.---.---,-::-.,7„,„,:,,,,,....„„„.-.,,•:, fi • . .•. • • .„. „ . . „ • . ., . , ''''''',' t4'...„14E4_'• ' ' - -* -• ''' , ,., ......,..,,. . .. ..'.. , ,.. ..., .... . *.. ... . .. . .. .. , . .. .. .2. .,..... ,4,4t.40. .,,,,,...., Cif) . .4:2-: •'''''''r''' ' , . -..„ .. 41 ... , .„...„... ,,„ _ ... .. . ,.. „!., • , , „.... , ,"*„•-• •.• ,:„,„...„.„...,_,...4, ••" ....„ ,., .._ -- -----":•• -= ,--,-.,;,,,, „---,,,,,,i.,. :„..,,,,i,,,,,. •:,.. . .., , . . .,.... ....„,.. ,..•.„0.;, _,,,,,,,,,,i,„„. •.%„, 0.,,,-. ,.... , .,.... •_••• ... - • .. . ••• . . .--..,i.,,,„7,i,lp,„ ,.•„ , 4' : ' ';,',', ,, .„. . . , I •--,': ".'.,:,-'4'.',7`;,'„„...,--i;.',/,.;,,' liAS4,''.,-,,A-00-; .. ,-•, '.:.',.,' 4.''',-4'' 4'4'4 44'''',4'!'4'4'7'44.,'''A-''''''j4,4'4.144,41,1W,'1,,4,44.k4'r.4,4 4.. 4'4•4,', .'• 4 , (:1100) „ ': , 4'4'''' ',,',' 4 4'7:'''t4'4:'4 iii,44:4 4' '44 • , .,,! I, . • "•- , ' •: ' I 4 , ,'''',:t:','\'' '''' ','...,4,_4'4,,•,;11'4 4,\ , •'1 ''-'' ' 4 , , ">11' ' ( :44,4t,,r,J 4117 ' • :.4,-f-.4''.,•;4*1, \,.,,,,, • 4 4 ,„•, ,\,'':4 ,.4 4,' 4•' • ' 4 4 4"',.4 4*;''W''4 4''..'''• :4''' '''''''''4'4'44'4'4' 4- '# 411 ' 4ft • ..,'\ ' ,\ ,-;.•-•:.,...4",,'-'a,'"..•„'W.:..„‘,1'.Z.--,:„. '-•-"-",,A ' .".1'',...:17,.,,,,... .',J,; , ''. '''- ,',-.-'..., , . '.-''' '''''''' * , ''.., "....,,''1,,,' '1).'..';',,1:-.'.- ,....,/, ,,. ,.11 . '• ' -',,,:,.:,-,:-,N,'.7,4i.,,..--,,,,*•,-..#4,:--z,-, ';'''.-„-„,--',',.- , 410e14: - -•-;',',2,t.,-. '' -."--,t40.,— ----.,,,,,‘-,,,,., ., „._-"'".0.,, •..q,',':-:-„IfIr.:'!'-‘'/;-'P'''',4--`4..,'.---4!"" ,„-, „,„ „ „ _ - ,,,,,-.'.:%•.,,J,,,z4-, ,..:-,Vof., ,,,.., ,..,........,,.„...,„„„,.. . .,...,, . .., .. - - - , ,..,,lkt;,te.•.-f--,1„,,,,,,,,,v,,N.:;i4A.F,,,,t' -1. ,2-,-0.-14-'-:,,,i--,„;.-_->.i' :•-;',,,, , (L) -''.."4,-',,'iZk4,,,:':•',,\,...v.0'4,'.''',;:,44. 41' 'i" -'7':'-.7.::'il::::34'4V.tir''''-f.';'''''''''„7;',.Jil' ili,r-11.42;1A4Tr..,',' ...,-,' , -,';',',111":741*.::', .,,, '„Ii-P''' ' 't>,,,i.V.•':,',f..e,;k,,,-•"'--."'-t-'-1;,.r-'')..2 - '!,:.,-;3;ix.:-:,",,,,. :',•- -,,,,,,,,i':,•:'', _ ,., --"-- ,!,-,:','-'.."-•';.' "'--;:`,--,-4,-„[4,,i.,t4,,,,,k.,?W" , -2,'''?,''":-,-,,,' - VD „ . .. ...., , ., . --- , ',,,,,,n,11,,t,'4,v. .*,,.44,1,-,-, ,•-'-' , • •- .-:•"„",• " "-• '--f'-,•,,"- " • „ „7:1'1'!;-;:','"::.7';.'''',1'..-:i.'*;%:;)1"..."11.'-•:Y,-'. .,•,,,'._""-„:•,.' "` N .• '..':".,,;,.•";,.,".•':,'•;',;;....":.•...,.:„.- .. -A _:--•..•.,,::. • •-•-•,„, -„. ,„. ; :„.„•,, " f „, •-:',',7-'0.--Aviv- - • , - . ,t,„, - „ ......,,,,,4„ . .. ., - _,,, - ,,, -, ,5;•!... , '-' .......,„,,,,i •,,,,, . ,, ... , „.,,,••;,-.„,.•', .—..,,,_ ..,7.;,.z1 „,v.;1.'!;1,-,..•,,,„,..!-••,... '''',-.41,r,w,•••• , ' , • , _ „ ,,„ ...„ .. . . ,. ..• : -„„ ..'.'".'••4'`A'''',..•... - ,•<:„'''''':.•„- k-'1,.''',-,:: . . . • ‘,,,A -...'p-- ,,-•, ,„ „.„, •• • ',-•'• - • ',,,'*:'4:, A..-„,• ,,tA,,,A, _.,„4„,,,I,is ,,,p-,.,„„,., -A, . ",,,• . .. 14,7''.,,..... . . i'',...?,*-_.---k,-,!--.-,.',F.,r,-"->",,-,•--«,." ..V.,;- ---"%,'•-•?, v,--e• -• '''.,;." -,-,. ,. ..,,,,, , , ,_ - , . .,_. _ , .... ,, - ',:-,F-',T4r.,-.,.. . ' . •,„ -. ,';' -.:59,,,i-1.ki,‘4•:',--•:.4, • .17,..:-?W,,i:,' .'. ,.1-',?,,,,',•5;';',;*", • ,-,iniiiii ,. ,.. - „„„ • " - - . ....... _ .,, - •-.:,.. .....„ „ .,,,.--, ,, ,t-.•,4?.'---- . . . .: . •-.,i.:,. .',..-1,,:q4', r111111111111111 .:4 . ..„..„. ..... . .... , .,., ........ . , .,..,,, • „...1 •. • - I ..„. ._.‘,.,..,... .,,.. . " •,?;.,, ' - , , ... .. ... .. . ,•••0410 .. . ii. t'' S • . 5th,.., . ,. .„[.., ..• ,., „,..:,.„.. . _._.;:.,:........ ..,4..,,,,„4„,,...e.„;.4.....,,, „. ,,,, ...,,...,.„..,... .... .., _,,,.,. , „,:. .. . . .. .• ,....„,„ ..„,...:,..t.e.„.,:w,,,,..... _..,....,.....,:„.,...,,.:.;..„.;,, .. ...,,,,,...., 4,4...„,:... .. _ .:„, ,.. ,. _ . .., ,,...,.. ..,,..,.,„*;‘,...„,,,...,,,,.,....,,,.., .•,::. , .,, ...,..,...:...,,,... 4...,,,,,,.,,•,:,.4......,..,..i..,.,.:,,..4„:„., ..,. ,..,:. .........., wx,.,. .„..iw.,.:;•,,,:,......,04.vilv.,. ..„.:„,..;., .._• :• ,..,...,. .. .., .., . ....ti.,,,,,•,..,... .p..13,..„.::,. .. ._: .....; . 4,,i _.::::.,1:_: :,.........„.,,,, ,v... . . . . .,...„.......,...,. Jr..,.-• r.,.4,,........, ., .. ,-,. ..... ,,,.. . , . '''''''.12%?,•:'.:::'Je-....:.....';.:..'.1*:ij- . 4k•1 $ 16„!:.":1.";-:: 5.•.X.,,,,,,,,,OW• ,,, ,- ',:„. „•A.',,:".:.••••.',..,- , ••>-,•7,-", --, ..' „I'''.„-'1„..4,„ A/.4-3• ... ?A-01.44--ltio,..70',..,4 41,:y.c.:,..,•:::...,...,-.,,,,,,..,.. ..tio,,,,tw..'.,-,. ::,../ 4.,,,,..,,,,.?„,,,...........„..„,„, _.. ... ,...4.....,--,-':,•.,,,40..,z,'''. ..,...-...,../. --7' l''-'1.,..5).t.,k . . , .02.4.„...4.411.:44,,,,,,..,,, -, . ' 2,1 -.„-o-m,,-,.'--„,...,.•:...:2•.,,-. ,.-4',...,t-...,..','.....,,-.„,„-,,,, '..... . ., .r.,,,,,. „..,...„‘,..,,,,,,.t...,. ,,,..,..t..1..,,, .,...., ,,„ ,, ..„. ..„. 1 .....-.- -;'.,-.•..----,‘- ..., .:-:.?..g'FTA,0410:-..'A*Rq'*-$.,":, 4.'''''14:4W4'' ' 44 42'4' ZA.':•-;,'..„ - --. f.,- '',.:',,,:::' .....„.-,,..,:-':-.fit''71.441,',;:',-•:'''..-.'-,'2?-1Aiik ' ..." -.--.•,r •:. .,_„...-...._, --„,..,....„,....... ..„.. ,. tittiria.t.;_fr:-... .„,::•,.,,..'.7 ,,,; -: •:::.. '--...;' .,.... „.,..........„ ••..,•,...• .,..„..„,, .., ...... . :.,liv.41,007...4,,..,„k,;,,, .. .,„,.:.,,, •..„.....,,:„....,„,.,,,,,,,„ . .,., . .... ,,,,•,. .,.:„.:...::::::gr„....9.:y. ...,;;:::,,,-_,,, ,-,,,,,,,!,,,,, s--:,,,,.‘:',.:'."•:',,c:'',, ,'- ,:v.i.4,,!•,p,,,,,,;,.,..,..„;',..,...,..:,..,.......,,,z.4.5:.,,...,:., . . . .,:!..giiNep, ..': •..-., :;0 - .. :,,?,,,,,,.,1,;.,:,,,,,:,-„,.44,,,...,...,;,4., '.•.,..., „..,... :„ ...... .. . ,......,•..., . . .. . . ,..... ... - .• f'.1. 4,,,,.: .4...„ -'-.•. ,,, .,,...,,..,,,,,r,:-.,..*:,,,,,,:,, . - - -- ,,.,•\''.''',7' , ',''` •",,,,• \ *eit,.4'.-',, 4'4'4* ' 44,4','4,4 4:4::4',,,i,. ,1 ,•', ',,,,,?.,\ ',,, '*""t44ig -' .'. -. 01P1,,tielAfit4',4 ,,, 4,44,'X4 4'.'4.4'''4'•4 4' '44‘441'.74:4- ' -' 4, liktk.. .t.tiMi'':.' .„. . . . ... _ . . .. . . . ... . ... .. . ... ....._.. ..... , :....,..i,,„.;....,.:,.:....'-: -•-• i. , .:.,...... ,,.,..,%..,..,,,i„...,g,..*:.0...A.,:,,,,,,,,,,,..• „... . .. ',,,.„4..,,',„':.,7*?,ilke,'„,,,, ..:', ..::.•..,,.... :' - - ':. * _....„., ...„......„.... :. ...........-;;,,'-'.- . . .. .....„,„......,................ ..,..,....„„ .,.. .......... ,...!-,..,-.i...; ••41•,f1:„.•.",,-,„-.,,',,,.S..,4,4, .',•,-' ,,,,,,...i.,, . i '--tV,:!----,,,7...r,,'''."';;;,i71,1.441.,*.r.;,...,:-','''• . ' ''':'''':'''•I' ' :. '''. ''tilt- „,'..:',.';,100i.:3f-1,',---- ' ,','....:-.,:-:.::::,,-,:->•;,-7.,..3..i.4,,-4,,y-4,4,-,...,. -.--„,-;:21'4„....1„?i;',:lit"::4;;;WMA:. „ „.. ":'.-:-.1y-'0,1!::',-2.i.1,,i'il .-- -, .„...,,,-„:.„. . ..,. '-;9tfg'''-r,0'.,:!'' :,'.. •.:',''':',-.':',"'.•••.t,',!'.,"'", ,r,f,',.q.:•5,0,.:' .,••••,,,,,,,,,,..,„.. .,,,q.,4y. •,-.....,,A,'„I.0„..y.:,,,,,,, ... , .. ,„„,,,,4.-;k4.. „'1,44.'',•",• .- „,'-•-.' •:-:.i•-' , -• 1-, • •,. . . . ... ,..,,-....,,, '.'' '.,-if,f-,.'n,„...3p,,,,,r-Ne'. le.".•'-r:- •••:•••14," • . : ' •-•:.,..„•"';,;;•`,t',,,,, , .,..,....,,•.,,,. .,..,•.„•••;;.'4-..‘,•+.1-•,,i-,-„,,- ,•,,-..... „,,,,,,,!,,,—,„..,---.- - ., . .. ...„. „ -',.`4'..',i--44.4y•'''', .,,,,„-„---,1„.: ',,. , ••. . •••'''',',,,. -. ,A,'-1-?.*:., --."'"•--i::r-..,A....*X•'",!-2•11417.k,iA4,Itt,‘'''''.,,„ ,,i,,,•:••.:', : • - - -..,•.,,,,...•-:. • -•.,-. •-,..,i,•,-,, ,T.-',.•';!-,--',7.,*,',.„,",• -„,,,...—.....,,,,.,.....—„,.... '''lk--- ;-;,:;-,kAiri.i5,'.!,,',-.•;;:,,;.',„ "'- .:,:•?„," • : :' -•''',,,,. ,,,„5,417"..„-_,,,-...••, ..!,•W,',V.!..;•,„",,' - -.--”.1,,q,,,-,:,,.:, : .•,,,,,,,,-„,„:,,,,,,,v,. ,,,,,,,,.,,, . ',1-*'• '--,,,- ,•:...,..,„,...-,,,,,..,,,X.. . „:.....•4',.A..0, . • ,• • ,••••,"' '''VA-?'.. .4-;:*4*''44-. .'-':'.. .' . .'''''''''''. .:.,."-,.....!;-,,,,.:::;`;',;-1i,:i';i, 17'.:',.....,,,:?,,i:,i,-;r),•,.,.:,.:14,!..:,,'.',;-'T':, , _„, . .,..,,„„...„, ,,. '.,;iiV:,-;'!.P.,''. 6.',..;::;.'srg:.,,•,:'',• '.. '."•.;.'.!' . .., • ..-, •- ' . .,,, .. . • . V .',‘,,.1-jr.;k e:4411,'.;-INV"'...'.';,:-',';:""-,,,,,:I;A'.`-•','''','-.4.L'.i;,!,.',-,c-..--,,-'',7.'-- .,4,:ii,c`..J.,...„,„.. .. .4,-,' ,-.''- -:•-,---,:4,-?-,---,:,,,:,4„ia.: :,,,,-,.,-.-44c-.-41 ,-,,':„1-'4,10,1,:.'--'.:_, a:Y„,,-,.::',-,:- ,`„g::,,,,4,.,sz,v,,'.,:-:....,3P,Ii.t.;L',.-:‘,-;,..„ •..*:,,,,,,i,:„,,,,, ,,--4,,,-,-,;„,..t....i.„-, ;:, ,;„- - '' ',.°;3:-..;,AlitV, ,.,-.-!•',`.!•i..,'-!t.'?„;'..,."-Pf•:;,`,.!.,:-.-,...;;;:,2!,,,t.,.mit,,:'., ,„,,;_:' ,•.,-;., -., 'i,„,,,,i,..;V.'-';.::14,.,,„::-'' -r_,:..,.;?,i,,,,,,,m,tti,-,.,„:.,;t vi,,,.A..4i444.0.,,:.•-'., .'-,,:„„.„..r.„,„2.,, ,,•,••-...;*,'„, ',4111k0" .?.,:„.ji,..„,,,„k•f;ii:„,,..,,,_"?.,.„,,...4,,i,". 4.:4:-':4,41-•••-;:1,.-.A•ii',:f.,,ii.•,,,,.•;;:ii,;:.,.1,-...,,!:-:,,, ,•-...,,,::::#1.114 47,,,-,;t:iiM.W. ';l'il,.:i.:-..,g,I,W..,,,f.,5;1>:7'.•••„,„:•••‘", ,,'''''' ''A'''-'''''''-',","q,: '•',',',•,•'.'rit,:.::'•i.,:.''':':'`.P.S.1.'::, ;1,., -Ni,',.44, V.•:-A•.e.,',4.?:-. ,4,-'-'„••:;!,-W''''''':.'-'''''''''-'14':f."-'';'•,;;!--,....'".'",'''''',..;''''''''''',.,-.*.it., ''':.'''''Atittij:W..13,;..re'f:Of,,,s.:tRO'irk,f,'.4S,,,4,',,.,.',ilf.,.,.. - ,, . -.„. '',:';,.e..,:*:;,,,isfr'' '''.1-C, ''','.•'-'".''''"'''''44.'*,e;«,,',r i`- _,,______ Dean Sherman Apartment Site 0 50 100 !:•:!:!:+:!:!:•:!:4!:!:!:4...i.,:,x..;.;:4.,..titi!3!:!:!:..0:104*:!:!:**.ititiftiltifi. _ Site Area . , . 1:600. , ,. , lk aRre_s i //v in 01,i0 /--,-1-1, il N/ . aTRIr _ ric 041 vv. t 4 AA , Ak. _ii e 5 oAle_W 4 ___ ----- P-' '--1 -A/1 - ---- ----,—. --.------- -- ----,.. .--,-.-_, . • CA ks CAYI __ ' ------t----(1 ----;• ON'I - • " I '' r! " - ..-IV.kVe. c'• ‘ I • 5 A -121--- 0 4----- ! a..., ,. , -,..+) ,, I eit Rq, apitT 4q-eZ„, (.,, , 1 1•11, 1ye TR4cr(c: i 0 f 1 i 0 . •" ' . . 97C12 1 6/if ..___Av: ,,. !I w .7-1 Aar r-, Allo N./4 v R /,,P AA,i i 77-•,' --,,r' :.-. :-.) s7-r-a P (0// i (Tad o 43100. 76130 3 heavyweight 4 /2x10 /81n/11.4x26.3cm • (OKRAFT xM a nag ment ' Series EN VE OpEs 76130 01993 The Mead Corporation. Dayton, Ohio 45463 U.S.A.Made in U.S.A.Made in U.S.A. CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Gil Cerise, Senior Planner9G DATE: March 29, 2001 SUBJECT: Scenario#9 Maximum Zoning Densities I am attaching the results of scenario#9 of the maximum zoning densities for South Renton. The South Renton Study Area Density Alternative Analysis(Scenario#9) spreadsheet cumulatively incorporates your priority changes from the March 7th Planning Commission meeting. Row Explanation On the spreadsheet,the first row shows the current Center Downtown(CD)zone that is outside of the South Renton study area. The next three lines entitled"SA"are the study areas broken out into the various density zones. The caveat to the"Study Area"is that the existing RM-U zone adjacent to the Cedar River is included in the 75 du/net acre line in this section. The final two rows, entitled"CA"show the Commercial Arterial properties within the Urban Center(west of Shattuck). Column Explanations From right to left, the first column shows land area(excluding public rights-of-way) in each density. The next column shows the redevelopment assumptions. The third column shows the public use assumptions which is land taken up by parks, streets,public buildings (like post offices, etc). The Net Area column shows what land area(of the amount in the first titled column,remains to be treated by the new densities. The "Density"column tells what density is being used to treat the redevelopment units. The "(Density) &Units"column shows the number of units resulting from applying the redevelopment density to the net area(Net Area column x Density column). The "Existing units(Portion)"column outlines an estimate of the existing units that will remain in each subcategory. The final, left-hand column shows"Total Units"which adds the"(Density) &Units"column with the`Existing units (Portion)"column to result in the total number of units in each subcategory. Spreadsheet Analysis As can be seen,most of the redevelopment planned for the Urban Center is anticipated to occur outside of South Renton,within Renton's Downtown CD zone(approximately 64%). Reduction of the redevelopment assumption to anything lower than 60%makes this an unworkable analysis. As can be seen,the result is 198 dwelling units higher than the absolute minimum needed to retain the Urban Center designation. Gram (Scenario #9) Priority #4 with 60% Redevelopment Assumption Total Area Redevel. Pub. use (Density) & Existing units (No r-o-w) assumption assumption Net area Density Units (Portion) CD Outside SA 61.22 60% 16% 30.85 150 4628 287 4915 SA 150 du/net acre 11.69 60% 6% 6.59 150 989 28 1017 SA 75 du/ net acre 19.34 60% 0% 11.60 75 870 107 977 SA 35 du/net acre 21.69 60%o 0% 13.01 35 455 182 637 52.72 CA MF existing 1.66 0% 0% 0.00 20 0 48 48 SF existing 1.64 60% 0% 0.98 20 20 . 0 20 7615 7417 units required to meet Urban Center residential density criterion 03/29/2001 .--- > mil --iirommumm um _____ S 3 r d S z---, < < .111i --__ . IMI — lift, D —1 IT' I •c-/2 I I EI P - I * 3 r d , = •— L.__ -c) . i. ...., •— mm,m_Ab - ,ap, 0 1/4 rrir.'li n Pi_ (-- - p... ..1 . / . 1 in . asi Ira < 11 ---• A-16r\ or I > . l< • pip!_- ,zLi,.., _ .? .6 s.._ _ _ MOM MINN 111111111111 MIMI I -C) — :::- MIME 1111111111111 CL) / (ll 0060. li -- - Bill I Ea . ,_ MINN MINIM MEM MINIM MI= IIIIIIIIIII / C.) MINI . iMi -- — - 11111111111111 MUM ----- MEM MEM / Kill i — ,,,?. MUM MEM E , 0 , A II RA Nig I ._-_-_-_ =_ la 1 __ Alin [- 1 _ _ = (1) , ry- NS. 7tn' St Vdpir cr) ii -1 sa) > _NI Scenario #9 ,,,::,,,,iii„::,i, 35 dwelling units per acre 1-1 75 dwellinu units ner acre rinommimi - rz,---:-..:-:-:-:-:-:-.:-:-_-_--.- ._-, WilliplIMISMIlli ---_:.:;.."-_-:.-:-:::-:-:-::-..::_::.-, ,• ,, e„,,,, , ___ ____„:„..._,:::::::::::_._:_:.:_,.., volipl w ...___i rm....,..mim ,.44110.htt. P' dir-'.- 4_ Illiiii -----H.-_-:-::::::::::::::::::::::::::-:::::.:. 1 ITMI V112:::::tr! 914 1 i"litar % , , ,.„_:.:::_::::::::,::::_x______ . ii, •____ :_:____- -_-- - ‘i In 1 r• it ,. v tr., __ -_- -_ PI,.__:_:_, :.___. ___.._, .. 4 _ �T it ,_ r 1 -40111110i. 1 _ • -..,d 1 • f, t , _ ___ Si 1 I �.� I1 Ira i� i rE / :' • . A'S ihkyk ' ., it, =iiiiiiii:_ ii::_:,, — „Le., Rittr. i... /::::::::::_::_ • ---- -- - _- I/' -_ ---_ _ / __ _ ____ I e: :00 _ ___ _ __ _ ____*, . 1 . t i ♦ 1.11110 I. • * .... ....1 -.NO N. lk. lib W V Ir.". 13111110,w4,t rEig,•'' "Alti -4'1�Fes. ..• .' K'iIfl•':!'� �'cj_a �:• :___--._____7.________________ ________ :__:=___ °1311 1 .-��• ■ " '' IMIe 111111 Pka:11441 re si:'-----rtt.t.(ki,,-.;,-.-::::-,,zzazzE:E-33_]__:-.- --_:E.E:-.:•:,E:LE_,i,E:i::a::- , inn ram_ 4, : 0— , se ,..„,,, ,,.. *it ,,,,,1,42 ,-_-_-_-_-,-,-,-,-,-,-,7,-:-,-_-,-:-_-,-,-:-:-:-_-:„. ,,,,_, 17 7 otitil 4.41m. ...... i ,i 134idi � � once,. ,.; • ,r-raillauscalk 5-- a .1 li 4 a��v it .!riria I' � �bm.15121 . .1 .�, i _.1. 0„,, pf I G o�i , ; A ® tot um WA l - I . - riiiifro �FFI111 ;r-otoo; • Ir al 011)31 1 ..e Toll” i •♦ m1 . --___J ,,,, „ .... , 1, t� -`���+ Il NiV lil,`C � ..,, IJI : �_1 1 1 i i1Ei VI+ APIMPIIMMY Apo- °11 Ai" , ; , ariV, ' ‘,„4.1.1piplik �.,.. ,,�4■®i II Ali', ,/IE LI . #1,04 ....I 6. ■�: ,. ®� ; • ti' -'' 21 % WAli ,,! -�i iilliniiiwirt ti Irk �1� � ; .. � uflllll� ��"► taLull• Ott 1 1 1 ‘ rilin,' ' aSr. \ i ti lioppw / -LT 10,,,, N..4 14rirtm 6 - . . . IN .... . . I: 4c ‘ ,0 -"g6,0490111!"""' -pi,I'lrill - • A.ii* •. fit .,, , $s. IV% LNA . ..., , „ ,..., Li .i,„ : 1 i . ,.. _ iii,,,. ..4 i .„... .... In 1 � II I van _ _ k_______ _ 1 i L , W. wq1% N, i_,,,, ,..4,(, , [17 $ 4111 . I. 711, is'8 dErl" % 41 -RA Pill — ;1111:::10111ri Pg. I, t IS‘,...•iitik,44 ••••*. , 4 *le . i.iiiii• I) ijor, E . 114-, 1 Ilk . _ , IF .... Sip ....I1 nia, e . ' I li, ll 44,,_ I _ :.a ' dEI; ' 1 1 1_ . ,E. ■a• ; i LP Q"1_ 1 .«—.�.—.—.i {-___- \ti .. , •Nen 1pi -: -/ i 1; oltew, "' ;-.7. , il.,-._N :'>,, 41 ' a , . ...., , i ,I it r, min a lik / a 0. ,.. . 44% - .• II I 1 IL �14EN ®11111/" ' 'B� mpg RPm i ill ." ' -____-__--_ - lip '� ■ �� I AlCE I aI al I 0 _ 1 I PANTfR+RI.A1L$ EWA- , " iII _____ a 0 I I --:::: , a ill ir . . _____________________-_- \.------\ ..;,46 . ; Jig ______ ._,_________ . . .,:pia i i ___________-___,--____-_-_______-_-_ IW .tim•... i_ ,... � t� il .... . __ _ _ _ _ , Ii I 111 l _ ' i i ■..,• 11 .ra I/ :i• RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT AREA DESIGNATIONS INResidential Rural n Employment Area-Commereial n Residential Single Family Employment Area-Mee nResidential Options rn Employment Area-Industrial nResidential Planned Neighborhood O Employment Area-Valley n Residential Multi-Family Infill CITY OF R E N T O N MISCELLANEOUS DESIGNATIONS CENTER DESIGNATIONS MI Convenience Commercial- Center Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan Land Use M a p Center Suburban -- City Limits nCenter Downtown Urban Growth Boundary • Technical Services 0 2000 4000 - Center Office Residential Immo=ammlnl." ♦ ♦ Planning/Building/Public Works Center Institution 1:48000 Adopted August 14,2000 •., • Printed March I,2001 1111 Center village RESUME Mark J. Jacobs, P.E. P.T.O.E. Associate Traffic and Transportation Engineer Degree BSCE University of Washington, 1984 Professional Registration Licensed in Civil Engineering, 1989 State of Washington No. 25744 Certified Professional Traffic Operations Engineer Association Membership Institute of Transportation Engineers, Associate Member Occupational Experience Mr. Jacobs has prepared over 400 transportation impact studies for a variety of office, commercial and residential developments in the Puget sound area since joining TP&E in 1989. In addition, Mr. Jacobs has prepared road variance requests, signal warrant analyses, and sight distance studies for numerous projects. Mr. Jacobs prepared for and testified before the State Legislative Transportation Committee regarding access onto State highways. As project engineer for TP&E, Mr. Jacobs has been responsible for several school district projects. Among his school district projects have been the Tukwila/Thorndyke Elementary Schools Traffic Impact Analyses. He has also worked with the Northshore School District on the Transportation/Administration facility project in Snohomish County traffic from which would use the congested Highway 9 corridor. Mr. Jacobs has worked on several projects for Auburn School District including the Junior High School No. 4, Senior High School #2 and Transportation Center Improvements Traffic Impact Analyses. Mr. Jacobs has completed plans and specifications for traffic signal improvements at intersections in Auburn, Federal Way, Moses Lake, Yakima and Snohomish and Thurston Counties. He has designed several illumination, signing and channelization PS&E packages. Mr. Jacobs has also performed signal construction inspection for the SR 99/156th St. S.W. signal in Snohomish County and 1st Way S./S.W. 330th St. signal in Federal Way. As an employee of the City of Renton, Mark wrote the City of Renton level of service policy report, and reviewed proposed development traffic impact studies. During his four years with the WSDOT, he designed the signing, channelization and illumination for the 1-405 Factoria to Northup HOV lanes, the illumination PS&E for the 1-90 East Mercer Interchange and the pontoon maintenance communications system PS&E for the new I- 90 floating bridge. His experience there included working at the Traffic Systems Management Center running the 1-5 ramp control meters and writing the twenty month 1-5 HOV lane update report. January 5, 2001 Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc. • .4 • r .-, _ - �_ '''II':•SI 1.i'4••• .,F L E 1 ' �{`�=�• ' '''11 }r - - Illlllllllllllll�� - .� • - .;i i tr1 d . lit ---- --. ..—.. -- - ._.., '':::., .: . . • r _ _ , lilr�i. u L+. 1 I�w " 1 . A 1 - '3: .. lkit*- J y, r.. .00/ J v F • 1 i I1 p/ ...• it �^.i i I - -- - I, fl - - - 00- 110-g J TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT kIrROFILMED Smithers' Place South 5th Street and Williams Avenue South Renton, Washington Prepared for: SD Renton, LLC April 15, 2002 Revised: May 22, 2002 Revised: September 3, 2004 Revised: July 19, 2006 Revised: November 9, 2006 Our Job No. 7251 ///•6` .994/ e' / .„4 CITYOFRENTON G`/S- Q� RECEIVED �SS1ONALEN� NOV 1.3 20u6 I EXPIRES: 2/05/ Of BUILDING DIVISION jettA, CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING,SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES p •Z 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH, KENT,WA 98032 • (425)251-6222 • (425)251-8782 FAX www.barghausen.com A'a aNG'IN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 Technical Information Report(1'IR)Worksheet 1.2 Vicinity Map 1.3 Assessor's Map 1.4 Topographic Survey 1.5 Boundary Survey 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Preliminary Engineering Plans 2.2 Administrative Site Plan Review Staff Report, Advisory Notes to Applicant, dated January 29, 2001 2.3 Summary Core Requirements 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual 3.0 OFF-S111.ANALYSIS 3.1 Preliminary Drainage Report byBarghausen Consulting Engineers,Inc.,dated December 15,2000 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology 4.3 Detention Calculations 4.4 Water Quality Calculations 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYS 1'hM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 5.1 25-Year Conveyance Analysis 5.2 100-Year Conveyance and Backwater Analysis 5.3 Pump "A" Sizing Calculations 5.4 Pump"B"Sizing Calculations 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 6.1 Geotechnical Engineering Design Review, Sherman Apartments, Renton, Washington, by Shannon &Wilson,Inc., dated February 25, 2002 6.2 Geotechnical Engineering Study for the Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments by Earth Consultants Inc.,dated November 12, 1999 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] 6.3 Review of Project Plans,Sherman Apartments,Renton,Washington,by Shannon&Wilson,Inc., dated April 18, 2002 7.0 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS 8.0 OTHER PERMITS 8.1 City of Renton Postmaster Approval 8.2 Fire Marshal Approval 9.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 9.1 Pond Sizing Calculations 9.2 Temporary Sump Pump Sizing Calculations 10.0 BOND QUANITIIES,FACILITY SUMMARIES,AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 11.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed project is 0.9 acres in size located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street in Renton,Washington. The subject property has 115 feet of frontage along South 5th Street on its south side,approximately 250 feet of frontage along Williams Avenue South on the east side, and 350 feet of frontage along an alley along its west side. The subject property is bordered to the north by a single-family residence. The subject property is currently occupied by the Renton Family Practice Clinic,parcel parking lots, and existing single-family residences that serves as a medical laboratory,an attached garage, and a grass field area. There are ten fir trees, one cedar tree,two pines trees, and two ornamental trees on the subject site. Both Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street have existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the frontage of the property with catch basins and underground storm drainage system for stormwater collection. The existing parking lots have catch basins and underground storm drainage systems that connects into the City of Renton's underground storm drainage system on South 5th Street. The property is essentially flat with less than five feet of elevation change along the north/south access of the site. The site will be developed by construction of 92 residential units. Residential construction will be four levels of wood frame structure over concrete parking garage. Additional improvements will include the reconstructing and widening of the existing alley located along the site's western property line. Additional improvements include reconstruction of the sidewalk along Williams and South 5th Street to the limits of the site's property line. As part of this development, the existing structures, parking lots, utilities, and trees, etc.,on site will be demolished prior to construction. Runoff from the proposed buildings will consist mostly of rooftop drainage and sidewalk drainage which is considered clean stormwater and is not subject to water quality treatment. Additional impervious area is being added to the alley along the site's western property line. It is under the 5,000-square-foot threshold required to mandate water quality. As a consequence, no water quality for this additional impervious area will be required. Runoff collected within the parking garage area will be collected by a series of drains within the parking area, then routed to an oil/water separator, and then pumped to the existing sanitary sewer system within Williams Avenue South. In accordance with the advisory notes to applicant,Note No.2 under Plan Review Stormwater, all calculations have been performed in accordance with the 1990 edition of the King County,Washington Surface Water Design Manual. 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET • part 1 PROJECT:OWNER AND Part 2 PROJECT PROJECT ENGINEER . D.ESCR'IPTION ; Project Owner SD Renton, LLC Project Name Address 2100 124th Avenue N.E., Suite 100 Sherman Apartments Bellevue, WA 98005 Location Phone (425) 602-3700 Township 23N ' I Project Engineer Rob Armstrong Range 5E Company Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. S.E. 1/4/S.W. 1/4 of Address/Phone 18215-72nd Avenue South Section 18/17 Kent,Washington 98032/(425)251-6222 Part3 TYPE OF PERMIT Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS APPLICATION >= ! ❑ Subdivision HPA ❑ DFW HPA ❑ Shoreline Management ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ COE 404 ❑ Rockery ❑ Grading ❑ DOE Dam Safety ❑ Structural Vaults ❑ Commercial ❑ FEMA Floodplain ❑ Other ❑ Other Multi-family ❑ COE Wetlands Part 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Renton Drainage Basin Black River Drainage Basin :.'Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS ❑ River ❑ Floodplain ❑ Stream ❑ Wetlands ❑ Critical Stream Reach ❑ Seeps/Springs ❑ Depressions/Swales ❑ High Groundwater Table ❑ Lake ❑ Groundwater Recharge ❑ Steep Slopes ❑ Other 7251.009.wpd [RJA/ath] a ,.. Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities UR Varies Moderate to low. Varies ❑Additional Sheets Attached .MEN T.LI I`l"AT,I 'LOP M 8, E'Part. REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT ❑Additional Sheets Attached SC REQUIREM '' . ,_..., - .....,:. . .. _.. , .....- ... • ram..-_ , .. ....,. . MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION ■ Sedimentation Facilities ❑ Stabilize Exposed Surface ■ Stabilized Construction Entrance ■ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities • Perimeter Runoff Control ■ Clean and Remove all Silt and Debris ■ Clearing and Grading Restrictions ❑ Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities ■ Cover Practices ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation • Construction Sequence areas ■ Other ❑ Other j', .rry DER=:S :S M A. T U 'F EW - ❑ Grass Lined Channel ❑Tank ❑ Infiltration Method of Analysis ❑ Pipe System ❑Vault ❑ Depression LI Open Channel ❑ Energy Dissipater ❑ Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation ❑ Dry Pond ❑Wetland ■ Waiver of Eliminated Site ❑Wet Pond ❑ Stream ❑ Regional Detention Storage Brief Description of System Operation Pursuant to SEPA, no detention and water quality is required for alley improvements. Runoff within parking garage will be routed to sanitary sewer system. Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation 7251.009.wpd [RJA/ath] I i T RAL'ANALYSIS Part 12. EASEMENTS/T , . . Part 11',.STRUG U . . . ... RACTS ❑ Cast in Place Vault ❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Access Easement ❑ Rookery>4' High ❑ Native Growth Protection Easement ❑ Structural on Steep Slope ❑ Tract ❑ Other ❑ Other Part.13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL'ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided her cur te./ Signed/Date 7251.009.wpd [RJA/ath] • 3N AY '/' .1.''`,..,,,..4q \ y 2 - .... ` '�;:f.:.i• ;. j c •P' ]J 11V 3l1IA.. 2p i-4 ." M \ •.�.°��, > • \/; •C i': o- rh 3xrna. v c• S JQi !r-:. Hl II, 3N l%� rl/irr'•t'o ..._ : ./ 02' f " ` g O/ 4lyh,' 0 ' r b. NOS E'I e'1/4 v c " • r_ _ • , `�.ld 1. _-/ $ z�Wl� N"` '' N>�y •i�'bL'n `�' '`w 'O,' 3.94.3Bb € q C . r. fi0e, ♦ipm\' � ••�0. ''' i' ,. ,Y J' OFF';,,`:;:. �r— .. �� .., ♦•h7aR::SSi `'..:kx?M'_ �' ' ,,..r .,?.,..+°�,< .`I,,:T,_:. ° S nr S N /' ^I :, .5' '`=.' e` fit`~ a xla+ r r O^)- C e�_►^ , :; 1, „49: f°,r ,5��'ry ;-*:. w:i- , � +�; \�\� ��1 : „' ' > ©)t.q zra P'' e" ¢ .r,, 3S IJ M]I 3S O ���ar'r.-':1 (] Nis ao F.. '\ '��,ilk�6.."c4's�? I II4�rs•A r' /. "�' S3NOC 'iav .' ''I �tj�l S3NOC S ��,:so /. x�.., AV c i AV 006 �� �i' �� .9 " �„ •z.. `-_ -. �.`N'�a ��H9IH GRANT Oy " 30NVg st';;. oos - v® o • 2: , AY 1100 Ei_��111i ,: ._ °''• 1 .. o NO", b makmiessin _ _IIE s �°,vinimi 5 s Ay �P 8"30 ...� p • �� �- ` r`b�at, �— oea �� Scn I ��© �p1 �d. oos �NIVW ON ©p�G' N AV i�Y •- © 05 '1 M Sll " �.. BENS $ t NdJ ) /,. � , S.,. '�ar SWVIIIIM ao\ a `I� Nnv N" P r1 N��©� tx� h i'� ; SVNb'90l /g1I ERS SI z _ �` iii S AV gry•� Inal n mo',. • .. _.. y� 5 ! EY71 N fY"' "42 ❑'{1 PI .\---s 3NY7 AY 3An 1 -F'jct. m a i�hi: O. i ZNI ER. NI R }S En I , •,`. '.....� a tl r�z� RA AV., N..v. AVN rs k `.. r LLD ' v, y �� -tT° i� MS 31�` �c, 310atlN . Y {I SY ................. `ff•s p�. �flfti a t�2; 0® \ T 3\ (/ Ala LT ~ }� D• ,efir, 1 Il{I er naur s MN 00. AV . ON l nr •`Ms� ,Its AV a JYLn we N� 3ld [B r�.. 4 \i Y C�1 " . �� :.; r MS ���Ri2+� __�w� __ OO��rr_��1-. -- - ~ _ OO6I � ' 1 3 s AY ra, CA Av A.',,,," �,..y AN id Y33, • c®a i�� r' MS AV liiii 1,:I Y.�5B:jrpvraNa:�I ,�] I �)vye' �'�C 5�` VO3N3S ~" ir o s_ N d�N.N�•'."�$ AV5,:.'Y�� -,' _ _ _ OOL lit • BB4I- _— AC;Qu[e � S'V,,,� ORB a' �ar4" .., 3 MS4l✓ 0,,, k �— MS—A—SVWONI '1Mt'Oi. . .4../. cid S AY,_:.. N108 �" 2 ''` ..yyy��� -, �b►.tI:" \ is0 .. S ,tih51 ,�a N S AY N10Brn � a� ..;V, NACHESt .t16 I AV xrct :' ? ' AV SW SDP'�� I I c I I 1(1 I 0't' I Ali I -; 01 I I I I A t `I I I I I J _ �� N le- ,ps° Ia N I ap° pe + N���o \ 2 ,..It•'`{t�,� IOs11 5kti2�''I ,, ttor7 5°tV H° _l °0 S1, 0�4p j0DI ►O Ql n 2 M'1 /Co ,� '^a1�) t GD •0 60 ^,� D 000 �° > > 4 � 4 0 4 0 4 4 4 4 f «-- ni — a 3 ,� d.D� 4.4 ,/� ,q� �0 40 ¢¢ ¢¢ Q 44 _ �� /5 k 3 9 111 8 v 30, (^4 3 f v o t° v /20 N ti N v: 3 e ��I I 1Zo J •3 1 3• 1Z N ° /20 /F —91 �. O / pf� 11 o ,2 0 o rG /2 n f7 pofl� h/i 24 ,f r) `—7 I ZS" p 0 ° > !f/2 ✓ • �. . 0 a 24 7 A p3 p t• 50 1 a 8 A °nag 7 , pl S > 5A / ; 4 /2 : • aA;I� `^ p° -� a°d poi > m k �►n _ 4 31 //7./9 (\ �j • �^l]'5 �iV 5 IC ' °I i) 0°44 Ar 03 z3 ; : 8 o "034z 23 • thj 26 o S �� 3 ./A ° cl . � �I /, D 2 3 f3 "a e) p 0 K o o �. N -I I 211 0 0 k J�' „, 1 4a xI • a ° r\� v7 e�< z > z 5 73L �( .: I °, h /3- ' ; 000 �: 150580 0 °h°� �i§ a "I Q 5 N- > �-•, /3 `� Izo H / ``P� ;� /zo •- t �� HBO ell) a. 2.2 s W 9 ''P�1v A•b°ol0"p _w. V, //5 ad'i° 2 2 �' ; 9 0 " u ° 3 0� = o 0 _, I; I „� /,o °d 1L77�' - - p� l,' _� 0 1- 0d a0 it h° hV tJ h 2 of cm 0�D 2/ 00 , 0 33 • 1. /3 CZ 1�ti14 7 h Z /B,ZIDfl ° 69c • o I- o �� J5 ' ,16. n 3 WIC�' °°u "e°i°ED : // • (8 /0 m 20 = F- v, 7 I/ �p 1�/>° 0 iZ7� 5 I N. v G 2 I // " j1 IZ_ /9 L QN V°' /9 : `=� /2 �t�°ol' Z oath /9, M /z �� > °°J aJi h 8 O hM8 loTIA'°"/ �� �/ C, I w .4r- t 274° 1��1� H44 L _O r \ 0 / °`>b0 "8°°00//3 •0 0 h /3 40}rye /zc /11 0 1°p/ZoI �.� / I IZo 10 20 I�,} sr- /t3 = 3 elp U o� J s ,/ t a , / •0 2 U� i /1 p 5 `' S r1 Z�� 13 > rt ope6 L(J�J /7 /'f� �r�'i� N `I°��eu/79'1b'' �6°yh J , d /Z9d ▪ no r 7 Is/q ILo p °� ti/ / �z°(o91A 1.419o300 • ,6 1 17C'' • . °�y5 �._L..� Rb6 A. / h 3 I.'�o ) tj, 03h 4 141 Er 6 �/� ; p J ,� q {"+ t/6 30 30 4. / r.h 1. h Zo IZ� l7_0 i L 11.00/6 7/.� oDIC. 1OZ0 D R,/(..1 "' . + 10s 5.0e s b r /0 730 /e •.. 3° 3o 0 i••�:'•i6►•.1'ditd-� •.,�_._ GJ Ito '' ostl s)os•eosui ,.an�e �s 0 /t/©9-07%3 -, ,)6u no, �' Q M f S. FOURTH (J)�T. to vi • S. 4TH ST �" • `'` ror .96 L / rzo ��I" / •o rZ.0 6,:4-.7 li/s GD v 0I 19� I (4 T4 A�'L•� F R.tL I/S < 13 J15 Q 0 O' o I Ao ,l° 40 /� 40 eo ¢o /i-J J LO • 20 h i I D 2 -E'Li/ a 'n / f1t°� p 20 h 1 I,I,20 • h ,� y I co I1 • (O 4 3�Z / ) 3$ 6-1,5 Zh I h' l u 0t) / ,130 l 9 0 l v v"`i' o a o 1 a Q f`-A k tto p� i] yQ izo .0 nj 5L'� Do 13 I ti v •_ y ` -f N t` ar41 N ^too 0) '� 2 //�A6°.ti9� tl �'1 /ti Lj 2 101 10 c. (0 • _ 4.00 1, .fi I R ' , e 1) 11 ,--,-2 ! °� yo' rd I, h`9 • 112 18 ' ` 3 U- o R rLa A ot�o ¢o �0 4° I 40 Lo Oft AS'� 50 3O;b l �66 l U 3 II' I.o4'y I I j�f ,�°� /zo p0o 0 o rt o/O, II/ t • 1� 0 �• 13 T. u )0,11.4° /6 q �' 7 \yti p`l' rs, d ,qo , I G° 01 ( o� w Ib ry 06/ 1 D() h n �oz�6t ' So�3 1' E��{ 4 •I 4 2 &ell u 016 -17�,� W 4 h1` h .' S%1,00 17 i�. F1. 4 TO I i v.L1.i,. N� E . Aeno d-`''/ I SNe 30, °'z,.,3� . et At. Fptr" 0 V3Ph �-I5°\ N 4 1 '� ' t• > 1 '% _ y o ? zo a d Iil'7 / 1324 . 13 / , F 1 ' Its a� k0 160 5 > M` Iat d'° , k5• o h o yo ' 5 t'� °I° •‹b% tiet�-/6 h� IL' 1P9 — 1�• ilv- d55/6I ' 9 , ° t1e• A. . �er� - cj. t0 5 h �+�°�L h I1' Z3 �9 16 L+ °L c. ,3 'y' II 0 44'. ^ G .1 0 n 40 40 _ 40 ^I gh� 9 d� 0 uj I+K ft m 7 6 £ .i 5 •• 0 15 I{) 6 O 30 3 Im►"I y 3 VI 4 �(./ .% K /L0 \ 7 p A t`�°15 v° s 5�Z ik.. , 30 30 �o1,°I.„%4 d• 464.°o9.7�S ° 7:2g' 1,1CP ' 6 5 11'a : h IIA� ( ) D04j 11 G �• 1� o °°° k/D 16 = b1°� • J �'� 7 hl :" h1 � ;3� 14 ' j 7 n 30 el' G CjFi 2 n . 7 4• p115 LL p i p . IO I�/J Iln i '1 I G n� 1 QI 0 v p H-•1 I—.r-4 > r- 3' �� `QG \ U� � J 3 N '^ 'LhV n eo° ° 0,° 5 ; rp 0 o • U Of, 'U ▪ 5�t l GO• 5�Z,1 A „ la , hvtI N _ v, , + °l� j-� + 00. 8 0,i0 .(13)' 8 51'1�/� I, ,.fig i0�o 13 0 Q ,, I . • >1 r) ,,,,er—,.-s� 4ti e0 • 4c'to 4o 9 °1� o��� Q1-- Q � /�1) i�4 12 9 0 p'11 i 1 ti tiro„ vti 3rp 9 ( : 9 61� o h I �' ' ^��* n ?� /,0 } o'° 00P q t 9 �1/'D /2 IbIO ' '1 10 o J I iv ` 4 p e /3 vi • / 1 ` �� r� hti��wg 4o 0 n 4 /� +BDIq�J DAD) 'h0 I� f�� �r �0 I I J ,1 10 1'1`, 40 40 4° r 7- rJ� r) W 31c y �o po y �'r. bti° • �p ,,e°°S �.B p2O°1 LIn /0 61tiAr dp /I (1 10 ,, ►�' I��/zo� h )zo ie. ,3 YI ° (O kao°�i° tl 0 5V // /20 otq /G /20 So //d /ZOZ � .o /�� IZO----A ^ h�h Q /20 /4 /PI & NB/-07.3olt/ .i .�/`° a \J o" FIFTH F TH ST. 0 �. �= -•Y`-y -... S. l0 S. R, _ --__ 5 T HT. Q� (Srx Ad6•) ' I{ /r.<n/ tf ) nl I I t„ I .__ - I ._ I f 1 i .,.- I 1,vn I /Zv A I 4�. I /zOA75 I '�._ Ic, !30 /Z01 40 I 60 4 - • g , '' •••' BURNETT AVENUE S. 8 gnI •• i i I. I • • I1 III; • I 1 • ci co . , ' c�1 , . (n I U' • 1 I I • A \ • k I 1 �'+ I I �t;_� I • C.�J ; • t �,; i, '5�:�:' a-r� �%�25..^:;'r6-:+*rsfxy-r<•."1'^�7y,•Z' e_= re? ., ^r,. __ _-a._ r . - �.r�.nt�� s1,n, .•''XIIA„011 1. Yi ,r,a.�,+.' 3'• 11,•,i.t + r :4•', h: v1; s,�..?l:? .5.. .7.v1u,b..GrF+n- '• !, bk. 'bt+� ?L_-.,5 q•}':. ;:xn. at,. :�.. t. •.1. ,:tk 1.' :.:f,11,L,,:7,, 1•,n i' •t^` A::h1t:X�:. ?..•`G ',l, t •^le � �� �,,� 1: f}�'° • yA, .s..A,. 5.,. ,�',�r. :a..�tl•':1 '•,�:, ..� ). oc,• r,>, ..lti r~,!><+• ,a•.F't_< „c.;Ya nt :=.,,y,>..�v r �., •,,�,;y. ..a .(,. -;w, r„ ..,-,•• „.' ;S^'y. +,l.1 '„tb'' SU.t '?t;'. .,ar :.JOY•,\. �'1?.• :" .> .�':-_ • t,ea .5,,,($, IsY At n },•=hc. „rc % 1,r ...r.,•:, K':6 pt ;..: ;1 rp,•;n•, 'Est , ,,•:'.4 }},,::�Yg ,� - ..t.,,,.r?,e,� .I,w. .a„u,¢..:�,. •^'�°�'L'rr�:• ,Yi�i:,''!r v1�t G�1•:t.�t��zdnr>'!r,,.,,a+''.e ,.1•„�,t.S;. .:cA:?',4i�;�(�,;..t.$.:-t�^4i�St .f.y.y,i,;e.yi ,., � •tt ,- :'c• ..•...— - .... :'riFid'7t1-2ts•.eb!d•1o.: . Ss::••},r ". .,,J., :..,•_:: .,a;)-----.: �<t :t•r. ,,.i i � 'r ' 'se • 'n hI�i ;:r-' 'V,,. YsISv.F. EAlI V 1:- g 1''• -------- �" T',. ;:0..I•; ,, A.,. o,•:•.,.,,;s.;,:,F `L wl} r,.y:r.,a. .ii.•. 1,,. 7 :j::.�lt1!; I . '1'1° •+y, •• y, --- I Fr:r"('r ,'!10• f �. \'ia::•', I i 4'.�;•--fTy,,..cp:-i-' �, _1..:1ii.r 4i.N:; I . ,h..,,!.. g -� -_ )r.•f:.�.i44'tt�rcai:•"�::yw'''v: .,. .♦ iSa« C f�l 1'� i�\' • ° a •'" d:. :I 'AAA • t..av Al•'I • a —_ -- - o :,,, , ri'-f:ai�• i.4.%�. I� �u'd'.�25 aid ••..„, 1./.+.,i 4:K:{� t7 1r8f.' .T1A:� cx ^I• 1% "r[t*r ,. '4I,.,',S{ r�- / • t:',14 :`a'v;i•a,.:' <I.1'i1b5r1 'u•rirr �r, - ,r \ i'f' o'b iQF�:S. i � r ,• '�,r,,xnrt;::;'5;.: ,"1�''"�. :'re''c','t ,1�e.r \3: '/a/�' : � L'�<\\ '..(1. •I °° �;I''' 'I • A • 1. :y!�.:.. ryd.,}l.'Ji'-�1 I;`:'�, ',c;� G n I 1, \ • _ zc t..�} I . 6. `'fti '3 ,i1441,14t� ••r . • J _ _L-L ° 'D,' • p a•• �t7 ti' fi '• - '11! w, • il;t; a�t t1i��`1li< , �� pe r� s y�fl r-'- t`', taa6su ,i gg 1='1..i1":r}., �� ' ti, /,Ixp,i440...N......,14.10,,,, ��.Z�i�'7,A•,;..: 0... - ri1 4.ie „1�., „t•c!, ,.t'` r, . .. l , �1 .I ., i. 4 R e ;.t;(s:lX1: ,; .,rr, j".l! ' },f;ii i byfS'« ali, I Q1 0 �Y� "Y` I°'''il,, y , 1 - •0 l'o•,1`i?f„'Itj+�[ r;ii4. 1: „r;;i7s�.y��,fi4ivi„ LN;`n'Rib:= ,:rt r..}f_/... �d' c I s: YII11:�ii'':rT.'� 111 ".NCO:.:,...,• `,t,,:;,,, ` -.' W M �•' I" I r • 1 N °^ 64e, lb n11,1.1 i � / • ' V" - , ^'F•qtki.� `^'MI b I� /,�--i � ` /� r� I igg � ♦. . J R 3i$; 4; r)X �4JLc / c:� Y!,:rµ, _� ;;,.:4 t' �_ ivt. _. 0€� i ,R5t ��^y,_ �rFI t.,.,.,yy. LIB ;'-.; ° +'I_ __ iv�wA0.:E t_ 7, I I _ _ a p - IMI I I w. •. 3.c�y0j. rH"�:'r'�: - - a � •' i••': •. DcgnUi..a, � „ b •�'y 'q ra .rs, r A n;.:•5• ,r1; tiitima�..49, 9D ...� 'a> "-7 'c' r•'t: :.'-�. •:�: ., .>.!(f!:, ,.4.. :�A1,"', •v;.t.E'�Y�'. •'wq,,b. .:r'II� .} C} ?,(„"� :( IV -Tvmrn+m+®uresrasm .� •i..r`s. .IuO ,.O;a• 7 i wk .x' t1 t: k 'a�•r Vioi w' - — *full j.r ..,A' , Ht ,� • : -,lr�' Pki dr'tr,t?"`A. -p' - - -._ - 17�'. _ , �i e�'::G...y,1 r:r f' I, d..,'Y('.'. 6 ,,,...o:,S i''rt� j' - .. s.,, °2�,�`1r:;�- .,t, fi. .'3, +S �•r~uy' -- -- •.,ly:T .f`.Y. a,rY,r. (, •\al r:',rt ,Ix,,,.7,A(a t Cb;�1 -..,, _ ,....;:t;l,' :tea- ,; .;.•rtw;asrr,> .1. •P 1'-'::ttl ; ° x,,-...,L , • ':i.�r� e6f',r!nl li . ':S i:•'1Lfrerv9,:6 it ,�\ .��: lidr,•:+a R141 yyo t t•+,_fir �1" n?� f.,titry'. :t;<,. t I , 0•~I•r 0'• <11'4.r ..-. 'SOMA byl.t5500,dp•K=Jr'��•' litV.6ti<C 10..'�,.,.. ✓, (k- :,T1iA... ,..(ri• \• ;PA, -":?-x,. .r f— y r - . 0 .,0 0 .lwa_.J} ,;v+?'L,ri'-b:;i�4x?.:'r u.1..!:i:•c:ti:r•r. ,. CA k� v u ♦ I ��A 1 �t ° —^y— , o o .�__0 i•9;:ar.:.,.r•:.,.;..,• -\` • • fi •r' �; w Tb, . w ti__.w- --'•_w -•w :'�. 9 c'— " •wr, Anw <-s -WILLIAM• AVENUE S. 'F. w tiT -�-. ��� w w • w Xo A y ga __• __ cv • vE 60 Ha ®p®bsBAO®❑m 4 e • • 1PS8• �5 y�� gg • . 1 gCO 11 R 0 • • r r o cngl i-�z • _ ♦ °�-tiiN In o a • ill.11,1111,17.:‘,.,,,.,...,,oz sI II •• • • S. • a• a en• g Z [p �. ° g�ni fR{..I:rp n N0d' !+ leN c , iQa ,'o m m� li Ili u HtiiS L 'Z �' N �y c ,-�u� • • e 11 K _ �ssp dig gqg yyT2PyngppcyL�?( e. p2pZZ phi ' ° s(- 8, �B A =Zl,) 15-;•,. �' St'° rF Rt.lr y "' C4_.r+G1 .tn�1 _._`-1 r ° 1 .2. °m. '^+ s. in • .M- 6InE y $ m v '1 c S c o ;p8. -=b1 m r z iiz§A¢ �' F,°° Z Z° sg a :'Nv 84- 0t p tio, _ 0 r �� gi oR �V v zq .01g v y m HL �^PS yb� �D; o i r �1z�-z A4 2S �� o p .1. s T 4 .0Sd� g.91 4 i NigA I N ig s:q 21 is g • qt1,,!, g g 's15 : P g .1 1 F,,, g 11; ; g% . ./ 1- ,,m 'g ! gl gil . 1.. -A142 m�� ;g OiA: ;Mi e0 gR li' 2 o a z g • � 58 " �K= H 'ii • • LE_ �r 6 f E As z I gP g g6E M1 _A . ql _ _ " m, t$ > 8 Z ggmpKf ° zG 1, m XVIk b. A • oION A8g gg0 ig 97 °no� e� f g gfi s. dg d € gE d $ °t g . 30H > a _ g p m 4g0 iM.7, 3 - g .g R. -1; "°v6 ii 0 iglA 8 r 2 '§ 861ydili 1 1; 8 2 .. ,.. • • � g9a . ha 'sr A �' � ggg€� 8 I 5' C XI ° Agl id ; gl 1 PI E. o $ g ' a', 18 1'8 ' • i i . . � .3 R K ° c 4� H C . 4 o _af2 = k • �rvi1E Ts P 8 ill! ,^ r=„ N ii 10/ rz ::1 Ii 6 2 . • p'1■ 4 z • m vos♦♦yd • • . •ay��31 1 IR/6/0015RF I Rwc I RWG I REVISED CONTOURS AT NORTH PROPERTY UNE, •,•".•'. ° •'•••••" . . No. Dot' AN CM. bD RM'i'n, ,GNAO.' • Oaton.a,= scold: 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH For: Title: ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY • 7251 Q KENT, WA 98032 om«n Hotl:ont'1 • SDI, LLC m ��, (425)251-6222 LOTS 11-17; BLOCK 27 sm.t ; J o' . (a25)251-8782 FAX ^°«I^- ''-ZA' 2100 124th AVENUE NE TOWN. OF RENTON se �Iti1t:� .....,,.,. APPrevre�''$"r_ Vrrtleal • SUITE 119 ..-_.. .... • • i - - - - - _ N01'27'04'E 660.02' _ - 22 £ BURNETT AVENUE S. -� F i A ;r- ., -IT ,,,-F-- f' i F. A I Ni NI 01 M I j AI N 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 -., I (C) COCTJ f 11 T I 1 I I (- aCJ I I 1 -n mmm2 a; C a 1 N -. Iz 6. ' u=. mP � 2 rJ , I I �fOaL:! ,..:: ':y,%�:1;�,f;.- .�;.,_._ ,4�- 7'-�--- ;,-!, . ir:w. ,e .:-':''.1',..'.','.. • • .,. 28f25.E•:•.3AB19b5:, ^6.. %c•. •.i�`.^ .��.t:%L' �?. y ` •. - "..u.___�._._. ''v'Y it[u:�1._. __-.a._._v1_.r_ N.._5...✓..+;', i,J,:�`�y'{y I,j mmmmN o "` �%c 1 •A ' F,w lC PnAnri 1 wxmz 2 s J^ CFF �m n' I xe �w 'r:'rA , CFF F .� m ,f0F J w c, am. I 1 1 0 1 1 F m I i.nk I I )-1 9 2?,I. rt P x .` 22FFe0 2.1'3 €4 1<, G NI . ri I . h O 4 •fi § J d E. r'Sn ;f9� •`"1I F I �'•3•�'ii''iran''....f''['• E £ 3 2 > >T *2 .d•� co O ^.8yyyy : �•::1 `I fig t�ilr014-`, R "S I?8r-4 1 $ I^ `°'F �''- rl7>- P\oi ,,:i::rf3 I i.:Jl,�: �';:`l;`��' S� I n I `i 'V."-'imN• - N / ¢e oHivE lAY i., R 1 2 -..ly --- _ i:.g I^ ! r+j�•P(a• _ _ �� 01'29'46'Y( J4988'.• 'S �•�,:. ../'Q=-t{:`' ..IITyaA� — — - —___ � F^ - P oli ...row_, .,..i.. :.1 x v.,,x - ...,e.a...,,.... ,.,.,.,:,r ,471(8 - . CR 2,•( ,r,•m:,.,,,,..,,,„.,:5.:,,,,),,,,,,, u:a-.a. a^f.µ�-f3 .or, a_:5. �, aTA&F1 a «.,.• .}�_ .OwT` „'i —_ - - - .� .w., h., ?o. . r<_ yT <;1::"'�� -.si ".:f ,•?L�+.,. ,rlt[61 - __ - '.ter. � �,, ������ m .4r.. .r''! y�4 a. ,1 .,1... ( Y - .I._ -'o sir r k =1~. =bv � Nt1 r-, z' �y =rn a r•p r., :fa, nk,-: .rtv, a.' �tr'`` `Qya'+ :- '`%t..- r.Wr: :l:_ s- ..u(.',' p, . 51 $' Sa.: /� ...ate 1 fl-. .N"+F Y .'T,r.: ( r '<(tS S�•,,., - .T :1 r^• rr• ,h1...1 r..L.,< lar- . e y('r i: r7�111pp t r Y. 'tar: I ii.''i,. .....i.1 _ - ,an - _a �� _ x IN ..Y• .:'x' Et i.r . �Y'= S GfE•:WNRiRIP :+!:<';:�:,•`^_ �F• �',y- _ _ ..• -r� _ �.� E5 E; ,� �•i.o. -,4-::'„ ,I✓'a,o-.ap.!�:- .g. ,�. .� .x:..,t,.,•c - .,�.q. �,. .`� G G c -Po'.''-f n -�- I i-• '�.<;::: _ " - •::�t���, l:.,r... ,,�,"?T..'+'�`t: tt '..v-� �,.:'':4y....+'.; 9 3 `\� i G g ' G G w Ld 5�f 194B'1C�TSS• _G -�i` i:.a-i.=,•iv.�.;w __-..... .:«.�.��C,t...,r,..,;. �• ' - t f z: C 0 .. I I r 'Q. 1 G �a G Q G l II 1(4, ta't"\C:"\----- % o e N U E S � w w;-w y W - w w W 11 s w rE ��„g AR� >�,Mm;-m yy Nn WILLIAMS AVENUE E E _ 0 �W ~, JW CI - mm lA r.t N,.,S r.,4 ZA -` mms' - ^ '`N A. yyl A Fgbtl,n^ g k v1.1NmZ rm2 ARE f',O F,m mr1AS• ,. __ � £mg 2111 4 u. P gbo g "y HgrgNHH§ s o mu .. n� $'N s1Ngsz sg Dun Y$ ij Eu „' wa6 `� Ye lae m aE1a �� $ ,• $� b' 3 " I�II >j r j,.}, \ ° / •e+f o 8 nC c%j, y wwaJs AVE s D 11 1 1 !il A 1 i9! 3 OR o og` II ,. r' . •eaEozD000. °ems 5 _ 5 a 9S o i5$ 2N20 N IT�III ice'•. r �n � D.N1�; r 4 21^n �2g €gym (� £l g4 EElimho �� N CEDAR AVE S —°1 1 2 i!! liAg i 11 1R1 G) "A - N....i < 1111P 1%,,,,,0 Q a �� o am F� au € , 3 _a2 Z or; LTJ o_ \J! my 2 R. o _ � ig o 0 $ g 5 m g Pem g° �v. �_ :6.1 N i ? 11 g 5 -g ; gT31 ItO Pli: 93 g" ge . ._ C1 m x- o� np - 'o m m za 1' c, s a+- a rr- .: . 4 r marE y xxT 6}4a1, -v°� 2E gm . �nlss u 2 Ae' • o � ;;2Eoo 8gg c ' nQ ° m . o oar e � �� gb • "1 �% 1 ,§1P e m � A 2,9 '� o o r iif: g ''^_' > S4�g ig Ern IT iR "e g °" I�>' F ��f �: aN o - oy ��g'A E • s - lE8 'a a P ` � �A L m g. . m n m D =� �. € �g Qg� LiLs �" a � m o � � w in , Z o� � `b' 'n O1 5 5' G o r� �!n^ g e f a gay ao $ a�3 � o �m � �� g � . Z $ I; is XAg' a $15, !' Ai a1�N m� g g I; i 1 A g p i g µ /Q, a $g 1. o .88 . o 8 X'g ° la 8a'°E 41AN t NI c, E6p ' F, 9A gA i 1E -< pgg ,.. q v. lig.t R A4 4 g. g 8 ,t8 cn g g4- giI A9� g o is m r p c ¢ z o a aAO '�' y OS2 - 8 lb • IA0. . 8 '9 8 o c '^ 2 9z i� 5 5P ! i egg' � g � �� q € e 4 s o C m�� �� a d ! iIPP M2 "g54-5pR 5 1 .8/ ono( �$ 12 OW o 'rGVI1T'p6.,0.yyd a No. I Dote I By I ONd.I Appr.I Review, Job Number i'• I is Cosigned Sortie: For: Title: ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH 7251 „y T►� c�2 KENT, WA 98032 Drawn SRI:yTW FIFTH AND WILLIAMS HOUSING ASSOCIATES, LLC. LOTS 11-17, BLOCK 27 Horizontal Shoot 44 (425)251-87826222 FAX Chocked RWG '''2D' 2100 124th AVENUE NE s Approoed_mg Vertlaol TOWN OF RENTON s�(r �Py' CIVIL ENGINEERING,LAND PLANNING, N/A SUITE 112 RENTON, WA 1 aT 1 /a'0 ENGR4' SURVEYING,ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Dote 3 x4 os BELLEVUE, WA 98005 rile:P:\m000o\7251\,urvey\726tto21-d„g Dote/Time:3/24/2o06 1:07 CM Scale:III (WEST %ref:---- • • • LOT LINE ADJUSTI IEf T LUA-OO-168-LLA0 A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 SECTION 18°AND THE END-30-0211 • - • . SW 1/4 SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E, W.M. ' CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON . • • • • EXISTING PARCELS ADJUSTED�± PARCEL A DECLARATION �; LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION • LOT UNE ADJUSTMENT IS MADE WITH MY FREE WILL AND CONSENT AND IS THE GRAPHIC - DEPICTION OF MY WISHES TO ADJUST THE PROPERTY UNES AS SHOWN HEREON.I DECLARE THAT I AM • THE FEE SIMPLE OWNER OF THE LANDS SHOWN HEREON. PARCEL 1: TAX LOT 723150-2465-9 LOTS 11 THROUGH 17 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS, PAGE 135, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; I • THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 17 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON, ACCORDING TO PLAT 1` RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS, PAGE 135, IN KING COUNTY.,WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 5 FEET'OF SAID LOT CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 910203 AND 910204. SD RENTON LID EXCEPT THE WEST 5 FEET OF SAID LOT.CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS • teo.,,,,,,.,.........6) .. • RECORDED UNDER RECORDING.NOS:.910203 AND 910204. //) PARCEI_-.2: TAX-LOT 723150-2455-01 BY: (� ITS: 4 /2 9L - LOT 16 AND THE SOUTH HALF OF LOT 17 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON, • • ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS, PAGE 135, IN KING.COUNTY, ACKNOWLEDGMENT WASHINGTON; • In EXCEPT THE WEST 5 FEET OF SAID LOTS CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS STATE OF WASHINGTON 2 RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 910203 AND 910204. • COUNTY OF KING i SS' PARCEL 3: TAX LOT 723150-2450 I CERTIFY THAT I KNOW OR HAVE SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE THAT'tigasMYAt01\Ifit • o PERSON WHO APPEARED BEFORE ME,AND SAID PERSON ACKNOWLEDGED THAT(S)HE SIGNED 1p 1W , a LOT 15 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME THIS INSTRUMENT, ON OATH STATED S E AS AUTHO TO EXECUTE THE INSTRUMENT r " 4p h y! FFq��IIIDDD - 1 -OF PLATS, PAGE 135, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; `1� �L ' 1Oh ''•.��1 o AND ACKNOWLEDGED IT AS THE GJggff OF SD RENTON LLC i �;,�; 1 j o TO BE THE FREE AND VOLUNTARY ACT OF ARTY.FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES ;� ' EXCEPT THE WEST 5 FEET OF SAID LOT CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS - MENTIONED IN THE INSTRUMENT.A_, ..` 1 5 "� _ ' IJ RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 910203 AND 910204. DATED THIS isDAY OF 0.10 4.1b , 200a. Syif 0 in PARCEL 4: TAX LOT 723150-2430-01 S'•:. _ • �TQ1t1� q�tr� q�S.B g.06.• o LOTS 11 THROUGH 14 IN BLOCK 27 OF TOWN OF RENTON. ACCORDING TO PLAT ;�'• ~' NOTARY PUBUC IN D.FOR THE ST OF WASHINGTON �!{ jr t " RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS, PAGE 135, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; RESIDING AT •4 PRINTED NAME aCOMMISSION EXPIRES �� 4 �� � . o EXCEPT THE WEST.5 FEET OF SAID LOT CONVEYED FOR ALLEY PURPOSES BY DEEDS �SIn RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 910203 AND 910204. ty"�' - 0 I,. r 0 • 1 1 0 ,l. l o \ . ,, __' 9 APPROVALS • E. EXAMINED AND 0.ANND�/APPROVED THIS 30 DAY OF A ove I 200?. n Aid:e 0 -gn 40'411 2r,.nwer04avi CITY OF RENTON ADMINISTRATOR OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBUC WORKS • c o KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ` - ,uo EXAMINED AND APPROVED THIS. DA F. 200�i o \ 1 n1 I477 aft& _. •a i KING COUNTY ASSESSOR EPUTY KING COUNTY OR ' . ACCOUNT NUMBER 7Z3/SD-2430' .aya. �t/33 t�zy&r i • • i , - • �- - - n/L -D r en.- ♦ ti v`T . RECORDING CERTIFICATE: LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: �0AM G{ `\g GH41 DRAWN Br PWH IFNEJf DATA ��� Recording No..2 A A 3 0..So e:? 90a 0/5' �y ,p4 .- .,, Q• ;�1 182-15 72ND AVENUE SOUTH DATE SE 1/4 SEC 18 SW 114 SEC 17,T.23N.,fl.SE.,W.M. SHT This OCT correctly represents a survey mode by me or under my * . , A Q' KENT, WA 98032 4/4/02 SURVEY fled for record ii, day W/1.2 4 ej 21v11 at .1_,.moo dued;on in conferment•, th the requirements of the Survey Recording ` > /y� , ,. ' " I P,LL u book��d swhn of ws. �_m u.rev...f Act at the request of `', TO LLC,in July,2t10D. . '%' •; a I% W "..•''� ?► ( ) SCALE: SD RENTON LLC 1 W»�eaa,rn.lea. � �F. .. C.�� 425 251-8782 1" = 40' 124TH AVENUE NE ���� ill., (425)251-8782 FAX CHECKED BY: SUITE 100 I ' r ;;Lliili' _ o q RING �,A_JLd'.9 p� ; .;N�Tt�fy1�SO� yd, 'YT�•f ; ? JOB NO.: 7251 BELLEVUE, WA 98005 OF ��Q � l 04 R4 1 LAND p t y' CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, Manner Superintendent of R words ..., Ft. I,1 NANO,T8138� a� ',EXPIRES:05-18-03 '�r1NO ENGtA SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PROJECT NO: CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY WA 3 i n a. n . - 9dO0 i5 /S7.1 03. Ft . _ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA-00-168-LLA A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND THE LND-30-0211 SW 1/4 SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E, W,M. .� MONUMENT CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Sbg�� �:SURVEY205COMTROL • -- CITY OF RENTON I • SURVEY CONTROL MONUMENT o RENTON NO. 1140 0� ( S. 4 T H STREET END.CONC MON. • _ • - STIBM'FYE 300.49' W STEEL DIN • CALL. . POSITION 0 20 40 80 � in I i n::�W`'.M sbisling , biding / I ��w"LIMIE ':: .MIS �Carage, ��. House __ SCALE 1'=10' I L--- -- __ Seg'24'2i'E-115.17'-i I u. Ft I • PARCEL 1 inl • 4-, •I Co r "" 30' sEr I W 1 Cd i . EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS Z it PARCEL 2 �I � ii PER FIRST AMERICAN NO.503196-5K - W .- x 10.THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO WE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A W 1 5 I .0 C r iv Z , PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT DATED OCTOBER B, 1950. I •�- ` n . m Q , 13.THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A PERMISSIVE I ` �l • ID c USE AGREEMENT AS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO.9205222702,RECORDS OF1----- - -- nx r r q! — �I I o KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON.(NOTED HERE) 1 ` " <I 14.THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A RECORD OF I `�.``:" ' SURVEY'AS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO.19990707900019.RECORDS OF ~ ,r r`� • • c KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON. (UTILIZED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS SURVEY) ' W W. P. ` &. :t'_-�-; PARCEL 33 m (- -. .in 1,;Z histing� I•. OLD LOT LINE m 1 01�' • I -- _ ,{,t image TO BE REMOVED < .Q m U N I __ 1, (TYPICAL) —P/ _IP U a o m m fly r 1sG#m J t SURVEY NOTES - 7—7 I w 4 =* --I I /' L / I o —' LI!< i-"r� Existing 1 ,cmv _ -;:i� c 1.HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD 1983/91.HELD POSITION OF CITY OF RENTON I cWi ¢ , House +�, a SURVEY CONTROL MONUMENT NO.205 AND DIRECTION TO CITY OF RENTON SURVEY I W i , o ? o CONTROL MONUMENT NO.1140.VERTICAL DATUM IS NAVD 1988.HELD CITY OF ¢ T- ., to RENTON SURVEY CONTROL MONUMENT NO.2123.ETEYATAN=45.11 FEET. -- -- Q�Q— ,_ - I • 2.PROPERTY AREA = 40,276 t SQUARE FEET(0.925±ACRES). F WF_ 0 3.THIS SURVEY REPRESENTS VISIBLE PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS CONDITIONS I co` EXISTING ON OCTOBER 1, 1999.ALL SURVEY CONTROL INDICATED AS 'FOUND'WAS R W 1n iJ e RECOVERED FOR THIS PROJECT IN OCTOBER OF 1999. ¢ d I J _- "I 4.THIS IS A FIELD TRAVERSE SURVEY.A SOKKIA FIVE-SECOND ELECTRONIC TOTAL J PARCEL 4 I ' " o :5STATION WAS USED TO MEASURE THE ANGULAR AND DISTANCE RELATIONSHIPS -- -- --. ,n BETWEEN THE COWN°MONUMENTATION AS SHOWN.CLOSURE RATIOS OF THE I I TRAVERSE MET OR EXCEEDED THOSE SPECIFIED IN WAC 332-130-090.DISTANCE I / n ONTR _ •l_ .- q MEASURING EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN CALIBRATED AT AN N.GS.BASELINE WITHIN ONE I • YEAR OF THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY. LEGEND i j 1 , :19.4'1 • ' I` I I -- , f, I ® FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED m T -- i • 1/2'REBOIL AND CAP'BCE 28238' . — —• o • Benton Family 30 TO BE SET AS CONSTRUCTION IS • o Practice • Clinic 4^ 11:' COMPLETED. a I J I I 30' TAT ' I -- 10' 19 't, `I + -- -- ~ NBEP26'04IN 115.04' w c 3Q Q.05' _ --- ' END. MON.W/DRILL HOLE S. 5 T H S T R E E Te IN CASE o °J END.MON j W/1-1/2'STEEL DISC -- - IN CASE �;r••:•••••• •••••roe, INDEX DATA �._v • a4 wMsc<ys �GHq(�S 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH DRAWN PWH SE 1/4 SEC 18&SW.114 SEC 17,T.23N.,R.SE.,W.M. SHT yc T't^ r 0 KENT, WA 98032 °A� 4/4./02 SURVEY FOR �'. ..‘01 • a. .5 5'4' ,.4 I. (425)251-6222 SEW P 1" - 4D. SD RENTON LLC ' 2 Y �, C 2100 124TH AVENUE NE si =•l�7,t;T . .1 m ' 425 251-8782 FAX CHECKED BY:RING 1j•` ( ) SUITE 100 • 11, Jam, ��,=" "'V•• ? JOB No 7251 .BELLEVUE, WA 98006 OF • • • 9� a . P w• CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING. LAN° \ <r1 �tiP SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PROJECT NO.: CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY WA 3 n,EXPIRES OS-18-03 NC ENG1N — — O Y LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA-00-168-LLA S A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND THE LND-30-0211 • SW 1/4 SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E, W.M. I CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ( Y — -l - � I I I I � � n! III I--- I 0 100 1 400 SCALE: 1-=200' I - `� *//50J�� � d • , ...id. = SOUTH 4TH STREET -- E ! I I _I I -�z I .. gli 'I _ _ �_- _ = O Nt $ Q W W W W w F 'C TOZ- ; t¢1! �/��/) H I U cus j3I ii SI IL i m I y 3 I -m • it I o SOUTH FIFTH STREET a • I IH +EW -_- I i Ft. � _ I 1 N I t 2 co I l Li , � i N SOUTH STH STREET _ 4!4 o I I' ii/ , _ Seit - `1 I 1 / \ / I NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP , , ,4-44 ,,, .. __ _ _ _ P j INDIX DATA l !! �G VS SOUTH DRAWN SHT {-1.� , . .,11.5E,WM.RE — ' ; :V/ Q' �}.M Z Q7 h. (425)251-6222. .•L �� _ g j�VUE, WA 68005 F 100 . % z. J08NO.: ,! tR J� y f- 7251 - %yRt SLANQ `, s*. a Py; CIVIL ENGINEERING. LAND PLANNING, PROJECT"o.: 3 t> SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY WA \ ,t BEM 05-18-03 /NG ENG*1 #4.....0 1 i. 6 R.4 E. R. 5 E. SEAT TLE(CITY P.0)IO ML112'3Q'I 6 M, TO INTERSTATE 90 ���- -• �IOIr15 sheet 5) .�� •�. ISSAC •i q to.t; I �r- .I �a � _M Ili '«.,•::.:.:::. � `' k" 1 FT •li � ,I♦I I.- I 1i •:;:::: in: �I�a �'�; j Suo�t ri. I CD . �,_:i:>:>. ` ■ it iiiiii ‘ �Sch ; • .\.•i"—j: •r-', = .. I 7I U ICI -:R \a .� -c' -***Niiikiipp'-',---• W• 11111 4I�. •� iii\\ — AgD 81 .............. i`i+--=� .1 I ■ ix :;' ' "' i' i i M L in ,t .. .• „...........: -IL'-l�i 411 \ r._ AR01I � II�� �' ( 'j i 9 y \\�� I I `�.,\ -: z, IIII �,;T: �- ��� .■B�/ r �, e •i D Athle• tiMuIII.E 'II ' f %* 1,,,,iy, jU f 9� ,, .., ., II Field AllE111,144. j � 111 ill • .. BeD �I��\\��__I�r_�� �- Pliii -- --i,lP:- : 11,,N/Spo ri / \ I•.MtOli?►\` �L14v 4-i•r 1 ISMI1tr, ''' Cemi Evc .......„ 1i :asebait/ ID 1 -- -' GRAVEL 'PIT - „, -fit, Park1... • : � •� �' I II1 _ - I `,:/ ��� \i„,„, tom 1�321. BeD �'-. i:.ali:r�i:. III�'��t� — (-=- -- - - 4141 \ 1��I�( AkF EvC p �-- 1 it %j 4 1157 ._,IN 4 • kill .ROAD TL \ WK .��IIII iii ` \� ... 11') „far .. L� ,- T - �.� I,.. ,���11 �� LNk1 " AkI r.� ��A I� _ -.1000 t • NM �`• � •�I �—B — Wo I \ • !.'� "f Imo/-. • ==_ --- — - \e 13 --r --'---- JI `•, • , / I d 1 AgC BM 37 \ TI I .� i sta... ' Golf:Course :;; - -- :\•\,e -'ij°_ .‘.:__ ::::,,Ag, • ���. Sew.ge OR7i �'� ,�� •. I 4i - yO `6s -I ." \\ I \\ w►oo Disp.sal �� s , =a ° _ _ Substa AITrC 0 / r � I�T��_• ill %\AgD Sill . E `� -` ���; ::"1 '''. —=--1-4116 It , ,-,,lk,,,., , ii. riFirrr(:) 4 •1',,,, . 7----...... i.,1' .":,11//`. ... Pu 91 %. ..: .•.:. E 1 Longacre;I�i�ir Pu . ....-- i. 515 G (_ • Ao( r.-� I -- •• BeC� 1 Pt' 1)-) '' "--\- (I r".> ._))___, • _____ R _ ��� Py WO / BeD ui• ;,' .■ �D ijI iFi Ur ��� , I •l� • ii• •' 'a• I IAgD \ • r �_, o I Track : \\ h _ _ n$R1• in. . __ ___ • 1 1 1 'l u Ur I ' /110 I I A C L Ng i I R:s:rvoir O g �( • • ' )If2 , L So TU m i Sk \\ ... s. 'I� � 1 P , m It--\1L- 117�r wu , 1G I ; • � ; ` )��25 'll f 0• ) ; : D Z91 3 a pC 1 •I—LL: ep1 i1 \ If drained, this soil is used for row crops. It Ap2--3 to 8 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silty clay loam, is also used for pasture. Capability unit IIw-3; light brownish gray (2.5Y 6/2) dry; many, no woodland classification. fine, prominent, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/3 and 3/4) mottles and common, fine, prominent mottles of strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) and red- Urban Land dish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) dry; moderate, fine and very fine, angular blocky structure; hard, - Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified by friable, sticky, plastic; common fine roots; disturbance of the natural layers with additions of medium acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 4 to 6 fill material several feet thick to accommodate large inches thick. industrial and housing installations. In the Green B21g--8 to 38 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silty clay loam, River Valley the fill ranges from about 3 to more gray (5Y 6/1) dry; common, fine, prominent,_ than 12_feet in thickness, and from gravelly sandy brown (7.5YR 4/4) mottles and medium, promi- ' loam to gravelly loam in texture. nent mottles of brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) dry; The erosion hazard is slight to,moderate. No 25 percent of matrix is lenses of very dark capability or woodland classification. brown (10YR 2/2) and dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) peaty muck, brown (7.5YR 4/2) dry; massive; hard, firm, sticky, plastic; few fine Woodinville Series roots; medium acid; clear, smooth boundary. 30 to 40 inches thick. The Woodinville series is made up of nearly level B22g--38 to 60 inches, greenish-gray (5BG 5/1) silt and gently undulating, poorly drained soils that loam, gray (5Y 6/1) dry; few, fine, prominent formed under grass and sedges, in alluvium, on stream mottles of brownish yellow (lOYR 6/6) dry; bottoms. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent. The annual massive; hard, very friable, slightly sticky, • precipitation ranges from 35 to 55 inches, and the slightly plastic; strongly acid. mean annual air temperature is about 50* F. The frost-free season is about 190 days. Elevation The A horizon ranges from dark grayish brown to ranges from about sea level to about 85 feet. gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam. The B In a representative profile, gray silt loam, horizon ranges from gray and grayish brown to olive silty clay loam, and layers of peaty muck extend to gray and greenish gray and from silty clay loam to a depth of about 38 inches. This is underlain by silt loam. In places there are thin lenses of very greenish-gray silt loam that extends to a depth of fine sandy loam and loamy fine sand. Peaty lenses 60 inches and more. are common in the B horizon. These lenses are thin, Woodinville soils are used for row crops, pasture, and their combined thickness, between depths of 10 and urban development. and 40 inches, does not exceed 10 inches. Soils included with this soil in mapping make up Woodinville silt loam (Wo) .--This soil is in elon- no more than 25 percent of the total acreage. Some gated and-blocky shaped areas that range from 5 to- areas are up to 15 percent Puget soils; some are up nearly 300 acres in size. It is nearly level and to 10 percent Snohomish soils; and some areas are up gently undulating. Slopes are less than 2 percent. to 10 percent Oridia, Briscot, Puyallup, Newberg, Representative profile of Woodinville silt loam, and Nooksack soils. in pasture, 1,700 feet south and 400 feet west of Permeability is moderately slow. There is a sea- the north quarter corner of sec. 6, T. 25 N. , R. 7 sonal high water table at or near the surface. In E. : drained areas, the effective rooting depth is 60 Ir inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth Apl--0 to 3 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silt loam, grayish is restricted. The available water capacity is brown (10YR 5/2) dry; common, fine, prominent, high. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/4) and reddish-brown slight. Stream overflow is a severe hazard unless (5YR 5/4) mottles; moderate, medium, crumb flood protection is provided (pl. III, top) . structure; hard, friable, sticky, plastic; This soil is used for row crops, pasture, and many fine roots; medium acid; clear, smooth urban development. Capability unit IIw-2; woodland boundary. 2 to 4 inches thick. group 3w2. • 33 1 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 1 7251.008[BHE/bq] SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17,PM'. 23 N., RGE. 5 E„ W.M. 2• I 1111' b Ea/.34.27 g B \ !E=32 22(12' 7 r) rn \ I IA . ..T , •• . z , ,,, , < ...1 a. 1E-31.65(?2'17)\ \ , i 1E-31.21(12'E ,__, .g•• 0 10 JV.:4\A20 4s10 9Z/w1=3, 43.7392.2(12-1 WA1 //•-E7J1-lEE.EET-7,=C3321-4,7. 33C3.1125!_..7 ( .'•,,,: , T EF1i!EEEX3.=•3••.G333001....B97.11.912 1((O,1-;2r./-'' \\ \ \ -..L,., i ICC•I'=1I=1IEr==31411:.23)11--((4T11-r1i4••,- •:, g iI324 4 E, . ?) 31 408 .112 )\ 314 W) 0 IE.3559fE) i / a a? l -- 'r 1,„1• ' , WILLIAtvI AVENUE S. i i 4, T\ I 2 g -..i w- I W----i'----•I-* ---i-- ---/-..- I i :1•••,,Ct •, -sy--; --V: ' IV \. ri _,.L,f, ; 1 -. _, , 1 w , , w • 1 , \ : 14 -- - - k II , . • 0 11-`•, l• -Fat---il---/ i / ..2. .• 0 21 t_ .o.. I. \ II, - .2 ii . EX CE 11 I II i ' '' I ' I I _ -, '• 'I . s 1 III F=32.43 02'3) -•-• II : , G ' ' r-77-G- II ' I , '-- I G I I ---.1 ---3-I---G • 1 ., ---7 G-1 . G G , G / I rj__7,4_ f. 1E-,-•34.45 Of E) ' 11'1 -`' l. 1 : _, _-_,,i,..t. . ,- 1 0 ET. lE=3;4.30 _ LI-- -•--- .,_ ' 3a.E7-2.V4qt-3 z:.• . . orREmcovEvse%IlLsioEpt.Acwel fto_,LF. .-. _1.1_4._ i.y. ___Li,"k______----..,* - , • ,.,,,,,____ . , Fp: 4..t • ----"-L._ •- -- ; 7---i". _ ,„•-•_,,,,dfe.5, . .... :L.G tt-I I ,':'•• 5.i3 - , 1 -.._. . -7-'-'- jj '-------REmvE±RoF COB.FoREPSTIACE-717FORm i -tri 11 D:(Is ' REM. ' 'EP• • ir ; ItUE1) X T(1.0>7.• ' -•OSTRUCT NW S DEWALK RAMP IYPE 2AIE/•30.93 412"Ej ''y /// 1NSTALEATION • I II 7-T-0 .,17.,,,,,___j_-_____,,v .4!) __-.---, -T1,116)-1,---- ----7(0.1--F17--;5'; ' ,:"---41(UG'4-0F qus . R 3 ORM TOJD),----.-----W., , I ' Z lE=34.76,(NEW 6'W)..] • PER CITT OF REN1114 STANDARD MANS iE=30.93 i1B"V?) . • 0 1 I e. i E;=..4.0 ,c c w 1E-_35•37Ir. , ,,,,.,-- TiLIG)-1- -1(LO) mw -1--; --7(1.1G)-1-t•O/47.),--_SEE_ ••(,§1-.,1p7 CD _ : , epA4 1,1EvEil.:30.93 '•--- fr•-•'-lf•• -r'•-- -T '1(7..-=,.,-- -.7 .-''""° '-., , :----i -•12;t, .• " '--7--A ;rgitaf'" ''.."----- '' '-- -Valsrif;," ITIGN l'ERE77-'3:i1T. 16 W) C(CB---------d RII.4/•37.82 El • I --- - -11.110) wiiii,- D.1-..) - •- •:,..•-• -.;..:1-•:-- ------;71,:”.,.,L1-'-- -•-T•i•Tc,E=.7=11-----1-K&C7-7.-- . --)-- ....... . . .. ° e3 y '•- ' • •.. . •- ., , ..•F I.' -'•.,• .. • .•. • 1 .. 413'• % . ... .. , . • .... ....' .. .!•..'•' •'•• - ..... .....: ..3.' . . • ,..___.. • 0 1E,35 B3 02'W) .... • - • • • •• • TO REMAIN .- 1% \IM2 1 11:la! :WI: _ . ° i lisrj."3" -1111012.11-111Th --'.--1-‘1W III "''''''''' SE011111WIEEMIIIIII -,..-----.----,..---:-; -.0 ----, _.-7.: ---- ---ErzEil... .„•_...._..,.. ----IL , • ., • _J. .• ..• • •_r .01:_i ii.. .- : _?441,..• •,,,,, CI. IP 71111111111*. --'i° - ;•••••-___. _-_!._-_ i'-1.-- ... . - ; 7''.1.1-' -- - . 'A Eli 'I Mt- . 11111merimms_ :.;. ._ :: •7' . 1 1•••*-11 - WI i.,,,' ?, . . • :44 t 0 ...... __ , _......,. . . t - . ;I II - ..- •• ' *. __.__... IEX STREET SIGN 1 LI--101, . 10 LF 6"DIP 0 2.00%MIN,..FROM EX CB TO BUILDING.FOR-ROOF Clill EX STREET*SIGN „ ; . . TO BE RELOCATED EX CB BO BUILDING FOR ROOF ,/ 1 H 0 0 'e, TO PLANTER STRIP , Ig0.11.110110' DRAINS lE=34.96 AT BUILDING SEE DETAIL SHEET SD3. ADJACENT TO STREET I : DRAINS:lE=34.96 AT DBOLDING ,. 2q.DETAIL SHEET S • • , F7.1 -3'34 , >4 Z 12 1110101 • CONNECT TRENCH DRAIN ; ., , • + . . .• ,. '• %I :1 . .I .• I• • , U.I I E-'W Ti 1-I C.)Z '''" I ' IL, .- . • Z-.7. TO ROOF DRAIN LINES IN I GARAGE LEVEL OF BUILDING , 50 LF ACO TRENCH DRAIN I 1.• „ . SEE SHEET.502 •.. .••• . • -, • 'I. •:; \' ./ •' •,, E Existing . ' NORTH 1ST STORY . 5100 PART FS 110, 111 , • •.NOIT11-1 1ST STORY . . ,L,,,,- -'111111 1... :ii .7, IA •5 House tr-; GAMIC>LEVE3_ • • AND 112 OR APPROVED • .• B.5 LF AC DRAIN 00.6% GROUND LEVE3_ :• ^:,' NORTH BUILDING ' EQUAL 0 0.5021 SLOPE • ,...nymaiic _S-100 PALI#'S 110.111,0112 SOUTH BULDPIO . d, ',. 8.5 LF ACO DRAIN 00.6% OR APPROVED EQUAL FF.EL-3775 . • 4 I '': igaF .E. k,.,'Emu FF.EL-3775 s 100 PART B'S 110,111,&112 . NI • . IE=28.77(S) 48 WITS -.•118, .,. ...11 • 4 II E I ;17,w11.11:. 46 MRS OR APPROVED EQUAL, • I „ SEE DETAIL SHEET 5D2 AND SD3 • pi • --( s_ ---------1-A kriet : • ,71 Cl_ Icti 1111 Li _ : .SEE DETAIL SHEET SD2 AND SD; i il.13 ..,•' ...... ..... ! . .. - .. ..-.• LOCATION dEl RELOCATED II Ir 1 POWER POII W/LUMINARE. -. .. • .., • , .1. . • . --• •• I• 1,, ; ir , ii 4--_... nie . 4110 rJ:, EENNDD;IAEWwc JCLtliRB AND GUTTER i b §;iiilat, iiir- ____ ----'•--' ...... . . . 'II I --,;-.--, . . • Alp; , 71,FIAVIK4 Ex ED • ----- 5 St. `,,,v _F NI, • • is=zi..• _.ii==.1 ., .. • 1==1 i ____.,. . -. i ,, . 50i Vi 1- i II ; . . . . . • ' • - •II • '' -liar'l .-' ',i_.3,.,--, • ...._(II PVC NiEN)SE REMOVED) I : -;-•!: -I' .* . '' .. . ' . , • • • • • • ir,DO&L,(IT•CON:" 'V . Existing: , . t • '• ..,* -- , - 1 €11572- :. _A.. V-r-'1 - ----f3a:ftize -P., I - I 8-D -P41 Gara e : :11.1 • - - g 37 6 i j ''• _HOM:111 • • . • . ,...,....,,. .L....•t .L,R:DE.,• -4.•-•c•-;:e-,.111 ,-;,^6,,,,,4-',..-ENT,TI,D, T.11,..wAR,.,.,ARE=.1,-,•-c_1,,TA .9°?'_1 I Aria. , . •- q . .MATCH E1g•',',0', E':14537,f4CT-WV-+V.,••'''?•x.e'''•b.'xarT•1,--••.••"•.--.s,•••-='' ' ` ' ''''''''''''•‘ "•••'•••••• •5': *`•••1.•:44'..--'Ai d .4)st), ,V.•,,,..4„TLZ-B,5-5-1,T•,g,„0,0,,.,.,4,'.,, ,142Jtr,,-_,, ,..,-- -..-zr..,••"..„,,,,W0,1, c.4,200,,,,,i2,,__,-,,A.-.,,,• .F.„'-....;_it,_ k••„ ..:,..L-P.„4„.,,,,,,>1_,T.,„,„.,...-••T, ' .,,,_.‘.•4,,,,,,......„,,,,,,,,4,...i .,‘,,,,,,0 .....__,....,......: ."-------.. E-29..S3(16•Wl• I' 1E-.3`.1.-1:1(le•0 _ ID "0.53 02-N) j1.1 1.5E.c ; •AV,T;DiTcRew-ORT‘-• -..-...1...a....•!:44g1,-.'"4.. -,1..:•.••';',',AA.,':,",,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,T•- - - -1-,---1.•,..1-"2.••-•*...',.','^. "''''''''''"',.'-'- ''"';'''''-''',,..,..;;-;-'''', ...,!'L -._.•'•-"- '.;.1,-.•.:-..."---, .,..,...,-,-.....,-........,..,- ...”,...,;,--,,-..rer,-•-m. ,..,-,r m..,,,,,,,---:,,t,'4,W.--lrf-Y"A' l-= -.-"-•--------l---LB -E.c30.25(12. • . I ,•;g,_or,. -S- ,..,..,„.,-,„--„,:.,,--, ,„....,..,,-,..a.,„..., „.„,.,-.,,,,,,,,,,r,..,.zna7_3,7_,,,a,13-?eike*-4,T.W.,..•\?;. 3,T.74-71/1.-f-f-ttfr,wf,,„--tais-f-z4,,,:iff...-:-..„,-5..-fe4-2.,f. t t•'..•i'•-•' ',2"-IIff-,11'..,..i..*&-44,,,-.4:imat,t ...41,4m.t-tit,V.,. ..prasortak-P,Sprf.e.-si-",,Taf-40, 5„ftty..44,',,,,Lx....-t%..ifffg,r,t-f,st,......kf -- :R.le'.,-.8. I IY:k- -.'- .644 -,.0`;,--,',I'MV..--....-,...,'W'' •••'-'- 77Mr' LZ'Y,,,AtN;..-.,L4'.7.0-spe,-..,...tr;W:t I',":2,":if. •• - .2-`•'=:-.;....,4..."..i'lL',-......,;-4.1t.:::':,....z." - `7' ' -.;„=; - -,:•••-„,..,•_,,.;,,,=,,, ..fr.,;E'• n -,--_-,- , I I . V b 37.42 ._„_.,-.. ,„ 7,-,,v,s,.., ,,,,;,;.....,,,,, „.-4,,,,,..',I',-,,, . ,Li•,1,..••k.,323/7,,,,,TAT/074 • , ffr,f14,•44.f -fac4c,ftz.,..- .- t tf„fir4,tfa, „.10, --/Rfk,,,,f• ,f,of-,W9f.a.--f.,-, :f:vo-failf,,,,,f`f-,-4,zftof.-,,,, FL I . r ,S'*a..,..7',4-..4,,,i.W.lig'''Xr..Fri ,,-, ..-. .. ...-:5-,.,4-- .e."... ,--$.7,......,.,..,...-..,r1 . -,..... .. ..... . ....... .,-.... -----------------37..8 . 36.0 T TO 35.00 .,_ , '....-1"1.-'-.,.T-s-,T3 g 1 L PI il• . 34.00 -• •-^,......,.•• 7 • . 1 '. '.4.1;•".•-•.•'' , I R 37.52 r CB#2.TYPE 1 I • oxisting : i WISTO.GRATE • I MATCH EX J- /STO. GRATE ; NI 126932.20 :i-._. to I . • , - I I SAWCUT EXISTING PAVEMENT , • I E: 1300656.94 Ey,ou• T, 3' 3O' 8,' • ‘ Eristillg NI 177115.13 Garage 2 TO PROVIDE SMOOTH CLEAN , E: 1300661.65 SEE PROFILE SHEET SD3 RIM=53.90 BE REM. / . TRANSITION Garage : • , RiM=35.73 1 lE=3Q.90(12') o-J -7, i 1 I , IE=32.73(12") . I END SAWCL1T/ 1 ED I A -I- /-"‘I-- -r-I i r- NEW PAVING i 9 6 1 9 ? I \.__/i I r l 1.7._ EX.PP W/LUMINAIRE TO BE 11 ,q 11 -I-,---•x A i r• i a-••rl-- E)r-N I-I-y"-L, Is. I . RELOCATED TO THE EAST. • COORDINATI W/PSE. . /frill •in., ',/ / •,K, \-_,/ V V I '4 \-/IT i \C_.I V I \-Y I NI .• I/ 6,,J,i0 cr. • 46. «a a 1 w -1 -1 (11> V \-._../L-- (A•••.,1.7._ I,r):----I „ • I * 3. ,..,,I . :23,. ST C n's.\4''' 0 0 0 o^-,..1 T,T r-- c:..) •:,.`,....r.-1 ....1- T-E) DETENTION AND WATER QUALITY CALCULAllONS P,to - ' 11., ----,I•Z•'..7., 8 `I- Ll-.) --- . "......c4 1 ' x cn m . EX. IMPERVIOUS AREA PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA I EXPIRES 2/5/08 I f.:... E- ,---;--(--to 6,236 SF ROOFTOP 22,400 SF ROOFTOP ,,, •'•i, L. ..• 2 M X 16 I , 10,077 SF PAVED PARKING LOT 14,716 SF CONCRETE WLK DFVEI OPFR. SD RENTON.LLC GliAti t 2100 124TH AVENUE NE iii. 0 S I 1.000 SF CONCRETE WALK 1.120 SF PLANTER AREAS SURE 100 1:1-Aidill" ICI --ri ---1 ce S BELLEVUE,WA 98005 221963 SF GRASS 2.040 SF PAVED ALLEY (425)641-3939 _I'lL , EX 10 R/W 5'R/W DEDICATION I - 40.276 ON SITE TOTAL 40,276 ON SITE TOTAL CONTACT:BILL SHERMAN 'T• 0 ...11• 1' ..> . • 8 'I ui o 5' 5' [ TOP OF PT SLAB EL=37.25 0.=0.84 CFS 8 En ...k 7 Li 0 100 YEAR INCREASE IN RUNOFF =0.84 CFS- 0.69 CFS= 0.15 CFS a: - DISTANCE TO FACE OF WALL VARIES I _ . 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH 6‘, SEE PLAN.VIEW i• . • • • SIDEWALK 8'WIDE ON WILLIAMS AVE. S. LESS THAN 0.5 CFS THRESHOLD,THEREFORE NO DETENTION IS REQUIRED. --, e.->0 • • • . •_( I SIDEWALK 11'WIDE ON .5TH ST.S olTO BE CONSERVATIVE,THE RAISED PLANTER AREAS WERE COUNTED AS KENT,WA 98032 '4•C E N G , LASIDEWALK 5.63'WIDE NORTH OF NORTH BUILDING (425)251-6222 z re LIMITS OF EX. PAVEMENT IJMITS OF EX. PAVEMENT • CONCRETE. a ci- I Z g . (425)251-137132 FAX ,-- , • SEE PLAN VIEW - [Fe. CONCRETE-CURB AND UTTER TO REMAIN UNDISTURBED ' NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA SUBJECT TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC<5000 SF 6 L,_i...i 01 t7) A. t..rvi,t2,,,E. ..: • • THRESHOLD FOR WATER OUALITY TREATMENT ALSO LESS THAN THE EXISTING 2% CITY OF RENTON \ -TOP OF FOUNDATION WALL • PARKING LOT.THEREFORE.NO WATER QUALITY TREATMENT IS REQUIRED. • I'L8•,_u'lj Ec I ,..Z.T.LCA•_-•, .• • EL=36.33 „ . • . • . L. REc014.4ENDED FoR APPROVAL 2.00% _2110_. . CrEF.A.R-1-MEN-1-Ci,F PUBLIC WORKS • co G u.i I ,'V''r,-",-",,,',/-4,2",-•:;•'/,`;';,71",,.--,',,,,,,,,..f.-, • . . ;/;-"'":4';,;E:4'4';'"'42.??.•(;-(;),V,4;•XiE,.••••••"?,,,,///r(•;•:;;;/,;;;;•W;;I„•,•;;•';:c ••,••-• •_ •_ _ _ _ , ,. .., , 1; ' . ; I *4 Iff, ••=11 11F-11 rn--2-Eip---,,,-f,,,---• •t_ __a.-_-__-3 --,. ..- .'.-'e•-• '6.;.. ,....,;> E.s.-,-';,:,.,_,8_ ,:z•,_•• :a ;E:. .6 . • • •.._. _ - - • c5 _-_-.- i-Elitil,7_7•E,...---.II '11,7-" F1- 7----,..1,-, 4"THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK " BY Date- GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN z --iii9IHR.. , PER CITY OF RENTON STD. PLAN L.J Ld ID re -- - - - 4'MIN.COMPACTED DEPTH CL'B' . ........ .' F-007 . . Ca Fifth le Williams Apartments LB>.. •&-• ASPHALT • - - BY Dote. 0 ne' I 6'MIN. COMPACTED DEPTH CRUSHED ..•-•.._. DES/SNED BHE DATE 3/28/01 FLE NO. CL , ROCK BASE Br -Date Ili ; SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 957.MAX. ell SIDEWALK SECTION . -______ DRY DENSITY SCALE 1•=20' FELD BOOK PAGE ' LI 411.-- d e ALLEY SECTION By: . Date &, 7 SD1 5 o - , . • AppRoc.......,ED RR JAHE 1 I I -t-- T SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17, WP. 23 N., RGE.5 E., W.M. I- 5 I- : _X C3 RIM=34.27 a ' o a I j 1r=32 o2(,2'Se); OF DI E='c 21 N 0 10 20 40 _,2' DI WF2d • !; r 8"CNC N--v i3(TOP P!PE)+ I p I ••••M\�t�zi.'\a�1T,V\4*.`.3,7°sA.v:y 1E e•,_NC 0.12 j` '\1 I -•CE t I I RIu=34 J5 \ \ EX ce =31.8..(•2'w)�, \ /RIM=3.`�.0, I' Z r- 1. .. \ \ !1E=3,-2, (12'E) ._ O • E -. rX CB ` / .E=31.21 (,^.-1y) EX C-r. uM=}r 3e P-v.4='4s'`•, \ II I�r ::=31.51 (,2•1,E) F <-j?:? -=Jl.i4!1'_ Y,C5 E=30.5: li= $)'•\ \`\ II 1 IE=3i.3: :12 S4 ' IE=32.43(1_-' S)� /P.IM-_5.7e IE=30.91(1t N) \ 99 -}2< 12'Ni i54-:RIM-B../.20 IE=3_.c4(12'c!`• 'E=3i2 0 W) E=31.78(,.c1 \ \\ �-1• II / c C - Z Ex r___._ - - DS 1,2'E1 11 G PVC 1:=32.2$ =3�7q 1/2'ki 1l f% - iE=3•x5 nj '.\ \ \ `6.- B Z Z RSS� 1,2..08 i IE 3 PVC 5=32.20 - - -- -- t�` `IAI=34.3M1` . Q _=:SE39,llt Y,'!. - __ _ - \ °i.9' 12'ti) o Rain=37.69 -Ea ea ® I \\ LL l IE=35.69(12'W) ® 1 i / I =MN RI!3=35.G0 �NR ` ® WILLUAK AVEN{JE S. . I JA, ®�, `� III / CINC==-d.2D ' , 2'C n i ' i ' II"""")I W Z _ ._.A:____- ty p }/____ Y.' ___ _ _,_._N- N E I , 1 ____ _ Jr jy1;__f____�____yI!-__L (F yl- �- a yr t. Q EX CB t1?x _� gi__ih tI -r ...tit I jM!s_35... l n, '•\ ( \ y ,.M=38.13 \ II 49. • !I IE�426:,2'Et V II IIII� I CO 0 IE=32.48 12'S) II ! !I i G �'G G TIE=J4.7F (6'W)\. 1 ) I G I ". G I G "-�G 1 _G \ II II G Q t ( G G G =3q• W J �t o, J II ' • r 2. - __ t -` - - I 3 -~ I I I G I 6 -G ( G I I G >- G IC t7 I ` RIH=35.13 0 ' W // I II -Ex esr T(uo T(UG) T(UG) . N(uG) v T(UG) I T(UG)� T(uG) -(uG) 'T(uG),- T(0Gf rr - .(3)7.t;KVr- i,30.2S(1-2.E) • ` I /!/ 3.,i IE=34.67;t(zy)Ej I I _ IUC • E ' y EX CB �(w)I (c) T uc T(OG) - T('JGy ifUGi T(uc) 4N (uc r TN) i�Uc (uc) w) F( rIW q _-. ga!_ Bf ' © ® ® ��1 -:-\N C6 `"\� SSMN k:M�35A3 R=35.089 B3 ® 1 tl1 -" A=:ai.32 IC d �'N=.--c IE=35.d9(li E) _ _+._.d._ ._.-._._._._._._.-._._._._._._._._._._._. _.__. _.__._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._ _.-._: _..__...._- 'PVC FILL OF x - C -- - -r�_ - _- -• --c- - -- - - --x ... ,1 a ACKEC F'LL O: GIRT / ! -r.y._.n_-. __I_.•-_..._s ._,.,�.i_.�s- a.�.,._: F._....1._.�.-._.fir. �.y_.�_.�.x._._v,._ �_..._.�- •-�.V S--L 1,5 I l n _I-- .I ! I .i. i ' Imo! / ' , I I 1 I T. -i • r I [�jB ❑ IJ J J `� J IL J t a p ! I - I L J L J !1'11 41 MNNI Y I- I tt y ,JI 3 • �1 I L.1 FORC •gi•e I 0 o I ! OUTLINE OF - - __ al I l d I i -- - i i __-BUIL-DING-ABOVE--..-_-- --__--. r' :. . ;I r`I' 1�,E"'1 , . , _ EDGE:1F COVERED �;B. d ._'r• '-' ' �. '- :I N • ✓'Z u i--;--'- "+�°" ARA ABOVE I ! 22 6'DI ! 1 rs ^., [-y NN I , i uI I ! �'7 .4•%� i%•i: I i' ''/1...i' rgc.a� ere. '�/ agsw:4 , i ° - I t } v F+� G 1 !. I 1 I qq . n t I s I'1' B s I ' i:. Fin,a ..1'1 ii 0 ! I I C FF-2B.75 ❑ -Ltf i!+ I o a j j o �'® i tiI� 28 '� pn u rs � � 1 as:' Y! I Zn1S71Rg i !L 1_ • ' I I I '.7 ° `+ s sfl.. I i i,k.\ti //' ° ,ore. / .errt:' I I I I - --1 I- m i .a7'°`wcw a _ I a I aS .c , I a i O y P:i. ! s I / O O ✓• . u L s, S7- • ,''H011Se I I " 1 " . II <• J6Pleil I,: - ! fl -s I II W! I �6r: R�nI is IIIIIIII l �I =, I x ! i .J2 a. � I . I IIIIIIII I i,� i � ' F` 1i ; 1I ! - ; I ��I • t : I i i �. .nllll' s ; I I I 116.dI NTS iI I I IJ El cti t3 [5v S = v y smil ! i� °a ! ! !u _ I T I ' e i --GARAGE FF-28.75 +9-- • !• ! ti N1 ! ! I OUTLNE OF -_ti-1 ei ( I 'a 1� ' i i !' a BUILDING ABOVE I ' i :I ti x . I } Al ,,, I ! LI 1 I--- r- I i34.97 i !m I r _ _ I '# 1 r o i I I esov - 1 1 i nrnF.e� Fci'1;S Jam_-xI:A=:3-B0t ! oww J 4_._._._. I I I I Fa ES1St1R 1 I�F°RCw. ! ! 1 ! I i ! I I 1` 1._._._._357 I ! ! IEl I I I I I 1 1rII" - I s_iir-Y-�/ o ;E=31.73i('B'FYC N N g ! • I I I i l . --1-,� I ! :! .,. i I I 1 -- ---=e-1-sOa ::=..ti.63i(12'CCi.'C�9Yi; Garage I w I I~ e oV ! ,oI ! =M t : I tt v 11 r f-•u jr III I ._ _c i _'I._,:__n:_i._. 1 IL I I:-i._._. B I 2..:_.=_!-u'_1-a.�_'n`4=-1-sw'An1n .----'-'1 ' Ssp S IE=30.633 (NEW 12'CONC. NW) n I se ' r_-- -- - - - I.. - W ° fie` 1 - - . . . N07 lb FEE 34994 7" �s a ALLEY I y I ! =_ I ! dating I • o u N EX CB I' `PoM=i oa a, n I I I 4'PERFORATED PVC FOUNDA ION DRAIN AROUND INTE��SR1Ge I �I`--�' T I_=5.M1 ,16•`m f I Existing I LD E:aa_3 , OF THE PERIMETER FOUNDATION WALL. SEE BUILDING �1 I I ; House STRUCTURAL PLAN SHEET S11 FOR CROSS SECTION DETAIL. E=x.25(12•NI m I I APPROX. IE=25.83 I I } Zo-p(2 I 1 = I TOP OF PT SLAB EL=37.25 I I 4"PERFORATED PVC FOUNDATION DRAIN AROUND EXTERIOR (i� J.MR1 E • • =1 OF THE PERIMETER FOUNDATION WALL SEE BUILDING 1 0F, oC NASyx1'P� --• I IU < STRUCTURAL PLAN SHEET S11 FOR CROSS SECTION DETAIL. o <' < - <, APPROX. IE=27.91 i ��/' `.. - A I 1 1 icC ce cc ce Q TOP OF FOUNDATION WALL EL.-36,33 ., 'E • 2.• , /I I<`'.t a N I ! ' 'en • I.L LaC'a 1 I n1\�� p .`. L- - ( E%PIRES 2/5/OB (f ( -i i.-1v''n 29.32 < ,,,, --� ce :;- S SPEGAL STRUCTURE NOTES DEVELOPER: v cx m m 15 F a 3'x 90'BEND -� SD RENTON,LLC GHA�/-�pp ._ c. - �-- -I yI •• 2100 124TH AVENUE NE V" I �~ ■� • GEO-COMPOSITE DRAIN STRIP J� 1 SDMH �,,TYPE 2-60" SURE 100 Q' i !"':-:: I (PLACE GEOTEXTILE SIDE O W/DUPLEX PUMP (100 GPM MINIMUM) BELLEVUE,WA 98005 tor li Es w I I • ACO AGAINST GROUND) RIM=28.75 425 641-3939 "' < .z FREE DRAINING ( ) _ _ t SHEET SEE 15• (( G 1 LS w I'Gi SHEET SD4 SAND OR GRAVEL IE=25.75(6'IN FROM ACO) DRAIN) o - 'v' _� o 1 w � , \ IE=25.00(3'FM GUT) ENGI CONTACT: BILL SHERMAN Z o I w U to¢1 D1© 67 - - - _ IF,' _ ��,r- - `EX. CATCH BASIN 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH Q. - z O 6 3 1.• 3'DI FM FROM STORM DRAIN SEE DETAIL SHEETS T) At sG C z LP 6 6•x 9D BEND (NJ) - PUMP STATION- Ti E� ENGVA O 19 LF ACO DRAIN (425)251-6222 m o. U of z TO PUMP cI ORIAPPROVED E110,QUAL 111.112 KEM,WA 98032 Nc 4 U z Ig (425)251-8782 FAX I' m aLILL' z EM28652(67 In __ 0,Hp, v, SEE DETAIL SHEET SD3 •' o O la-,�I PARKING GARAGE FF EL=28.75 " CITY OF RENTON I-; RAMP DRAIN DETAIL ( } E>EPARTMENT 0I PUBLJC WORKS • I F3 jLa U \ L t,= FOR APPROVAL. I I c�ID.W <, in w o o_ S �.;J!. _ \ ( 3.90 BEND GARAGE RAMP DRAINAGE O o_18 w w o D "---1 Dote: PLAN z IJIw ice rn - --- e;!O LI = \ ' E=27.75 - - - Fifth &WilliamsL `1Apurtmenls CO 'I w.ln �I SUPPLIED C BY DRAIN ATED I STRIP By. Date: DEsx BHE O tsI� m MANUFACTURER. DATE 3/28/01 PIE No. 7 ', �_I • - STORM FORCE MAIN DETAIL 2" PVC CONNECTOR PIPE EXTENDING By: Date 0E0DRAwN ONE THROUGH FACE &TERMINATING AT EACH C¢CREU RJA SCALE 1"=20' FIELD FIOOK PAGE- LU i_ E. Ian N,� z 1'=2' BY STRUCTURAL LAGE STRIP;ENGINEER. By T.B.D. sFum!o....<...KS SHEET SD2o, 5 0 VERTICAL By. Dote APPROVED 1 m CITY OF RENTON SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17, TWP. 23 N., ROE. 5 E.,W.M. (-- a STORMWATER DRAINAGE NOTES ' 1. BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OCCURS,A PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING MUST BE HELD WITH THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, DESIGN ENGINEER. I/2'K4'E7a'.wBON MATERIAL 42" MAX 1/4"R AT JOINTS 24•• MIN D V Aa 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE"1988 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD,BRIDGE I AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION"PREPARED BY WSDOT AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATIONS ��� z"X4"EIEPANSIDN MATERIAL __- --- (APWA),AS AMENDED BY THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. t/4"R AT JOINTS �'LONG CT1R8 AND I --- -_ -=-_ - = ` CH ARE " APPROVED PLANS WHICH - - - 0 THE P 0 C ORDING T � u'8;i_V^i 3. THE STORM DRAINAGE STS¢M SHALL BE CONSTRUCTEDA C REQUIRE �■ A � 2-1/2"• I _>_y•___ UBLIC WORKS. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLANS WILL E { t�kyy�7 DEPARTMENT OF P � =1�1= '�L �s ON TEE IN THE DEP WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE CRY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS,DESIGN ENGINEER OR STORM WATER UTILITY, SCORE LINES TO BE RADIAL � 1-1�2T TO CURB AND GUTTER Q4. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. + - - w�,.• Z 5. DATUM SHALT.BE U.S.G.S UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. ��i � 1/2'%4"E%PANSIDN MATERIAL ( REFERENCE BENCHMARK AND ELEVATION ARE NOTED ON THE PLANS. 1/4'R AT,AIMS SCORE LINES ,�.4• STD 90' BRACKET OR 360' J 6. ALL SEDIMENTATION/EROSION FACILITIES MUST BE IN OPERATION PRIOR TO CLEARING AND BUILDING Nil B B ADJUSTABLE BRACKET IF O- CONSTRUCTION,AND THEY MUST BE SATISFACTORILY MAINTAINED UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AND I I REQUIRED. M THE POTENTIAL FOR ON-SITE EROSION HAS PASSED. 0 ."1Y-VYIDTH OF SIDEWALK PIPE CAP 7. ALL RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITIES MUST BE INSTALLED AND IN OPERATION PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION Q 0 WITH ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, 0 e STORM WATER UTILITY. (pm, / iy 1 Z 8. GRASS SEED MAY BE APPLIED BY HYDROSEEDING. THE GRASS SEED MIXTURE,OTHER THAN CITY OF RENTON �I� 4 I I` 2" GALVANIZED Z Q APPROVED STANDARD MIXES,SHALL BE SUBMITTED BY A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVED BY THE , STEEL PIPEA B•-6, 2fROM F OFF ' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, STORM WATER UTILITY. -- Q r „{ CURB. 9. ALL PIPE AND APPURTENANCES SHALL BE ON A PROPERLY PREPARE FOUNDATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ` TIII ID'MIN CLEARANCE SECTION 7-02.3(1)OF THE CURRENT STATE OF WASHINGTON STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE IF NO CURB. Z O CONSTRUCTION. THIS SHALL INCLUDE NECESSARY LEVELING OF THE TRENCH BOTTOM OR THE TOP OF THE Z FOUNDATION MATERIAL AS WELL AS PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF REQUIRED BEDDING MATERIAL TO O UNIFORM GRADE SO THAT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE PIPE WILL BE SUPPORTED ON A UNIFORMLY DENSE UNYIELDING BASE. ALL PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE APWA CLASS"C;WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PVC PIPE. ALL CC TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO MINIMUM 95 PERCENT FOR PAVEMENT AND STRUCTURAL FILL 7/2"%5"EYPAN9nN AND 90 PERCENT OTHERWISE PER ASTM D-1557-70. PEA GRAVEL BEDDING SHALL BE 6 INCHES AND OVER AND MATERAL Ct1Re RETURN UNDER PVC PIPE. 1/4"/FL SLOPE ONLY • 10. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE AND ALUMINIZED STEEL PIPE FOR ALL DRAINAGE FACILITIES SHALL HAVE ASPHALT t/YR 1/4"/FT.SLOPE TREATMENT N1 OR BETTER INSIDE AND OUTSIDE. 4 1/YR CEMENT 1• ( 1/2'R rPAVEMENT AS PER PLANS 711. STRUCTURES SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE SPRING UNE OF ANY STORM DRAINAGE PIPE, / 1-1/2•CONCRETE OR 15 FEET FROM THE TOP OF ANY CHANNEL BANK. I CLASS'B' 4" PAVEMENT AS PER PUNS I({ 12. ALL CATCH BASIN GRATES SHALL BE DEPRESSED 0.10 FEET BELOW PAVEMENT LEVEL. / 3' STANDARD CELL CONC. PARKWAY) ANC a� 5/8th 13. OPEN CUT ROAD CROSSINGS AND EXISTING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL NOT BE ALLOWED UNLESS a09 TO MINUS SPECIFICALLY APPROVED BY CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS,DESIGN ENGINEER. 1-1�2' _7-.••�~ SECTION A-A SECTION B-B CRUSHED 0 O `0 14. ROCK FOR EROSION PROTECTION OF ROADSIDE DITCHES,WHERE REQUIRED,SHALL BE OF SOUND QUARRY ROCK ROCK _E-g _ 3 PLACED TO A DEPTH OF 1 FOOT AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS: 4 INCHES TO 8 INCHES/40Z SEE SHEET 261 FOR ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS I D PERCENT TO 70 PERCENT PASSING; 2 INCHES TO 4 INCHES ROCK/30 PERCENT TO 40 PERCENT PASSING;AND-2 INCHES ROCK/10 PERCENT TO 20 PERCENT PASSING. 15. ALL BUILDING DOWNSPOUTSVEDBYTHE AND NT RAWS SHALL K CONNECTED INO THE STORM DRAINAGE UTSTEM ILITY. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS,DESIGN ENGINEER OR STORMWATER 11TILTIY. AN ACCURATELY DIMENSIONED CERTIFIED AS-BUILT DRAWING OF THIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM WILL BE SUBMITTED CFNFRAI ND1cv P. TO THE CITY OF RENTON UPON COMPLETION. 'j ,gx19 DIR IV am SOIL E RA®Nor A®T5 C/C NO NETS TWAA lE O/C DET OW.. I d . 16. ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT BY THE CITY OF RENTON DOES NOT RELIEVE THE NOT BE MAR YAK'P1 MOON 100 S a pppmin r own TE OR141 E E 1� May JAMS SNAIL BE RA®AT ALL WD MINIS AT DIRECTED eY MM.AND s1N1 MEND I' OWNER OF THE CONTINUING LEGAL OBLIGATION AND/OR LIABILITY CONNECTED WITH STORM SURFACE WATER COMER..E DISPOSITION. FURTHER,THE CITY OF RENTON DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY OBLIGATION FOR THE PROPER NM ME>mar.NA c TD a WADE AUNT RC GEm AND GUTTER TIE MKT 9w1 a A rnD 4 �( = FUNCTIONING AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STSILM PROVIDED DURING CONSTRUCTION. vro r DwAxsw wTDA.E s o.s AU=TOW P.Os to P.T.'S AT ALL__AEREOS • I/YLT•ORA4SON WAE AL SMAL IN HA®AT DEW r9ANH s¢EAIR PAWL a THE L TE IAi RIR=EW.SOIL MEM TO THE IETA1,omATS IY cuss 6 10/.•7 OW AR 17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ADEQUATE SAFEGUARD,SAFETY DEVICES, DrwAEEmrr. PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT,FLAGGERS,AND ANY OTHER NEEDED ACTIONS TO PROTECT THE LIFT,HEALTH,AND >�mAaE1c wu wvE A MOM rwsl T�Au mm xATENA A 2 t/Y TOOLED FINISH. GROUND MOUNTED STREET NAME SIGNS m • SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC,AND TO PROTECT PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK TYPICAL SIDEWALK COVERED BY THE CONTRACT. ANY WORK WITHIN THE TRAVELED RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT MAY INTERRUPT sNwA-mb•ACTON 9W1 a mx p,msEn Bwm011 'S p, ADOPTED 4. NORMAL TRAFFIC FLOW SHALL REQUIRE AN APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL'PLAN BY THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ADDPl'ID CITY OF ORBION 13g I � OMSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. ALL SECTIONS OF THE WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS ®1-07.23,TRAFFIC CONTROL,SHALL APPLY. BWTRA D PTAIS NANWO PIANO 1.BASE SHALL BE POURED AGAINST COMPETENT.TO 1sr Del$M/o4 NATIVE MATERIAL OR STRUCTURAL FILL I 18. SPECIAL DRAINAGE MFASIRES WILL BE REQUIRED IF THE PROJECT LOCATION IS WITHIN THE AQUIFER o 5 PROTECTION AREA. DWG. NAME:F007 SP PAGE FD07 DWG. NAME G013 SP PAGE:G013 2.ALTERNATE TRENCH DRAIN SPECIFICATION MAY H DATE REVISOR BY.PPR'C DATE REVISION BY APPR'D BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. ACO SLOTTED STEEL GRATE ACO FRAME ".= CONC. SLAB "s V °z a 3.DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY PER . .. .... .... .... ... ..... ,.. .. ._ ... .. .. CITY OF RENTON STANDARD PLAN B701 ... ... .. ROUND ..... .. .. .. . . :: . ::. • ..•.. -.. . .-PROPLO GR D PROFILE OUN 1.lXIR � S: • 5TH �STREET • �.6", / 11.1111. ••T6' .. ;PRKMG.GAWIGE FE L7=28.Z5;... ... .. ..... - . :.. BOTTOM OF:GARAGE;SLAB:E1=28.25�. ..I.. • • • L,iI �lil. �I' ... .. ... .. • ACO TRENCH DRAIN • 34 • . • : ••o • ' .. ... .. . : : .. .. • ER. UG . .. WATER _ In - PART NO 1005 fi 1 .. ... .. .. .... .... ... 8 TELEPHONE i • 2 S $ • ... •.. .. .... ... .ijI�it n i�iii ... .. ... .. .. •• .... .. .. 6 S • • I la a a -. .. IE-25,75.(4,SLAB tUUUNG,DRAIN).. .... .. �3^DISCHARGE32 .. NEWCB�2,;TYPE Y .... ... ... .. .. .. . •f+ - - I I I IF:64, I���I a :477 ••• :..:: LF I-III- ���- o?i1 IE=25.75(6'SQ :. :: ... .. .. E/:1 007.15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. :.• • .. .. ®0.875 P' �\' \?�: SEE SHEET SD2 I_ \o � w T .. � i .... ... .... ..... -. FOR CHANNEL INVERTS SLOP S. \h f HW ALARM EL25.25- SD FROM ALOE /--3'ELBOW�l R@1=35.73I ... < ''' / E() S \\ o .:: TRENCH DRAIN)l ) 30 . E=32.73.{32')........ O .. .... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .... .. .. .. .. • • • ••.:•.NEW E8#1,TYP•ET .. ._ .: FORMED-IN-PLACE TRENCH DRAIN (FO RAMP) • I--.w CHECK VALVES .. .. 1 . . • .... .: .. : .. .. . ... ... .. .: ... NOT TO SCALE D... .I ..........:..-4".:DISCHN2GE -3.�.DISCH9fTGE::.P • • • x m . .... . ... .. ...IE=25.00.... .. .: .... .. E t300 .. \\ I I �;. �, i �W/STD.'GRATE � ..�... ' EVFI OPFR O U m PUMP#2 ON EL-23;75-- p • .. .... .. - .RIM=33.803 `IJ ?y S01 RENTON,LLC ... • .. ..... ... I :• . • .. :. • • .. -_ -_____ -__.._. :1E-730.9005?2 - V 2100 I24TH AVENUE NE �GHa�/� • ¢ I NC :.: • :. ...I. ::LCWRROL... .' .. •I : .. .. .' - __._--.. .: __ -. n 112 .::::. .. __.... .... NW)} ... BPL.EWE.WA 98005 d-: 3I PUMP ON EL=22.25- .. ... .... .. .u TYPE_2=6p':MANHOLE.' .. • .. ...o:. • :..•.. • - •.. . •. •--. . �i : .. COMACT:IBILL35HERMAN >� j" �. ..i: ,� � 33i�N .. . m ..... .. . . d n ..N... ..... ....._....... .. ............ .. .. of .. • • z .. .. ....-PERDETNL 5HEETSD4 .. m:' .. .. .. _ __ 1E 30.6 2"CO • IE=30.fi EW'12- • z .. .: .... ..._-_._-.-.-.__..-___-_-_ _-...._---_-�_.___._____--__.__-.___ --_-__--__.--___-_....._._--_.--____- _Z E SOUTH 4 W to m PUMP OFF EL=21.10-:. a• . i NEER' ygq pg-,�E¢O, .. I .. .. 1+00 ^2+00 3+0 C Y KENT57 D AVENU `PG� `i' '�0O I-, ... . ... : 0 PE. RIM=J4.B' i Z Z 61 STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE (CB#2 TO EX .CB) IE=29.93 16"W) (425)251-6222 '} L n_ i z0 BOTTOM OF MH EL=19.90 - .. IE=30.33 18'E) (425)251-8782 FAX OF RENTON T .::._ U�io rn .. :. - -__ "=20'H. t"=2'V IE 30.53 12"N) _ _ _ 512S CITY csi Io N - 6 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS .." o. OI _ .'.: .%JMP.�T AND�: :BB:SHALL BE PACO NAOEL/O 40702J OO FOR APPROVAL .135151 a 5 ':.. ... 1rp.:1150;RPM.;3=PHASE 4fi0 VOLT.FXPL0510N'PROOF.'AND, _ .V 3.AR S� r•T O awl 16'• • .. • RAIL MOUNTED.AND.INCLUDE ALL,ETTANGS;-P{PING,.VALVES.AND: .... ... - D 4� HAS GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE • Iw APPURTENANCES. CONTROL PANEL SHALL BE LOCATED IN UTILITY h/;• _pole: I w m OI ROOM. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SEPARATE CONDUIT FOR POWERNOTES AND DETAILS By: Z a N AND CONTROLS. SEE MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. • ' •A _ = ..yyy • Ivowi SDMH#1 W/DUPLEX PUMP(TO BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTED UNDER THE BUILDING PERMIT) / / By: Dote: Filth&Williams Aportmenls O 1'2'V.H fit - •r 1• O DFStG`�D BHE DATE 4 02 02 Gil B/515.9.�'\'T' IXIAWN BHE LL__._._- FLE No. m I + /0HA L LMG 8' Dote ��® RJA scnLE AS SHOWN Flab BOOK PArf- N I_ z . ©� �: Date AFPRovED .O nx Ox, S,EET SD3 oP 5 r'f= SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17, TWP. 23 N., ROE 5 E.,W.M. I — $ 2" usia t,/A• FDRIDlDR,M1E ,µ-Fm rAV2a{91G -s/t B g BOX NO. TO 7 D8") USE /B"SE EL COVER PLATE y BOX NO.27(1Tx2BE NI7H J/B'STEEL COVER PLATE "' ,h't[TBns R[assID / . ,t/t' METER BOX SHALL BE DOUBLE STACIQD.FOR 2-1/2- ro nLISH F'W41 NTH FINISH GRADE 70 Y DCVA USE UTILITY VAULT CO.YODEL 25TA OR �. BM'-ixlOt - r1 Y/`• EQUAL E•:= 11P.4 TRAILS -. (TYPICAL) • /� �j \ R j/ fillitrl‘i G sua 1 s�nwcW / �J /�\ IB j1� MOT - •- a, Hs ARu ' QA, UNIW)(TYPICAL) I — - �j/.. D ,v, JO•MBL ESr, _ 30'MIN. ' WERABtE rNam,D a m � .I�II!I!13rQARH)l!mI\_ .;. PATIDIN(SREDETA� --.. Q » 11 6'CLEARANCE AFTER TESTING a APPUOVAL PLUG vwrnrd TOP VIEW Y' :s e,; I M. 21/Y ' ' ALL TEST coats NTH BRASS PLUGS. ISOMETRIC VIEW 1 r _ _ tI JEWELING PADS ,/s' FND VIEW CC CO O J E — a�/ ��� — TO CITY METER - TO PRIVATE SYSTEM RAMIS POINT OF SUE1MX RAMP i` I- AND DNB REIU R 0 W `' �'/` z 0 Y RNIP i)_ A,` Tnr I ""`' N. 7/B'YWUS GRAVEL 12'YWWUM I+/10.I RAT I/A, I t/1' . Z 4 s/e•vrAFmDR ,Y/s"J I0 cLrt(TTID.P(SEE 5T0..) F-Y) 2J,/t• qDT DFTaI O, BELOW GROCHE INSTALLATION FOR 3/4" TO 3" DOUBLE / — CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLIES �^ WOE ht�( PEDESTRIANd� '.• ' ' Railp py) TAIANf BE,rEII1 \^'vy TO RAIN I — OPTIONAL DESIGN FOR GRATE OPENING ENDS - la NOTES: o. 1. SLOT FORMED AND RECESSED FOR 5/8'-11 NC X 2"SOCKET HEAD 1 o I (ALLEN HEAD)BOLT. t, I 2. GRATE SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON. pg4wx UM) O O 3 CURD RETURN CT DIAIA I (SEE sro.PDX tFm) I rZy' NOTE: 3. SHALL CONFORM TO SEC.9-05.15 OF THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 41 d AFTER FIELD INSTALLATION.DCVA MUST BE,US,EU SATISFACTORILY BY A DEPARTMENT OF SIDEWALK RAMP TYPE 2A 4. USE VANED GRATE IN CURB LINE C HEALTH CERTIFIED BAGST.OW ASSEMBLY JEa1FR TEST REPORT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO C CRY OF RENTON WATER UTILITY ENGNEFIDNG PRIOR TO ACTIVATION OF NEW LINE MIS PLAN 5. USE FRAME SHOWN IN STANDARD DETAIL D-7. v I. Add O. °1 NjN ibic .peel.�..Ir 6. GRATE IS OLYMPIC FOUNDRY 5OG OR EQUAL SURFACE WATER UTILITY eu=°e.w°Ia.n nl er nmP�• • f5M 1 m • a D.e.am.wm.g P=t,-n•may a�,-°h r^Y � CATCH BASIN FRAME&GRATE DETAILS S I 1;''' rn met.R In. op pat. ma SIDEWALK RAKP D c DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY :p".tw+--� The e.estml.rmeq pat.-�+'"' WPM(s &2e (SHEET 1 OF 2) o 4 91 I Y a Dale.,n=cp./.O.S,e Spec 8-163(3) 6. c ` ADOPTED s, Dee end wuA.+-.I....1n.Centred Plm.a.BI.curb Sfl¢Ef 1 of s ADOPTED Q[f 01'ISEMON , °-tT yadM A 5,6 Rm F-t tQ avt aehia �� ADOPTED RV DI®tl� I 1 a S.su P.F-s ra.a..rA;1�1 q�..ne�e m,ee. �Fr�� @r w Rcrmt • •.•®f STANDARD PLANSLse S. R-np Nape Mb M G Nee,I.1M1V. yt-1,' �'�RD PUNS ,I A,.TO STA DATE:PLAN ��.� ie2 W ova I:tl P•Tt M/D, i __.Dt sn� �v�� IDATE REVISION eY APPR'C DWG. NAME 8020-1 SP PAGE:B020.1 - t;`^ DATE REVISION BY APpR'q DWG. NAME:B101 SP PAGE:8701 61,E REVISION Oft DWG.NAME:Fo11 SP PAGE:F011 I s' I - r-IT Yea x D- R;�„� W o d S .I m 0 2sTOP OF ROADWAY TOP OF PT SLAB 5' 2 BRocym FINISH " •• '�• _ EL=37.75 r-TOP OF FOUNDATION WALL I T e 0 `/ A' M PRIMMER CDMIT CONCRETE EL36.83 0 Jr' MIMED PETOYL'Id StDE11AUt CEMENT ae WATER 3 +S d ,'lll SECTION OA (�NDIE�) D 6•ClFANOUT W/RING AND COVER PER i% t� 1 014 „• 5' \ a CTIY OF REMON STANDARD PLAN'8076 ^EXISTING CURB N r �.,a C 6'DIP , - / u y' CEMdT CONCRETE CURB ATTACH TO CEILING 1-6'x90'BEND • • - I (CURB AND allTd SNDMI 6' e'-e•TOIL / ' I NOT INCLUDED w BID ITEM Lµ M cn cn S' / TOP cr 6'DIP .l _ ,D 1 II I • 0.41100. ♦ / nls ROADWAY LENGTH AS REQU RED I -y a N 1-6'x90'BEND m GEMENT J-- I ♦ RXRrmncnoN JOINT ...-.. DLPWSTE➢ • -6'D.I.P.®2.002 MIN. I e " t s �. w sDEwAlx o2aY tsJtwr rDNaE,E ` WNaa£E (�rntEWs�T I' DPANSaR JOINT IN BOTH PRES,MAN Dam DDYARX • EXIST NG P PE.MATCH SS ETH p I, 9 / (SEE Sro.PUN F-,) PATIRNDEIECTIT3LE(S WARNING axm AND sRbEwux SECTION© PATTERN • <sE DETAlU SHEET SD7 0 1 1 aa¢ a 1 ¢¢ < `/ JOINT AND FlNIs, DIMING CATCH BASIN) • o --18 OCTAn. SEE SHEET SDI 0 - o^n` 1 < vM2S.. vMEs- •' EPIPEXISTING SEE SHEETTSDI�ORM- N \f\� o . • r-0'ro'K r-be TO-c' PARKING GARAGE FF EL=28.75 !: f SLOPE ROUNDING•- VARIES(SEE CONTRACT) -TYPE 2A TYPE 28 1 . , • . 4'PVC FOOTING DRAIN IE=27.91 �' r F W m 11EEJI SPECIFIED 9DEWAU!MAY BE ADJACENT I • +. - .. y I=ANTED-D'-0'To•B'� VARI6-r-0•ro'Y V SDI RENTON,LLC U U Sm w CONTRACT ro A WALL(SEE DETWW RAUP RAC I DEVELQPLR: a: ,, I 1 I I SIDEWAUC VARIES- o'NN. I r - 2100 124TH AVENUE NE •GH G (SEE CONTRACT) I B' 6' I ..• SUITE 112 v ..r .. • ;• BELLEVUE.WA 98005 MMr r� '�" wi 1/2 R(TIN.) am NOT s/s'EaANsa (425)sal-3939 -y �"1 i� y 2x 2f[,_ `w BIO ITEM 'A0'^(TIP.) 'A.M. 4'PVC FOOTING DRAIN IE=25.83 0 Z w ' (sEE sm.rum F-s)_ CONTACT:BILL SHERMAN 1; o ' QO -i 'f e -a t o �f \c T FILLER SECTION O _� Z In K 1//'�P NF]1 J J ENGINEER o O RADIUS A B G ROOF DOWNSPOUT K 215�A 9803VENUE SOUTH yd'G(T i� �Qq d p f (AT OMB FACE _ <W DEMENT CONCRETE 9DENAQR — --- --_ CONNECTION DETRAL (425)251-6222YNG ENGTdE }Q. Z ADJACENT TO Curl t 20 FEET r-s o- e-lD I/Y Y-EMT LZ r (425)251-8782 FAX Q.0 O YD FEET Y-,r T-r Y-2IX NTS _ "'° CITY OF RENTON N •, II Cr ADDFT Y-T T-r Y-r [DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS N. II Cr j sD FTET Y-s I/r r-,D s/r Y-ID 1/! 7-7A-os FOR APPROVAL I oa d LY W FEET Y-,I/7 a-A F/1' Y-s,/2. •(3.ARMS 1 n,EL w TO FEET Y-2 2. V_7 tK Y-r 0<� y/'' GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE b i IW N1n, CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK /' SIDEWALK RAMP '•. �' J� By: Dote: D. w; BD FEET Y-2t/r r-t,/! r-e,/Y LrPES zA a 2B , DETAILS z . wig SHEET 1 OF 9 ADOPTED - -m FEET 7_23/r a-s,/t Y-B,/r SHEET-3 of 3 - 'V /. � �, . Date: Filth&WBGoms Apartments m - I N t T OF MT. IOC FELT Y-3 t/Y F-S Y-e �1t� mDrt n i4.A i ..1: �� DE6IGNED BHE 0 I -I I� go lOT U WI iti1D INIEIDIFDIATE RAW CM BE NEWMED - ,er DuD MOON/DI �FSS OHALT c't' By: Date DRAWN BHE DATE 4/02/02NA UN U Mo. LSr TUTU W/M z i CHECKED RJA SCALE FB.D BOOOK PAGE 7 n N Z ' DWG.NAME F005 - SP PACE FOES PATE REv510N py •C DWG•NAME:F01 t-2 SP PAGE:F011.2 EXPIRES 2/5/OB I "Cm v - SD 5 0 DATE REVISION BYJIPPR' By: Dote APPROVED S.cE1 OF m 1 ''-I SE 1/4 SECTION 18 AND SW 1/4 SECTION 17, TWP. 23 N., RGE.5 E, W.M. E 8 I c 25. o 21/2-1 I- vim\ '\ �'• I ARFµA OF ACCEPTABLE OUARE INCHES PER iFOOT MAY BE USED.WIRE MESH SNAIL _ ,�I\Q' YOT BE IN ArcD DI KNOCKOUTS. '! W \'�' 2 THELVUWE UT DIAMETER THICKNESSOF NOT MORANER SIAN 5MAXI KNOCKOUTS IDE Q SIWLHAVEte AWOL GAP BETWEEN NOtKOUM T02r MAXIMUM.PROVIDE PS ELMOlocoa FRAME AND VANED GRATE A is Y AFTER GAP BET1A'E S THE INSTALLS). F FAT WALLAND THE OUIBIOE OF Z NEVER THE PIPE.AFTER 7HE PIPE 15 NSTALLS).FAT.THE GAP 1MM JOINT MORTAR - [ EN NE MAXIMUM DEPTH FROM THE PISSED GRADETO THE PIPE WERT SMALL UICH BASH BE S. Q WALL VEEDLI "cR �. •T;1. Zi �• 4 FRAME TGRATE SEGDONY� �ID WTI FLANGE DAME OR CAST DRO laTRUDED MRS E• SEE NOTE 1 j%/. 5 d' s MAr BE SLOPED AT A RATE OF 112a HAVE b ROUNDED FLOOR AND THE WAILS _ - IO J s, r ' %/ b/// '' I OPEMNG SHIdL BE MEASURED AT THE TOP OF THE PRECAST BASE SECTION.Q ¢- LEVEL PADS(18) // I T L �� . 1r uJ• 0 3/4-%2 1/4•X 1/B- , Z 0 `3 PO GTHDE iN Q At ELAM EARTH DAWN WALL ONE AR BAR HOOP FOR 6' - 0 _�___ TWO I3 BAR HOOPS FORTY I o Z G RECTANGULAR ADJUSTMENT SECTION PIPE ALLOWANCES Q 18-K24' 9/16. 1 1/2' r 1aAXDnuT g (+1/32-.-0-TYP) I PIPE WTHIIAL AMOM MMO .. 1 I Ts�,�, I (� I o> N0�41 PLAINOCONCRETE ".7477 4 /3 TYP // (SM.SPEC.aMm) o� 25-X31- I iAAOT LNN'a�� SDUD WAIL PVC JDp L ' Fl FYAITOH eJ BAR EACH'CORNER I I (SSE.SPEC.ao5.121T)) 's A L. I. PROFILE WALL PVC (Dn.Lau(L tans I I u - (STD.SPEC.6DE12RI) ,s •CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE CATCH BASIN TYPE 1 0 STORM SEWS)PIPE LT•1 1 Y NOTES: a BAR nooP STANDARD PLAN B.1 f OF WPM ? 0 O 0 1. MEG AND TAP FOR.AND PROVIDE TWO 10CKMP BOLTS 5/B--TI NC STNNIES . TTPE 304 STEEL SOCKET HEAD(ALIEN HEM)BATS 2-LONS ••'.. ' I AmnVm wn Aar 1Na I�-1 O _..J.--- Nw1OPTEDTM1sa to-21mI I 2 FRAIEE W1F]DAL IS CAST RON PER AMR MB CLASS 30 OR BETTER _ _ ADOPTED PRECAST BASE SECTION CITY OF RENTON F�-4 WN \ 3. SET FRAME TO GRADE AND CONTRACT ROAD AND DIETER TO BE FLUSH MATH FRAME ��` W 4. THANE IS REHIRE MONDRY/SMSD GL EQUAL STANDARD PLANS 1n LAST DATE:0721/2003 0 C /It TJ • B012E •� ` • SP PAGE m BAST SURFACE RATER GRATEUTILITY .. m CATCH BASIN FRAME& DETAILS c a •U (SHEET 2 OF 2) v �( 20 ADOPTID N076 1. No steps are required when height is 4'or lie. r a Jar oT erortaa -j erarmaa�� 2. The bbttdn or the prttost catchheight booth 4 mpy s sloped to ' ,�ym DV.. fadilnte cleaning. S . . �s DWG.NAME B020-2 SP PAGE:B020.2 �uT�BA9N MUM AND VANED MATE 3. Rome and prole moy Be Metalled With flange down or ii 1111 _ DATE REVISION BY APPRT, AwfaE MC MO COVER cast Mto oapslmenl seelpa 4- L Q'.:`L . --"c"an 4. Knockools.is'E.Move a woR tidatMAA of 2e minimum to % •' 3j o . $ice,` 2.6-mpolyOum• Provide o'1.6.'alintillum gap petween y" .._ r �``-wm LAR AD,N T ANGULAR AD4.11031T5 SLIM O. pipe is ldled.Il and MI thehe ouipicie g with joint�OE or in ocee. the rdance _ I' A .. - - •!°�^ _„- with Std.Spec.9-04.3. w m oceD N I -y L �- u r-OAT SAB loP 5. Manholes equal to and greater s p 20-feel deep shall hove - -.T..- � �� D'SIIRETRACT climbing and/00 protection system installed. 6e Lv . b CATCH BASIN DIMENSIONS B„ 2-0` y GTCAi NAYIMUN u sr DR a'•; WALL BASE DISTANCE BASE RPYFORONG STEEL �E 48',54',60'.Tt, hT/R N EACH DIRECTION _�," 4:::::_=4 0- J1J -C YaRTM<TW.) DIBASINERTOCKNESSMICIOIEssKN 9gWT BEIHEQENTEfitAL SEPARATEaI % I CONCRETE �F�(��A,, 48• KNOC" 0.15 0.23 oI _ CLASS 3DDD t.. 4" 6" 36" A" ,•_G•• • STEPS OR 54' .4.5" 8" 42" R" 0.19 0.1 9 "2 1 Irr \ _ IA, EDDo j fiD',. " 8" 48" 8" 0.25 0.25 0 1 •! �7 I1 4-3/4" i 72 6" .8" 60" 12" 0.24 0.35 G ' I Os 12"B- i I 64' . 8" 12" 72" 12" 0.29 0,39 c O a 8 t SFCTDN A-A FIBER JOINT WATER TIGHT 1 Am ) 9r 8" 12" 84" 12" 0 29 0 39 PACKING PLUG 1 G L\ R. I J 3 T^ - PIPE ALLOWANCES o 0: .. NERTM FB1ET 25'NNN.G .N$ ..:. FaROHc s1EEl PIPE'MATERIAL'PATH MAXIMUM INSIDE DIAMETER o, HH OP O D- ..:.a..;• B ��:. n I .y CATCH IL 0 45"(1/8)BEND _ AtILT A� WALL PROFILE 6 .�'^T. s-T!4r_,�� DIAMETER CONCRETE METAL CPSSP WALL WALL 'iwiX�..-�, I I.•:•r`.. .•: m PVC PVCGT D O\ W . ; .•..,,.::: �•:;.:::.J=• 48' 24' 30' 24' 27- 30' ' n\n ¢ SEPARATE BASE INTEGRAL BASE \� O • CAST IN PLACE PRECAST WITH RISER 5/' 70' 36- 30- 27' 36' a 5 OA N 113• \ 36' 42' 36' 36' 42' _ .I ff66 RING 60- U U m } PIPE MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED - .p 72' 42- 54' 42' 36' 48' -• c m I BY THE ENGINEER - mAYTL luDou TDR DFVF1 O c RPE 2G¢BEDDPIC t7 64- S4- 60' S4- 36' 48- \ �T"'.T-^ SDI RENTON,LLC ' e•T 22 96' Cl)• 72- 60 36- afi' CATCH BASIN TYPE 2 2100 124TH AVENUE NE Qil.' 0 9 1!-.:i:°'::>,;'.•'.�I=� SURE 112 - . W SEPARATE BASE TO(Std SpeTE 9-OS.I((H))Y))LENE STORM SEWER PIPE(Sta Spec,9-05.2Q1 ADOPTED BELLEVUE,WA 9BOD5 /� ' 0 i CcrRON R-B PRECAST m S1m Spec.9-0.5.12(2)) yl�,®•,.o..o.r. a Y (425)641-3939 w Z o STAND RDPLANSTANDARD PLANS COMACT:BILL SHERMAN a G aI a oI o _ w" w�; Ra°. _LAST DATE srm2Do4 " 1 ` l�,r s 0" CAST IRON RING AND COVf,R GIN O 4T _ _ .m R07.7 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH yiPG y v O .• (4 251-6222KENT.WA 2 ., NC.EN GtN��Q 4 -- ry' V W _ -- PLUG TO BE SEALED ��1 IN SAME MANNER AS (425)251-8782 FAX 1, N:. �.w O I N -_ I MAIN SEWER JOINTS. CITY OF RENTON CCV 1 I o to I - 7-z0-[.'6 RECOMMENDED ENDED FIB( AL DEPARTMENT OP PUBLIC WORKS d U In Br Lo ly o ��` J. t�� GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE O1.6.OFAHWT RWG AHD COVER SHALL BE EAST JOROAN IPON WpitMS.P1C. 6 WCH CLEANOIIT i', r011 _ DETAILSZd N. No.WM.GLEAN OUT SHALL BE A WATER ACTT ASSEMBLY. J. _ _ _ I � - - O -I Wcru, I 2.R U0FDOL WD AREAS.POUR A 1'-0'TIDOL Y-D-SODNEE y W Date: Fifth $WIIFN)m5 ADortthent6 - NCONCRETEASPHALT CLASS 3DQT.PAD AROUND THE SW AND COVER K` V' 1 IN GONER O M ROAMED B, STANDARD AROUND ON SOK,.RING AND ADOPTED `I� 7.(6 �� DESKl� BHE CIMq AS REWIRCD BY SrNEDMD DONE DMNING BR36. CRY DT RENTDN f FOISTCRt'`\a� DRAVIp BHE DATE 4/02/02 FiE NO. �' , 420 STANDARD PUNS Dote I.4I DATE as/d 'P/ONO I. L�� BY CHECKED RJA SCALE NA FgD BOOK PAOE_ W �MAU R.Naed nel.z JDH DMO CS 'I. I 1.1 N I� Z e= Adore mT... DID'14 AO DWG. NAME:8076 SP PACE:8076 EXPIRES 2/5/09 �• _pole A�flO� ya_,D.a wxN w,.s SHEET SDSpP 5 A DATE REVISION 9Y�APPR'01 02/28/2002 11:52 FAX 425 251 8782 BARCHAUSEN -' BCE OLYMPIA i1002 ut:u-i 1-U 1 r1UN 12:21 N?1 SHERMAN HOMES FAX NO. 4258853939 P. 05/ OC7-10-2021 MIS? CITY OF RENTON 425 432 7300 P,02/14 f J Cffy afBm+rt+a PIA/pWDepa,wAerr AAA, 'rfrnrlvs Skis W.Sto,(rXddpiofr - ' ►F' yjattoNAPARTMENTS grA-ox1is SA-A,P.cr,_ AF.POarANPAtrisioNrtp JANWAYzst.too! Pace13efi5) Achlfimrry Notes'tCl Appllcunt: ' 71016110 ruing notes are wuppt mawfallnformation provided In conjuneflon with the envlronrnenhtf dvferrrrinatiun. Etocause these notes are provided as informaf/on only,fhayorr notsubjecf to fife appeai process for anVirlannrenfat determineGars. Plan Review•-Sanitary Sewer 1. This protect la outside of the Aquifer Protsdion Zones. 2. There le an existing 8"sanitary sewer main In Williams Avenue s. 3. Parking garages;bah require floor drains and shall be a nnected to the sanitary sewer. Flows shall be .directed through floor drains that am installed In accordance with the UPC to an exterior oil/Water separator. Tho separator shad be sized to meet a minimum 15-minute retention time for peak/lows rnticlpated in the gerege area,but In no case will be less than 200 gallons of storage capacity. The type of Interceptor shall be as manufactured by Pipe Inc.,Utility Vault Inc.,or approved equal. 4_ Due to the project biting in the tenter Downtown Zone,the System Development Charge(SDC)shall . turf at the current rate or$0.106 per square fool of property(401278 of x$0,106=$4,288.26). The SDC will ho collected as part of the consttruction permit A redevelopment credit may apply. Pion Review.Water 1. There Is an existing d'water line in Williams Allellee 8,and B"lines In both 8 4e and S 56'Streets_ A 24'transmission line is located In Burnett Avenue S. P. The Berated Rnt flow In Williams Ave south is approximately 1200 gpm. 3. The slaltc pressure is approximately 72 psi. 4. This site Is located In the downtown 196 Preeeure Zone. $. There are two fire hydrants in the vicinity,four hydrants will be required for the project. 6. A 12-inch water mein Is to be installed in Williams fronting the properly by the City of Renton.The developers share for the project would be the cost of the new stub for fire sprinkler service and domestic service line and any additional hydrants needed for the project. 7. Due to the project location In the Center Downtown Zone,the System Development Charge shall be et the current rate of$0.164 per square foot of property. The fee has previously been partially paid. leaving a net square footage of 17,260 sf(17,250 sf x$0.1 s4-14,66e.60).The SDC will be collected es part of the construction permit, 8. A separate utility perfhIrerid excrete plane v i be required for the lrietblletion afil a doublo detector chuck wive assombly for the lire 5prini ler system. The applicant shall submit a copy of the rrwchanicd plan showing lodntion and installation if backtiow device is to be installed inside the building. 9. A domestic water meter bactdllow device Is required when building height exceeds 30 feet, as has been Proposed for the project. •0. The required Irrtoatlon system must have a state-approved backflow device installed. / Plan Wow.Stolunvefer 1. A storm drainage narrative and conceptual plan has been submitted and reviewed. It has been given pretfm1nary approval. 2. Final slams drelnage report and design shall cornplyvrilh tho ling Courtly Surface Water Design uttap4m`ceena 02/26/2002 11:53 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN BCE OL1'hiPIA f�00a DEC-17-01 HON 12:22 p►1 SHERNhN HOMES FAX NO, 4258B63939 P, 06/17 OCT-10-2001 1415? CITY OF REN(TON 42S 430 ?300 r.03/14 • c,re offtpuon P/3Jf TDeya►rsroanl AdMlnletroli.c S+1CPlan Revive Sl'eRsparr 1A-'ae�161 SA-4 BCP.uw ILFP'nr4pq)DECJSMDNdr`J1NIU1lr39,2441 ""�'�•�"••• . 10 Ii of2S iviahcaal,1990 Edition. 3. No on-site detention is required, 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision-to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of Record to the Public Works inspector. Certification of the installation,maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities Is required prior to Temporary Certificate of occupancy. 5. The Surface Water System Development Charge,at the rate of 50.163 per square foot of new Impervious sulfate,is applicable to this project($0.153 x 22,96344,202.23). The System Development Charge will be collected as pan of the consbuctfee permit. 6- Temporary erosion control shall be installed end maintained to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the durat m of the project. e' lean Review—Street Improvements 1. Any substandard or damaged street Improvements shall be replaced to City of Renton standards. 2. Ailey design standards require a minimum of 20 feet of right-of-way,with 20 feet of pavement within the downtown any. An additional 5 foot dedication of alley right-of-way or access easement,the length of the property. Is required to comply with City of Renton code_ ti 'I M Review—Genera! 1- All wire utilities shall be inetalled underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance, if " three or more poles are required to be moved by the developmerd design,all existing overhead utl ides ; ' shall be placed underground. ' 2.. All required utility,drainage,and street improvements will require separate plan submittais prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards bya licensed Civil Engineer. 3. All plans chat!conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. • 4. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these Improvements. The fee rut 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 lose than$200.000,and 3 percent of anything over r )1�� x200A44- Hrjtf of th►s fee must be paid upon application for construction permits(preliminary plat f improvements),And the reinaindot when the construction permit is Issued_ There may bo additional foes for Water servica3 related expanses. 6. A ronstrucfton plan indicating haul route and hours,canstnlcforr hours and a traffic control plan shall he submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 6:30 am to 3:30 pro, unless Approved In adkanc a by the Development Services Division. s. Cohetrucfion h'd(,1ty;Halt limited from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday tfuvugh Friday end 9:ob am to • 0:0o pm Saturday for utility construction activities. My dlanges to wort[bows shall require approval in Advance by the Development Serweee Division. rr CorrsbuCii0118ervlces 1. A demolition permit In required. ' 2, The 199't Uniform Building Code and 1A®8 NEC are the governing codes. 3. Elevator lobbies are required. . 4, inspections ere required as per peotechnlcal engineering report. sileµhuav4oc 02/28./2002 11:53 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAtTSEN a BCE OLYMPIA __ 004 DEC-17-01 I10N 12 23 PM SH1^RMAN ItOMES FAX NO. �258853939 P. D7/17 oCT-•10-' 1 14:5B CIT`l OF RENTON 425 43e 7300 F.Od/icr Cziy tf R ;W n PII/Pir epa► moni Adn..,att fve 1 k Alan Rr.4 St;Pepon b 1(011TytBl f]r7Mf MT3 ZflA.o-l61 34,4 BCP 1L RRPOITANf DeCIVONOFl�WU4p2 .2I0) P ga IS oil! li_ `)eGtrical wiring must be in conduit. i/ rircr Prevention '1 The preliminary tire flow required Is 3.750 gpm. 2. hour fire hydrants are y required. One hydrant Is required within 160 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. ..ti 3. A looped water main is required. 4, An approved fire alarm system shalt be installed throughout the structure. 5. Ana roved fire sprinkler and standpipe approved 6p pip system shall be installed throughout the structure. Two Standpipe outlets shell be provided on the west side of the building. e. Separate lane and ap P permit ere required for the installation of it+e sprinkler and fire alarm systems. ' Parka 1, Ail landscaping outside of property lines Is to be maintained by the applicant. Planning 1. Retaining walls in excess of four(4)feet require engineered drawings and a separate building permit. 2. Construction easeme is obtained from abutting properly owners may be necessary prior to construction on or near property Tines. These agreemolil9 must include protection maesures for(or permlSsion to potentially damage or remove)trees located on abutting properties within 20 feet of the property ling. a.•Tho applicant oust contact Steve Anton of Waste Management,Inc.at 20a 243-405D,ext.860,for 4 pproval of the dumpster location and cenfiguratlen. W N CENTER DESIGN OVERLAY JiiITQULATIQN3 In addition to the genera(objectives and poUtes of!lie Downtown Element of the Comprehensive Plan,the proposed project lies within the"Urban Center Design Overlay Districr as defined by Out. No,4821. The Pu(P°h of the Urban Center Design Overlay Regulations Is to establiett design review In accordance with pOlitios astat,lishod in the Land Use and Downtown Elements of the Renton Comprehensive Plan- There aro two categories of regulattQita,a)'rnlnlinum stendends"which must be met unless rnedirred es provided in Renton Municipal Code 4-0-2fl0D,and b)'guidellnes"which,although not mandatory,are considered by the Developi tent Services Director in rendering a decision on a proposal. 1. raUiLDING SITING AND DEQi®N A. Pedestrian Building Entries 't, Minimum 8bindards: a_ Building Orientation Attached buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. nitai��lav,da i _ , 02/28J2002 11:53 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN 1 BCE OLYMPIA 1Q005 , UtC-t I-U 1 NON ]R;23 PHSHERIIAN HOPiES FAX NO. 4258853939 P. 08/t 7 UCT•1.0.-2tatal 1415E1 CITY OF RENTON 425 430 ?300 P.05/141 kl g ddm a[srmsi a 9lbPIcet Review St Report RbIQUt7 ND9dCAyloNQFJANflfJ2YzA.2not - ZED Jai S�l.4,�c LL 1 Pose rA@!2J MO Iwor separate buildings have their primary fe odes feting warrens Avenue South. Pedestrinan w'aikw�YB► With stairs,connect the raged entry plaza level to the public r:ldawe/k. b. Entrance Location -- A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade faring the street. Such entrances°had be prominent, visible tom the fit,connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk and Include human scale elements, Them era two primary entrances to the Iwo,separate buildings. round frscee Williams Avenue S has its own private miry from the z level Hum nevel scalenit that dements at the plaza level Include landscape planters. 2. Guidelines: Q. Entries from the street should be clearly marked with canopies nts, ornamental lighting,or landscaping. Entries from parking lots shod be bordinate to those i rotated to the street. The primary entry Is prominently marked by a glass and metal canopy, Landscaping!s contained within planting beds or eiLhdectural planters around the perimeter of the bw7dlag. EXtHrlor lighting, far securItY PutP0Eas,Would be requlmd Pedestrian connecflons to the underground parking garage are within the building. b. I:ntr es should provide transition space betvreen the public street and the private residence such as a porch,laniMcaped area,terrace or similar feature. The printery tery entrances to the bulletings,and the indhrlduuf entries for ground floor units,aro eceersseed across a lanc s+caped formate,ratlrerthan directly from the public streets or s+dOWalliz; a. Features such as enter,lobbies,end display Windows should be oriented to the way,otherwise, etreening or art features such as trellises,artwork,morals, landscaping,f or combinations thereof,should be Incorporated into the street-oriented facade. The primary building entries 4nd/06h/es are oriented to Williams Avenue South, The largest space to be dedlested as common area Is bested can the West side of the bur7ding, between the*admen(building and the alley, It is eleva( i above the grade of the alley and includes pavers,planters,a trellis, and steel and wood seating benches. Private entrances ter and floor units would be se scions and gates, The tr,elh"s has been appareled'Awn�o cwtl�no, �a ley alleyway,to a screening feature. Tho plaza el ibackhe landscaped throughout which faces Pavers o public dilfarang dimonsvvns have been proyosad l br the plaza and common are rfbe of materials The smallest pavers would be used in the private outdoor areas. Them are no or(features, such as murals,or fountains,that have been proposed for the .,, reflect. d- pwi©strtan pathways from public sidewalks to primary entry nces,or kernvrlrna►y entrances Should be seoessible and should be clearlydelineated.pan9 loEs to Thea podestrlu/�walkways or ramped walk to the primary building entrances are by moans of either a stalrlyaY p Pedestrian aomms to the underground parking garage would be by means 611gr►knhv_doet 1 02/26/2002 11:54 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN + BCE OL1'DtPIA f�006 utu-i r-u1 NUN ie i'q FM SHhRMAN HUt1E FAX N0, 4258853939 P. 09/17 OCT-•10-202/ 14:,50 CITY OF RENTON 425 430 7300 P.06/14 Cay fergenum P/IWPir.Orporirneer d! !!s !°. ?EtrtR'4Pfs :Cfg1V�31 Ada. 1h,mrvcShe „R�tmwSIVReport • srporirosiascrsloxapWr. v4Rrr moo ' SA EcF >>Wr?s of either an elevator or stai,Wey inside the building.Lighting would be incorporated info the construction at alt for entries. a. Multiple buildings on the sense site should invorporate aliments such as plazas,walkway;, and landscaping along pedestrian pathways to pro%i a a clear view to destinations. The two buildings that comprise the Dean Sherman Apartments are separated connected es a single P and not connected bya ng'a unit. A cour rd would be between the two structures. They are paved plaza,with architectural planters and landscaping. Clear dictinctlons would be Invade between private and semi-private or pubfo spates These areas would be _ ' defined by the planters,landscaping, and gates. I. Ground floor units should be directly accessible from the street All ground floor traits would be accessible from either the plaza level at the exterior(gibe building or rcrn the hallway Within the buiktlrrq The steps up from the street would enhance I the sense ofprivote space for these units. B. Transition to surrounding Development 1, Minimum Standenis: Cattail siting and design treatment Is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new building&differ from 5urraundir�g development In terms Of building height,bulk,end scale. The following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: a. mocks at ttia side or rear of a building may be Increased In order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger bupdfngs and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards. Setbacks that exceed the minimum required would be provided. All setbacks have l)lidscaping. The rear setback also has planters seating benches, and a trellis. h. Building proportions, Including step backs on upper levels. The four-story building as ptvposed is at a larger scale then the existing single family homes surrounding it,Most of which are one end two roofs,modulations,and balopnlo trowover, t bra uc X�k or the perception hasp/lfbein large scale within its context of being 1 •- _ .... _ c. Building articulation to divide a larger archltirt,rel element Into smaller pieces. The building has extensive vertical architectural articulation,awnings,end balconies that enliven the facade and wattle visual Interest The Intention is that!/lase elements, and creating two,sopamte buildings,rattier then a single building, would make the structure appear .Sfiol/er. a. finollirles,pitches,end shapes. raooflnes are pitched In add/lion to the canopies over'the primary entlunce.N windows have milieux that cretins pdness of gle sa fn various sizes and shapes. Balconfea hays grillwork r, 2 Guidelines(none required) y ertephimv,c:c a i 02/26/2002 11:54 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN y BCE OLYMPIA 007 _ DEC-17-01 NON 12:25 PM SHERMAN HOMES FAX NO. 4268853939 P. 10/17 OCr"1O-2001 15100 CITY OF RENTUN 425 430 7320 P. 7/14 City oJ7trrroa MOW �in/�Ltt►a it J..iNS[►PJ[AfAdY.r7�adt7�fall�f Pray linfo w.TORepod OPORr, aerrr�itJva AORI RYM tea "�" tU J6 s�,t tor L[,t NIX 1eof11 II. PARKING,ACCIEt5,AND CIRCULATION A. Lcacatlon of Parking 1. Mtni►►ium tehdards: i No Parklike shall be located between a budding and the front properly line or the street side yard of a oomer lot. <µi No,such parking is proposed for the project . . Guidelines(none required) ii. Design of Surface Parking(not applicable,ell aparbnent,parking Ia underground) rg ) ;. G. StruGtltre I Garage Parking • 1. Minimum standards(none required) 2. Guidelines: a. Perking garage entries should be designed and sited to complement,but not subordinate the Padosirien entry. If passible.locate the parting entry away from the street,to either the side `> or roar of the building. The Wilk*enlrance ro Ms underground parking garage would be Off the alley at tho roar of the bulkiing. Pedestrians would seder and eldi the gentile from WOO the building. The _ Vehivle ramp should be marked es"not for pedestrian use.' b- parking garage entries should not dominate the str ppe- Them old be 0 single parking garage vohtcle entrance/exit at the alley. c. The design of structured parking at finished grade under a building should minimize the appaeare width of garage entries. The underground!AMP a e Irdyis vlsuart minimized kyIts location as a tamped entry that rums perpon, u►er fo the alley. - ... ... d. Parking within the beading should.bo_nnolased.or screened a through decorative grilles,or trellis Work with landscapi• ng, g any combination of wail��_, till garage parking would be out of view underground. B. Garage fmeedes should be landscaped or banned to reduce vlaual impacts. Most of the game facade would be anderyround. f. Parking gorsvee should be des�noq to be ettchiteduratiy compatible with the reeklennet portion of the building. Ube sirnitar forma,materials,and details to enhance garages. • ,-. Most of the garage to would be underground. r r I 02;28/2002 11:54 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN BCE OLI'MPIA fj008 utu-1 i-u i NUN 12:Lb Pf1 SHERMAN HOMES FAX NO, 4258853939 P. I1/17 err.-1O.•2uoi i5u00 CITY OF R NTON fterof�tu nP1i1/11rDepernne�,r 425 439 ?300 F'.EB/14 '+yY. w.� .. A . 4troos S1h eta RixtrwSrq(IR ,x ltePal7r,PEPPEt lc r or.�t tiRrzs roof l I .f l LU QalJvr�2� s • g. Garage parking should be secured with electsonrc entries. The applICent has stated that a imp dorm'automated garage door, with elechonk security, Would be activated during evening hours h. The street bide of perking garages should incorporate one of the following uses Ih street- , facing facades: • i• Retail or 5ervice commercial uses in the Center Downtown(CD)zone: Not applicable+for structures that am totally underground. it. Facilities or services for residents.such as recroatton rooms.or building lobbies. Not applicable forstrudurae that ate totally underground. JA (II, Residential units that have access dIrectiy to the street, Not applicable for aiructures that ere totally underground. iv. Service and storage functions should be located away from the street edge and generally not be visiblO from the met or sldewaike. sere r e loading,macharufal equipment,and durnpstars would be either ieceted within the underground tbarage or screened from vim I), Vehicular Access i. Minimum Standards(none required) • 2. Guidelines: • a- Parking tots and garages should be accessed from alleys orside streets. The underground,gases would be accesses From the alley between Williams Avenue South and Burnett Avenue&21410, b. Drivawlxs 3houid be located to be visible kern the right-of-way,but not I de circulation on-site or to adjoining properties. Where mpee clrlvswys�►rd curb cuts. possible.minimize the numberr of ostrian • The drivewany tamp that Would provide underground perking garage a:COSS end egress would have limited vial*for vahiculer traffic in the alley.. The Installation of mlrmrs to improve visibility may be necesvery. pedestrian traffic in the alley should be somewhat limited. There wows bee single garage entry, V. f'`edestrien CtrcUla1Ion 1. Minimum Standa rds(none required) elbF+�K�aV,r.'49G 02/26/2002 11:55 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGIIAUSEN BCE OLI'MPIA 0009 PEG-If-U1 f1UN 12:26 PM SHERMAN HOMES FAX H0, 4258853939 P, 12/1 -2G 3] 15:r31 CITY OF REM"ON 425 430 73013 P.091I4 ClfriffitentonPl$TR'l3apwIM4At Atbehtlithtth,rSRtFIcm)ta,dew 4'Rvart weat'gibNAP.hNtrurrrtl Ns20of2J 2. Guidelines: • R. Developrrenta should include an integrated pedestrian circulation system thatconnects buildings,open space,and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system. The oti site pedestrian circulation system appears to be well-coordinated with the adjacent public street and sidewalk systom. b. Pedestrian pathways should be delineated separate from vehicle circulation by using a variation in paved fracture and color,and/or landscaping. Pedestrian walkways, which are rutted to a hlher elevellon then streets end public sklcwwelks, would be distinguished by use of decorative pars. LANDSCAI}INc1 I RECREATION 1 COMMON SPACE A. Common Space 1, Minimum Standards r a- Attached housing developments of 10 or more dwetling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to 50 square feet par unit. The common space area should be aggregated to provide usable araa(s)for residents, 1 With 88 units,the protect would require a minimum of 4,300 square feet of common space. The pmposvd common space areas total 5,900 sr,or 6a 6 sf per unit. 4. The location,layout,and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be%lb ect to approval by the bevekrpment Services Director. The requiredsummon open space may be satisfied with one or more of the following elements: Courtyards, plazas,or multipurpose green spaces_ • All of the common ama used fe MN the raquirement ether Overlay District is passive In nature and designed as exterior courtyard/pram areas__ The largest apace to be dedicated as common area Is located on the west side between the aparbtent building and the alloy. Itis elevated above the grade of the alley and includes/raga,planters,a trellis,and steel end wood seating benches Private rl _.o1•tlrences to ground,floor units would be seperattedfrom the common area gated wells n re byscreened, Another Goatrn a space/s located at the main eniy and between the two buildings Il rips Planters and landscaping,including a lyge,speolmen tree es a focal point. ii. Upper level common decks,patios,terraces,or roof gardens. • None proposed,however,the vppnrstory units have private,outdoor balconies. iii. Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public sweat system alai kI M.dry; 02/28/2002 11:55 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN BCE OLI'MPIA 010 in -11-u1 nufy ti'.:'Lb rrl SHERWIN HUPir:S FAX NO, 4258853939 P. 13/17 ocT-1B- )01 15101 CITY OF RENTOt! 425 430 7300 P.10i14 • !Ylct M Asir- hPram 1r.vraw Self RePorf r.+Nvt�act3rW$+orJr Nt t2s 2091 lU.. 1 •FCr RE ix Ild • Pedestrian corridors we planned far portions of the building perimeter,but would be discontinuous In swne areas duo to private outdoor space associated with ground floor wills. lv. Remotion facilities Including.hut not limited to tennis/sport courts,swimming pools. exercise areas,gang rooms,or other similar facilities. None proposed. v. Children's play space. None proposed • Guidelines: The location and layout Of recreation and common apace should be as follows! a, Common sPara areas should be centrally located.so they are near a majority of units, accessible and usable to residents,and visible from surrounding dwelling units. Prapoeed common areas would be eenbnlly located and accessible from the building entrances. The wart common area would be ADA accessible through the building. - The confer common area would ho somewhat secluded In nature,although It would be accessible to the public,while the west common area would be both more private in use,but highly visible from abutting mat b. Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances,significant landecapfng.Unique topography or architecture,and solar exposure. The we.t common mroa would have good solar exposure. Chlldren's play apace should bo centrally located,visible from the dwe1lIngs and away from hazardous arm SWgarbage dumpsters.drainage fadiltles,streets,and parking areas. None proposed on she. A ehltdren tt play area fa located one-huff block west at the Burnett Uno irPad1 i City of Renton public perk • c. No required landscaping,driveways,parking,or other vehicular use areas should be counted toward the common space requirement or be located In dedicated outdoor recreation or common Use Areas. Ce4r r►orr areas do not Include rsgtdred landscaping, driveways, etc. d. Revived yard setback areas should not count toward oLitdoor recreation and common space onus such areas are developed as courtyards,plazas,or passive use areas containing Iahui capind and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development. Common areas.do riot include eetbecks. bitplrury in 02/26/2002 11:55 FAX 425, 251___8783. BARGRAUSEN BCE OLYMPIA C�O11 UhU-1 NW HUN 1''2:2.1 NI SHERMAN tIMMES FAX NO, 4258853939 P, 14l17 CICI--1I.2201 15gt 2 r_IT; C EhtjpN 425 439 ?900 P.1zi14 City Df i'iinton Mini T :2mPa TJh[F, 2's .ldn,ravrnndHc9tc`iPrrunkivlswStgD.t.pgr! 7Fl.POkT AND DEVISJQNO JANUARY29,ZVI ]dl S .RCF Lb! Pop:11 cat e• Docks,balconies.end private ground floor open 5c:2 should not court toward the common space 1 r}ec{eatton area require:non!, - - Common areas do not-Include balconies or private open spaces. f. Other required landscaping,and sensitive area buffers without common Accost links such as poderririarl trails,should not be Included toward the required rrcreatien and common space requirement_ Not included In common Mae. 13, Landscaping 1. Minimum Standartlo: The owner shall provide regular maintenance to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. Such maintenance Is required d by Cods(Rlld/C44-08011). 2, Ouldolinos: a. Landscaping ehouid bo used to soften and integrate the bulk of the building. Appmxrmatoly 2,250 sf of the total(44276 sf), or 5 6%of the total afro area,Is pervious area, All porvioue areas am landscaped with trees,shrubs, vines,perennial dowers end groundcover. b. Use of low ma1Rtenanco landscape material Is encouraged, IV. EttfLnlrie ARfHtTEC1t,IJ AL DE.stoN A. Building Character end Massing 1. Minimum Standerdy; Al!build 1ng facades shall Include modulation or Maculation at intervals of no more than 40 feet_ 4. AL recedes are modulated al intervals of no MOM Otn 35feet The man entrance has articulation above the door(metal end glass cencY)Which servos the purpose of facade modulation by mating-Weed Interest ...._. _ 2. guidelines: • a. Building façades should be modulated and/or articulated with architectural element to reduce the apparont size Of new buildings,broak up long blank welie, add visual tnterest,and enhancto the character of the neighborhood. The facades of tiro bonding an),modulated and furil:er ect/cWated with balcony overhangs; a class and rnalal canopy over the main entrance,private balconies with grillwork fallings on the second, third, and fourth levels and,gnflworm grates at acme ground floor unit entrances. - b. Articulation,moaulaticih, and their Intervals should cteate a sense of scale important to residenna1 bWid%ng$, arapirov.r3oc 02/28/2002 11:56 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN + BCE OLl'MPIA 0012 )EU-1'/-Ui noH i2:z'r FM SHEEt11RN HOMESFAX NO, 4258853939 P. 15/17 OCT••10-260t 15:02 CITY OF RENTOtN 425 431 ?See F.t2'14 f,frYtankvanPis IP ORNCRI( Adm. artaltirmasaManRciaL-vSn;Q' .wort R.Et'cI1#T.tND3Jt;pSlGtAf pPJANCLtR!zD,20j�•r�� ----. ...__ , L34A-gal f..74 4 E � read gritY Articulation and modulation,es tueil as pitched roof, are appropriate 1e idenfiel !e to the building. proposed to increase the sense of _ }Ivariety or modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual Interest and to reduce the bulk and scale of large projects, The perceived bulk of the building should be significantly reduced by We modulations, articulations; roollines,end extedorsutface treatments Mat have been proposed. d. The following methods of budding modulation should be used such that the combination of features meats the intent or ibis provision: 1, Building modulations should be a minimum of 2'In depth and 4'In width. 13ullding modulelions.and balconies,would be greeter-than the minimum. • it Alternative 1m ttexts to shape a building etch se angled or curved facade elements,offset pianos,wing ara&,end terreclna,will be considered,provided that the intent of this sed1Oh Is met. 11, The plexa laval would be lern:rcad above the,public shiest falley/sidewalk grade_ e. Building Articulation The following rnothociaof ardoulaflon should be used in combination to project a residential character, i. Articulation of each interval with features such as balcony,bey window.porch,patio, deck.or clearly defined entry. Each modulation of the facade would be ftrrtherarticulated with private balconles with grillwork railings and canopies over the main enhance. II. Provision of pedesirieriwscalod elements for each interval such as a lighting fixture.trellis, or other landscape feature. The primary[-nade,erg WilliamsAvenue South,would have private entrances that connect the ground level units to the public sidewalk(across private open courtyerris), ..____... • Exterior lighting would be piovidSd. Pelt effect would be somewhat similar to°row houses'anti would increase the sense of pedestflen scale, tu. Provide architectural features such as indentations,overhangs, projections,earnices bays,canopies.or awnings. Several of these features have been proposed. - It�. Use'of metsrlal variations such,as colons.brick or metal banding,or teortural changes. Exterior materiels and finishes would consist of asphalt roof shinglbs,horicontol lap = sldirrp(material unspcca9ed), vinyl windows,painted wood window trim,stucco wffh ::than u.v ou) 02/26/2002 11:58 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUiSEN ; BCE OLYMPIA 013 DEC-17-01 MON 12:28 P11 SHERMAN HOMES FAX NO. 4258853939 P, 16/17 OCT-20-2001 1510'S CITY OF RENTDN 425 430 7300 P.n/14 Crry ofgauon 1/1141Y1)gpoinigar 'Jf�t�N c sn,ikl �7AssMs Aimirrisrrarlvlt Ste:Ptah 1evfer.Weverr JUPORT AND AitaralV7FlANTI4Rno,MN Pate11 9/21 an,*topcoat, concrete planters, cast-in-pleas conerate welds,and metal grillwork on balconies and prawn/level unit entry gates. v. Use of artwork or building ornamentation(such as mosaics,murals,grillwork,sculptures. relief,etc.). --- Although no artwo,fr,parse has been proposed,the steel and wood benches,wood trews with motel him,end motel grillwork et various locations would be decorative In nature and matt the intent of this guidatine. vi. Use o1 rechsd building entries,plazas,or courtyards,or seating and planting areas. Several of these elements have been proposed far the project. E1. Building Brine t. Minimum Standard°(none required) 2. Guidelines; a. Building rootlinee should be varied by emphasizing dormers,chimneys,stepped roofs, gables,prominent writ ra or fascia,cc be broken or articulated to add visual interest to the buildings. The building roonfne,as proposed, would be highly pitched and both create visual interest while reducing the sense of bulk of(Ito buildings, b. Rooftop equipment screening should use materials that are architect►rally compatible with the building, Mechanical®Vuljument located on the roof would be screened by the sloped roc/itself c. eulidir►A Materials 1. MfnIrnurrl Standards(nano required) 2_ CuldeDnes; a. Ali building exterior finishes should add visual Interest and detail and be mode of material which is durable,high quality,and.aaally_maintyained. Materials that have an atfrac lv+e. . texture,patty m,or quality of detailing are encouraged for all façades. 7hb proposed exterior materials end finishes(see above)would appear to meet his guldaflne. b. Exterior finish materials should adhere to these guideline: i. aiding texture and color should renect types Northwest building patterns using materials such as Wood siding and shingles,brick,stone,and terra cotta bIos limited use of wood hes been proposed. sap slaw'has been proposed, bent the prat-orrel has-not beery specified No brick stone, or terra Cotta her been proposed• Stucco,wh(oh Is not generally considered a vernacular bulk ng material In the Northwest 02/26/2002 11:56 FAX 425 251 8782 BARGHAUSEN BCE OLYMPIA 0014 ur.i--i i-uw null J�;eti rn HEKtiHN rums AX NU. 4�bBdb��3y P. 1li]'i — cn;r i4�-�?crcJl' 1S•O CtD? {2ENTDN C1Vj of Roston j'/U/PW rrp�eHr • 425 430 7300 P.14/14 DlfitNR uaw,fA]y�p R? EMt' A* front!Sit elan R Remo.44Repof-r REPoriliNi)-D7CacllAVo .14Mil1eY-df2pa! ` 1 S,!„4er2S I5 r�ee�czsolx3 w0t4d bo the primary extedormaterlel Colon&of materials hav not been indicated by the applicant 1f- Metal siding should always have visible corner moldings and trim. No metal siding has spec►ficaly been proposed iii. Concrete walls should be enhanced by texturing,coloring with a concrete coating or admixture, or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces,mosaics,or artwork. Concrete walls have been proposed for retaining walls only,not 45 an exterior tit/Ming �tatetiaL. iv. Concrete block walls should be enhanced with textured blocks and Colored j n mar, decorative bond pattern and/or incorporate other masonry materials. No concrete block walls have specifically been proposed. v. Stucco and siila b'oWeled finishes should be trimmed in mauls such as Wood or • masonry and should be Muttered from extreme weather by roof overhangs or other methods. • stucco Woarld haV1,an acrylic topcoat. • • • •—ter•--- • Rala fnncv.due TOTAL P,14 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS A preliminary drainage report has been completed by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated December 15, 2000, and has been included within this section. The City of Renton recently completed some storm drainage conveyance system improvements in jSouth 5th Street and Williams Avenue South to improve the downstream drainage system. A copy of the as-built plans for those improvements are included within this section.' ' I 1 I _ + 7251.008 [BHE/bq/ath] I i 1 N l' , . - ;. r • E. • T I_I_l c �a- ( f432 WILUAMS AvE i N o .N 8 O! '. _ ) ti. /434 BURNETT AVE S NI I 2 _i. 4'eoneMk a all-, i `'• . 1,•••._ ...i ) • ENi I I . . _ . . - . . _ ..� .. _ .. _ . ._ . . _ . . � -..- . Plan -. _ . - I I'. I C w COt1NECT,.: ro Ex SD c I )4 '> ,o'• I azA `"CO m< �O �' I -41 1 91 ,S10RY _/ i o _ w , � •:A 1� , CB is 3 - QQ b. q li, I ��({ •I 1 STORY /435 • • {t y y REMO Spa?AND REPLACE • ' • 7 W t a � 4J Q I. 171 � HOUSE �j>• • ` O 57 I 71 3 w • . ' 0 .d: in„, • 411:4; i�ii_-__ '� ; IN O / •y IREMOVEXNH_ �•• V 1 O N ,-I v . Z O a > I` - �.,:_:=�:-- I.:I' ' • us'Ex.SD (,�wr4 •i 1}/11 ,� - eoiovE's'. �.: i �_ 1 �� ( . Q I ',` y�rr� I (� VE EX.PIP ' i�i Z. ij ..wwww:xiw.wwwwwwit.. - - -_ g: (•ti(•j�VE EX CB i - � • O I I-• , v_ �y i�IF Grass G �u " - :,:, ,��L ►� Pwc EXISTING SD(� sz eAwII�' w�i.........�... ��r 1 � OIL • y • ray 7 arm-- '< _ � T 27 w `G Th g`' • Q C V, m . . - `• �__ II► _. - -mg b.1111111i .- - - - • -�- -'-i UGTW UGT . ���,u CB/4 S �1 e ,,,, _117= f . , . . . am. r ';-_ �`` � S 5 ri: �� ...,„ - G- P I ::'•® ....ti��...,".,.:.,,.„<...,.,.,r..•.....o�, ...�,w....ss.,.u:....,�..w_.r? .- r,.su..�.,. M/:�L1h./ s,..... ..n...M...o,e,..- .2 _ ...w�.... - 11111. • • m., x _UMW 1.140 • ,� O' 4'IP GAS n V"/""• • _ `_ _-_ -- � ' - --_ a� `�� G t� GAS N �_ i W , i! 4'IP C q___ i I.ql\ g r ...ram _�� �505 ®07[Tii CB a3 .. C •.. 1. 1 '^ $ n8 - i f 1.' I' I �iJ s b<" :l q•gya -- .. �n - - 1I - .�L.J_�_ - _,:.� VE i ��wEAIOVE E%- w"• A`• w •V' w z _ • �k ; I i l�Ns_ ca C6 12 Mj � E�'H SET 1 •� •! 5• .{,-wripil . rzT.. .,, :�I, 4 • I ,,0 � .. 1IIEMOVE AND RESET i , . • F a I I YIIII NOUSE EXISTING SURVEY MONUMENT I c n ,• O ....f . •\c i I a5� / PER RENTON STANDARD ,rta c_E . . I REMOVE FJC 50 PIPE ICB/2B SPECIFICATIONS 1 "II i.t v,`2 "v I CONNECT 18'SD TO rFAt' i'llitil. 1 I S2 STORY . I a s HOUSE \E I I _ CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTOR SIDEWAUC 13 d5D0 __ • I I . I �AND LANDSCAPE OI TMS AREA "1' I ac I • i• I • - • LPL I -•�.6.. - . ._ . . - . _ . • • •w r I I , coot, /504 BURNETT AVE S ST.ANDRE115 LODGE • Colic) . t I I ■ . I! 1. ik ,I • I /505-507 -• D I o • _ • • SCALE --- . c' E 1 Horiz. 1' - 20' D dy • • Vert.. -:5' • • - • ,� - . • . :• •- • C9I4A TYPE 113+00 114+00 115+00 116+00 117+00 STASTA.11"Q+76 e, -_ .. '• i - .. CBf3;TYPE:2 t8 6•WATER cm;11'PE 2,•6M'••-BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE STA. •116r38•RT.r STA.116+69,I T.I' •F D !L P 8 - (ABANDONED) W i - • SOLID LOCKING Lro SOLID LOCKING LID _�'•n _ //f, .,i m '• CB R2,TYPE 2..4r PM 35 02:. All4�-95tdD-l- IZ'(S)IE s 32.M _' :o NOTES: • CB 1l1,TYPE 2Y.8' :.,, 5 - 40 STA.113f28,Rt.r - SCUD 11_Ot.r(,RT.r svoit4�eD.S,RT 1' 12 a 33.13• Rtn=3s.m ,^ t^ 40 �- 1. ALL TYPE 'i ='S SHALL HAVE SCUD LOCKING LIDS. SOLID.LOCKINGLID %i_ • - 12'(E)IE'=30.93 It(E)IE=3L2) `_. m :'- 2. TYPE 1 C=•I, OFILES-ARE ALONG PIPE LINES. • k„q-y„-;A . R114<'W313 . � rri- �. - - 3. ALL CB G';, S'SHALL BE SET 0 1 FEET BELOW RIM=34.25 2 LB'(W)IE=30.93 • I2 (W)iE=31.31 . I ¢- 'ADJACENT I:"OUND LEVEL IY(N)IE=28.16 IB'(W)IE.30.23 I>�•(rnis.' SD- S (T BE A(P.N.) 12' _ • ft. •-• 4. ADJUST 1I 1 CBS TO LOCATE AT•LOW POINTS, 18'(S)IE=28.Ib - 2'GAS he(N)IC-35.9 I2'WINE) <I•I IN FLOW'L„�S, AND TO CLEAR EXISTING UTILITIES. 35 !ai4E 46-z€9= 18'(q IBC<-dd.-•2b�Ib<(6) G 30.25 (TO BE ABANDONED) _ � Y�IIY Ip.�)K_J6.9J� - 12''t t_=b1.9 3 CJ • ' , .w ' 5. CONTRACT-;;1• SHALL RESTORE ALL LANDSCAPING, IV(E)-IE-.28.76 - - GRADE AT.LARc+R UN! IU.5E ?:Qi" - r • _ l�CS)IE 31.31 �.-� . '. PLANTING, ;I,RFAGNG, AND STRUCTURES DISTRIBUTED - - - - _ o T- IZ'(S)IE=3L.31 `�, T� 1 o• BY CONS 1 T10N- 12'(N)LE=30315•S _ 149 LF Ir CPEP SD•O.5716 •1_'•1 - • 6. WHERE NO??I1 ON PLANS, AND/02 PROFILES, RELOCATION' • 6 SO(NDARD(NED) - - � - / 136 LP Kr C.PEP SO 0 tieb% �--� 171 • } OF PRIVAT;il 71UTIES SHALL BE fY OTHERS. • I .I cr.D - 174 LF IB'CPEP SB®'0.75% IL' )IE=3o•5�s 0 - �V T 0 1 - .�--t m' 7. CONTRACTi;•.. SHALL MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF 6 BETWEEN. 30 1 - t.nl1`ct=IYF'EA-- _ • 12' WATER Ii_•IN/SANITARY SEWEP AND 12" & 18" STORM DRAIN. O,• i •1 - STA.115.02.LT.17• 0 �"A -i 8. KEEP MINI'1 OF 3"-6" VERT1CLE CLEARANCE BETWEEN GAS LINES - IS' 6 ABANDONED TIATEfd1NE - STA.ECTI GRATE 0- B•5 NI'1Y IY WATERLF 12' SO O 1-3% CB•2B,TYPE vt AND STOR';II PIPE. - 24 WATER - STA.115402,RT.A •RI?1 L1..Isy,3p.* : IY GAS&SEWER STA 55406,RT B' -BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED-GRATE - 'Rm�..3.9e 12N4•EL,.3%.95 _ z J Y 5 1�9. PSE WILL ���.VIDE FIBERGLASS REINFORCED PLASTIC FRP) - - CONNECT TO EX.MN -- - (APPROX.DEPTH) CBtLs,TYPE 1 _� J INSULATIO '•.PACERS BETWEEN 1:'.GAS UNE AND 12� STORM.LINE. 35 -•EXISTING=TYPE-2 48• RIM O"- - 35 - STA.:I16t•69;RT:IS r - ` p1 10.•CONTRAC T' SHALL PLACE CDF BACKFILL BETWEEN 12' HP •- y � ="r^ RIME.=33.86 s - w•^"� RIM EL=35.12 A 12•(S)IE=30.83 . BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE GAS UNE ,;i i 12" STORM DRAIN AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. -L - _r IB'^^ -OT.^ T -"12"09)IE,=31.60! ""'S 3J" 12'(N)IE-30.86 I ASH CONCRETE BACKFILL J :. IB'(N)IE=27.9T - •/WERT) (REMOVED WITHIN LIMITS OF RIM EL.34.34 • Iy - p �-,,��""EII.12'SD • ♦ EX.SD STORM WATER TRENCH) )IE=3L94 WATER i I o UTILITY NOTE: 4'GAS WATER / ETo BE REMdVED) - -- ----- -- •--••• - `• S • f_ •.. - 30. - 1 THE CONTRAIL R SHALL BE RESPOI.SIBLE FOR VERIFYING 3Q 1� - -- - �a• - -L --�.• '_. w I - - __ - GA �UGT THE LOCATI01 RIMENSION, AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING - 16 lF IZ'CPFP- - 6'SS (RELOCATED FIBER OPTIC DUCT BANK BY PSE) 20 Lp 12'CPEP 49 IF IB'SD CPEP 0 0.53% - 18•LF it DIP - SO•0.2% UTILITIES WI i THE PROJECT, HE'HER SHOWN ON THESE 'SD®I.0%- ._59 0 1.0% (APPROX.DEPTH) • PLANS OR Ner! BY POTHOLING THE UTILITIES AND SURVEYING : 4.GAS 17 LF IZ'DIP - • NEW 12'WATER . • ' ' THE VERTIGO 'i i ND HORIZONTAL LOCATION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. - (TO BE RELOCATED BY PSE) - 12'WATER SD 0.10% ' • THE UTILITIES• i OWN ON THE PLANS ARE BASED UPON THE - .' •^•^" '- • UNVERIFIED P•,^ IC INFORMATION•AN I'ARE SI IBJErT TO •vAR1ATIrK. AS i-DRAWING - - - IF CONFLICTS,, CUR THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSULT THE • '. .. - AS RECORDED BY PROJECT END!; ER TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEM PRIOR TO _ - CONTRACTOR FIELD NOTES PROCEEDING • CONSTRUCTION. AND SURVEY VERIFICATION • FROM THE FLUER COMPANY • • . - - - • 1-14-02 D-2 7 2 2 1 1 z . , • .• • ' i . • ' ' • . . . • . • I ' • . . - • NJ • i . • NI r, • • • NI § P-- S • I i • ,, - ! ' I - • I :ill 1-.... 7 1 C-,1 or - I • I • j • , !: moo cx.stj(wro I i . I . can REMOVE EK:CB AND REPLACE i • 'I ' I 1 I 1 1 1 : . ••• • .• ! I. j . .. . Ca#413 I I P r•-• . 1 . I i • - (.,, i (SEE SHEET;11) - OII : • • - : C810B - • CBfl 0 ! ::1; t S.NI i `ti i . • ;- • . . t .. i . . • i . t • i • t ; CB#4 taall:z., A occ smccri it) 1 I i . I CB#4A I 1 . • • - • I t • Ca. Ill • co . A , ..--- N. . ... . 1! ! . • . - ! (SEE SHEET, 1 REMOVE _ •e,es I •' % I t . . FX.CB ANO -e•LACE ,i .1 .• : r.n.1 li 1 ORY 1111 1 • LLJ 1 •i,‘ in-2 i •I" S , • "IR t . . 1-z..1.' . I,r, ' i i . l' i.L.i ' r27,z i .1 1 • . .0 ,, a . • •= m 6 15 .5,4 . :1 11 111 . ; .. ....„ ,21 Cd ' 1 r3 V.3 7 • il.z ,,, • VIII i i III i t,r • .6". - a 0_ tn .i. i .real. :7 1, g . .e 6 * r1,1 1 ' ill i, 1 . . .4; , _ i• IIII . Dec.1111 ' •W 12 E . : 8 LA wt. 0 t'-'--_.___1. EMS=16 .1,,E, 1- • ji riminprii # *v. - ' f ILLIAN/A,,. E '11 -.• ,i 1111:3 •01$ u., tu , 1-- f-g :1 i, . D....,J 1 I 'mu.,•0- s s .m 1 I : _i-- Z 11.3 . :, till _ li sii..6_,.:__,Imigiggic_. ilh. III g i .1 E...) i In Illnellm.....gr !.• WNW ' C B :: MAI g •ry, M 5 v, • . . -* 111121;11'46..mmilligril ti ..,01 •., giminuativimmu. Conc-Wolk i 11.l&k."41111111%.1111Mal 1 ENE 111111-MMINTEM BANDONE9,4" - 111- . • LLJ IX ert • >' N MIVINIIIIMMI ,..,_"!....lin ,_.„.1,1, ..211111.11XTMill- • . •. 11.110.1111 II . ril . . • .• '1 1 •N'' ' ucr tp.GAS .azirammalsr..._ G----- 12"HP.CH! ovilik.7.-+ xv;,..x-11112kte- In• , . • - TM; 1 it liquilt, - .. . . _ .1?!.. ..•dmimugNow...„.„.__ .Ell . AEI I - 11111111111110111 IIIIII • ...-4 - " • -Csi . .- • . . .0 , 2 =IMI___MMOINIMINIINImmigilimio•im ...MLIMmnirM12=111111111Mft oillIMMIIIIIII1211.111 -1. . ' . ..: . _ _ _ illim.4.MIIIR,allifit "..i 1.11-* • in . : rallommollPisio km III 'IN 11111 1111111111111 G • . iiimmi -- , okomirlo rig; Nirrmoi..4. ...a-14 IMIIIIMWI,amirsiiiKIIIIIIIII ................... .II 11111111Men . IIII,m101111.- .11 .2:11:7= I . f HP.GAS I • • ' ...•o M 2 111111111ammir"" "mm•siliammiTh"'""momm"-Ailimino•mmo.„. ...rommi ME • , , .... ct 2: _ . iisimiimememommtimerc---ere•-•.-- 6,, I r-T-. leg .<t- 11.0 - --•4 ----- Mail _ - . 111111.2111 11111116a01212aWl....1111E ""41111111a1;i1liclia Ehisillmindllitill)Imo:Emor , ..., g : . i -...1.0- -,1410 • ' ILIS . . I I 24 • i• ' • -'11--P-. RIM-37.27 ..„........ ..,1 : =32.3 i: 1 1111 ,-1 CB#11A : t5' kt ,--4 ,n- i i l'.' • i I ... .".. . c_.)%. s,,E, I • • 111111 "" COLLElicTER i A 1 40 . • /I i . i 111111 !al I ND RtgOVE(CBSECAN3 TEETRESEITI lip' I ,-o - I I • . vs 1 41110;16 vs t. I.V En ,,,,eu i •1 w !r , i i . i ., SA I - • - :124,i • • • ' ! - °3 . :us . , I : ' * " e',. • F i i i 1 , rorioiNE:suRr.A=HENT-4 .• : - _ 711R 1 1:::.” . '',3 , • 11 I 1 i . - 4 . 111 i e • i . j Ir 1 , . . ' 511, i . lig g •I • I . • ' 3 i SPElanCATONS ill . . < . . •. .. • . =M ae9/ • , , . . • • 4 f. i • i < 1 • ..,• az • j - I.g i • I f • I • r. Al • . . . j • 1. ,r. ' . ..: i •••...di-" .,• .. .• , . • • • . i V.-------9.1 • • i i i 4 t . - . i • CB10.A. _. . ' ' Z • ! ' ail .• ii. m : • i . . • .. i , .. • • •._, _., . ...., . ..,.1 . ! . • • . • • RECORDED BY CONTRACTOR FIELD NOTES - 4,1 I AND. ' ,. • . . • • , SURVEY VERIFICATION' • Horiz. 1 = 20 . . - . FROM THE FLUER COMPANY • • ' g -. .. i Vert_ 1" = 5' • . - • . . . . . 1-14-02 60+00 59+00 - • • • . • . t 63+00 62+00 61+00 • 1 1-• • .• . 64+00. - . • • NOTE: : . . •o o• I' . C.B. #9, TYPE 2, 48 SIDE 5E0E8 DEPTH • - • - • LI F21 E -CIL #11,:1YPE ?,,4Er. , -C.B. #10, TYPE 2,,48" : STA. 61+32; RT. 1' UNKNOWN(TYPICAL) C.B. #3, TYPE 2, 48 - •`q 1 .3 g "' n- . ÷ L'i - STA. 63181. RT. 1 STA. 63+73.58, RT. 1. STA. 62+86 RT. 1 .SOLID LOCKiND LID - : SOLID LOCKING LID STA. 59+2 ,9 RL 1! C, SOLID LOCKING LID . • • ' C.B. g8,TYPEtn_2, 48" SOUD'LOCKING IJD- CO RI 37.90 _L i4im = 37.51 RIM - 30.75 1 . 36.34 • RIM 34).S0 I. . IiIM 38.13 STA. 59462, RT. 1' STA 9461, 1 RIM =:35.02 A . + E- . 12 S IE •- 31.44 - ' 12" ii.;).1E:- 32.nG 12: ri.1E- 32.48 . . 12" c•Si IE - 32.43 12 , IE = 32.43 12 IE = 31.44 - ; SOLID.LOCKING LID 12" p IE = 31.07 1. 1 1 • *41- I • 12 •E) IE - 34.60 12= E IE-. 34.4.8 • - RIM•• 34.71 Ra.,1• •35.20•:1'• • •1 ir'116 It-..,-:'3 1.b7 40-•-•-(31 i 1 - .. ,- cr • 40 Y3- • t - _ 12"•W)•FE 34.60 122'..* W 1E*=:•34.vir - • - _ 12 •'E '1E-=34.05 4 • GRADE AT CENTER LINE 12-1E) IE = 32.24 ' 12 E) 1E = 31.78 „ 12' I IE = 31.45 • • 12" N) 1E = 31.07 in w_,_ ...a. < - . . . - • • . - 12: vajE.-.- 32.74 12" N IE = 30.91 12" S IE= 30.91 •• :-IC . . 0 - . I.- 1_0 . . ' • : GAS --...-. - GAS GAS 4Z .13 T 35 I . La _ • 0 , • • - < • ,, V) vi 35 ! • . ss - • . r-uct - • 0 ss ss . s ss • ss (4 Lai 1 °um. . • i . - o o i • . o 0 0 - - .. C.0) .._.. >- . - . . • I . . • .• 95 LF 1.2" CPEP SD 0 0.45% • . , 0 (11 . ' 154-LF-121.-CPEP SD 0 0.45% 168 LF 12" CPEP SD 0 0.18%• ' • - SS 0 - L'B# 11A, TYPE-1 -- ' - ce#-9A,-1YPE•1 N._ 30 ' . . . 30 • tyrtc 83•+•81-,"LT.'20' OW 4143, TfPE 1 - . STA 61+3Z:Lt 20 - -CB# 913,T•fPE 1 - -.- . . • 131-DIRECTIONAL • • 1534-8 RT. 20' •STA. 63+73, RT. 20' • • STA. 61+32, RT. 20 • - (1 NEW 12 WATER . .. VANED GRATE • • Ell-DIRECTIONAL VANED"GRATE - cal 108, T:IPE 1 BI-DIRECTIONBL BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE • ABANDON EX. 8' SD- I--ABANDONED. 8" SS VANED GRATE • RIM EL 3C.05.1. IM EL_ = 34.76 - (IN PLACE)- - • 1 • • 11IM EL - 37 dO .L • KM LL. 3/.881 RIM EL - 37.69 STA. 62+86,RT. 20' • 112." (E) 1E 31.81 - 1 c" (11) I-E - 34.79 12" (W) IE 35.69 - 12 (E) IE - 35.13 12" (E) IE = 33.22- 35 LF 12 CPEP • ' [RIM EL = 37.89 - . • BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE, ,-, RIM EL. 37.00 ± 40 CEI#-8A;TYPE•1 SD-ID-0.17% - -, . 2.5 r 2 (E) IE.-25-840 CBI;:10A,'TYPE.1 4li 12" tW) 1E - 3I.35 -CBI 88, TYPE•1 STA. 59+68 LT. 27 sm. ou+/5 LT:. 2Lf- STA.-62+86, LT. 20 RIM EL = 37.29 • BI-DIRECTIONAL . ir • 'Six o9+7o RT. ifY STA. 59+63 Rf, 20' • . - • . - ' -- ----- 1 "---- 81-01RECT1ONA12 VANED GRATE . - 12" (W) SE 34.39 VANED GRATE- BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE z • I RIM EL , 37.001 ''''.' .' 1227.1" ((CC LEEL)) I EE -3•;*.M3).8455.216 _RIM EL 34.32 RCM CL. 31 bi A RIM EL - 3.521 RIM EL. = 34.35 o . ) i .E-- -34.38 • • L7) . ' RIM'EL = 37.17 - • -- . -- -- --- .-12" ) IE = 32.40 IC(L) f E .31Z+ 12' (E) IC - 31.32 12- (E) IE = 31.85 i- 35-•. .'----- I -I 0 . 12...zE)..1E._.34.87 . .. • '35 . . . • t , ap 35 _,- - -----___-- RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL _I- . -•0 0 1 °L._ .. Y - °I- 7L1-1-Nit„„C W12"CrWoATERBE I 1- I g tO.LII - STORM WATER UTILITY DATE • - • I 1__-E. ' - W (TO BE ABANDONED) ' - • . UGT- TO BF: RELOCATED BY OTHERS- UGT STORM-WATER MAINTENANCE DAIL - 30---- I i. • UGT UGT---TO k:RELOCATED BY.• OTHERS-- L TED BY OTHERS ' • (TO.DE.BE OcA ) LL 6"W (TO BE ABANDONED) (TO BE RELOCATED) UGT--I L,,,,,,6" • NEW 12':WATER UGT 211 LF 12" CPEP SD 0 1.0% . ' OCT_ 19 LF 12" CPEP SOB 1.0% NEW 12'WATER - UGT •- • • ' - . 2" GAS " 12" HP GAsA ' 21 LF 12" CPEP SD-0 1.0%- ' 21 LF 12' CPEP SD 0 1.0%- ABANDONED -19 LF 12' CPEP SD 0 LOT 72.STWOATEBER ABANDONED) 20 LF 12" CPEP SD 0 1.0% 1-12" HP GAS A • . . 19 LF 12"CPEP SD 0 1.0% 21 LF 12' CPEP SD 0 -- , • ' 2' GAS 2. GAS 12" HP GASA D- 2 7 2 2 1 2 12" HP GAS A 2' GLs-- . d' '; . Ein SS - . ' . • Er• ss 8" SS - B" SS 2 •. z . . •. • . . _ • . . • •N N r- • .• ••N o •- N. 5 ; N N 2CV N i. t i i I I i .UI - 3 o • N o I 5 21 � i. c8#2D j• 8 ` , �= i i j i ! i i m 1 " W dS ?1) N . . - a - 1 W - I�- �--�.� I 1 CBa19j Z ♦ j i j j • a I I . i - - - i i t • �•� r e e I D -cp#21B • LA z i " 1 CB OB IYt ' 1 I r1 N AI 6"' I 0 1 ; m ! I CB/18C I i f . cd W C ` �m i I + - j t i 3 . j f i 1 i u U m N f i ¢ \ i1 P 2 STA 1 6+4. ci 1 !; (. 3 I ; I 1 j x Fryry. • D EF6G_IN^VFRT. • a. Deck cv 1 a 3 1,:,� • s r;. m EL. N �� p �CI LG('TIDNI , .•_ ^�� Decka , . 2G 1 `" V to _ ! ° 19 . I I X �" Q .> r'•1 E LI �,. _ I o '- o ;c;f �- Porch I �Lilk it'll:in ' m • 5 \ i Er i mg. '•II • LI lillanilEt -_-• • G 12'HPCAS GG • Mil _-_ 0� • iZ"H.P. I"� • a.. W >� 8'CONC 55 _ -_ _- ..:..�.,.. �.._..... JiNOI2L. G co I G 1 1/4-IP.GASG CONC55n , 931.21: '• "�,� t�7•�= _�___ m .1 -i 4' P.GAS ' i O EO"1 3 a UGT _ UGT -v U N UGT O _ V,_' 1 GT UGT _�� s'-G -C *4 1.34 �- - _ UGT UG _I-II i UGT • o, •U - I - " 4 ___.0 ! 1 ; IE 8'i/5=29.0 c o - I . 1 '� - im a "` � CBd21 I 6 I - • L CBA[OA. I V I I �, r7L____Inelly„ i �< _ • j- i j n' �kF FL ci i CBd19A i m 11 3$3 h liii j n a I Wd I n r • F--_ a" • 6 ' . AS-BUILT DRAWING w Y . 11 .1 g AS RECORDED BY ` lioriz. 1" = 20� °>• - - CONTRACTOR FIELD NOTES - Vert. 1 = 5 • AND SURVEY VERIFICATION . ' - • FROM THE FLUER COMPANY • 59+00 58+00 1-14-02 • 57+00 56+00 55+00 54+00 53+50 - - 14 LF 12' DIP 0 0 • Nair: DE-SEWE DEPTH - (NOT INSTAL 2. -CB �1 BC, Tt'PE 2, 48' ' • __ a .�-.1 C-B.ff21,TYPE 2, 4B" I:MKNOWN,(TYPICAL)• C.B. 120,TYPE 2, 48' C.B. ,Q19,•TYPE 2,,48" CO /18D, TYPE 2.?8' STA 53+B5, RT. 1' -' STA'57+ 96, RT. 1', STA 56+ 36, RT. 1' - STA 54+92, RT. 1 STA. 51101, RT. 1 3TA 53+90, RT. 1' Y. = pg L �--1 NG b OCI(ING:UD SOLID LOCKING LID SE1Hb L�d6ipN6 61D SOLID LOCKING LID a S $ . RIM = 34.16 R Mu L339 440 I - b R�M D 3 25 F/ 17 M:EL 31.7U1 = 1.69 D i''d . • 12" S IE = 30.26'12" 3 IC - 30-30 12 S 3IE7 9 p� 3 c-r^"rxa 12. S 4E-=-2824• 18.•N, IE _ 21.85 =.2:4 (( )) t " 7'79 MI EL IE - 7.74 35 Le 12'1E)-IE•_•30:58 42"'(E IE 30.38 12"•'N IE= 29.2P • - 12" (N) IE= 28.84 10"tNI IE - 27.74 oa w35 12' (W) IE = 31.26 14 (w) ¢ = 31.uu 12' E))) IE = 29J0 - 12" E IE 28.74 t�" cj IF = 9145n 10" NI tC •-24.00 . Lt.,+ 12" 'W) IE= 29.54 12" (W) IE = 28.68 - t P" ;S IE _•27.4gg� =O1 - GRADE AT CENTER LINE 12' N IE =Z7.4lY • _ 18" ,,N• IC 27.43 • N SS • --UGT a • 3� C 1 160 iF,, 12.,CPEP;SD•®-0:787. i - 144 LF' 12" CPEP SD'® 0.64Z _ • • 30 1V I FA >- w d SS 1 AA 0 ...-...-- • `' ,• '-// `, i!s-r ,�. 44 LF_12" CPEP SD 0 0.39y m w• } SS W t u • - I - - SS CR �1 sA. TYPE 1 Ss" ss •• o • 0 . STA. - -V8•�1118,•TYPZ't SS- ._ - -- -CB 21A TYPE 1 - CB' •1120A, TYPE 1 'BI-D BI-DIRECTIONAL STA. 54+92, RT. 20' • !t' 25 - _ - BI-DIRECTIONAL Irk$yi•96, RI' 20' _ t--1 STA 574-96 LT_ 20' _ - V-- STA. 56+34 LT. 2O'STA 56 t 36 LT.-20' CB �20B, TYPE VANED GRATE - BI$DIRECTIONAL:VANED GRATE 81-DIRECTIONAL cell 216, TYPE 1 BI-DIRECTIONAL RIM Et_ 31.75 I __ _ T2- SEWER • VANED GRATE • STA 57+96, RT. 20' VANED GRATE STA 56+36, RT..20' 12' (�EII,• IE 28.21 � at 78� _ Eyp " RIM EL _ 33.05 1 BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE • RIM EL. = 32.62 RIM EL 32.70 t BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE 14 - 3 67- -'-- I - �. ' '12" (C)iC - 3121 RIM M. '33.88'f 72'-(E)•IE•_'30.62 12"-([) IC 30." RIM EL''-'32.73-t''••' R2- ( •IE =1 29.07 RIM'EL:'e.31%88 14 LF EP w RIM EL 33.73 12' (W) IE - 30i'8 • •� 12" (W) fE - 29.47 30 I 12' (W) IE = 28.98 SD 0 036% W c I z • 35 12" (E) IE = 31.58 ---_ _ RIM EL = 33.82 3`7 RIM EL = 32.68 I I • N --.... 5 --i---'• •--- - 12" (W) 1E = 30.52 --.-.-- - _ 72" (W) IE 29.36 i Y- 1 . 1 - rt • I T I 21 LF 12' DIP ct, 1.OR�� 0 i O.NEW,t2"WATER RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL -w •¢- - 0 2" GAS STORM WATER IfTIUTY DATE w { 30 J e yp :p 30 8' SS 6"PATER V� N 1 ,I 2.5' (TO BE ABANDONED) - UGT J - • UGT J J a�p O Qt 1 2' GAS . STORM WATER MAINTENANCE DATE • 2" GAS 19 1f 12" DIP ® 1.07 • - • 21.LE.12".DIP SD ®'l-GA •_ 2- GAS �EW ', TER B" 55 1 2 t LF 12' DIP ®.1. (T B"WATER Q12' GAS e" S5 • (TO BE ABANDONED) i • 19 LF 12" CPEP SD6"WA1 R- Q11 " GAS- - •19 LF 12" CPEP SD ® 1.07. V • _ a.' (TO BE ABANDONED) -_ , - - D 2 7 2 21 3 Z NEW 12'WATER • 1 . • . • . . .. . • . ._______ __ ._ _. _ . ____ . _____• : • ' - • - _ _. ' • • , . . . . - • N . . . . . .' N 8 ...Jr-. s- - . • . • . • • •• . • • ... I f if ID 1 • . . ,• . . - • . , . s.< . r-- - /• ., .• . . - . .-• -, i , I . • • w • • . 111. . • . ,, •,. , . CL ' \• En • .>-. • • Ex. r H RIM=01.73 EX C.O.STA.52+i.d.,, \ \ ... - V) to • • - IE Er. =27.6 \CB#16B . •_,. . RIM EL=30.65± , • tE r .=27.5 \ IE(N)= 28.25t ' MI .;•' i . FE E 27.0 \ \ . , \ \ • , CB/1713 •, F- . • \ P \ b g - , \ • . • • - . N , P ' ' jft • • • 0 c CB#18 . s', . IrjOr i-1 \ • . \ ItillS\\:‘ \\\.,„. \I\4 FEB=ict32,.8 -_•;,_73702,..28, , \/ Gil• • 1110,tik A41111111 , • Trailer \ . . . /h. ..." • • \. ...,,e. i.,,,.. ; • • NA = d = 0° • • ._ it el . Gross I fa, A T lir . . . • LAIL.1„,, tn . wA~AlliroAlig-i -o- parAfeagilic.,41 aE C1 . . ' . > . 'I' arir -1.8111111111141/1/11111"111r 111111.111111alrililli it_.- .k•. -0 ,Y. • in ZJAIMX",\\ . E. . • Wililf , ,.. ..... ,_iitsjillaki APE! 4 ,,,,, ELE111111111111rAial. • • - • . • __.....gelm.rww_ ,.,_Iv____,' _ ,,, ___w __ w • , ....... .- - 1 . • = . MC I IAIIIIIPT I 11§ • \ \.: ; . . - IIIIW, • • ' "`• .`a. `"-•.. -+...“•--".- illir'11..1• •!•,_--•_-_,,,f..--..,,_,,:.,-•...._,..-_,,,.. ,-,,,,,, • INIIMIMINMANIIMIIIIT -- " . 17 * (f) 1 : 1-1/e P.GAS . G _ _ - - -:6-- li . to . . ' C UGT.7-4,..,Z .T..g • UGT '1.1G1 MENI MImmison ......op., -adnall ----Ite 11 I _ LI GT ----.. .0 s-'0 t E • . ., • • 4 IrT,!• • . 1111111rdit . 1061 , ' . I___ • strir4At-1 -o- _ • • Z :I!I.1 . _ Begin conc =111 ____-__, ____ ' •)__,E-'c-T-1 2°: . ' 111 NI "NI --Hir -tlailiNiall: t _.r._____ ,t . -14)• \ ci ,-,t5 • • -- oordith_L• - , ch . ---c•- ,. • I AS-BUILT DRAWING , . • -pc t. ' ED-' f:g Ili g t . AS RECORDED BY •:i' CONTRACTOR FIELD NOTES r". ' 'ne .-al.E. • , 1• • ,, r i i . Brush i • CB#17A \ . • caocaripANyow . -- • ILe• CB#1:A , 3 I C8118 \ V1 WI E g,* . ' -i . • 0 1 : ,-, . • PANBoDM s7HURvEYEisiL4U_vERE0R21 CS R11.1.=29.83 NOM: • j . IL 6- • • • IE 27.7 • -a - . •••.:-3 13 '1_ (2/ 6.5 I MANHOLE T• EXISTING rush 'B \ . • t -i ' 1,1 . .., . RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL j • j wi, i ., ." . • ' - . I • STORM.PI'. ' • al E, • i . • x i ,I" . • \ STORM WATER UTILITY DATE to 5 E - i• , i . Etro.i, ', . • . . Si Ai in.' . . . . . • •;' F. EI • i• W HOlE. I < Locan *COPPER \ P - . • . . . ..,.. c, i . • • • . WATER SERVICE CONNECIIONS l STORM WATER MAINTENANCE DATE - Mk • • ! .-2 i F., OVER NEW STORM DRAIN PiPE i • ' I 3 (TYPICAL) . " • ._ . . . . . ' . -. . . . ' . ' -. .. . • . • • .0 g gk • , • - w,/ • .• • ' • - Horiz. 1" = 20' ' • • I. . • . • - • • . Vert. 1" = 5' - - • . . . . . • - - • . • • 1 . • . . • - . . • • . . • • . • • . . • • . . . . - . . •• 53+00 • . • 52+00 51+00 50+00 • 1., g 0 g • • • • 53+50. . • __: t .4 el ci• 5- . • - .. • '• • CB 117,TYPE 2, 48' : -:C • ' STA.51+88.:RT, 1' CB 016,il'PE 2, 48' • 1 1 1.1 i • . : •--1 STA. 53-1-46, RT. 1. . ' •. • •- SOLID•LOCKING LID - STA. 50+54, RT. 1' • SOLID LOCKING LID - i RIM RIM -31.10 I RIM = 30.54 SOLID LOOKING LID 18" S IE = 27.44 • RIM - 3060 1 35 • ce 0 1....... 010 - 31.A0 4- .60 ' •a ' 10" (S IC 27.57 18; -S 31 18" N IE = 27.21 • ' 3.5 ±w1-11 _ 12" ,E IC.• 27.5727 4 . - - • '•i2;f4-1E',-'27:2i 12111.1•-..-30;75 • 12' IE 28.20 12" w) IE = 28.04. 12 IE = 27.00 . • . . • , . . . 1- . • • 18' SW)1E = 27.29 - • • In V) • .: . a . - o . GRADE AT CENTER LINE 30 • 5 - . . • . ------- . • 30 ' t.d • • •-<i . . • - . . • rr, . . . • • • v)v) • u • (I) .• .• 134 LF, 18 DIP 0 0.11% . . - • - 158 LF, 18 DIP 0 0.08% ' . - • • ' _ - •--, 25 __ ... 25 . . •- • 6- w-(To BE ABANDONED) NEW 10"W . . . . •. .- ' . • . . . . . • • . • • • • • . . • '• - cB. IBA'"tYPE 1 • - CB# 17A. TYPE 1 CB# 178, TYPE 1 • CONNECT NEW TfPE 2 . ' CBI 18B, TYPE 1 sT.4. 51+88 LT. 21' 'MANHOLE TO EXISTING . STA. 53+46 U. 2i' - STA.-514-88.-RT.. (;' ' • • ' szA...5344-6,RT..20' , BI-DIRECTIONAL 18'.trIzial'PIPE Ell-DIRECTIONAL . • BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE ' VANED GRATE • o VANED GRATE RIM EL. =30.:...6 1• ' RIM EL. 31.08 A 12" • - i6 . - 0.55 i • vr. 27'63 "IFI.A1' '.(E) IE 12" (W) IC 27.7C 12" (C) IC - • . • RIM EL. = 298_ .9 27.58 • • . .• • ,. RIM EL-= 30.98 27.66 -- 12" (W) 30(W) IE = 28.47 -__--- • 12"•(E) IE = ---- 30 - , . - _ . . - , . . .. . (I) --r o (11 • : • ____u L -IA 10 01_,. • 25 25- •JIG/. UGT-1 6•-•WATER(TO BE ABANDONED) • [(..1.0 ISE.=DOMED) • d: L 1 2"WATER 22 LF 12" DIP SD 0 1.0 • - 12"WATER . 22 LF 12' DIP SD 0 1.0% • 2" GAS i 1 19 LF•12' CPEP SD 0 1.0% 2" GAS -19 IF 12' CPEP SD 0.1.05 ci z 12" HP GAS A\ '-' • . 12" HP GAG A\ D- 2 7 2 2 I 4 - • n N o fi^ - _ • N �I 1� • AN •• p��p�,�p 57 ; m • MEM V) j • • I I. I REMOVE EX CB AND REPLA I.'�„' 1 ry '�, ��+ '•r OFFICE I 081E t5I9-33E I Q. r^ �' I 1.5 STORY n2A w:l j12 1T435 _ IN?B"cHsaEo T NW CO2N MT. I I . LJJ Zit - HOUSE •- I 111, yr !DVE SSIN5T-/d NNNAVE5' S5A 431 • !19 -i i EItV.=41.Dt Q b 3 �'. REMOVE EX MH. /IA ' ti� �' hL71 - W _ PLUG IX.SD ,77� . i, lu h, 0 ti"( I ! P'A -- I .0 0..,_ �I • 1 �' p`a 1 ' «. 4,11113v11.74...4101111 ► �' (►! II�+ RoaOnV"E Ex C8 AND RERACEO� •• Ce�" I kW' C W;1 `rs ..., �ft�i►\'-I .A99 PLUG EXIS SD .. k00 p I O• :�OYS W jp � ��/ s 'it - - - - - I� - - ®::IN - - !a9Pt��j o' 'v '�-1 -��-� UGT ��.'�1�� Il��_�ri'i1 �I_ A � iFIEMIll MIN • SIXAPI' 41011".E1 IP IP mi.V.,------• . - - - - .cc • w � 1 I, si _ ♦�. . ... sroRN , J .. .,fl�� ,...,. T•4 ... '1 - - (n }� IIIS�C�I� .YI•� ,._,--....,,._„,....,,..sB824'], � T10N VAUL - - I Cn - .[Ill i GAsph.�n '19anMite s N- ■ - � - • 1'C • ::,w . C°ncWolk ' :: I ''Sit �, o �� �' o SEE S T':i T i16 WV d 4-t� - - - ii : _ - � • - • o� I i�z H oa _ ,- I HOUSE RY/B79 I 30CB f6 . I" VP I B CB f8 ll �- a I:8/5B • T,V,BO i W if.: • C6 • .:I I!! I. ' 1.5 STORY p.y .mac M I • s HOUSE I � I ___! • 'v E - I V ••u' I d' v 1 STORY P913 II I t . HOUSEI. 1 STORY I 1_,L Li ir I I r . . HOUSE I : _ • , 3 AS-BUILT DRAWING �+� - • CONTRACTOR AS RECORDED FIELD NOTES •�� FROM STHE F UVERIFICATION COMPANY •• - _, • 1-14-02 _ Hariz. = 20' . . • Vert. 1" = S' CB S TYPE 2, 48' DIA: CB16 TYPE 2, 48' DIA. -- CB#7 TYPE 2, 48' DIA. CB/8 TYPE 2;48" DIA. N I STA. 119+38, RT. 1' STA. 119+67, RT. 1' SEA. 121+02 RT. 1' I ST0. 118+18, RT. 7' RIM - 38.83 t RIM = 38.76 I I , , Y RIM = 35.6D RIM•'- :FAD 1 • RIM = 36.41 • .RIM - 36.1 4 i RIM 36.KI J. RIM = 36-32 ¢ ,SOUD LOCKING LID • SOLID LOCKING UD SOUD LOCKING LID SOLID LOCKING LID s, ' 12".:(W) IE = 32.71 ,2" (W) IC S 32.01 12" (W) IE - 32.87 12' W) IE = 32.82 12' W) IE 33,03 12' (W) IE = 33.98 - 12' (W) IE = 32.75 72" (W) IC - 32.33 - 72" N3 IE - 36-06 12 l(N)J IE = 34.65 _ 1 22-}-OO • 9 12" (E) IE = 32.15 12' (C) IC - 32.33 ., 12' (E) IE = 32,71 '12" E IE 32.81 12" (E) IE - 32.87 12" E) IE = 32-82 1 I I 72' '� IC - :F,66 12" 5 IE = 34.73 _ _ 12" (N) IE ='32,15 12' (N) IE - ;2�1 • 12" ((N IE = 32.71 12' N IC - 32.01 • '2"(N) IE - 32.87 tY N) IE = 32.82 •• 12' S IE= 32.15 t7" S IF = 'S9"59' 72" (S) IE = 32.71• 12' �q; IE - ' g1 12 (') IE- 1?87 12" S IE = 32.82 • • • 119+00 120+00 -NOTE: SIDE SEWER DEPTH 121+00 w o = c 1 - .. UNKNOWN --.-.r r 40 a1 � �� � (Toe1 aBN'bTd Eq) -- _ _ - _ __ - EX. 6' WATER (TO BE ABANDONED) ! • ¢ - GRADE AT,CENTER UNE. _ ._ • - - • UGT - ( • TO•BHYR SE TED{..-- O 1. 55 35 a • 0 a o nn 0• 135LF 12" CPEP SD 0 OJ 7. o 120 LF 12" DIP.® 0.4%• G0.53 0 V 149 12" CPEP SD ® 0.57% (TO BE RELOCATED WATER !1 • -2 �-•1 BY PSE) 0 29 LF 12" DIP-®0:21' 3 v } • m 30 ••-+ SSMH' 10"WATER -CB�BA TYPE 1 CB#BB TYPE 1 STA. 121+02,.LT. 17' Y STA. 121+02, RT. 17. 81-DIRECTIONAL VANED CRATE I'- + BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE -RIM-- 38.24 i _ B 78 TYPE 1 -CB#7A.TYPE 1 RIM 38.30 4 1r-(S) !E= J5-24 • { - .�-I CB#58 TYPE 1 -GB15A TYPE 1 STA. 119+67, RT•_17 - STA. 119+68, LT. 17' 12" (N) IE 35.82 RIM = 38.35 - -- -Z STAF'iT6+18,'RT:-17 STA: t-t8-+18;LT:17 BFOIRECTIONAL-VANED-GRATE_ - _ _ ___-131=DIRECTIONAL'VANED'GRATE' RIM" 38a3 ��++ 1 12'(S} IE = 35.75 - • - (n BI=DIREC--TONAL VANED GRATE - BI-DIRECTIONAL'VANED GRATE RIM - 35.34 1 RIM --35.3G i - 12"• (N)-IE-= 35.78:�'- - -� - - - - RIM 34.07 ± RIA1 - to 77 4- 12" (N) IC - 33.03 12' (S) IE •- 33.05 1 • I.'"' 12" (N) 1C - 32.49 - . - ' 12' (N) IE 32.10 RIM_ = 35.66 RIM = 35..$0•Li (n RIM = 34-95 RIM = 35.08 12" (N) IE = 32.98 12 (S) IE = 33-71 ° • • _ 35 I • 35 N 12" (N) IE = 32.65 Y 1 12' (N) IE = 33.28 3rJ. EX..6-.cS),IE.=,34.40:, 35 -r- f 0 • y �r I i • ' J -°Z. 4- GAS '/ • • • �-- CONNECT EX. SD j_i `ABANDONED 1Z' SEWER ¢ I TO NEW SDMH - 1 Q OTHERS) 30 j - O 0 1 - _ - 4-GAS - -UGT(TD 8E RELOCATED 30 16 tF 12" DIP 0 1.0% • STC�MWATDER FOR APPROVAL UA7 30 lll=== 30O • 4"G'0.S -': '' �T •. - ABANDONED 12' SEWER 12' SEWER 16 LF 12" CPEP ® 1.0% ORM U71Un E _ (TO BE RELOCATED • 16 LF 12' DIP 0 1.07, I I U BY;OTHERS) 12" SEWER NEW 72'WATER • .. ,1 16 LF 12" DIP 0 1,OS'-J, J I - • - ,I STORM WATER MAINTENANCE DATE • 12'SEINER • I-12" SEWER NEW 12" WATER • NEW 12" WATER - - 18 IF 12' DIP S 1.07 • ' 8'Cr 12"-Dip'19't.07- _ - - z • D- 2 7 2 2 1 5 i . ' . • . • . 1._.! . • , . • • . . . . - . . . r•-• r•:•• • •• . . . l'••• r-:-.- - • . - • . • -.. : . - • . • I , .., i ( • )/-;' ' : t;) ! - - - •.. - • - _ -------1 - , i , . - .4 • , csi - I R I .- • I. :. " CB#I4 •-j-7- I . . C.B#L3 1. ' I I• MCA . • • . " ' ' • I ' ., i•-.. . ,. .; . c4 • - - . • • - m - _ • • • r.', '6',, •• . . . i . ,It.' . . CB#13B g . ag_ _ ' 0_ . . • • • • - C814B . I . I I V') . . . • . - • )- 15 CD. - • 6 . • 1 1 . i . t-, •; -- 61 . . . . • i • • * I 1 (0, .,1--- - • 1- Ar) • m . L! 1 . i . . , ., ,. , • < F.,-DI - • • . I - . re • i ' NOTE: c:, I i 'it . / • T, i ' • o ..° • VI . ' '. . • ., Z M " - • - . vjo I g • . • • REMOVE EX. 4" WATER - I - j . - i ri• 0 ce °'E • . CBMB . W . --1 .•,:l I . .• WHIN VACINITY i:IF i."' •• • g i CD L I N 20 t I \ • . . 8 NEW SD PIPE (TliPICAL) . CD •. 1. . • cars- L--- / i 1--4- . • u.i:VA • 011 E 6 • . . i . - •I- 0- • - - 1 ! .. . .6u.)1 .11 _li.,Low - L.7-=-----:_ ______ i w • =,_.= - . •• . . • ,. . .1.a.! .. : • • •i , • • LF3 . 4 - - ' 411111Arla : , 1; --. i 2 WELL i . g / I ' C4 • ,.._ 5 i. •‘8 a, A --1 I • I i °30'I dtt 3o1 i • • - , ite m."an .. - , .•• • ° 1" , • , . ,i- •• . 1-',...•az .. • . _____ __ - i _Val_________i_ i•••4.,..„..4,-.:.,_____-u-t___._ lift. ITI(4--- ‹C .' . • , • `di • ----- lir . Conc-Wolk •3 .9 - . - ::• _ • . , • . 63-41- c. ---116.... EL a, 6.Conr_Walk mow A ...., \ •. . ...... .. ......, W . --- •• itiA. i A, m,„„ A ,..._ • imEt..--1-as, w w 4-.Lk. w . Mt (E(4 Vi TO BE ABANDONED) . • WitS, girl' orj - . ;• - CY) ' • • 11 - • .. - - 4 • • . - w : w w w • •i w w w w •-_ 1.....ii ..K. , . I- C. A• ,. • . . lo DIP SEE W-840) • E- • ''''• •,‘ . ' o I Mr . •• . • .._T,', 3 k3 • - 3 . - libilanil .e .7!. •• .1_ V) 'k° ' 6"DEACTIVATED G •G • G-- , . .. G : . -G '= 11*LLI WI G I 6'DEACTIVATED C G Mai c I -- ! ,I G• , , • : Ill • . .4 b G . • G , -G I ' 017.3'La . , Ez.'..-.; . --„, , f - 4' G G __I i G L = . . tol LLJI -D 0-, g =:. • GP •t 1.111!!l• killINIIIIIIMMIIIIII~. • 6.111MINIMINIIIIIM///MWAILIMIN,. i G.--4-_,___ __ E . 0 0, ',1,-ff VII ''''' • Conc.Walk . ..,------ • O•• . „ ,-.F4 --'( CA ,r,,,GT 9.n..wou - :•.L1.1._______ . . __--_ -_ --- . . . " 1 6'Cone.Walk A . Sli , . . ., ' e"Z Id . • . " "471 ------'-- 111- ----- -- ---T-7- • . . Planter_ ..' ! 6 . ,. • F4 c,T4 =13: . . 6 . 1. -' .`§--- -14- --------1.1.--Ti -'-- ..---- ------- ,._, 11. g -_____ _ • . . • i - C.)C4 I 1 ' . =.- 1 - . Porch 'o._ •i . i• 6 - • ,'• - '•;'? . • ) • .. - • CB#I3A I -'. 'i • I/ 6' 1• _ d „ Pme 30 ; . [ i . Porch .2 CEI#14A . . jj • .6 JD - . . . '',',:'E .• • • f,. /______ cl. . 1 ,,\). . .• . . '.' • I. .I • i • ; , 0 ' 1 . . -.. - 1i1. . • - . . .. .. • _____y . , . , . - 1 W..6 i . . ' • -4 CEI#15A 1 • . : ' • • . . ri X . • • . - • 4 . • - . - - • .; .• . . . 1 li all a , - ' • • • • • • • ; AS-BUILT DRAWING RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL . .. 11. 9 .: . , • • • . ." • . • ' • • :• • --A1‘. DATE • • .. . •-••. , . • • " ' " • CAONNE;TRAsASuCRRTv EOE RECORD HEWRvERD E 1 NOTESBcYA.ri0N STORM WATER UTILITY . .•., • . .• _ .. • . • • . .. . : . • FROM WE FLUER COMPANY • • " • • SCALE • . • STORM WATER MAINTENANCE DATE• ' -CB#14, TYPE 2, 48" • 1-14-02 • • HORIZ. 1" = 20' • CB#13,'TYPE 2, 48 . . • • . 0; • . X • • -CB#15, TYPE 2, 48 VERT. 1" = 5' - STA. 59+57 RT. 1' . . STA_ 58+15 RT. 1' • 57+00 (SEE SHT. 15)' • •11 X di - - • . O • • SOLID LOCKING LID • ' STA. 60+67, RT. 1' • SOLID LOCKING LID CB#12, TYPE 2, 48" CB#6, TYPE 2, 48" - :74 . RIM = 39.26 . . 56+00 • ; • i • --7 . , . • • . • . . • ' • SOLID LOCKING UD RIM = 40.25 ' • • • - • RIM 30.00 1 • RIM = 37+78 RIM - 37 i 60 ± 58+00 STA. 56+61 RT. 1' -STA. 56 t G2 RT. 1 • STA. 56+28 RT. 1' SOLID.LOCKING.LID 61+50 . 61+00 . - RIM'- 40.001 ' 60+0012: S.1E.=.33.46 SCUD'LOCKING'UD RIM EL = 36.14 1 • ., • • . - •12"•S•IE-,•34:38 . - 12"2 rs)),IFE.=_.,3203.9,69._ 5.9+0.0 : • • RIM =:36.27 • 12' (W) IE = 32.81 If) 1 • ' • • • ' 12" (N.) IE = 3.4.0 ' . 12" IE = 5.3.44 • RIM - 36.25 ± ; 12" (E) IE = 32.81 •-.1 - . - • • . . . • • • ., • • . 12' S IE = 32. 1 12" (N) IC - 31.1G . - • • - 12" IE -:-- 36.48 ' 12" 01) 1E = 32.81 12" E E -- 34.00 4.2L, - + * - g I Cv) - . -.- . • .• . • - 12" (E) IE -= 35.59 - . 12:. IE.= 32. EX.CB,.TYPE.2,•48" - ' 12- (W) IE =,,35.28 • -NOTE: • 12- (E) 1E - 35.30 ' • 12" ,E1 IE - 3:1 00 GRA.DI: AT*CENTER LINE 1122: :WW .IICE.="3311° 40 - 7f. -c,i ,i 5 • I 0 - - 12" (W) IC =•35.22 . SIDE SEWER DEPIN ' i:2"-(W).IE.=•34:69 • . - 12: 1E = 32.91. (TO BE REMOVED) La • 'Lii Itr- - 40 w + . - . - - • - • __Q_NKNOWN LTYPICAL) • 12" (W) E 35 lo • . • 4-2- 12:: IE = 32.96: - • • - 30 ,. _. . • - M-.,-; . . . - m ' . GAS • .--- ' ".(4 AO • ' • . • • . : o . • • . ' , • ' 3 - • • • • . . . , - -I r- T 35.LI-I • • - . • tat • • I I .e •L.LI•.:f . ._ .. - 0 (I) • o • o o 1 -• .1) .• - . to , 35 Li-t.- 1 ss • ss ss - • L i ; . • .:c . 0 0 , 110'LF, 12"-CPEP'SD 0 G.4%.0 SS -• • . • .0 SS .142 LF, 2",CPEP SD @ 0.4% • °SS . 153 LF, 12" CPEP SD 0 0.4% oSS 0 _i_ La • .• • . - _...., 1 0-0 • o _ . - • , • _ . - • . - • -C13#13B, rfPE.•1 • • 34-LF;12--CPEP •>. (4 L NEW 12"WATER A-4 m . , • - • ' ..CB#1413.TYPE.1 CB#13A;-TYPE•1 STA. 58•3-15, RT. 16' • SD a 0.5% 12" SEWERu • • • •C8#15A,•TYPE t.---• t-CB#158, TYPE 1 ' •88414A; E-1 *''''' *. STA. 59+62, RT. 7'. sTA. 58+15 LT. 17 -I : • • STA.-604-67, LT. 17' STA.,60+67; RT. 17 • STA. 59+62 LT. 17' BI-DIRECTIONAL -CB#126, TYPE 1 • BI-DIRECTIONAL BI-DIRECT1DNAL • VANED CRATE CB#12A, TYPE 1 STA. 56+62, RT. 17' , :. • . - BI-DIRECTIONAL • BI-DIRECTTONAL. ' • BI-DIRECTIONAL VANED GRATE • . VANED GRATE- • • . STA. 56+62 LT. 17' BI-DIRECTIONAL • . ' VANED 'GRATE • VANED GRATE VANED GRATE . • RIM EL= 38./3 RIM EL = 37.23- ' BI-DIRECTIONAL • VANED•gRATE - 0 , . . • RIM EL = 39.76. RIM EL=:38.75 • • • RIM EL•= 39.57 • . . . RIM EL. 38.58 ± RIM EL. 37.13 1 RIM'CL: - VANED'GRATE • • RIM CL. ' 39.53 -1- ROA.CL. 38.53 a - E 1E -.:-•35.31 • RIM EL- = 35.64 4•.r -R1112121!(E(EIV41-VL).)-=IIE 3377:136332411:3162 - RIM a. - 35:80 1 . . . • ' 12-- E *I-E•..•*37.57 - ' 1122: . 1 w2" IC 35.4G 12 C 12" (1 IC _ 33.11 X - . • 40 '4.22-6-3-4E---36*-43-7----------------I 2" a IC 36.16 ' • R12111 (ELS) It=-353.32•51S .. . 12" (W IE - 33.14 -- •• . . 12" (E) IE -= 33.05 I sibE VYALK • • • : t • - - --T • I • _,------ -- --:•7i r . '' ' ''• • • ...... 1 ......... ......... ... 1 LL • ; . . . ,c, • 35 . z - • _I, • 35 35 ______ __ . . • 0 . 01 , L n (1)-: L13ELF,C413"-EX. SD . ' • 0 I -o-4"*WATER • • • 7 0 • 0 • - 0 .--4" WATER (TO BE ABANDONED) . I) 0 _ _ • - - (TO BE ABANDONED) i 0 - 0 . , • • • • . . *15 1LF, 12' CPEP 0 1.0% • 4" GAS=- 0 -4" WATER (TO BE ABANDONED) - .-..1• '•'.4"'WATER'(TO BE'ABANDONED) , 4" GAS - . 16 LF. 12" CPEP @ 1.87; • . . • NEW.10 WATER • • 16 LF, 12 CPEP g 1.0% 30 _16 LF, 12 DIP 0 1.0% . 6"-GAS-(DEATIVATED) NEW 10" WATER • • - 30 • 4" GAS (TO BE RELuACTED BY PSE) : EX. 8" SEWER • - NEW 10 WATER NEW 10" WATER ••, ... -18 LF, 12" CPEP W 1.0% 6" GAS (DEACTIVATED) 6" GAS (DEACTIVATED)- . 18 LF, 12" CPEP @ 1.0%- •. • , 8" SEWER. 8' SEWER . . • • 8" SEWER - - • . - - *6" GAS (DEACTIVATED) • 18 LF, 12" DIP 0 1.0% 18 LF, 12" CPEP 0 1.0%- . • .. . - 47 GAS . - . ,. . . . •r • . • . •, • ,c; • - . • .z . . - • . • - . PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT Williams Avenue Apartments Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street Renton, Washington Prepared for: i S-D I, LLC June 14, 2000 REVISED December 15, 2000 Our Job No. 7251 A 2,;,/Scc WAS/y, 'Sr I4 14' . SSIONAL�NG.4. CoPIA(! !EXPIRES:2-05• 02 ITPy. CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH,KENT,WA 98032 . (425)251-6222 . (425)251-8782 FAX 2 www.barghausen.com sG<r./d G ENG«'', PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed project is 0.9 acres in size located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street in Renton,Washington. The subject property has 115 feet of frontage along South 5th Street on its south side, approximately 350 feet of frontage along Williams Avenue South on its east side, and 350 feet of frontage along an alley along its west side. The subject property is bordered to the north by a single-family residence. The subject property is currently occupied by the Renton Family Practice Clinic,paved parking lots,an existing single-family residence that serves as a medical laboratory,a detached garage,and grass field area. There are ten fir trees,one cedar tree,two pine trees, and two ornamental trees on the subject property. Both Williams Avenue South and South 5th Street have existing curb,gutter,and sidewalk along the frontage of the property,with catch b asins and underground storm drainage system for stormwater collection. The existing parking lots have catch basins and underground storm drainage system that connects into the City of Renton's underground storm drainage system on South 5th Street. The Renton Family Practice Clinic building will remain with the development of the Dean-Sherman Apartments. The existing paved parking lots, medical laboratory/house, and garage will be removed. The subject property is essentially flat,with less than 5 feet of elevation change along the north-south axis of the site. The site will be developed by construction of 86 residential units over 113 parking stalls. Residential construction willbe four levels of wood-frame structure over a concrete subterranean parking garage. An average cut/excavation of 8 feet is planned to build the subterranean parking garage. A geotechnical engineering study prepared by Earth Consultants Inc. dated November 11, 1999,has confirmed that groundwater elevations are several feet below the proposed grade of the subterranean parking garage. Drainage in the subterranean parking garage will not be conveyed to the stormwater system because this is a covered parking area. Drainage in the subterranean parking garage will be collected by a series of floor drains, and discharged to the sanitary sewer system. Drainage runoff from the proposed buildings will consist mostly of rooftop drainage and sidewalk drainage, which is considered clean stormwater that does not require water quality treatment. There will be 5 feet of additional impervious area subject to vehicular travel along the west margin of the project resulting from the required alley widening. This is a reduction in impervious area subject to vehicular travel compared to the existing conditions,because the existing paved parking lots will be removed with the development of this project. The enclosed calculations show that the project meets the exemptions from detention and water quality treatment according to the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Storm drainage provisions for this project will consist of curb and gutter along the alley widening,with a series of catch basins and underground storm drainage pipes to collect drainage from the alley and building roof drains. The new storm drainage system will connect to the existing storm drainage stub out for the property. Please refer to the enclosed preliminary grading and storm drainage plan for a graphic depiction of the proposed storm drainage facilities. 7251.004 SUMMARY OF CORE REQUIREMENTS 1998 KING COUNTY SURFACE DESIGN MANUAL Section 1.2 Core Requirements Section 1.2.1: Core Requirement No. 1 - Discharge at the Natural Location Response: The proposed storm drainage system will connect to the existing 6-inch concrete storm drainage pipe that is the existing natural outlet for the subject property. Section 1.2.2: Core Requirement No. 2 - Off-Site Analysis Response: The subject property does not receive off-site drainage from any upstream properties. A downstream analysis is contained within this Preliminary Drainage Report. Section 1.2.3: Core Requirement No. 3- Runoff Control Response: The enclosed calculations show that the project meets the exemption from on-site peak rate runoff control because the proposed project site post-developed peak runoff rate for the 100-year/24-hour duration design storm event is calculated to be less than 0.5 CFS more than the peak runoff rate for the existing site condition. The enclosed calculations that show that the existing 100-year/24-hour runoff is 0.69 CFS and the proposed 100-year/24-hour runoff is 0.84 CFS, a difference of 0.15 CFS. Section 1.2.4: Core Requirement No. 4- Conveyance System Response: The proposed drainage system consists of a series of catch basins and tightlined drainage pipes that connect to an existing tightlined system. Pipe slopes and capacity calculations will be completed at the time of final engineering. Section 1.2.5: Core Requirement No. 5-Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan Response: A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan will be prepared at the time of final engineering. Section 1.2.6: Core Requirement No. 6-Maintenance and Operation Response: A maintenance and operation manual for the private storm drainage system will be prepared at the time of final engineering. Section 1.2.7: Core Requirement No. 7-Bonds and Liability Response: Bonds and liability insurance will be provided at the time of building permit issuance and project approval. 7251.004 - SUMMARY OF SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 1998 KING COUNTY SURFACE DESIGN MANUAL Section 1.3.Special Requirements Section 1.3.1: Special Requirement No. 1 - Critical Drainage Areas Response: The project is not located in a critical drainage area; therefore, this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.2: Special Requirement No. 2- Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan Response: The site is not located within an existing Master Drainage Plan;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.3: Special Requirement No. 3- Conditions Requiring a Master Drainage Plan Response: The site is not large enough to require a Master Drainage Plan;therefore,this special requirement does not apply_ Section 1.3.4: Special Requirement No. 4-Adopted Basin or Community Plan Areas Response: The site is not located in an adopted basin or community plan area;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.5: Special Requirement No. 5-Special Water Quality Controls Response: The proposed project does not contain more than 1 acre of new impervious surface that will be subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.6: Special Requirement No. 6- Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators Response: The proposed project will not construct more than 5 acres of impervious surface; therefore this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.7: Special Requirement No. 7- Closed Depressions Response: This project does not discharge runoff to an existing closed depression; therefore, this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.8: Special Requirement No. 8- Use of Lakes, Wetlands, or Closed Depressions for Peak Runoff Control Response: This project does not propose to use a lake,wetland,or closed depression for peak rate runoff control; therefore,this special requirement does not apply. 7251.004 Section 1.3.9: Special Requirement No. 9-Delineation of 100-Year Floodplain Response: The project does not contain or abut a stream,lake,wetland, or closed depression; therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.10: Special Requirement No. 10-Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 and 2 Streams Response: The project does not contain or abut a Class 1 or Class 2 stream;therefore,this special requirement does not apply. Section 1.3.11: Special Requirement No. 11 -Geotechnical Analysis and Report Response: A geotechnical engineering study has been prepared by Earth Consultants Inc.dated November 11, 1999. Section 1.3.12: Special Requirement No. -Soils Analysis and Report Response: A geotechnical engineering study has been prepared by Earth Consultants Inc.dated November 11, 1999. 7251.004 EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 6,236 SF Rooftop 22,400 SF Rooftop 10,077 SF Paved Parking Lot 14,716 SF Concrete Walk 1,000 SF Concrete Walk 1,120 SF Planter Areas(2) 22,963 SF Grass 2,040 SF Paved Alley(2) 40,276 On-Site Total 40,276 On-Site Total Q100 = 0.69 CFS Q100 = 0.84 CFS 100-year increase in runoff = 0.84 CFS - 0.69 CFS = 0.15 CFS Less than 0.50 CFS threshold;therefore,no detention is required. (1) To be conservative,the raised planter areas were counted as concrete walks. (2) Impervious area subject to vehicular travel<5,000 SF threshold. Water quality treatment also less than the existing parking lot. Therefore,no water quality treatment is required. • 7251.003 i 12/14/00 1:19 :44 pm Shareware Release page 1 WILLIAMS AVENUE APARTMENTS BCE JOB#7251 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE ANALYSIS BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-100 NAME: 100YR/24HR PRE-DEVLOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 92 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION - 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0 . 53 Acres 0 .39 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC • 10 . 00 min 10 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 69 cfs VOL: 0 .23 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: D-100 NAME: 100YR/24HR POST-DEVLOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 92 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs '1AINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .90 inches AREA. . : 0 . 02 Acres 0 . 90 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 86. 00 98 . 00 TC • 10 . 00 min 10 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 84 cfs VOL: 0 .28 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • • • � / 16t•_ 16'1•-1 .••�dQ iri-10 ^ I 16 -! 6 • ( ; u ;•' J.','16t6;.16,Gi•7I..I 16'.G61 ; Q• .. 7.16 1 ice® • , \ L� 7 1,.'.1 E,(.' ��. 16t6-2 • - 6ri-1.r i:T I I•_ �• •I I 7.ii-10 17.ii-9 Y J7.Ci•7 ,� ,•i� 1iiiil 4 ( I •• . • �..� •IitL-E 16•t6�I • r j ----uj IL 6-7;. • • , _ • r ` vU I D = v I I ,, ` l6 L 1 �• ' II;V 1 • .16t7-1 lLt1�;• 11 1 I ..._.. �{th L , `— .�`• l iP,: �1 'r� \� �f0 ? 16r7- • '�7-L .+- - 16.66- ILN7-19 • �:• �N7'1•.• rO ur7-u " / MN ` • • • • ` li'rY=EO, • '• [ 1L.N7 E• 1• •.`tea+:\ }: /® ✓ is IL{ - • \ 1Lr7 -I `� . • 116f7-! .. y s1. i • i...� a -1 I r7; I O • �I 16 U7'j3 I60.7 6 7-4 I iiT�C7•I' mum 7 0�!' ;1 ;r' 16r7.:10 ' ,_ . -`' �, P ISN-17 •`�Vai�— URI / 'Mr I j; 4 •16t7-1`, J • ILl7-E •: ;. 1L.G7 ILF7-I _ .-. eSE7r�._F.1 ]_1( ;� -m+�'�, 7�6 J -'•,`•C\ s •, - 6rci if \, 1/` 16 - �/� \N- I6,G7-9 \r-iiM ,F,-/C=I ill i:1 -1 - ^IF, \ , /• \ -'16t7-7 Icr7-Ii. ••• f7-17 ' ` .. iW \ III•. o ,. , ' \��` :\ `�i6 :'-Is• �' r' 1 ra �, 1. N� Minn _ II t1-L I.t1-E - :�ll_�IcfT. .. 76...! vl Tc.r.1-11 .-i.....__. ,,L____, .....- 4____ ___5 0 Ill 'f1-iL�!1-.....\ k 1:;‘,.:.-7------ -..... ,. - , ..�ILJ 0• I' . VI ;I �_#• I . , uEII i•) �f�.ME _w /I7��,'—.-.ill Lte•1 ''J;•; 1r ill LIM `iru-Ej1 \TIIj$ �•'_• ,c3 _ pf I I iii 1 j,� It -WI i?. \ l �J Ley'7 ILt•-1 16,0 /' 1 LII L / 1 0 �T r`\ I 1-'• � 5 Ict1-0•• , ,• \/ ILJ1d7 r 111 / �' ` \ • 16 3 r 16t1-10 16/8-1_ALI Lt1- 1611-. -C 17d1-. '-7• (` .,/ f -.EIII��•_'l ==-�'`s •ram,. • ' • 2 .fx I 'W• I - Q y� J1 ••eE-, , te-e ` f / l \• ,' 1l11-1 E• •:> G3 . 19T23NR5EE1/2 f` 1. ;�aY °; UTILITIES DIVISION ---- Renton city Limits 1s48Oo 4 0 �+ ..: ��N'C� 1 ✓03/99 Datum N"� �° '�'a" 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Basin: Black River Basin Subbasin Name: Subbasin Number: .SymbolDrainage Comporjenj Drainage Component Slope Distance j!gxistitigint Potential Obsevtions of Field Inspector Type Name and Size - .- Description from Site Problems-3 qAtkfrlg#6ii6Vgaaltaiktetg See Map Type:sheet flow,swale,stream, Drainage basin,vegetation,cover, Ft Constrictions,under capacity,ponding, Tributary area,likelihood of problem, channel,pipe,pond;size, depth,type of sensitive area,volume overtopping,flooding,habitat or organism overflow pathways,potential impacts diameter,surface area destruction,scouring,bank sloughing, sedimentation,incision,other erosion A Site Discharge Location 0' A-B 6-inch Concrete Under Alley 0.12% 0-130' No erosion exists B-C 8-inch Concrete Under South 5th Street 130-260' Partially filled with leaves C-D 8-inch Concrete Under Intersection of South 260'-350' No erosion exists 5th Street and Burnett Avenue South D-E 18-inch CMP Under Park in Middle of 350-720' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South E-F 18-inch CMP Under Park in Middle of 720-850' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South F-G 18-inch CMP Under Park/Under Burnett 2.11% 850-980' Possibly buried/Possibly labeled Avenue South as sewer G-H 24-inch CMP Under Park on East Side of 0.30% 980-1250' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South H-I 24-inch CMP Under Park on East Side of 0.30% 1250-1273' No erosion exists Burnett Avenue South I-J 24-inch CMP Crossing Burnett Avenue 1.26% 1273-1365' Four manholes at intersection. South Under South 7th Street Three labeled sewer;one labeled water. Assumed Type II storm manhole labeled as sewer. J-K 24-inch CMP Under South 7th Street 0.11% 1365-1871' No erosion exists 7251.002[PCM/rbficti] ------- . . --- '-- -- 'I a.,..„----- ,B or Dra. PLOT. ' _ . Zel, GII. _, , , ' .._ - CITY OF PREUMINARY GRADING AND MG /"Ilk tu.. RENTON STORM DRAINAGE PLAN ,...... 1 1 1 NEN ARCHMMT DIE PIM WM -112/15/00 FLA ...... wie I AT*I''',:... r 1 DATUM Planning/Building/Public Works Dept yllin .1 , 5;11"1=L'Y MI I NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR or.". IA - Raton litual-farnay • 4- EX.6'WATER-IV -w. -vs w II ,vs vl fir. 1 t , lennrc meg. S. 4TH STREET I _ s3P1t01)EJ.4 il . _ - _ i ___ _4__ 51 i Mliglia X 11 gp I I 1 A liAl ill itt I • 1 f 0 1 2 1 I r- _ ' tat kl.t J...r M i 7:0 1111111— Z ______ nu 0 ________ ----- -- --- -4:-0 ,, 1 1 II • ,..i,. ...• 2 I 'II il ' ft ::: 1;1111111— I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ill:1111 I I I I . . A 1 , cl: li 111 . . 5 1 al M /14 1 i I 1 I I I , ___ ..._ • _______________ -- __ ge __ _ 1 , - q sii q ,T, . lig g_g r Ta • \ .. .. P 1 4 gill g I i ii E , E 1 __ t-- w.. E II I, , , , 07 i r.:t:;,, Y, e Lo. i 112 41 I f,,t , , , , , ,,)w i E %ijitlirs'- ----------1 Salr 2 1 , 5 gsi ,,:..:,,,,,...,.... HAI 114 ii 21 §1 [0,,...ti i.,,,,,, L, .,. ii 1.1011""' 1 P ;; „.,,I MI -: .,...?....0..:P. • >..'..I• g °Y N I tAb"''''' ' ; ,-.,.0,.:4!: !:1! 11 t :1 1::::::: ..;iti It:A lip!! '1111 ..g. 11 i '-' . A - 1 If Nli , qui FA I Fill. iliiiii I. ;• a all I- ,.r. , 4:b I ill 1 _ 1 j :•4--- _____ • ' 1:11.af.:?; oi.11 a ____ __ lima a' E Igo „ tli -1 MI------ . •:::::::::: - ...., - .. ...... 1 ..,,I. it q cr, 1,,,, . • •,,...:•, .:;::Illilii i t''' sr 1 ,....4. cr) g r ir 5gi r, 4.1iiii 1 NNi'i.:0.:.I IlL:;:l e 1..'::3- i ,I f.1 '4 r::../•C IV "41,• III t4 i-. ) J II I ' '''',.- . • ....',„ 1 11 5' 11181 1 i 71 -I -a. • • 4, e 1, 6 aiI:'I'i L 5(F . -,,, ini t I . .„,,,„,,,,„, . ;],,,,,,,,,,.„,...i.. , 01 :' or 3 1 . '' * .-•,• 4 , w. •. .. ti:Ir g 'I I till ,,,•:, di 151' CP 1 01.1':f:!.14.1 iii 0_1 .•..ilin .... ill; Ill. iR _Pt ••V.13 ci! el 8 i lig§ 1 “9 5`,.. 'vs, Iiii li. r •r, 1 .1 M A '4tP:•.# III 4 MI @ . t po g. ; 41 oa,a.4 5 -;g -x HO 5 g i g ' ,d6A pi, 516111 1 - -4 ___ 1..':1.•,:(P1 1111, w ______,„„,„ ..,, _.ir , • _ LOT UNE • l'IMI 111 ..g": * i *:•i :Z i,'.g:::::•'''''•W - -1E- ••t, **, - a: -- ,,ii .+= . 1 • • m 'I P , „4... r 11 120 117/4'4-1 ,, •44.,,,,, , 11 I II_ mi! 1111,1 • ,So 511 c*-23 I fibi ,. ,.., %vi"" ............ niszimio-int is t • -- 4 .,...,,„ ..• 1 .. , .,, cm,,.,. A .1[1.• Ill - .--- ,.:.... , _, . ......1; 1 1, •. . *;ii0 ;-•*Al , wag— q lin* ; ,,.4 .In _ . . I,.4 0 Air,: NalitarPI %. N Sinn 111, .. . tit 'Y'"1.' --I-Lc - - •'L-.......--.-W-3 1 III .t 4 . 101. il .. kititii_......- w.. .,......••• --Ng " .--!-:.'R 9 zp _T-1 _ •--F,--„ --,,,A.4;71 ad -Ao, ------ ,) RI •••- ..,:•..:.:a',-,...i ms -iiij '44 •.'4, ... - ,'9 d>`' go i's ot )> *' •*a • -g. '4• is r 0:-F:.$/' ..milm 4 iiii 9 ; -1, e■ .. .>.I (.4 1:$ cj /'N —1 if r--.;g1,g •IM iiii g M eri s 1 1 A. PI /I •12 ..1:_i .. ' 'c ...,1 1,,,,,iiiiiiiiiit-- -<1,1 - .•iit I Wilg 1 rililli — . •-• ..... Z- -1- 1 _J- .:gli V 3 Ailli... I Niliii III I .=.' . I -1 M g N :A::zg 9 imptill11::.,.. . agl -- ,.... -' 0 .Ihizi' IL. Hi* ...kt till II __ IN UNE .1 1 liwww1111W1 Ill• . s•..;itI• ....... E i 1 A 01 4- ..----- .i 4.'13 aurifa I. 1 ii a.: I • ..,.., 1 Ti ,- • . .01 --)- r- . 1 A ..-- .k.......,...?..' • '...,,FAtHI FR'evo i' ,DiN WA II 1.1 !7: I / - 0 H.g kid g. •• , ::::,e 6>/ i. . „,,x 2 % t: l'f.•J 1..20' Or!: ....._,, i. . ___w...t.!.1.__,33 ,,....7.7.011 v 11 0 L.:114. ,,, \ bkb h11,:,.6 ottl:,! ..If ..• 4,.1 ,.._.....-4.-.31 4.000 a St. ,..ii,,,:...i... :i:i:'• _a 1 ''' t*•1.... P-In 1 1. -;1 !WV'''.ilV.. Egilil, t..) Viiirli) 16 ...-----::?:•41 ea E:, ---,v ,v ,Ati)j-.711 • . _ f,....1 'is , - k • c tit P.i!' ' i W' ; ' '''Illai OE,- ) g" 304;i1 'V' 9 $.4,0 •, ...e. •41/c.ti. eV' . ,.:m.:..:: . ::,,:i qiii i...:: iii! lip;1;3 k ii 1.4.;..7. •.. ...... l.4.11 _.1 ).!.....•,..4 .....: ::± ......''11 EP•:7.7!•.::-..2"....,.:N'..-..:,:....-.:-:.....::,. iiii ,. C) .EN•, :13 ',Z••!;ft, L'11 IBM I 1 ,' ................. g 0 ' .."Iti.t '‘'..' r. • -yr .,,,,3 ,,,,,...; il - - im. 1:::.:iim_u_ogRilt j`. M ;:ibi.r.ii.. ,rtp• .. - ..... --_,..... .,:, ,...:`, Wenn- '--,Or.,i,i.ii:.,1'.:":.,:.,___._ _____ MIE::•:•#.4-11.:ICAIIIIII...:1111r. ..44 ..• ' ...4....t. I...! • / i lif lal N 1:. tg • • 111.!.41A 111111111.11111111kM1) ..=-1:4. _rt Oili 4:....vie spoionsuimusumnem...2,7-5..•.. ,.grk....-s., .•. 4 Iiii,lp !, , rn 4 , P ZnumsF!`t111111111Pniaki I" . .,,,,,,4w. vii.iit'•:.:'.'. .71.,f_wt, 1 o \ miliarlawat.410 1 , . a I •\ . . ,- •,,i..gr-arake. r,,.. . ..r- / 1 - s."...4:4 -5 .AR.-4.-,-.P i1-k r11 i 15 6z1 g 1.A0X..1 Dm-3 %,'L-'----I:N.N.EN•A,„G.,I,„,AN,T_.Ei7•••1 1%i1Pm,A1:4 a4u6'.Mi:it,t,Iit xi z.',:IoT‘,/r\'I.liN t.(,2,t;•1-•'. 1v•)>'41,M‘47eV,•r•1i6O.2.Mn.mPrkaM, , L __4id_1•4 •uviV. :4--A,.,10M ,q„'-F....•.::. F S - - ° 1. 1l14.:l'1, -mg,r;/ 71 -w- L -p.....„.''0s:,,'..;4,.,,i;a/, iRg9°5,rg:1..'a-,1..4)p vi...l•••..m.s'4t".,'7'.' .111,tit••. .1.-1 w--, E- , f„,_1743.,..... ...._...t„. „.,f ly 6 (6 .Utt 1 i§ .. ..' ....1 ca iA . . . - • 1 8 A 6 : Pilo: P:\SOSKPROJ\7251\preliminary\7251-oldwg Dote/Time: 12/14/2000 10:26 Scale: 1=20 shoresse Irels: 27251P6,27251P/2. B.C.E.JOB NO, 7251 , . ---" --� _. � -. __ - _ -— B N — 1 1 1 re .� - ,�� ----�• Sao 0:1 i r __—..I= ; 1 - - - __ -- .-- PLOT DAIS - - PW '1PKE __- .. —_ ' - - - u.'. �. ww: PREUMINARY WATER PLAN �D.Dw �" f� Nava 4a:• • CITY OF ^si ` MG VTS /: RENTON, STREET LEVEL OW 00.1Mn1C MR .1s , DATUM I ae rcx 1 NEW ARCHITECT EDE PIM WTS 12/15/00 NA ''''''' Ri\— Iu svu Planning/Building/Public Works Dept. H ,a Winton Multi-fmnly NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR ."°"� Iw ' Elfr -11- -W--•---..—...-f.. -r- i- . .IX.tr WATFR r_.-....._—. _., 4I I- 14 — _ _ - _ _ S. 4TH STREET — _ _ I 1 1 I 1 1 ■ 3 j 1 F..) -- -- -- -i r — -- -- 1 1 / 11 d ®p®IDNS20®0g011 1, I•� i Zci i 4 i pPIP i '1114 i 1 c iR� ' I IL I � v Is , � I --F ' wen II i an li II (� Z Ili .. (P I ::�f �I ii I G • OR II I „i: , IIII II_ , j i g '. �• . •:S''.„ 1 r I 1. 1 i 1 i 111: — '— 1 gib;II JsJ 1g :1 ; M Milli W ' I n. :• ii i € I 1 s % iiiir • n pi I,c I, J : :: -.1 if ifi® ® ® ®D®® D as 1�jj G 3t a A. ii" t rt1 IP y ti.,` ' cn m ;<I .... m ill a ri 1 11 i 1 1 Mil- CI eirs:;,. .... .,,,, ,,.,,, ..,,,, tJE.. , g e.! I gg }z gap It . . q , —9 i . 1 „ .l�--r ff 0_,RI D _< rt " iM �' Iv - 1 IL P g I _ !14< rn -- -- -- iiii • _ _- -- .- rn :J. n::1 it i 11 g4i l m ! ig m Qi:;; IN 1 j:, il '.I iir— i H. iii ___ — ...?: i i , J )1 g �J 1 er --� CIE...... 1 it ■ I-`'� ;' � IIn If n1).: j-. ::::• IE ...4 \ T A VI- N �• r L ■ 12 1 L_ 1.Y. J , 1. lie N i i iqg Fling4 &AIii !!!!.:!.;;!."11"' !,:z.:.. . iii ,i,ii:14ii Mr' ;Toni PI i # _ 1R 1 r 1 t 4 :F:Me 1 1 • •• ul 1. ,::i%),,, 'µ :,�! ...Rig^^ ti 4 .: _ ii1. l;= a "ii g ,:.. t i ...: ,r i1 $+ -- -- -- ,> r Ni, `Pit rg. i tleiaI' e I i sit #•. N�•Apo.�, N i S':s)'j. '. •—.:.« • w...� ..:... ---1;�:Z: !' ..A,(�; .as •Kw:ii�'i tgVimr'4. 1 '1 e 4 a •mu\•uipaimp� Q If aj_ —,- # -- 1/ p 5 `too I -, ,..,iiituto... • L......,....i: .1 . ..., PN i — • i 0 1 . .-rx _4 .. , ;:.*4,, 1 u 0 i 1 1r�',\\ e'mTrrm cum "EX e'er / .1.. ••S•kr•,.:6 .„,„, 1 i * 1113 Pll 1 -/.- m -f... .i.,.. .... ....- - - 1.04,1,„ TEL MH lil aZ . Fills, '''''1/T rr- -r =',i ' --- y ..RI.9:>! w ��r�sy 4� ..g y. `�`�s rah ] ' -- -.- I, • '._ fr�'„kl to i`� ; r GEC Ca i File:P:\SDSK R0J\7251\preliminary\7251-pl.dwg Dale/Time: 12/15/2000 11:09 Scale: 1.20 sharesse%refs: Z7251PA2.Z7251 14, B.C.E.JOB NO. 7251 . 1 • ____ l _: _ --- —1 _ PLOT Or PLOT ._- SPACE -- - - T 1 Tn ��� SVMVR suu. Yaal.XM: oax� As New mxaeNW 14ai(,. 40� CITY OF PREUMINARY SANITARY SEWER PLATkv,'' r�,e.„ 1 Px.x, ' \ - AN RENTON UNDERGROUND PARKING PARKING LEVEL e"�w x4 1 NEN ARpJTECT STTE PUN MIS 1 5/D0 RJA aaaeu j 01"w j I DATUM 1 �/ RA : Planning/Building/Public Works Dept. NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR ILA swc K n°Nmxar MI Renton Muff-famly 1 il- -r- -w - it -w .w -w,,, w r -w w f'I — _ _ _ wart mill 4TH STREET • I I —4—Thr..N. I i -- f FS _, I fir. c) at ® D®i>DCo y� . I N.)M Ai 1 I Co i 1 1 -- -- -- I 1 1 1 0 if I I I -___, i I ` mig g I i 8 ■ -- `, soriiis7'E -ib.1 ---------j rt7 m I ,fr l 1 g �a. ao s ; i1 R +. I `'`i ":. / 1- + 'Iil�lli:+y„l I I ;: n1 1Iiii. �` 7 C '11 . r — — — -- } rI — it , 2 ` LI: T mCn Yvtt# eEF4'11131- 5 q ' -I i5.14 "4: —I i 1 (.'a DJ g .... stt, :,:,,,...,..:,:. " I , gI [1 ., „ It 'f O il 1 . fJ () () N: t= Fl I r ll?g <` r c� w� PLi ir � �11�D rii — Pi pi 1._ I F- il'4. iI 1 • In I ` /, _ '� _ a [_ -.- a "t-- v Ni ,,. `,t I QJ -7 r ;:< ;> 11 Ililt:•:i:.:r I f'ji 11311 itiMql .......,.. E A iwi 1 . 7 I ' 9 , 4.D1 - � y O rs Li Mill "t ,. fA .....;i 4----ri W -----w-F.A.--83 --'I - . '-'e- >' Ti4. . 1 r 1 t lw i ;:l!ii. 1 -.' • . NOV , . -7 s 1 •piii , , irmi.,, , .1 • - I ,t - -- hi � — -- '• C " o 0 • � ,y.P a'A;1::` 5 .. ..:w "»'`?fie I° m `3., .--- - 1. ~ if g. 4- 1 Ffp i D n `t"> 24'd01Au[M/LZ5 O24•.6.. .. C; . - •i�■`•"ems t. 1 R Z. III .. >�<e:> t •.:• '•R.Sic-Q,iAjL. •.,e... -: .....1 R xa,..<m: 1..J i0 n 1 B �xTcai cvREl IX�a. ! I �: « • t'' �' ii s� h.:., I ,� 1 RIDIrernR :: S. 5TH STREET L:jr'''' • � :.: • " N _ «ro ig 0 Z :4 :„�6'• J S! as1 < _---'•r '+ yrii 7 u, 'i al°t -. ��,�Q is ;1, KK rF` f¢� 44 w -w w- w . yu u.;),' Av. a' i �? if 2f S ?' ..°� '{i r:x. p p siS 1 0 ; --3J -- 64. I -- -'-r.a Viii z; W i 1, I - -_'� i lit! ii O File:P:\SDSKPROJ\7251\preliminary\7251—p2.dwg Dale/Time: I2/14/2000 11;11 Seale: 1.20 shoresse%refs: 27251P0,Z7251PAI,27251 PA2,.020, B.C.E.JOB NO. 7251 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology Drainage from the proposed buildings will consist mostly of rooftop drainage and will be collected by a series of downspout connections to the existing storm drainage system within Williams Avenue South. Runoff from the alley located along the western property line will be collected by a series of catch basins and tightlines and routed to an existing catch basin located at the intersection of 5th Avenue South and the alley. Runoff within the parking garage area will be collected by a series of floor drains and routed to an oil/water separator,then to a pump that will discharge into the existing sanitary sewer system located within Williams Avenue South. The subject property is currently occupied by Renton Family Practice Clinic, paved parking lots, an existing single-family residence, detached garage, a grass field area, and some scattered trees. The impervious area on the site is approximately 17,313 square feet. Pervious areas comprise approximately 22,963 square feet of the subject site,which results in a runoff rate of 0.69 cfs at the 100-year pre-developed event. Within the proposed conditions, the impervious area will be approximately 40,276 square feet in size resulting in a 100-year post-developed runoff rate of 0.84 cfs. According to Section 1.2.3 (page 1.2.3-5) of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual,as well Note No. 3 under the Plan Review- Stormwater Section in the advisory notes,no detention will be required for this site because there is less than 0.50 cfs increase in the 100-year runoff rate. 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology The runoff within the proposed development, with the exception of the improvements within the alley will be roof and sidewalk drainage which is considered clean runoff and not subject to water quality requirements. Approximately 2,129 square feet of asphalt is being added within the alley. In accordance with the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual, because it is less than 5,000 square feet, it does not meet the threshold of requiring water quality treatment. Also, there is an existing 10,077 square feet of paved parking lot on site that will be removed, so the total impervious area subject to vehicular travel will actually be reduced by the development of this project. Drainage within the underground parking garage will be collected by a series of floor drains • and routed to an oil/water separator. This oil/water separator has a capacity in excess of 200 gallons as required by Advisory Note No. 3 under the Plan Review - Sanitary Sewer Section. This runoff will then be routed to a sump pump located within the underground parking garage and then discharged to an existing sanitary sewer stub located within Williams Avenue South. Additional detention and water quality calculations can be found in this section. 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] ' 4.3 Detention Calculations 1) Existing ground cover (Total site area = 40,276 sf) a) Impervious: Rooftop: 6,236 sf Parking Lot: 10,077 sf Concrete Walk: 1,000 sf E = 40,276 sf b) Pervious: Grass: 22,400 sf • E = 22,963 sf 2) Proposed ground cover I (Total site area = 40,276 sf) a) Impervious: Rooftop: 22,400 sf Concrete Walk: 14,716 sf (1) Planter areas: 1,120 sf Paved areas: 2,040 sf (1)Planter areas counted as impervious to be conservative. E = 40,276 sf 3) Flow rate summaries - Pre-developed Post-developed Qloo 0.69 cfs 0.84 cfs Increase in runoff = 0.84 cfs-0.69 cfs = 0.15 cfs pursuant to 1990 KCSWDM Section SCT 1.2.3 (page 1.2.3-5) Increase in runoff is less than 0.5 cfs,so detention is not required. 7251.008 [BHE/bq/ath] � 1 4.4 Water Quality Calculations 1) Roof areas and concrete walkways are non-pollution generating surfaces and are subsequently not subject to water quality requirements. 2) Additional pollution generating surfaces being added to alley area = 2,129 sf Threshold that triggers water quality treatment = 5,000 sf(pursuant to 1990 KCSWDM, Section 1.2.3 -5) Threshold that triggers water quality treatment •= 5,000 sf ✓ Water quality treatment not required 3) Per SEDA Advisory No. 3, oil/water separator is required to have a minimum capacity of 200 gallons. No calculations were done to estimate the water quality design flow because the contributing basin is a parking garage. Consequently,we have proposed an utility vault Model 660-SA baffle oil/water separator which has twice the required capacity(415 gallons). 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The conveyance system for this project will consist of catch basins and a tightline system. The conveyance system was sized for a 100-year event pursuant to the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. We used the rational method of analysis while using the C-factor equal to 0.9. • I 7251.008 [BHE/bq/ath] BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS-PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR using the Rational Method&Manning Formula KING COUNTY DESIGN FOR 100 YEAR STORM JOB NAME: SHERMAN APARTMENTS NOTE:ENTER DEFAULTS AND STORM DATA BEFORE BEGINNING JOB#: 7251 DEFAULTS C= 0.9 n= 0.014 FILE NO.:7251-100.XLS d= 12 Tc= 7 A=Contributing Area(Ac) Qd=Design Flow(cis) COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD"Ir"-EQUATION C=Runoff Coefficient Qf=Full Capacity Flow(cfs) STORM Ar Br • Tc=Time of Concentration(min) Vd=Velocity at Design Flow(fps) 2YR 1.58 0.58 1=Intensity at Tc(In/hr) Vf=Velocity at Full Flow(fps) 10YR 2.44 0.64 PRECIP= 3.9 d=Diameter of Pipe(in) s=Slope of pipe(%) 25YR 2.66 0.65 Ar- 2.61 L=Length of Pipe(ft) n=Manning Roughness Coefficient 50YR 2.75 0.65 Br- 0.63 D=Water Depth at Qd(in) Tt=Travel Time at Vd(min) 100YR 2.61 0.63 FROM TO A s L I d Tc n C SUM A A'C SUM AT I Qd Of Qd/Qf D/d D Vf Vd Tt CB2 CB1 0.11 1.00 183 Ik 12 7.0 0.014 0.9 0.11 0.10 0.10 2.99 0.30 3.31 0.089 0.199 2.39 4.21 2.54 1.20 CB1 EXCB 0.12 0.87 31 12 8.2 0.014 0.9 0.23 0.11 0.21 2.70 0.56 3.08 0.181 0.285 3.42 3.93 2.97 0.17 Page 1 - r € 1T •SSA I I r_- � —' ..e o =:.7..• A" CITY OF .. [W» /., \ I RENTON PIPE SIZING MAP ....p • «�_ DATUM Planning/Building/Public Works Dept. NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR ww,om 'n'i'®'""a• Sherman Apartments :.l • NTS J.> I • x •,g, '•.•:•l'1:..____ .4, : _See 77. t .49' .t__ — � c::= � �n ....... u I : v.. :: ' ;IlJ g od .o I••. ..ii: ..i..,,.: . .,,,.!.:.-;:, - s.. .'. _;. I ti �, �.... ngz ...............//:... .':.. •c:: 11 tiN �q _ ....... .....................;.............................. .. . . :i�vi .......Il... 1 ; g� N66'26'0411a:1D0.05 �. :.: ff .........._.. g a ' a II m NtiE5 ml> �_ M z O N> -e. >R it s S.5TH STREET s ___- o m ' R 0�1N ' E ^ 11 ............. • . . Z yy 3 D F Q 6NOp t Q _ __ __ -- . i k -0 0 z 1. w �1 ,,„ RO1. -- . F �c �► C) A e?•D f 9rate,tp . sr it y 10 / \\ C u s° 'A I Rps Ao .^o 'ayi 251 FlIe:P:\07000s\7251\exhibit\7251-XI.dwg Dote/llme.7/19/2006 2:I3 PM Scohn0.022727 CTEBAIDI %2f:.Z7251-Ldvg,:7251-n2.dwg B.C.E.JOB NO. 7251 7), 5.3 Pump"A"Sizing Calculations Pump "A" is designed to collect drainage from the slot drain within the same area and groundwater collected by the 4-inch perforated PVC drain system underneath the parking garage slab and discharge it to an existing catch basin within Williams Avenue South. The reason that a pump is required is that the finished floor elevation of the garage is 28.75 and the invert elevation of the existing catch basin is 34.26. Regional discharge rates have been determined by combining the 100-year developed event within the ramp area (using KCRTS with 15-minute time steps) and the suggested discharge rate for the groundwater within the underground parking garage area, as supplied by the geotechnical engineer. 1) Determine Flow Rate a) Assume 100-year post developed flow for ramp area=0.028 CFS _ b) Per Shannon & Wilson's project review dated April 18, 2002 (Section 6.3 in TIR) minimum flow assumed for underslab drains is 100 GPM. We will use a safety factor of 1.5 so flow= 150 GPM=0.33 CFS. c) Design Q=0.028 CFS +0.33 CFS 0.358 CFS 2) Determine Total Dynamic Head a) TDH=HLEL + HLMC,,on + 2HLe,how HLEL + ELE,, - ELoU, ELIN = 34.92 HLEL = 34.92-25.00=9.92 feet= 10.00' HLfr;C,;on = 3.02 LD- 1.167 V 1.85 +2HLe,bow Ch HL6ici;on = 3.02(48')(0.25-167) 7.21FT/S)1.85 140 L = 48' D = 0.25' HL ,;on = 3.02'+2HLe,boW V = Q = 0.358 A 0.0496 HLemow = KV' ; K=0.8 V = 7.21FT/S 2g Ch = 140 -elbow = 0.8 7.21 FT/S 2 2x32.2FT/S2 HLe,hcw = 0.64' HLMC,,on = 3.02'+(2 x 0.64') = 4.31' TDH = 10'+4.31' = 14.31' 7251.008[BHFJbq/ath] 3) Pump Requirements a) Q = 0.358 CFS(161 GPM) b) TDH= 14.31' c) 3'Discharge I —:7) 7251.008[BBEThiVath] Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:7251ramp.tsf 7251RAMP.PKS Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Frequency Analysis Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (cFS) Period 0.015 4 8/27/01 18:00 0.028 1 100.00 0.990 0.010 8 9/17/02 16:15 0.025 2 25.00 0.960 0.025 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.015 3 10.00 0.900 0.010 7 8/23/04 14:30 0.015 4 5.00 0.800 0.015 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.015 5 3.00 0.667 0.015 3 10/22/05 10:00 0.014 6 2.00 0.500 0.014 6 10/25/06 22:45 0.010 7 1.30 0.231 0.028 1 1/09/08 6:30 0.010 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.027 50.00 0.980 I 1 Page 1 IntellEquip Selector-Performance Datasheet Page 1 of 2 -pOmP IA x Features I Return to Products I New Selection I Accept . ;q`4,-- 4-e. . mil :1 :.. ,,.` The Smart Pump Con Conditions of Service Product Lines Pump Size List Search Results Performance Datasheet Performance Instructions: To navigate to other pages click on any active button(top of page) Customer Pump size :407023 QDSC Customer reference Stages :1 Item number Based on curve number • :RC9825-1 Service Pump reference number :3 l' Quantity of pumps :1 Date last saved : Operating Conditions Liquid Flow,rated 161 USgpm Liquid type • 'Water lip. Head,rated 14.3 ,ft Additional liquid description 1 Suction pressure,max 0.000 -u psi.g Solids diameter,max 0.00 _ in NPSH available,rated Ample ul ft Temperature,max 168 j of Site&Utility Data Specific gravity,rated 1.000 j Frequency 160 1IF Hz Viscosity,rated 11000 _ cP Performance - •• Speed IT Set @ 1173 rpm • Material Impeller diameter,rated :6.45 in Material requested Cast iron ;( Impeller diameter,maximum :7.00 in Material selected :Cast iron Impeller diameter,minimum :5.00 in Pressure Data Efficiency :70.0% Maximum working pressure :8.57 psi.g 7) NPSHr :3.4 ft Working pressure limit :175.0 psi.g Nss :6,165(US units) Suction pressure limit :30.00 psi.g MCSF :27 USgpm Hydrostatic test pressure :N/A Head,maximum,rated diameter :19.8 ft Driver&Power Data Head rise to shutoff :38.1 % Driver sizing specification [Rated power i'. Flow,BEP :199 USgpm Margin over specification 0.0 % itFlow ratio(rated/BEP) :80.9% Service factor :1.00 Diameter ratio(rated/max) :92.1 % Power,hydraulic :0.58 hp Head ratio(rated dia/max dia) :82.3% Power,rated :0.83 hp Viscous coefficients(CQ/CH/CE) :1.00/1.00/1.00 Power,maximum,rated diameter :1.08 hp Selection status :Acceptable Motor rating :1.00 hp/0.75 kW 30 ��... iL �a �� !.. _,_ ,_;.�u. , t , : ! {_ L } ! , • 1 r. ._;_ i .1, , ,_4_1-7--- .....-!--, 1 4 , . , . ,....-...,4.....,_:_2J-4.4.,It 4-471J--+ t. .�..e _:..t.�_ :_.w - -1-:--F- a._- _:f_t .1-1.a.._4__4_:_ !_ _;..........:.t_~_ -1.4_:J.__1.:.1 ._.._.-t" 7.00 in Maxi rnum 1 f { --t T; -f E , ( t 1 ' ) rr t-r - -- r-i 24 y, �. -i • i H- r • ' i-+-1--_ _-T-;---1--._:- ,-1-4-=--. -r-; T i .._i-r._.u_ i , , --1-:-- 1_:._-.tom Y- - :. t-� �.r'r -1 �I----•---:- Y"-.L;.�_t� .E-P''-r-1•1',=...ram_;--1-- i; -1, _ r ,;--4_i_ ; ,. .�1 } f 14--G----{-- r 1-7-��, � i-r �-- P r -'�.-. � --•�.r. i --r-r_'-f • i I E � r"_r" : =-i-•-t 21 r 4_f - J z_-_� t.-1. _ I , �. f �}..� !_J -f _ ' -�= -- --11-r� ; s4 , �--+i .j l t k -7--_.-.a--t----' azry_j._i 4_f��.Effioi , y� -�:__ 46.45 in Rated=1.. --:. _ i 1 -_ _! .�.:_.; :� -( ,_:_ r _ r .;�.�.:- -_,�-iJ 18 j f 1't _ �� } -I$`'� !! 1--�+-1-;.._. 2 _t. ..I�'L_J_.._: -'1"i 1 1 ' �-4 Li-: '-.t.L'``1_._ lt=_ .` L ;1..1. E i l ! _ _ -t .. ; -1.___,_..,___ 1 `1--r- I --7-t t--!:__i•--I_' 74:2 -T5 00 n Mini m, um. -i.__-i;---Lj_ i-, r_F--a_-__..'� I-.r.._•..�-i�'r-_f�-- -s=:;_ -r - a-�- ; t � - , -,�! : , . :12 1-`" i_ r.- t-_ `..s�_1, I-4-:-?-d, .i-i-j-Aji -I _ ___`1 i i i -- -`-: j ' .. -....,--.-.r•_, --- _ _:: ,I.". :; , t.:_- ' _ -`."I-t _ r --a__-7--h-tf' .. ---..:._t--_-.--. - _..-c =�r71,--,-_"-.._ -r- r .- .---,_:_-.. I-7-. ....am. : ;-" __-t _s--i .. �-F- . F _,_; . _ .:t ��am_j-� _ A ._:�---t-=- ' --zz- . T_ := '-- i ( ,-rr '- ` _t _r--;.r- ..___ . .r- ; _ -rr -24 _42,l._., 6 { • zir --' ____.__:74 }- t- J. •1-J- - : - •--••-r-`_... Y-1-�-.. r_ -t--1_.,_;_r..._ _..__ -4 , '_,--.i_ 1-, -Imo...._ _-4-_ .,.., -1-.,_ i ;. ,+' ,... a. -.1- a_a_ ,_ '---1-`�.T s I 1 'T'-F i_....-:_"1"f-i-i__ 0 20 ....:• --_...__t . 0 ^40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Capacity-USgpm j http://pacopumps.selector.intellequip.com/IEQHydSel/HydSel_JSP/App/performancedata:... 5/15/2002 IntellEquip Selector-Performance Datasheet Page 2 of 2 8 .rsis.rrarrrrm...air..r..mumw ersos. r rra.a.rr..rrr.asmmorm r..r.rtirr. �,.,_1 rr. .rw rr r...rrr ..r.� onmsmr.= r= r....rrw..rrr r ....■ • = w mom 4 .,.:M:E :s_:,m_ �.C.a .�r.mC �!>. 'ram•••�- . r...r�Ci rt...rr.r.r .. r .r.a ��j r j..ir. r . .rri.r.. z .w"�"i'r'C�'Sogim"'r'rr misu pp ..ir.. 'UMMISJ ia�r:r : r G.Z.rr}ir.i..MMMCCC:L'i MISIMMMIMMIMMIUMIMMINMIMMEIMMM '..ram. :' S Rai rr�rra�u C ."�"��."'�"=� a .. rr . .....sr . .r or 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Capacity-USgpm • 1.6 , ..i rrro a a aww...w�.ram. arono.'�'".3'. .rr:. .MMMMM_r�rri..' ."����r ` •ram. 'r'. .� ��.rrr� r'GGO MAIM iii�iiii runmen.r... r� m r sum mow IMMIMMUMMIMI III �� MIIMINIMMON ..i.�assim i�..�u = �Ti.r_.t. .r _. —...ti[..G.r5�...r...�.r `....irsrmrir a 0.8 ffil�uM_.0 ^rrra�alw. ."..2 — �tr o...rr.'r. iri*� p rrr 1.1 rm.�'W'�'L •r mi_« r�irgrmmm liimr.irr 0.4 '�i�r"�.��'�.�. .rr�ioner rMMMM uesseimurimaiMMMMMM i...r` 'rr rrr..MMr....srr ..Ma.. MEMM • _--r on ! ra a. �.wrr.rlc..rii...�..rfo.na.rw {_ 0.00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Capacity- USgpm Powered Jn lEqu#prrr©2002 All rights reserved. , • I http://pacopumps.selector.intellequip.com/IEQ_HydSel/HydSel_JSP/App/performancedata;... 5/15/2002 5.4 Pump`B"Sizing Calculations Pump `B" has been designed to collect drainage from the area drains within the underground parking garage and discharge it to an existing 6-inch side sewer within Williams Avenue South via a 3-inch force main. A pump system is required because the finished floor elevation is 28.75 and the invert elevation of the existing side sewer is 32.08. A required discharge rate of 100 gpm has been assumed. 1) Determine Flow Rate 1 a) Assume 100 GPM(0.228 CFS) 2) Determine TDH a) TDH = HL + HLb;et;on +2HLe,,,,,W 1/4 HL = 32.08-25.00=7.08 feet=8.00 feet HL ton = 3.02LD-1.167 V 1.85 Ch HL = 3.02(28') 3" -1.167 4.65FT/S 1.85 L = 28 feet 12" 140 D = 3 inches V = 0.228 = 4.65FT/S Lb1C1;on = 0.783' It 1.5 2 7)_ 12 HLe,�W = K V 2 = 0.8 4.652 Ch = 140 2g 2x32.2 HLe,now = 0.26 feet TDH = 8.0'+0.783 feet+2 x .26 feet=9.30 feet 3) Pump Requirements a) Q = 0.228 CFS (100 GPM) b) TDH = 9.30' c) 3-inch Discharge 7251.008[BHFfbq/ath] .` IntellEquip Selector-Performance Datasheet Page 1 of 2 Features I Return to Products I New Selection I Accept P C'_:i.tA. i4 4'=� k x'-,:;kF # :t'!� � v ,.�. The Smart Pump Con Conditions of Service Product Lines Pump Size List Search Results Performance Datasheet Performance Instructions: To navigate to other pages click on any active button(top of page) Customer Pump size : 407023 QDSC Customer reference Stages : 1 Item number Based on curve number :RC9825-1 Service Pump reference number :3 Quantity of pumps :1 Date last saved • Operating Conditions Liquid Flow,rated 103 1 USgpm Liquid type Water • Head,rated 9.3__ 1 ft Additional liquid description _ Suction pressure,max 1 psi.g Solids diameter,max 0.00 !in NPSH available,rated Ample ft Temperature,max 68 F Site&Utility Data Specific gravity,rated 1.000 Frequency 60. Hz Viscosity,rated 1 A00 �i cP Performance - • Speed F Set @ 1173 'rpm Material Impeller diameter,rated :5.34 in Material requested Cast iron Impeller diameter,maximum :7.00 in Material selected :Cast iron Impeller diameter,minimum :5.00 in Pressure Data Efficiency :57.0% Maximum working pressure :5.63 psi.g ~•;) NPSHr :3.1 ft Working pressure limit :175.0 psi.g Nss :6,165(US units) Suction pressure limit :30.00 psi.g MCSF :21.5 USgpm Hydrostatic test pressure :N/A Head,maximum,rated diameter :13.0 ft Driver&Power Data 't Head rise to shutoff :39.5% Driver sizing specification Rated power Flow,BEP :179 USgpm Margin over specification 0_0 Y % Flow ratio(rated/BEP) :57.6% Service factor :1.00 Diameter ratio(rated/max) :76.3% Power,hydraulic :0.24 hp Head ratio(rated dia/max dia) :48.6% Power,rated :0.42 hp . Viscous coefficients(CQ/CH/CE) :1.00/1.00/1.00 Power,maximum,rated diameter :0.51 hp Selection status :Acceptable Motor rating :0.50 hp/0.37 kW 30 - 71` _ _ -.. 1 t_; a_ { }± 4 -i _.. ` .- r7,00 in Maxi mum-r�-- •—'+t-�-- r; ' I : _ j ,=.ti r t - y ._�4 24_, -_ - '-1 - _ _ .. '-.-.�=Y-`"_, r- .-*--i_..,...Y µr-r-;-1-._.ce_.; , - .-.1_ ,..,--,:-.'µ --Eli cienc 1.... I_._.�. 18 t i I i • I i f �r.__ ' _``°- 1 i 3 / ' : Wit_.:"._ r'-T:c_--�''__ ,-u{_: � -iT_:f:= -w.-�-:-� - I -'^,--l-t - -t '-1i -i-- � t 1'`-�---i -� '-<--"t � �j.r._i-'��:'a'.7.w._,:-_`„-�-_:—i-�--_;-._}_: 6 15-5.34 in Rated__• ' ._'_. =r- �-� �- i_�-G-F_`__-._s._�.« =r_ ',-t-_,y...4.__-.._: fC.� �. -.;�....- . ,_�=--i ft. 12 '., .:_ _1.. b._.._ r_ .±5.00in Mini mum -'""1"-a . '_?'1__._=-,- -,- -- ::#...ter -:--1 _'._.-_,J . :TALI—. . mm. i "-C:'_1 S ; i _ 4. _ - -..:._i ' _71..._ _ , _� _.^h. i_.._ �. .L..—1- _:%:....i-i---;7_777 _ - .'.:..__.Jam. 3 t ±-± _ MM -1_.. . i —.1---... . 1...., ..i_:y —a- > -,.-,- -3: _- :.:" :A_''''. - _ yam- . ry�. E ......-1.- I I . ....1 r �- �,� �_-1-_ -----.: i.�- - w _ _-'-§-; _ _;.. i- :-�,-r� _, , _,_-r_•.-.--- 0i204060 � 0 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Capacity- USgpm • http://pacopumps.selector.intellequip.com/IEQHydSel/HydSel_JSP/App/performancedata:... 5/15/2002 IntellEquip Selector-Performance Datasheet Page 2 of 2 5.0 • : t_ t, 4 L j z - i -'�i . -r _� I--- - t i i i [ _ f-; 4 0 0.0 ' 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Capacity-USgpm i•�, 0.8 , , •, error .,�.�_ • �r T, F w�Q w. t a0.6 1 I. ro`wru =rru �rr�r GNUMEMIsam'imegine'm VS Mt SirYa i�'r� i _ _�i. VS Mt iir rrws�� w�tr�.rrrr.r i rus irarrrr�r�llrr• -- ar�rrwrrrrrrrrwrrrwarrwrrrrr • 0.4 rrwrr r r�rwr r�rs r wrrLrw r r fir �rTir 11 r� i rrs w r r rw wrryrr 1:1 r �crr MI CL �r�} i r'rli�irrTiirrrrwrrr r�iirrrrrrrrrrrsryrrr rrr=rr �rrt�r rrwr�r --r-'� L � 0.2 • f rr _�_; w�i. r� ti _ it z �iw-i_ �rr l r-_ 1 0.0 1_4 r 1�2 •; 7 { { _ _, err a� r {_ ...y I rrrr,�w -, 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Capacity-USgpm Pnvered IIate1.]T4ttipng©2002 All rights reserved. • • • • • http://pacopumps.selector.intellequip.com/IEQHydSel/HydSel_JSP/App/performancedata;... 5/15/2002 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 6.1 Geotechnical Engineering Design Review, Sherman Apartments, Renton, Washington, by Shannon &Wilson,Inc.,dated February 25, 2002 6.2 Geotechnical Engineering Study for the Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments by Earth Consultants Inc.,dated November 12, 1999 6.3 Review of Project Plans,Sherman Apartments,Renton,Washington,by Shannon&Wilson,Inc., dated April 18, 2002 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] 6 'I SHANNON iWILSON INC. StATTLE RicNI AND ANCHORAGE t . , • alatOY GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS DENVER •S•^ SAINT LOUIS BOSTON February 25, 2002 Mr.Eric Wagner SD Renton LLC 2100— 124th Avenue NE, Suite 100 l i Bellevue,WA 98005 RE: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN REVIEW, SHERMAN APARTMENTS,RENTON,WASHINGTON Dear Eric, In accordance with our proposal dated January 16, 2002, Shannon &Wilson has completed a review of the geotechnical elements of the Sherman Apartments project and has met with you and your project team to discuss the conditions and our recommendations. This letter summarizes that review and presents our recommendations. • SCOPE.OF OUR SERVICES Shannon &Wilson reviewed the geotechnical engineering report prepared by Earth Consultants and dated November 11, 1999 (Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Williams Avenue Apartments,Williams Avenue South,Renton,Washington,E-8890). We also reviewed existing plan sheets for the development, and met with the project team to review the project design and performance requirements. The Earth Consultants report included the results and an analysis of three borings and eight test pits. Those explorations were spaced generally around the northern half of the site. Only one boring was completed in the southern half. We completed no additional explorations. The conditions disclosed by the subsurface explorations were reasonably consistent,but there remains some potential that more variable conditions may exist in the unexplored areas on the south end. Except as noted by the discussions in the letter, we concur with the conditions, conclusions, and recommendations presented in the Earth Consultants report. 400 NORTH 34TH STREET• SUITE 100 21-1-09630-001 ^O BOX 300303 SEA T TLE• WASHINGTON 98103 20& 32.802C FAX 206-695.6777 TOO: i•600.833.6388 Mr.Eric Wagner w F NNON WILSON,INC. SD Renton LLC February 25, 2002 • Page 2 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS, FOUNDATION DESIGN,AND CONSTRUCTION The geotechnical report gave pile capacities for 12-inch and 14-inch augercast piles. The ensuing design showed 18-inch augercast piles supporting each column. We analyzed the conditions reported in the three soil borings, and re-estimated the capacities of the 12-inch augercast piles with the following results: for piles installed to a depth of 40 feet below the pile cap the allowable capacity is 45 tons; for piles installed to a depth of 50 feet below the pile cap the allowable capacity is 60 tons; and for piles installed to a depth of 60 feet below the pile cap the allowable capacity is 65 tons. This assumes that the competent soils begin within about • 15 feet of the bottom of the pile cap, and very dense soils begin within about 40 feet of the bottom of the pile cap (as disclosed by the three borings). These recommended capacities include a factor of safety of about 2 1/2. Confirmation of the deeper conditions and assumptions will be made during augercast pile installation. A Shannon &Wilson geologist or engineer needs to be at the site during pile installation to observe the conditions, and verify that the piles are capable of supporting the design loads. We concur with the Earth Consultants conclusion that the capacities may be 1 increased by one-third for short-term seismic loading, and that the piles should be spaced no closer than three diameters from each other to achieve the maximum allowable capacity. We also concur that we expect post-construction settlements of less than 1/2 inch. Note also that during construction it may be necessary to alter the installation sequence for adjacent piles, to allow the grout column in a newly installed pile to achieve the initial set. GARAGE SLAB DESIGN After considerable review and discussion of the requirements, costs for the required site preparation, and performance expectations of a slab-on-grade,the project team concluded that a structurally supported slab best met the support and performance requirements for the project. We expect the soil conditions exposed at the base of the excavation to be soft and wet. Summertime excavation should result in better conditions, but some overexcavation of soft soils 21-1-09630-001-L2/WP/LKD 21-1-09630-001 Mr.Eric Wagner HAN n i 4 f s SOr,.INC. SD Renton LLC February 25, 2002 Page 3 may be needed to allow construction of a firm working surface to support workers and equipment. For slab support,we require only a subgrade capable of properly supporting the curing concrete. To provide an appropriate capillary break and drainage layer for the subgrade drains the slab should be underlain by 6 inches of clean, well-graded, sand or sand and gravel with a maximum fines content of 3 percent or less. It will probably be necessary to install a separation fabric or geotextile between the exposed subgrade and the drainage layer to prevent contamination of the drainage layer by the underlying silty soils. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS Subslab and foundation drains are also required. We recommend that a network of drains be installed beneath the slab,with cross drains on about 50-foot centers. We also recommend that an external foundation drain be installed behind the wall. These drains should be perforated and placed on a bed of and surrounded by 6 inches of drainage material. All drains should be sloped to a sump and suitable discharge point. A cycling pump will probably be required to periodically discharge the collected groundwater. r ° To provide drainage behind the basement wall, we recommend either the installation of composite drainage material, such as miradrain, or placement of well-graded, free-draining sand or sand and gravel within 18 inches of the wall. Depending on the groundwater conditions disclosed during excavation, the composite drain could be affixed directly to the wall in 1- or 2-foot wide strips spaced about 8 feet apart. More extensive placement of the composite drain could be needed in areas of significant seepage. The composite drains typically come with a filter fabric on the "waffle" side that faces the soil backfill behind the wall. The composite drains should be connected to the perimeter foundation drain with a hard connection. If drainage fill is used instead,the fill should be continuous with and envelop the perimeter foundation drain. Note that this represents a slight shift from the discussions we last had on February 6. We believe that an exterior foundation drain is required, supplemented by either the miradrain strips 21-1-09630-001-L2/WP/LKD 21-1-09630-001 ZS Y d L SON Mr.Eric Wagner _ ���•,_�EINC. SD Renton LLC February 25, 2002 Page 4 or the drainage fill. The exterior foundation drain can slope to the same sump or discharge point as the interior drains,or it can be connected to the interior drains. EXCAVATION SUPPORT We expect that the excavation can be completed with careful open cuts. For planning, we recommend assuming that cuts as steep as 1 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (1H:1V)will be possible. There may be some areas that are wet, or susceptible to caving, that may require flatter slopes or slope protection. Exposed slopes may need to be covered with plastic to prevent softening by exposure to rainfall. We recommend that a precondition survey of the adjacent property and structures be completed, particularly noting the conditions on the north side of the site where a home and garage exist. Along the north side,the Contractor should be prepared to provide more extensive slope protection if excavation conditions warrant. For example,the exposed slope could be covered with a layer of shotcrete as a stronger deterrent to caving and rainfall degeneration. Note that we believe that shoring will not be necessary to complete the excavation,based on our understanding of the proximity of the property line to the edge of the development. If shoring is required,we can provide additional recommendations for design. If, during construction,it appears that some areas of the excavation require shoring,we will work with the Contractor to design and install an efficient system. OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS AND LIMITATIONS When the project plans and specifications are completed, Shannon &Wilson should be given an opportunity to review and comment on the geotechnical elements of the design. We should also be on site during excavation,pile installation,drainage material installation, and any other construction sequences related to the geotechnical design elements of the project. Except for the modifications noted herein,the discussion and recommendations contained in the referenced Earth Consultants report are appropriate and supported by Shannon &Wilson. We 21-1-09630-001-L2/WP/L1CD 21-1-09630-001 Mr. Eric Wagner SHANNON ON GWILSON,INC. ti) SD Renton LLC February 25,2002 Page 5 assume that their presentation of field and laboratory data is correct. We do not warrant that . information and have relied on it for the completion of our studies. Any variations in the conditions may not become evident until construction. Our discussion is for the exclusive use of the SD Renton LLC and its design and construction consultants for specific application to this project and site. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. Please call me at (206)695-6681 if you have any questions. Sincerely, .1�O G � 1/4 Q og )�` SHANNON & WILSON,INC. �� WAsk �- P. . , _ 2/2/22_ .{� 4, 22609 q ww id G. inter,P.E. Vice President ��SjONAL V,TA DGW/dgw I EXPIRES '7//a fib»._ Enclosure: Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report ,.,1 21-1-09630-001-L2IWP/LKD 21-1-09630-001 SHANNON &WILSON, INC. Attachment to and part of Report 21-1-09630-001 ' M. Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Date: February 25,2002 To: Mr.Eric Wagner SD Renton LLC IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CONSULTING SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND FOR SPECIFIC CLIENTS. Consultants prepare reports to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a civil engineer may not be adequate for a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise,your consultant prepared your report expressly for you and expressly for the purposes you indicated. No one other than you should apply this report for its intended purpose without first conferring with the consultant. No party should apply this report for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first conferring with the consultant. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS BASED ON PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS. A geotechnical/environmental report is based on a subsurface exploration plan designed to consider a unique set of project-specific factors. Depending on the project,these may include: the general nature of the structure and property involved;its size and configuration;its historical use and practice;the location of the structure on the site and its orientation;other improvements such as access roads,parking lots,and underground utilities;and the additional risk created by scope-of-service limitations imposed by the client. To help avoid costly , . roblems,ask the consultant to evaluate how any factors that change subsequent to the date of the report may affect the recommendations Unless your consultant indicates otherwise,your report should not be used:(1)when the nature of the proposed project is changed(for example, if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage, or if a refrigerated warehouse will be built instead of an unrefrigerated one,or chemicals are discovered on or near the site);(2)when the size,elevation,or configuration of the proposed project ' is altered;(3)when the location or orientation of the proposed project is modified;(4)when there is a change of ownership;or(5)for application to an adjacent site. Consultants cannot accept responsibility for problems that may occur if they are not consulted after factors which were considered in the development of the report have changed. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE. Subsurface conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Because a geotechnical/environmental report is based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration,construction decisions should not be based on a report whose adequacy may have been affected by time. Ask the consultant to advise if additional tests are desirable before construction starts; for example,groundwater conditions commonly varyseasonally. Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and natural events such as floods,earthquakes,or groundwater fluctuations may also affect _ subsurface conditions and,thus,the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical/environmental report. The consultant should be kept apprised of any such events,and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are necessary. MOST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS. `, Site exploration and testing identifies actual surface and subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken. The data were extrapolated by your consultant,who then applied judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions. The actual interface between materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than your report indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ from those predicted in your report. While nothing can be done to prevent such situations,you and your consultant can work together to help reduce their impacts. Retaining your consultant to observe subsurface construction operations can be particularly beneficial in this respect. I Page 1 of 2 1/2002 4 REPORT'S CONCLUSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY. I he conclusions contained in your consultant's report are preliminary because they must be based on the assumption that conditions revealed 1 through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Actual subsurface conditions can be discerned only during earthwork;therefore,you should retain your consultant to observe actual conditions and to provide conclusions. Only the consultant who prepared the report is fully familiar with the background information needed to determine whether or not the report's recommendations based on those conclusions are valid and whether or not the contractor is abiding by applicable recommendations. The ' • consultant who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of the report's recommendations if another party is retained to observe construction. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION. Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretation of a geotechnical/environmental report. To help avoid these problems,the consultant should be retained to work with other project design professionals to explain relevant geotechnical,geological,hydrogeological,and environmental findings,and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to these issues. 1 BORING LOGS AND/OR MONITORING WELL DATA SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE REPORT. Final boring logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation of field logs(assembled by site personnel),field test results, and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data. Only final boring logs and data are customarily included in geotechnical/environmental reports. These final logs should not,under any circumstances,be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings,because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. To reduce the likelihood of boring log or monitoring well misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to the complete geotechnical engineering/environmental report prepared or authorized for their use. If access is provided only to the report prepared for you,you should advise contractors of the report's limitations,assuming that a contractor was not one of the specific persons for whom the j: °.7" ')ort was prepared,and that developing construction cost estimates was not one of the specific purposes for which it was prepared. While _ ontractor may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party,the contractor should discuss the report with your consultant and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost estimating purposes. Some clients hold the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing the best available information to contractors helps prevent costly - construction problems and the adversarial attitudes that aggravate them to a disproportionate scale. READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY. 1 Because geotechnical/environmental engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion, it is far less exact than other design - disciplines.This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against consultants. To help prevent this problem, consultants have developed a number of clauses for use in their contracts,reports and other documents. These responsibility clauses are -- not exculpatory clauses designed to transfer the consultant's liabilities to other parties;rather,they are definitive clauses that identify where the consultant's responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all parties involved recognize their individual responsibilities and take appropriate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your report,and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your consultant will be pleased to give full and frank answers to your questions. The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the ASFE/Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences,Silver Spring,Maryland • Page 2 of 2 1/2002 6 7251 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED WILLIAMS AVENUE APARTMENTS WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON E-8890 November. 11, 1999 PREPARED FOR. DEAN-DEILY COMPANY 47),(h&e. A, Mitchell G. McGinnis Staff Geologist Ft. CA44/3' ,� $(C b ' '` oti Wtlit. Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Manager of Geotechnical Services Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT More construction problems are caused by site subsur- technical engineers who then render an opinion about face conditions than any other factor. As troublesome as overall subsurface conditions,.their likely reaction to ' subsurface problems can be.their frequency and extent proposed construction activity,and appropriate founda- have been lessened considerably in recent years,due in tion design- Even under optimal circumstances actual large measure to programs and publications of ASFE/ conditions may differ from those inferred to exist, The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how the Geosciences. qualified,and no subsurface exploration program,no matter how comprehensive,can reveal what is hidden by The following suggestions and observations are offered earth, rock and time. The actual interface between mate- to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays, rials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report cost-overruns and other costly headaches that can indicates.Actual conditions in areas not sampled may occur during a construction project. differ from predictions. Nothing can be done to prevent the ; unanticipated, but steps can be taken to help minimize their A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING impact.For this reason, most experienced owners retain their REPORT IS BASED ON A UNIQUE SET geotechnical consultants through the construction stage,to iden- tify variances,conduct additional tests which may be OF PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS needed,and to recommend solutions to problems encountered on site. A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur • - face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique set of project-specific factors.These typically include: SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS the general nature of the structure involved,its size and CAN CHANGE configuration;the location of the structure on the site Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly- and its orientation; physical concomitants such as access roads. parking lots, and underground utilities, changing natural forces. Because a geotechnical engi- and the level of additional risk which the client assumed neering report is based on conditions which existed at by virtue of limitations imposed upon the exploratory the time of subsurface exploration,construction decisions _ program.To help avoid costly problems,consult the should not be based on a geotechnical engineering report whose geotechnical engineer to determine how any factors adequacy may have been affected by time.Speak with the geo- which change subsequent to the date of the report may technical consultant to learn if additional tests are affect its recommendations. advisable before construction starts. -- Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and , - otherwise, your geotechnical engineering report should not natural events such as floods,earthquakes or ground- be used: water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions •When the nature of the proposed structure is and,thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical • changed, for example, if an office building will be report.The geotechnical engineer should be kept erected instead of a parking garage,or if a refriger- apprised of any such events,and should be consulted to ated warehouse will be built instead of an unre- determine if additional tests are necessary. frigerated one; • •when the size or configuration of the proposed GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ARE structure is altered; PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES •when the location or orientation of the proposed AND PERSONS • structure is modified; •when there is a change of ownership.or Geotechnical engineers' reports are prepared to meet •for application to an adjacent site. the specific needs of specific individuals. A report pre- ' Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility for problems pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade- which may develop if they are not consulted after factors consid- quate for a construction contractor.or even some other ered in their report's development have changed. consulting civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise. this report was prepared expressly for the dient involved - and expressly for purposes indicated by the dient. Use • MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS" by any other persons for any purpose,or by the dient ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES for a different purpose, may result in problems. No indi- E- ,., vidual other than the client should apply this report for its `�.:. Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions intended purpose without first conferring with the geotechnical only at those points where samples are taken,when engineer. No person should apply this report for any purpose they are taken. Data derived through sampling and sub- other than that originally contemplated without first conferring sequent laboratory testing are extrapolated by geo- with the geotechnical engineer. I il A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING der the mistaken impression that simply disdaiming re- ' PORT IS SUBJECT TO sponsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability.Providing c ;, ISINTERPRETATION the best available information to contractors helps pre- `=.3 Costly problems can occur when other design profes- vent costly construction problems and the adversarial ' sionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations attitudes which aggravate them to disproportionate of a geotechnical engineering report.7b help avoid scale.. , these problems,the geotechnical engineer should be READ RESPONSIBILITY retained to work with other appropriate design profes- i I sionals to explain relevant geotechnical findings and to CLAUSES CLOSELY review the adequacy of their plans and specifications • k relative to geotechnical issues. Because geotechnical engineering is based extensively i on judgment and opinion, it is far less exact than other I . design disciplines.This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted daims being lodged against geotechnical ;l ' , BORING LOGS SHOULD NOT BE consultants.To help prevent this problem,geotechnical engineers have developed model dauses for use in writ- SEPARATED FROM THE ten transmittals.These are not exculpatory dauses ENGINEERING REPORT designed to foist geotechnical engineers liabilities onto 1 someone else. Rather,they are definitive dauses which , Final boring logs are developed by geotechnical engi- identify where geotechnical engineers'responsibilities Ineers based upon their interpretation of field logs begin and end.Their use helps all parties involved rec- (assembled by site personnel)and laboratory evaluation ognize their individual responsibilities and take appro- of field samples.Only final boring logs customarily are priate action. Some of these definitive dauses are likely induded in geotechnical engineering reports.These logs to appear in your geotechnical engineering report,and I should not under any circumstances be redrawn for indusion in you are encouraged to read them dosely.Your eo- g g Y architectural or other design drawings, because drafters technical engineer will be pleased to give full and frank may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. answers to your questions. IAlthough photographic reproduction eliminates this :` oroblem,it does nothing to minimize the possibility of OTHER STEPS YOU CAN TAKE TO ` ntractors misinterpreting the logs during bid prepara- - ion.When this occurs,delays,disputes and unantici- REDUCE RISK I pated costs are the all-too-frequent result. Your consulting geotechnical engineer will be pleased to it To minimize the likelihood of boring log misinterpreta- discuss other techniques which can be employed to mit- Lion,give contractors ready access to the complete geotechnical igate risk. In addition,ASFE has developed a variety of Iengineering report prepared or authorized for their use. materials which may be beneficial.Contact ASFE for a Those who do not provide such access may proceed un- complimentary copy of its publications directory. . t. k . 3 I .I _ -- Published by "r THE ASSOCIATION ASFEOF ENGINEERING FIRMS PRACTICING IN THE GEOSCIENCES I 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G 106/Silver Spring,Maryland 20910/(301) 565-2733 : { II 0788/3M ; • t 'p 'i4\ ,,j Earth Consultants Inc. � Geotechnical Engineers.Geologists&Environmental Scientists November 11, 1999 E-8890 Dean-Deily Company 16720 Northeast .116th Street Redmond, Washington 98052 Attention: Mr. Ed Dean i Dear Mr. Dean: We are pleased to submit our report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Williams Avenue ` Apartments, Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington." This report presents the results of our field exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analyses. The purpose and scope of our study was outlined in our August 3, 1999 proposal. Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion the site can be developed generally as planned. The proposed building and underground parking excavation can be accomplished using a combination of conventional open cuts with temporary slopes and shoring consisting of cantilever soldier piles. he site is underlain by loose, compressible soils. In our opinion, support for the proposed building should be provided using an augercast pile foundation system. The slab-on-grade floors may be supported on a minimum of twelve (12) inches of structural fill. We appreciate this opportunity to be service to you. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Manager of Geotechnical Services MGM/KRC/bkm 1805-136th Place N.E.,Suite 201,Bellevue,Washington 98005 Bellevue(425)643-3780 FAX(425)746-0860 Toll Free(888)739-6670 TABLE OF CONTENTS E-8890 PAGE ` `, NTRODUCTION - 1 General 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 Surface 2 Subsurface 2 Groundwater 3 Laboratory Testing 4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 General 4 Shoring Recommendations 5 Cantilevered Soldier Piles and Lagging 6 Lagging Design 6 Lateral Resistance 6 Shoring Wall Drainage 7 Shoring Monitoring 7 Temporary Excavations 8 Construction Dewaterinq 8 Augercast Piles 9 Pile Installation 10 FD Pile Installation Monitoring 11 Subsurface Obstructions 11 Retaining Walls 11 Slab-on-Grade Floors 12 Seismic Design Considerations 12 Site Preparation and General Earthwork 13 Site Drainage 14 Utility Support and Backfill 15 LIMITATIONS 16 Additional Services 16 APPENDICES Appendix A Field Exploration IAppendix B Laboratory Test Results TABLE OF CONTENTS, Continued E-8890 —"ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Boring and Test Pit Location Plan Plate 3 Cantilever Soldier Pile Shorin.g Plate 4 Shoring Wall Drainage Plate 5 Utility Trench Backfill Plate Al Legend Plates A2 through A9 Test Pit Logs Plates A10 through A16 Boring Logs Plates B1 and B2 Grain Size Analyses Plates B3 and B4 Atterberg Limits Test Data GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • PROPOSED WILLIAMS AVENUE APARTMENTS WILLIAMS AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON E-8890 INTRODUCTION General This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study completed by Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) for the proposed Williams Avenue Apartments,Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington. The general location-of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1 . The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and based on the conditions encountered to develop geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site development. At the time our study was performed,the site, existing and proposed building locations, and our exploratory locations were approximately as shown on the Boring and Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. Project Description DWe understand it is planned to develop the site with a multi-level apartment building. Based L. on preliminary design information provided by the client, the proposed building will consist of four levels of living space above one level of below grade parking. The upper four floors will be constructed of relatively lightly-loaded wood frame construction and the parking level will consist of concrete frame construction with a slab-on-grade floor and post-tensioned slab above the garage level. Based on our experience with similar projects, we anticipate wall loads will be on the order of three to six kips per lineal foot, column loads on the order of two hundred fifty (250) to three hundred fifty (350) kips, and slab-on-grade floor loads will be about one hundred fifty (150) pounds per square foot. The parking garage will be accessed from an alley along the western property line that extends in a north-south direction from South 5th Street to*South 4th Street. In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, cuts of eight to twelve (12) feet below existing grade will be required. The excavation will extend to within two feet of a single- family residence and detached garage north of the site, to within ten (10) feet of a clinic to the south to the property line to the east side, and will extend five feet into an alley west of the site. Earth Consultants, Inc. • �-`-� GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY �,lbean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 2. If any of the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulted to review the recommendations contained in this report. In any case, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design. -SITE CONDITIONS Surface The subject site consists of a 40,250 square foot, rectangular shaped site located northwest of the intersection of South 5th Street and Williams.Avenue South in Renton (see Plate 1, Vicinity Map). The planned building area is bordered to the north by a single-familyresidence, to the south by the Renton Family Practice Clinic, to the west by an alley and to the east by Williams Avenue. The proposed building area contains an asphalt paved parking area, a garage and a medical laboratory building that will be removed in order to make way for the proposed development. The subject property is essentially flat with less than five feet of elevation change along the --.The axis of the site. The original topography has been previously graded in order to provide level parking areas for existing buildings and for buildings that formerly occupied the site. Portions of the site are currently developed and are covered with existing buildings and pavements. The site vegetation consists primarily of grass, several large trees and brush. Subsurface Subsurface conditions were explored by excavating nine test pits and drilling three borings at the approximate locations shown on Plate 2. Please refer to the Test Pit Logs, Plates A2 through A9 and Boring Logs, Plates A10 through A16, for a detailed description of the conditions encountered at each location explored. -A description of the field exploration methods is included in Appendix A. The following is a generalized description of the subsur- face conditions encountered. Earth Consultants. Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDYcan-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 3 In all our borings, we encountered a surficial layer of fill. The fill ranged from a minimum of six to eight inches thick in Test Pit TP-6 to a maximum of four and one-half feet thick in Test Pit TP-2. The fill consists of loose silty sand and silty gravel (Unified Soil Classification SM and GM, respectively) and..was similar to underlying native soils. The central portion of the site contained abundant concrete, wood and metal debris. Underlying the fill, we encountered interbedded sequences of silt (ML), elastic silt (MH) with organics, silty sand (SM), poorly graded gravel with silt and sand (GP-GM) and poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM). The soils in the southern portion of the site as encountered in Boring B-1 were very loose to loose to twenty-five and one half (25.5) feet below grade. The soils became very dense in Boring B-1 at thirty (30) feet below grade. The soils encountered in the northern portion of the site were typically very loose to medium dense to thirty-five (35) feet below grade. The soils became very dense at forty-three (43) feet below grade in Boring B-3. ,,Groundwater Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage was encountered in Test Pit TP-4 and at all of our boring locations. The seepage level ranged from twelve (12) feet below grade as observed in Test Pit TP-4 to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet as encountered in Borings B-1 and B-2. With seepage at this depth, we do not anticipate groundwater seepage will result in significant construction issues; however, the contractor should be aware that groundwater is not static. There will likely be fluctuations in the level depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface-water runoff, and other factors. Generally, the water level is higher and seepage rate is greater in the wetter winter months (typically October through May). Earth Consultants, Inc. I rT . EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY can-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 4 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples to verify or modify the field soil classification and to evaluate the general physical properties and engineering characteristics of the soil encountered. Visual field classifications were supplemented by grain size analyses and Atterberg Limits tests on representative soil samples. Moisture content tests were performed on all samples. The results of laboratory tests performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample depth on the individual boring and test pit logs or on a separate data sheet contained in Appendix B. It is important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test results and their use in guiding our engineering judgment. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. In accordance with our Standard Fee Schedule and General Conditions, the soil samples for this project will be discarded after a period of fifteen days following completion of this report nless we are otherwise directed in writing. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, a cut extending eight to twelve (12) feet below existing grade will be required. In our opinion, the excavation can be accomplished using a combination of conventional open cuts and temporary shoring. Where there is sufficient room on-site, or if permission can be obtained to extend cuts into public right-of- ways or adjacent properties, a conventional open cut can be used. The cut side slopes should not exceed 1 H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical). In areas where cuts of this inclination cannot be accomplished, we have included recommendations for temporary shoring consisting of - ' cantilever soldier piles with timber lagging. Due to the presence of loose, compressible soils underlying the site, in our opinion, building support should be provided using an augercast pile foundation system extending through the fill and compressible soils and bearing in the underlying dense to very dense native soils. We have provided axial and lateral capacities for twelve (12) and fourteen (14) inch diameter augercast piles. We can provide additional capacities for other pile sizes if necessary. Slab- on-grade floors may be supported on a minimum of twelve (12) inches of structural fill. Earth Consultants, Inc. • ;<--r. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 5 Our test pits and borings indicate the fill underlying the site contains concrete rubble, milled lumber, and other miscellaneous debris. The pile contractor should be prepared to pre- excavate or pre-drill as needed in order to get through debris in the fill. A procedure should also be established between the geotechnical engineer, structural engineers and pile installation contractor to allow for adjusting the pile locations if the debris cannot be removed in a timely manner so as to minimize delays in the pile installation process. During our field exploration we encountered groundwater at twelve (12) to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet below grade. Based on anticipated cuts of eight (8) to twelve (12) feet, we do not anticipate seepage will be encountered in the building area excavation. However, groundwater levels and seepage rates will vary depending on seasonal fluctuations in precipitation. If seepage is encountered it should be collected inside the excavation by sloping the excavation in order to provide positive drainage to one or more sump locations, where the , collected water can then be removed from the site. Depending on the amount of seepage actually encountered, it may be necessary to provide additional dewatering measures. We can provide recommendations for additional dewatering measures during construction as the actual pgroundwater conditions are revealed. This report has been prepared for specific application to this project only and in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area for the exclusive use of Dean-Deily Company and their representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report, in its entirety, should be included in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor. Shoring Recommendations In order to achieve construction subgrade elevations, a cut extending to a depth of eight to twelve (12) feet below grade is planned. Due to the depth of the cut and the proximity of the cut to property lines and adjacent structures, it appears shoring may be necessary to support a portion of the building excavation. Temporary shoring should consist of cantilevered soldier piles with wood lagging. Where there is sufficient room, a conventional open cut with temporary slopes may be used. Recommendations for temporary excavation slopes are provided below. Earth Consultants, Inc. EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY can-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 6 Cantilevered Soldier Piles and Lagging Cantilevered soldier pile walls are typically most economical for wall heights of twelve (12) feet or less. Walls with a horizontal backfill condition can be designed to resist an equivalent fluid pressure of thirty-five (35) .pounds per cubic foot (pcf).• This value is based on a horizontal backfill condition and assumes that surcharges due to backfill slopes, construction equipment, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressure. We anticipate there will be surcharges from the existing buildings on the north and south sides of the planned excavation. We should provide surcharge loads from the adjacent structure during the shoring design process. Hydrostatic pressure should be alleviated by seepage between the lagging. A typical pressure distribution for cantilever wall design is included as Plate 3. Lagging Design 74.-" or temporary shoring applications, the earth pressure between the soldier piles can be reduced by one-half to account for soil arching in the lagging design. Voids between the lagging and retained soil greater than one inch in width should be backfilled with sand or pea gravel. The void spaces should be backfilled progressively as the excavation deepens. The backfill material should not allow the potential for hydrostatic pressure to build up behind the walls. An impermeable backfill material such as lean-mix concrete or control density fill should not be used. Lateral Resistance Lateral restraint at the bottom of the shoring walls will be provided by passive soil pressure - against the embedded length of the soldier piles beneath the bottom of the excavation. A passive pressure equivalent to a fluid with a unit weight of three hundred fifty (350) pcf may be used for design. The passive resistance may be applied to twice the soldier pile diameter. The passive pressure should be neglected in the upper two feet of the excavation to allow for disturbance of the excavation surface. Mobilization of the full passive pressure assumes the ground surface inside the excavation will be horizontal for a distance of at least four times the depth of the soldier pile penetration. ECI should be contacted to provide revised design values if this is not the case. Earth Consultants, Inc. • , GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY — }Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 7 Shoring Wall Drainage The joints between the lagging will allow water to seep through the shoring and reduce the potential for hydrostatic pressure to build up behind the shoring. However, the permanent basement walls or concrete facings,applied directly to the shoring wall will block this drainage. In order to maintain drainage a continuous sheet drain incorporating a filter fabric such as Miradrain 6000, or approved equivalent should be applied to the shoring wall prior to constructing the finished wall. The Miradrain should extend the full height and width of the shored face. The Miradrain should be connected to a tightline drain installed along the base of the wall to collect and remove any seepage. A typical detail showing the sheet drain and tightline installation is included as Plate 4. Shoring Monitoring Whenever excavations are made adjacent to existing streets, utilities and structures, there is the potential for movement. A monitoring program should be established so that movements are detected early, to allow for remedial actions to be taken, if necessary. The monitoring program should include optical surveying of adjacent streets and buildings to detect any horizontal or vertical movement. Movement of the wall should be monitored by placing survey points on the top and bottom of each soldier pile. The survey for these points may be performed by the general contractor or surveyor, with the reduced survey data transmitted to ECI for review. The survey points should be monitored on a daily basis during excavation and weekly until the shoring loads are transferred to the permanent structure. All readings should be promptly provided to our office for review. A string-line should also be established along the top of the soldier piles to measure deflections at the top of the piles. The string-line should be measured on a daily basis during the excavation and then twice-a-week until the shoring loads are transferred to the permanent structure. Earth Consultants. Inc_ EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY can-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 8 Temporary Excavations If sufficient room is available on-site or if permission can be obtained to extend excavation slopes into public right-of-ways or adjacent properties, it should be possible to accomplish portions of the excavation using conventional open cuts with temporary slopes. The inclination of temporary slopes is dependent on several variables, including the height of the cut, the soil type and density, the presence of groundwater seepage, construction timing, weather, and surcharge loads from adjacent structures, roads and equipment. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state (WISHA) and Federal (OSHA) safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from our field exploration and laboratory testing, the native silty sand with gravel would be classified as Type B based on Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N. Temporary cuts greater than four feet in height in Type B soils should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1 H:1 V. ''''',4tecause of the many variables involved,the inclination of temporary excavation slopes should • e evaluated during construction, as the actual soil conditions become more apparent. The preceding information has been provided solely as a service to our client. Under no circumstances should this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. Construction Dewaterinq In our borings and test pits, we encountered moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at twelve (12) to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet below existing grade. Based on anticipated cuts of eight (8) to twelve (12) feet, there will be a potential for seepage to be encountered in the excavation, especially if construction occurs during the wet season and when groundwater conditions are relatively high. If seepage is encountered in the building excavation, it should be controlled by sloping the base of the excavation and using pumps to collect and remove the seepage. Trenches may be necessary to direct seepage to the pump locations. If the seepage cannot be adequately controlled with these measures, then alternative dewatering measures may be necessary. We can provide additional dewatering recommendations during construction, as the actual groundwater conditions are realized. Earth Consultants, Inc_ EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY \=. can-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 9 The groundwater conditions may destabilize the excavation subgrade. In order to maintain a stable base for construction equipment and the pile installation equipment, it may be necessary to place a mat of quarry spalls or recycled concrete across the excavation. A contingency in the construction budget should be provided for stabilizing the excavation base. Augercast Piles Due to the presence of loose, moderately compressible soils underlying the site, building support should be provided using an augercast pile foundation extending through the loose and compressible soils and bearing in the underlying dense to very dense native soils. We are providing allowable axial, uplift, and lateral pile capacities for twelve (12) and fourteen (14) inch diameter augercast piles. We can provide load capacities for other pile diameters, if needed. Augercast piles should extend at least five feet into the dense to very dense native soils which were encountered at forty-five (45) feet below existing grade in Boring B-3. For twelve (12) nd fourteen (14) inch augercast piles extending at least five feet into the bearing layer, the ,, ollowing axial and uplift capacities can be used. Pile Capacities Pile Diameter Axial Uplift 12 inch 30 tons 15 tons 14 inch 50 tons 20 tons These capacities may be increased by one-third for short=term seismic loading conditions. No reduction in pile capacity is required if the piles are installed on a center-to-center spacing of three pile diameters. Earth Consultants, Inc. --,\3EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY `4 -,KK Jean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 10 Lateral pile capacity is generally governed by deflections at-the top of the pile which is dependent on pile stiffness with respect to the surrounding soil conditions in the upper portion of the pile, the pile length, and degree of fixity at the top of the pile. In our opinion, a lateral pile capacity of ten kips may be used for design. Given a ten kip lateral load, maximum pile deflections are estimated to be 0.5 inch. Additional lateral resistance can also be provided using the passive pressure acting on grade beams. Provided grade beams are backfilled with structural fill, an allowable passive resistance of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used. If sufficient lateral resistance cannot be achieved, batter piles may be used. If batter piles are necessary, ECI should be contacted to provide addition recommendations for maximum batter and lateral capacity. We estimate total settlement of single augercast piles will be on the order of one half inch. We estimate differential settlements should be less than one quarter inch. Pile Installation lie piles should be installed by a contractor experienced in the successful installation of )ugercast piles. The piles should be installed with a continuous-flight hollow stem auger equipment specifically designed for installation of auger placed grout-injected piles. The grout injection point should be at the bottom of the auger bit below the cutting teeth. The contractor should supply sufficient auger length and drilling capacity to extend the piles an additional ten feet, if unanticipated conditions are encountered. Each pile should be drilled and completely filled with grout in an uninterrupted operation. The grout should be placed under a pressure of two hundred (200) psi in order to ensure adequate bonding with the bearing soils. The grout pump should have a visible grout pressure gauge to verify adequate pressure is being obtained. The pump should also have a counter so the volume of grout pumped for each pile can be calculated. -The auger hoisting equipment should be capable of withdrawing the auger smoothly, at a constant rate without jumps or stops. -A positive grout head of at least ten feet should be maintained to prevent caving and voids. This can be accomplished by directing the contractor to slow up the auger withdrawal rate such that a column of grout extends at least ten feet above the auger tip. Earth Consultants, Inc. EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY can-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 11 Pile Installation Monitoring As it is not possible to observe the completed pile below the ground, judgment and experience must be used as the basis for determining the acceptability of a pile. Therefore, all piles should be installed under the full-time observation of a representative of ECI. This will allow us to evaluate fully the contractor's operation, to collect and interpret the installation data, and to verify bearing stratum elevations. Furthermore, we will also understand the implications of variations from normal procedures with respect to the design criteria. The contractor's equipment and procedures should be reviewed by ECI before the start of construction. Subsurface Obstructions As previously discussed, localized areas within the site contain concrete, milled lumber, metal and other miscellaneous debris. The pile installation contractor should be aware of the potential for encountering obstructions and should be prepared to pre-excavate or pre-drill to " et through obstructions. In our opinion, it would also be prudent to have an established procedure developed with the pile contractor, structural engineer and geotechnical engineer to resolve issues related to relocating piles during construction without delaying the installation. Retaining Walls Retaining walls constructed against temporary shoring should be designed for the same earth pressures as the shoring walls. Free-standing retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. Walls that are designed to yield can be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pcf. If walls are to be restrained at the top from free movement, the equivalent fluid weight should be increased to fifty (50) pcf. These values are based on horizontal backfill and that surcharges due to backfill slopes, hydrostatic pressures,traffic, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressure. 'tiff ) Earth Consultants, Inc. EOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY can-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 12 In order to reduce the potential for hydrostatic forces building up behind the walls, free- standing retaining walls should be backfilled with a suitable free-draining material extending at least eighteen (18) inches behind the wall. The remainder of the backfill should consist of structural fill. The free-draining backfill should conform to the WSDOT specification for gravel backfill for walls (WSDOT 9-03.12(2). A rigid, Schedule 40, perforated PVC drain pipe should ' be placed at the base of the wall and should be surrounded by a minimum of one cubic foot per lineal foot with three-eighths inch pea gravel. cc:, Retaining walls cast against the temporary shoring should utilize a continuous sheet drain as previously discussed in the preceding Shoring Drainage section. Slab-on-Grade Floors Slab-on-grade floors should be supported on at least twelve (12) inches of structural fill. Disturbed subgrade soil must either be compacted in place or overexcavated and replaced with structural fill. A woven geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 600X may be necessary to stabilize he excavation subgrade prior to placement of the twelve (12) inches of structural fill. f4, Slab-on-grade floors should be designed by the structural engineer based on the anticipated loading and the subgrade support characteristics. A modulus of vertical subgrade reaction of L. two hundred fifty (250) pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for design. The slab should be provided with a minimum of six inches of free-draining sand or gravel. In c_ areas where slab moisture is undesirable, a vapor barrier such as •a 6-mil plastic membrane may be placed beneath the slab. Two inches of damp sand may be placed over the membrane I' for protection during construction and to aid in curing of the concrete. Seismic Design Considerations The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone 3 in the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with regularity, however, the majority of 1 these events are of such low magnitude they are not felt without instruments. Large earthquakes do occur, as indicated by the 1949, 7.2 magnitude earthquake in the Olympia area and the 1965, 6.5 magnitude earthquake in the Midway area. Earth Consultants, Inc. 1 L�. T GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY '—'Dean-Deily Company - E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 14 Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under buildings, slabs or other load-bearing areas. Structural fill under floor slabs and footings should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent _ of its laboratory maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or hear their optimum moisture content. Fill under pavements and walks should also be placed in horizontal lifts and compacted to 90 percent of maximum density except for the top twelve (12) inches which should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density. During dry weather, most soils which ,are compactible and non-organic can be used as structural fill. Based on the results of our laboratory tests, the on-site soils at the time of our exploration appear to be near the optimum moisture content and should be suitable for use in their present condition as structural fill, provided the grading operations are conducted during dry weather. However, the native soils contain more than five percent fines and will degrade if exposed to excessive moisture, and compaction and grading will be difficult if the soil moisture increases significantly above its optimum condition. N )f the on-site soil is exposed to moisture and cannot be adequately compacted then it may be necessary to import a soil which can be compacted. During dry weather, non-organic compactible soil with a maximum grain size of six inches can be used. Fill for use during wet weather should consist of a fairly well graded granular material having a maximum grain size of six inches and no more than 5 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction. A contingency in the earthwork budget should be included for this possibility. Site Drainage Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage was encountered at four of our subsurface exploration locations. Heavy groundwater seepage was encountered at twelve (12) to thirteen and one-half (13.5) feet below existing grade. If seepage is encountered in the excavation, the bottom of the excavation should be sloped to one or more shallow sump pits. The collected water can then be pumped from these pits to a positive and permanent discharge, such as a nearby storm drain. Depending on the magnitude of seepage, it may be necessary to provide additional dewatering measures. Earth Consuhants, Inc. :GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Jean-Deily Company _ E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 15 The appropriate locations of subsurface drains, if needed,should be established during grading operations by ECI's representative at which time the seepage areas, if present, may be more clearly defined. Water must not be allowed to stand in areas where foundations or slabs are to be constructed. Loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Final site grades must allow for drainage away from the building foundations. The ground should be sloped at a gradient of three percent for a distance of at least ten feet away from the building, except in paved areas, which can be sloped at a gradient of two percent. - ' Perimeter drainage should be provided using the shoring wall drainage and retaining wall drains as previously discussed. Utility Support and Backfill -,,-, Based on the soil conditions encountered, the soils expected to be exposed by utility excavations should provide adequate support for utilities. However, the loose condition of some of the soils and the potential for a relatively high groundwater table may result in de- , stabilizing of the trench bottom as the trench is excavated. Where loose soils or heavy ' groundwater seepage is encountered, remedial measures such as overexcavating soft soil or tamping quarry spells into the trench bottom may be required. Caving of trench walls should be anticipated where the trenches encounter groundwater. Dewatering may also be required. Utility trench backfill is a primary concern in reducing the potential for settlement along utility alignments, particularly in pavement areas. It is important that each section of utility line be adequately supported in the bedding material. The material should be hand tamped to ensure support is provided around the pipe haunches. Fill should be carefully placed and hand ' „ tamped to about twelve inches above the crown of the pipe before heavy compaction equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than twelve inches. A typical trench backfill section and compaction requirements for load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on Plate 5. ,,,-, Earth Consultants, Inc. • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY ` Jean-Deily Company _ E-8890 November 11, 1999 Page 16 I LIMITATIONS Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed, selective laboratory testing and engineering analyses, the design information provided us, and our experience and engineering judgment. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings and test pits. Soil and groundwater conditions between borings and test pits may vary from those encountered. The nature and extent of variations between our exploratory locations may not become evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations of this report and to modify or verify them in ;1 writing prior to proceeding with the construction. -additional Services As the geotechnical engineer of record, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation ; recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the construction specifications. ECI should also be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. We do not accept responsibility for the performance of the foundation or earthwork unless we are retained to review the construction drawings and specifications, and to provide construction observation and testing services. • Earth Consultants, Inc. K< � x.a - S r-3,. �`f I zi 1 1 'I rr t � ,:✓v� _.tales+::` k�°-` •r l p il• °�..:<° +ter- - �r �' ��i'. �%'`r - • .f {� -.r'y�ps�^.�',,` - cr,' .5?;.4�u fir::%. ,`�? .-c�si�:.P'.�:. J. _-y •xit'<,t. �:r:.'.�9 �':fit._ ''"��' 'rq� ii :,s>_`{ � .;./Soa:.:'�1..f:,.:�;.5;- - d�,... ��. 4" G'' x t ',.Me.<„:'tA,Fr�'/ 3. •}' �.,•r.'`s'°,z :h•Y': .L,.4; •,...." ''. `F,,' .y''del, ,,_,:,-- /—`..' • + " ifx.,..' ,- -jr xs' 9:S: x?".&-i...F Ncy.; �t . ale 1%.,.:* -113 ;h.ter.':' -., er' 'ay"s�ril '7 •.31 4r N ? .�. 3c z' - .� } E �t .•. •:• -:\tj {;,-lr .,, ,'�.''+m ,wl .;:gip f +;4 z 3'+ 41' ';s ,:+ „y Y;;;1 T u, ,•S:^' > {",` .a.... •4.,.4 ,1 C faro!Y t, 1�„t ,, ,. Micig. .S $' ,,A kR µ '..,•'r„‘. V.,`,. ''. . .,tt •', fol riac,- Essarr 7..y i ,. FL1RF��;�/ •{` 5` , >• /i' AIW C'•";R f' c •.r i�uY�y� -i O kyi', , s:� k a-r v�',3�U?s.. rt Yr n. ;:;=;, :� � 9� x.., ��' f 3,�/,{ a+r x 7gi'�g �"�}s���.'•$.�-L+'=�y'Ei�s� 2 � -.ta'nt.'�'`.� y�a��. d' Y''��=o v� } L. '�' _ a�-:a ��'sztii;'d" 'it�f'y iii r ,' + 1 •.. � N+ r ( �v�,. „t '4'k°l.:..e*'2"r & .,�! tsF alr•47 kl-W < _ - Off <7 c ,--.� � �..,,. w � and.x i 4. s ; r- y ai i rrk :������.7 [�����+++ ;&:. C rfa �E'�F"`' .z.•,$ 1, sr ,cf1. ''- x �+F - �� "'' . r% 4 r a V im"'.„,. ` { 1,arq _ '4�a ' Pr2:• • 41 W A ,, , b.`* , _• —ii? 4 ;r' aXs.fi.7::-ry $, r ,4 ,- , • .Ti � y� y�� ���, "�Y� �.j5' i2�� �� .y w5a`P d�`K�" �y T' �'.Ff� �� •{, D r0 t�r"" ...31 •Y , -1,,.- v' jy„ ,,,, 1f +'-J x,a� ,A �':0t�} j� �lE _ �i3 r:�,, fep*f s "1�n ' j �vq„ ? _r y t ,,---- `e•1..:°'Sj��i ..,, f — =>•-ac,'ab i,,,g J'WA??...._ 3 r !ice "••C� : i 'a$e a�:: �s N�gM.rp x E -,#� r ;-cif€,,:x � ✓ ,6i`,. a 3 y r -r_ * ' � -V 1 `1 x �� F ��ti ��f� 4 a �, Zg �y 3�1 :�l E � FIO'tit M _V .�5, ',J� 4m '.a, ",Ir 5 3_ , a Ka,`Yi��a'F � (�, h' f.I Jyf' 4 F dT 1 t 3 � r 2 ,,,._ sr ( � • } � f s`a r rr��.,�x �.x �, :rs�,h zc - fi rY �-- tya•a v3r s _ ,' ,- -,.- y4 ,farms # h SY . : iiii c ° ' 1 C s ` a A .T.. to '.;'vim'`i s xr -,-- at: •WG . ?_'. PAY"' 4•c' •'s r tw?�- .y)i�i L-��' -�� w. .9 sue, }# J., ,..' t./,. .• c fY ' a i '•' � fY"�f'�. �' 3 S �3} u f:"'... x, 6 {tf 6 +' f. i 3• l41Ffi a r .ter o '.�� qr.., n dr s.• i't "t: N - k '"e v o +s: as F 3^ d f },t NFIr . ,,-, n4 G 2� t 5 -' .. Fi+;•3 -i• s '3 _-fl'_,"0-s- ,c3R'tP. ''_` 't- 'f'�i 'y.�''a°Q [ ` �'Y `fr'.�1 'A ebs, c 1 r ,,#y� 5�; � F cR�• 'F.` "'<a `jr -r- 0 .,..i..�...'t+s p-F•' g. ..'.4 �.triio�•'6in'� -.�'* .•'d. f ° ,a r',,,,,4 e r•. .wn "ram'@.' 5" Orl • �'£ .tt•r?• .i`,*-�' }C'�Prs a,/.h a r/ "" - 3', .- 4 i., tir �y S • '� •1 E �r`5 ' �V . .. Fri rf:'n;,4 ,{, X i ' �.•,•,,,1Fs s 4,. �S}Tt`+7 v_ a 1; p , ,q,-%, �s7i y R i J .r � 'Li, _•'•• jvr{p P s E?x y nro ? °v -,. 7 F,s '&. M t . 3:a,3/';i.P-. �� ' „,,..,,,„,....„,,,.,„,,,,„ RN- X • ' 4 >r f' g oPs , l ._ SE 15? Si .. Y` sff-�,S`t ' d. � `s1Q C�.'s' I T l ` '�' +ia. �ry5i•.r �. Ys'-9 C �s � i �` • • rr .t to rif s ..` ''d s ' ''`y� w ,., -F-- „' ya'at04.0_, VI is. ,,t,,L '-'1'*-,.,,,„''' -,,,,,IRI,'V,r-yr,r5,-,..,fg,,,A-Z-y.,i, -:-.' ..r• •:,—,,,,...-7.i.- „,„„..., - (6�1 fi • r ,w -i• t� t,c,`' �.-s c .c - '�1. H Haim; `.i`Al ��'•..�f ..w .+ i -3 E dy-. "0. 14►, f1 � �i� Earth Consultants, Inc. Reference: 11�/\`'I�\`G� KingCounty/Map656 Engineers. ists&Environmental _M By Thomas Brothers Maps _ Dated 1999 Vicinity Map Williams Avenue Apartments Renton, Washington • NOTE:This plate may contain areas of color. ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent Drwn. GLS Date Sept. '99 Proj. No. 88901 misinterpretation of the information resulting from black&white reproductions of this plate. Checked MGM Date 9/21/99 Plate Existing • Residence& I I I Gaiege I I 1 I I 1 Existing 1 I 1 I I Residence 1 i .— ;) . — '— —T1-8 B-3l TP=1�t -f�- I I LjI _ffT f � t I i _I_ Approximate Scale . I i • I TP-6 -211 Uj 0 25 50 100ft. • .16 -IT- W ITP-7 t D — I i-I- -.- . - — - -. — - -I Z W I . 15 ogep. > 1 TP-SI ;tg :: •%, I a ng I lig.'s. I �Existing Q Garage .o°q ` I 2 LEGEND 9__— -- _ cret€ 7ebd&'. _. ` i. Q — T i—:— -3 i I } _i B-1-D. i-Approximate Location of ; ' .1 ECI Boring, Proj. No. I 1 - Existing ' i E-8890, Sept. & Oct. al 1 MedicalLab. el -.- - -I - -- - - i 1999 Ioi `' TP-1-f-Approximate Location of ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. 13 E-8890, Aug. 1999 - -1 — -: - - - - - -I Subject Site i I -.T 1 i B-1 12 1 1 Existing Building I ! L I I I I ' 1 i Proposed Building I l Fainting I i MedicalCtinA ; i 16 Lot Number // . I ! I I I J t1 did Earth Consultants, Inc. \I�Li t'ii iv 1 Geotechnical Engineers.Geologists&Environmental Scientists S. 5th STREET Boring and Test Pit Location Plan Williams Avenue Apartments NOTE:This plate may contain areas of color. Renton, Washington ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent ':`" misinterpretation of the information resulting -} from black&white reproductions of this plate. Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '99 Proj. No. 8890 Checked MGM Date 10/22/99 Plate 2 ,:.;/ Ground Surface - • (Sredharpac are to ecjacent structures to be evaluated on a case B 8Y cas,basis) \ A Active Earth ,. Pressure=35 DCf • r. - y Passive Earth :.. . . . .. . . H(ft) Pressure = . - .. _ s: ,3 O(D+2)psf • i-i K Base of Excavation 3. Neg'ectpassive h upper 2 fret j z F D(ft) , f: Notes: • Embedment depth(D)must also be sufficient to provide necessary vertical capacity. Minimum depth r • of 1.6(FI). • Passive Pressure assumed to act over two pile . diameters and includes factor-of-safety of 1.5. • See text of study for a detailed discussion of shoring. • \IIIi,1�i(1,��ih Earth Consultants, inc. Geolechnical Engineers,Geologists a Environmental Scientlsls CANTILEVER SOLDIER PILE SHORING - Williams Avenue Apartments Renton, Washington • Dnvn. GLS Date Nov.'99 Proj. No. 8890 Checked MGM Date 11/1 Q/99 Plate 3 i I.. WOOD LAGGING rf.:7•1. CONCRETE FACING r • ? ` ' CONTINUOUS MIRADRA.IN 6000 ; OR EQUIVALENT .=111 . 11L • NATIVE SOIL DI % . • SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOOR EXCAVATION . •• -1 • pu=U1 . \ I. --. -,: -;:::_ :.: ,..--_,•. III ,' i v -� ,• 17• e .'-•_•- - - O . . ' 111--Fir `^ PVC TIGHTLINE • n o a c ' J a- �� ill / r: - STRUCTURAL o ° , o FILL , • J DRAIN GRATE •''''''-', FOUNDATION • • ' n III—Itt —ill=III` • l —1i1-- NOTE: DRAIN THROUGH WALL SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT MIDDLE OF LAGGING. j iii 'A; !11\ SHORING WALL DRAINAGE si Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartment . WJ/ up !) GeolechNdFsgIncers.Gcolo4llsu&envhorvncn2lScirnIbzs Renton, Washington : , Proj. No. 8890 Drwn. GLS Date Nov. '99 Checked MGM Date 11/10/99 Plate 4 • Non-Load Supporting Floor Slab or Areas Roadway Areas r-D 1 1 _ I' •;;I Y 4<.'+ -' •try 0-1 • ° Varies ° ° 0 ,y0 ^0 0 0 o C - 95 0 o 0 • rJ FootM'1 Minimum ':s. 0 _ 4 Backfill s p Va ries es YK{ A ';!Z:Z- `- o PIPE m.o;': oe. p Q oq :; Bedding1; o• �'Q .!e op 'd. a -C Varies o.o.e•.o0o°•. oo0.. o.o0oae°ava=•c -0••-o:o-.0-•Q .00..• .,3•.o o O .o,o, o o �0Q•°• p. oo�o•,-.0• ooQ'oU.g o 00 .000°�o� .ac 4n Qo�o beOon•�r:o.0'Qo6•-;oa'o-o°coo V LEGEND: ,, :.;a:.••,.•. •.-r ; Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab , oo.o a°,e. r . ° , °. Base Material or Base Rock Backfill; Compacted On-Site Soil or Imported Select Fill Material as Described in the Site Preparation of the General Earthwork Section of the Attached'Report Text. 95 Minimum Percentage of Maximum Laboratory Dry Density as Determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557-78 (Modified Proctor), Unless Otherwise Specified in the Attached Report Text. ..o,o"C Bedding Material; Material Type Depends on Type of Pipe and 1-- p' Laying Conditions. Bedding Should Conform to the Manufacturers Recommendations for the Type of Pipe Selected. ./& •Ak 44\ TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL . •4 Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments I/ iiii NI CrOWChniCal EnginerTS.Gro ogtsts&Fnvironmrnnl S[irntKlS Renton, Washington ma Proj. No. 8890 I Drwn. GLS I Date Nov.'99 Checked MGM I Date 11/15/99 1 Plate 5 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION E-8818 Our initial field exploration was performed on August 30, 1999. At this time, subsurface conditions at the site were explored by excavating eight test pits to a maximum exploration depth of thirteen (13) feet below existing grade. The test pits were excavated by Northwest Excavating, subcontracted to ECI, using a rubber-tire backhoe. On September 15, 1999 we drilled two borings to a maximum depth of thirty-seven (37) feet below existing grade. We encountered refusal in Boring B-2 on a large log encountered at thirty-seven (37) feet below grade. These borings were drilled by Boretec using a B-24 trailer- mounted drill rig. A third boring was drilled to a depth of fifty-six and one half (56.5) below existing grade on October 20, 1999 to further evaluate subsurface conditions. This boring was drilled by Associated Drilling using a truck-mounted drill rig. Approximate boring and test pit locations were estimated by pacing from the site features depicted on a site plan provided by the client. The elevations were estimated based on the 1994 United States Geological Survey Renton Quadrangle Map. The locations and elevations of the borings and test pits should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. These approximate locations are shown on the Boring and Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. Drhe field exploration was continuously monitored by a geologist from our firm who classified she soils encountered, maintained a log of each boring and test pit, obtained representative samples, measured groundwater levels, and observed pertinent site features. The samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System which is presented on Plate Al, Legend. Representative soil samples were placed in closed containers and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. Logs of the test pits are presented on Plates A2 through A9, logs of the borings are presented - on Plates Al 0 through A16. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory examination and tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual. The borings were drilled using hollow stem augers. In each boring, Standard Penetration , Tests (SPT) were performed at selected intervals in general accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1586. The split spoon samples were driven with a one hundred forty (140) pound hammer freely falling thirty (30) inches. The number of blows required to drive the last twelve (12) inches of penetration are called the "N-value". This value helps to characterize , the site soils and is used in our engineering analyses. These results are recorded on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths. Earth Consultants, Inc. MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL SYMBOL ,--1 C] OA ( GW Well-Graded Gravels.Gravel-Sand Gravel Q o Q e Y o gw Mixtures, Little Or No Fines And Clean Gravels. n n n Gravelly (little or no fines) ` M. 4 GP Poorly-Graded Gravels,Gravel- Coarse Soils $ • I • I; gp Sand Mixtures.Little Or No Fines Grained f Soils More Than ( 'I GM Silty Gravels,Gravel-Sand- 50% Coarse Gravels With gm Silt Mixtures Fraction Fines(appreciable Retained On amount of fines) GC Clayey Gravels.Gravel-Sand- No.4 Sieve gc Clay Mixtures • 'a eo. . SW Well-Graded Sands, Gravelly Sand a , • Clean Sand o e a o c SW Sands, Little Or No Fines r And (little or no fines) • '�•• , Sandy :0•:•:::�r:,,$r :;. More Than ;':L::.f.V i:,•>• SP Poorly Graded Sands, Gravelly Soils _A: ♦r< 50% Material :��`%'Q',�i•,.`•:`=:��fr. Sp Sands, Little Or No Fines Than .T V(y Larger More Than # ?;:= <'[: !—_-- ;;; CoarseSilty Sands Sand Silt Mixtures raction Sands WithSm • Fines(appreciable • ..,i.. ,:;.. Passing No.4 amount of fines) "i�.;>'( ter•"::' SC }`:y>�::�: Clayey Sands, Sand Clay Mixtures Sieve "::',., f.':: SC ML Inorganic Silts&Very Fine Sands,Rock Floi.r,Silty- II I ml Clayey Fine Sands;Clayey Silts w/Slight Plasticity Fine Silts Inorganic Clays Of Low To Medium Plasticity, Grain1 Liquid Limit �� CL i Soils fuid Clays Less Than 50 CI Gravelly Clays, Sandy Clays, Silty Clays, Lean I IIl I I OL Organic Silts And Organic i I I I i I I I 1 I OI Silty Clays Of Low Plasticity MH 11 Inorganic Silts.Micaceous Or Diatomaceous Fine More Than mh Sand Or Silty Soils 50% Material Silts Liquid Limit dy_ Smaller Than And • CHInorganic Clays Of High No.200 Sieve Clays Greater Than 50 Ch Plasticity, Fat Clays Size / //�� OH Organic Clays Of Medium To'High Oh Plasticity, Organic Silts '_i,"f •`%+2 PT Peat,.Humus, Swamp Soils Highly Organic Soils r� `‘r, `t,, `‘i,, pt With High Organic Contents Topsoil 'y y 4,4' Humus And Duff Layer �•�•�•�•••• ♦♦♦♦♦♦• Highly Variable Constituents Fill ♦♦♦•♦♦ J 1 The discussion in the text of this report Is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the material presented in the attached logs. DUAL SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderline soil classification. C TORVANE READING,tsf I 2"O.D.SPUT SPOON SAMPLER qu PENETROMETER READING,tsf t W MOISTURE,%dry weight 11 24"I.D.RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER • P SAMPLER PUSHED * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED i WATER OBSERVATION WELL pcf DRY DENSITY,lbs.per cubic ft. LL UQUID UMIT,% 2 DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER PI PLASTIC INDEX DURING EXCAVATION 1 SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER LEVEL W/DATE 1... ' I1110 b �� �• Earth Consultants Inc. LEGEND ) (ixNrxiurk:d l9 ighrx.-rs.Gou4ugISIS&tirivirurpr1 11:11 SI-101161S Proj. No.8890 'Date Sep t. '99 'Plate Al Test Pit Log Project Name: - Shed of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 • Date: Test Pit No.: / Job No. Logged by: 8/30/99 TP-1 8890 MGM Excavation Contactor. - Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' Notes: O O m Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4":grass „ 2 General W m E 2- E c E Notes (%) 6- m o in rn .�• — •��� SM Brown silty SAND,loose,moist(Fill) •♦•♦+ ♦♦♦♦♦i ♦♦ 6.6 ♦♦Q♦♦ ♦�•H 2 GP Gray poorly graded GRAVEL,loose,moist(Fill) ♦♦•♦•♦ ♦♦ i, 4 ML Mottled.brown SILT with sand, loose, moist 32.2 5 -iron oxide staining 6 8 I ilio• : i s GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose,moist 5.4 lk III • o i;; fin 10 — -iron oxide staining • 1 , t t -7% es • , t 12 Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater . encountered during excavation. NOTE:Elevations estimated from 1994 U.S.G.S.Renton Quadrangle Topographic Map .l c. m 0 . U W O. " - .f��r;.. 444, Test Pit Log m I '1- �� ' Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments \�i�l����f�r��i��� �'�����, s' &F"`"�°'""�"�""""�' Renton,Washington _i ~ Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A2 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: . 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-2 m,' Excavation Contactor. - Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' Notes Q L m Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4":grass Notes General % c a o 2- N m ii E co >. ( ) LOCO � ♦•♦• • � ML Brown sandy SILT,loose, moist(Fill) •• ♦♦•♦♦ 2 — ♦♦♦ 22.3 •�♦�♦� �.��•� 3 SP Brown poorly graded SAND,loose,moist(Possible Fill) •♦♦♦♦♦ �♦�♦�♦ 4 — . •♦♦ 5 ML Mottled brown SILT with sand,loose,moist l 6 - ' 7 -loose to medium dense • I I GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,medium dense, moist g c 11 3.7 • i� • 4 . '.-) s -iron oxide staining • ill s.4 ! 10 -8%fines -. • 11 Test pit terminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater encountered during excavation. '' W r g m H Q U w fg ill>%�� E11: 46111% Test Pit Log „s. aa=1 a, ! Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments 1 wilt' v1!�tir'I ccolechnical Frignects.a.''°sisi'&B"''"" "`nra's"""'t„ Renton,Washington _ WProj.No_ 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A3 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by. Date: • Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-3 • \, j Excavation Contactor: . Ground Surface Elevation: _fi NW Excavating 30' Notes W o m o Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil and Duff 8"-12" NotesG ! % T p E co a ..•�� ML Dark brown SILT with sand,loose,moist(Fill) •••• ••� 1 •••••• • ' 2 ML Brown SILT with sand, loose,moist 3 221 • 1 4 SP-SM Brown poorlygraded SAND with silt,loose,moist . a 5 — '! ML Mottled brown SILT,loose, moist • II 1 6 7 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose to medium dense,moist 7 it 8 ;10 b * 10 . Mel ,411 : _ 11 — • 12 - 48.8 • r _ 1 1 1 1 13 MH Mottled brown and gray elastic SILT,soft,wet,contains organics Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater !' encountered during excavation. • • • ,r co . ci t, 'a 0 W 07 ArN.. m hfo.,v pl: 4444 Test Pit Log s Earth Consultants Inc_ Williams Avenue Apartments VIII(, rif mi// Co ImlcalFnghx)s.CcologIsis&PrvtmrtmeralSckrtNs• Renton,Washington 4 Proj.No. 8890 I Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A4 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log _. Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-4 Excavation Contactor - Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating - 30' 11 Notes: • /I.. _ m o surface Cond1tions: Depth of Topsoil 6"-8":grass ' Notesl W (7° T o� R ? O GeneraN . : ML Dark brown SILT with sand,loose, moist(Fill/Topsoil) o��•♦ I ML Brown SILT,loose,moist 2 3 26.0 4 SP-SM Brown poorly graded SAND with silt, loose,moist •'0 5 -iron oxide staining ML Mottled brown SILT with sand, loose,moist i 6 -iron oxide staining r GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt, loose to medium dense, moist U I* 2.5 0!0• 7 -very dark iron oxide staining from 7'to maximum depth explored • • �n:. . 1 •• 10 — III 3.9 ;• t _ -becomes wet at 11' �� 12 -heavy seepage at 12' I Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 12.0 feet during excavation. I - r W 0. U W l'n' fpt: 4111‘ Test Pit Log °° Q Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments " � 4! V f�,ir1 GaatchnlcalFnpMnaaGeoiosIsA6FmIronmerxalxYentlgs Renton,Washington wProj.No. 8890 Dorn_ GLS Date Sept_'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A5 • Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of -^ information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pd No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-5 Excavation Contactor. - Ground Surface Elevation: NW E cavating 30' Notes: L Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4" Notes General W o N •• SM Brown sitty SAND with gravel,loose,moist(Fill) ML Brown SILT with sand,loose,moist 20.0 2 3 4 -becomes mottled 5 6 7 -dark iron wade staining 8 -contains interbeds of poorly graded gravel and poorly graded sand 9.2 9 LL413 PL=42 76.3 11111 10 MH Gray elastic SILT,soft,wet,contains organics P1=18 Test pit terminated at 10.5 feet below existing grade due to messive caving.No groundwater encountered during excavation. • it m _ m 0 , v W �!:: 0. 'AV TestPit Log Melt: `�� Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments r n WI/ \v1 \iiF1/ GoxechnicalFirAnws.ccobsisissmvironmenraiscirmtwsRenton,Washington Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A6 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-6 Bo avation Contactor _ • Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 30' Notes: General W — L a, Surface conditions: Depth of Topsoil/Fill 6"-8" • Notes (%) o" T u0 v) CO • SM Brown silty SAND,loose,moist — 1 -contains mottled silt interbeds • 13.2 2 — -33%fees -mottled 3 4 -mottled r 5 — ;r 6 — 7" i • I GP Reddish brown poorly graded GRAVEL, loose, moist -dark iron oxide staining trt 8 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose to medium dense, moist 3.1 • �N � 9 — I I 10 — 111 -becomes wet 70.5 MH Blue,gray elastic SILT,soft,wet 12 -contains organics Test pit terminated at 12.5 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. k9 g hos m: ,.4k Test Pit Log Ow l(f r`4 f Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments `III� \%l�/ \ 1/ GcOreci ink-al Fnanmtra cr[47gsis 6 FiwlmnMrnral5Chs7rt Renton,Washington v_No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A7 face conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and 't. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of "rn. vi presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test PA No.: 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-7 .,` Excavation contactor Ground Surface Elevation: NW E cavating 30' V` Notes: _ „ Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4"-6" General W 13-E m it E Notes (%) 6 • ❑ co D rn ♦ ; • - .• 1 SM Dark brown silty SAND,loose,moist(Fill) ♦....• SM Brown silty SAND, loose, moist . 2 -interbeds of silt and poorly graded sand 3 — 9.2 4 . 5 30.0 6 ML Mottled SILT with sand,loose,moist 7 • ,k Ir-`�I 8 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt,loose to medium dense, moist I i • 4, 9 6.1 lb 110 — -11%fines -dark iron oxide staining increase in gravel • i . -1-1 -becomes wet at 10.5' . •M ,ti I 12 — 62.0 1 111111 ML Blue gray elatsic SILT,soft,wet,contains organics 13 Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade.No groundwater encountered during mavation. _Th -It co 0 0 d w - Test Pit Log Ole 01010 ,i f Earth Consultants Inc. - Williams Avenue Apartments .._k? '1IP' NI(/' \�rL/ GworcimicalF"si`""'S'C.-N4t"'&EnvImonKnrdlSCYwnros Renton,Washington W I Proj.No. 8890 Own. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A8 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modfied by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. ; 11 Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: :--'r.-- 8890 MGM 8/30/99 TP-8 Excavation Contactor: _ Ground Surface Elevation: ) NW Excavating • 30.0 . ' Notes: — Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil 4"-6":grass General W Notes (96) e,- , •••* SM Dark brown silty SAND, loose,moist(Fill) ••-• •• ,, - •••• .1 _ •-•- ••• ••• — •••- ••-• E ! 2 SM Brown silty SAND,loose,moist 3 . r poorly graded sand interbeds . - .,, 5 — -: — , - 6 — i I- - 'ML Mottled SILT with sand, loose, moist 24.6 - ' 8 -iron oxide stained sand interbeds 9 io MH Blue gray elastic SILT with sand,soft,wet 51.7 -contains organics 12 Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. 1, 1 i a ri • u, • - 0 \ 8 *-t /01- //411‘ Test Pit Log -,--23, $ 1(1-fiv/Iii Earth Consultants Inc_ Williamsliams Avenue Apartments 1: if 101 \tjui Crearectinical Fnalneers,GEORKOSIS&FIIVIIINUI terral Sctrsittss Renton,Washington Q... . , - ' - PT0j.No. 8890 lawn. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/16/99 Plate A9 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessanly representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of —• information presented on this log. Boring Log -:-_-! Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: --r-) 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-1 c....., Drilling Contactor. . Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Boretec HSA SPT _ ` Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' CI Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer 1X1 Abandoned,sealed with bentonite T No. Surface Conditions: Parking Lot 9- -6 = R rn . General W .c .0 — . cl.. 0 sr Blows g. E g-it E Notes (5) Ft • •-• •• ML (2"-3"Asphalt,2" Base) • ••• Black sandy SILT,loose,moist(Fill) •• •-•-• •,•;, .1• ••• — •_,. •• . •••• 2 — 17.9 ••• _ -•-•• -contains gravel 4, •••• — -sample recovered from cuttings •••• 3 • ••• ' ,I • •-• ^• 4 , . .. — SM Mottled brown sandy SILT,very loose,moist 5 19.9 ( -iron oxide staining 4 6 -52%fines • 7 — 214 8 i' 'Th ,,,..,"; 3 9 -becomes wet, blue gray 48.0 i o 3 11 ML Blue gray SILT,very loose,wet 12 -organic stringers 104.8 13 -dark brown to black wood debris in silty sand matrbc,wet 2 14 MH Blue gray elastic SILT with organics,soft,water bearing , . 38.3 -- 15 I 1 - - 16 LL=39 PL=29 ML Blue gray SILT,wry loose,water bearing PI=10 . 17 -6"-12"peat interbedded at 16.5' ...,- cp. 28.8 18 -trace sand r. 12 -becomes medium dense i la 19 iii a_ , o ,g itT. R. AV Boring Log E thili(--411 ,110 Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments wr)., Nell \lir,' Goatectuilcal Eng:hems.CcologIsts&FiwIrorunenral ScierntEvs Renton,Washington E ' o Proj.No. 8890 Dwn. GLS Date Sept_'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate A10 co Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of ', information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of Wdliams Avenue Apartments _ 2 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: • 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-1 � Drill-mg Contactor. _ Drilling Method: Sampling Method Boretec HSA SPT _-• Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑Monitoring Well ❑ Piemmeter ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite General W No. s a . co Blows €o 2-u. - cv» Notes (%) Ft. � cn o al D cn • 1 72.6 ML Blue gray SILT with sand,very loose,water bearing 5s%,Itsl I, PT Brown fibrous PEAT,soft,water bearing . i, .%,, ., 21 ML Brown SILT with organics,loose,water bearing 23 24 ( 14.7 25 20 : 2s _ SM Gray silty fine SAND with gravel, medium dense,water bearing 27 - 28 — 11.1 +-�i:.4G 3o SP Grades to gray poorly graded SAND with gravel,very dense,water »a'r. bearing 51 wQ�'4:n o::::_;:: 31 "'° P;:r -1%fines >'`<'` -heaving sand flushed from augers prior to sampling,sand is \.narse grained I r Boring terminated at 32.0 feet below eAssting grade.Groundwater table encountered at 13.5 feet during dulling.Boring backfilled with cuttings. -- I 0 o . 1 ° W� a .��._ r /a11` Boring Log /y0 I Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments \ .bli( ),,,\ iI/ \IIrj� GaoxcYmkai Mai ''' &FriAmnmenral sctrntb'1& -Renton,Washington m Proj.No. 8890 Own. GLS Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate Al 1 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of . information presented on this log. 1 ! Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 2 1 . Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-2 . ‘ . '.---L. Drilling Contactor: . - Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Boretec HSA SPT . 1 . . Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: .- 30' 1:3 Monitoring Well 1:1 Piezometer IE Abandoned,sealed with bentonite ,- Surface Conditions: Grass No 1--) 75 .c P.- c o Z ? General W - -c Blows J3 1:01- Notes (6) Ft. i •1/4,- ... - ....e., 1 SM Brown silty SAND,loose, moist(Fill) ••• •-•• . ••-• — •-•-•- •A„.•-• , •••-•• -trace gravel •• •• •• 3 ••• J S ••• SM Brown silty SAND, loose, moist - 4 . . . : 5 -iron wide staining -- : 12.9 . 5 ' ' 6 % 7 ., :. E 7 — , . 18.4 8 . ,.. -becomes very loose, iron oxide staining 2 ! . -mottled ' • • :, 9 10 72.8 C. I 1 _.-.1 . 1 MH Gray elastic SILT with organics,very soft,wet 1.1 12 04 04 71.3 PT Brown fibrous PEAT,soft,wet 4 4 04 0 13 V I 14 ML Blue gray SILT,very loose,water bearing 15 36.0 -6"interbeds of elastic sift with organics ! 1 3 LL=38 PL=26 16 PI=12 . : ' SM Blue gray silty SAND,very loose,water bearing - - 18 — -organic stringers cr, . . ... ....7 0 : 1- o '- .• 19 f 6- - • , w • -, , a -, o A g, 'i''. igiv. 4411. Boring Log i . E i1liviitiAlil Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments , * 4/ 11/4 lof Nki Fp ccofechnical Enalnems.Goorustso..-&Environment:1i Sctenrevs Renton,Washington k i Proj.No. 8890 Own. GLS , Date Sept.'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate Al2 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. ' Boring Log , 1 Project Name: Sheet of ..... Williams Avenue Apartments 2 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: L'r•7:--,, 8890 MGM 9/15/99 9/15/99 B-2 • .:• .- Drilling Contactor: . Drilling Method: Sampling Method '.k.., Boretec HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 2:, 30' El Monftoring Well El Piezometer N Abandoned,sealed with bentonite No. -2 Z .c 2 co -6 General W l .= rt — _i, o_ 0 -0 Bows a E G9-i i rn Notes (6) Ft. 6- c)- 0 0 CO • 29.6 ::. :, : : , SM Blue gray silty SAND,loose to medium dense,water bearing 10 :-::: : : 21 . . , • :i : • -trace organic stringers „ . . .:. •-- :i. 23 — : . 1 •• ,-_ • 24 • .7,-.. i•'... 25 ...,: 27.3 ' i -6"elastic sift interbeds 7 S . ' 26 .•.!'.. : '... SP-SM Gray poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel,loose to medium 27 — :::::O:• .: dense,water bearing :__: :• i:i'l, ' 28 — •..r...I 30 10.1 ':::' i : ' -becomes medium dense 40,,„ ::::ijiii: i , -5%fines p.:3:,-,i.: • 31 • -flushed heaving sand from augers prior to sampling at 30'to 35' a..,,z . ::::::9•.:i : • — • ,.::::::••4: : , ,:g.:•?: i.• , : :;4:::. • :::]: : : 33 — • 34 .- 35 -- 98.7 :.- • SM Grades to blue gray silty SAND,medium dense to dense;water •:: -: bearing 54 • : 36 : -slightly decomposed wood .-: .. -high blow count due to wood,soils are medium dense to dense, i: •..: 37 \refusal on apparent log at 37' f I al Boring terminated at 37.0 feet below existing grade.Groundwater .., -- -:-- seepage encountered at 13.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings. ' 8 q U la -, • i106‘, •at ;i1111\ '•Boring Log • A ..‘ r $r .. ' Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments /77 )1(0\110 GcoreclinicalFirgh,ft.s.Groiosis+saawlmnmenrdi Seit:TITISS Renton,Washington Fe . o Proj.No. 8890 own. GLS I Date Sept_'99 Checked MGM Date 9/29/99 Plate A13 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. ' Boring Log • Project Name: • Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 1 3 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 8890 MGM 10/20/99 10/20/99 B-3 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT • Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' D Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Surface Conditions: Grass • General W Blows E S u E XI Notes (96) Ft. 5 m C I co ° m • • •si. • SM Brown silty SAND,loose,moist(Fill) ���N —1•.•.• • • •�••H -trace gravel ��j��� 2 •�•H ...... 3 ML Grades to mottled brown SILT,loose, moist 1 4 5 27.8 6 6 :; '' SP-SM Reddish brown poorly graded SAND with gravel, loose to medium :xv: - 7 — dense, moist :a> : - x'::>z = 8 - . o: .::>u ';:.: : .• 10 — -dark iron oxide staining `` 16 a`• ;::>o>: 11: "<a:':: 12 z 13 MH Gray elastic SILT,soft to medium stiff,saturated 14 -contains silt interbeds 37.5 15 -trace organics 4 16 17 I rn g 18 S Q 19 U W iiik Boring Log .i� -0 ` 410 Earth Consultants Inc. Williams Avenue Apartments ��Pi' if if \fir Q d,NcalErVInexs.CcOO2tvs&FrWmrolunralSclrnil:Rs Renton,Washington Proj.No. 8890 own. GLS Date Oct.'99 Checked MGM Date 10/25/99 Plate Al 4 - Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of - information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of Williams Avenue Apartments 3 3 Job No. Logged by. Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: ' 8890 MGM 10/20/99 10/20/99 B-3 ==., Drilling Contactor. . Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 30' ❑ Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite U C7 p W No. = -0 . Q. 0 a GeneralNot W Blows f T m ir ET Ft c c 0 a D m 4.5 GM Brown silty GRAVEL,medium dense,waterbearing 28 41 1 _ -comprised of rounded clasts • a 1 . 42 -interbeds of silly sand II 43 •I -becomes dense to very dense(based on observations during 44 — drilling) 1 7.2 -becomes gray 69 s 1 -contains thin interbeds of slightly less dense soils lb 46 • 1 47 - 1 IN 1 49 13 50 17.9 69 •i 51 :1 52 — _I 53 — a 54 — Or 13.5 SP-SM Gray poorly graded SAND with gravel and silt,very dense, 53 waterbearing: 56 Boring terminated at 56.5 feet below exisstin9 grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 13.0 feet during dnlling. Boring backfilled m with cuttings. c 0 0 0. a W m ia'. r fay: Av. Boring-Log 2 I 41 {d, Earth Consultants Inc. Williamsams Avenue Apartments �\I' l `■! )' \%VI \mut ink-di FnR &FnN "' �Scterirkgs Renton,Washington o Proj.No. 8890 Own. GLS Date Oct.'99 Checked MGM Date 10/25/99 Plate Al 6 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. 7-7) , . . APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS E-8890 Earth Consultants, Inc. -_ , SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS D GRAIN SIZE IN MM 1 SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES 1 NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH. U.S,STANDARD p O OO t0 tp� N .Q- z ` ,� ID d M N i- �- 4'n ri Or tD N M Ill t�0 O�0 N 0. q O O Q O O O O O Q • 0 10 O 90 x Cn - 20 a) .o eo 30 M x z 70 . . • m n O -I.. Z x n '[7 40 = r1) -n60 , _ n Ir r Z �\ '• 0 v .-. m \- :: . a rr c. 50 Do cn CO 5 .-r -C \ 7m0 C g 40 \ \ 60 CO 1..N.***%..\ 20co 80 —I O. 10 90 co rX CD N 0 I I I 1 1 1 I I II III I t I I II I I 1 1 I I [III 100 • w 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 03 ID a M N ,- CI ID a M N ,- 8 C $ O N 'p C 8 g M N o (n D 0 0 o ao m a M N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS • c 0 0 0 0 0 CI o z • a3 D. COBBLES COARSE .I FINE COARSE] MEDIUM I FINE FINES r N N GRAVEL SAND cn 0 m o a Moisture. KEY Boring or DEPTH USCS DESCRIPTION Content (%) LL PL wy Test Pit No. (ft.) , , • r O rrt N • m.iimI m 0 cr) TP-1 9.5 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt 5.4 --- --- iti Cn 3 ------ TP-2 10.5 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt 5.4 --- ---- 0:1 O TP-6 1.5 SM Brown silty SAND 13.2 --- --- —•— TP-7 9.5 GP-GM Brown poorly graded GRAVEL with silt 6. 1 --- --- I €�'. - • `, - . SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES 1 NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S,STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM oo p O O f0 p1 N O O g O O Z ; rN- ID M N N�.�• main CO M �� et d` N M st Iti t00 000 N O • O, O O 4 O O O O• O O,0 0 • 100 —� . } .0 90 • \. : 10 g m 1 '- D .,0 80 t 20 1 m ` I -D3 m Di x. ^ m 70 �� 30 70 l J 0a O m g _ t'• 40 -1 TI 60 ' ----C\A: al M 50 50 D y _ 00 I • cn ., Mill n 3 u < 40 , . 60 y m -•1_ - - 7 ^ � - . .0 It37 . c9 20 \ • �'•ti _ ' 80 I • • co _ . G 10 N.© ~•-•• , .. 90 1-•• 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I III 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 11 I �--I 11N 100 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 CO CD I•) N .- CI ID �' M N r CO ID O O O M N O M O 0 0 O O ..__ m N XI O O O co co a M N D D CI N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o 0 0 0 0 0 p rt CA Z . ,-. 0 C N COBBLES COARSE ( FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE FINES CDy m GRAVEL SAND CT fD Z Boring or DEPTH Moisture w KEY Test Pit No. (ft.) USCS DESCRIPTION Content (%) LL PL vo 00 .D v1 p B-1 5 ii L Black sandy SILT 19.9 --- --- .. rt c� �' a--- B-1 30 SP Gray poorly graded SAND with gravel 11. 1 --- --- N 1p B-2 30 SP-SM Gray poorly graded SAND with silt & gravel 10. 1 --- --- • 100 80 x 60 w 0 >- 0 H 40 ``—A-Line 5 a 20 CL-ML l 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Natural Key Boring/ P.n4/ Depth Soil Classification USCS L.L. L. P1. Water Test Pit (ft) Content • TP-5 10 Gray elastic SILT MH 60 42 18 76.3 Atterberg Limits Test Data ;j fE Williams Avenue Apartments I�I1r[' t,,1 Earth Consultants Inc• Renton, Washington II� Ify\ir / Ens. &e, ,� , Proj. No.8890 IDateept* '99 I Plate B3 rip 100 • 80 x 60 z 40 A-Lime CD 20 CL-ML 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID UM IT Natural Key Boring/ Depth Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. P I. Water Test Pit (ft.) Content S B-1 16 Blue gray SILT ML 39 29 10 38.3 • B-2 15 Blue gray SILT 38 26 12 36 :, Atterberg Limits Test Data Earth Consultants Inc Williams Avenue Apartments wri/ +Ilir/ ,Engineers.Geoeoglsts a Environmental Scientists � Renton, Washington Proj. No. 8890 I Date Sept. '99 I1ate B4 DISTRIBUTION E-8890 4 Copies Dean-Deily Company 16720 Northeast 116th Street Redmond, Washington 98052 Attention: Mr. Ed Dean Earth Consultants, Inc. 7 2-S I SHANNON iWILSON, INC. SEATTLE E CHLAN FSAtEKS RID PURBLAND GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS AICHORAGE DENVER SAINT LOU'S April 18, 2002 p_6 ._. �.......C�...ti Mr.Eric Wagner SD Renton LLC 2100— 124th Avenue NE, Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98005 RE: REVIEW OF PROJECT PLANS,SHERMAN APARTMENTS, RENTON,WASHINGTON Dear Eric: We have reviewed the plan set generally dated March 28, 2002, and prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers and have the following comments. On sheet SD2 the underslab drains are shown as 6-inch perforated polyvinyl chloride (PVC), :T although the elbow and tee connections are shown as 4-inch size. The Storm Force Main Detail also shows a 4-inch PVC underslab pipe. The note referring to the new pump also indicates a 6-inch inflow. We recommend the pipes all be 4-inch size, and that the main drawing and note be changed accordingly. Although not specifically designated on the drawings, we have recommended that the pump serving the underslab drains have a minimum capacity of 100 gallons per minute (gpm). We also recommend that the pump be designed to cycle on and off in response to groundwater inflows. You may want to consider a dual pump system to protect against pump malfunction and potential water pressure damage to the floor slab. The Temporary Cut Sections on sheets T1 and T2 call out a vertical cut slope or temporary shoring wall, as required. For a level surface behind the wall,the horizontal soil pressures on the wall can be estimated using an equivalent fluid weight of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The resisting passive pressures act over two soldier pile diameters (or the full face of a sheet pile wall)and can be estimated using an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pcf, including a safety factor of 1.5. For a wall with a 1:1 slope above, estimate the pressures by assuming that the slope acts 400 NORTH 34TH STREET-SUITE 100 P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 21-1-09630-001 206-632.8020 FAX 206.695.6777 TDD: 1.800.833.6388 Mr. Eric Wagner SIANNON F&WILSON.INC. SD Renton LLC April 18, 2002 Page 2 as a surcharge on the wall with a lateral pressure component equal to 35 times half the height of the slope. We will need to observe the conditions in the field to assess the slope protection requirements. Please call me at (206)695-6681 if you have any questions. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON,INC. inter, David .i inter,P.E. Vice` resident DGW/dgw c: Robert Armstrong,Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 21-1-09630-001-L3/WP/LKD 21-1-09630-001 7.0 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS cIZ • • • 7251.008[BHE/bq] 8.0 80.:HECRityPEofRMITS Renton Postmaster Approval 8.2 Fire Marshal Approval 7251.008[BHEJIN/ath] 9.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The erosion control plans for the Sherman Apartments were prepared in accordance with the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The first phase of construction is to demolish this site and prepare a flat pad ready for construction and excavation. Second phase of construction will include the excavation of the building site in order to construct the parking garage. In this phase of construction, runoff collected within the open excavation area will be routed to a temporary sediment pond. Once this water has been treated within the pond, it will be discharged by a temporary sump pump to an existing catch basin located at the intersection of Williams Avenue and 5th Avenue South. The.measures implemented within the open excavation area include temporary V-ditches, silt baffles, and temporary construction entrance. Since the portion of construction that may cause silty runoff is taking place within the open excavation area,no additional TESC measures will be implemented at street level except for existing catch basin silt protection. Calculations for the temporary sump pump and the temporary sediment pond can be found within this section. 7251.008[BHE/bq/ath] • s, • TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND SIZING CALCULATIONS (Per Section D.4.5.2,1998 KCSWDM) 1) Pond Geometry. a) go = 0.273 CFS (KCRTS was used to be conservative) b) SAREQ = 2080 x Qio = 567.84 SF c) SAREQ = 568.00 SF SApRov = 690.00 SF 690 SF > 560 SF ✓ Design Adequate d) DEPTHmiN = 3.5 FT DEPTHpRov = 3.5 FT 3.5 FT = 3.5 FT ✓ Design Adequate 2) Orifice Sizing Calculations: a) Ao = Ao = Solving For 0.6x3600Tg'n AS = 690 SF h = 2.5FT Ao = 690 (2x2.5)"2 T = 24 HRS 0.6x3600x24x32.2'n g = 32.2 FT/52 Ao = 0.005 FT2 b) Orifice Diameter Ao = x r2 0.005 = x r2 r = 0.04 FT = 2r = 008 FT = 0.98 IN 7251.008 [BHE/bq/ath] 7251P0ST.PKS �", Flow Frequency Analysis ' r. Yv Time Series File:7251postdeveloped.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Frequency Analysis Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.224 7 2/09/01 2:00 0.437 1 100.00 0.990 0.197 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.335 2 25.00 0.960 0.273 3 12/08/02 18:00 0.273 3 10.00 0.900 0.230 6 8/26/04 2:00 0.273 4 5.00 0.800 0.273 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.239 5 3.00 0.667 0.239 5 1/18/06 16:00 0.230 6 2.00 0.500 0.335 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.224 7 1.30 0.231 0.437 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.197 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.403 50.00 0.980 • -„°` Page 1 KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location Sea-Tac Computing Series : 7251POSTDEVELOPED.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI60R.rnf . Impervious 0.92 acres Total Area : 0.92 acres Peak Discharge: 0.437 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:7251POSTDEVELOPED.tsf . Time Series Computed KCRTS Command eXit KCRTS Program I • TEMPORARY PUMP SIZING CALCULATIONS 1) Calculate TDH: (Size for 100-year event) TDH = HEL + Hfr HEL= 32.90 - 23.40 = 9.5 FT Hfr = jl V2 j. _ .025 d 2g 1 = 21FT d = 0.25 FT v = Q = .437 CBS = 9.64 FT/S A nr2 g = 32.2 FT/S2 H¢ = 0.025x21' x 9.642 0.25' 2x32.2 Hfr = 3.0FT TDH = 9.5 FT + 3:0 FT = 12.5 FT 2) Requirements: Pump 196 GPM 0 12.5 FT of TDH 3) Hydromatic Model S200M3/4-4 Pumps 250 GPM at 12.5 FT of TDH ✓ Design Adequate • 7251.008 [BHB/bq/ath] Section NON-CLOG Page 101 1,1 Dated SEPTEMBER 1993 F: Performance bill Curve III III PPM: 1750 Discharge: 3" Solids: 2-1/2" 50. i .15 LOMMEIII ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ p l■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 14— • q 1■ro1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 45■■ :!t■140�j45 ■ii11'ii1�a 6s, 11■1111\■I■L50%J■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 12- 40■ 4, 11■■1u\\I;■iI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ �II1IIIi►U IIIIHhIII■HHhI■■■■■■■■■1■■1 sue, ■1112i 111S■■��I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 35■ Pp1 31■I 1 \ru•mmI•II'IM ••u••••i•■muuu•uuuu••MI `gy 11 p ■,\■1■■I►`111■Il■■■0I■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ INq 1M\II;■IB\\RI■■■■I\ II■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ? 30 II 3IMINIIIININE■IPA maw'i\■■1\�I■■ixou ■■■■"■■■55% Ii!!iIii!1i !iIIii! IOIIIIIIIIIIII 01 14 61 25 ,_,,, 2 sob, ■I'►■■IB■■►\■\\te■■\\■■■■\a�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ = • 4 I■■■nun `\■\►�1�1■■\\■■■■ ommr1■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ q lI;■nII■■■►NWIMI U■INUIIMINV•I;50%MN 6- 201■■■I.1111■111�.1111.■■111.1■■I1I1■ lIIIlIlHIIh !i !ii !iihiIIIPI_ 4.- 15 IHIHIHWHiA!hU! ! j11 r 40% t o 1111111111101111111114111111 3// I I -_ BHP 2- IIIII011IOhIIIIIIiIiiII III! 5■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■a■■ 1.5 1■■■■ 2 ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■AMIM BHP 1■■■■ BHP ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■I - 0■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1I■I BHP U.S.GPM 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 M 3/HR 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 The curves reflect maximum performance characteristics without exceeding full load(Nameplate)horsepower.All pumps have a service factor of 1.2.Operation is recommended in the bounded area with operational point within the curve limit. Performance curves are based on actual tests with clear water at 70° F.and 1280 feet site elevation. Conditions of Service: GS AURORA PERAL SIGNAL GPM: TDH: HYDROMATICT" PUMPS 10.0 BOND QUANTITIES,FACILITY SUMMARIES,AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Quantity worksheet for the civil portion of this project has been included within this section. No retention/detention facility is being proposed for this project. As a consequence, no summary sheet or Declaration of Covenant has been included. • • 7251.008[BHF/bgj