HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA-06-155_Report 1CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 14, 2010
To: City Clerk's Office
From: City Of Renton
Subject: Land Use File Closeout
Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City
Clerk's Office. -
Project Name: Blueberry Haven/Gordley Short Plat
LUA (file) Number: LUA-06-155, SHPL-H, ECF
Cross-References:
AKA's:
Project Manager: Jill Ding
Acceptance Date:
Applicant: Richard & Lauralee Gordley
Owner: Same as applicant
Contact: Same as applicant
PID Number: 3343903563
ERC Decision Date:
ERC Appeal Date:
Administrative Denial:
Appeal Period Ends:
Public Hearing Date:
Date Appealed to HEX:
By Whom:
HEX Decision: Date:
Date Appealed to Council:
By Whom:
Council Decision: Date:
Mylar Recording Number:
Project Description: 7-Lot Short Plat with Critical Areas (stream). Due to vesting issues,
application was taken in across the counter as incomplete and applicants were informed that they
are not necessarily vested to the R-8 Zone.
Location: 2010 Jones Avenue NE
Comments: 6/14/07 -Applicants requested to withdraw their project and a refund of the
application fees. 6/18/07 -Planner processed 80% application fee refund and withdrew the project
per applicants' request.
Printed: 06-18-2007
Payment Made:
:ITY OF RENTON
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Land Use Actions
RECEIPT
Permit#: LUA06-155
06/18/2007 08:34 AM Receipt Number: R0702998
Total Payment: -1,200.00 Payee: Project cancelled 80% refund -
Gordley Short Plat
Current Payment Made to the Following Items:
Trans Account Code Description
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review
Payments made for this receipt
Amount
-1,000.00
-200.00
Trans Method Description Amount
Payment
RD Pmts
PO
Re-Dist
Account Balances
Trans Account Code Description
3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee
5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees
5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat
5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review
5011 000.345.81.00.000B Prelim/Tentative Plat
5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat
5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD
5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees
5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment
5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks
5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone
5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt
5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev
5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval
5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use or Fence Review
5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees
5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee
5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies
5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable)
5954 650.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage
5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax
-1,200.00
.00
Balance Due
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
City of Renton Finance Department Request for Claims
/ Date of Request I Date Required
/ Requesting Department j -p / 13 / -P vJ I Authorized Signature~ fJiki/,&/L/r
REASON FOR CHECK
I Deposit Refund Name Amount $ti
Finance Receipt No. Receipt Date
/other>( Describe Circumstances Requiring Issuance of Check:
L ~n ~ . V\ 'e et:p? I ~ ~ c,-v\ vv '71. s. vv rrh ...<r ""-w r\ b--j
tt:p,pl1CCl-f'Yt. 'i2.c-f1.-1nol Sho..--f :Plc,r,..-t ; Envt(dn ~nf,,.J
. . . O'lo
CHECK PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS
/ Amount / $ 1200~ Charge to Account(s)
Payable To .j2 \ C h~v-,::,\ 0 r'" )... ~l,l.Vt. I e.e.. G. on:,l {-e.M
Address -
2010 ~o .--. ('"S .. A-vt!.. N~
12<..n-to I" , vVA q ¥'DS-<.e.:.
Soc Sec or IRS ID No
CHECK AUTHORIZATION -Finance Department Use Only
/ Approved / j Date
IO/ Claims / Check No:
\cor
000, "!>'+"=>. 'i, . 00. 000
Ooo . ;i!.Y'5 . I. oo, ooo -=i-
Mail Check to Payee
O Return to Dept.
O Other:
Rev: 10/99
Erez Barmor
2004 Jones Ave NE
Renton, WA 98056
(party of record)
Updated: 01/24/07
PARTIES OF RECORD
BLUEBERRY HAVEN GORDLEY SHORT
LUA06-155, ECF, SHPL-H
(Pagelofl)
,,,,<tY 0 CITY ~F RENTON
(;~, ~) tit< + + Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department ~ ~ ,P.. Kathy Keolker, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P,E., Administrator k"N,ro",:,,,----------------------------
June 18, 2007
Richard A. & Lauralee Gordley
2010 Jones Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98056
RE: Biueberry Haven Short Plat Withdraw!
Renton File No. LUA06-155, SHPL-H, ECF
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gordley:
I have received your request to withdraw the Blueberry Haven Short Plat application and
to process a refund for the application fees. The submitted application materials are
available you to pick up on the 6th floor of City Hall. Your refund request is in process
and the refund will be sent by mail.
Feel free to contact me with any questions at (425) 430-7219.
Sincerely,
' 1f~~
~., -V
Senior Planner
cc File
Parties of Record
-------l-05_5_S_o_uth_G_ra_d_y_W_a_y_--R-en_t_on-,-W-a-sh_i_ng-to-n-98-0-57 _______ -~
@ This paper contains 50°10 recycled material, 30% post consumer
AHE"AD OF THE CURVE
June 14, 2007
Jill Ding
City of Renton Planning Dept
Dear Jill,
Per our conversation yesterday we are withdrawing our application for the Blueberry
Meadows aka Gordley Short Plat. We would like the refundable amount returned to us as
well as the documents submitted. We will be using the documents submitted for our two
lot line adjustments we will be submitting in lieu of the Short Plat.
Richard & Laura ee Gordley
2010 Jones Ave NE
Renton, WA 98056
(. // .. -;·
//
CITYOFA!:kTON
RECEIVED
JUN 1 ~ 2007
BUIL.DIN0DIIIISION
Kathy Kcolkcr, Mayor
March 6, 2007
Richard A. & Lauralee Gordley
2010 Jones A venue NE
Renton, WA 98056
RE: Blueberry Haven Short Plat
Renton File No. LUA06-155, SHPL-H, ECF
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gordley:
CIT~ )F RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator
Per your request, I am sending you a letter outlining the requirements for a proposed
revision to your short plat application. After a phone conversation today with Mrs.
Gordley, it is my understanding that you are proposing to record a lot line adjustment
with the property owner located to the southeast of your project site. The lot line
adjustment would adjust your property boundaries such that your neighbor to the
southeast of you would acquire all of your property located to the east of the Class 4
stream, which bisects your property. I am attaching a Lot Line Adjustment submittal
checklist and waiver form outlining the materials that are required for the preparation of a
complete Lot Line Adjustment application. One of the items that I have waived is the
requirement for a wetland delineation report on this portion of your property, as you have
indicated that you wish to release this portion of your property to your neighbor and will
not develop it at this time. At such time as development is proposed on this portion of
your property, a wetland delineation report will be required.
In addition, you have indicated that you are proposing to reduce the number oflots that
would be created as a result of your short plat down to a total of 3 lots. A 3 lot short plat
would be processed administratively within an estimated timeframe of6-8 weeks. In
order to begin processing your revised short plat application, the following materials are
required to be submitted:
I. 12 copies of a revised wetland delineation report. The submitted wetland
delineation report prepared by Ellisport Engineering, Inc. indicates that all
previous wetlands on the project site have dried up and no longer meet the
criteria for a wetland per the Washington State Identification and Delineation
Manual. The City has conflicting information from other wetland delineation
reports that have been prepared on this property and in July 2005 had the
Watershed Company (City's wetland consultant) conduct a review of the subject
property. The review from the Watershed Company, dated July 19, 2005
(attached in my previous correspondence dated December 18, 2006) concludes
that a wetland is located over much of the property and that the Ellisport
Engineering Wetland Delineation report dated October 20, 2004 should be
revised to accurately delineate the wetland. The report submitted with the
-------------~
I 055 South Gra~ \\'.ay-Renton, _\Vashmgton 98-~~7 AHEAD OF THE CURVE
project application has not been revised to address these comments is therefore
not accepted. A revised wetland delineation report is required delineating and
classifying all on-site wetlands. The wetland report shall be prepared in
accordance with RMC 4-8-120.
2. 5 copies of a preliminary wetland mitigation plan. A preliminary wetland
mitigation plan is required for impacts proposed to any on or off-site wetlands
and/or wetland buffers by the proposed project. The wetland mitigation plan
shall be prepared in accordance with RMC 4-8-120.
3. 12 full size copies aud 1 reduced 8 Y, by 11 inch Contact Print of a
Preliminary Short Plat Map. A revised preliminary short plat map prepared
by a licensed surveyor shall be submitted showing the proposed changes to the
short plat layout. In addition, the revised layout shall include the ordinary high
water mark (OHWM) of the stream, the wetland edge, and the required stream
and wetland buffers. Further revisions may be required pending the results of
the revised wetland report.
4. 12 full size copies and 1 reduced 8 Yz by 11 inch Contact Print of a
Conceptual Landscape Plan. A landscape plan is required showing a
minimum 5-foot landscape strip along all public street frontages and two trees
within the front yard areas or planting strip of each lot. The landscape plan shall
include at a minimum species, size, spacing, and location. The landscape plan
shall be prepared by a landscape architect, certified nurseryman, or other
similarly qualified professional. The landscape plan shall be prepared in
accordance with RMC 4-8-120.
5. 5 copies of a Supplemental Stream Study. A supplemental stream study is
required per RMC 4-3-050L.3 when impacts are proposed to a stream or stream
buffer. The supplemental stream study shall be prepared in accordance with
RMC 4-8-120.
6. 5 copies of a Stream Mitigation Plan. A stream mitigation plan is required to
mitigate for impacts proposed to a stream and/or stream buffer. The stream
mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with RMC 4-8-120.
7. 12 copies of a revised Density Worksheet. The submitted density worksheet
should be revised to reflect the correct density based on survey quality data
regarding the areas contained within any sensitive areas located on the project
site.
8. 12 copies of a revised Environmental Checklist. Please submit an updated
Environmental Checklist with the corrected information.
9. 12 copies of a revised Project Narrative. Please submit an updated project
narrative with the corrected information.
10. 5 full size copies and I reduced 8 Yi by 11 inch Contact Print of a revised
Utilities Plan, Generalized. Please submit a revised utility plan showing the
updated information regarding sewer, water, and transportation improvements.
11. 12 full size copies and I reduced 8 Y, by 11 inch Contact Print of a revised
Grading Plan. Please submit a revised grading plan showing the updated
information for the revised short plat.
12. 5 full size copies and I reduced 8 Yi by 11 inch Contact Print of a revised
Drainage Control Plan. Please submit a revised drainage control plan
including the updated drainage information for the revised short plat layout.
13. 4 copies of a revised Drainage Report. Please submit a revised drainage report
including the updated drainage information for the revised short plat layout.
Once the above requested information is received, review of your applications will begin.
Feel free to contact me with any questions at ( 425) 430-7219.
Sincerely,
jcLI 'cKV~
Jill K. Ding
Senior Plarmer
cc File
Parties of Record
Enclosures
+ ..a +
CIT~ JF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator
o~:"k '
~-~ Kathy Keolker, Mayor ?ZiN,ro·:..------------------------
December 18, 2006
Richard A. & Lauralee Gordley
2010 Jones Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98056
RE: Blueberry Haven Short Plat Notice of Incomplete Application
Renton File No. LUA06-155, SHPL-H, ECF
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gordley:
After reviewing the materials submitted for the Blueberry Haven Short Plat application,
staff has determined that the application is incomplete according to the City's submittal
requirements as outlined in RMC 4-8-l 20C. The following information is required to
accept the application as complete:
1. Revised wetland delineation report. The submitted wetland delineation report
prepared by Ellisport Engineering, Inc. indicates that all previous wetlands on
the project site have dried up and no longer meet the criteria for a wetland per
the Washington State Identification and Delineation Manual. The City has
conflicting information from other wetland delineation reports that have been
prepared on this property and in July 2005 had the Watershed Company (City's
wetland consultant) conduct a review of the subject property. The review from
the Watershed Company, dated July 19, 2005 (attached) concludes that a
wetland is located over much of the property and that the Ellisport Engineering
Wetland Delineation report dated October 20, 2004 should be revised to
accurately delineate the wetland. The report submitted with the project
application has not been revised to address these comments is therefore not
accepted. A revised wetland delineation report is required delineating and
classifying all on-site wetlands. The wetland report shall be prepared in
accordance with RMC 4-8-120 (see attached).
2. Preliminary wetland mitigation plan. A preliminary wetland mitigation plan
is required for impacts proposed to any on or off-site wetlands and/or wetland
buffers by the proposed project. The wetland mitigation plan shall be prepared
in accordance with RMC 4-8-120 (sec attached).
3. Landscape Plan. A landscape plan is required showing a minimum 5-foot
landscape strip along all public street frontages and two trees within the front
yard areas or planting strip of each lot. The landscape plan shall include at a
minimum species, size, spacing, and location. The landscape plan shall be
prepared by a landscape architect, certified nurseryman, or other similarly
-------,-0-55-So_u_th_G_r_ad_y_W-ay ___ R_e_n-to-n,-W-as-h-in_gt_on_9_80_5_5 _______ ~
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
,
qualified professional. The landscape plan shall be prepared in accordance with
RMC 4-8-120 (see attached).
Furthermore, .the additional items listed below are required to complete the review of the
submitted application. Please submit the following information:
1. Supplemental Stream Study. A supplemental stream study is required per
RMC 4-3-050L.3 when impacts are proposed to a stream or stream buffer.
Based on the proposed short plat layout it appears that impacts are proposed to
the on-site stream and stream buffer, therefore a supplemental stream study is
required for this project. The supplemental stream study shall be prepared in
accordance with RMC 4-8-120 (see attached).
2. Stream Mitigation Plan. A stream mitigation plan is required to mitigate for
impacts proposed to the on-site stream and stream buffer. The stream mitigation
plan shall be prepared in accordance with RMC 4-8-120 (see attached).
3. Revised Preliminary Short Plat Layout. Please submit a revised preliminary
short plat layout including the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the stream,
the wetland edge, and the required stream and wetland buffers. Further
revisions may be required pending the results of the revised wetland report.
4. Revised Density Worksheet. The submitted density worksheet should be
revised to reflect the correct density based on survey quality data regarding the
area~ contained within any sensitive areas located on the project site.
Please submit S copies of a revised wetland delineation report, 3 copies of a preliminary
wetland mitigation plan, 5 full size copies and 1 reduced 8 Y:z inch by 11 inch PMT of a
landscape plan, 12 full size copies and 1 reduced 8 Y, inch by 11 inch PMT of a revised
preliminary short plat map, 12 copies of a revised density worksheet, S copies of a
supplemental stream study, and S copies of a stream mitigation plan. Once the above
requested information is received, review of your application will begin. Feel free to
contact me with any questions at (425) 430-7219.
Sincerely,
eqf(J)--t)
Jill K. Ding •.
Senior Planner
cc File
f.
City of Renton
LAND USE PERMIT DEC /J : 2006
MASTER APPLICATION 1,1 ,-:to
PROPERTY OWNER(S)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
2-D IO JDNG'J
j W,U,(tL 11'.L, (: O(J/ lj
8 NC
ZIP:
OS?.c
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
1-S ~22-0-qq3l
APPLICANT (if other than owner)
NAME:
COMPANY (1f applicable):
ADDRESS:
CITY: ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER
CONT ACT PERSON
COMPANY (if applicable):
ADDRESS:
lO jON18? t'(\/'c: NC
ZIP:
q~S-L
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS:
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
K \ \J Lk:X{ (" i-t1l v ll/1 Gio vd 1{)1
~
PROJECT/ADDRESS(S) LOCATION AND ZIP CODE:
-2010 0D(\.\l-;..~ -AVE-Nt
Re:..n-t1:Jn 9e:io<;b
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
"334 3c103003
EXISONG LAND USE(S): a)l
e..S, cl-t' n h
PRO~ED LAND USE($): o_J
/ eS1CTmh'
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION:
(JC,~
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION
(if applicable):
1--J A
EXISTING ZONING: Y<-<c,
PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NA;
SITE AREA (in square feet): 112<o5'
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE
DEDICATED: e
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS:
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET
ACRE (if applicable):
NUMBER OF PRO~ED LOTS (if applicable):
NUMBER OF NEW ~ELLING UNITS (if applicable):
' .
-()e.,,1 '
09/J 9/05
Piaf
It
PROJECT INFORMATION (continued) ~--~----~-----------~
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable) PROJECT VALUE:
I
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable):
111/ h.
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 32qo
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): NA.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): !\!A
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS j1f
applicable): -e-
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMNOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT (if applicable): A
CJ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
liil"' AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
CJ FLOOD HAZARD AREA
CJ GEOLOGIC HAZARD
CJ HABITAT CONSERVATION
~ORELINE ~AND LAKES
[:) WETLANDS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
___ sq.ft.
___ sq.ft.
~ __ sq.ft.
qb{of} sq. ft.
___ sq.ft.
/Attach leaal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the followina information included}
SITUATE IN THE Nf=" QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-~ RANGE S, IN THE CITY
OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
List all land use applications being applied for:
1. ]?(e l,rr'l,= SY'1or+· :Pleet-romf.
2. 6'1111foYlm f<NtwJ 'Vf%_
I Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
I, (Print Name/s) _B.K}1£1.Yd A":" ~t\...lel--6,uvJ \ll1 declare that I am (please check one) ~e current owner of the property
involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to ct for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing
statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
~
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
Notary Public
Stai. l:fl WasNnglon
CHRISTIN A WAlSON
MyAppclnlment Ellplres Jul 27. 2010
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that~~~-~~~-~
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the
rposes mentioned in the instrument.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
My appointment expirrjvlv 8 J. 'JOI o
09/19/05
Comm,tment No. 6364084-1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SCHEDULE A CONTINUED
The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
Lot(s) 4, City of Renton Short Plat Number SHPL-060-87, recorded under Recording Number
8805099006, in King County, Washington, and that portion of Lot 2 of said short plat, lying southerly of
the following described line:
Beginning at the northeast corner of sairJ Lot 4:
thence north 89'29'00" east on the easterly pro1ect,on of the north Ii ne of said Lot 4 a distance of 226.50
feet to a point on the easterly boundary of said Lot 2; said pcint being south 00'35'32" east a distance of
326.88 feet from the most northeasterly corner of said Lot 2, and the terminus of the herein described
line;
(BEING KNOWN AS Lot B, City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment Number LUA 95-093 recorded under
Recording Number 9511299005).
/
i
1-·· -
I
fl
~-"' ____ (l) __ c::
_o ,_,
-C/l
Q) ---c:: ·-o _..,,
I ;-'<!
' IU
OJ'~
---(l) -I ,c:: --~,c::
--1-··---Q)
__ 1 :::::c::
1 ~ ZONING e,.;" ;; P/B/PW na<NICAL SEllVICEII
~ UJC7""'
R-8
PRE-APPL!( ATION COJVIMENTS
PROJECT: Blueberry Ha, en Shor! Plat
2010 Jones Aw '<E
PRE 05-031
DA TE: March 24, 2005 (a' 11 :00 p.111.
STAFF COMMEI.\TS: FIRE l'RF\ENTION-Jim Gray
PIJHIIC \YORKS/UTILITIES-Jan Illian
co,NSTRl'CTION SERVICES-Larry '.Vleckling-
NO COMMENT
Pl \ 'li,I.\C/ZONING -Nancy Weil
SUPl'LEM~:NTAI. INFORMATION: ZONING MAP
SITE ARIAL
SUBMITTAL WAVIER FORM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
CITY OF RENTON
FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
MEMORANDUM
March 10, 200;)
Nancy Weil, Senior Plrnrner
,Jim Gray, Assistant Fire-Marshal ~J,
SUBJECT: Blueberry Havel! Shllr-\ !'lat, 2010 Jones /\.vc. NE
Fire Department Comments:
l. I\. fire hydrant with 1000 «PM lire flow is required within 300 feet of
all new single-family structuns. If the building square footage exceeds
3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM
and requires two hydrants within JUI) feet of the structure.
2. I\ fire mitigation fee of $488 OU is required for all new single.family
structures.
3. Fire Department access roadways require a minimum 20 Foot paved
roadway with an approved fire ckpartmcnt turnaround. A full 90 foot
diameter cul-de-sac is required. S,se attached diagram.
1. All building addresses sh,t!I !Jc visible from the public street
Please feel free to contact me· iC .' 01..1 ',ave any questions.
FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS
RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU >< I/J.fr-'130-7000
EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURNARGUNb -l.UL-CiE-SAC
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Nancy Weil
Jan llliJr\ ,
March 22W2005
CITY OF RENTON MEMO
PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: PREAPPLICATON REVIEW COMMENTS
BLUEBERRY HAVEN SHORT PLAT
PREAPP NO. 05-031
2010 -Jones Ave NE
NOTE ON PRELIMINARY REVIEW COMMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT:
The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-
application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant. The applicant is
cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification
and/or concurrence by official decision makers (e.g. Hearing Examiner, Boards of
Adjustment, Board of Public Works and City Council). Review comments may also need
to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by the City or
_m_ade by the appl_ii;ant. __ --------------
WATER
1. There is an existing 6-inch water main in NE 201h Street and an 8-inch water main in
Jones Ave NE. Available fire flow in NE 20 11
' Street is 1,100 gpm.
2. Extension of an 8-inch water main will be required onsite. Extension of an 8-inch in NE
20'h may be required fronting the sito
3. All new construction must have a lire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000
gpm and must be located within 300 tee! of each structure. New hydrants will be
required to be installed as part of the water main extension on site.
4. The proposed project is located in the 435 Water Pressure Zone and is inside Aquifer
Protection Zone 2. Static pressure in t11e area is approximately 70 psi.
5. The Water System Development Charges (SOC) are $1,525 per new building lot. These
are payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. Credit will be given for
t11e existing residence connected to w~tm
SANJT ARY SEWER
1. There is an existing 8-inch sewer rnair: fronting the property in NE 20'h Street.
2. An 8-inch sewer main will be required lo hr, extended within the plat.
3. Separate side sewers are requin,cl. M1n1mum slope shall be 2%.
Blueberry Hflven Short Plat
4. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges (SOC) is $900 per new building lot.
These are payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. Credit will be
given for existing residence connected to sewer.
5. This parcel is subject to two Special Assessment Districts. NE 20'h & Jones SAD is
based on square footage. The rate is site square footage x a rate of 0.27926559. West
Kennydale SAD is based on a rate of# lots x $1,050 Payment of these fees will be
required prior to issuance of utility construction permit.
SURFACE WATER
1. A preliminary drainage pl3n cJnrl drainage report will be required for the site plan
application. The drainage plan shall include provision for detention and water quality
treatment in compliance with the requirements of the 1990 KCSWM.
2. Applicant shall submit separate structural plans for review and approval under a
separate building permit for proposed vaults. Special inspection from the building
department is required.
3. The preferred method of storm discharge in Aquifer Protection Zone 2 is infiltration, if
soils permit. A geotechnical report is required.
4. Roof drains are required to be lightlined to the storm system within the short plat if
infiltration is not feasible.
5. The Surface Water System De1clopment Charges (SOC) are $715 per new building lot.
These are payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. Credit will be
given for existing residence.
TRANSPORTATION
1. The traffic mitigation fee of $75 per zicJditional generated trip shall be assessed per new
single family home at a rate of 9.57 trirs ($75 x 9.57 x = $)
2. Half street improvements in NE 2D"' tnduding, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb
& gutter. storm drainage, street siqns. ;ind streetlights are required.
3. Private streets are allowed up to six lots or less with not more than 4 lots not abutting the
right of way. A 26-foot easement with 20 feet of pavement is required. This site plan
exceeds 4 lots. Applicant wil! be required to meet public street improvement
requirements of 32 feet of pavement with sidewalk. curb, and gutter. A request for code
modification may be submitted for consideration.
4. Roadways in excess of 150 feet, requires a fire department approved turnaround.
5. All wire utilities shall be installed underqround 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.
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. All plans shall conform to the Rf:n ion Drafting Standards.
2. When approval of preliminary piat :s grcmtod, please submit permit application, three (3)
copies of utility drawings, two (2) sels of street lighting plans, two (2) copies of the
drainage report, an itemized cost of construction estimate and application fee at the
counter on the sixth floor. A fee worksheet is attached for your use, but prior to
Blueberry Haven Shorl Plat
preparing a check, it is recornmerJded to call 425-430-7266 for a fee estimate as
generated by the permit system.
The fee for review and inspection of tl1ese improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 of
the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,000 but less than $200,000,
and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half the fee must be paid upon application.
3. Separate permits for water meters, siae sewers, irrigation meters and storm drainage
connections are required.
4. The site is located in Aquifer Protection Zone 2 and may be subject to additional
requirements per City code. _c:;_onstrLJcted secondary containment may be required if
rnore than 20 gallons of regulated hazardous materials will be present at the new facility
(RMC 4-3-050H2d(i)). Certain uses require operating permits (RMC 4-9-015). A fill
source statement (RMC 4-4-060L4) is required if more than 100 cubic yards of fill
material will be imported to the project site. Construction Activity Standards (RMC 4-
4-030C7) shall be followed if during construction, more than 20 gallons of hazardous
materials will be stored on site or vehicles will be fueled on site. Surface Water
Management Standards (RMC 4-6-030E2 and 3)--Biofilters, stormwater conveyance,
and water quality ponds may re<-1uire a groundwater protection liner. Impervious surfaces
shall be provided for areas sub1ect to vehicular use or storage of chemicals.
5. Rockeries/Retaining Walls. All rockeries or retaining walls, greater than 4 feet in height
to be constructed as part of !his site will require a separate building permit and shall
have the following separate note be included on the civil plan: "A licensed engineer
with geo technical expertise must be retained for proposed rockeries greater than
four feet in height. The engineer must monitor rockery construction and verify in
writing that the rockery was constructed in general accordance with ARC
standards and with his/her supplemental recommendations, in a professional
manner and of competent and suitable material. Written verification by the
engineer must be provided to the City of Renton public works inspector prior to
approval of an occupancy permit or plat approval for the project. A separate
building permit will be required "
cc: Kayren Kittrrick
DATE
TO:
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
-------------
Marcil 24, 2005
Pre-Application File No. ll5 IJ31
FROM: Nancy Weil, Senior Pl,mnrer. 425-430-7270
Blueberry Haven Short Plat SUBJECT:
---~---·---------------
General: We have completed a prtc.11r11:1:-::\ r·e\.'1ew of the pre-application for the above-referencec1
development proposal The following con"""' ls on development and permitting issues are based on
the pre-application submittals made tc, the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on
the d3te of review. The applicant is cc~L,tio1~.ed that information contained in this sumn1c1ry may be
sub1ect to rnodificat1on and/or concurn-:11ct: r.1y official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Zoning
Administrutor, Board of Adjustment, BoL-Hd of Pr1'uiic Works, and City Council). Review comments may
also need to be revised based on site plan1·1ir1q and other design changes required by City staff or
mcidc by the applicant. The applicant is en co waged to review all applicable sections of the Renton
Municipal Code The Development Regulations me available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from
the Finance Division on the first floor of C·ty I Ii-iii m on~line at www.ci.rcnton.wa.us.
Project Proposal: The subject site is <.~(!dressed ~?010 Jones Ave NE and 1s 1.47 acres. Tlic site has
one sing/e-farrnly resiclence, which is _:;ropu:,ed to remain. Trie parcel has an unusual shape with
public roDd frontage on both .Jones NE ::wcl NF 20 1n St. both is not a corner lot. fhe site Is zoned
Residential -8 (R-8) which is s1ngle-farn.,y lJ'.>O T!1e proposal is to subdivide the site in:o 7 lots tor the
eventual co11struct1on of 6 single-family resic!erH;cs as the existing residence will remain on one of the
lots.
A strec:nn and possibly two draina~Je dilci1es bi::-,ccts the site, flowing frorn south to north and east to
west respectively. In addition, portion of ,1 we!lcmd is indicated on the site according to t11e City's
Critfc:"1! Arcs map. The applic~nt proviciE·ci weti.J11d~.:; delineation report with the pre~application. which is
discussed later in this report. A City u/ f\u1tun Utility easen1ent crosses the eastern section of tile
parcel, north to south.
Site History: It appears this parcel wcs pc1,' of a short plat, SP 60-87 to create 4 lots. This parcel
dppcars to include lot 4 ancl portion of l;J! '2 r,f !hd'. short plat_ Two lot line adjustments have been done
involving this site, LUA-95-093 L LA a, HJ I L/\ -CJ 14-85 for the property owner at that time, Charles A
Pohl
Zoning/Density Requirements: The sul1,ect p'operty is located within the Residential -8 dwelling
units per acr-e (R-8) zoning designati:::::,:1 Ttic density range required in the R-8 zone woulrl be a
rrnnirnum of 4.0 lo a rnaximurn of 8.0 dv-:"r..d!ing lJ:1,ts per acre (du/ac). The method of ca!culatinn net
density is a,; follows·
A calculution of l11e nwnber of 1,uu:;1nq 11·1,ts and/or lots t11at would be allowed on a propc1ty
r:1fter critical areas and µutJ/ic riqhts-of-\t,.r<.:1y ;:ind legally recorded private occess easements c:ire
subtmcted from the gross area (:~Hoss ,1crcs minus public stmP.ts, easements and criticc1!
oreas rnult1pl1ed by allowable hous11°q tll'lh ;ier acre) Required critical area butters and pubiic
Gnd private alleys shc1II not be sul;tr,:11...:lHI from gross acres for the purpose ot net densily
calcu!;1tions.
The applicant did not provide a net density for this site. Due to the unusual shape of the parcel,
critical areas and the proposed lot configuration as well as the proposal does not comply with
Ll!ud1crry Haven Si1or1 1.:i1at
r-,1 c1 r <_:h 2-'I . )()(l 5
Pre-A1)p;icat1nn Mect1nr_J
r·\lfJC 2 Of 6
City street regulations; staff was unable to estimate a net density. The applicant would be required
to submit an accurate net density iridudfng all deduction as part of the land use application.
All square footages of areas to be dediicteci (i.e. public right-of-w8y, private access easernP.nts. and
critical r.1reas-protccted slopes. we!lan,=!s_·1 rl'LIS! l:e provided at the time of formal land use application in
order to determine density.
Development Standards: The R-8 zor:c ~8,Tnits one residential structure/uni! per lot. Detached
accessory structures are permitted at a maxi; 11 _11~-, number of two per fot at 720 square feet each, or one
per lot .:cit 1,000 squ.?lre feet in size
Minimurn_Lol_Size, Wicllh and DElpjh -T/1P, '"" irr,um lot size thnt would permitted in the R-8 zone is 4,500
sq_ ft. for p.Jrcels greater than 1 gross <.ic1 c ,-nrd f),000 sq. ft. for p8rcels less than 1 acre-gross.
The site is gr-eater than one (1) acre-gros,, i'1erdore, a minimum lot size of 4,500 sq. ft. (net area-after
easement deductions, if applicable) wo1_1ld /.J(-J required. A minimum lot width of 50 feet for interior lots and
60 feet for corner lots, as well as a min rnum ic! depth of 65 feet, is also required.
Lot width of Lots 1 and 2 was not shown, the rest of the lot dimensions appear to comply as
proposed for the pre-application.
Land area included in private access easements must not be included in lot area calculations.
Please provide both the gross and net squar~ footage of each lot at the time of formal land use
application. For the formal land use ;1pi)·1C<1iiur1, all lots must be fully dimensioned to determine
compliance.
Building Stan_Q.sir_ds -The R-8 zone wouiu .1llow c.1 maximum building coverage of 35% of t11e lot area or
2,500 square feet, whichever is greater fm 101s 5,000 square feet in size or greater. Lots less lilan 5,000
square feet in size would perrnit a maxi;"11 irr1 buiidir·g coverage of 50% of the lot area.
In lhe R-8 zonc:i, building height is restr1ctl~cl iu 3U feet and two stories. Detached accessoi y structures
nwst remain below A height of 1 G feet csr 1d 0·1n-stnry with a gross floor ore a that is less than the primary
structure. Accessory structures are alsc ,ric!ucJcc:' 1•1 building lot coverage calculations.
Square footages of bu1ld1ngs lo rem,iir . ,t cry, must be provided at the tirne of formal land use
a~plicc11ion .4./so, any buildings that are tu be :-em~Jved/clcrnolished must obtain a demolition perinit and
be removed and inspected prior to recmdin~; h(-o :111c.d plat.
Set!l_9.c;;h~ ---Setbc-1cks are the minimum di.st:_mce ·-equired between the buifding footprint and the property
JinE or private access easement_
T/1e required set!)cicks are 15 fl_ for the pr·;:-n~ry slructure and 20 ft. for attached garages accessed from
the front yard in tt·1e front, 20 ft. in the rear zind '.'i ft on interior side yards. The side yards along a strfwt
setbacK 1s 15 ft for the primary structure d1cl 2U ft for the attached garages which access from tile side
yard along a streeL
Setbacks are not provided in the pre-applicat\on information. As part of tl1e Land Use Application
submittal, setbacks including the existing residence shall be required. Setbacks are to be shown
from the access easement and criticai cnc;:i buffer.
Access/Parking: i\ccess lo the develop'i:c·11 ,:; proposed along the existing drive off of NE 2011
' St and
extending east across the stream. The cxis'.inu residence fronting Jones Ave NE is to rernain. Proposed
lot 1 through 6 will gain access via the P,'V<iic, ;iccess easement off of NE 201h St. The proposal did not
m(iict the width of the easement
The .access easement needs to comply with street and critical areas requirements. Proposal
shows the access within the stream buffer and serving 5 lots,
Private streets are allowed for access le si,, o:· le" lots, with no more than 4 of the lots not abutting c;
public rigill-of-w<ly. The street is to include c-i niir"i11·c,ci easement width of 26 feel with 20 feel of paving.
Private driv(iw~iys rnay serve a rrJ8ximurn ui" i'.\·c., r,,!-::i ~ind rnust have a minimum easement width of 2U tePt
w,t11 12 feet of paving
Blueberry H~iven ~!hort Pint
Mc1rch 24, 2005
Pre-Applic;::ition McHting
Page 3 of 6
Each Jot is required to accommodak un stree-:-i)arking for a minimum of two vehicles per lot. Jn addition,
cippropriate sh0red maintenance and ;_=-icet:!ss aqreement/easements will be required between lots with
shared access.
Private streets and private driveways ;iri: e~-ise1'f1ents. The !and area of the easement is to become part ot
the abutting !ots
Addresses of lots along private streetsic11·1vew,1ys are to be visible from the public street by provision of a
sign sl8ting all house numbers and ,s to lie localed al the intersection of the privale street and the public
street.
o_~i_y~_vy.9y__9..JPdcs: The maximum dnvovv;iy slopes cannot exceed fifteen percent (15%), provided that
driveways exceeding eigt1t percent (U'/_,) arc :o provide slotted drni11s at the lower end of the driveway. If
tile grade exceeds 15%, a varianc.:e frc,,n t•ie l:3ocHd of Adjustment is requi1·ed.
Landscaping and Open Space: Fer cJlca1s ,,outting non-arterial public streets, the minimum off-site
landscupmg is 8 five (5 ft.) wide irri\Jd'.er.J O( cfrought resistant landscape strip provided that if there is
additional undeveloped right of-way w, excess nl 5 ft., this also must be landscaped. For plats abutting
principal. rninor or coHector arterials. ihc vv1citli increases to 10 ft. unless otherwise determined by t11e
reviewing official duri11g the subdivision prucl:ss
Tree requirements for plats include al leas: two (2) trees of a City approved species with a minimum
caliper of 1 '.I, inches per tree must be pla,1ted ,n the front yard or planting strip of every lot prior lo
building occupuncy.
A landscape plan must be provided wit!, the formal land use application as prepared by a registered
Landscape Architect, a certified nurserymar: or other certified professional.
Sensitive Areas: Based on the City's c,,kc:I t1reas Maps and available information, the site 1s located
within criticaJ areas, including: lands/1cle 11;.:;zards. stream and wetlands.
Geologic ttq;i.:ards_ -The site appears t(J cunt;;::ii:1 areas ot 15% to 40% slopes as shown on the City's
Slope Analysis mcip
Sensitive slopes hove grades from 2f.-~{1 to 40°/.,. Specific standards also apply for development located
within sensitive slopes. landslide cmt: 1?rnsion hazard areas. Protected slopes are defined as
topographical features that slope in excess of 40% and have a vertical rise of 15 feet or rnore.
Pursuant lo the Renton Municipal Code ( 1-ilv1C4-3-050J) the applicant will be required to obtain a
geotecl,nical report stamped and sigr,c·1 fm,n a Geotechnical Engineer stating that the proposed
development 1s suitable with respect tu the cur~·cnt site conditions for soils, slopes, landslides, erosion.
seisrnic, etc. In addition, the report \.VOCJ!d need to address any special construction requirements
deemed necessc1ry by the Geotechnicel Er1~;i11ecr
Through the plat review process, the C1t:.,i 1·nc.1y condition the approval of the development in order to
require mitigation of any potential hazard::; u.JsuJ on the results of the studies. !n addition, pursu~mt to
RMC section 4-3-050.J 3, the geotcclrnir:di repo, I submitted with the application may be required to
undergo independent secondary review !Jv ;1 cual1fied specialist selected by the City 81 the applicant's
expense
!".'/.~ti ands --Wetlands are known to exist on the subject plat. The applicant provided a wetland delineation
report prepared t,y Ellisport Engineering, lr'c. October 20, 2004 addressing the quality and size at the
wetlands. streams and classification. The report c0ncluded from 3 soil test pits the site did not meet the
three criteria for a wetland. The site nl:-w corit,;1ins a stream, which the report classified as a Class 3
req,11iir1[J 25-fool l>uffer. The required buffers will need to be shown. The proposal shows the access
easement in the buffer and crossing the buffer and stream_ Any proposed modifications to the
requirements must be clearly identified and written request with justification provided by the
applicant would be required_
The wetland report will need to be prf:p,:i·eu hy a qu.'.3/ified wetlands biologis! and subrnittecJ w1!f1 the
formal land use app!ic3tion. Based on ttF: urn·r::1/. code, for wetlands presenl, the applicc1b!e buffer widths
based mi the ca:egory of the wetland ;,ic rcq1Jired (Category 1 -100 fl; Category 2 -50 ft.. and
Cate~ory 3 --25 ft.) Please see Renton i,h:,cic;;;,; Code 4-3-050 for current regulations.
fJluebterry Haven Short P/~Jf
tv1ar"r:tl 14. 200.S
Pre-AppliCcll1on Mer.>ting
Pc1ge 4 of 6
The new Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), which is tentatively proposed to be adopted in April/May
2005, may affect the subject prat in terms of the wetland buffer widths.
Strearns/c_reeks_-The current code 1equires ~J 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM)
ci( the Category 3 stream However the new Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), which is tentatively
proposed to be adopted in April/May 2005, outlines new regulations for streams and creeks.
According to the wetland delineation submitted with the pre-application (prepared by Ellisport
Engineering, Inc dated October 20, 2004) a Class 3 Stream, which would require a 25-foot buffer
on each side of the OHWM. The City's w~hsite provides additional information on the proposed CAO
See :1,_\__\\·w.1..·i.r.-..:nton_wJ.U'.:i
Variance: Per RMC Section 4-4-130 ~1 vcmnnr:e from tree cutting and land clearing regu!atfons may be
required for proposed impr1ct to critica.1 circa (i.e. stream).
Environmental Review: The project requires SEPA review due to the number of lots of the proposed plat
(greater than four dwelling units ancJ cri:1cal src,;1s). The proposal would be brought to the Environmental
Review Cornrnittee for review, as it is their charfJ8 to make threshold determinations for environmental
checklists. Typically, mitigation of impacts is ;iccomplished throug~1 fees related to issues such as
transportation, fire c:md parks as we!! nr, n1ea~;urc3 to reduce impacts to environmental elements such as
soils, streams, water, etc.
Permit Requirements: The project wo11lcl require Hearing Examiner Short Plat review and Environmental
(SEPA) Review With concurrent review ul triese applications, the process would take an estimated time
frame of 12 weeks. After the requiret! ·1ot:-i1cat101~ period, the Environmental Review Committee would
issue a Tlireshold Determirwtion for the pmwrt Wnen the required two-week appeal period is completed,
the µrowct would go before the HearinG f:xce,1-i1-,e, for a recommendation to the City Council on the Short
Piaf. The Hearrng Examiner's recommendcit:011, as well as the decision issued by the City Council. would
tic subject to two-week appeal periods
Tho application fees would be $1,000 for li1c Sno:: Plat and Y, of full fee for SEPA Review (Environmor1tal
Checklist) whicl1 is dependent on project valc;e: less than $100,000 is $200 (1/2 of $400.00 full fee) and
project value over $100,000 is a $500.00 fee (1/2 of $1000.00 full fee) plus first class postage per mailing
label required for notification to surroumk,g property owners within 300 feet of the site. The estimated
fees for the land use t.1pplications are $1 ,soo.::u p,us postage costs.
The applicant will be required to install ;-1 puOlic i11formation sign on the property. Detailed information
regarding the land use application subr111tL::1I :·equirements is provided in the attached handouts
Once Short Plat approval is obtained. 1!1'3 applicant must complete the required improvements and
dedications, as welf as satisfy any cond1t1or1~:, ol the preliminary approval before submitting for Short Plat
Recording. The newly created lots may ocly be suitl after the plat has been recorded.
Fees: In addition to the applicable bu1ld1:10 ,:ind construction permJt fcos, the following mitigation fees
would be required prior to the recorciing uf the pi;Jt
• A Transportation Mitigation F-ce based on $75 per each new average daily trip attributable
to the pro;cct;
• A Parks Mitigation Fee based on S530. 76 per new single family resic!ence; and,
• A Fire Mitigation Fee bas,'(! on $488 per new single-family resfrJence
A handout lislrng all of lhe City's Developrncnt related fees is included in the packet for your review.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The existing developrnent is located within the Residential
Single Family (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Lrnicl Use designation. The following proposed obJectives and
polic,es are applicable to the proposal:
Land Use Element
Objective LU-FF: Encourage ro-investrnent anci re/iabilitation of exist1hg /Jousmg, and development of
new res1iJe11tiu/ plats· resulting in quality nciqh{)urhooc!s that:
I. Are planned at wban densities ancf ,mr,iemcnt Growth Management targets,
tfa:eberry Haven Shc_)ri Plat
M~llch 24. 200'.)
2. Promote expansion and use of public tronsportation; and
3 Make more efficient use of urhan se,vice_-.,-ancJ infrastructure.
Prc-Applical;on Meeting
Pc;1ge !l of 6
Policy LU-147. Net development densitws sl1011hf fall within a range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre
If/ Residential Single Family neighborhocJ(/s
Policy LU-148. A minimum lot size of 5. 000 s11u,,re feet should be allowed on in-fill parcels of less than
one acre (43.560 sq. ft.) in single-family designations. Allow a reduction on lot size to 4,500 square feet
on parcels greater than one acre to creatP. dn incentive for aggregation of land. The minimum lot size is
not intended to set the standard for density in tl1e c!esigna/ion, but to provide flexibility in subdivision/plat
design and fucilitote development within the allowed density range.
Policy LU-149. Lot size should exclrn.lu ,nrivate sidewalks, easements, private road, am.I driveway
easements, except alley easements.
Policy LU-150. Requirer/ setbacks sl" ,,Jicl exclude public or private legal access areas, established
through or to a lot, and parking areas.
Policy LU-152. s;ngle-famiJy lot size. Jot width. setbacks, and impervious surface should be sumcient to
allow private open space, landscaping tu prov/Cle buffers/privacy without extensive fencing, and sufficient
area for maintenance activities.
Environmental Element
Objective EN-C: Protect and en/Janco tile City's rivers, major and minor creeks anc! intermittent stream
courses.
Objective EN-D: Preserve and protect w0tlnnds for overall system functioning.
Policy EN-8. Achieve no overa/f net loss of llw City's remaining wetlands base
Policy EN-10. Establish and protect buffers along wetlands to facilitate infiltration and reduce amount and
velocity of run-off, and provide for wildlife lublat
Policy EN-76. Design, locate, and construct utility systems in a manner wl1ich will preserve the integrity
of the exi.':i'ting /and forms, clrainage ways. :·md natural systems.
Community Design Element
Objective CD-A: The City's unique naturill features, including land form, vegetation, lakes/Jore, river.
creeks and strearns, and wetlands shou/J i)e protected and enhanced as opportunities arise.
Policy CD·1: Integrate development into natural areas by clustering development and/or adjusting site
plans to preserve wetlanc/s, steep s/c,.n,cs all(/ notable stands of trees or other vegetation. Natural
features should function as site ameni!if-'!s. UsP. incentives such as flexible lot size and configuration to
encourage preservvtion and add amenity vnlub
Policy CD-13. Infill development. defined cJs new short plats of nine or fewer lots, should be encouraged
in order to add variety. updated housing steicA, anrl new vita!dy to neighborhoods
Policy CD-13. Infill development shou!c! bn reflective of the existing character of establ1sl1od
neigt,borhoods even when c/es,gnec/ using c/1/tercnl architectural styles, anc/ !or responding to more urban
setbacks, //eight or lot requirements. lnf,ii ,iv, Gir,pmcnt should draw on elements of existing development
suc/1 as placement of structures. vegetation. nud iocation of entries and walkways, to reflect the site
planning and scale of existing areas.
Policy CD-17. Development slwuld be ,ies:uned to result in a high quality development as a primary
goal, rattier than to maximize density as c? fit st :~uns1deration.
Blueberry Hoven Shod PJU
M;uch 2,1, 2005
Additional Comments:
Pre,App!ication Mee1ing
Pc19e G of ti
• It is likely that the new Critical Are8s Or di,,ance would be effective at the time that this plat is
submitted to the City Staff recommends tl1at the applicant venfy the final regulations of the
ordinance prior to submitting the formal hnd use application.
• In advance of submitting the full land use application package, applicants are strongly encouraged to
bring in one copy of each applicaiion rnateri.:-1.I for a pre-screening to the customer service counter to
help ensure that the application is ccr•1plctrs pr•or to making all copies
cc: Jennifer Henning
Neighborhood Detail Map 4
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISIOI
WAIVl:::rl OF SUBMITTAL REQUlrlcMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
This requirement may be waived by:
1 . Property Services Section
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section
4. Development Planning Section
PROJECT NAME: ~-'.~·~=jyl;f=·~' VlZ,~· 111~."-l . ....._/::l--"""~·~Ut~-:J.,,._-,1=;.,Y~f--f'='lecf°
DATE: __ 11 +-/ ~2,-_1 +/~c0~----
c,0-. -
Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\waiverofsubmittalreqs_ 9-06 xis ;,j) 09/06
VELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER uF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
················'llill!lllill1;llilllllll!lllllll 1!1111!!1 illllli'I
Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis,
il!ll~rllrlil'tilf¥£~1[iI•·:
Site Plan 2 AND,
v' ~tMl~~l!ttii!•;ifii~!~!l'illll!IIiillll!!~ll11II!l'i
v' Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental 4
;-.§tr.I}tiRl!~ilffl!lii!!!l1il\llm!ilk:iillllf;i;lilmiill!i!tl!I
Street Profiles 2
Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan,
~r1ii:&,llli~m1x~l}l1li!!lllillt1e11~111111iii
Utilities Plan, Generalized 2
l!lll!!ffi~:ll'll!til!lllii'i!:IlliI!i1!!:il'ii1;:!llMI!
Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Preliminary 4
Wireless:
Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3
Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND,
Lease Agreement, Draft 2 ANo 3
Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 ANO 3
Map of View Area , AND 3
Photosimulations 2 AND 3
0H r-etct ',J-1~·~~
This requirement hiay be waived by:
1. Property Services Section
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
PROJECT NAME: (j ,tu.,l,~j ~ ,'jt.ol't ~-
DATE: _.,._,[ \c1-/_,.,7.,""Z-c~(e.>.0"-G=--------3. Building Section
4. Development Planning Section
Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\waiverofsubmittalreqs_S..06.xts 09/06
DENSITY
WORKSHEET
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98055
Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231
.... ·.· ,·"';
1. Gross area of property: 1. rJ 'l l&S: square feet
2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations.
These include:
Public streets**
Private access easements**
Critical Areas*
Total excluded area:
3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area:
4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage:
5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned:
l DZ. ':I l square feet
~~~= square feet
q lo ~o square feet
2. \ q J q \ \ square feet
3. 5 'l I bSlf square feet
4. , 3 )-acres
5. units/Jots
6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 6. 6, 3 = dwelling units/acre
*Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for
development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations
including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways."
Critical areas buffers are not deducted/excluded.
** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded.
Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\density.doc Last updated: ll/08/2004 1
November 21, 2006
Preliminary Plat Application
Project Narative
Blueberry Haven -7 lot short plat
2010 Jones Ave NE
Renton, WA
Required Lane use permits -Master Application & Environmental Review
Zoning designation -R8 for properties and surrounding properties
Current site is a single family residence abutting Jones Ave with the most south east
property line abutting 20th Ave NE. The property is currently surrounded by six privately
owned single family dwelling properties. The east side of the property has a 3 7 single
dwelling dense neighborhood development. The property has a drainage ditch running
south to north in approximately the center of the property with the most east property
ingress egress easement thru a northeast property to 20th street. A city utility easement
with existing sewer line runs south to north thru the property 100' from the most east
property line.
Site is a mostly flat site with the most west sides having constrained slopes. Site has had
fill in past construction during the construction of the existing single family dwelling site
of a sand loam type. Soil type is sand with drainage run off sloped towards the drainage
ditch.
This short plat proposal is for the purpose of lot development for future building sites.
The applicant is not anticipating applying for building construction permits. The site area
is 77,265 sq ft. Deductions include 9664 sq ft for drainage ditch, 10251 sq ft for the
proposed road. Net area is calculated as 57,197 sq ft. Net acreage is 1.31 acres. Seven
lots are proposed. .18 is the calculation for net density. The proposed lots vary in size
from 10, 850 sq ft. maximum to 4,565 sq ft minimum. Access is proposed from 20th
street for 5 lots with a 48' right of roadway, crossing the ditch 134' from 20th street to
access three additional lots. Fire emergency tum around will be provided by a
emergency access only exit thru the l 5' ingress egress easement on the most east side
with an additional 15' of existing property to accommodate a 20' emergency vehicle exit.
Proposed lot I will face 20th street and lots 2 thru 6 will be accessed via a road crossing
the drainage ditch with a 48' culvert road crossing. Proposed lots will be used for single
family dwellings. Total construction cost is approximately $75,000. Anticipated fair
market value is $1,250,000. Six existing dead poplar trees will be removed and two
deciduous trees will be removed. Thirteen conifers will be removed.
' 't*b v < ,; f: cia.Lt s -= t..{-+: 8-S prn
'Vvopo~d Hctutc~:va.11~(-brirhm
. : __t) Ile S f-n 2.f/"*7 . . .
. At:e.rrClnv) io 2..Dv,
..-----------------------·-
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way. Renton, WA 98055
Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231
PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Chapter 43.21C 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 you 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 infonmation reasonably related to determining if there may be significant
adverse impact.
USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals. even though questions may be answered "does not
apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in
the checklist to the words "project," "applrcant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal,"
"proposer," and "affected geographic area." respectively.
R:\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\envchlst.doc09/74/03
')
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
2.
3.
4.
01 utwry H-rt v. I 1
Name of applicant:
R\dlLLrd -A LituYc, lee epvci llj
Address and p~Ofl!' number of ap.plicant and contactfllrson:
It, ctu,ct ":' '=,[LLL.f' ll r ( {. C.iO I" Cl I £_,<. I
2P10 .:io NE ~J,, Av C ts.:,,-:_ ~~rNTbl'J I}.) A ( 'l <c, C.>C. (.
Date cnecklist prepa/ecf ? · · J v.::,
NDv '2--0, ?-CD lo
5. Agency requesting checklist:
C.; h~ c,f f.:e.-Vtt-t ) \
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
f\Sp.:-P
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected
with this proposal? If yes, explain
I-JO
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared,
directly related to this proposal.
vJ e + I cu1d 1)e I I nu1J-1 cl\ ~-:ge.f D rf-
\',Jm.r Ci fl$ 5 i h C(.i....·f I ._ 1/\ r1i? v/ ( e (U
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 governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the
project and site.
Sho(+ p ICLt -ti)( \,, t·ri_, If I v\q '1'1 1 2k S" ~f+ parce)
tu ,s~lot<:) L(1A1\,4 Ct r-R..rnO,.,v'\LA-9 r.esicLtncu
o.s u'f1( of 4Jt: ')1::iu)6t'::>. Tvu £5~ y1e1,v /ots
\JJ o l,, \ d. bt, -{; ( +r, ( (JU v po sc of r .es I c~ rL ti oJ..
\0 JI I cLC: rte, c,, 1 tc +,, ;, fv·h)ye._, L{ )<'...,,'
R:\PW\OEVSERV\Forms\Planning\efWchlsl.doc 2
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise
location of your proposed project. including a street address, if any, and section, township, and
range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries
of the site(s). Provide a legal description. site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if
reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this
checklist. \ 111 [.' , , ,/.-,I a
, l wl,LUA. , n C•.ff'l1 ca:t10Y1
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. EARTH
a.
b.
C.
General description of the site (circle one~rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other . ~
What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)
~a C. t "5 ,cu o-f I' r ,.1di11 a..f L"/ 1', h t\Ct (l,.S ,d,t,,i,c<.J -I~·;.,
S.G, c.,.vnercd Zt·'" ''it /'1.0.S 10 '/. s)e,pu
What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, cla~dl gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify~and note any
prime farmland.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe. fV Cl
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
tJ 0
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
P(ope.v·~ ,s Ot'1;, ,,, ,: +ill..+-(l.T' rvupo":>t'd l"tt'.W /o+
l DC o..:t°l OY\ ')
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
3u'/.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth. if any:
Nlk
3
R:\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Ptanning\envchlst.doc
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 .
. ' r~ \ A-
b. Are there any off-site sources of efl)ission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe. tJ ": f\
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
r'"'' I A-
3. WATER
a.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Surface Water:
Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-
round and seasonal streams. saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type
and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
vn: ... , v'\.O..C c u , 1 , 1 , CCL+ tt c.iov j 4 -d.-v cc,_,;,, s. _ +u
\"<...(_l'\"""\&"--u.. ( ,·,, k. hw,..vL p,c"r--e_.,,hl ·)-.-, '->ndlJ..r reodv-'a.'{S
Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
"ft'-<:c., pt"Vtt+0t0ec:/ -t-L cnr;:,cl1tct1 iU1th 20· c,.,tl~tJ-+·
CW 1 cl r, CJ)./ IL fM~'Lr
Estimate tlie amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from
surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
m,n,.nctC al £.,ik_,,of cutve..,t-Jt'IS.f.tl..iltd--11,,h
fo '( r \'\ \, iltc roctl:\
Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. m lUj ( (/ 1.Jv i( (/_, I· ,: it ! I ,r:,J. d I v~·s I DYi ( OYl:,, I S fr.iv<±· uJ I '-rh
l-+t'J I rtl.'j C.. ( j[ i / !I I p V O Lt' ~f;,
Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan.
f1}0
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and ant,cipated volume of discharge.
f\10
R:\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\envchlst.doc 4
b. Ground Water:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known,
2)
c.
1)
2)
d.
vVaJtv tL1sd1uryrl ·fc grouYld i1.J{tfif.
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 systern(s) are expected to serve.
Iv lA-
Water Runoff (including storm water):
Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known), Where will this water flow? Will this water
flow into other waters. If so, describe.
( . I I (1,l. /'l off
Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
NO
Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if
any:
4. PLANTS
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
v"'deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
"7_ evergreen tree: fir. cedar, pine, other
~ shrubs
_Lgrass
__ pasture
__ crop or grain
__ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
__ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other
__ other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Se Vt.vi c( ec i (i ,.u ,, ·, +re e S
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
NI~ 5
R:\PVV\DEVSERVIForms\Planning\envchlst.doc
5. ANIMALS
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site:
Birds hawk, heron, eagle_i:So.;-gbirE~)Other J)ttLLS 1 hw~11.,,)~'( t' c1. 5
Mammals,f(e;:),ear, elk.~ other _________ _
Fish: bas~l!11i1on, trout, herring, shellfish, other ______ _
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
rJ ,A
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain
tJ f't '
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
I ., r" ·. \-,
6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a.
b.
c.
What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc. ( ! ._ , _ _ Cl r, "C / I'"' 0 ,
~. i l' r" ii I (_,., i ~Ju....-:,. ( v,.._...,,
Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe.
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:
r
' ,· ,,
\,' I +'<
7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
a.
1)
2)
Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals,
risk of fire and explosion. spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe. I\ I A-
Describe special emergency services that might be required.
Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
N \ t-\'
6
R:IPWIDEVSERV\Forms\Planning\envcl11sl.doc
b.
1)
2)
Noise
What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
What types and levels of nrnse 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.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
r~ Ir\
8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
~fcJ i cLc., Li I rd Cl u.)e_// 1 nq S
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
~ h-
c. Describe any structures on the site.
t\tS iCU..,Ul (.d , ,'v' i kN\ 1 C/ (l_lY\ t/lOil S·LJ
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
K-is
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
'r t i _,
''J '
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
i.
specify.
NIH
Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
/) ,.r .....
R:\PW\OEVSERV\Forms\Planning\envchlst.doc
7
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected
land uses and plans, if any: I" t J /+"'
9. HOUSING
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle,
or low-income housing.
b. Approximately how many units. if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
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.
tJ ~
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur? tJ j ft
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
8
R:\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\envchlst.doc
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
tJ )r.-
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, ii any:
rJ /rt
12. RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
P0--rt, /\ ),1f/d.ecn ~ J.. '--Iµ;,
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
;JI A-
13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION
a. Are there any places or ob1ects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so. generally describe.
p.,/ 0
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
fv' 0
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
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.
Nt~\J lots LI.J,J~ L,t servicrc{_
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop? f '1 L' L-f-jO I O cf c. 'S
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
l c-no
9
R:\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\envchlst.doc
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
' t ? l pnvae. t,./ \ (:. f _· .J ",tw I n 1:vt. roa.c
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation?
If so, generally describe. f,v 'O
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
tJ I /:1
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
tJ /A-
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result ,n an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection. health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
NU
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
f,/ u
16. UTILITIES
a. efuse service,
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction acllvities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might
be needed /JI ft
C. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and
complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance
that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or
willful lack of full disclos o y / ; -, -_ -,.,.,.
Proponent: --,~s4~y
NamePrinted: &1cf?ay// ~ft,&rfdlt;f
Date: t.llJ I ;_·,c . ~:"'cu '2 •
R:\PW\OEVSERV\Forms\P1anning\envchlst.doc 10
'
CEDAROCI< CONSULTANTS, 1NC.
February 17, 2006
Jennifer Henning
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: Upper Kennydale Creek Basin Water Classification
Gordley, Umbedacht, Dutro Properties
Dear Ms Henning:
At your request I am providing an independent third party review of water type classification for
the upper Kennydale Creek headwaters area. As you know, I was a consulting aquatic biologist
for the streams and lakes portion of the new City Code, thus I am familiar with the intent behind
the code. It is my understanding that there is disagreement as to the appropriate classification for
the existing watercourse. This watercourse starts in the area southeast of the blueberry farm and
continues north and west eventually passing under Jones Ave NE near NE 241
h Street. I have also
provided an assessment of existing functions and values of the ditched watercourse.
As part of the review I examined a number of documents and visited the site. The documents
include:
• A copy ofRMC 4-3-050(L) (revised 6/05)
• Figure 4-3-050Q4 Streams and Lakes
• A copy of Section 4-ll-190, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260.
• A letter from Jennifer Henning (City of Renton) to Terry Dutro (Masterbuilder
Construction) dated December 1, 2005 regarding a reclassification request.
• A memo from Gregg Zimmerman (City of Renton) to Terri Briere (City ofRenton) dated
November I 0, 2005 regarding reclassification.
• A letter from Neil Watts (City of Renton) to Terry Dutro dated July 29, 2005 regarding a
reclassification request.
• A letter from Terry Dutro to City of Renton Hearing Examiner dated August 12, 2005.
• A letter from Nancy Weil (City of Renton) to Terry Dutro dated July 22, 2005 regarding
a reclassification request.
• A letter from Hugh Mortensen (Watershed Company) to Nancy Weil dated July 19, 2005
regarding a Blueberry Meadows environmental review.
• A letter from Anne Seethoff (Elli sport Engineering) to Terry Dutro dated July 29, 2005
regarding a critical areas evaluation.
• A letter from Anne Seethoff to Lauralee Gordley (homeowner) dated April 25, 2005
regarding a stream classification.
I ·.lh',1'~ ;_• '.',1).' • Pi);::'';., S8-09h1 F 42S/780-SS62
Jennifer Henning
February I 7, 2006
Kennydale Headwaters
• A letter from Terry Dutro to the City of Renton dated May 17, 2005 regarding
reclassification.
• A report entitled Wetland Delineation, Gordly and Core Properties by Anne Seethoff of
Ellisport Engineering dated October 20, 2004.
• A letter from Ken Sargent to John Hobson (City of Renton) dated August 16, 1999
regarding a wetland delineation.
• A report entitled Wetland Delineation, Higate Sewage Lift Station Elimination, Renton,
Washington by Entranco dated December 1996.
• Various aerial photos from 1936, 1946, 1960, and 2002.
I visited the site on the afternoon of January 27, 2006. The weather was dry but an unusually
high amount of rainfall had fallen over the previous month. I reviewed the blueberry farm from
off-site locations on NE zo•h Street and NE 19th Place. I reviewed the Gordley property together
with Mr. Rick Gordley, I reviewed the Dutro property by myself. I was not allowed access to the
Umbedacht property but was able to see parts of it from other locations.
The watercourse in question was flowing strongly in all areas visited and much of the area
adjacent to the watercourse was saturated.
Water Type Classification
The watercourse has been classified by the City of Renton (Figure 4-3-050Q4) as a Class 4 water
based on their belief that: I) the watercourse is not fish-bearing, and 2) the watercourse is
intennittent (i.e. stops flowing in the summer) during years of normal rainfall. There is no
disagreement regarding fish-bearing status. If indeed the stream is intermittent, even just
occasionally, then fish from populations in Lake Washington would have to recolonize the
channel each winter. It is believed that the steep slope of the channel as it approaches Lake
Washington historically prevented fish from migrating past this point. Currently there is also a
manmade dam in this area.
There has been discussion of whether or not the watercourse is intermittent in normal years. If
the watercourse flows continuously during years of normal rainfall, it would be classified as a
Class 3 water. Conclusively evaluating the intennittent vs. continuous flow issue is difficult at
best and not possible at this time. The stream would most appropriately be examined during the
period between late July and late September during a year of normal rainfall. Normal Rainfall is
defined under Section 4-11-140 as "Rainfall that is at the mean or within one standard deviation
of the mean of the accumulated annual rainfall record, based upon the water year for King
County as recorded at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport".
This year looks like it might be unusually wet with rainfall currently almost 40 percent above the
mean. Water year 2005 was unusually dry ( about 20 percent below normal) but just barely met
the definition of Normal Rainfall. Water Year 2004 was near normal being about 10 percent over
the average. The wetland delineation conducted by Ellisport Engineering was completed on
October 6, 2004, typically a relatively dry time of the year. Records indicate that only 0.24
inches of rain had fallen in the previous IO days. Normal would have been about 0.50 inches
during the same period. Under Existing Conditions, Ellisport Engineering staff state:
Page 2 of5
•
,
'
Jennifer Henning
February 17, 2006
Kennydale Headwaters
"South across NE 2(/h Street is a blueberry farm where the Class II stream
originates. The stream flows under the street in a culvert which extends
northward onto the Gordly property. Water was flowing in the stream at the time
o(the site inspection". (underline added for emphasis).
The Watershed Company inspected the ditch on July 18, 2005, a normal but very dry year. They
reported "standing water was present in the pond and in the main ditch/stream".
Recollections of a past landowner in the area was provided by Mr. Dutro in his letter of August
12, 2005. A previous owner of the Blueberry Meadows Property told Mr. Dutro that "he thought
that the ditch on the blueberry farm to the south dried up in the summer at that time." He was
apparently referring to 1958 when he dug the ditch. Anecdotal evidence indicates the
watercourse may flow seasonally during some years and be perennial during others. The most
credible report was provided by the homeowners consultants (Ellisport Engineering) which
provided some evidence that the stream may flow year-round during normal years.
It is possible that previous to human disturbance the historic swamp dried up each year on the
surface. The ditch system may have cut into an elevation of perennial groundwater. This would
cause the ditch to be perennial where historically the ground water receded below the ground
surface elevation during normal years.
The second issue is whether or not the channel was artificially constructed in an area where no
naturally defined channel had previously existed. Certainly the existing channel is manmade.
Aerial photos from as early as 1936 show no obvious channels in the area. However, the area in
question has a very low gradient slope and one would not necessarily expect a well defined
channel to naturally develop under this situation.
The historic area was described as more of a swamp with very soft soils. In my experience,
watercourses in these relatively flat headwater valleys consist primarily of wide, swampy, and
densely vegetated areas. Defined flow patterns are difficult to discern with hydrology mainly
controlled by groundwater levels. High groundwater in the area was evidenced in wells dug for
the Higate lift station, local private wells, and the wetland pits. Many examples of this type of
feature can still be found throughout King County.
While these swampy areas are clearly a type of watercourse with important aquatic habitat
functions and values, the question is whether or not they meet the definition of "naturally defined
channeI". One could argue that a swamp is a channel and is the only type of channel that would
form under the circumstances. The definition in the Webster Dictionary defines channel as "the
bed of a body of water flowing on the earth". There is no evidence that the site was ever
hydraulically isolated. It most likely drained to the north under pre-existing conditions as it does
now.
The area was clearly a wetland and still contains wetland characteristics. The channel was dug to
drain the historic wetland and create "usable" land. The City of Renton may choose to
distinguish between wetlands and channels. However, there is no clear dividing line between the
two so any distinction would have to be done carefully.
Page 3 of5
Jennifer Henning
February 17, 2006
Conclusion
Available evidence supporting each Water Class is presented below:
Class 3 Water
Kennydale Headwaters
• Two recent reports during years meeting the definition of Normal Rainfall reported
observations of water in the ditch during the summer. One report was made relatively
early in the season, the other relatively late. However, no observations were made during
the driest time of the year and it is possible the stream dried up at some point one or both
years.
Class 4 Water
• One anecdotal statement about the creek going dry in 1958 was reported.
• Before the ditch was dug, the "swamp" may have dried up each year.
• A wide watercourse (swamp) meeting the dictionary definition of a channel was present
across the area in the past.
Class 5 Water
• Aerial photos show no well defined channel in 1936 though this was subsequent to
human disturbance.
The perennial stream flow issue (Class 3 vs. Class 4) can only be answered by direct observation
of flow characteristics in the channel during the summer. These data could take a few years to
gather if this winters heavy rainfall pattern continues.
The presence or absence of a previous naturally defined channel (Class 5 vs. Class 4) depends in
part on the definition of channel that is acceptable to the City. Evidence provided by the
applicant to date only addresses the absence of a well defined "classic" stream channel with
clearly identifiable banks. As this type of feature would not naturally be expected in this area, it
is not surprising one wasn't observed by early residents.
In the absence of conclusive evidence supporting a change from the existing Class 4 water
classification, it is my recommendation that this classification stands.
Functions and Values
Non fish-bearing stream channels and their riparian buffers are important to the contribution of
clean, cool, and productive flows to fish habitat downstream as well as providing wildlife habitat
and migration corridors. Vegetation in riparian areas shades streams and maintains cool water
temperatures needed by most fish. Plant roots stabilize stream banks and help control erosion and
sedimentation. Riparian habitat contributes leaves, twigs, and insects to streams, thereby
providing basic food and nutrients that support downstream fish and aquatic wildlife. Riparian
vegetation, litter layers, and soils filter incoming sediments and pollutants, thereby assisting in
the maintenance of high water quality. Riparian habitat moderates stream volumes by reducing
peak flows during flooding periods and by storing and slowly releasing water into streams during
low flows.
Page4 of5
'
Jennifer Henning
February 17, 2006
Kennydale Headwaters
The existing ditch on the Gordley property provides little in the way of riparian vegetation
beneficial to aquatic habitat. A single line of poplars planted along the west bank are dead.
Though they still provide a minor amount of shade, their organic nutrient contribution will soon
cease, as will any bank stability or wildlife ftmctions. The maintained turf grass on either side of
the channel and down into the watercourse does little to protect water quality or remove
biological and chemical contaminants from upslope runoff. Existing conditions are somewhat
better on the portions of the Umbedacht property that could be evaluated. Native vegetation
including a dense willow thicket have returned to some of the riparian corridor. Most of the
Dutro property appeared to have been kept cleared of vegetation in the past though exotic grasses
and blackberry are beginning to take over. Overall, the three properties provide minimal to
moderate riparian ftmctions under existing conditions.
Should the City approve moving all or parts of the watercourse, it is possible that a riparian
buffer could be created that would increase the overall ftmctions and values of the corridor in
comparison to existing conditions. With an appropriate planting design the channel could be
enhanced to protect water quality, improve shade, increase organic input and aquatic
productivity, provide channel stability, and prevent human access. These values would be
important to fish populations in Lake Washington which depend to large extent on input from
lake tributaries for food and nutrients.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Carl . Hadley
Principal Biologist
Cedarock Consultants, Inc.
Page 5 of5
•
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
)
)
)
DEC 11.·· 20%
a :e Lo J, ~ y ~ :c . being first duly swam on
oath, deposes and seys:
1. On lhe d, 1: day of IV@ t(~,,..,bt;'/', 20£lb_, I Installed Cf_ public Information
algn(s) and plastic flyer box on the property located at
l,O 11? iTuN I? s: A ,I e' 1(/e: far the fallowing project;
Levie,;</ .I WA 'i go.-,
#Iv~ 6 ect •c Ila v,c111
Project name (
?-4 u cg. Le ,e.
Owner Name
2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood deteil map marl<ed with an "X' to Indicate the location
of the Installed sign.
'
,. not -·-
1.2
I
-~-r:n
"' ---i::
·-o
---~
I -"" .. 'u co·:;
, , Cl,) -1 -:c:
Q'.'.:C:
---,----IQ)
:,,::
, I
" -·, -
' '
r----
----w z ---i~:=.;~
co-I> , , , -r::
I !"' Cl:'.'. , C:
·ca 1-•••• ,......... I
co --,
16lh
R-8 , ,
--) I E I tl _I , IL "' ~. , t-'." ·1 --
' I •
_J "11:1• --LR-=8! ~
t! -,,,,,,, , , 2:
;
/ '
! ';:::::::_::::=:, /,
C: [Ll j ·i z ~ R-8(P ~_f_,I'
NE 12lh St-o· "" •'
t:s:l,, _____ \.'::__ ------~~-=--R-_.:.Bc.LJ~Gc.::::,_~__J~ '~ } ,,(il
ZONING
PIBrPW TICHN1CAL IID.VlCP
U/01"8
E4 • 8 T2JN R5E E 1/2 0 •g•_,,go D4
1,440c
5 T23N R5E E 1 1 2
,,,,,,,, _______________ _
-~.
Printed: 12-05-2006
Payment Made:
CITY OF RENTON
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Land Use Actions
RECEIPT
Permit#: LUAOG-155
12/05/2006 03:57 PM Receipt Number:
Total Payment: 1,500.00 Payee: ALASKAUSA
Current Payment Made to the Following Items:
Trans Account Code Description
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review
Payments made for this receipt
Trans
Payment
Method
Check
Account Balances
Trans Account Code
Description
258555
Description
3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee
5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees
5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat
5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review
5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat
5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat
5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD
5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees
5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment
5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Horne Parks
5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone
5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt
5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev
5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval
5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use or Fence Review
5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees
5024 000. 345. 81. 00. 0024 Conditional Approval Fee
5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies
5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable)
5954 604.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage
5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax
Remaining Balance Due: $0.00
Amount
1,500.00
Amount
1,000.00
500.00
Balance Due
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.OD
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
DECO 5 2006
R0605992