Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA -08-057_Report 01
\, !I'D CIT Y Of" ~ RENTO N ~ / -------~ ~ L ---=-=-r-e-c-"-,,,,,,---,,-.-,,-_JJ / ,) -----~ MEA DO W AVE . N. w :: l '"C;'KE WAS H ING TON VI EW ESTATE S : I I :!,:=:~~B CLARI SSA PARTNER SHIP I .. ",., LAKE WASHINGTON VIE W ES1ATES RrN10N . WASHINGTON ;; \ -~ ------\\ / ~ o '" " o z o ~ " o < -i r o ~ .- MEAD OW AV E. N. 8> 1)0 1[ _- ,----____ J ",.J ! • ~ '~'KE WA SHIN G TO N V IEW ESTATE S ~ ~ I' t Ii RO B CLAR IS SA PARTN ERS HI P !In CITY OF ~ RE NTON --------......... ----- --------- ! LAK[ 'Ii A5HING I 0N VllW [SlATES RE NTON ..... AS I"II NGTO N 1 2 -' Ol,TrAl 1 ~ r r tl 'J j ci.!}O / ~ o » ~ o z o ~ ~ o < ~ r o ... , 8 , 8 '.OJVf ~ ,~ I ~~ ~i l I\~;;;" ~:1~ ~.;~ ~!i " . ~E ~: , , . ~i ~~ oj~ -- tu\i_:iUo ~ ~''''''' .!>O .OO tU~*·~.O\O ., s'<..'''",oo , , ~" : ,. ~l. i " , f .~ ;';: " ~'-': : , 8 , 8 ! , ' ~ ,,' LAKE WASH IN GTON V IE W ESTATE S : ~ I III <~< ROB CLARISSA PARTNERSH IP '".JO ,,~ ·.M ,>~ ,.ru ~ .. ~ "00 ,,~ I-- I !m CITY OF ~ RF:NTON ., • LAK E WASHINGTON VIEW ESTAT ES R[NTON. WA SHINGTON OunfJ'XJ1 .. -- , -,----f , i N <3 ~ o < ~ r o ~ ,- - I !I~ I ! LIJC! WASHINGTON VIE1f ESTATC3 - I ! I I , I mE ROE! &I: CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP AND CLARISSA Ii. FA WCE'IT --'-..,------- -- HANSEN S URVEYIIIG .-_.---_ .... _-------- LAKE WA$ttIHOTON \4[.W ESTATES RENTON. WASH IN GTON .. !" " II; LUA-_-__ IJII>-_-__ LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PORTION OF GOVERNllENT LOT I , SECTION 32, TWP. 24 N., RGE . 5 E., 11'.11. CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON , CURVE TABLE / / I , / , /.:' :I / I / ." • 't~. cr~"" ~ OPEN SPAC! TRACT ~ J.~ L37,.1 "P, S.17 Ao. +/- ~; 10 6._ I!.P. 0.14 .... /- ~'i ~I; " • '" e'..... I ......-(3 IV )..".~. ~It " 6 ',816 aI, 0.1& At:.. +/- ~r C'<'\>~.t • i-;. ~~~. • .. ~ ~. ,oa., • --<,< ,Jr,. y.~"~ "t; , ,~ :~. Q iii? ~ CT.. r Iii ,>-~-1-7?:rO-'''"'J! C12 JD.1:i ""# t 1~_ct..-• p......::a:..._~ • MI4'-._ 0; ROPOS~ ____. .. --=_---~. e.d ar, ~. 0.16 Ao. + /-.. .,;n RoJlD ". if , .... 4.,JIIj' '!'> ~_C 1; e +,.,. 'Zt,.,. ~~~. / 6 e .• So" 0 .:16 Ae. +/- !?~ -/ I I I 'b'" / '11 ' ~ I ........ ...,... COIIDO 1f01.. 4& POI.. __ 72 ..,-"'I. 41' POll. 1I!:()-23 I " = 40 ' 0' 40' 60 ' MIlS " IILIIDGl IS NIl tn1' OT IOmII LDT LM:~UfIII)""""'UO-_ ~""''''''_'01_ LEGEND • -at'1"D a.o: I • .......rTD: CIllO • • roo. IDI. .. CId[ • • an IOl .. CAlI: o • ne. ,.... ~ AI ICI'fD • • an VI' a. ItIIC6 1m .... --LAfUT III£VtIIDt ...., ... fOe.~.2,. !>or ,'---U' , ~ , ,4<' ..... ~Ir ~ • ,'---• OPEN SPACI TRACT -A- 13'7.1161 .. ,. 3.17 .10. +/- "'I'" I I ~ I ",I ~I~ I I I ____ -.l 8 ~ IUTCH _ SHE!.!... 2_ _n A wn:: SHD'T 3 1M or: oon. 1m L SIC. 32. TWP. 24 If .. IGI. 6 1 . YoM. CITY OF RENTON LAKE WASHINGTON VIn' C9TATES fILl: NO. LUA-_-_ HANSEN SURVEYING I " r:r 5 'R' -I ~ -...u. .. ~ DRAft' BT: Rr D...ft" 03/2t/O'l , 108 110.: 2G8:M l'I'_u.tII ........ --. .. _ .. __ .lIa raz _ _ _. CIID) In': ... "'~ ," • 40' ..... 2 or s LUA- UID-_-__ '0 ~. .. eJ .. ,. ~ o.~ M. +/-.. ~ . .. .. ... "P, !r.~ 0.10 _ +1-. . ~ ~ < .~ • .' a.-. --• ~ MATCH SH!ZJ' 2 UHE--SHEET'" S- LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PORTION OF GOVERNIIENT LOT 1. SECTION 32. TlIP. 24 N .• RGE. 5 E.. 11'.11. CITY OF RENTON. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON OPEN SPACE TRACT •• - 13'UOt .. ro 3.11 _ +/- +~~., •. ... >It. 7.,~ .... I 1 1 NI" ~I~ "I" ",I ~I~ 1 1 I ____ -.l ~}- , (>~ ~", ¢'<t ~~. ~ 8 50' ICI( ...,..,. --lEe. .... 11C11iZJC11&a .• tI,_",. ~"'" '''''J:~. I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 II 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1\';,. II!" 1 I 1;0 , I .... ~J,>. ''5.~. I '~'" -~~ 111'Ir.14' E n,' I ~ I 2II~~1IIDfIQII ~ 8 e ? ~~-~ OPEN SPACE T'RACT -1.- 13'7,1161 5.r, 3.1'7 Aa +/- 1 1 I I ·/~3>-· .' '. " 1 I 13 ':5' ..-: a!Y OF IIPI1tlM I I z 14,.114 s.r. 0. ... +/-, MlC. _ 13IIUCnUl11 ~ """":::.~~ 1 1 0 ~ L_ ,.; .'~. --". e "" • (3 • rna 0.4' II 111 ' • e , I---~? ~# ~"'I''= e , I" ------.-'\-I~ r ------.:.---I.J 1 ~I i I ~ I r S 1:;~"! 1 1 ~I' : ~ ~I ~ ;; -I ..,:; III --: '0 1 ~ c -0 1 CU;~.[ ,,... S 88' .,'OJ-E 1J.4 . .52' 8 Me. *' 75100Cl'41 16:. ltD. l'S100em.., 1 L==="=~~ ~-----...... 1II!C._~1 :.. ....... ::..: •• I: _ ~ ___ N. _40TH ~ ___ '--£-"'-~" iI '"'z ~ -e- I 1" = 40' O' 40' 80' MID IT ........ a I'DI an IT .:JfT1III UIT LX ~ UIICI .aID _ UD-31H1212 M.01'I:M"'S ru ...-. _,012I0000I LEGEND • • ID:TDII aJICJt J • ...-ra CDMIt • • na. IDL ... CAa: • • lET _ II CAl[ o • ,.. .... era ... tICl'O • • 1lT vr ta. \l1CW ~ ~- LATUT IIIlVtSDIo 1SII7J11 -_ .. A ~ . .. ~ ::.< PoHnoW 0 .... con. LO'I' L DC. :I!.. ftP. 24 "., II:;&. lit I., •. M. CITY OF REln'OH LAD YASHDfGTON YIn ESTATIS FILE NO. LUA-_-_ HANSEN SURVEYING I Hf _ 5 1ft' E - 1Me~.~AnI IaAW 8'f: Br' I fllt'lt «J/PSI!f1? I .108 MO.: rr_ .... ~_ &1, -.a.. ... _ ................ ,&2 __ -Icam 8'f: IIJIl 18C~ 1" _ 40' I SHIft: ..... 3 or 3 J .-;::~ ----------------------------f',_) --------_._,. -------c _ I;~I ':~J '=r l ITI I~IT :~ .. It, , p~ -, IIJI~!! " " t :1' ~ ..,., !' ~! ~ • t , 1m} , I , , I · ~ ~ " ' ' , 0 " II f 1\ l I ~'~Il= " ~ Ii \~ _J 0 '" ~~I ~~6! i=:~ , , I 5 c" 1 ~~~I[' r --~[Il ~ I ,~ tl 1i ' (! ~~~ f " r '1/ r " d ., f il " I I I I " ~~ I, '-, '-~ '-~- t= 1= -""""'---~S ~ ::_ ~ I§~ I if '" " " ~ $ '" . , " = -, ~ ( n ,. r , m '0 0 • , • t , ! > , 0 , • , :) ~ & ~ " MEADO W AVE. N. ,i ~ ;:. ~ ~ ", • , l , , r. " 1'_ r d ~ • I~ , s ~ ~ 8 s 0 • 1 9 c " , ~ ! ." , , ~ , ~ l 1 ., un ClTY Of' ~ RE NTO N , " ~ LAKE \ilA SI"IN GTQN VIEW (ST ... TES R(NTON . W .... SHING TON F--- i ' ., :-L , I , "I ~' ;! 1 m .. I .. 1'-'I~ I- Ir , I , I , I 1111111 ! ~m!1 p.mh~ 1111111 j jllJlI 1111111 LAKE WASHINGTON VIE1f £STAT&9 -THE ROB & CLARISSA PAR'I'NERSHIP AND CLARISSA II. FAWCETT AID CI TY OF ~ REN TO N ~.::II.I:r;, 11 I I~ ! i I ! 'I :' UJ(E WASHI'IGTDN ... EW ESl~T£S RENTON. WASHINGTON -+-- '~ ...... I -.. -r ! 'I ;:;111 I ! 15 ~ -: +z--I. I' & i'I,1I 'Ill g I • I I . , II !, ~ I I I HANSEN SURVEYING ---.... _-------- Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mal lard Cove Lane Mt Vernon, WA 98274 te l: (360) 422-5056 PARTIES OF RECORD LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES LUA08-057, PP, SM, Greg Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Partnership PO Box 402 Cia rissa Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Partnership PO Box 402 em l: jchanson@verizon.net ( contact) Fall City, WA 98024 tel: (425) 222-7011 (applicant) Fall City, WA 98024 tel: (425) 466-5229 (owner) Updated: 07/08/08 Lynda Priddy EPA 1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle , WA 98101 " '" '" 11> February 4, 2015 Stuart Carson 20 Sixth Ave NE Issaquah, WA 98027 Via email: stuart@carsonnoel.com Community & Economic Development Department C.E. 'Chip'Vincent. Administrator SUBJECT: Lake Washington View Estates, LUA08-057, PP, SM Dear Mr. Carson, Thank you for your letter of February 3'd, wherein you request that the City reconsider its position regarding the expiration of the shoreline substantial development for the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat (LUA08-0S7). You state in your letter that the "need to obtain any ather governmental permits and approvals for the develapment that authorizes the development to proceed ... " justifies the extension of the shoreline permit. RCW 90.58.143 (4) states "The effective date of a substantial develapment permit shall be the date offiling as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods in subsections (2) and (3) of this section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reasonably related administrative or legal octions on any such permits or approvals." Renton Municipal Code mirrors state law and clarifies that the other permits and approvals are those permits with other agencies, other than the City, and of any other legal or administrative actions on any permit or approval. RMC 4-9-90.J.10 states: "Notification to City of Other Permits and Legal Actions: It is the responsibility of the applicant to inform the Planning Division of the pendency of other permit applications filed with agencies other than the City, and of any related administrative or legal actions on any permit or approval. If no notice of the pendency of other permits or approvals is given to the Division prior to the expiration dote established by the shoreline permit or the provisions of this Section, the expiration of a permit shall be based on the effective date of the shoreline permit." Renton (ity Hail. leSS )outr': Gr<JdyVJ,ay • Rel1:of""!, Wash:r'f.]tnf'l ()80S/ • rentonwa.(]ov [\J,r. S!'Jdrt Can,(Vl Frcfuarv 4, 2U1'I PJ8e2of2 Further, RMC 4-1-04S.F "Duration of Approvals" provides specificity with regard to Shoreline Development Permits. "7. Shoreline Development Permits: An opproved Shoreline Permit shall be allowed to develop pursuant to the time limitations listed in RMC 4-9-190) (Time Requirements For Shoreline Permits), as it exists or may be amended. The development of an approved shoreline permit sholl be governed by the terms of approval of the permit unless the City finds that 0 change in conditions creates a serious threat to the public health, safety or welfare." We stand by our previous determination that the shoreline substantial development permit terminated on August 27, 2010, and that application for a new shoreline substantial development permit is needed in order to proceed with the plat. The preliminary plat continues to be valid until September 15, 2016. Sincerely, -t: i( ~J~Jl~K~ Jennifer Henning Planning Director cc C.E. "ChIO" Vincent, CE;) Administrator Larry Warren, City Attorney Vanessa Dolbee, CGrrent Piannir,g Manager Steve lee, Development Engineering Manager Laureen Nicolay, Senior PI<lnner Greg Fawcett, Applicant Denis Law Mayor February 4,2015 Stuart Carson 20 Sixth Ave N E Issaquah, WA 98027 Via email: stuart@carsonnoel.com --" i Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: lake Washington View Estates, lUA08-0S7, PP, SM Dear Mr. Carson, Thank you for your letter of February 3'd, wherein you request that the City reconsider its position regarding the expiration of the shoreline substantial development for the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat (LUA08-057). You state in your letter that the "need to obtain any other governmental permits and approvals for the development that autharizes the development to praceed ... " justifies the extension of the shoreline permit. RCW 90.58.143 (4) states "The effective date of a substantial development permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods in subsections (2) and (3) of this section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal octions or due to the need to obtain ony other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reasonably related administrative or legal actions on any such permits or approvals." Renton Municipal Code mirrors state law and clarifies that the other permits and approvals are those permits with other agencies, other than the City, and of any other legal or administrative actions on any permit or approval. RMC 4-9-90.J.10 states: "Notification to City of Other Permits and Legal Actions: It is the responsibility of the applicant to inform the Planning Division of the pendency of other permit applications filed with agencies other than the City, and of any related administrative or legal actions on any permit or approval. If no notice of the pendency of other permits or approvals is given to the Division prior to the expiration date established by the shoreline permit or the provisions of this Section, the expiration of a permit shall be based on the effective date of the shoreline permit." Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Mr. Stuart Carson February 4, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Further, RMC 4-1-04S.F "Duration of Approvals" provides specificity with regard to Shoreline Development Permits. "7. Shoreline Development Permits: An appraved Shoreline Permit shall be alia wed ta develap pursuant to the time limitatians listed in RMC 4-9-190) (Time Requirements For Shoreline Permits), as it exists or may be amended. The develapment of an approved shoreline permit shall be gaverned by the terms of approval af the permit unless the City finds that a change in conditians creates a serious threat to the public health, safety or welfare." We stand by our previous determination that the shoreline substantial development permit terminated on August 27, 2010, and that application for a new shoreline substantial development permit is needed in order to proceed with the plat. The preliminary plat continues to be valid until September 15, 2016. Sincerely, ~~ Jennifer Henning Planning Director cc: C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CEO Administrator larry Warren, City Attorney Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Steve lee, Development Engineering Manager Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner Greg Fawcett, Applicant Stuart Carson, Attorney at Law stuart@carsonnoel.com February 3, 2015 Ms. Jennifer Henning Planning Director City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 CARSON I NOEL , PLLC Re: Lake Washington View Estates/City of Renton File LUA08-057, PP, SM Ms. Henning, Thank you for your reply to my letter of January 16, 2015 regardin9 the alleged expiration of the Shoreline Development Permit ("Shoreline Permit") issued to the Fawcett family under City of Renton File No. LUA08-057. In your letter, the City asserts that the Permit expired because the Fawcett's did not start construction activities within the time periods in RCW 90.58.143 and RMC 4-9-190(J). The Fawcett's believe such conclusion to be incorrect because the period of validity of the Shoreline Permit is extended by the time needed for the Fawcett's to obtain other approvals authorizing construction activities under the Shoreline Permit to proceed. The Renton Municipal Code (RMC) and Revised Code of Washington (RCW) expressly excludes from the time period durin9 which a Shoreline Permit remains effective any time during which the development was not pursued due to the "need to obtain any other governmental permits and approvals for the development that authorizes the development to proceed ... ". The Fawcetts could not proceed with the construction of homes on their property (Le., the "development" authorized by the Shoreline Permit), until they first obtained approval from the City of Renton of the final plat and clearing, grading and building permits. The Fawcetts andlor their agents have applied for and pursued such permits and such applications remain pending (See enclosed permit details for LUA08- 057). Under RMC 4-9-190(J)(9) and RCW 90.58.143(4), the time periods applicable to the Shoreline Permit are expressly suspended while the Fawcetts pursue the application for such needed permits and approvals. The development approved under the Shoreline Permit cannot be separated from the development contemplated under the Preliminary Plat. These applications were submitted and processed together and are mutually dependent. In fact, the City processed and approved both applications under a single permit number (LUA08-057) (See enclosed permit details for LUA08-057). Both approvals contemplate the same development; the construction of homes on the lots created under the Preliminary Plat. Since it is the same development activity, it is impossible for the Fawcetts to start the construction activity under the Shoreline Permit until they obtain other permits and approvals for the development of the lots created under the Preliminary Plat (e.g., final plat, clearing, grading, utility installation, building permits, etc.). In other words, the Fawcetts need to obtain additional permits from the City for the development under the Preliminary Plat before they may proceed with the development under the Shoreline Permit. Both the Renton Code and Washington Revised Code expressly state that a Shoreline Permit won't expire due to a delay in starting construction activities while the applicant gets other needed government permits and approvals to allow construction to proceed (See RMC 4-9-190(J)(9) and RCW 90.58.143(4). In light of the foregoing, the Fawcetts request that you review this matter again. As noted previously, the Fawcetts are parties to an agreement to sell their property which is contingent upon the continued validity of the Shoreline Permit and Preliminary Plat. They are likely to suffer significant financial loss 20 Sixth Avo NE, Issaquah, W A 98027 P. 425.837.4717 xl051 F. 425.837.5396 Leiter to Ms. Jennifer Henning February 3, 2015 Page -2 if the City's refusal to acknowledge the validity of the Shoreline Permit causes the buyer to terminate the sale. If the City declines to recognize their permit, they may be left with no alternative but to pursue legal action. The Fawcelts are sincerely hopeful that the City will reconsider its conclusion and that such effort will be unnecessary. Thank you for considering the Fawcett's request. Please contact me if you have any questions or if I may provide you with any additional information. Sincerely, CARSON & NOEL, PLLC Stuart Carson 20 Sixth A vc NE, Issaquah, W A 98027 P. 425.837.4717 xl051 F. 425.837.5396 21312015 Perm it Details Permit Details Close this window I Activities Inspections Conditions Fees INFORMATION ON PERMIT LUA08-057 Permit Status: Approved (status definition) Description: People Data: (click for applicantiownerlcontractor details) The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) lone. Streams (Including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes Site Address: 4200 Lake Washington Blvd N Application Date: Jun 09, 2008 are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North, An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. Parcel Number: 322405-9081 (property map & information) 1/15/10 -Request for 1 year and additional 2 year extension received. City Staff: Kris Sorensen 1/22/10 -Planning Director approves 1 year and additional 2-year extension request as authorized by extension Ordinance #5452. New expiration date is 9-15-2016 Activities Fee Payment City Staff: Laureen Nicolay Status: Complete Date: Jun 09, 2008 Notes: Payment Method: Check Receipt Number: T000067639-R0802988 Fee(s) Paid: Prelim(Tentative Plat $2,500.00, PLAN -Environmental Review $2,500.00 Inspections Conditions Fees Item PLAN -Environmental Review Prelim(Tentative Plat Other permits associated with this parcel Permit Number Status ---.. _ ....... _ .. ---- Fee Amount $500.00 $2,000.00 Description Fee Remaining U 13002677 Pending INSTALL PLAT IMPROVEMENTS -ROAD, STORM, WATER & SEWER https:lfpermitsearch.mybuildingpermit.com/PermitDetails.aspx?permitnumber=LUA08-057&permitstatus=Approved&parcelnumber=322405-9081 $0.00 $0.00 112 2/312015 PREll-OSS LUA08-0S7 LUA07-039 PRE06-030 PRE04-144 PRE03-092 Permit Details • Pending INSTALL UTIUTIES AMD ROADWAY FOR B-LOT SUBDIVISION. Lotsl-12 will be provided via a new street which terminates in a hammerhead Complete AMEND EXISTING APPROVED BUT NOT RECORDED PREUMINARY PLAT A d 13-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH STREAMS, WETLANDS, FLOOD PLAINS, AND STEEP oorave SLOPES ON SITE. A d 13-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH STREAMS, WETLANDS, FLOOD PLAINS, AND STEEP pprove SLOPES ON SITE. The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the ResidenUal - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new A d street which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard oprove North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. 1/15/10 -Request for 1 year and additional 2 year extension received. 1/22/10 -Planning Director approves 1 year and additional 2-year extension request as authorized by extension Ordinance #5452. New expiration date is 9-15-2016 E!illl!i!Jg 13-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH WETLANDS, STREAM AND STEEP SLOPES Approved 13-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH WETLANDS, STREAM AND STEEP SLOPES Canceled The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval, Environmental (SEPA) Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the subdivision of a 241,053 square foot . (5.53 acre) parcel located within the Residential -S (R-S) dwelling unit per acre zone, into 13 lots. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family residences. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,167 square feet to 15,173 square feet. Two streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N. 3/4/08 -Letter sent from the owner to the Hearing Examiner notifying the City that the original applicant is no longer with the project that the owner [Greg Fawcett] will continue with the project. 3/27/08 -Hearing Examiner sent letter to original applicant dismissing the application due to inactivity. A new application will be required to reactivate this project. 4/4/08 -Letter from Carson & Noel PLLC [Greg Fawcett "Owner" representative] requesting the project stay active and allow Mr. Fawcett to continue with the process of the project. 4/17/08 -Hearing Examiner responds to correspondence from Owner attorney stating that the "".matter was not pursued in a timely fashion," and dismissed the project. Pending 13-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH WETLANDS, STREAM AND STEEP SLOPES 18 LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION. R-8 ZONING. PROPERTY SHOWS STREAM TO Comolete NORTH AND 3 WETLANDS. ACCESS TO LOTS 17-18 FROM MEADOW AVE. NE. LOTS 1-16 OFF LAKE WA BLVD Complete 18-lot plat with wetlands Initially in August of 2003, a 24-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT PREAPPLICATION followed on 5-Complete 10·2004 by a revised submittal for a 3-lot short plat. See PRE04-144. Close this window I eCityGov Alliance I Contact Us I Feedback Page Copyright © 2010 eCityGov Alliance. PROD· Version 1.08.402 https:/lpermitsearch.mybuildingpermilcomlPermitDetai Is,aspx?perm itrlllnber=lUA08-057 &perm itstatus=Approved&parcei num ber= 322405-9081 Denis Law Mayor February 3, 2015 Stuart Carson 20 Sixth Ave NE Issaquah, WA 98027 Via email: stuart@carsonnoel.com Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: Lake Washington View Estates, LUAOS-OS7, PP, SM Dear Mr. Carson, I am in receipt of your letter of January 16, 201S regarding Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat (LUA08-057). You have requested clarification regarding the validity of the preliminary plat and shoreline substantial development permit approved by the City. The preliminary plat was approved by the City's Hearing Examiner on August 14, 2008 and was valid for five years. A three-year extension of the plat was approved on January 22, 2010, extending the period of validity of the plat to September 15, 2016. The Shoreline Substantial Development Permit was issued by the City on August 27, 2008. This date is the effective date of the permit per state law. RCW 90.58.143, regarding time requirements for Shoreline permits states: "(1) The time requirements of this section shall apply to all substontiol development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance or conditional use permit authorized under this chapter. Upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of the project proposed and consistent with the policy and provisions of the master program and this chapter, locol government may adopt different time limits from those set forth in subsections (2) and (3) of this section as a part of action on a substantial development permit. (2) Canstruction activities shall be commenced or, where no construction activities are involved, the use or activity shall be commenced within two years of the effective date of a substantial development permit. However, local government may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record on the substantial development permit and to the Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Mr. Stuart Carson February 3, 2015 Page 2 of 5 department. (3) Authorization to conduct construction activities shall terminate five years after the effective date of a substantial development permit. However, local government may authorize a single extensian for a period not to exceed one year based an reasonable factors, if a request for extensian has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and to the deportment. (4) The effective date of a substantial development permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods in subsections (2) and (3) of this section do not include the time during which a use or octivity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reosonably related administrative or legal actions on any such permits or approvals." Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-9-190 follows state law and states: "J. TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORELINE PERMITS: 1. Applicability: The time requirements of this Section shall opply to 011 substantial development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance or conditional use permit authorized under the Shoreline Master Program. 2. Unspecified Time Limits: Where specific provisions are not included to establish time limits on a permit as part of action on a permit by the City or the Department of Ecology, the time limits in subsections J6 and J8 of this Section apply. 3. Discretionary Time Limits for Shoreline Substantial Developments: If it is determined that standard time requirements of subsections J6 and J8 af this Sectian should not be applied, the Planning Division shall adopt appropriate time limits as a part of action on a substantial development permit upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of the project proposed and consistent with the policy and provisions af the Shoreline Master Program and RCW 90.58.143. 4. Discretionary Time Limits for Shoreline Conditional Uses or Shoreline Variances: If it is determined that standard time requirements of subsections J6 and J8 of this Section should not be applied, the Hearing Examiner, upon a finding of good cause ond with the Mr. Stuart Carson February 3, 2015 Page 3 of 5 approval of the Department of Ecology, shall establish appropriate time limits as a part of action on a conditional use or variance permit. "Good cause" means that the time limits established are reasonably related to the time actually necessary to perform the development on the ground and complete the project that is being permitted. 5. Extension Requests: Requests for permit extension shall be made in accordance with subsections J6 and J8 of this Section. 6. Standard Period of Validity: Unless a different time period is specified in the shoreline permit as authorized by RCW 90.58.143 and subsection J2 or J3 of this Section, construction activities, or a use or activity, for which a permit has been gronted pursuant to the Shoreline Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a shoreline permit, or the shoreline permit shall terminate, and a new permit shall be necessary. However, the Planning Division may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed with the Planning Division before the expiration date, and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. 7. Certification of Construction Commencement: Construction activities or commencement of construction referenced in subsection J6 of this Section means that construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the twa (2) year period. 8. Time Allowed for Construction Completion: A permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of no more than five (5) years after the effective date of a shoreline permit, unless a longer period has been specified pursuant to RCW 90.58.143 and subsection J2 or 13 of this Section. If an applicant files a request for an extension prior to expiration of the shoreline permit the Planning Division shall review the permit and upon a showing of good cause may authorize a single extension of the shoreline permit for a period of up to one year. Otherwise said permit shall terminate. Notice of the proposed permit extension shall be given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. To Mr. Stuart Carson February 3, 2015 Page 4 of 5 maintain the validity of a shoreline permit, it is the applicant's respansibility ta maintain valid constructian permits in accardance with adopted building cades. 9. Effective Date of Filing: Far purposes of determining the life of a shoreline permit, the effective date of a substantial development permit, shoreline canditional use permit, or shoreline variance permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods in subsections)6 and)8 af this Section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions, or due ta the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reasanably related administrotive or legal actions on any such permits or approvals. 10. Notification to City of Other Permits and Legal Actions: It is the respansibility of the applicant to inform the Planning Division of the pendency of other permit applications filed with agencies other than the City, and af any related administrative or legal actions on any permit or approval. if no notice of the pendency of other permits ar approvals is given to the Division prior to the expiration date established by the shoreline permit or the provisions of this Section, the expiratian of a permit shall be based on the effective date of the shoreline permit. 11. Permit Processing Time: The City shall issue permits within applicable time limits specified by State law. Substantial development permits for a limited utility extension as defined in RCW 90.58. 140(11)(b) or for the construction of a bulkhead or ather measures to protect a single family residence and its appurtenant structures from shoreline erosion shall be issued within twenty one (21) days of the last day af the comment periods specified in subsections E6 and E7 of this Section. 12. Construction Not Authorized Until Proceedings Completed: Na construction pursuant to such permit shall begin or be authorized and no building, groding or other construction permits or use permits shall be issued by the City until twenty one (21) days from the date the permit was filed with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General, or until all review praceedings are campleted as were initiated within the Mr. Stuart Carson February 3, 2015 Page 5 of 5 twenty one (21) doys of the dote of filing. Filing shall occur in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130. 13. Special Allowance for Canstruction: If the granting of 0 shoreline permit by the City is appealed ta the Shoreline Hearings Board, and the Shareline Hearings Boord hos approved the granting of the permit, and an appeal for judicial review of the Shareline Hearings Baard decisian is filed, canstruction authorizatian may accur subject ta the conditians, time periads, and other provisions of RCW 90.58. 140(5)(b)". Further, RMC4-1-04S.F discusses vesting of shoreline permits and states: "7. Shoreline Development Permits: An approved Shoreline Permit shall be allowed to develop pursuant to the time limitations listed in RMC 4-9-190J (Time Requirements For Shoreline Permits), as it exists or may be amended. The development of on appraved shoreline permit shall be governed by the terms of appraval of the permit unless the City finds that a change in conditions creates a serious threat to the public health, safety or welfare. Approval of the preliminary plat is separate from the approval of the shoreline substantial development permit, and the periods of validity do not run concurrently." Approval ofthe preliminary plat is separate from the approval of the shoreline substantial development permit, and the periods of validity do not run concurrently. The Lake Washington View Estates preliminary plat remains valid until September 15, 2016. The shoreline substantial development permit terminated on August 27, 2010. Therefore, in order to proceed with the plat, a new shoreline substantial development permit is needed. Sincerely, / ' " C {r (.ltt\ /\ {/ Jennifer Henning Planning Director CC: C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CEO Administrator Larry Warren, City Attorney Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Steve Lee, Development Engineering Manager Greg Fawcett, Applicant Stuart Carson, Attorney at Law stuart((1)carsonnoei. com January 16, 2015 Ms. Jennifer Henning Planning Director City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 CARSON NOEL PLLC Re: Lake Washington View Estates/City of Renton File LUA08-057, PP, SM Dear Ms. Henning, My firm represents the Rob-Clarissa Partnership ("Partnership"). The partnership is comprised of members of the Fawcett family, which owns the real property ("Property") that is the subject of the preliminary plat approval referenced under the above file number. One of the managing partners of the Partnership, Greg Fawcett, has asked me to contact you about whether the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit ("SSDP") issued to the Partnership as part of the preliminary plat approval may have expired. For the reasons outlined below, the SSDP was automatically extended by law during the time when construction on the Property has not been pursued due to the need to obtain development approvals from the City. The City issued preliminary plat approval to the Partnership on or about September 15, 2008. The Partnership was required to obtain the SSDP as a condition of approval of the preliminary plat. Enclosed is a copy of the Minutes of the Conclusion and Recommendation of the City of Renton Hearing Examiner containing the requirement that the Partnership obtain the SSDP as a condition of preliminary plat approval (See, page 5 at paragraph 10). The City issued the SSDP to the Partnership on August 25, 2008. Before the construction of improvements may occur on the newly created lots, among other permits and approvals, the Partnership is required to satisfy the preliminary plat conditions and to apply for and obtain the City's final plat approval. The Partnership's deadline to obtain such approval was initially September 13, 2013. This deadline was later extended to September 15, 2016 in a January 10, 2010 letter to the Partnership from the City's Planning Director (See enclosed copy). RCW 90.58.143 and Renton Municipal Code Section 4-9-190(J) specify time frames within which construction activities must begin and be completed under an SSDP (See enclosed copies). However, both provisions provide for the automatic suspension of these time frames where construction is not commenced or pursued due to the need to obtain permits or approvals to allow the development to proceed (See, RCW 90.58.143(4) and RMC 4-9-190(J)(9)). The deadline suspension language of the RCW and RMC is nearly identical. It reads in pertinent part as follows: The permit time periods in [the subsections containing the time limits] of this section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued ... due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed .. The Partnership may not proceed with construction on the Property until it has obtained, among other approvals, the City's final plat approval. Under RCW 90.58.143(4) and RMC 4-9-190(J)(9), the time during which the Partnership has not actually pursued construction due to the need to obtain final plat approval is not counted when determining the time by which the Partnership is required to start and finish the development approved in the SSDP. In other words, counting under the time deadlines for 20 Sixth Ave NE, Issaquah, WA 98027 P. 425.837.4717 xl051 F. 425.837.5396 Letter to Ms. Jennifer Henning January 16, 2015 Page -2 commencing and completing construction does not start under the SSDP by law until at least the date when the Partnership has obtained final plat approval from the City. It is clear that the deadline suspension rule was intended to provide for situations like the one faced by the Partnership where an SSDP is part of a development requiring additional governmental approvals before construction may proceed. The intention is clearly for the period of validity of the SSDP to follow the deadlines for the other governmental permits and approvals necessary for the development. These rules correctly recognize that it would be unfair to the holder of the SSDP for the SSDP to expire due to the inability to pursue construction when construction could not commence because additional permits and approvals are needed to proceed with the development. The Partnership is currently engaged in negotiations with a prospective purchaser for the Property who has asked for clarification regarding the continued validity of the SSDP. Should the City concur with the foregoing analysis, would you please confirm such understanding in writing by issuing a letter confirming the continued validity of the SSDP? Your assistance in this regard would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for reviewing the foregoing and enclosed information. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr. Fawcett or me at your convenience. Sincerely, CARSON & NOEL, PLLC Stuart Carson 20 Sixth Ave NE, Issaquah, W A 98027 P. 425,837.4717 xl051 F. 425.837.5396 Letter to Ms. Jennifer Henning January 16, 2015 Page -2 commencing and completing construction does not start under the SSDP by law until at least the date when the Partnership has obtained final plat approval from the City. It is clear that the deadline suspension rule was intended to provide for situations like the one faced by the Partnership where an SSDP is part of a development requiring additional governmental . approvals before construction may proceed. The intention is clearly for the period of validity of the SSDP to follow the deadlines for the other governmental permits and approvals necessary for the development. These rules correctly recognize that it would be unfair to the holder of the SSDP for the SSDP to expire due to the inability to pursue construction when construction could not commence because additional permits and approvals are needed to proceed with the development The Partnership is currently engaged in negotiations with a prospective purchaser for the Property who has asked for clarification regarding the continued validity of the SSDP. Should the City concur with the foregoing analysis, would you please confirm such understanding in writing by issuing a letter confirming the continued validity of the SSDP? Your assistance in this regard would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for reviewing the foregoing and enclosed information. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr. Fawcett or me at your convenience. Sincerely, CARSON & NOEL, PLLC Stuart Carson 20 Sixth Ave NE, Issaquah, W A 98027 P 425.837.4717,105' F. 425.837.5396 Denis Law Mayor 9 r _"::"-=-fIIIIIIII""~..! ~ January 22, 2010 Department of Community and Economic Development Greg M. Fawcett, D.D.S. PO Box 402 Fall City, WA 98024 Alex Pietsch, Administrator SUBJECT: Request for Extension of Project's Period of Validity Lake Washington View Estates I City of Renton File LUA08-057, PP, SM Dear Dr. Fawcett: This letter is sent in response to your request for an extension of the above referenced project's approved period of validity. Section 4-7-080L ofthe Renton Municipal Code, relating to preliminary plats, authorizes the City to approve a single one-year extension of the usual five-year expiration. Under Ordinance No. 5452 (RMC 4-1-080F) authorization has been given to the Planning Director to approve an additional two-year extension beyond the standard extensions possible under the Code for any land use or subdivision project that was valid on or after April 1, 2009. Our records indicate that this project will expire on September 15, 2013. We understand that you are still working to complete this project and will require additional time. Therefore, your request for the standard one-year extension and the additional two-year extension under Ordinance No. 5452 is hereby granted. You now have until September 1S, 2016 to submit a final plat application. You should be aware this is a one-time only extension and if a final plat application has not been received by the new expiration date it will become null and void and you will need to resubmit all application materials. I hope this extension meets your needs and that your project can be completed. You may call Laureen Nicolay at (425) 430-7294 if you have any further questions. C.E. "Chip" Vincent Planning Director cc: Jim Hanson / Contact City of Renton File No. LUA08·057, PP, SM Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Kayren Kittrick, Plan Review Renton City Hall _ 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057, • rentonwa_gov Stacy Tucker From: Chip Vincent Sent: To: Thursday, January 21, 2010 1 :07 PM Stacy Tucker Subject: Attachments: FW: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits image001.jpg Stacy, could you please give me a status and I will respond to Greg. From: Greg Fawcett [mailto:gfawcett@nwlink.com] Sent: Thursday, January 21,201012:12 PM To: Chip Vincent Subject: FW: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Chip, Just checking back with you to see how the letter of extension is going) Thanks .. Greg Greg M. Fawcett, D.D.S. PO Box 402 F311 City. WA 98024 1425) 466-5229 cell (42S) 222·7011 office (425) 222-7912 home www fcfamilydental.com From: Chip Vincent [mailto:CVincent@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 3:21 PM To: 'Greg Fawcett' Subject: RE: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Stacy, could you please prepare a letter of extension for my Signature. Thanks, Chip From: Greg Fawcett [mailto:gfawcett@nwlink.com] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 2:17 PM To: Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Chip ... Here is what I know ... Applicant Greg Fawcett Owner The Rob -Clarissa Fawcett Partnership Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat LUA08-057, PP,SM 1 Subdivision of a 5.3 acre parcel into 13 lots for single family residences Approved by council on August 5'" 2008 Ordered August 14th 2008 by Fred Kaufman Permit good for five years so ... due to expire August 5" 2013 Chip let me know what the new expiration date would be after the two year extension. Thanks ... Greg Fawcett Greg M. Fawcett, D.D.S. PO Box 402 Fall City. WA 98024 (425) 466-5229 cell (425) 222-7011 office (425) 222-7912 home www.fcfamllydental.com From: Chip Vincent [mailto:CVincent@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 12:48 PM To: 'Greg Fawcett' Subject: RE: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Greg, just send me a letter identifying the specifics (project name, type of project, current expiration date .... ) related to you request and I will take it from there. Chip From: Greg Fawcett [mailto:gfawcett@nwlink.com] Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 2:40 PM To: Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Chip, Thank you for your time and information ... most appreciated! So ... how do we go about extending the preliminary plat approval for an additional two years' The ordinance says that this provision expires December 31 2010. Yes, everyone seems to recognize that in these extraordinary times with this economic downturn it is in the best interest of society to try to mitigate the effects of this recession and try to get some economic activity going. One of the things that may be holding back investment is "uncertainty" so ... if we could take some of the uncertainty out ... perhaps investors would be more willing to take reasonable risks and help to get the economy going. Thanks Chip .. let me know ... Sincerely, Greg Fawcett 2 Greg M. Fawcett, D.D.S. PO Gox 102 Fall City. WA 98024 (425) 466-5229 cell (425) 222-7011 office (425) 222-7912 home www.fcfamilydental.com From: Chip Vincent [mailto:CVincent@Rentonwa,gov] Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 1:30 PM To: 'Greg Fawcett' Subject: RE: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Greg, good to hear from you and happy New Year to you as well. Attached is the Ordinance adopted by the City Council last year giving me the authority as Planning Director to extend development permits up to two years. I think the State is following our lead on this issue as we were one of the first jurisdictions in the State to recognize the need to do this. Hope all is well and talk to you soon, Chip C.E. "Chip" Vincent Planning Director Dept. of Community and Economic Development City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-6588 Fax: 425-430-7300 CVI n ce nt@rentonwa.gov www.rentonwa.gov From: Greg Fawcett [mailto:gfawcett@nwlink.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:12 AM To: Chip Vincent Subject: Lake Washington View Estates ... extension of time limits on development permits Dear Chip, Hope the New Years finds you and your family doing well ... I was reading in the Seattle Times today about the problem the Governor is having with the State Budget. One of her solutions was she was "ordering state agencies to extend time limits on development permits for two years". Would this be something the City of Renton could also do ? Thanks Chip ... let me know ... Sincerely, 3 Greg Fawcett Greg M. Fawcett, D.D.S. PO Box 402 Fall City. WA ge024 (425) 466-5229 cell (425) 222-7011 office (425) 222-7912 home VJWW fcfarnilydental.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -www.avg.com Version: 8.5.4321 Virus Database: 270.14.140/2621 -Release Date: 01/14/10 12:39:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -www.avg.com Version: 8.5.4321 Virus Database: 270.14.143/2624 -Release Date: 01/15/10 12:47:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -www.avg.com Version: 8.5.4321 Virus Database: 270.14.143/2624 -Release Date: 01/15/10 12:47:00 4 Lake Washington V :states Conditions of Development mmary) LUA08-057 Project Source of When Party Responsihle Notes/Completion Condition Condition Compliance Date is Reqnired I Compliance with Shoreline During Applicant/ContractorlBuilder Construction Pennit construction Mitigation plan dated 6/9/08. Submit revised Preliminary Prior to Applicant preliminary plat Plat building map showing 35-pennit foot curb return I approval radius with Lake Washington Blvd l\. Record a Native Preliminary Prior to or Applicant Growth Plat concurrent Protection with final plat Easement map recording 9NGPE) over protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and their buffer areas. Delineate the Preliminary Prior to utility Applicant/Contractor/Builder edge of the Plat construction NGPE with a pennit split rail fencc approval and identify with approved signage. Trees proposed Preliminary Prior to utility Applicant for retention shall PIal construction be shown on pennit each plan sheet approval and tree protection measures shall be submitted. Provide sizing Preliminary Prior to utility Applicant calculations for Plat construction detention and pennit water quality application facilities per 2005 Surface Water Design Manual. Drainage and Preliminary Prior to Applicant surface water Plat building design modeling pennit shall include a approval detennination of the future conditions to determine 100- year flood Lake Washington V Estates Conditions of Development , mmary) LUA08-057 - surface water elevations All development Preliminary During Applicant/Contractor/Builder occurring on the Plat construction project site shall abide by appropriate safety standards depending on flood plain analysis Compliance with ERC During Applicant/ContractorlBuilder recommendations construction of the Geotechnical Engineering Study dated 3119/07, Major earthwork ERC During Applicant/Contractor/Builder shall be construction conducted during April-October dry summer months. Construction of a ERC Prior to Applicant/ContractorlBuilder residence on Lot building 13 shall maintain pennit a 25-foot buffer approval from protected slope and a 15- foot building setback from the edge of the buffer unless a geotechnical engmeer concludes otherwise. The buffer ERC Prior to, Applicant/Contractor/Builder required from the during and Ordinary High after Water Mark of construction May Creek shall be 50 feet. The stonn ERe Prior to utility Applicant drainage system construction shall comply pennit with the 2005 approval King County Surface Water Design Manual. Pay ERe Prior to Applicant $9,330.75 Transportation building Mitigation Fee permit approval Pay Fire ERe Prior to Applicant $6,344.00 ~ . '~ ....... Lake Washington" Mitigation Fee Pay Parks ERC Mitigation Fee Work shall ERC immediately cease and the Washington Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation contacted if any archaeological artifacts are discovered during earthwork. Haul hours are Code limited to 8:30 am to 3:30 pm Monday through Friday Construction Code hours are from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm Monday through Friday. Construction hours on Saturdays are from 9:00 am to 8:00 pm and no work on Sundays. cc: Chip Vincent Neil Watts Larry Meckling Kayrcn Kittrick Jennifer Henning Mike Dotson Estates Conditions of Deve!opmen ,mmary) LUA08-057 building permit approval Prior to Applicant $6,899.88 building permit approval During Applicant/Contractor/Builder construction During Applicant/Contractor/Builder Construction During Applicant/Contractor/Builder construction L~1~C~s;7 frvJe0-4 1=:(e CITY ~F RENTON Denis Law, Mayor September 16, 2008 Greg Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 City Clerk Bonnie I. Walton Re: Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat, File LUA-08-057, PP, SM 4200 Block of Lake Washington Blvd N. Dear Mr. Fawcett: At the regular Council meeting of September 15, 2008, the Renton City Council adopted the recommendation of the hearing examiner to approve the referenced preliminary plat, subject to conditions outlined in the Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation dated August 14, 2008. Pursuant (0 RCW, a final plat meeting all requirements of State law and Renton Municipal Code shall be submitted to the City for approval within five years of the date of preliminary pial approval. If! can provide additional information or assistance, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Bonnie 1. Walton City Clerk cc: Mayor Denis La\v Council President Marcie Palmer Jennifer-Henr'ling, Principal Planner Panies of Record (5) -1-05-5-S-o-ut-h -G-ra-dY-W-aY---R-e-nt-o-n,-w-a-sh-in-gt-o-n~9-8-05-7---(4-2-5-) 4-3-0--6-51-0-I-F-AX-( 4-2-5)-4-3-0--65-1-6-~ * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE • PARTIES OF RECORD Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat Approval Notice LUA-08-0S7, PP, SM Gerald Wasser Development Services Division Ci ty 0 f Renton Ron Straka Utility Engineering Supervisor City of Renton lim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Clarissa Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Lynda Priddy EPA 1200 6th Avenue, Ste 900 Seattle, W A 98101 September 16, 2008 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane MtVernon,WA 98274 SUBJECT: Lake Washington View Estates LUA08-057, PP, SM . Dear Mr. Hanson: CIT .... ~ 'F RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Please find enclosed, comments from the City's Property Services Department. These comments will guide you in the preparation of the Preliminary Plat for recording. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at (425) 430-7382. Sincerely, Gerald C. Wasser Associate Planner Enclosure cc: Clarissa Fawcett I Owner Greg Fawcett I Applicant -------------IO-5-5-S0-u-th-G-r-ad-y-W-a-y---R-en-to-n-,-W-~-h-m-w~on~9-80-5-7------------~ * This paper contains 50% recyded material, 30% postCOllSumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM September 12, 2008 Jerry Wasser , Qs Sonp J, Fesser~ Lake Washington View Estates 2008 Format and Legal Description Review Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the following comments: Comments for the Applicant: It appears that the changes made to the above referenced preliminary plat did not significantly impact our review memo dated May I, 2007, However, said review memo was compared to the most recent drawing submittal, and some comments were removed from said review memo, Some new comments have also been added at this time, A new listing of the review comments follow: Information needed for final approval includes the following: Note the City of Renton land use action numher and land record number, LUA-OX-XXX-FP and LND-I 0-0459, respectively, on the drawing sheets in the spaces already provided, Please note that the land use action number for the final plat will be different from the preliminary plat number and is unknown as of this date, Note two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network, The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties are provided, Provide plat and lot closure calculations, Note the date the existing monuments were visited, per WAC 332-130-150, The drawing sheet size currently presented is not standard (use 18" X 24"), and cannot be used for recording purposes, \H:\File Sys\LND -Land Subdivision & SUfyeying Re<:ords\LND-lO -Pluts\0459\RV080909,doc September 12, 2008 Page 2 The "VERTICAL DATUM" and "BENCH MARK" information should be removed from Sheet I of 3, Remove the City of Renton "SEAL" from Sheet I of 3, Complete City of Renton Monument Cards, with reference points of all new right-of-way monuments set as part of the plat. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC 332-130-100, Required City of Renton signatures (on the final plat submittal) include the Administrator of Public Works (a new title), the Mayor and the City Clerk, An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required, Appropriate King County approval blocks need to be noted on the plat drawing, All vested owners of the plat property need to sign the final plat document. Include notary blocks as needed, Include a dedication/certification block on the plat drawing, Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the new corners of the proposed lots, Show tbe appropriate symbol on the plat drawings, Said symbol is already noted in the "LEGEND" block on all three drawing sheets, On the final submittal, remove all references to utility facilities, topog lines and other items not directly impacting the subdivision, Remove the "OWNER" block, the "LAND SURVEYOR" block and the "CIVIL ENGINEER" block from the final submittaL Note encroachments, if any, Note all easements, agreements and covenants of record on the drawing, Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any, The city will provide addresses for the proposed lots after the preliminary plat is approved, The addresses (and street name) will need to be noted on the plat document. Note whether the adjoining properties on the north, east and south of the subject plat property are platted (give plat name and lot number) or unplatted, Reference the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document on this plat submittal, and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that ifthere are restrictive covenants, easements or agreements to others (neighboring property owners, etc,) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. H:\Filc Sys\LND -Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-1O -Plats\0459\RV080909.doc\cor September 12, 2008 Page 3 The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. If there is a Homeowners' Association (HOA) for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of TRACT "A" (OPEN SPACE) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat drawing as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract "A" is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat of Lake Washington View Estates" Homeowners' Association (HOA) for open space. All necessary maintenance activities for said Tract will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non-payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. If there is no Homeowners' Association, use the following text on the final plat drawing: Lots 1 through 13 shall have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract "A". The forgoing statement is to be accompanied by language defining the maintenance responsibilities for any infrastructure located on the Tract serving the plat, or reference a separate recorded instrument detailing the same. NOTE: The City of Renton does not assume ownership of open space tracts created via the establishment of plats. Comments for the Project Manager: If the city is to have access rights to Tract "A" (OPEN SPACE), then language to that effect should be noted on the final submittal. If this is true, then add said comment to the applicant's list noted above. H:\file Sys\LND -Land Subdivision & Surveying Rccords\LND-JO -Plats\0459\R V080909.doc\cor Cit ,~nton Department of Community & Econo ,elopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:HCt1X"-fN S l,! CS COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-057, P~, SM 0 DATE CIRCULATED: JULY 8, 2008 APPLICANT: Greq Fawcett PLANNER: Jerry Wasser PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washington View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) NIA <-'.' I Y \).' UT:Ui--{ :.-[ WORK ORDER NO: 77913 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable Mo ... Element of the Probable Probable Mo ... Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals ~ Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources M:~'"nM'", f;':;';';'F~~' B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date September 15, 2008 CONSENT AGENDA Council Meeting Minutes of 9/8/2008 CAG: 08-125, Citywide Walkway Improvements, End General Construction Community Services: May Creek Propel1y Purchase, King County Funding Community Services: Panther Creek Property Purchase, King County Funding Plat: Lake Washington View Estates, Lake Washington Blvd N, FP-OS-OS? Public Works: Capital Improvement Deferrals Cost Contribution Transportation: Commute Trip Reduction Program Services, King County Renton City Council Minutes Page 293 MOVED BY TAYLOR, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE THE ISSUES OF I) HIRING OFF- DUTY POLICE OFFICERS FOR SECURITY, PARTICULARLY FOR THE PARKING LOT; 2) STEPPED-UP PATROLS; AND 3) PRIORITY RESPONSE FROM 911, AS WELL AS REVIEW OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP RIGHTS, AND MEASURES CURRENTLY BEING TAKEN TO ENSURE PEACE AND SAFETY AT TOUCHDOWNS SPORTS BAR & GRILL AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD' Councilmember Zwicker requested follow-up information regarding the recent incident, including the City's response and any additional calls the City is receiving regarding the business. 'MOTION CARRIED. Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Approval of Council meeting minutes of9/8/2008. Council concur. City Clerk reported bid opening on 9/5/2008 for CAG-08-125, Citywide Walkway Improvements, 12 bids; engineer's estimate $492,220.22; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to low bidder, End General Construction, Inc., in the amount of$428,435.35. Council concur. Community Services Department requested authorization to execute a purchase and sale agreement with Russell L. Bucklin to purchase 6.7 acres of land located in the May Creek Greenway, adjacent to Jones Ave. NE, and authorization to execute an amendment to CAG-90-029, Conservation Futures Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with King County, to accept $200,000 in grant funding for the purchase. The City'S match is estimated at $240,000. Refer to Finance Committee. Community Services Department requested authorization to execute a purchase and sale agreement with 4A Development to purchase 3.66 acres ofland located east of the Panther Creek Wetlands, and authorization to execute an amendment to CAG-90-029, Conservation Futures Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with King County, to accept $100,000 in grant funding for the purcbase. The City's match is estimated at $100,000. Refer to Finance Committee. / Hearin g Examiner recommended approval, with conditions, of the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat; 13 single-family lots on 5.53 acres located on the 4200 block of Lake Washington Blvd. N. Council concur. Public Works Department recommended approval to establish the cost contribution toward Capital Improvement Projects for properties in which frontage improvements have been deferred by restrictive covenant. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Conunittee. Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with King County Department of Transportation to provide Conunute Trip Reduction services to 24 affected employers in the City of Renton for 2008- 2009. Council concur. (See page 296 for resolution.) MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE CONSENT AGENDA. CARRIED. I C OF RENTON Co-UNCIL AGENDA" L % e .. Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 9115/200S DeptlDivlBoard .. Hearing Examiner Stafr Contact... ... Fred J. Kaufman, ext. 6515 Agenda Status Conscnt.. ............ X Subject: Public Hearing .. Correspondence .. Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat Ordinance ............. File No. LUA-OS-057, PP, SM Resolution ............ Old Business ........ Exhibits: New Business ....... Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation and Study Sessions ...... Zoning Map Information ......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dep!... ..... . Council Concur Finance Dep!... .. . Other. .......... . Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required .. . NIA Transfer/Amendment ...... . Amount Budgeted ...... . Revenue Generated ........ . Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The hearing was held on August 5, 200S. The Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plan was published on August 14,2008. The appeal period ended on August 2S, 200S. No appeals were filed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: I / Approve the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plan as outlined in the Examiner's Report and Recommendation. Rcntonnetlagnbilll bh i August 14,2008 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Conclusion and Recommendation APPLICANT: OWNER: CONTACT: LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: SUMMARY OF ACTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: PIIDLIC HEARING: Greg Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partuership And Clarissa Fawcett PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 08-057, PI', SM 4200 Block of Lake Washington Blvd N Requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for subdivision of a 5.53 acre parcel into 13 lots and one open space tract for the fllture construction of single-family rcsidences. Development Services Recommendation: Approve subj ect to conditions. The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on July 29, 2008. After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the suhject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the August 5,2008 hearing, The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, August 5, 2008, at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Lake Washington View Estates File No.: LUA-08-0S7, PP, SM August 14, 2008 Page 2 ninary Plat The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No.1: Yellow file containing the original application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this reques!. Exhibit No.3: Overall Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No.5: Preliminary Plat Plan Lot 13 Exhibit No.7: Preliminary Drainage Plan Exhibit No.9: ERC Mitigation Measures Exhibit No. 11: Full size map of 100 year flood plain along the Cedar River Exhibit No.2: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit No.4: Preliminary Plat Plan Lots \-12 Exhibit No.6: Landscaoe Plan Exhibit No.8: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 10: ERC Advisory Note The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, Community and Economic Development Department, City of Renton, lOSS S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The property is located east of Lake Washington Blvd, north ofN 40 th Street and south ofN 44th Street in the R-8 zone. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,159 square feet to 15, 174 square feet, resulting in a net density of 3.95 dulac. A wetland report, stream study and geotechnical report were submitted with the project application. The wetland report identified 3 wetlands, 2 Category 3 wetlands and one Category 2 wetland. May Creek is located on the northern boundary of the site and is a Class I stream. There is an unnamed Class 4 stream that connects the two wetlands on Tract A. The geotechnical report identified two protected slope areas on the eastern portion of the site. All critical areas on site would be located within Tract A. Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated with 10 mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. This Determination was issued for a previous project of the same name with project number LUA 07-039. The new project today is with a change of Applicant and a redesign of the project. The proposed plat is consistent with the Residential Siogle Family Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plan further would allow for the future construction of up to 13 new single-family residential units. After the deduction of public rights-of-way, private access easements and critical areas from the gross acreage, the 13-101 subdivision would result in a net density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre. As proposed all lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards for the R-8 zone. All setback standards and building standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted and appears to comply with the City's landscaping regulations. Each lot would have access to a public right-of-way, Lots 1-12 would access directly off Road A and Lot 13 would access offN 40 th Street. All lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. The proposed lots further appear to have sufficient building area for the development of detached single-family homes. Lake Washington View Estates, ,liminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 3 A revised preliminary plat map along with the Utility Construction Permit Application was requested showing a 35-foot curb return radius along Lake Washington Blvd N. Access to Lots 1-12 would be provided via a new internal 42-foot wide public street (Road A). Lot 13 access would be provided via a pipestem offN 40 th Street. Full street improvements, including paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drains, landscaping, street lighting and signage would be required along the frontages of Lake Washington Blvd N and the new internal street (Road A). Traffic, Fire and Park Mitigation Fees were imposed by (he Environmental Review Committee. The site slopes dOl'm to the north at an average grade of 13 percent. A slope with a grade in excess of 40 percent is located on the east portion of the project site and meets the City's criteria for classification as a Protected Slope. No development is proposed on the Protected Slope area. In order to further protect May Creek the City's ERC imposed a wider buffer of 50 feet on May Creek rather than the 25-foot buffer mandated by the City's current shoreline regulations. The project will be subject to the 2005 Department of Ecology Manual regarding erosion control. To ensure that none of the trees proposed to be retained are damaged during construction, it was recommended that those trees would be shown on each of the plans submitted as part of the Utility Construction Permit Application. To protect the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and associated buffer areas from impacts related to the constmction of new single-family residences, it was recommended that the plat map be revised to include the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer areas within a Native Growth Protection Easement prior to or concurrent with the recording of the final plat. In addition, the applicant proposes 30 new street trees as part of the project landscape plan as well as additional trees in the Wetlands Buffer Enhancement Plan. The Renton School District has stated that they can accommodate the approximate 6 additional students generated by this proposal. A Technical Information Report was previously submitted, a Level One Analysis was submitted with the current application. The existing drainage currently discharges to May Creek The proposed drainage control would be by two detention vaults. The project site contains a portion of the May Creek 100-year flood plain, it was recommended that drainage and surface water design modeling be conducted. Further discussion was had regarding the flood plain and the effects it could have on a development of this (ype and size. The site is within the City of Renton water and sewer service area. There is an exisling 12-inch water main within Lake Washington Blvd and Meadow Ave NE. Water main improvements for this development would entail improvements to provide the minimum fire flow and would include a water main extension along the frontage of the project on Lake Washington Blvd to the north property line, a water main extension of an 8-inch minimum within the new street, and fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters would be required. There is an 8-inch sewer main adjacent and available to serve the site. There is also a King County Metro line in Lake Washington Blvd. This development would be required to extend the sanitary sewer along the frontage of the site, however the plat can also he served by a connection to the Metro Sewer line. Subsequent to transmittal of the Preliminary Report, the Direc(or of Parks has requested in addition to the Parks Mitigation Fees, they would like an easement for trail purposes on (he north side of May Creek for continuous trail connection from Lake Washington to Cougar Mountain. Lake Washington View Estates File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14, 2008 Page 4 minary Plat Jim Hanson, Hanson Consulting, 17446 Mallard Cove Lane, Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 stated that they agree with the staff report with the exception of the 100 year flood study. FEMA regulates flood elevations and it is a requirement that the adopted I ~O-year flood map be adopted and followed. FEMA is in the process of redoing some of the their maps in this locality, however, May Creek is not one of the streams that they are actively looking at changing at this time. It is very clear on the FEMA map where the I DO-year flood plain is located and it is shown on their plat map. The Examiner questioned Mr. Wasser as to what the impetus was with regard to imposing this condition. Kavren Kittrick, Development Services stated that it appeared that it was inadvertently from the previous comments as opposed to what was specifically commented on for this project. The only point where there might be a constriction would be at the point where May Creek crosses Lake Washington Blvd and everything has been improved in this area. This appears to be an old comment, it does not show up in her plan review's comments. Darrell Offe, Offe Engineers, 13932 SE 159th Place, Renton, WA 98058 stated that he is familiar with the questions being asked. The Level One analysis provided to the City (May 30, 2008) Section 4 does state sizing for the detention vaults and on the Drainage Control Plan there is sizing also shown for the two vaults. The actual FEMA map, which includes cross sections marked on it (was included in his report to the City) under Appendix 3b, shows the elevations and flood zones as it affects the property. At cross section E the elevation is 29 and upstream from that is a cross section with an elevation of 30, going further to the east side of the property the elevation becomes 34. At the bridge there is a cross section elevation of approximately 26. Moving from the westerly portion of the property to the east within May Creek, the elevation is changing in that flood plain. The elevation of Lots 8-11 is currently 28 and the cross section of the flood plain in that area is 28/29. The complaints that have been stated in the report are coming from a basin report that is approximately 20 years old. Those constraints that are downstream at the Barbee Mill and at the mouth of the creek have gone away with the activity that has occurred down there. The dredging has reduced the silt build up in the creek and the restrictions that are in the basin plan no longer exist. The Examiner inquired as to the cost of having this analysis done. It may not be an issue, but in 10 years or so it just may flood and become an issue that should have been handled now and not left alone. If the analysis were to be done, how long would it take to complete? Mr. Hanson stated that the previous applicant did get one proposal to do this study and it was a little over $25,000.00. The only other issue he had was the trail. The north side of May Creek is not part of this parcel, and not part of the application. Mr. Offe stated he was not certain of the time, it is not an easy task, but he can't imagine that it would be too long to do. However, the City is required to go by the FEMA adopted map. The applicant in building houses must go by the FEMA adopted map. If they were to do a study and find that the flood elevation is lower, FEMA would not accept it. Kavren Kittrick stated that she was not aware of the trail issue, there was nothing in her report about it. The 2005 preliminary report was fine. There were some calculations for the vaults, the question always arises if anything would change in the final design. An updated TIR is always required as part of the Utility permit. Mr. Hanson stated that they have had conversations with Dave Christianson, the City's Sewer Utility and Metro. Metro at the time of those discussions had no objection to using their facility, but the actual application or Lake Washington View Estates •• liminary Plat File No.: LUA-OS-057, PP, SM August 14, 200S Page 5 request had to come from the City of Renton, at the time of the construction permit, the City of Renton would be the one to make the application to Metro. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:06 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and entcrs the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Greg Fawcett, The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership, represented by Jim Hanson, filed a request for a Preliminary Plat. 2. The yellow file containing thc staff report, the Statc Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located in the 4200 block of Lake Washington Boulevard North. The subject site is located on the east side ofthe boulevard north ofN 40th Street. May Creek generally forms the northern boundary of the subject site. 6. The map element ofthe Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of detached single-family homes, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoned R-S (Single Family -S dwelling units/acre). The R-S zone requires density to be in the range of 4 to 6 dwelling units per acre. S. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 2341 enacted in July 1967. 9. The subject site is approximately 5.5 acres or 241,053 square feet. The subject site is a very irregularly shaped parcel approximately 220 feet wide by 900 feet long. 10. The subject site contains a variety of critical areas including steep, protected slopes, one Category 2 wetland, two Category 3 wetlands, a Class 4 creek and the south shoreline of May Creek as well as the creek. May Creek is a "shoreline of the state" and brings the proposed plat under the Shorelines Management Act. The proposal requires a Substantial Development Permit. 11. Wetland 1, a 6,093 square foot wetland, is a Category 3. Wetland 2, a 3,831 square foot wetland, is also a Category 3. Wetland 3 is a Category 2 wetland and is 23,756 square feet. Wetlands 2 and 3 are connected by the Class 4 creek. Two protected slopes were identified on the eastern portion of the site. The applicant has proposed creating a separate tract, Tract A, to contain all of the critical areas including their required buffers. In addition, the ERC required setbacks from the top of the critical slopes unless geotechnically appropriate and an increase in the protective May Creek buffer to 50 feet. Lake Washington View Estates File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 6 linary Plat 12. A tree survey indicates that seven (7) trees would need to be retained or replaced under City regulations. 13. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 13 lots along with the tract containing the various critical areas. Twelve of the lots, Proposed Lots I to 12, would be on the western portion of the subject site with access from Lake Washington Boulevard. Proposed Lot 13 would be located on the far or east side of the critical areas tract and it would be accessed via an existing pipestem to Meadow Avenue North at its intersection with North 40th Street. 14. The main portion of the plat, Proposed Lots I to 12, generally would be aligned north and south of a new west to east roadway off of Lake Washington Boulevard. Proposed Lots 1 to 6 would be aligned on the south side of the road while Proposed Lots 8 to 12 would be aligned on the north side of the roadway. Proposed Lot 7 would be located at the end of the road. A modified hammerhead or cul-de- sac would accommodate turning maneuvers in a half bulb in the vicinity of Proposed Lots 8, 9 and 10. The roadway would be a deadend since the critical areas east of Proposed Lot 7 would prevent any extension of the roadway further to the east. 15. As noted Proposed Lot 13 would be separated from the rest of the plat by the critical areas. The lot's proposed pipestem access will exceed City standards because it exceeds 150 feet in length but staff noted that this excessive length is an existing condition and access is already permitted via this pipestem. 16. Staff noted that the proposed curb radius of the new street with Lake Washington Boulevard is proposed at 25 feet and code requires 35 feet. The vertical curve for the roadway profile is proposed at 50 feet and code requires it to be 100 feet. Staff noted that the constraints on the shape of the parcel and the limitations imposed by the critical areas makes alley access infeasible. 17. The density for the plat would be 3.95 dwelling units per acre after subtracting sensitive areas (wetlands and protected slopes: 83,838 square feet) and roadways (13,543 square feet). The proposed subdivision results in a plat that does not meet the minimum density required in the R-8 Zone. Code permits a density below standards when a properly is constrained by critical areas (RMC 4-4-IIOD.l.b). The fact that the entire center of the subject site is encumbered by streams, wetlands and protected slopes justifies approving a plat with less than the normally required density. 18. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 5 or 6 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis. 19. The development wiII increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 130 trips for the 13 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 13 additional peak hour trips will be generated in the morning and evening. 20. Stormwater now drains to May Creek. That flow will be maintained but controlled by two detention vaults. Staff noted that size calculations were not provided but indicated that there is sufficient room to provide appropriately sized vaults. 21. Water lines are available in both Lake Washington Boulevard west of the site and Meadow Avenue North, east of the subject site. The Lake Washington line would have to be extended along the property line to the north. The City might want the line oversized and would share the costs of a line larger than Lake Washington View Estates ~ liminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-0S7, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 7 required. 22. An 8-inch sewer main is adjacent to the subject site. There is also a major King County Metro line in Lake Washington Blvd. The King County line may be used but the applicant would need special permission to use that line. 23. As noted, May Creek runs along the north boundary of the subject site. The creek's 1 DO-year floodplain is located along or ncar that boundary. Staff noted the following: "Due to staff concerns regarding the impacts flooding could have on the proposed development, staff recommends as a condition of approval that drainage and surface water design modeling be conducted. The modeling shall include a determination of the future conditions to determine the maximum 1 DO-year flood surface water elevation. Hydrologic modeling using the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software will be required as part of the Utility Construction Permit submittal. The future condition flow should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan 100-year model flow of 1059 CFS." At the hearing staff suggested the condition had been attached to the prior proposal for this site and it might not be appropriate at this time. No representative from Surface Water was available to make further comment. CONCLUSION: 1. The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. A major factor in this plat is the extensive area in the center ofthe property dominated by critical areas including protected slopes, three wetlands and two creeks. The acreage constrained by these critical areas also reduces the overall acreage that may be divided to create lots suitable for R-8, single-family homes. 2. The fact that the entire center of the subject site is encumbered by streams, wetlands and protected slopes justifies approving a plat with less than the normally required density (RMC 4-4-11 OD.I.b). While the Zoning Code provides a minimum density of four homes per acre in the R -8 District, when critical areas reduce the overall developable area, density may be reduced. In this case the site can provide a reasonable development pattern when achieving a density of3.95 dwelling units per acre. 3. The applicant will be segregating out those critical areas and they will be placed in a Native Growth Protection Easement to assure that they are undisturbed. This area will contain not only the critical areas themselves but also the buffers that protect those features. 4. The property lies along May Creek and proposed Lots 7 to 12 are located along the south shore ofthe creek While there appears to be some question about the appropriateness of the condition requiring a delineation of the 1 ~O-year flood zone quoted in Finding 23 above, it appears that a review ofthis property when development was first proposed found that there might be some ambiguity about where the 1 DO-year flood plain intersects the proposed lots of the south side ofthc Creek as well as actual or current conditions for this site. A condition to study the IOO-year flood level to assure lives and property would not be jeopardized if flooding events were to occur on this property is reasonable. The City is bound by minimum FEMA flood standards. But it may impose greater safeguards using its appropriate discretion to ascertain current conditions at the location of a proposed development within its jurisdiction. Flood conditions can change due to erosion, sedimentation, deposition of woody debris and other seasonal or longer-term events. At this point in the review, it appears that the condition is Lake Washington View Estate: File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 8 ,minary Plat reasonable and should be required. All development that occurs on the site shall abide by appropriate safety standards depending on flood plain analysis. 5. The plat appears to provide an offset to the impacts its development will create. The ERC imposed fees to help pay for additional transportation improvements, emergency services and recreational needs. 6. The development of the plat will also increase the tax base of the City, which should offset additional impacts of providing a range of urban services to the new residents. 7. The impacts of developing this parcel on traffic and the neighborhood character were considered when the zoning and comprehensive plan policies were adopted for this area. Clearly, the site has its sensitive elements and development will affect the character of the May Creek conidor. 8. As noted, the applicant will have to comply with the various technical standards for roads, stormwater detention and sewer and water lines. The applicant will also have to comply with the City's landscaping and tree retention regulations. 9. In conclusion, it appears that with the conditions proposed below, this plat containing very sensitive critical areas and flood plain encumbered property, can be reasonably developed. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the proposed 13-lot plat subject to the following conditions: I. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated that was issued by the Envirorunental Review Committee on October 22, 2007 for Project File No. LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM. 2. A revised preliminary plat map shall be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit Application showing a 35-foot curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd N. 3. A native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) shall be recorded over the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer areas prior to or concurrent with the recording of the final plat map. 4. The edge of the NGPE shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division Project Manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit Application for review and approval. The fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. 5. The trees proposed to be retained throughout the project shall be shown on each of the plan sheets submitted as a part of the Utility Construction Permit Application and protection measures for the trees to ensure survival during construction of the project shall be submitted for review and approval by the Development Services Division Project Manager prior to the issuance of a Utility Construction Permit. 6. Sizing calculations for the detention and water quality facilities (detention vaults) in accordance with the 2005 Surface Water Design Manual shall be provided at the tine of Utility Construction Permit application. 7. Drainage and surface water design modeling shall inclnde a determination of the future conditions to Lake Washington Vicw Estates. liminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14, 2008 Page 9 determine the maximum 100-year flood surface water elevation. Hydrologic modeling using the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software will be required as part of the Utility Construction Permit submittal. The future condition flow should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan 100-year model flow of 1059 CFS. 8. All development that occurs on the site shall abide by appropriate safety standards depending on flood plain analysis. ORDERED THIS 14"' day of August 2008. FRED J. KAl AN HEARlNG EXAMlNER TRANSMITTED THIS 14"' day of August 2008 to thc parties of record: Gerald Wasser Development Services Rcnton, W A 98057 Clarissa Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lanc Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Lynda Priddy EPA 1200 6th Avenue, Ste 900 Seattle, WA 98101 TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of August 2008 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Dave Pargas, Fire Greg Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Ron Straka Utility Engineering Supervisor City of Renton Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Marty Wine, Assistant CAO Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janel Conklin, Development Services Renton Reporter Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., August 28, 2008. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors oflaw or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a "yitten 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 hc dcems 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. Lake Washington View Estates File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 10 .minary Plat Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed iu writing on or before 5:00 p.m., August 28, 2008. 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. YOll 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. Project Location: 4200 Block of Lake Washington Blvd N (parcel 322405-9081) . , R5E W 112 EXHIBIT 8 COR ,R8'",'.'" • 'R.J8' 'R',"""""'8", ,-, ...... """"'. oN ',32n:d st;' .' ~~=ll. : :R,S ,N' 31'\ti~t uRJB ~~T=9 E R-sN ' 30thSt't"W I-,-'--~--l 11Fn~=lIRi 8N 29th' st ~~ I R~8 H • 2BdI~1',' ZONING PfBIPW TBCHNICAL SERVICES 01/l8I0'1 __ ... --fu,nton City IJ.mi~ 'A <[ U ,CA ~ 200 400 C4 32 T24N R5E W 112 5HZ ---~ ...... ----- ---------- O. I : I I I I 1 ' I ' EXHl. I 0 ::;' ,-r --..:J,I , I I WATER I I I I fm I ' / ' ,,,e Mill Go. /ln91. I I I I I , I, I ) 9 :,' 6 - 2 =:=-lOa V.NN1NG ~~~~WlNiON .)U~ -9 1008 ~ECa\\fEO Pon Abode. In<. I@J O.S2AL. / ' ® .;:~ 'f---t _ EwL-+-__ Schaeffer- "". '::', :. ~:: ' ... , ~ '-1" 1 t-~ , 'i "j . ,,- ·. ::i 3i ,.; " < w ., w '" z -< ox Z ... .. .. :;: ., z ~ 0- '" ., z 0 1= 0 w " "" 0- 0 ~ t-> 0 '" ~ 0 z 0 1= '" 0 .. '- -~ EXH1_.iT 7 f- U <! cr f- W U <! 0. (/) Z W 0. o / ./','\ \ \ ~ , , / ., ------/ N01:::lNIHSVM 'NOJ.N3~ SJ1'V'lS] M]lA NOl~IHSVM 3::.tVl ~~~\; ~ ~!, I " ---/- --;! • I / ---------------/ I I ~ , I _______________ f ---J I ! I / / OIM;:,CI:j.'U .. t'lVO V~::>'O". 1...1 ova ~I ~" S31Vl 1/\ NOWNIHSVM 3Wl ~ 00 = = c-.I en I :z ::::> -. o w ::> -w (.) UJ a; D'~ I I , , ; . , or ('" . 'c.P STATE OF WASHINCTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOCY I\'orfh ..... e'it Regional Officf'· .J19fJ 16mh Al-'enue Sf· Bdfevue, Washington 98008+54:')2. (42.1) 649·7()f)(J September 2, 2008 Greg Fawcett, Applicant Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, WA 98024 Dear Mr. Fawcett: I certify that I mailed a copy of this document to the persons and addresses listed herein, postage prepaid, iff re~~9J~ for United States mail in 't' 1/ v.i;! Washington, OJI ::.1 Subject: City of Renton Permit # ~..og!05W-Approved Greg Fawcett -Applicant Shoreline Substantial Development Permit # 2008-NW-I0063 Purpose: Notification of Receipt of Approved Substantial Development Permit (SDP) On August 28, 2008, the Department of Ecology received notice that the City of Renton approved your application for an SDP. Your permit is for the creation of 13 lots within shoreline jurisdiction of May Creek. By law, local governments must review all SDPs for compliance with the following: • The Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) • Ecology's Substantial Development Permit approval criteria (Chapter 173-27-150 WAC) • The City of Redmond Local Shoreline Master Program Local governments, after reviewing the SDP for compliance, are required to submit the SDPs to Ecology for filing. . Your approved SDP has been received and filed by Ecology. What Happens Next? Before you begin activities authorized by this permit, the law requires you to wait at least 21 days from the date we received the decision letter from the City of Renton on August 28, 2008. This waiting period allows anyone who (including you) disagrees with any aspect of this permit, to appeal the decision to the state Shorelines Hearings Board. You must wait for the conclusion of an appeal before you can begin the activities authorized by this permit. Greg Fawcett September 2, 2008 Page 2 of2 If no appeal is submitted you may begin activities any time after September 18, 2008. The Shorelines Hearings Board will notify you by letter if they receive an appeal. We recommend, however, you contact the Shorelines Hearings Board before you begin permit activities to ensure no appeal has been received. They can be reached at (360) 459-6327 or http://www.eho.wa.gov/Boards/SHB.asp. If you want to appeal this decision, you can find appeal instructions (Chapter 461-08 WAC) at the Shorelines Hearings Board website above. They are also posted on the website of the Washington State Legislature at: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac. Other federal, state and local permits may be required in addition to this shoreline permit. If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Joe Burcar at (425) 649-7145. I Jo urcar, Shorelands Specialist Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program JB:cja cc: Gerald Wasser, City of Renton Jim Hanson, Contact Person August27,2008 State Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office 3190 160th Ave. SE Bellevue, WA 98008·5452 CI'I OF RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator SUBJECT: Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit for Lake Washington View Estates File No. LUAOB·057, PP, SM Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed is the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the above referenced project. The permit was issued by the City of Renton on August 25, 2008. A Determination of Non· Significance -Mitigated was issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee on October 22, 2007. The appeal period ended November 14, 2007 and no appeals of the threshold determination were filed. We are filing this action with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General per WAC 173· 14·090. Please review this permit and attachments and contact me at (425) 430·7382 if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, ~~ Gerald C. Wasser Associate Planner Enclosures: Administrative Decision Copy of Master Application Project Narrative Neighborhood Detail Map Notice of Application SEPA Checklist SEPA Determination DNS·M Mitigation Measures DNS·M Advisory Notes cc: Office of Attorney General Contact / Applicant -Jim Hanson, Hanson Consulting/Greg Fawcett Owner-WDNR -------------]-OS-S-s-o-u-th-G-r-ad-y-w-a-y-.-R-e-nt-on-,-w-a-s-hi-ng-t-on--9s-0-S-7-------------~ * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CCRVE • CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM DATE RECEIVED: June 9, 2008 DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: July 8,2008 DATE APPROVED: August27,2008 TYPE OF ACTION(S): [X 1 Substantial Development Permit Conditional Use Permit Variance Permit Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the City of Renton has granted a permit. This action was taken on the following application: APPLICANT: Greg Fawcett, Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership, P.O. Box 402, Fall City, WA 98024 PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: Lake Washington View Estates The proposal would result in the creation of 13 lots for the eventual development of detached single family houses and one open space tract (Tract A). The 5.53 acre project site is located east of Lake Washington Blvd N between N 40 th Street and N 44th Street and is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling units per acre. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,159 to 15,174 square feet. Landscape, roadway, utility improvements and one sensitive area tract (Tract A) would be established with the plat. A wetland report, stream study, and geotechnical report were submitted with the project application. The wetland report identified 3 wetlands (Wetlands 1, 2, and 3) . Wetland 1 is a 6,093 square foot category 3 wetland, Wetland 2 is a 3,831 square foot category 3 wetland, and Wetland 3 is a 23,756 square foot category 2 wetland. Wetlands 2 and 3 are connected via an unnamed class 4 stream. The stream study identified a class I stream (May Creek), which flows along the north property line and is also identified as a Shoreline of the State. All of the critical areas located on- site would be located within Tract A. I' DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED): LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWNP-R: WITHIN SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: The closest construction to the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of May Creek is a bio-filtration swale which is outside the proposed 50-foot buffer. A 25-foot buffer is required by the City of Renton shoreline regulations, but a 50-foot buffer is proposed. No work is proposed within the buffer other than enhancement. The May Creek Channel is a man-made channel. The area around the channel has been disturbed in the past. At this time the vegetation is described as unevenly aged deciduous forest. Eight of the proposed lots are within the 200-foot Shoreline Area. The City allows a 30-foot maximum height for buildings in this zone. Lot 1, City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment Number LUA-05- 069-LLA recorded under Recording number 20051012900009 NW Y. of Section 32, Township 24N, Range 05E May Creek City of Renton The following section/page of the Master Program is applicable to the development: Section 4-3-090.J 4-3-090L.14 Description Urban Environment Specific Use Regulations -Residential Development Page page 3-25 page 3-36 Development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the following terms and conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all conditions by the State agencies and all conditions provided in the application and modifications submitted to the City. 2. Compliance with the Construction Mitigation Plan, submitted by the applicant, dated June 9, 2008, is required. This permit is granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and pursuant to the following: 1. The issuance of a license under the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant from compliance with federal, state, and other permit requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any condition hereof. 3. A construction permit shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the City of Renton Development Services Division or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review period have been completed. C.E. Vincent Planning Director Exhibits: 1. Neighborhood Detail Map 2. Site Plan c: Attorney General's Office Applicant I Owner -Greg Fawcett, The Rob-Clarissa Partnership Contact -Jim Hanson, Hanson Consulting Yellow File o. \ 'I I I \ I I , I []::1" L-( ~I , , , , I I , J J I J ' )ee M ill CO. ,In,/ , , , I I I OJ 89 I, 4C.'!U:j, II I, II "9J I N. ----------'--~ -- ,-----~. 7"r.~"=FJ'~ ) / Qo6~-' , , .lUN -9 100& RECE\'JEO Pon Abode 1no. \'~ , •• ,1 , 110 3~1 ----------... ----_ .. _ ... ... (I) '111111111111111111 ••• I" " .. I ••• "~.' ,111111111 j 11111111 ..•••••...•.......• • '11'11'11'11'11"'"'' "'" 'II , I ~ .: .: .. :-: . : ~. ~: : : ..... " .......... " .......... .. " ....... "" ..... ,," .. " . ::~::::~::~~~~t ~ ~ NO.WN!HSVM 'NO.L~ I;; STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT 0)<' PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a bi-weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a bi-weekly newspaper in King County, Washington, The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County, The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period, The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on July 26, 2008, The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $92.40. .. ?/f71k .}/,;!pAd,., LindaM. Mills NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHI'IGTON A public Hearing will he hc!d hy lhe Renton Heming Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on August S, 2()()8 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petitions: Lake Wao;hington View Estates LUA08·057, PP, SM Location: 4200 Block of Lake Washington Hlvd. N. The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for a 13-101 subdivision of a 5.53 acre parcel in the Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (induding May Creek, a shoreline of tile State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and Sleep slopes are located on the project site, Access would be provided via a new street off Lake Washington Blvd. N and via a driveway off N 40th SI. An open space tract and a NOPA casement would encompass critical areas. Legal descriptions of the nles noted above are on file in the City Clerk'sOmce, Seventh Floor, Cit" Hall, Renton All interested persons a~e invited to be pT"t!sent at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. Questions should be directed to [he Hearing Examiner at 425430-6515 Published in the Renton Rep0!1er on July ,'\\\\\~\\\ 26,2008.#99260 . Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscribed and sworn to me this 26th day of July, 2008, ..... ,' Ii/ ,--' :-{ DAlS "I, ~ ~0 .... '-",\\\'\\1111 ~Q 1/ -" .... , ..... \ON ~-t III/ I = 'X'"" .;:.-.... G:J? A/. 'I, ' ... := ~ =~ "(Ali,.. ~~'I;... ~ -3~ ~O rJl'1. /' :;'::::0 _ ~ ~ :;; ~t.) _. E Z ;::. , ~ ~ ~ =0- 'c forthe State of Washington, Residi~ <I' \, ;us~.""f /; ff 'l ~ 1I111 0-1 .. , ............... ~ -= II 1 r II~\\\\\,,\..... 0'" .::: 11// (0 OF Wf'-S ,.::::- //1 , .......... 1\\\\\\\\\" City .enton Department of Community & Econom ~velopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: m#rfir COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22,2008 APPLICATION NO: '.'dlili:G67;,I'p, SM DATE CIRCULATED: JULY 8,2008 -APPLICANT: Greg Fawcett PLANNER: Jerry W PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 PLAN REVI~: Mike Dotson ~ In~ SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING B~ 'DC. .-rA' ~ LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake WashinQton View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (Qross) NIA [ WORK ORDER NO: 77913 PLEASE RETURN TO JERRY WASSER IN CURRENT PLANNING 6TH FLOOR SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13,lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential -B dwelling units per acre (R-B) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake WaShington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable Mo ... Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water UqhVGJare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation -Environmental Health Public Services V Energy/ Histon'dCulturaf Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED 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 additcI5~t:x::5ded to properly assess this proposal. ;o;-~,-'~W=,--~_r,--______ _ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. County of King ) Nancy Thompson being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 14th day of August 2008, affiant deposited via the United States Mail a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: 'C7 I SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this rr day of ,2008. Application, Petition or Case No.: Pub1ic~ and for the State of hington Residing at 'i ->--5,-", , therein. Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat LUA 08-057, PP, SM The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. .. OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON August 14, 2008 Conclusion and Recommendation APPLICANT: OWNER: CONTACT: LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: SUMMARY OF ACTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: PUBLIC HEARING: Greg Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership And Clarissa Fawcett PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 08-057, PP, SM 4200 Block of Lake Washington Blvd N Requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for subdivision of a 5.53 acre parcel into 13 lots and one open space tract for the future construction of single-family residences. Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions. The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on July 29,2008. After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the August 5, 2008 hearing. The legal record is recorded 011 CD, The hearing opened on Tuesday, August 5, 2008, at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Lake Washington View Est File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14, 2008 Page 2 liminary Plat The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No.1: Yellow file containing the original application, proof of posting, proof of pUblication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Overall Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No.5: Preliminary Plat Plan Lot 13 Exhibit No.7: Preliminary Drainage Plan Exhibit No.9: ERC Mitigation Measures Exhibit No. 11: Full size map of 100 year flood plain along the Cedar River Exhibit No.2: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit No.4: Preliminary Plat Plan Lots 1-12 Exhibit No.6: Landscape Plan Exhibit No.8: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 10: ERC Advisory Note The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, Community and Economic Development Department, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The property is located east of Lake Washington Blvd, north ofN 40"' Street and south ofN 44th Street in the R-8 zone. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,159 square feet to 15, 174 square feet, resulting in a net density of 3.95 dulac. A wetland report, stream study and geotechnical report were submitted with the project application. The wetland report identified 3 wetlands, 2 Category 3 wetlands and one Category 2 wetland. May Creek is located on the northern boundary of the site and is a Class 1 stream. There is an unnamed Class 4 stream that connects the two wetlands on Tract A. The geotechnical report identified two protected slope areas on the eastern portion ofthe site. All critical areas on site would be located within Tract A. Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated with 10 mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. This Determination was issued for a previous project of the same name with project number LUA 07-039. The new project today is with a change of Applicant and a redesign of the project. The proposed plat is consistent with the Residential Single Family Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plan further would allow for the future construction of up to 13 new single-family residential units. After the deduction of public rights-of-way, private access easements and critical areas from the gross acreage, the 13-10t subdivision would result in a net density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre. As proposed all lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards for the R-8 zone. All setback standards and building standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted and appears to comply with the City's landscaping regulations. Each lot would have access to a public right-of-way, Lots 1-12 would access directly off Road A and Lot 13 would access offN 40'h Street. All lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. The proposed lots further appear to have sufficient building area for the development of detached single-family homes. Lake Washington View Estates heliminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 3 A revised preliminary plat map along with the Utility Construction Permit Application was requested showing a 35-foot curb return radius along Lake Washington Blvd N. Access to Lots 1-12 would be provided via a new internal 42-foot wide public street (Road A). Lot 13 access would be provided via a pipestem offN 40 th Street. Full street improvements, including paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drains, landscaping, street lighting and signage would be required along the frontages of Lake Washington Blvd N and the new internal street (Road A). Traffic, Fire and Park Mitigation Fees were imposed by the Environmental Review Committee. The site slopes down to the north at an average grade of 13 percent. A slope with a grade in excess of40 percent is located on the east portion of the project site and meets the City's criteria for classification as a Protected Slope. No development is proposed on the Protected Slope area. In order to further protect May Creek the City's ERC imposed a wider buffer of 50 feet on May Creek rather than the 25-foot buffer mandated by the City's current shoreline regulations. The project will be subject to the 2005 Department of Ecology Manual regarding erosion control. To ensure that none of the trees proposed to be retained are damaged during construction, it was recommended that those trees would be shown on each of the plans submitted as part of the Utility Construction Permit Application. To protect the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and associated buffer areas from impacts related to the construction of new single-family residences, it was recommended that the plat map be revised to include the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer areas within a Native Growth Protection Easement prior to or concurrent with the recording ofthe final plat. In addition, the applicant proposes 30 new street trees as part of the project landscape plan as well as additional trees in the Wetlands Buffer Enhancement Plan. The Renton School District has stated that they can accommodate the approximate 6 additional students generated by this proposal. A Technical Information Report was previously submitted, a Level One Analysis was submitted with the current application. The existing drainage currently discharges to May Creek. The proposed drainage control would be by two detention vaults. The project site contains a portion of the May Creek 100-year flood plain, it was recommended that drainage and surface water design modeling be conducted. Further discussion was had regarding the flood plain and the effects it could have on a development of this type and size. The site is within the City of Renton water and sewer service area. There is an existing I2-inch water main within Lake Washington Blvd and Meadow Ave NE. Water main improvements for this development would entail improvements to provide the minimum fire flow and would include a water main extension along the frontage of the project on Lake Washington Blvd to the north property line, a water main extension of an 8-inch minimum within the new street, and fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters would be required. There is an 8-inch sewer main adjacent and available to serve the site. There is also a King County Metro line in Lake Washington Blvd. This development would be required to extend the sanitary sewer along the frontage of the site, however the plat can also be served by a connection to the Metro Sewer line. Subsequent to transmittal of the Preliminary Report, the Director of Parks has requested in addition to the Parks Mitigation Fees, they would like an easement for trail purposes on the north side of May Creek for continuous trail connection from Lake Washington to Cougar Mountain. Lake Washington View Est , liminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PI', SM August 14,2008 Page 4 Jim Hanson, Hanson Consulting, 17446 Mallard Cove Lane, Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 stated that they agree with the staff report with the exception of the 100 year flood study. FEMA regulates flood elevations and it is a requirement that the adopted 100-year flood map be adopted and followed. FEMA is in the process of redoing some of the their maps in this locality, however, May Creek is not one of the streams that they are actively looking at changing at this time. It is very clear on the FEMA map where the 100-year flood plain is located and it is shown on their plat map. The Examiner questioned Mr. Wasser as to what the impetus was with regard to imposing this condition. Kayren Kittrick, Development Services stated that it appeared that it was inadvertently from the previous comments as opposed to what was specifically commented on for this project. The only point where there might be a constriction would be at the point where May Creek crosses Lake Washington Blvd and everything has been improved in this area. This appears to be an old comment, it does not show up in her plan review's comments. Darrell Offe, Offe Engineers, 13932 SE 159th Place, Renton, WA 98058 stated that he is familiar with the questions being asked. The Level One analysis provided to the City (May 30, 2008) Section 4 does state sizing for the detention vaults and on the Drainage Control Plan there is sizing also shown for the two vaults. The actual FEMA map, which includes cross sections marked on it (was included in his report to the City) under Appendix 3b, shows the elevations and flood zones as it affects the properly. At cross section E the elevation is 29 and upstream from that is a cross section with an elevation of 30, going further to the east side of the propcrty the elevation becomes 34. At the bridge there is a cross section elevation of approximately 26. Moving from the westerly portion of the property to the east within May Creek, the elevation is changing in that flood plain. The elevation of Lots 8-11 is currently 28 and the cross section of the flood plain in that area is 28/29. The complaints that have been stated in the report are coming from a basin report that is approximately 20 years old. Those constraints that are downstream at the Barbee Mill and at the mouth of the creek have gone away with the activity that has occurred down there. The dredging has reduced the silt build up in the creek and the restrictions that are in the basin plan no longer exist. The Examiner inquired as to the cost of having this analysis done. It may not be an issue, hut in 10 years or so it just may flood and become an issue that should have been handled now and not left alone. If the analysis were to be done, how long would it take to complete? Mr. Hanson stated that the previous applicant did get one proposal to do this study and it was a little over $25,000.00. The only other issue he had was the trail. The north side of May Creek is not part of this parcel, and not part of the application. Mr. Offe stated he was not certain of the time, it is not an easy task, but he can't imagine that it would be too long to do. However, the City is required to go by the FEMA adopted map. The applicant in building houses must go by the FEMA adopted map. If they were to do a study and find that the flood elevation is lower, FEMA would not accept it. Kayren Kittrick stated that she was not aware of the trail issue, there was nothing in her report about it. The 2005 preliminary report was fine. There were some calculations for the vaults, the question always arises if anything would change in the final design. An updated TIR is always required as part of the Utility permit. Mr. Hanson stated that they have had conversations with Dave Christianson, the City's Sewer Utility and Metro. Metro at the time of those discussions had no objection to using their facility, but the actual application or Lake Washington View Estates ~ reliminary Plat File No.: LUA-OS-OS7, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 5 request had to come from the City of Renton, at the time of the construction permit, the City of Renton would be the one to make the application to Metro. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:06 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: I. The applicant, Greg Fawcett, The Rob-Clarissa Fawcett Partnership, represented by Jim Hanson, filed a request for a Preliminary Plat. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located in the 4200 block of Lake Washington Boulevard North. The subject site is located on the east side of the boulevard north ofN 40th Street. May Creek generally forms the northern boundary of the subject site. 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of detached single-family homes, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoned R-S (Single Family -S dwelling units/acre). The R-8 zone requires density to be in the range of 4 to 6 dwelling units per acre. S. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 2341 enacted in July 1967. 9. The subject site is approximately 5.5 acres or 241,053 square feet. The subject site is a very irregularly shaped parcel approximately 220 feet wide by 900 feet long. 10. The subject site contains a variety of critical areas including steep, protected slopes, one Category 2 wetland, two Category 3 wetlands, a Class 4 creek and the south shoreline of May Creek as well as the creek. May Creek is a "shoreline of the state" and brings the proposed plat under the Shorelines Management Act. The proposal requires a Substantial Development Permit. II. Wetland I, a 6,093 square foot wetland, is a Category 3. Wetland 2, a 3,831 square foot wetland, is also a Category 3. Wetland 3 is a Category 2 wetland and is 23,756 square feet. Wetlands 2 and 3 are connected by the Class 4 creek. Two protected slopes were identified on the eastern portion of the site. The applicant has proposed creating a separate tract, Tract A, to contain all ofthe critical areas including their required buffers. In addition, the ERC required setbacks from the top of the critical slopes unless geotechnically appropriate and an increase in the protective May Creek buffer to 50 feet. Lake Washington View Est liminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 6 12. A tree survey indicates that seven (7) trees would need to be retained or replaced under City regulations. 13. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 13 lots along with the tract containing the various critical areas. Twelve of the lots, Proposed Lots 1 to 12, would be on the western portion of the subject site with access from Lake Washington Boulevard. Proposed Lot 13 would be located on the far or east side of the critical areas tract and it would be accessed via an existing pipestem to Meadow Avenue North at its intersection with North 40th Street. 14. The main portion of the plat, Proposed Lots 1 to 12, generally would be aligned north and south of a new west to east roadway off of Lake Washington Boulevard. Proposed Lots I to 6 would be aligned on the south side of the road while Proposed Lots 8 to 12 would be aligned on the north side ofthe roadway. Proposed Lot 7 would be located at the end of the road. A modified hammerhead or cul-de- sac would accommodate turning maneuvers in a half bulb in the vicinity of Proposed Lots 8, 9 and 10. The roadway would be a deadend since the critical areas east of Proposed Lot 7 would prevent any extension of the roadway further to the east. 15. As noted Proposed Lot 13 would be separated from the rest of the plat by the critical areas. The lot's proposed pipestem access will exceed City standards because it exceeds 150 feet in length but staff noted that this excessive length is an existing condition and access is already permitted via this pipestem. 16, Staff noted that the proposed curb radius of the new street with Lake Washington Boulevard is proposed at 25 feet and code requires 35 feet. The vertical curve for the roadway protlle is proposed at 50 feet and code requires it to be 100 feet. Staff noted that the constraints on the shape of the parcel and the limitations imposed by the critical areas makes alley access infeasible, 17, The density for the plat would be 3,95 dwelling units per acre after subtracting sensitive areas (wetlands and protected slopes: 83,838 square feet) and roadways (13,543 square feet), The proposed subdivision results in a plat that does not meet the minimum density required in the R-8 Zone. Code permits a density below standards when a property is constrained by critical areas (RMC 4-4-11 OD, I ,b). The fact that the entire center of the subject site is encumbered by streams, wetlands and protected slopes justifies approving a plat with less than the normally required density, 18. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 5 or 6 school age children, These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis, 19. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 130 trips for the 13 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 13 additional peak hour trips will be generated in the morning and evening, 20, Stormwater now drains to May Creek. That tlow will be maintained but controlled by two detention vaults. Staff noted that size calculations were not provided but indicated that there is sufficient room to provide appropriately sized vaults, 21. Water lines are available in both Lake Washington Boulevard west ofthe site and Meadow Avenue North, east of the subject site, The Lake Washington line would have to be extended along the property line to the north, The City might want the line oversized and would share the costs of a line larger than Lake Washington View Estates. ,eliminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14, 2008 Page 7 required. 22. An 8-inch sewer main is adjacent to the subject site. There is also a major King County Metro line in Lake Washington Blvd. The King County line may be used but the applicant would need special permission to use that line. 23. As noted, May Creek runs along the north boundary of the subject site. The creek's 100-year floodplain is located along or near that boundary. Staff noted the following: "Due to staff concerns regarding the impacts flooding could have on the proposed development, staff recommends as a condition of approval that drainage and surface water design modeling be conducted. The modeling shall include a determination of the future conditions to determine the maximum I DO-year flood surface water elevation. Hydrologic modeling using the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software will be required as part of the Utility Construction Permit submittal. The future condition flow should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan I DO-year model flow of 1059 CFS." At the hearing staff suggested the condition had been attached to the prior proposal for this site and it might not be appropriate at this time. No representative from Surface Water was available to make further comment. CONCLUSION: I. The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. A major factor in this plat is the extensive area in the center of the property dominated by critical areas including protected slopes, three wetlands and two creeks. The acreage constrained by these critical areas also reduces the overall acreage that may be divided to create lots suitable for R-8, single-family homes. 2. The fact that the entire center ofthe subject site is encumbered by streams, wetlands and protected slopes justifies approving a plat with less than the normally required density (RMC 4-4-11 OD.l.b). While the Zoning Code provides a minimum density of four homes per acre in the R -8 District, when critical areas reduce the overall developable area, density may be reduced. In this case the site can provide a reasonable development pattern when achieving a density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre. 3. The applicant will be segregating out those critical areas and they will be placed in a Native Growth Protection Easement to assure that they are undisturbed. This area will contain not only the critical areas themselves but also the buffers that protect those features. 4. The property lies along May Creek and proposed Lots 7 to 12 are located along the south shore of the creek. While there appears (0 be some question about the appropriateness of the condition requiring a delineation of the IOO-year flood zone quoted in Finding 23 above, it appears that a review ofthis property when development was first proposed found (hat there might be some ambiguity about where the I DO-year flood plain intersects the proposed lots of the south side of the Creek as well as actual or current conditions for this site. A condition to study the I DO-year flood level to assure lives and property would not be jeopardized if flooding events were to occur on this property is reasonahle. The City is bound by minimum FEMA flood standards. But it may impose greater safeguards using its appropriate discretion to ascertain current conditions at the location of a proposed development within its jurisdiction. Flood conditions can change due to erosion, sedimentation, deposition of woody debris and other seasonal or longer-term events. At this point in the review, it appears that the condition is Lake Washington View Esliminary Plat File No.: LUA-OS-057, PP, SM August 14, 200S Page 8 reasonable and should be required. All development that occurs on the site shall abide by appropriate safety standards depending on flood plain analysis. 5. The plat appears to provide an offset to the impacts its development will create. The ERC imposed fees to help pay for additional transportation improvements, emergency services and recreational needs. 6. The development of the plat will also increase the tax base of the City, which should offset additional impacts of providing a range of urban services to the new residents. 7. The impacts of developing this parcel on traffic and the neighborhood character were considered when the zoning and comprehensive plan policies were adopted for this area. Clearly, the site has its sensitive elements and development will affect the character of the May Creek corridor. S. As noted, the applicant will have to comply with the various technical standards for roads, stormwater detention and sewer and water lines. The applicant will also have to comply with the City's landscaping and tree retention regulations. 9. In conclusion, it appears that with the conditions proposed below, this plat containing very sensitive critical areas and flood plain encumbered property, can be reasonably developed. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the proposed 13-10t plat subject to the following conditions: I. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on October 22, 2007 for Project File No. LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM. 2. A revised preliminary plat map shall be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit Application showing a 35-foot curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd N. 3. A native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) shall be recorded over the protected slopes, wetlands. streams, and their associated buffer areas prior to or concurrent with the recording of the final plat map. 4. The edge of the NGPE shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division Project Manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit Application for review and approval. The fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. 5. The trees proposed to be retained throughout the project shal! be shown on each ofthe plan sheets submitted as a parl of the Utility Construction Permit Application and protection measures for the trees to ensure survival during construction of the project shall be submitted for review and approval by the Development Services Division Project Manager prior to the issuance of a Utility Construction Permit. 6. Sizing calculations for the detention and water quality facilities (detention vaults) in accordance with the 2005 Surface Water Design Manual shall be provided at the tine of Utility Construction Permit application. 7. Drainage and surface water design modeling shall include a determination of the future conditions to L~ke Washington View Estates .nary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057. PP, SM August 14, 2008 Page 9 .. determine the maximum 100-year flood surface water elevation. Hydrologic modeling using the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software will be required as part of the Utility Construction Permit submittal. The future condition flow should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan 100-year model flow of 1059 CFS. 8. All development that occurs on the site shall abide by appropriate safety standards depending on flood plain analysis. ORDERED THIS 14th day of August 2008. HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of August 2008 to the parties ofrccord: Gerald Wasser Development Services Renton, W A 98057 Clarissa Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vemon, W A 98274 Lynda Priddy EPA 1200 6th Avenue, Ste 900 Seattle, W A 9810 1 TRANSMITTED THIS 14"' day of August 2008 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Dave Pargas, Fire Greg Fawcett The Rob-Clarissa Partnership PO Box 402 Fall City, W A 98024 Ron Straka Utility Engineering Supervisor City of Renton Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmennan, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development lennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Marty Wine, Assistant CAO Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Renton Reporter Pursuant to Title N, Chapter 8, Section 100Gofthe City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., August 28, 2008. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors oflaw 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 requcst for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date ofthe 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. Lake Washington View Eshliminary Plat File No.: LUA-08-057, PP, SM August 14,2008 Page 10 Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed iu writing ou or before 5:00 p.m., August 28, 2008. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contaius the requirement for Restrictive Coveuauts, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or fiual processiug of tbe me. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) conununications 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 conununications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the conununication 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. Project Location: 4200 Block of Lake Washington Blvd N (parcel 322405-9081) B4 . 29 T24N R5E W 112 EXHIBIT 8 SI COR R:::-8 N 37th ", "R-8'""~ .'" (1). " :> , <>; , .' St ""' R~8 rv-:::-;:-~ rt~=========~ N32nd St N32ndSt r ' R-8 < "," I R, ,,8,' ,~~ N Ztlth¥! • R'-8 e .. ZONING .~. PIBIPW TECHNICAL SERVICES Ii 02Il&I0'1 _ ---Renton Ci.ty LImit,! CA NE' <[ U C R 6 ,yo <yo C4 .1,4800 32 T24N R5E W ----'------- ----------- 89 I, ,u.s.a " • 1, .' " 49J I , ,.,l-• 'n "" 88 jf: § /'/ 1 , , , .. ~ -ti .. ~----~'.~','I --i-~~,~~~~ ... ~~~~ @J>7 ' t:r :87 >' "'i".-'!1!.lL--! k=6=!'''''-----.,.:;;'''''''''----~ .'-' '0' G?O:" , , 9 :: 6 '0 -', ~ .-, -~-. 'i1j~ t f§30) • ~ " ---lOa --- !&po 410 jUN -91.00S , ~ECE\'JEO Pan Abode ln~, .. . 1·2DO '00 104 4<>0 :' :. l'i 'i . ~ .~ , l t-~ " '"; ; ;1 . . , :i 3i '" '" '" ... ~ ... " z '" or Z ~ '" .. :;: ., z ;0 0 ... '" .. z 0 1= u ... '" '" ... 0 ~ ... :. 0 " ... 0 z 0 ;:: or 0 .. u:to~alr:o _._--""-- ;! ~ co EXHIbI. 7 l _~_~~~~_~ru.-t::lva V::);:;'I(JV IJ tJUtI il/31"J ~I 01 .1 S31V1S" ,-WNIHSVM 3>1\11 ";: ____________ "-______ ffiro. ! .' / '--; N01~NIHSVM 'NOlN3~ S3J.'I1$] MJIt'. NOl!)NIHS"M ]>tVl I- U <{ tr I- W U <{ 0. Vl z W 0. o / / \ \ I, \ ~ .... _-1- • I ~-----; ~~ ___ i ~' i / --1 I , 'ldOQ-~ ® I--::::'-:-0-1 NO.LN'l! ~ AO tiD -:r.=:=-.oc±.1 - "= I I -=-::j Cl z ~Z 00 ~~ = = "" !z~ 01 WlL I ~O :z &?: :::::> ....1-...... wO iii 0 -.~ ~ ~ ,-------- ! 0 W >--W (.) Ul a: -~ .~ , on Department of Community & Economic I opment City of ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: +tu1LS COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-057, PP, SM DATE CIRCULATED: JULY 8, 2008 ,..., APPLICANT: Greq Fawcett PLANNER: Jerry Wasser PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washinqton View Estates 2008 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (qross): N/A LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washington View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A .' '\.) I ~C WORK ORDER NO: 77913 W SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substa~1 Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround oft of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway oft Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Informat;on Environment Minor Major InformaUon Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth iousing ,,, Vlaler Plants Land/Shoreline Use ri~:. ~. Animals Environmental Health Public S.",;ces Energy/ Natural Resources A;1:gg! ~::: 8. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS ~~.It)j ~~ 10 ~0 C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application w' h particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where a ditiona! information' eded to properly assess this proposa!. r a-5 V Y Date (7/28/2008) Leslie Betlach -LUA08-057 From: To: CC: Date: Subject: Hi Mike and Jerry, Leslie Betlach Gerald Wasser; Michael Dotson Gerald Rerecich; Peter Renner; Terry Higashiyama 7(28(20082:46 PM LUA08-057 Regarding the above proposed development please include the following comments: I. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future residents that would utilize existing City park and recreation facilities and programs. The City has adopted a Parks Mitigation Fee of $530.76 per each new single family lot to address these potential impacts. 2. Easement for trail purposes on the north side of May Creek for a continuous trail connection from Lake Washington to Cougar Mountain. these same comments will be includec as part of the circulated green file. Thanks, Leslie Page 1 : CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 28th day of July, 2008, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information was sent to: Name Jim Hanson Contact Greg Fawcett Applicant Clarissa Fawcett (The Rob-Clarissa Partnership) Owner (Signature of Sender):, ~ ~~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker Representing signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ""'~~~/II"III Dated: ) J Olejoa II "" 'Projei:tNa¥iTie:~' Lake Washington View Estates projec~'~~r.iI~~J¥} LUA08-057, PP, SM :::"":-v " " I-t.a '/ .::-f.<.v". ",\..,>, ·\\Q11\ ~ I" = c,' .:, " . .')01 ~II' ~ = ¥' ..,,,;.,. I ~ CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING August 5, 2008 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: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-08-057, PP, SM PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located within the Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling unit per acre zone, into 13 lots and one open space tract (Tract Al. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family residences. The proposed lots would range in size from 5, 159 square feet to 15,17 4square feet with a net density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre. Two streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N. HEX Agenda 8-5-08.dQC PUBLIC HEARING City of Renton Departme nt o f Community & Economic Deve lopment PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: Project Name: Applicant. Owner: Contact: File Number: Project De scrip tion: Project Location: Augu st 5, 2008 Lake Wash ington View Estates Preliminary Plat Greg Fawcett , T he Rob -Clari ssa Fawcett Pa rt ne rship , PO Box 402 , Fall City , WA 9802 4 Th e Rob-C la ri ssa Partnership & Clar issa F awcett , PO Bo x 402 , Fall City , WA 98024 Jim Han so n , Hanso n Consul ting , 17446 Ma ll a rd Cove Lane , Mt Vernon , WA 98274 LUA -08 -057 , PP , SM Project Manager: Gerald Wasser , Associate Planner The ap plicant is requesting Pre li minary P lat approval, and a Shorelin e Su bstant ia l Dev elopment Permit for the subd ivisio n of a 241 ,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel loca te d within th e R es id ent ial -8 (R -8) dwelling unit pe r ac re zone, int o 13 lots and one o pen space tr act (Tract A). T he proposed lots are inte nded for the futu re cons tru ction of sing le fami ly re sidences . The proposed lots would range in size from 5,159 squa re feet to 15 ,17 4square feet wit h a net den si ty of 3.95 dwell ing uni t s per acre. Two streams (including May Creek , a shorel ine of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are locat e d on t he project site. Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be pro vided via a ne w street off of Lake Washington Bl vd N, which terminates i n a ham m erhe ad turnaro und and acces s to lo t 13 w ould be provided v ia a driveway off of Me adow Avenue N . 42 0 0 Blo ck of Lake Washington Blvd N (pa rcel 322405-908 1) City of Renton CEO Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner WA-08-057, PP, SM PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: August 5. 2008 Page 2 of 12 B. HEARING EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. Exhibit 2: Neighborhood Detail Map (date received: June 9, 2008) Exhibit 3: Overall Preliminary Plat Plan (date received: July 17, 2008) Exhibit 4 Preliminary Plat Plan Lots 1-12 (date received: July 17, 2008) Exhibit 5: Preliminary Plat Plan Lot 13 (date received: July 17, 2008) Exhibit 6: Landscape Plan (date received: June 9,2008) Exhibit 7: Preliminary Drainage Plan (date received: June 9, 2008) Exhibit 8: Zoning Map sheet C4 w Y, (dated: February 28, 2007) Exhibit 9: ERC Mitigation Measures Exhibit 10: ERC Advisory Notes C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: The Rob-Clarissa Partnership & Clarissa Fawcett, PO Box 402 Fall City, WA 98024 2. Zoning Designation: Residential - 8 (R-8) Dwelling Units per Acre 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Single Family (RSF) 4. Existing Site Use: Vacant 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Single family residential; R-8 zoning East: Single family residential; R-8 zoning South: Single family residential; R-8 zoning West: Barbee Mill Plat; COR zoning 6. Access: Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street (Road A) off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N. 7. Site Area: 241,053 square feet (5.5 acres) 8. Project Data: Existing Building Area: New Building Area: Total Building Area: Hexrpt 08-057 Area NIA NIA NIA Comments N/A N/A N/A City of Renton CED Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-08-057, PP, SM PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: August 5, 2008 D. HISTORICAUBACKGROUND: Annexation Comprehensive Plan Zoning Lot Line Adjustment Preliminary Plat, SEPA Land Use File No. NIA NIA NIA LUA05-069 LUA07-039 Ordinance No. 2341 5099 5100 NIA NIA E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations Page 3 of 12 Dale 710311967 11101/2004 11101/2004 912212005 Dismissed by Hearing Examiner 411712008 Section 4-7-050: General Outline of Subdivision, Short Plat and Lot Line Adjustment Procedures Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan-General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-150: Streets -General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-160: ReSidential Blocks -General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots -General Requirements and Minimum Standards 6. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria 7. Chapter 11 Definitions F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element: Residential Single Family objectives and policies. 2. Community Design Element. 3. Environmental Element Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CED Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-OB-057, PP, SM PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: August 5, 2008 Page 4 of 12 G. DEPARTMENT ANAL YSIS: 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND The proposal would result in the creation of 13 lots for the eventual development of detached single family houses and one open space tract (Tract A). The 5.53 acre project site is located east of Lake Washington Blvd N between N 40 th Street and N 44th Street and is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling units per acre. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,159 to 15,174 square feet with a resulting net density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre (241,053 square feet -97.381 square feet combined sensitive areas and public roadways = 143,672 square feet or 3.29 net acres; 13 units / 3.29 net acre = 3.95 dulac). Landscape, roadway. utility improvements and 1 sensitive area tract (Tract A) would be established with the plat. Existing development within the vicinity of the site includes predominantly residential development located within the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) zones. A wetland report, stream study. and geotechnical report were submitted with the project application. The wetland report identified 3 wetlands (Wetlands 1, 2, and 3). Wetland 1 is a 6.093 square foot category 3 wetland, Wetland 2 is a 3,831 square foot category 3 wetland, and Wetland 3 is a 23,756 square foot category 2 wetland. Wetlands 2 and 3 are connected via an unnamed class 4 stream. The stream study identified a class I stream (May Creek). which flows along the north property line and is also identified as a Shoreline of the State. The geotechnical report identified two protected slope areas on the east portion of the project site. All of the critical areas located on-site would be located within Tract A. Access to proposed Lots 1-12 would be provided via a new 42 foot wide public road off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Access to proposed Lot 13 would be provided via a pipestem off of N 40'" Street. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on October 22, 2007, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat. The DNS-M included 10 mitigation measures. A 14·day appeal period commenced on October 31.2007 and ends on November 14, 2007. As of the composition of this report no appeals of the threshold determination have been filed. The DNS·M was issued for LUA 07·039, PP. SM, ECF, a project which was substantially the same as that proposed, currently, in LUA 08·057. PP. SM. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non·Significance -Mitigated: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services. dated March 1 g, 2007. 2. Major earthwork on·site shall be conducted during the dry. summer months of the year. 3. The construction of a residence on proposed Lot 13 shall maintain a 25·foot buffer from the protected slope and a 15·foot building setback from the edge of the buffer, unless based on appropriate subsurface exploration and slope stability analysis a geotechnical engineer concludes that the 25·foot buffer may be reduced. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the 2005 Storm water Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be sublect to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 5. The buffer required from the Ordinary High Water Mark of May Creek shall be 50 feet. 6. The storm drainage system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual, Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CEO Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Augusl 5, 2008 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner WA-OB-OS7, PP, SM Page 5 of 12 7, The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,899.88. 8. Work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation shall be contacted at (360) 586-3065 if any archeological artifacts are discovered during earthwork activities. 9. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 for each new net daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in the payment of $9,330.75. 10. The applicant shall pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. The fee is estimated at $6,344. 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address site plan issues from the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of the report. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT CRITERIA: Approval of a plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat criteria have been established to assist decision makers in the review of the subdivision: A. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Designation. The subject site is designated Residential Single Family (RSF) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Land designated Residential Single Family is intended to be used for quality detached residential development organized into neighborhoods at urban densities. It is intended that larger subdivision, infill development, and rehabilitation of existing housing be carefully designed to enhance and improve the quality of single family living environments. The proposed plat is consistent with the following Residential Single Family Land Use, and Community Design Elements of the Comprehensive Plan: Land Use Element Policy LU-147. Net development densities should fal! within a range of 4.0 to B.O dwelling units per net acre in Residential Single Family neighborhoods. The proposal for 13 lots on the subject site would arrive at a net density of 3.95 dwelling units per net acre, which is below the denSity range permitted in the R-8 zone. However, RMC 4-2-11 OA provides for projects with environmental constraints to have the minimum density requirement waived. Policy LU-14B. A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet should be allowed on in-fil! parcels of less than an acre (43,560 square feel) in single-family designations. Allow a reduction in lot size to 4,500 square feet on parcels greater than an acre to create an incentive for aggregation of land. The minimum lot size is not intended to set the standard for density in the designation, but to provide flexibility in subdivision/plat design and facilitate development within the allowed density range. The site is greater than one acre and all lots would be greater than or equal to 4,500 square feet. Policy LU-152, Single family lot size, lot width, setbacks, and impervious surface should be sufficient to allow private open space, landscaping to provide buffers/privacy without extensive fencing, and sufficient area for maintenance activities. The proposed lots would all comply with the minimum lot size, width and depth requirements. In addition, it appears that the proposed lots would create adequate area for the construction of detached Single family residences in compliance with the required setbacks. Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CEO Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: August 5, 2008 Community Design Element Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-OB-057, PP, SM Page 6 of 12 Policy CD-19: During development, significant trees, either individually or in stands, should be preserved, replaced, or as a last option, relocated. The applicant will be required to retain or replace 25 percent of all existing significant trees on the project site. Policy CD-26: Streets, sidewalks, and pedestrian or bike paths should be arranged as an interconnecting network. Dead-end streets and cul,de,sacs should be discouraged. A grid or "flexible grid" pattern or streets and pathways, with a hierarchy of widths and corresponding traffic volumes, should be used. The new internal road (Road A) would be a dead end street, terminating in a hammerhead turnaround. The critical areas existing onsile prevent a through street from being constructed. Environmental Element Policy EN-9. In no case should development activities decrease net acreage of exiting wetlands. A category 2 wetland and two category 3 wetlands are located on the project site. No impacts to the wetlands or buffer areas are proposed. Policy EN-10. Establish and protect buffers along wetlands to facilitate infiltration and maintain stable water temperatures. provide for the biological regime, reduce amount and velocity of run,off, and provide for wildlife habitat The category 2 wetland requires a 50,foot wetland buffer and the category 3 wetlands require 25,foot buffers. No impacts to the buffer areas are proposed. S, Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation, The 5.5,acre site is designated Residential -8 Dwelling Units per Acre (R,8) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The proposed development would allow for the future construction of up to 13 new single-family residential units. Density -The density range permitted in the R,8 zone is a minimum of 4.0 up to a maximum of 8.0 dwelling units per net acre (dulac). Net density is calculated after public rights,of,way, private access easements. and critical areas are deducted from the gross acreage of the site. After the deduction of 13,543 square feet of proposed right,of,way dedication. and 83,838 square feet for the sensitive areas from the gross lot area, the proposal for 13 lots would result in a net density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre (241,053 gross sq. ft -97,381 sq. ft. = 143,672 sq. ft. or 3.29 ac, 13 units 13.29 acres = 3.95 dulac). The proposed plat would provide less than the minimum density required in the R,8 zone. In the event that minimum density cannot be achieved due to environmental constraints, the Reviewing Official may waive the minimum density requirements per RMC 4,2,110D. 1 .b. Due to the presence of 3 wetlands, protected slopes, and two streams on the project site. and the requirement for buffers from these critical areas. staff recommends that the minimum density requirements be waived for the proposed project. Lot Dimensions and Size -The minimum lot size required in the R,8 zone is 4.500 sq ft for project sites that are greater than 1 net acre in area. The minimum lot width required is 50 ft for interior lots and 60 feet for corner lots. and a minimum lot depth of 65 feet is required. Proposed lot widths range from 50 to 100 feet and lot depths range from 86 feet to 145 feet The proposed plat would create 13 lots which are proposed to range from 5,167 square feet in area to 15,173 square feet. As proposed, all lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards for the R,8 zone. In addition, the Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CEO Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: Augusl 5, 2008 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-OB-057, PP, SM Page 7 of 12 proposal includes one open space tract (Tract A) for the critical areas, Three wetlands, steep slopes, and a class 1 stream (May Creek) would be located within proposed Tract A. LotlTract Size (sq, ft. ) Access -~ 1 6,741 Road A 2 5,167 Road A 3 5,456 Road A - 4 6,277 Road A 1-;:--- 7,467 Road A ~- 6 5,876 Road A '7 - 6,625 Road A 8 6,615 Road A 9 5,159 Road A 10 5,989 Road A 11 5,617 Road A , ~. 6,140 Road A ~ 13 15,174 N 40.0 Street - Tract A 13 7 ,951 Lake Washington Blvd N_ Setbacks -In the R-8 zone, the minimum front yard and side yard along a street setback is 15 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for an attached garage, the side yard setback is 5 feet, and the rear yard setback is 20 feet. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide for the construction of single family residences after the consideration of the setback requirements. Compliance with these setback standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. Building Standards -The R-8 zone permits one single family residential structure per lot. Each of the proposed lots would support the construction of one detached unit. Accessory structures are permitted at a maximum number of two per lot at 720 sq ft each, or one per lot at 1,000 sq ft in size, Accessory structures are permitted only when associated with a primary structure located on the same parcel. Building height in the R-8 zone is limited to two stories and 30 feet. Maximum building coverage is 35% or 2,500 square feet, whichever is greater for lots that are larger than 5,000 square feet in area and 50% for lots that are 5,000 square feet or less. The proposal's compliance with these building standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. Parking -Each detached dwelling unit is required to provide two off-street parking stalls per unit. The proposed building pads appear to be adequately sized for the provision of the required parking, Landscaping -The City's landscaping regulations require the installation of landscaping within the public right-of-way, The minimum amount of landscaping required for sites abutting a non-arterial public street is 5 feet provided that if there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5 feet, this shall also be landscaped. A determination has been made that if no additional area is available within the public right- of-way due to required improvements, the 5-foot landscaped strip may be located within private property abutting the public right-of-way. The landscaping proposed shall either consist of drought resistant vegetation or shall be irrigated appropriately. In addition, the applicant will be required to plant two ornamental trees, a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches (deciduous) or 6 - 8 feet in height (conifer), within the 15-foot front yard setback area for the proposed lots or within the proposed planting strip, A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application. The landscape plan proposes a 5-foot landscaped strip along the existing and proposed street frontages, The landscape plan also proposes a street tree planting plan along the existing and proposed street frontages. The proposed tree species include Amelanchier a. x qran 'Autumn Brilliance', Magnolia grandiflora 'Victoria', and Pyrus calleryana 'Redspire'. The submitted conceptual landscape complies with the City's landscaping regulations. Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CED Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: August 5, 2008 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-08-057_ PP, SM Page80f12 The applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscaping plan to the Development Services Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. C. Compliance with Subdivision Regulations Lot Arrangement: Side lot lines are to be at right angles to street lines, and each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement per the requirements of the Street Improvement Ordinance. Each of the proposed lots would have side lot lines at right angles to Road A, with the exception of the lots (Lots 6-8) that abut the terminus of the hammerhead turn around. Lots 6-8 have a wedge shape due to the narrow width of the hammerhead and cannot have the side lots lines at right angles to Road A. Each lot would have access to a public right-of-way, Lots 1-12 would access directly off of Road A and Lot 13 would access off of N 40th Street. As proposed, the lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Lots: The size, shape and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Each of the proposed lots is oriented to provide front yards facing a street (either Road A or N 40 th Street), and satisfies the minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-8 zone. The lots are rectangular or generally triangular in shape. When considering the required setbacks, the proposed lots appear to have sufficient building area for the development of detached single family homes. Property Corners at Intersections: The curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd should be 35-foot; not 25-foot as shown on the submitted preliminary plat map. Staff recommends that a revised preliminary plat map be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit Application showing a 35-foot curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd N. Access and Street Improvements: Access to proposed Lots 1-12 would be provided via a new internal 42- foot wide public street (Road A) off of Lake Washington Blvd N. Access to Lot 13 would be provided via a pipestem off of N 40 th Street. The City's street standards require that the minimum right-of-way width for residential access streets be 50 feet wide with 32 feet of paving, a modification for a reduced right-of-way may be granted down to 42 feet wide with 32 feet of paving if the modification will result in the creation of additional lots. Full street improvements (including paving, Sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drains, landscaping, street lighting and signage) will be required along the frontages of Lake Washington Blvd NE and the new internal street (Road A). The vertical curves for the roadway profile are required to be a 1 OO-foot curve. The submitted plans propose a 50-foot curve. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a revised roadway profile be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit application showing the required 1 OO-foot curve. Pipestems are proposed to provide access to Lots 6-8 and 13. Pipestems are permitted provided they have a minimum width of 20 feet and do not exceed 150 feet in length. The pipestems serving Lots 6,7,8, and 13 each meet or exceed the minimum 20-foot width. The pipestem accessing Lot 13 exceeds the maximum length of 150 feet, however the pipestem currently exists. and the approval of the plat would not further increase the non-conformity, therefore no adjustments are required. The City's subdivision regulations RMC 4-7 -150E.5 specifies that alley access is the preferred street pattern. An alley layout was not submitted for review. Due to the environmental constraints on the site an alley layout does not appear feasible. To mitigate Impacts on the local street system, the City's Environmental Review Committee imposed mitigation on the project in the form of a Traffic Mitigation Fee. The Traffic Mitigation Fee is based on $75 per net new average daily trip attributed to the proposed subdivision. The proposed 13 new resident'iallots would be expected to generate approximately 124.41 new average weekday trips (13 new lots x 9.57 trips per lot = 124.41). The fee for the proposed plat is estimated to be $9,330.75 (124.41 total trips x $75.00 = $9,330.75) and is payable prior to the recording of the plat. Topography and Vegetation: With the project application, the applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services, dated March 19, 2007. According to the report the site Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CEO Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING OA TE. August 5, 2008 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner WA-08-0S7, PP, SM Page90f12 topography slopes down to the north at an average grade of 13 percent. A slope with a grade in excess of 40 percent is located on the east portion of the project site (abutting Lot 13) and meets the City's criteria for classification as a Protected Slope. No development is proposed on the Protected Slope area. Vegetation on the project site consists primarily of alder trees, maple trees, a few cedar trees, and black berries. The information provided by the applicant indicates that soils on-site consist of Alderwood series (AgC) gravelly sandy loam. The 2002 Geologic Map of King County identifies the soils on the upper elevations of the site as Quaternary recessional outwash (Qvr). A Wetland Assessment prepared by Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC, dated March 20, 2007 and a Wildlife Habitat Assessment and Stream Review prepared by Altman Oliver Associates, LLC, dated March 26, 2007 were submitted with the project application. Secondary review of the submitted materials was conducted by Herrera Environmental, Inc and letter dated May 17, 2007 and a follow up email dated June 6, 2007 were submitted to the City. The submitted reports identified 3 wetlands on the project site, a class 4 unnamed stream, and a class 1 stream (May Creek). Based on the conclusions of the secondary review, a revised wetland assessment was submitted by Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, dated September 18, 2007 and May 16, 2008. The revised assessments included a delineation of the three wetlands (Wetlands 1-3) identified on the project site (Wetlands 1 and 2 were identified as category 3 wetlands and Wetland 2 was identified as a category 2 wetland), and a discussion and delineation of the Class 4 stream connecting Wetlands 2 and 3, and an enhancement plan for the 25-foot buffers of Wetlands 1 and 2. No impacts are proposed to the onsite wetlands, streams, or their associated buffer areas. In addition, to further protect May Creek the City's Environmental Review Committee imposed a wider buffer (50 feet) on May Creek than the 25-foot buffer mandated by the City's current shoreline regulations, To protect the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and associated buffer areas from impacts related to the construction of new single family residents around the perimeter, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the plat map be revised to include the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer areas within a Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) prior to or concurrent with the recording of the Final Plat. In addition, staff recommends that the NGPE be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division project manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit Application for review and approval. The fencing and s·,gnage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (TESCP) and the use of Best Management Practices would serve to mitigate potential erosion and off-site sedimentation impacts. The project application includes a Construction Mitigation Plan, which is subject to final approval prior to the issuance of construction permits for the project. In addition, the project will be subject to the 2005 DOE manual regarding erosion control, as conditioned by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC). Vegetation on the project site consists primarily of alder trees, maple trees, a few cedar trees, and blackberry bushes, The applicant proposes to remove vegetation from the location proposed for the new public street and the areas required for utility installation. RMC 4-4-070 indicates that existing trees and other vegetation shall be used to augment new plantings for landscaping where practical, and RMC 4-7- 130 requires that a reasonable effort should be made to preserve existing trees, A Tree Retention and Replacement Plan and a Tree Retention Worksheet were submitted with the proposed project application. These materials indicate that seven trees are required to be retained or replaced. The replacement trees shall be a minimum 2-inch caliper tree, 'To ensure that none of the trees proposed to be retained are damaged during construction, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the trees proposed to be retained are shown on each of the plans submitted as a part of the Utility Construction Permit Application and that protection measures for the trees to ensure survival during construction of the project be submitted for review and approval by the Development Services Division project manager, In addition, the applicant proposes 30 new street trees as part of the project landscape plan as wellas additional trees in the Wetlands Buffer Enhancement plan. Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CED Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Augusl5, 2008 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-OB-057, PP, SM Page 10 of 12 Relationship to Existing Uses: Single family residential homes abut the subject site on the south. A new attached residential community is being constructed to the west. The proposed detached single family residences would be compatible with the surrounding development. D. Availability and Impact on Public Services (Timeliness) Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development, subject to the applicant's provision of Code required improvements and fees. Therefore, the City's Environmental Review Committee is requiring the applicant to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single-family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,344.00 (13 new lots x $488.00 = $6,344.00) and is payable prior to the recording of the plat. Recreation: There are no existing recreational facilities in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future demand on existing City Parks and recreational facilities and programs. Therefore, the City's Environmental Review Committee is requiring the applicant to pay a Parks Mitigatian Fee based an $530.76 per new single-family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,899.88 (13 new lats x $530.76 = $6,899.88) and is payable prior to. the recording of the plat. Schools: The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District No. 403. According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Land Use Element (January 16, 1992), the City of Renton has a student generation factor of 0.44 students per single-family residential dwelling. Based on the student generation factor, the proposed plat would potentially result in 6 additional students (0.44 x 13 = 6). The schools would include: Hazelwood Elementary School, McKnight Middle School, and Hazen High School. The school district has indicated that they would be able to handle to additional students coming from the proposed development. Storm Drainage/Surface Water: A Technical Information Report prepared by Site Development Associates, LLC, dated March 23, 2007 was submitted with the application materials for LUA 07-039, PP, ECF, SM, the previous submittal for this project; and, a Level One Analysis, prepared by Offe Engineers, PLLC, dated May 30, 2008 was submitted with the current application materials. According to the reports the existing drainage currently discharges to May Creek. The proposed method of drainage control would be by two detention vaults. These vaults are indicated on the Drainage Control Plan received June 9, 2008. Because no sizing calculations were provided for these on·site detention and water quality facilities, staff recommends that as a condition of approval the applicant provide sizing calculations at the time of Utility Construction Permit application in accordance with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The project site contains a portion of the May Creek 100 year floodplain. Due to staff cancerns regarding the impacts flooding could have on the proposed development, staff recommends as a condition of approval that drainage and surface water design modeling be conducted. The modeling shall include a determination of the future conditians to. determine the maximum 100·year flood surface water elevatian. Hydrologic modeling using the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC· RAS) software will be required as part of the Utility Canstruction Permit submittal. The Future conditian flaw should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan 1 OO·year model flow of 1059 CFS. A Surface Water System Development Charge, based an the current rate of $1012.00 per new single· family lot, would be required prior to the issuance of construction permits for the plat. Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities: The site is within the City of Renton water service area. There is an existing 12·inch water main within Lake Washington Blvd and Meadaw Ave NE. The site is located in the 320·pressure zone. The static water pressure is between 90·120 psi. The project is outside of the Aquifer Protection Area. All fire protection shall comply with City Cade (i.e. hydrants with storz fittings, 1000 gpm minimum required for homes less than 3600 square in area, etc.) In accordance with the Fire Department requirement (prior to recording the subdivision), at a minimum, one hydrant within 300 feet af any proposed single·family structure is required. Additional fire flow and hydrants are required if the total square footage of the new single·family structures are greater than 3600 square feet. Hexrpt 08-057 City of Renton CED Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-OB-057, PP, 8M LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 5, 2008 Page 11of12 Water main improvements for this new development will entail improvements to provide the minimum fire flow (1000 gpm for homes less than 3600 square feet, or 1500 gpm for homes greater than 3600 square feet), The improvement will include the following: a, A water main extension along the frontage of the project (Lake Washington Blvd) to the north property line, Depending on the fire-flow requirements required (as mentioned above) the City will reimburse the developer to oversize the water main to a 12-inch diameter line, b, A water main extension of an 8-inch minimum (1 0-12-inch possible for increased fire flow requirements) within the new street. Note: The maximum flow rate for an 8-inch line is 1,250 gpm (unless the line is "looped"), c, Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters are required to be in place prior to recording of the plat. There is an 8-inch sewer main adjacent and available to serve the site, There is also a King County Metro line in Lake Washington Blvd, City Code requires this development to extend the sanitary sewer along the frontage of the site, However, the plat can also be served by a connection to the Metro Sewer line; parallel to Lake Washington Blvd, (as shown on the land use application), If this is the preferred method of service, then verification of acceptance must be provided from Metro King County sewer, The Sewer System Development Charge is $1,017 per new single-family residence, This fee is due with the construction permit. H. RECOMMENDA TlON: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat, Project File No, LUA-08-057, PP, SM subject to the following conditions: 1, The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on October 22, 2007 for Project File No, LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM, 2, A revised preliminary plat map shall be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit Application showing a 35-foot curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd N, 3, A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) shall be recorded over the protected slopes, wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer areas prior to or concurrent with the recording of the final plat map, 4, The edge of the NGPE shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit Application for review and approval, The fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. 5, The trees proposed to be retained throughout the project shall be shown on each of the plan sheets submitted as a part of the Utility Construction Permit Application and protection measures for the trees to ensure survival during construction of the project shall be submitted for review and approval by the Development Services Division project manager prior to the issuance of a Utility Construction Permit. 6, Sizing calculations for the detention and water quality facilities (detention vaults) In accordance with the 2005 Surface Water Design Manual shall be provided at the time of Utility Construction Permit application, 7, Drainage and surface water design modeling shall include a determination of the future conditions to determine the maximum 100-year flood surface water elevation, Hydrologic modeling using the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software will be required as part Hexrp108-057 City of Renton CEO Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 5, 2008 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-OB-057, PP, SM Page 120112 of the Utility Construction Permit submittal. The Future condition flow should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan 1 ~O-year model flow of 1059 CFS. EXPIRATION PERIODS: Preliminary Plats (PP): Five (5) years from final approval (signature) date, Hexrpt 08-057 --------------------- O. \ I' I EXHIg.lT 2 I J I [] ::; , [,------,-,I , I I TOWER I , I I , J I J ' )ee Mill (,0 In]1. I I I I OJ ,. 4C;;- @l>7 ' G-6-:"' " ~ :;; 4<0 ---'00 [010 JUN . 9 1()Q8 RECENED Pan Abod e Inc. .. . 1·2DO 7 i:3 At @ '. , ,,'~ , ':00 104 400 , ;-1 I .' ( -j , i : ;: , I " g EXHIBIT 3 .. , . -.... _-- r;I"_~ !IJ1S mSllYH J./.3alTA 11 TSSIlIY'D <IllY dIHSI!lIM.tIIYd YSSIlIY'IO " 80>1 :;uu .. S3.1Y.LSZ UJA lIOJ.lliIIlI8Y.I. 3lIV'I 1111111 lillI! ! 1111111 ~llnl! jl illlllli ---------~ . .,.,- - • , I , / " I ~I '"/- " !~ /" , / LUA-_-_ LMD-_-__ LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PORTION 0-,.. lVERNIlENT LOT 1, SECTION 32, TIP. 24 N CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, 1I'ASIllNG / / / / / / / / OPEN SPACE TRACT "It." 131,1&1 s.P. 3.17 M.. +/- -- 10 &,.oeo s.P. 0.14 Ao. +/-• • =~ ~-.. • • .. GE. 5 E .. 1I'.1l. EXHIBIT 4 6 e," aI', 0.:16 £D. +/- •. -........ OPEN SPACE TRACT"K m.tel 8.,. 3.11.k +/- I I I "'I" III I I ~I~ I I I e ____ -.l 1" = 40' 0' 40' 80' MUS " KIIDGI II f'DI an' fF ~ LGf tJII( IIDAIAIICId' LMD IIEOIID .....aI ....,..30-0212 .umIt'I I'l.! NlM!II!III 2OQ510'! ..... LEGEND • "I£CTDI aMtU I • IUIIlD a.N!It • .,.... ...... CAS£ • "ItT lUI. .. CAl[: o " ,.. .... tot. AS I'IJfO • " $tT vr lA. VIUI' II!l444 -_ .. Q) A HANSEN SURVEYING UIIt~.t~ -~ n_ IIftII ftE. ..... --. n. _ UllDf IIE'VlIDIo tI!LoW.-"" ... _ 1110 ftJ!1IlI __ POlmDIf 01': GOn. 1DT L SIC. It2, 'rIP. 24 ... JlGI. 15 :I., '1".11( CITY OF RENTON LAICE WASHINGTOK VIEW ESTATES FILE NO. WA-_-_ ..... ......... .. ..". "'/20/In 108 ltO..: ..... .,..." ... .... ~ 1" _ 40' ...... • or. LUA-_-_ LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES UtD-_-__ PORTION OF GOVERN1lENT LOT 1, SECTION 32, TlIP. 24 N. -,E. 5 E., lUI. 0 \ 1 '.~ 1,821 .. ,. 0.16 k +/- • ~~ 6 1.080 I.r. 0.16 Ac. +/- 4 • .~ + ,.--- • . . /1/ !~ OPEN SPACE TRACT "A" La'7 .... 8.r. 3.11 Ac. +1- CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, lrASIllNG I I I "I" III I I ~I~ I I I e EXHIBIT 5 ____ .J 8 i 1t- I 0' 1" = 40' 40' 60' MIlS IF ENtMiI rs rot CITT OF' IIEN113N UIT LM: .IClIITWHf ...., IIBXIIID JUa:III I.ICI-»-Oa2 .<UI'IOfI"$ p;u !Malt 2IOCISl~t!lmOOl LEGEND • _IO:TDI ~ I: .. tIJIIIIImJI CUIIU • • flUe Ilk DI CASt • .. IItT D. .. CAa: o • ne. ...... cat. AS ICI'D • .. UT vr t& V/CII' 111464 ,.-"" ..... • .' 8 , e e • -.. 13 16,1., .... i!l.J'. 0.80 Jc. .... /- 8 1 OPEN SPACE TRACT "A~ m.em s.r. :t.l'7 k +/- ,,..,. S 88"49'OJ" E 134.52' e POEmON or: oo'f"t. lD1' 1. sc:. 32. TIP. 24 .... ReI. iii I., ".Il crry or REM't'ON Lo\I(g WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES FILI!l BO. WA-_-_ y, -\~ ;/ , j I'" I! ! , , 11 , i ~ , ! ljl pI ~ ~; i !' '. ' hi , J:d 11 ' H! , "1 j ::l ~.! , " 9 <'i. , '<'<:;' --'---" I , , , . ~~. ------, ~ -'~J ... ;; u ~ , ill 0 '" '" '" ~ s I ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~J:I!I J 1 '" ~ • u " ~ ie, ±WJ' '" 1< R ~ ? .. jic i " r _J1Ii! ! C<. • ~ " \ I I I· :. "" E=--. EXHIBIT 6 - --_. '(1./\ j() i\J,(). i-~')i\m+::>//V\ :]j\/! J ~. '" ~ 1-7-1 -'=~ I-=~'"-I ;R ~~JTg~ ..... ------~ ~ ~~-~ 8'1' I CltIll: I APPR .:., ... .::.=, ~ ~ " '~ ~k"~. ~ ~ §:i --" ~ <>~ .~ ~ • to C"l .L---"-=» . ~ f }; r Om :::r::s m (") m -< m 0 i --------.-~ I-c:: :z "" ......, = = 00 0 ~ 0 m _r- :;!~ 0:;:: "TIm ::o~ m a~ ZZ Z * ~ ~- MEADOW AVE. N. I ~ :<il '0 ~~ NO N ~~ ~~ ~~ " f _______________ _ w ~-- I I ~ /-- • -l----,,"~ I~ \ \i \ ~ / / / " ~ -'~-;;-"PRfSSuRr -S£W[R-' J __ ~ ----' LAKE WASHINGTON \/lEW [STAlES R(NTON. WASHINGTON ~4S ~'" eto!\! &(vD ..yo"?}"",, GU27/2001 ~ N ~----------- ~ c ~ ~ / .// / \. ~~~~~~~ § ~~~~~~~ ~ ~mm~ :s3e:z:~:;~ ilIrili~t~,..,,",:! ~~~~~~~!~ ~~"i~li~:tl!i~ ~~;;~~?~! ~~~5~~~8 'il"'~~~~i:Z: SB':; ~;5~ ~. EoE~i ~ o " ::! o z o ~ " ~ -i § '" " g o z w ,~ 6 :e z " :I: ;; ~ ~ ,z " ~ z " '" .. '" ~ " ,~ :>' !" llI""HX3 ~ ~ 'i"- '. !. ~~'"'~."'KE W. AS. HINGTON VII. ~STATES , 0 I I Ii n"" ROB CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP I \t,b~J til, --=---'. :3 EXHIBIT 8 I I I ./ L I I I i ) l f f / / I B4 . 29 T24N RSE W 1/2 CDR ~ ~ 40th St <I U CA CA NE 43 ~ Q) ~ CA / / I .~ ;:§ ~~ R-8 ill I R-8 z (y Q) :> rIl Q) ~. o >-0 / / N 38th St <r; ~ / / R-8 N 37th ~ / f N 36Ui st ~ / ~~R-8 N 35th St R~81 C3 / 81 R-8N 34th St R-83 <Xl R-S I '" I R-S N33rd Pl R-8/ !~ 33](1 se R-S! R-S/ ,I R-S l~ 31st St R-si 'ER-s N 30th st R-Sii{ , . 10 ') R - 8 N 29th st R_tlOl I R-8 1<1 28th PI R-S R-8 z R-8 N 34th st R-8 N 32nd St. R-8 eN eN CN R-8 R-8 'f' R-8 . R-4 D4 . 5 T23N RSE W 112 ZONING -.. ---Renton .. t,-Umi" PIBIPW TECHNICAL SERVICES II2Il8fOl '" R-8 eN 1 R-S R-S ,j o 200 .4.00 1:4800 C4 32 T24N R5E W 112 5432 CITY OF RENTON DETERI'iIlNATION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE·MITIGATED . MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM EXHIBIT 9 APPLICANT: Volarehigh Land Development, LLC PROJECT NAME: Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval, Environmental (SEPA) Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located within the Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling unit per acre zone, into 13 lots. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family residences. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,167 square feet to 15,173 square feet Two streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 42XX Lake Washington Blvd N (parcel no. 322405-9081) The City of Renton Depprtment of Planning/Building/Public Works Development PI"nning Section 1 .. The applicant shall comply wit~ thil. reGommendE!til:l~S' f0Utldin the geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services, dated March 19, 2007.. .... ....••...• •... ' ... ' ..•..•... " 2. Major earthwork on-site shall becond~cted duriri~ th~'dtY,surim,er months of the year. 3. The construction ofa residence on prop<iSedL()r1~~hall maiptain a 25-foot buffer from the protected slope and a 15-foot building setback fromthe.~dgeL9f !tJ,e buffer, unless based on appropriate subsurface exploration and slope stability analysis a geotechnical engih~erconcludes that the 25-foot buffer may be reduced. 4, Theapplicarit shall berequired to pwvide i3Temporary Emsion and.Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of EcologY's Erosion and. SedimeritGontrolL Requirements outlined in Volume II of the 2005 Stormwater Management' Manual and proyide slaff. with aCo'ilstruction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits .. This condition shall oes!Jbj(l.Gt to .Ibe review and approval of the Development Services • ~ .,0. '.~' '",' , _ • Division. 5, The buffer required from the Ordinary High Water Mark of May Creek shall be 50 feet. '6. The storm drainage system forthis project shall be required tocomply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 7 .. The applicant shall pay a ParkS Mitigation.f'ee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,899.88. . 8. Work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation shall be contacted at (360) 586-3065 ilany archeological artifacts are discovered during earthworkac!ivities. 9. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 for each new net daily trip prior to the recording of (he final plat. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in the payment of $9,330.75 .. 10. The applicant shall pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the .final plat. The feels estimated at $6,344. . ERG M~tigation Measure's Pagel of 1 CITY OF RENTON DETERIlnINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM EXHIBIT 10 APPLICANT: VOlarehigh Land Development, LLC PROJECT NAME: Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The app/icantis requesting Preliminary Plat approval, Environmental (SEPA) Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development ,Permit for the subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located within the Residential -8 (R-8) dwelling unit per acre zone, into 13 lots,' The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family residences, The proposed lots would range in size from 5,167 square feet to 15,173 square feet. Two streams (including May Creek,a shoreline of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site, Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N, LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 42XX Lake Washington Blvd N (parcel no, 322405-9081) The CityN Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning S~ction AdVisory Notes to Applio,mt: . The following notes are supplement~1 infor"!atioll prlly(~e,qilJ conjunctionwit? the environmental determination. Bf;)cause these notes are prqvlded aStnf~.tl1J,a~f?J1on'y, t1!,ey arenot sub}f;)ct to the appeal process for . envimOmflii~aldetermitJations, ' Planning. 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits naul hours be~$eh8:30i!m,to 3:30 pm, MoMday through Friday unless otherwise approved by, the Development Seivice~Division,' , ",' " . 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single fari:iif~ and other nonresidenticilconstruciion activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00)a,m'<l,ild eighlo'cloGk(8:00) p,m., Monday through Friday, Work·on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours betweeBhine o'olock (9:00) a.m"and<eight o'clook (8:00) p,m. No work shall be . permitted on Sundays, '. ",' . .' . ' 3, Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading "WolR;tMapplicant shall hydroseed or plant,an appropriate ground '. cover over any portionol the site thai is graded or cleared of vegetation and whereno further construction work will occur within ninety (BO) days, Alternative measures such as mUlch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified 1n the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed betweenthedates 6f November 1st and March 31st of each year, The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspeetionand approval of theperinit. 4, Two ornamental trees, a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches (deciduous.) or 6 -8 feet in height (oonifer). shall be planted or retained within the 15-foot front yard setback area for the proposed lots, . . ' 5, The minimum amount of landscaping. required for sites abuttinga non-arterial public street is 5 feet provided that if there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5, feet, this shall also be landscaped, A determination has been made that if no additional area is' available within the pubJic right-of,way due to required improvements, the 5- foot landscaped strip may be located within. private property abutting thepublio right~of-way. The landscaping proposed shall either consist-cf drought resistant vegetation or shall be irrigated appropriately, 6, A detailed landscape plan complying with the requirements set forth under RMG 4-8-1200, shatl be submitt.Eld at the time .of Final Plan review for review and approval by the Development Services Division Project Manager, , Washington State Department of Natural Resburces 1, A forest practice application may be needed if timber will be harvested, Please call Department of Natural Resources, Forest Practices at 360-825:1631, for assistance, . ~RC Aqvjsory'Note~ Page 1 013 Fire 1. A fire hydrant with 1,000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3,600 square feet in area (including garage area), the minimum fire flow increases to 1,500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structures. 2. Street address must be visible from a public street. 3. Existing and new hydrants will be required to be retrofitted with a Storz "quick disconnect" fitting. 4. Fire department access roads are required to be paved, 20 feet wide. Plan Review -Surface Water 1. Surface Water System Development Charge is $759 per new dwelling unit. This fee is due with the construction permit. 2. Drainage requirements must meet the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The report and design. submitted with the application appear to have complied with the 2005 design requirements. A more through and comprehensive review will be completed with the formal plan review. Plan Review -Water 1. All fire protection shall comply with City Code (i.e. hydrants with storz fittings, 1,000 gpm min required for homes less than 3,600 square feet in area, etc.). In accordance with the Fire Department requirement (prior to recording the subdivision), at a minimum, one hydrant within 300 feet of any proposed single family structure is required. Additional fire flow and hydrants are required ilthe total square footage of the new single family structures are greater than 3,600 square feet. 2. Installation of individual pressure reducing valve for each domestic meter is required with static pressure over 75. psi. 3. Vvater main improvements for this'new development'will entailimprovemenis to provide the minimum fire flow (1,000 ' gpm for homes less than 3,60,0 square feet,or'1,5QOgphlforhomes greater than3,6oD square feet). The improvement will include the following: a) A watermainextensi.on along the Jronlage of the project(Lake Washington Blvd) to the north property line. Depending on the fire'fiowrecjurrements (as' met)tioned above) the City will reimburse the developer to oversize the waler main to a 12-inctrdiameter line; b)A water main extension of an,8-inch minimum (16-12 inch possible fur increased fire flow·requirements) witl1irlthe n~wstreet.Note; The maximum flow rate for an 8- ihch line is 1,250gpm (unless the line is 'looped"); c) Fire hydrants"domesticand landscape water meters are required to be in place prior to re.cord.ingofthe plat. '. Plan Review -Sanitary Sewer 1: City Code requires this development to extend the sanitary sewer along the frontage althe site. However, the plat . can alsobe served. by a connection to the Metro Sewer line; parallel to Lake Washington Blvd. (as shown.on 'the land ~use application). If this is the preferred method of service, then verification of acceptance must be provided from Metro King County sewer (contact Eric Davidson) . . 2. Th.e Sewer System Development Charge is $1,017 per new single-family. residence. This fee is due with the construction permit. Plan Review-Transportation 1. The traffic impact analysis is acceptable. 2. All new electrical, phone and cable services must be underground .• Construction' ofthEise franchise utilities (llust be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. ~ 3. Per City of Renton codethisprojectis required to install curb, gutter, streetlights .and sidewalks, along tne frontagebf the parcel being developed. Note: The plans submitted with the application do not show street improvements along the entire portion of the existing right of way (Lake Washington Blvd.). . . '4. As a condition of plat approval, We wiH be requesting that the Lake Washington View Estates reconfigure the intersection with Lake Washington Blvd so as to align with tne Barbee: Mill site Lake Washington intersection .. (A cursory review shows that it will require that the intersection centerline for the Fawcett site t}e relocated approximately 18-feetto the south). . . ERG Advisory Notes Pag~ 2 013 5. The curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd should be 35-foot; not 2.5-foot as shown on the submittal. 6. The vertical curves for the roadway profile should be revised to a 1 ~O-foot curve; not 50-foot as shown on the submitted plan. Plan Review General 1. All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the current City of Renton horizontal and vertical control network. 3_ Permit applications must include an itemized cost estimate ·for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 0"1 the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,000 but less than $200,OPO, and 3% of any1hing over $200,000. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting.Standards. . : : ERe Ad,visory Notes Page 30(3 DATE: TO: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M 0 RAN DUM July 24, 2008 Jerry Wasser FROM: Mike Dotson/p;;)- SUBJECT: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 -LUA 08-057, PP, SM The following Utility and Transportation comments concern the Environmental and Development Application review for the subject project. EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER The site is within the City of Renton water service area. There is an existing 12- inch water main within Lake Washington Blvd and Meadow Ave NE. The site is located in the 320-pressure zone. The static water pressure is between 90-120 psi. The project is outside of the Aquifer Protection Area. SEWER There is an 8-inch sewer main adjacent and available to serve the site. There is also a King County Metro line in Lake Washington Blvd. SURFACE WATER May Creek crosses the northern boarder of the site. Wetlands and flood zones are mapped on this site. STREET There is currently a paved and partially improved public right-of-way along the frontage of this site. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER I. The Level One Analysis and Drainage Plan provided with this application contains conflicts. In particular the report has Section 4 twice: once it states that detention and water quality will be provided in a vault; and the other section requests an exemption from providing detention based on a "Direct Discharge" exception. In addition, the plans show two vaults. But there were no vault sizing calculations provided in the report. MD 08-007.doc Lake Washington View E J 2008 Page 2 of4 07/2412008 2. The prior proponents for the proposed preliminary plat application, had previously requested a direct discharge exemption. In a letter dated October 5, 2007, written by Mr. James Hanson, a code modification was requested. That request was denied in a letter dated November 13, 2007. As required in the aforementioned letter, the project is required to provide both detention and water quality facilities in accordance with the King County 2005 Surface Water Design Manual. 3. Therefore, if as one ofthe Section 4's proposes, the project is proposing on-site detention and water quality facility, then the sizing calculations must be provided. The calculations may be provided at a later date, with the Utility Construction permit application. As it mentions above, the sizing would be based on the 2005 King County Manual. I. Water main improvements for this new development will entail improvements to provide the minimum fire flow (1000 gpm for homes less than 3600 square feet, or 1500 gpm for homes greater than 3600 square feet). The improvement will include the following: a. A water main extension along the frontage of the project (Lake Washington Blvd) to the north property line. Depending on the fire-flow requirements required (as mentioned above) the City will reimburse the developer to oversize the water main to a 12-inch diameter line. b. A water main extension of an 8-inch minimum (I0-12-inch possible for increased fire flow requirements) within the new street. Note: The maximum flow rate for an 8-inch line is 1,250 gpm (unless the line is "looped"). c. Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters are required to be in place prior to recording of the plat. SANIT ARY SEWER I. City Code requires this development to extend the sanitary sewer along the frontage ofthe site. However, the plat can also be served by a connection to the Metro Sewer line; parallel to Lake Washington Blvd. (as shown on the land use application). If this is the preferred method of service, then verification of acceptance must bc provided from Metro King County Sewer (contact Eric Davidson). 2. The Sewer System Development Charge is $1,017 per new single-family residence. This fee is due with the construction permit. SURFACE WATER 4. The Level One Analysis and Drainage Plan provided with this application contains conflicts. In particular the report has Section 4 twice. Once it states that detention and water quality will be provided in a vault. The other section requests an exemption from providing detention based on a "Direct Discharge" exception. MD 08-007.doc Lake Washington View E s 2008 Pagd of4 07/24/2008 In addition, the plans show two vaults. But there are no vault sizing calculations provided in the report. 5. Therefore we have two problems in providing comments: One: lftheyare requesting an exemption from providing detention they must make a request to the Administrator. In a prior review of this application we stated the following: The drainage report submitted with the application proposes no flow-control due to the proximity to a "designated" direct discharge water body (Lake Washington). However the project proposal describes discharge of surface water directly to May Creek. May Creek is not a direct discharge water body as identified in the King County Surface Water Design Manual. Therefore the applicant would need to apply for an administrative modification to the design requirements (submitted to Grcgg Zimmerman, Administrator). Depending on the determination of the "application for modification," the proj ect may be required to provide flow control. If flow control is required, then due to the sensitive nature of this drainage basin, the design requirements for detention would be in accordance with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 6. If they are proposing on-site detention and water quality facility, then we need to see the supporting sizing calculations. As it mentions above, the sizing would be based on the 2005 King County Manual. 7. Portions of the site are within the FEMA mapped 100-year Flood Zone. Therefore the project will be required to show that the future condition flood zone will not impact the proposed development. A model run of the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software will be required as part of the engineering submittal for permits. The Future condition flow should utilize the May Creek Basin Plan 100-year model flow of 1059 CFS. 8. Surface Water System Development Charge is $1012 per new dwelling unit. This fee is due with the construction permit. TRANSPORTATION 1. The traffic impact analysis is acceptable. 2. The traffic mitigation fee of $75 per additional generated trip shall be assessed per additional single family home at a rate of9.57 trips (13 x 9.57 trips x $75!trip = $9,330.75). This fee is payable at time of recording the plat. 3. All new electrical, phone and cable services must be underground. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton Public Works inspector prior to recording 0 r the short plat. 4. Per City of Renton code this project is required to install curb, gutter, streetlights and sidewalks along the frontage of the parcel being developed. Note: The plans submitted with the application do not show street improvements along the entire portion of the existing right of way (Lake Washington Blvd.). MD 08-007.doc Lake Washington View E s 2008 Page 4 of4 07/24/2008 5. As a condition of plat approval, we are requesting that the Lake Washington View Estates reconfigure the intersection, if possible, with Lake Washington Blvd so as to align with the Barbee Mill site Lake Washington intersection. (A cursory review shows that it will require that the intersection centerline for the Fawcett site be relocated approximately IS-feet to the south). 6. The curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd should be 35-feet, not 25-feet as shown on the submittal. 7. The vertical curves for the roadway profile should be revised to a 100-foot curve, not a 50-foot curve as shown on the submitted plan. CONDITIOj\,'S I. Drainage and surface water design modeling shall include a detennination of the future conditions to determine the maximum I OO-year flood surface water elevation. 2. Temporary Erosion Control shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the current Department of Ecology Standards and staff review. 3. A Traffic Mitigation Fee of$75.00 per additional Average Daily Trip shall be assessed. MD 08-007.doc ton Department of Community & Economic .' '/opment City of ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:Pb.n t:<.eVi et.rJ COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-057, PP, SM DATE CIRCULATED: JULY 8, 2008 APPLICANT: Greg Fawcett PLANNER: Jerry Wasser PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washin~ton View Estates 2008 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson Nt;t;tIVt:D SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A JUL t 9::03 LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washin~ton View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (~ross) N/A QI I" " I WORK ORDER NO: 77913 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shore/ine Use Utilities Animals Trans orlation Environmental Health Public Services Energy! Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this a ion with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where addition mforma on is needed to properly assess this proposal. r~ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date) • Project Name: Project Address: Contact Person: Permit Number: u)!\ Or-yO'» Project Description: Land Use Type: [0'Residential D Retail D Non-retail Calculation: \?:7'1-Y. '57;. \}..'-\.'-\ \ 1\\)\ \ C}.. 0,. 1.\ \ ). 'ti7:;:.. 'll ~ )::;:;L).15 Transportation Mitigation Fee: Calculated by: Date of Payment: Method of Calculation: WTE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition D Traffic study D Other eLle) ':;<,\2... °1 ">7/D~-- I\t'\~ ~ IL ,",:>\U1Yj C\j r"Q:'~'c I;(\,,,,,\,; 010 \ d-VI '> r ) City 0; ton Department of Community & Economic ,/opment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'vn.(f.::Qf-h'hlYl COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22, 2008 , APPLICATION NO: LUA08-05?, PP, SM DATE CIRCULATED: JULY 8, 2008 APPLICANT: Greg Fawcett PLANNER: Jerry Wasser PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson JiIlLO' SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): NIA LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washington View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) ~ILDING DIVISION I WORK ORDER NO: 77913 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. 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 lousin Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals ~ Environmental Health Public Services Energy! Natural Resources ';f~~~~;:: B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this ap lication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additio n or, ation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date l FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: 7121108 TO: Mike Dotson, Plan Reviewer CC: FROM: Jerry Wasser, Associate Planner David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal SUBJECT: LUA08-057 Lake Washington View Estates 2008 Review of current plans and material, previous pre-application material and on site review have disclosed the following Fire Code and Policy related issues and concerns which need to be addressed in order for the Lake Washington View Estates 2008 preliminary Plat approval to be recommended. Renton Fire & Emergency Services Fire Code & Fire Policy comments: 1. The Fire Code and Fire Policy comments made by the previous Assistant Fire Marshal on March 16, 2006 are still applicable to this project. Please carefully review the comments made on March 16, 2006. The comments made on March 16, 2006 shall be attached to this file. 2. Lots 17 & 18 shall require a Hammerhead Turnaround, as noted by the previous Assistant Fire Marshal. See attached diagram on Hammer Head turnaround requirements. 3. Fire Mitigation fees of $488.00 per unit shall be paid prior to Final Plat recording. 4. During the construction period temporary road access shall be maintained and a clear and visible temporary address shall be provided for emergency responders. 5. Any questions or concerns regarding the Assistant Fire Marshal's comments may be directed to the Assistant Fire Marshal at 425-430-7023. i:\city memos\08 final & prelim rev\lua08-057 lake washington view estates 2008.doc ';[21 COpy FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: March 16, 2006 TO: FROM: SUBJECf: Jill Ding, Associate Planner 't/.;' IJ (' James Gray, Assistant Fire Marsh ~ Fawcett Preliminary Plat, Lake W Blvd & N 40th St. Fire Department Co=ents: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single- family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. 3. Fire department access roadw. ays require a minimum 20-foot wide paved roadway. Fire ~ department turnarounds are required for roads over 150 feet in length. (Lots 17 & 18) The turnaround shall meet ~ minim. um dimensions shown on the attached diagram. l rI""/ 4. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. "y ~ Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. i:lfawcenpreJplldoc DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN - 9 2008 RECEtVED City of on Department of Community & Economic I opment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Vi f"t COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUAOa-05?, PP, SM DATE CIRCULATED: JULY a, hOOB . APPLICANT: Greo Fawcett PLANNER: Jerry Wasser ,~ L_--~ U PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson • SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gros~): N/A J U L -':1 i I LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washington View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (grdss) NIA--'-c::;-~-, --_ I I, WORK ORDER NO: 77913 l ______ , SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5,53 acre) parcel located in the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone, Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site_ Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North, An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas; an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6, 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 Watsr Li MIG/are 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-RELA TED COMMENTS /PI, Tlj a /,/p;<J ,;;~ s ~ J ~ ¥8$· del .6~ /?a,/d //2/~A '/cP ;:?;'A-/ /~-; "::>4."~ ft",-) t'A~ /SS/f / .-9,WT ?",'"£ fl~S'/../ /l ff4C"4'~cI //-'2C ~ SS / ,)'/;; .. -r ;;;;'e-,/J't -t f'4.J We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of ENVIRONMENTAL & on Department of Community & Economic D, ",opment DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: CL1brtllCh '1 n COMMENTS DUE: JULY 22, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-057, PP, SM DATE CIRCULATED: JULY 8, 2008 APPLICANT: Greo Fawcett PLANNER: JerryWasser PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 241,053 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washington View Estates PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A JUL G 9 2f11lR WORK ORDER NO: 77913 BUILDING IJI'//SION SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permiit for a 13-lot subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located in the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State), Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1 thropugh 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North. An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed and would encompass critical areas: an NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. 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 Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ HistoricICultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED 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 w re additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 7 n ~ , ~~i ~D~a~te~L;~~---------------- NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Appli~3t;O" h~s bean f'led and accepted witil the Department of Community IS.. fcnnnmiG Development (CEDI_ Planning Divis",n 01 the City of Renton. The following briefly desc"be~ the appl,ea!'"n and the necessary Public Approvals PROJECT NAME/NUMBER" PROJECT DESCRIPTION. Th~ ~1'1;1".ar,t 10 r~q'Je,llng Ihe ~ppro,.d ot a Prell"""'~"i Plot a,d S"ore'i,,~ S~~stanllal De,elo~[Y,"r,t Perm,i: lor a '~Io: SL,beIL,,,,,;,,n of a 241,Ct~ "1,I~r" feol 15 -5] acre) ,larcel lo~~led ,n to', Re~"~,,ntial 8 dwellin9 u'''iS I)e, a~re 1,,(-8} zon~ Slrb~"" (inclu3Pg r..,"JY CrF.~~, ~ sharel~e ~f \h~ SI~181, C~leg~ry ~ «rd J ·"ellando. Jnd steep ,Iup", flrc boated on the P'Uje',1 "I" ACO"5S to prop,,'Hd 10\,1 through 12 woLJld be pmv'ted '''3 a Ilel'> ",rcd 'NrI'chg 18rrr"n<,\~, "' a haC1,,",el1eJd \urn~F"H"~ olf of L~,e \'lasl"'''JI()n BOJicv~rd N~ .. lh ~nd a~ceS5 Ie 101 1J would hp. wavlded "Ia a dn'ie'·.'c., "f~ Meacow t,,'e~~e Nertr An ope" w~~e \racIITr~cf AIlS prop~"ed ~"d ,",ou!d wlCamp~s, c"llc~1 areas @r NG;of, eaoemenl 'N' ould encampa,s\he c'o:I~~f ~rP'80 on '01s j ~_Il~ 6 PROJECT LOCATION PUBLIC APPROVALS APPLICANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON Jim hJnson, H~Il~"" Cor~ulilng, Tel (3WI 422-50~6: PUBLIC HEARING El,l Ich~n"~'"@Ve"lU" nel Pu~';c he~'"I"1Q IS \erl~II'mly sch~~uled 'or August 5 ~_OOB before lil~ Rp',',0r ~rinn Fxam'n_cr;o Ren\on C~un,;,,' Chamber-Hea'i~9s b-a9ln JI 9 CO N,: ()Il 'J,e 7111 f,our d Ih~ ocw Renlon C,li H~IIIQCa:cc ~11055 Su,]\I-, Grad,! l'ia'f Comments on the above 3pplic~t1on 'nust be subm'tted on writing to Gerald Wasser. Ass~ciate Planner, Department of Community &. EconomiC D~ ... elopment. 10~5 South Grady Way. Renton. WA 98057, by 5:UO PM on July 22, 2008 This matter is also tent311~ely schedUled ,tor" publr" hearing on A"gust 5, 2QCS, at 9:00 AM CounCil Ch",mbe" $evel-,Ir Floor Renl?l Cr:, >-I~II W55 S0u:h Go,O'y Re~lc~ II YO'" ~'e ""~r"slcd In ~lle~d"'~ lice hearing, ple33~ ~on\~G\ trle Fla,n,ng LJI'''SI;n Ie e""J[~ I~a: :"G h~Jrlng nul been ,,,scheduled ~II,425:, 4~O_7282 II '.ommenls c~n~GI [-,,. ,,,omitted In wriling 0)' Ire d31e Hl(l.ca:ea above, you ,Idl arpear 21 Ire l'Hal<~g a1d prese~l 'y~"r commcnls on lh~ WU~,,"31 bBforc U'e Hea"~g Ex~rro" Hr :1 )'C," Oa',e aboul It-IS pr~~o~~', 0' w's; 10 be ","(Ie B parry 01 reco,,1 ~"d 'Hcelve addl!lOn~ m'orm3:lun by II,ail, ple~se conlad lile ~ro!ecl m~"~0'" "'-I",one wt-,~ ,utnl!~" wrillen :omme~ls will ~,,\'-orr,allcal y ~etQme ~ ~arty of r~,,,,,d ;;pd will b~ ~OIIII~rI (JI ~ny deCISion on tI ,. prqeCl PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: June 9, 2008 NOTlCE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION July 8, 2008 DATE OF NOTICE OF 11 .,.ou would ILke 10 be "Joe J p~,1y of re~uru In rec~i"e furtr,cr Informallon un this ~ropa5ec prujecl. cnmp efC Ihls form and relurn 10-ell! of Re1ton, CELl. Planning Division 1055 Soulh Grady 0N~" R~ntan, W/\ 9~057 r,:e l.ame iNc,: Lake Wasll!:l(J\( II V,€W EstQleS 20Ue.' L0AI.i~-O~1, PP SM NAMi:. ____ _ MAILING ADDRESS .. ____ _ f "LEPHONi" NO CERTIFICATION I, -t;~iL";S~Ore~~"'~~~~_, hereby certify that '5 copies of the above document were posted by me in conspicuous places or nearby the described roperty S!l" ........ ':{~~~'" "'" <l \.-,,,,,1)\ :.:.~ III l ' (/ '" o.c. .::-~',' ,,'~\\1l,~)t< 'I. DATE: ___ O!>!-'----'O"'--__ SIGNED: _-, '~, ~.J""~~ ;;.j.'", ::". -:: .'""~ )..~~ ~ m~ ,.. -, ~ ~ ",,~:'\.J j~E 'Cl .1:',,0: 1 .................. .:::- u ~ :WAS'P:-.., ...... ' 11\1\\\\"" CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 8th day of July, 2008, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter & NOA documents. This information was sent to: Name The Rob-Clarissa Partnership (Clarissa Fawcett) Greg Fawcett Jim Hanson Surrounding Property Owners-NOA only (Signature of Sender):/ ~ ~-v-' STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) Owner Applicant Contact See Attached I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker Representing signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for thJ-~\\flr.d purposes mentioned in the instrument. $"'\.. 'INN ~/Il $' ~. '''~*''*\~\\\'' '/, J = . $}p"""" ~ ~ Dated: 79/08 3' }.~ 1~ the State cg ~"lihlngt~lr). , ~ ~ ~ , ;; - .(\ ) J fl!J ;,: r.o:t h ,0 :~= Notary (P ri nt) :_...IN'-1.<ro,I>..Ib'-'-'''E..l.c ....... l--'>'f.P,,LLr.-''-.LN:J.>Q''-yr++.L'rY'A......,,'''-'-r..-'-~~ioi-",~"","",,:...,v,...,al-r=-'''''''''~~C:t',O~.r -='" 91: Ij ? '9-~:;:; -My appointment expires: 0;>-\ 'I-I D II/ ~ """,,,,,,,,,,> ..::- II/ OF W~ " .......... ' 11111111""'" ,,_:' c~-";..i,j .. ~.~·'-'·'" .• Project'fII~lT!.e;·'· Lake Washington View Estates 2008 project~Nuit[~r.'! LUA08-057, PP, SM · . 334270053708 ADKINS DOROTHY 1417 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270054805 CHAU BUN NELSON+YUEN WING K 3920 MEADOW AVE N RENTON WA 98056 322405905405 HAUER ALFRED H 1330 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270054003 LOPEZ CHRISTOPHER+JENNIFER 3932 MEADOW AVE N RENTON WA 98056 334270054409 POPAL AHMAD W+MADINA 3930 MEADOW AVE N RENTON WA 98056 322405908300 SNYDER VERA 0 1328 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 322405906205 BASIC VENTURES INC 18211 240TH AVE SE MAPLE VALLEY WA 98038 334270055000 CYPRIAN ALEGRIA 3922 MEADOWS AVE N RENTON WA 98056 322405903905 LANGE ROBERT H 4017 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98056 334270053302 MATHEWS MATI A+JENIFER L 3927 MEADOW AVE N RENTON WA 98056 334270054607 RICHTER GARY H JR 3940 MEADOW AVE N RENTON WA 98056 322405905009 THOMSON NEIL PO BOX 76 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 334270053807 CARLSON KATHLEEN & RUSSEL 1409 N 40TH RENTON WA 98056 322405903806 DIEU RANDY+JULIE 1312 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270055208 LEE DONALD 3926 MEADOW AVE N RENTON WA 98056 322405904101 PALKA ADAM & EVA 808 N 33RD ST RENTON WA 98056 322405908102 ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP LL PO BOX 402 FALL CITY WA 98024 334270054508 WILLIAMS GEORGE 3908 MEADOW AVE RENTON WA 98055 NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CEO) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Lake Washington View Estates 2008! LUA08-05?, pp, SM PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Plat and Shoreline Substantial Development Permll! for a 13-101 subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.S3 acre) parcel located In the Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the State). Category 2 and 3 wetlands, and steep slopes me located on the project site Access to proposed lots 1 through 12 would be provided via a new street whichg terminates in a hammerhead turnaround off of Lake Washington Boulevard North and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off Meadow Avenue North_ An open space tract (Tract A) is proposed arid would encompass critical areas; ar' NGPA easement would encompass the critical areas on lots 5 and 6. PROJECT LOCATION: 4200 Block of Lake Washington Blvd N PUBLIC APPROVALS: Preliminary Plat approval and Shoreline Substantial Development Perrnlt APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting; Tel: (360) 422-5056; Ernl: Jchanson@verizon.net PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for August 5, 2008 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Rentor1..Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 Atv1 on the 7th floor of the ncw Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on July 22, 2008. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on August 5, 2008, at 9:00 AM, Council Cllal:lOers, SeverMI Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Gr<:ldy Way, Renton If you are interested in atterlljing the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-7282 If cOMnents cannot be su:}mitted in writing by the date Indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on t;le proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal. or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional Information by mail, please contact the prolect rn2lnager. Anyone who submits wntten commellts will aU10maticaily become a party of record and will be notified of any dccision on this project PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: June 9, 2008 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: July 8,2008 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further informatlQrl 011 this proposed project. complete this form Gnd return :u: City of Renton, CED. Planning D~vlsion, 1055 South Grady Way, Rerlloll, WA 98057 File Name / No Lake Washington View Estates 2008 / LUA08-057, pp, Sr"v1 NAME MAILING ADDRESS _________ _ TELEPHONE NO: July 8, 2008 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt Vernon, WA 98274 CITY Subject: Lake Washington View Estates 2008 LUA08-057, PP, SM Dear Mr. Hanson: .F RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator The 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. You will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on August 5, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor,. Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Gerald C. Wasser Associate Planner cc: The Rob-Clarissa Partnership & Clarissa M. Fawcett / Owner(s) Greg Fawcett / Applicant -------10-5-5 -So-u-th-G-r-ad-y-W-a-y---R-en-to-n-, W-as-h-in-gt-on-9-80-S-7------~ * This paperoontains 50% recyded material, 30% post consumer AHEAD of 'l'HE CURVE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION AS A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP FILED SECRETARY OF STATE .jUN 0 2W06 STATE OF WAS;"IINGTQN Pursuant to the provisions of RCW Ch. 25.04, the undersigned hereby submits the following Application for Registration as a limited liability partnership to the Secretary of State. ARTICLE 1. NAME The name of the partnership is ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, L.L.P. ARTICLE 2. PRINCIPAL OFFICE The street address of ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, 1.1.P.'s principal office is 5408 324 th Place SE, Fall City, Washington 98024. ARTICLE 3. NUMBER OF PARTNERS ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, 1.L.P., has three (3) partners whose names are: ROBERT 1. FAWCETT GREGORY M. FAWCETT GEORGE A. FAWCETT ARTICLE 4. BUSINESS ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, L.L.P., is engaged in the business of investments. The undersigned limited liability partners, constituting a majority in interest of the partners afROB-CLARISSA ARTNERSHIP, 1.1.P., hereby execute this Application fO,r Registration. /</_. ,r" !J',"'~ ii~~'-' C" . -" -' \ .... ROBERT 1. FAWCETT ~-,k\~ tv :fiv~JlJ- GREGORY M~FA WCETT , r:. Vi) (,k' G ,-:;-('-~'-! cb-{j dWRGE A. flA WCETT CIT\'OFRENTO~ RECEIVED JIJI ~ 8 r['Q --'-' Iv BUILDINGOIVISIOf\ CONSENT RESOLUTIONS OF THE PARTNERS OF ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, L.L.P. CIWOFAENTON RECEIVED JUL u 8 2008 BUILDINGOlVISION The undersigned, being all of the Partners of ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, LLP, a Washington limited liability partnership ("'Partnership"), hereby consent to the adoption of the following resolutions in lieu of a meeting of Partners: APPLICATIONS WITH CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON: RESOL YED: The Partnership is hereby authorized to execute any all agreements, documents and instruments. represent the Partnership'S interests as its agent and perform all other acts necessary or appropriate in connection with the Partnership's applications with the City of Renton Washington for subdivision and other development entitlements benefiting the Partnership's real property commonly known as Lot I of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. 200510 12900009 (King County APN 322405-9081) located in the City of Rcnton, Washington. AUTHORITY OF GREG FAWCEIT TO ACf ON BEHALF OF THE PARTNERSHIP: RESOLVED: In connection with the foregoing authorized acts of the Partnership, GREG FAWCETT on behalf of the Partnership, is hereby authorized to execute all agreements, instruments and other documents, to represent the Partnership's interests and to take all other actions necessary or appropriate in the judgment of Greg Fawcett to effcctuate the above described applications and transactions; and RESOLVED: That all acts and deeds previously performed by GREG FAWCETT on behalf of the Partncrship in connection with the transactions contemplated herein prior to the date of these resolutions arc within the authority conferred hereby and are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved as the authorized acts of the Partnership. 5uJ..£, 0 rn f= ..t?.tF DATED this 30 dayofiuly,2008.GCI' G:ITJ~ (4dl~~~~~~~ , STAW OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF _"-K"----" /-J_l--,-'l_ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Greg Fawcett is the person ":1w appcan",'<i bctorc me, and said person acknowledged that said pt.."fwn signed this in:,1nnnent and acknowledged it toJle·-sa1d~'s free and voluntary act for tile uses and purposes ml"Iltioned in the instrument / Dated this 30 day of :Iv f.Jt:, . lOO8. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON AMIN G. MANII My Appointment Expires Nov. 16, 2011 ISeal or Stamp] STAll· OF WASIITNGTON COUNTY OF J( I /0 h ' ) ) S5. ) /' // (print or type name) NOTARY .P1.:nLIC i~ and for the Stat~ ofWa)i.hington, rcsiJing at_ Mv COlllrmSSlOn exp"o>: No\.! 16 0 D t ( I certifY that I know or have satistactory cvid\..'11CC that Greg Fawcett is the person who appcan .. "ti bcton~ me, and said person acknowk."<.lgt.-d that said ~son signed this instrumen~ on oath slated that said person w-as authori7..ed to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the attorney-in-fact for Clarissa Fawcett, as principal, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uscs and purpoSL'S mentioned in the instrument, and on oath stated that to the best of said pt:rsoll's knowledge the power ofattom<..."Y authorizing the execution of said instrument has not bt..'\..'IlJcyoked and that the principal is nmv living, and is not disabled or incapacitatt..-d at law, or if disabled or incapacitat~-mla;7the power of such attomey is a durable power of attorney which surviVi ... "S such disabIlIty or incapacity at law ~llO,.REW 11.94.010. Dated this ~ day of J iA/J t: . 2008. / NOTARY PUBLIC STATE Of WASHINGTON AMIN G. MANJI (print or type me) _./ My AppOlntmont "pi'.' Noy, 1 f., 2011 NOTAR Y PUBLIC in and for the State of Was lington, residing at _ My Commission expires: _~W t D' [Seal or Stamp] STATE OF WASHINGTON \(( ~ (1 1 ss COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Robert Fa,","Cett is the JX.TSOIl who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person SIgned thlS Instrument and acknowledged l~t5esajl pL'fson's tn.:!.! and vohmtan ad fot the uses and purpo:ses mentIonc ... "(i In the Instrument / 30 ~ / Dated thIS day of \ lA!0 [: ,200&' NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON AMIN G. MANII My Appointmenl explr •• Nov, 16,2011 [Seal or Stamp I STAn' OF WASIUN(;rON COUNTY OF (print or t . name NOTARY P . .Ie in mld for the State of W~ton, R'Siding at _ My Commission expires: Nou ( <=, I t ) ss. 1 certi(v tlk'lt I know or have satisfactory evidence that GcoJgc Fawcett is the person \\Ino appeared before mc, and said.person acknowledged that sai~ perSt?n signed this instnm:lt..--nt and acknowlcdg~ it w-9d person·s tree and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentIOned m the mstnnnent. ,,/ / Dated this :2:, 0 day oiJLlI-J C:: ,2008. './ NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON AMIN G. MANII My Appointment Expires Nov. 16,2011 [Seal or Stamp[ , -Arvt 1/'0 (') ~J \ -c--~c----:--7--'-~------- (printort lame) NOTARY POOL in and fOf(the State of Washington, residing at_ My Commission expires: "-uV [(, (}o I ( DURABLE POWER OF ATTORNEY OF CITYOFRENTON RECEIVED CLARISSA BERRY FAWCETT Ii Ii ~ 8 ")' l;; ~ -"-Ll t·u BUILOINGDlVISION 1. Designation. CLARISSA BERRY FAWCETT, being domiciled in the State of Washington, as principal, hereby designates GREGORY M. FAWCETT, ROBERT L. FAWCETT, and GEORGE A. FAWCETT as her co-attorneys-in-fact upon the terms and conditions specified below, and revokes any durable powers of attorney previously executed by her. 2. Effectiveness. This power of attorney shall become etlective upon the disability or incompetence of principal. Disability shall include the inability to manage her property and affairs etlectively for reasons such as mental illness, mental deficiency, physical illness or disability, advanced age, chronic use of drugs, chronic intoxication, confinement, detention by a foreign power, or disappearance. Disability may be evidenced by written statement of a qualified physician regularly attending the principal and/or by other qualified persons with knowledge of any confinement, detention, or disappearance. Incompetence may be established by a finding of a court having jurisdiction over the principal. This power of attorney, once effective, shall remain in effect to the extent permitted by law or until revoked or terminated under Paragraphs 4 or 5, notwithstanding any uncertainty as to whether the principal is dead or alive. 3. Powers. The attorney-in-fact, as fiduciary, shall have all powers of an absolute owner over the assets and liabilities of the principal, whether located within or without the State of Washington, including without limitation the following: Ca) To purchase, lease, sell, exchange, mortgage, and otherwise deal with all real and personal property and any interest therein. (b) To deal with all accounts maintained by or on behalf of the principal with banks, savings and loan associations, credit unions, securities dealers and brokers, and all other financial and investment institutions; including the authority to maintain and close existing accounts, to open, maintain, and close new accounts, and to make deposits, transfers, withdrawals, sales, and purchases. (e) To borrow money and make loans on behalf of the principal upon such terms and conditions as the attorney-in-fact deems necessary or desirable. Cd) To purchase United States Treasury Bonds which may be redeemed at par in payment of Federal estate tax. C e) To demand and collect all monies, debts, accounts, dividends, annuities, rents and other payments due the principal. (1) To pay, settle, compromise, or otherwise discharge all claims of liability or ICLARISSA Flj'IlRY 1-,0\, we!: n Durabl, PO"" or ·\norr,ol I -1- SMITH, BROWN, STERLING, P. S. P.O Box 940 4318 Preston-Filii CityRd SE FilII City. WA 98024 425-222·6374 indebtedness against the principal. (g) To participate in and conduct any legal action in the name of the principal. (h) To enter any safe deposit box in which the principal has a right of access, which authority shall supersede any prior restriction placed thereon by the principal. (i) To disclaim any interest in any property to which the principal would otherwise be entitled. (j) To make, amend, alter, or revoke the principal's wills or codicils, and shall not have the power, unless specilically provided otherwise in the document: To make, amend, alter, or revoke any of the principal's life insurance, annuity, or similar contract beneficiary designations, employee benefit plan beneficiary designations, trust agreements, registration of the principal's securities in beneficiary form, payable on death or transfer on death beneficiary designations, designation of persons as joint tenants with right of survivorship with the principal with respect to any of the principal's property, community property agreements, or any other provisions for nonprobate transfer at death contained in nontestamentary instruments described in RCWII.02.091; to make any gifts of property owned by the principal; to make transfers of property to any trust (whether or not created by the principal). The attorney-in-lact shall not be in breach of any fiduciary duty to the principal for gifts made or withheld in good faith. (k) To make guarantees of the collection or payment of debts on behalf of other persons or entities. (I) To make, execute and file any Federal or State tax return on behalf of the principal; the contents and requirements of IRS Form 2848 (or successor IRS form) are hereby incorporated by reference. (m) To exercise any and all powers granted to trustees under the laws of the State of Washington, which powers are incorporated herein by reference. (n) To execute and deliver all written instruments and do and perform each and every act and thing whatsoever which may be necessary or proper in the exercise of the powers and authority granted to the attorney-in-fact as fully as the principal could do if personally present. 4. Health Care Matters. With respect to personal and healthcare matters, my attorney-in-fact shall have the power: (a) To provide informed consent for health care decisions on the principal's behalf, to the full extent of the law authorized under RCW 11.94.010(3), as amended. (b) To have and exercise all of my rights regarding access to, and usc, release, and disclosure ot: my individually identiliable health information (as defined below), and other medical and billing records, it being my intent that this grant of authority apply to all information and documents and be recognized by all health care providers (as defined below). This grant of [CLARISSII BERRY FAWCETf Dur.lblc P(mCT of /I"o",e, I -2- SMITH, BROWN, STERLING, P. S. P. o. Box 940 "318 PrE'slon-Fall Clly Rfl SE F,lll Cily. WA 98024 425-222-6374 authority applies to any information governed by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and its implementing regulations, 42 U.S.C. 1320d and 45 C.F.R. 160-164 (referred to herein as HIPAA) and as hereafter amended, and to any information governed by the Washington Uniform Health Care Information Act, RCW 70.02 and as hereafter amended (referred to herein as UHCIA). I authorize any physician, health care professional, dentist, health plan, hospital, clinic, laboratory, pharmacy or other health care provider, any insurance company or other health plan and the Medical Information Bureau Inc. or other health care clearinghouse that has provided trcatment or services to me, that has paid for or is seeking payment from me for such services, or that has provided clearinghouse services to a health care provider of health plan relating to my treatment or payment for my treatment (all referred to herein as "health care providers"): I. to give. disclose and release to my attorney-in-fact hereunder. without restriction, all of my individually identifiable health information, as that term is defined in HIPAA, 42 C.F.R. 160.103, and as hereafter amended, and medical and billing rccords regarding any past, prcsent or future medical or mental health condition, including all information relating to the diagnosis and treatmcnt of HIV / AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, mental illness, and drug or alcohol abuse. 11. to treat my attorney-in-fact immediately as my "personal reprcsentative" as defined in I1IPAA, 42 C.F.R. I 65.502(g) and as hereafter amended, and as my "health care representative" as referenced in UHCIA, RCW 70.02.130 and as hereafter amendcd, who may exercise my rights under HIP AA and UHCIA. 111. to treat thc authority given my attorney-in-fact as superseding any prior agreement that I may have made with my health care providers to restrict access to or disclosure of my individually identifiable health information. The authority given my attorney-in-fact has no expiration date and shall expire only in the event that I revoke the authority of my attorney-in-fact in writing and deliver it to my health care provider. (c) To have access to, and authorize rclease, use, and disclosure of: my individually identifiable health information and othcr medical records, and to otherwise exercise any of my health care rights under federal and state law and as provided above. (d) To do any thing that such attorney-in-fact could do under the laws of the State of Washington and under federal law if he had been appointed the guardian of my person, including the power to provide for my support, maintenance, health, housing, and emergencies; to gi ve an informed consent on my behalf to the performance of medical tests, surgery, treatment, or other torn1s of health care on recommendation of my attending physician or physicians; and to sign all medical and hospital forms, authorizations or consents in connection therewith; provided, however, that if I am incompetent as defined in RCW 11.88.010(1)(e) at the time such consent is sought (i) no such consent shall be given if a guardian has been appointed for my person and such guardian has refused to give such consent; (ii) a decision to give such consent must be [CLARISSA BERRY l'A Wl'ETT DlI",bk i'~"or or Anorn", I -3- SMITH, BROWN, STERLING, P. S. f' 0 Box 940 4318 Preston-Fall Crty Rd SE Fall City. WA 9V024 425-222-6374 unanimous if two or more attorneys-in-fact have been granted authority jointly hereunder; and (iii) before such consent is given, my attorney-in-fact shall detennine in good faith that I would consent to the proposed health care, if I were competent, or if such detennination cannot be made, that my attorney-in-fact consent to the health care only after determining that it is in my best interests. (e) Further, in amplification of the foregoing subparagraph, if 1 have executed a Health Care Directive or Living Will with regard to tennination of life-sustaining procedures, my attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to take all action necessary to give efTeet to the provisions of such IIealth Care Directive or Living Will. 5. Revocation. This power of attorney may be revoked by the principal's delivering written notice to the attorney-in-fact, and shall be automatically revoked if marriage dissolution or divorce proceedings are commenced (by eitber party) between tbe principal and the attorney-in- fact. The appointment of a guardian of the estate of the principal by a court of competent jurisdiction shall vest in that guardian, with court approval, the power to revoke this power of attorney. 6. Termination. The death of the principal shall terminate this power of attorney upon actual knowledge or written notice being received by the attorney-in-fact. 7. Accounting. The attorney-in-tact shall account to the principal and any guardian or personal representative of the estate of the principal. 8. Nomination of Guardian. The principal nominates the attorney-in-fact as guardian or limited guardian of the estate and person of the principal if protective proceedings are ever commenced. 9. Indemnification. The estate of the principal shall hold hannless and indemnify the attorney-in-tact trom all liability tor acts done in good faith and not in fraud of the principal. 10. Reliance. The attorney-in-fact and any person dealing with the attorney-in-fact shall be entitled to rely upon the validity and eflectiveness ofthe power and authority given in this power of attorney in the absence of actual knowledge of revocation or tennination. 11. Applicable Law. The laws of the State of Washington shall govern this power of attorney. DATED the 28 th day of March, 2005 '> 9; ~F:{l;;;t~~/- ~dOW Avenue N. Renton, W A 98056 ICLARISSA BERRY FA WeE1T Durable hmcr of AIIO'''"' I -4- SMITH, BROWN, STERLING, P. s. P 0 80x 940 "318 Preston-Fall City Rd .SE Fall Clly, WA 98024 4252226371 STATE OF WASHINGTON) )ss. County of King ) On this 28 th day of March, 2005, personally appeared before me CLARISSA BERRY FAWCETT kno'.';ll to me to be the individual who signed this instrument in my presence and acknowledged it to be her free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto sct my hand and o11icial seal this day and year first above written. ICLAKISSA llE::RR~ FA W{'[ IT Dur;,blc l\mcr ~f Auornc\ I L"~~ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at: Fall City. My appointment expires: 12-28-05. -5- SMITH, BROWN, STERLING, P. S. P. O. Box 940 4318 Preston-Fall City Rd SE F<l1I City. WA 98024 425-222-6374 July 8, 2008 Michael Fortson Department of Transportation Renton School District 1220 N 4th Street Renton, W A 98055 Subject: Lake Wasbington View Estates 2008 LUA08-057, PP, SM CIT" IF RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietscb, Administrator rhe City of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a 13-10t single-family subdivision located at the 4200 Block of Lake Washington Bvld N. Please see the enclosed Notice of Application for further details. 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. 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 98057 by July 22, 2008. E'=,o.rySohoo' ~~~ Ci~ -~ii'0 Middle School: ~~ ~ High School: JJ T 7,Li~'-;r;S.-v-; Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes 'h 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, Gerald C. Wasser Associate Planner Encl. -------------I-O-55--So-u-th-G-r-ad-y-W--~---R-e-n-to-n-,W--as-h-m-~-o-n-9-80-5-7--------·~ ® ThiS paper contains 50% recycled material 30% post consumer i\HEJ\D OF THlo CUnVE June 24, 2008 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Subject: Lake Washington View Estates LUAOS-OS7, PP, SM Dear Mr. Hanson: CIT"· IF RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietscb, Administrator After reviewing the materials submitted for the Lake Washington View Estates application, staff has determined that the application is incomplete according to the City's submittal requirements as outlined in RMC 4-8-120C. The following two items are required to accept the application as complete: I. As part ofthe Master Application form, proof of signing authority on behalf of The Rob-Clarissa Partnership is necessary. Please provide one original and II copies of this authorization. 2. Also, as part of the Master Application form, Clarissa Fawcett's notarized signature or proof of Greg Fawcett's legal authority to sign on her behalf is necessary. Please provide one original and II copies of a revised Master Application form with Clarissa Fawcett's notarized signature or one original and 11 copies of Greg.Fawcett's legal authority to sign on Clarissa Fawcett's behalf. Furthermore, the additional items listed below are required prior to scheduling of the required public hearing: o The Master Application form indicates that 16,622 square feet of public roadways would be dedicated; the submitted Site Plan and Density Worksheet indicate 13,543 square feet of public roadways would be dedicated. Please verify which area is correct and correct the appropriate formes) and/or plan(s). o Please amend the plat map to comply with RMC 4-7-130C.2 by depicting the critical areas on lot 5 and lot 6 as a Native Growth Protection Area Easement. o Please amend the plat map to indicate net and gross square footage for Lot 5 and Lot 6 due to critical areas on both lots and areas less than 40 feet in width on Lot 6. o The Wetland and Stream Peer Review, Lake Washington View Estates for Project LUA07-039, prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants and dated May 17, 2007 states that it considers Wetland 2 and 3 to be connected and considered as one Category 2 Wetland. Additionally, Herrera states that the wetland referred to as -------10-S-S-So-u-th-G-r-.d-y-W-a-y-.-R-en-to-n-,-W-as-h-in-gt-o-n-9-S0-S-7------~ * ThIS paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE Wetland 2 extends approximately 30 feet west of the flagged boundary. Category 2 Wetlands require a 50 foot buffer. Please clarify the differences between the May 17, 2007 Herrera document and the Wetland Assessment Report, Plat of Lake Washington View Estates prepared by Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC, dated May 16, 2008, which describes three distinct wetlands. Also, please explain whether or not the plat and critical areas maps submitted reflect the revised delineation. Once the above requested information is received, review of your application will begin. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. asser Associate Planner cc: The Rob-Clarissa PartnershiOp & Clarissa M. Fawcett Jennifer Henning ---------------------------------------- City of Renton DEVIOLOPMIONT.. I'LANNIN Ni"V of RENTON LAND USE PERMIT JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: The Rob-Clarissa Partnership & PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Lake Washington Clarissa M. Fawcett View Estates ADDRESS: PO Box 402 PROJECTIADDRESS(S)ILOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 4200 Block Lake Washington Blvd N, Renton WA CITY: Fall CityWA 98024 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 4254665229 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 322405·9081'()2 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: G r .t '\ Fctwtd-t EXISTING LAND USE(S): Vacant COMPANY (if app;i-;;'ble)/i' 0 b-C i . ('q r inlrJ ~~ \.i Cl,(l •. hJtt.. PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family lots EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: r if) . BUl(LJ02. Single Family Residential CITY: rU I J t .t'1 vvA ZIP: qgOJ.~ PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): NA TELEPHONE NUMBER Y).S-"}''}..':J..-7()!! ~Ff:'C ~':l.5 -tH~-5Qo.~ Rtl) EXISTING ZONING: R-8 CONTACT PERSON , PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NA NAME: Jim Hanson SITE AREA (in square feet): 241,053 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): Hanson Consulting DEDICATED: '1:8:;G22-13) 5'f:) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 17446 Mallard Cove Ln None PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): a: 3."1':;- CITY: Mt Vernon WA 9827 4 NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): 13 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): NA Q:weh/pw/devserv/forms/planninglmasterapp.doc 06/06/08 PF IECT INFORMATION (conti NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): NA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NA NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NA NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): NA PROJECT VALUE: 1,300,000.00 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): D AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION 14,590 _ sq. ft. ~5q-,1",.3 __ sq. ft. ___ sq. ft. D SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 9424 __ sq. ft. D WETLANDS 32.554 _ sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE NW_ QUARTER OF SECTION 32_, TOWNSHIP 24N_, RANGE_5E_. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Preliminary Plat ~G In F 3. ! 2. Shoreline Management Permit 4. I Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $_2,500.00 __ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) G r {.. , declare that I am (please check one) )("' the current owner of the property involved in this application a the authorized representative to act 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) (Signature of Owner/Representative) Q:web/pw/devscrv/forms/planninglmasterapp.doc I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that (Q r",'j r-=c..wc.e.t-!- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislher/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. My appointment expires: __ l_O--,I_I_f.,_(,-W __ I_I __ _ 2 06/06108 AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) DEV~W~~~~EW6'rrING JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED COUNTY OF KING ) being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: WJlL 1. On the 3 0 day of No IH«:Jt , 20 0 2 ,~nstalled information sign(s) and plastic flyer box on the property ( public located at 'floc PM: LK. wp,.s!I BL M for the following project: LAK"t W""IJ.""6~"; V/I2v.J .ESr,f}-7ES' Project name 8~-Cot-AB ISS rl 'PA",twefl.:'#, PI UA'J:I. IS sot Owner Name F A.A..JG If!;: T/ 2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3. This/these public infomnation sign(s) waslwene constructed and installed in locations in confomnance with the requirements of Chapter 7 Tille 4 of Renton Municipal Code. ;;J '. Q~.:,~ C .... 7-:'~~ £c----_ Installer Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me thisd7r--day of,'}]e/lcJL NOTARY P\1BLlC in and fat the State of Washington, residing at~'1 '\\Cl., rc1-\if 'rV'~·-. My commission expires on / (). :. /0 hnp:!lrentonwa.gov/uploadedFilesIBusinessIPBPW/DEVSERVIFORMS_PLANNING/pubsign.doc 03127/07 City of Renton TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET 1/,..., r7 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter! on project site: 1. _-,--,,""'::-L. __ trees 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees t/lat are dead, diseased or dangerous2 0 Trees in proposed public streets 1,/; Trees in proposed private access easementsltracts ( , Trees in critical areass and buffers I 0 'i trees trees trees trees Total number of excluded trees: 2. _-,-1...,,:"'-.) .:='=--' __ trees 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: I " ,f; t, lA iii' (> tro,l.) Itl 0.;) '1 r, 2'" ';',1\ '" "',. i 3. -' trees I-I'I/o!, ,,;) -·1"·Jt ,,' . ' _ 7 If{.,.t=--"' --. &1...,J 4. Next. to determine the number of trees that must be retained4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones Re. R-1, R-4, or R-8 0,1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones I -, 4. ___ • ...:~:.... __ trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing5 to retain4; 5. 0 trees 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (II line 6 is tess !han zero, stop here, No replacement trees are required). 6. _---'--'/e<-.::"~~; _ trees 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. / ~ .:../ 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement ,.' I (Minimum 2' carlper trees ~) 8. .. - inches inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6 : (if remainder is .5 or greater. round up to "" reo! _ 00_> 9. __ ~~'~'L~~~)~ ___ trees '-Measured at chest height. •. Osad, diseased or dangerous trees must be certlfjed as such by a \oresteT. registered landscape architect. or certified arborist and approved by the CIty. ,. Cr1tica1 AreaS. su<:h as wetlands. slnlamS. ~Iains and protected slopes. are defined in Sectlon -4-3-()50 01 the RenIOO Municipal Code (RMC). ~ Count only those lJess to be retained outside of criIicaI areas and buffers. 5. The CIty may require modilcalion of the tree retenlioo ptan 10 ens ..... relonlion of the maxlnvn number of trees per Rt«; 4-4-1301-178 • Indies of sIJeeI trees. inches of trees added to critical areas.b.llfets, and inches of trees retained on site that are less than 6" but are greater than 2" can be used In meet the tree repla(:ement requirement ' . . ;/~) N.i...:,lj' ;57i'-.'-L-) ·rl<i'ic'-,'· •.. (5",,:L-.'.'d} "",./--'?' 'J'-"-I~"11JU1 H:DiYi,ioo/Fonns!TrccR<leationWorksheet './ . t - " '. ,oJ .. 11'7'" ,,',. w-_n'" ,,;! WV\"' I on ron lin'" Lake Washington View Estates Legal Description DEVELOPMEN. T P(.ANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED Lot 1, City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment Number LUA-05-069-LLA recorded under Recording Number 20051012900009, said lot line adjustment being a portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington. 7 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. 2.41 05"3 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: r3 5'1-:3 square feet square feet grQ=--:::.cg;;-3-::ilT" square feet 2. q 2 .3 8 I square feet 3. l't~ 1f272. square feet 4. 3.29 acres 5. J 3 unitsJlots 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 6. 3. 'I 5 = dwelling units/acre ·Critical Areas are defined as "Areas detanninec:l 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, protactad slopes, wetlands or floodways." . Critical areas buffers are not dedUcted/excluded. ** Alleys (public or privata) do not have to be excluded. I Last upd8Ie< •• • • . 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: DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires aU governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for aU 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 rt 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 knowtedge. 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 govemmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to aU parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of bme or on different panoels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or rts environmental effects. The agency to which you submrt this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information 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," "applicant," and "property or srte" should be read as "proposal: "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. C:1Oocumeots and SellingsIOwner\My Doc:IJmeo\sISEPA (1).doc:03I27/07 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Lake Washington v_ Estates 2. Name of applicant Volarehigh Land Development llC. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: PO Box 58877, Renton WA 98058. Contact: Jim Hanson, 17446 Mallard Cove Lane, Mt Vernon WA 98274. 360-422- 5056, jchanson@Verizon.net 4. Date checklist prepared: March 20, 2007 5. Agency requesting checklist City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): August, 2007 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 thai has been prepared, or wiU be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Wetland Study, Stream Study, Cultural Study, Transportation Report, Habitat Report, Drainage Report. 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 wiD be needed for your proposal, if known. Environmental Review, Preliminary Plat Approval, Construction pennits. 11. Give briel, complete description 01 your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size 01 the project and site. Subdivide a 5.53 Acre parcel into 13 residential lots and 1 open space tract. Which will Include construction of a City street with required utilities to serve the plat and future hou_. The frontage along lake Washington Blvd will be improved to City standards. 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. II a proposal would occur over a range 01 area, provide the range or boundaries 01 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 apptications related to this checklist. The parcel is known as Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment Numbat' LUA- 05-069 LLA being a portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, WM, In the City of Renton, King County, Washington. OnwIngs and maps have been submitted with the Preliminary Plat application. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); !!s!!, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _The site has varying terrain, the IoweI' portion slopes from south to north and Is flat near wetland 1 and may creek, the 811 tINty portion has steep slopes that are regulated by the City as critical areas. (See topographic maps submHbdI, ________ __ b. Whal is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) 40% plus c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the cJassificaIion of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. SolIs within the site vary and contain: AIderwood gravelly loam (AgCI, Indianola loamy fine sand (InC), and Nonna sandy loam (No). (See Wetland and Geo-tech reports) d. Are there surface indications or history 01 unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? II so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading will be limited to the construction of the new City street and utilities required for the plat. A balance of on-eite grading and fill is proposed. Required bedding for utilities will be imported. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Temporary erosion controls will be implemented per City of Renton standards to control any possible erosion during construction. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 21% of the total site will be covered with impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Proper erosion controls during construction per City of Renton standards. 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 desaibe and give approximate quantities if known. Typical emlsaions from construction equipment during construction. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally desaibe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The site abuts May Creek which flows into Lake Washington. Three wetlands are located on the site. Two are category 3 and one Is category 2. BuffenI per the City of Renton standards are being provided from the wetlands. (See drawings and wetland report submitted). A Stream report has also been submitted. A 50 foot buffer Is being provided from May Creek rather than the 25 foot buffer required by the Shoreline Master Plan. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Eight of the lOts are within 200 feet of May Creek. A portion of the new City street and utllltiee are also within 200 feet of May Creek. (See plans submitted) 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fiD material. No fiU or dredged material will be placed on site or removed from surface waters or wetlands. 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. The property lies within a 100-yr flood plain -However the proposed development will not be within the 100-yrflood plain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. None. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals",; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None c. Water Runoff (Including stonn water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. The proposed stann water system will collect runoff from the streebI, driveways, and houses. The runoff will then be conveyed to a treatment vault located along the westerty portion of the development. The vault will then discharge into the buffer of the wetlands along Lake Washington Blvd. Those lois along the sensitive area buffers will disperse the runoff along the rear lot lines with the buffers to re-charge sensitive areas. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Compliance with the King County 2005 Drainage Manual 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X_ shrubs _X_ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain _X_ wet soil ptants: caIlail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other _ X_ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation from the areas of the n_ street and required utilities will be removed along with minor adjacent grading. 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: (See Landscape plan submitted) 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: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other _______ _ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other ,.-:---c,.-------- Fish: bass, salmon, ~ herring, shellfish, other _____ _ b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Chinook Salmon. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain: None d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Providing buffers from the wetlands and May Creek. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAl RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed projecfs energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Elec:tric & natura' gas win be used by tuturv houses. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. Futurv houses will meet the City of Renton Energy standards. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Fire and or Aid Car during construction. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Minor traffic noise from Lake Washington Blvd. 1-405 butts the property of the east but the houses are a considerable distance away so the impact will be minimal. 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. Noise from construction equipment emitted only during hours allowed by the City's noise ordinance for construction. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant and overgrown with Blackberries. The site to the north is also vacant. The property to the south is residential. The property to the west is residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. None d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-8 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Single Family Residential g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designabon of the site? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No, there is no definition of "environmentally sensitive" in the definitions in the City development standards. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None 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: Compliance with the City's Zoning and Development Regulations. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. New residential lots will be provided for future housing of high and middle income. 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 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. No structures are part of this proposal. b. What views in the immediate vicinity \NOuld be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11, LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day \NOuld it mainly occur? None, b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No, 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? Gene Coulon Beach Park is located on Lake Washington Blvd to the south. Kennydale Beach Park is also along Lake Washington Blvd to the south. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. None. 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 CUL ruRAL 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. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A Cultural Resources Review has been prepared and indicates that the project has a moderate to high probability of pnH:ontact cultural resources based on the natural setting and proximity to a Native American village. (See Cultural Resources Review) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: A "Cultural Resources Assessmenf' will take place at the time of construction of the plat. Mechanical exploration of the western portion of the site that is being disturbed will take place as the first step in construction. The area will be cleared, then the grubbed material will undergo the assessment. (See Cultural Resources Review) 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on s~e plans, if any. Lake Washington Blvd serves the site on the west. North 40" Street serves the site on the south and will serve as access to one lot. b. Is site currentty served by public transit? If no~ what is the approximate distance to the nearest trans~ stop? Not available. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Parking on the new City street will be provided. Future development of ~ will provide garages and parking aprons at each house. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? A new City street will be constructed to serve the plat. The frontage along Lake Washington Blvd will be improved to City standards. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicin~ of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. None. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Future development of houses will generate 115 trips per day. Peak volumes will occur during the PM Peak hour. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Payment of the Transportation Mitigation Fee. (See Traffic Impact Analysis submitted) 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project resu~ in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Minor impacts to fire protection, police, health care and schools will occur as a result of future construction of housing on the platted lots. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electriCity. natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone. sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Water and sewer will need to be extended to serve the site. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utilily providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. A water main will need to be extended to serve the site. The City has indicated that an ulHlizin9 of the main to 12 inch will be required and that the City will pay for the additional cost of ulHlizing. A Metro Sanitary Sewer main Is across Lake Washington Blvd which will be used for service to the plat. Water, Sanitary Sewer and Stann Sewer mains will be constructed within the pist in the new streeL 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 wiilfullack of full disc ure on my part. Proponent: Name Pri Date: ( / / / J4ME5 c: 61A.ysD"() 3'-':l-0 -Q 7 · ~ FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: March 16, 2006 TO: FROM: SUBJECf: Jill Ding, Associate Planner U;' IJ r James Gray, Assistant Fire Marsh ~ Fawcett Preliminary Plat, Lake W Blvd & N 40th St. Fire Department Comments: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single- family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the s1Iucture. 2. A fire mitigation fee of $488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. 3. Fire department access roadways require a minimum 20-foot wide paved roadway. Fire ~ department turnarounds are required for roads over 150 feet in length. (Lots 17 & lit) The turnaround shall meet t¥ minimum dimensions shown on the attached diagram. t ~/ 4. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. .JI ~ Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. i:\fawcettprelpltdoc DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN -92008 RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON MEMO PUBLIC WORKS To: Jill Ding From: Juliana Fries (425) 430-7278 April 4, 2006 Date: Subject: PreApplication Review Comments PREAPP No. 06-030 Fawcett Preliminary Plat NOTE ON PRELIMINARY REVIEW COMMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT: Tbe following comments on development and permitting issues are based on tbe pre-application submittals made to tbe City of Renton by tbe applicant. The applicant is cautioned !bat information contained in this summary may be subject to modification andlor 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 made by !be applicant. I have reviewed the preliminary application for this 18-lot plat, located at Lake Washington Blvd and N 40" St and the following are my comments: Q / I •• J/I. ! ~7' W'1.0 ..... WATER I. The proposed development is within the City of Renton's wate service area. The site is located at the 320-pressure zone. .:¥-2. There is a 12-inch water main in Lake Washington Blvd project site (see dwg W-I066), and a 12-inch water (dwg W-0390). o approximately 13-feet south of the along Meadow Ave NE and N 40" St 3. The existing mains can deliver a flow rate of 2,80 pressure is about 120 psi at street elevation on La elevation at N 40th St and Meadow Ave N. gallons per minute (gpm). The static water Washington Blvd and about 90 psi at street 4. Installation of individual pressure reducing valv for each domestic meter is required as static water pressure is over 75 psi. \ 1/ 5. Water main improvements within the new deveM;;ment will be required to provide the required fire flow demand and for domestic water service for th~ect. The improvements will include but not be limited to the following: //) 'Oll ~ • A water main extension (8-inch minimum diameter) within !be new street interior to the plat. The maximum available flow rate from this water main extension will be 1,250 gpm (unless looped system is in place). • A water main extension (12-inch diameter) along the frontage of the project with Lake Washington Blvd. The water main will extend to the north property line. The City will reimburse the develo er for the difference in cost of water pipe and fittings associated Wlth e overslzmg of the water line Fawcett Preliminary Plat 04/0412006 Page 2 • Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters. All new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm and must be located within 300 feet of the structures. Existing hydrants will require a quick disconnect Storz fitting, if not already in place. 6. The proposed project is located outside the Aquifer Protection Area. 7. New water service stubs to each lot must be installed prior to recording of the plat. 8. The Water System Development Charge (SDC) would be triggered at the single-family rate of $1,956 per new building lot. ~se are pa2:,able at the time the utility construction is issued. SANITARY SEWER \f~W -ZQJ . -I. There is the KC-Metro South lnterceptor in Lake Washington Blvd. 2. There is a sewer main stubbed to the south-westerly portion of the site. This sewer main is in an easement. 3. 4. 5. The applicant shall investigate if extending the existing sewer main along Lake Washington Blvd (South of the site) can provide graVlsefVlc lots 1-16. If not a connection to the KC sewer interceptor may be required. . l i-t de~, ~t._ EXlstmg septIc systems shall be abandon acc ance With Kmg County Health prior t?) recording of the plat. _ 1l t" I dii;:;c Eli I J-• Plats shall provide separate side sewers stubs to each building lot. No dual side sewers are allowed. Side sewers shall be minimum 6" at 2% slope. 6. w System Development Charge (SDC) would be triggered at the single-family S~:CE $I':~:; building lot. These L7 a;L9 at ~ ;~~up~truction is issued. I. Due to downstream flooding and erosion problems, staff will recommend as a SEP A condition this project to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control) and water quality (basic) improvements. 2. There are drainage and flooding problems in this area. Portions of the area are mapped as FEMA Flood zones. Any structures built in this area would be required to have the fmished 1I00r elevation elevated I' above the base flood zone elevation. , 3. The Surface Water System Development Charges (SDC) are $759.00 per building lot. These are payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. TRANSPORTATION 1. Traffic Mitigation Fee of $75.00 per Average Daily Trip shall be assessed, at a rate of 9.57 trips ~: per day per new Single-family lot. l£r Maximum grade on any street shall not exceed 15%. S~.-, Jl.t~\,O(. r Cul-de-sacs shall have a mmimum paved radlUs of 45 feet, With a nght-of-way radius 0 ,;f;5 .. 5;;;:fe=e:..t ~ fr 4. for the turnaround. _ 7 ... Private streets are allowed for access to six (6) or fewer lots, provided that at least 2 of the 6 lots abut a public right-of-way. Private streets are required to have a 26-feet easement with a 20-feet pavement. Proposed private street for access to lots 7-11 exceed the maximum number of lots . /flO ft-:-~ /}e.c.~(i-- Lof-II ,7 f1-l.c»f-1)< ~..-~ ~ ~:s, not 4, -fa ,-h- ,;..~ Fawcett Preliminary Plat 04/04/2006 Page 3 5. 6. 7. Street improvements including, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drain, landscape, street lighting and street signs will be required along new proposed str,et J. interior to the plat. Cc.v-h t:t.J,/..... <fic),l.... ~ -1--"" Street improvements including but not limited to full pavement width, sidewalks, curb and j. gutter, storm drain, landscape, street lighting are required along the frontage with Lake Washington Blvd. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles necessitate to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All plans shall be prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Permit application must include an itemized cost of construction estimate for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,000 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half the fee must be paid upon application. 3. If you have any questions, call me at 425-430-7278 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works MEMORANDUM April 6, 2006 Pre-Application File No. 06-030 Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner, x7219 Fawcett Preliminary Plat A<:re r ;.;-e.d k ~ f /r1#rd-r CMb~ I~- JJOr ~R... Go,. VfUit General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above-referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by offiCial decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Zoning Administrator, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator, Board of Adjustment, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first fioor of City Hall. Project Proposal: The subject ~roperty is located on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard, west of 1-405, and north of N 40 Street. The proposal is to subdivide the subject site, which totals 396,532 square feet in area (9.1 acres), zoned Residential-8 dwelling units per acre into 18 lots for single-family residences. An existing residence is proposed to remain. Access for proposed lots 1-16 would be provided through a new 42-foot wide road, which terminates in a cul-de-sac turnaround off of Lake Washington Blvd N, access for proposed Lots 17 and 18 would be provided via a 26-foot wide access easement off of N 40th Street. The applicant has identified steep slopes, 3 wetlands (2 Category 1 wetlands and 1 Category 3 wetland), and 5 streams of these streams one was identified as May Creek which is a Class I stream as well as a State Shoreline. The remaining streams were not classified. Zoning/Density Requirements: The subject property is located within the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zoning designation. The density range required in the R-8 zone is a minimum of 4.0 to a maximum of 8.0 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). Net density is a calculation of the number of housing units and/or lots that would be allowed on a property after critical areas, public rights-of-way, and legally recorded private access easements are subtracted from the gross area (gross area minus streets and critical areas multiplied by allowable housing units per acre). Required critical area buffers and public and private alleys shall not be subtracted from gross acres for the purpose of net density calculations. The area within the proposed access road, access easements, and critical areas must be deducted from the gross property square footage for the purposes of calculating net denSity. No area was provided for the areas required to be subtracted from the gross lot area for the purpose of calculating net lot area, therefore staff was unable to calculate denSity for the proposed plat. All square footages of areas to be deducted (access easement) must be provided at the time of formal land use application. Development Standards: The R-8 zone permits one residential structure / unit per lot, detached accessory structures are permitted at a maximum number of two per lot at 720 square feet each, or one per lot at 1,000 square feet in size. Minimum Lot Size. Width and Depth -The minimum lot size permitted in the R-B zone is 4,500 square feet for lots greater than 1 acre in size and 5,000 square feet for lots 1 acre or less in size. The area within private access easements and critical areas shall be subtracted from Lot areas. A minimum lot width of 50 feet for interior lots and 60 feet for corner lots, as well as a minimum lot depth Fawcett Preliminary Plat Pre-Anplication Meeting April 6, 2006 Page 2 of 7 of 65 feet, is also required. The proposed lots appear to comply with the minimum lot size, width, and depth requirements. Please provide both the gross and net square footage of each lot at the time of formal land use application. Building Standards -The R-8 zone allows a maximum building coverage of 35% of the lot area or 2,500 square feet, whichever is greater for lots over 5,000 square feet in size. Lots under 5,000 square feet in size are permitted a maximum building coverage of 50% of the lot area. Building height is restricted to 30 feet and 2-storjes. Detached accessory structures must remain below a height of 15 feet and one-story or can be up to 30 feet and 2 stories if the use of the structure is animal husbandry related. The gross floor area must be less than that of the primary structure. Accessory structures are also included in building lot coverage calculations. ~ Setbacks -Setbacks are the minimum required distance between the building footprint and the property line and any private access easement. The required setbacks in the R-8 zone are 15 feet in front for the primary structure and 20 feet in front for the attached garage, 20 feet in the rear, 5 feet on interior side yards, and 15 feet on side yards along streets (including access easements) for the primary structure and 20 feet on side yards along streets (including access easements) for the attached garage. The prollosal appears)o contain adequate area to provide for the required setba.ck areas. ~ iY!-V cy! ~ Access/Parking: The proposal is to access proposed Lots 1-16 through a 42-foot wide residential access street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a cul-de-sac tumaround. Access to proposed Lots 17 and 18 would be provided via a private access easement off of N 40th Street. Each lot is required to accommodate off street parking for a minimum of two vehicles. Appropriate shared maintenance and access agreement/easements will be required between lots with shared access. Private streets are allowed for access to six or fewer lots, provided at least two of the six lots abut a public right-of-way. The street is to include a minimum easement width of 26 feet with 20 feet of paving. Private driveways may serve a maximum of two lots and must have a minimum easement width of 20 feet with 12 feet of paving. Addresses of lots along private streets are to be visible from the public street by provision of a sign stating all house numbers, and the sign is to be located at the intersection of the private street and the public street. A hammerhead tumaround is required for streets between 150 feet and 300 feet in length. The length of the proposed access easement serving Lots 17 and 18 requires a hammerhead turnaround In accordance with the City of Renton Fire Department standards. A cul-de-sac tumaround shall be required to have a minimum paved radius of 45 feet with a right-of- way radius of 55 feet. The proposed cul-de-sac turnaround has a right-of-way radius of 45 feet. The proposed cul-de-sac shall be revised to show a right-of-way radius of 55 feet. Half street improvements (curb, gutter and 6-foot wide sidewalk) along the site's Lake Washington Blvd N frontage and full street improvements along the proposed access road will be required for the plat. The applicant may elect to ask the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator for a waiver or deferral for off site street improvements. Please contact Jan lilian at (425) 430-7216 for additional information regarding the waiver or deferral process. Driveway Grades: The maximum driveway slopes cannot exceed 15%, provided that driveways exceeding 8% are to provide slotted drains at the lower end of the driveway. If the grade exceeds 15%, a variance from the Board of Adjustment is required. Landscaping and Open Space: For plats abutting non-arterial public streets, the minimum off-site landscaping is a five (5 It.) wide irrigated or drought resistant landscape strip provided that if there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5 It .. this also must be landscaped. For plats abutting prinCipal, minor or collector arterials, the width increases to 10 It. unless otherwise determined by the reviewing official during the subdivision process. A minimum of 5 feet of landscaping shall be required along the site's Lake Washington Blvd N and the proposed access road street frontages. PreQ6-030 (R·8 I8-10t plat with sensitive areas).doc Fawcett Preliminary Plat Pre-t --'ication Meeting April 6,2006 Page 3 of 7 Tree requirements for plats include at least two (2) trees of a City approved species with a minimum caliper of 1 Y. inches per tree must be planted in the front yard or planting strip of every lot prior to building occupancy. A conceptual landscape plan must be provided with the formal land use application as prepared by a registered Landscape Architect, a certified nurseryman or other certified professional. The plan shall show the minimum 5-foot landscaping strip along the street frontages and two trees within the front yards or planting strips of each lot. Significant Tree Retention: A tree inventory and a tree retention plan shall be provided with the formal land use application. The tree retention plan mu ervation of at least 25% of significant trees [those with a minimum diameter " (evergreen) or 1 deciduous) wMn measured four feet above grade], and indicate how propose UI 0 pnn WI be sited to accommodate preservation of significant trees that will be retained. The following species are exempted from the relention requirements outside of critical areas: All Populus species including cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), lombardy poplar (Populus nigra "Italica"), etc. All Alnus species which includes red alder (Alnus oregona), black alder (Alnus glutinosa), white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), etc. Salix species which includes weeping willow (Salix babylonica), etc., unless along a stream bank and away from paved areas. All Platanus species which include London plane tree (Platanus acerifolia), American sycamore, buttonwood (Platanus occidentalis), etc. Sensitive Areas: Based on the City's Critical Areas Maps, the site is located within critical areas, including: Flood Hazard (FEMA mapped flood plain), Geologic Hazards (steep slopes), moderate landslide hazards, high seismic hazards, critical habitats (forests), shorelines and wetlands. Flood Hazards -Pursuant to RMC 4-3-0501, general and specific standards related to residential subdivisions and construction are required for proposals localed within flood hazard areas. Geologic Hazards -Sensitive slopes have grades from 25% to 40%. SpecifiC standards apply for development located within sensitive slopes and landslide hazard areas. Protected slopes are defined as topographical features that slope in excess of 40% and have a vertical rise of 15 feet or more. Development is prohibited on protected slopes, please see RMC 4-3-050J for additional information. As required by the City's Critical Areas Regulalions, a slope delineation indicating the location of steep slopes will be required as part of the formal land use application. Pursuant to the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-3-050J) the applicant will be required to obtain a geotechnical report stamped and signed from a Geotechnical Engineer stating that the site is suitable for development and addresses soils, geology and other key elements. In addition, the report will need to address any special construction requirements deemed necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer. Through the preliminary plat review process, the City may condition the approval of the development in order to require mitigation of any potential hazards based on the results of the study. In addition, pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050.J.3, the geotechnical report submitted with the application may be required to undergo independent secondary review by a qualified specialist selected by the City at the applicant's expense. Seismic Hazards -The seismic hazard is related to potential liquefaction of soils during an earthquake event. Before the applicant pursues detailed design and engineering for the development of the site, it is recommended that the geotechnical analysis assess soil conditions and detail construction measures to assure building stability. Shorelines/Water -The property contains the May Creek water body, which is designated by the City's Shoreline Master Program. All development within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of this water body is required to obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. In addition per RCW 90.58.030 the definition of Shorelands includes land located within 200 feet of the Pre06-Q30 (R-8 18-10t plat with sensitive areas).doc \ Fawcett Preliminary Plat Pre-Anplication Meeting April 6, 2006 /1"\ U ~ Im\ f-+- Page 4 of 7 :;;t/ 7 I .LV u I ordinary high water mark of State Shorelines and any wetlands associated with the Shorelines. A wetland delineation report was submitted with the application and based on the information found in the report it appears that all 3 wetlands may be hydrologically connected to May Creek, and therefore would be classified as "associated wetlands· and would be regulated under the Shoreline Management Act. May Creek is designated as an "Urban Environmenr under the shoreline regulations. The "Urban" designation permits residential uses within the shoreline boundary provided the use complies with the applicable setback established by the master program. In this case, residential uses are permitted within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the creek. However, through the SEPA process, the Environmental Review Committee is likely to recommend a greater setback from the f\ 'II OHWM to address potential erosion, slopes and landslide hazards. The applicant is showing 50 ft. :I setbacks from the OHWM from May Creek. .. (\«;\" l Additionally, please note that the City has prepared revisions to the City's shoreline ~) "iI regulations. The pending alterations to the regulations may result in substantial increases to the required setbacks. Staff is uncertain of the estimated timeframe for the adoption of the revised code and the applicant is encouraged to consider the implications of the potential L changes in preparing the final site design. ~WetiandS -A wetland delineation report was submitted with the pre-app as completed in the year i 2000. The report did not provide any mitigation of impacts to the wetlands and their buffers for creation ~ ~ 'l-..::: r enhancement. ~,J\...i The report indicated that Wetlands 1 and 3 are Category 1 ~etlands which require a 1 DO ft buffer The _ ..... 0 pre-app plat plan shows Wetland 1 buffer to be reduced to 50 ft. It appears that a 25 ft. buffer for ~ ~ Wetland 3 was shown on the plan. However, the reduction can be no less than 50 percent, thus 50 ft. • \) for a Category 1 wetland. Further buffer reductions require a variance to be reviewed by the Hearing ~ t I\l Examiner. • ~ The applicant is required to provi an updated wetland delinea i nand miti ation re ... ~ addressing the quality and size of e we s an c ass Icatlon of the wetlands. The wetland report } ~"1~ will need to be completed by a q lified wetlands biologist and submitted with the formal land use '" application. In addition, the report w Id need to include a discussion regarding impacts to the wetland from the proposed development. e required buffers will need to be shown. Any proposed -...l ~ modifications to the requirements must e clearly identified and justified (I.e. buffer averaging, wetland ~ f---.,r' creation and enhancement etc.). ~ ~ ("'i The report would need to specify the area the wetland and the size and category type (pursuant to '-.J RMC 4-3-050M). The applicable buffer wid s would be dependent on the category of the wetland (e.g., 25 feet for category 3 wetlands, 50 fee for category 2 wetlands and 100 feet for category 1 wetlands). If the applicant elects to fill any portion of the we ands and not replace it with an approved ratio, a Critical Areas Variance would be necessary. All itical Area Variances are reviewed by the City's Hearing Examiner. In some cases, wetland buffer a raging may be allowed, if new wetland buffer is created at an approved ratio, otherwise, this also may rigger a Critical Areas Variance. Cultural and Archeological Resources: The SEPA hecklist requires identification of this potential project element. Areas of potential cultural or histori sensitivity should be investigated using the available data bases at the State Office of Archae logy and Historic Preservation, the Renton Historical Museum, UniverSity of Washington and Sta libraries. Consultation with pertinent tribes should also be conducted. The applicant would likely be required, as a SEPA miti ation measure, that in the event any potential cultural resources are found during project constructi n, the contractor would be instructed to stop work and contact the appropriate local and state offici s and follow established protocol for culturally significant resource findings. Permit Requirements: The project would requira..,fttI;!Iin'lin:!II"I~Jat"l'<i!view, Environmental (SEPA) Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Develo t P f ;h~P;C t a~u~#~h of these Pre06.()30(R·818·lotplatwithsensitiveareas).doc 101J f r ~ Fawcett Preliminary Plat Pre-." --'ica~on Meeting April 6, 2006 Page 5 of7 permits individually, however, concurrent review is recommended to better address potential impacts from the project as a whole. With concurrent review of these applications, the process would take an estimated time frame of 16 to 20 weeks. After the required notification period, the Environmental Review Committee would issue a Threshold Determination for the project. When the required two-week appeal period is completed, the project would go before the Hearing Examiner for a recommendation to the City Council on the Preliminary Plat. The Hearing Examiner's recommendation, as well as the decision issued by the City Council, would be subject to two-week appeal periods. The application fee would be $2,000 for the Preliminary Plat, Y. of full fee for the Shoreline Permit $500 (1/2 of $1,000 full fee), and Y. of full fee for SEPA Review (Environmental Checklist) which is dependent on project value: 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). If variances are requested the fee would be $250 for each Hearing Examiner Variance requested (1/2 of full $500 fee). Written justification would also be required as outlined in the Development Regulations. The criteria is dependent on the type of variance requested. The applicant will be required to install a public information sign on the property. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal requirements is provided in the attached handouts. After Preliminary Plat approval, the Shoreline Permit is issued and the shoreline decision is forwarded to the Department of Ecology. The shoreline decision is deemed to be final within 30 calendar days from the date of receipt by these agencies unless written communication is received indicating otherwise. Appeals of the shoreline decision must be filed to the Shoreline Hearings Board within 30 days of issuance. Once Preliminary Plat approval is obtained and the Shoreline Permit process is complete, the applicant must complete the required improvements and dedications, as well as satisfy any conditions of the preliminary approval before submitting for Final Plat review. The Final Plat process also requires City Council approval. Once final approval is received, the plat may be recorded. The newly created lots may only be sold after the plat has been recorded. Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction permit fees, the following mitigation fees would be required prior to the recording of the plat. • A Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single family residence; • A Transportation Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project; and, • A Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single-family residence. A handout listing all of the City's Development related fees in attached for your review. Expiration: Upon preliminary short plat approval, the preliminary short plat approval is valid for two years with a possible one-year extension. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The existing development is located within the Residential Single Family (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use deSignation. The following proposed policies are applicable to the proposal: Land Use Element Objective LU-FF: Encourage re-investment and rehabilitation of existing housing, and development of new residential plats resulting in quality neighborhoods that: 1. Are planned at urban densities and implement Growth Management targets, 2. Promote expansion and use of public transportation; and 3. Make more efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. Policy LU-147. Net development densities should fall within a range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre in Residential Single Family neighborhoods. Pre06..Q30 (R-8 IS-lot plat with sensitive areas).doc Fawcett Preliminary Plat Pre-Annlication Meeting April 6, 2006 Page 6 of 7 Policy LU-148. A minimum lot size of 5,000 square 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 create an incentive for aggregation of land. The minimum lot size is not intended to set the standard for density in the designation, but to provide flexibility in subdivision/plat design and facilitate development within the allowed density range. Policy LU-149, Lot size should exclude private sidewalks, easements, private road, and driveway easements, excepl alley easements. Policy LU-150. Required setbacks should exclude public or private legal access areas, established through or to a 101, and parking areas. Policy LU-152. Single-family lot size, lot width, setbacks, and impervious surface should be sufficient to allow private open space, landscaping to provide buffers/privacy withoul extensive fencing, and sufficient area for maintenance activities. Policy LU-154. Interpret development slandards 10 support new plats and infill project designs incorporating street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Community Design Element Policy CD-12, Infill development, defined as new short plats of nine or fewer lots, should be encouraged in order to add variety, updated housing stock, and new vitality to neighborhoods. The following policies are advisory and are Intended to Inform the applicant of the City Council's desired outcome for Infill development. Code implementing these policies is on the department's work program and may be adopted prior to formal review of projects now at the pre-applicatlon stage. Policy CD-13. Infill development should be reflective of the existing character of established neighborhoods even when designed using different architectural styles, and/or responding to more urban setbacks, height or lot requirements. Infill development should draw on elements of existing development such as placement of slructures, vegetation, and location of entries and walkways, to reflect the site planning and scale of existing areas. Policy CD-14. Architecture of new structures in established areas should be visually compatible with other structures on the site and with adjacent development. Visual compatibility should be evaluated using the following criteria: a. Where there are differences in height (e.g., new two-story development adjacent to Single- story structures), the architecture of the new structure should include details and elements of design such as window treatment, roof type, entries, or porches that reduce the visual mass of the structure. b. Garages, whether attached or detached, should be constructed using the same pattern of development established in the vicinity. Structures should have entries, windows, and doors located to maintain privacy in neighboring yards and buildings. Environmental Element Policy EN-8. Achieve no overall net loss of the City's remaining wetlands base. Policy EN-9. In no case should development activities decrease net acreage of existing wetlands. Policy EN-10. Establish and protect buffers along wetlands to facilitate infiltration and maintain stable water temperatures, provide for the biological regime, reduce amount and velocity of run-off, and provide for wildlife habitat. Policy EN-13. When development may impact wetlands, the following hierarchy should be followed in deciding the appropriate course of action: Pre06-030 (R~8 IS-lot plat with sensitive areas).doc Fawcett Preliminary Pial Pre-.-"ication Meeting April 6, 2006 Page 70f7 a. avoid impacts to the wetland, b. minimize impacts to the wetland, c. restore the wetland when impacted, d. recreate the wetland at a ratio which will provide for its assured viability and success, e. enhance the functional values of an existing degraded wetland. ce: Jenn~er Henning Pre06-030 (R-B 18-lot plat with sensitive areas).doc , COR D4 . 5 T23N R5E W 112 ~ ZONING ~ := 1WmIJCAL BIIlVICII <[ U CA C~ 43 ;2;. ClJ- ~CA R--=8 -.:~-.- ~~'2 • __ ~ _~ __ J,,_~ -'-._.". C4 Q :00 tr , ..... 32 T24N RSE W 1/2 Sf32 HANSON CONSULTING May 23, 2008 City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton W A. 98055 360-422-5056 Subject: Lake Washington View Estates street modification Dear Development Services Staff: DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED This letter outlines a modification request from the Cities Street Standards. The request is to modify the street width requirement from a 50 foot width to a 42 foot width for the street in the subject plat. The project site has considerable physical conditions that impact the location of lots and new streets. May Creek is to the north; three wetlands are on the site one of which is located along Lake Washington blvd which restricts access in that area. Access from the south is prohibited by steep slopes and a large wetland. The area left for access is narrow in width restricting lot and street width. Reducing the required width of the right of way will allow reasonable access without reducing the number of/ots. The May Creek drainage basin has been identified as a sensitive drainage basin. By reducing the impervious surface the impact on the drainage system will be mitigated. A previous preliminary plat application was reviewed for this plat. At that time a modification was approved for a 42 foot right of way with a turn-around. We have now modified the turn-around to make it more usable but it does meet the minimum fire turn- around requirements. We appreciate the city's review and approval of this modification request if there are any questions please contact me at 360-422-5056. Sincrrely, / ~ ,-' -t"2L'~r--'-' lrunes C. Hanson Lake Washington View Estates Tax number 322405-9081 13-Lot Preliminary Plat Submittal CONSTRUcnON MmGATION DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED Proposed Construction Dates (begin and end dates): The proposed construction for this project is scheduled to start in the summer of 2000 with completion by October 200J. Start of Construction will depend upon approval of construction documents by the City of Renton and King County Metro. The construction will be sequenced to perform all the sitE grading, rockef'ies, and erosion control; then install the seHer improvements both on and off site; then install the storm con'll!'{<lnce system together with the storm water vault; then install the water main with fire hydrants. Hours and days 01 openttIon: 8:00 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday Proposed Hauling/ Transportlltlon routB: Materials and laba' for the proposed project will enter and exit onto Lake Washington Blvd. The site is proposed to balance the cut and fill of material to avoid from hauling any excess material off site. If material Is to be remOlied from the site, arrangements will be made with the City of Renton for an acceptable haul routE. Mea_ to minimize amstruction activities: Silt fences and water trucks will be used to minimize dust during construction activities. Umit construction to dry weather only. $pedal Mun: Due to heavy use of U!ke Washington Blvd., the installatioo of the water main and seHer crossing may need to be scheduled for evening hours or weekend hours. This will depend on the extent of improvements required by the City of Renton. PnIIImInary Traffic Control Plan: Upon completion of the construction drawings and before start of construction, an acceptable contractor will be selected. A traffic control plan will be submitted and a~ by the aty of Renton prior to any wor1< within U!ke Washington BIIId. ..... , ........ _ ...... -_ ........... --_ .. , , PLAT NAME '!lESERVATION CERlFlqATE . TO: JIM I-iANSON 17446 MALLARD COVE LN MTVERNON, WA98274 PLAT RESERVATION EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2007 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED The plat name. LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW EST"'TES tIas been resfllVed for MUff! use by JIM HANSON. I certify that , have checked the records of previotlSiy issued afld reselVed plat names. The requested flame tIas f10t been previoUSly used In King CoUflty f10r Is It CUmt/lUy reserved by any party. This reservatIOn will expire May 23, 2009. one year from tI:xIay. It may be nmewed one year at a time. If the plat has not been NCOrded or the resentation "'''-by the above date it will be deleted. I I . 'i . Christopher Brown ({) Associates 9688 Qainier Ave. ~. &allle. W A 98118-5981 722-1910 fax The Fawcett Plat a TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for an 12-Lot Single Family Residential Plat in the North Quadrant of City of Renton February 7th, 2007 Traffic Engineers ({) Transportation Planners The Fawcett Plat TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Purpose Location and Access Scope Adjacent Land Uses Phasing Street System Traffic Characteristics Horizon Year Traffic Trip Generation Trip Distribution & Assignment Year 2008 Horizon Year Traffic Capacity Analysis LOS Note A Traffic Mitigation Fee Conclusions Vicinity Map Table of Contents List of Figures Current P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes I. 3. 3. 4. 4. 4. 5. 5. 5. 8. 8. 8. 11. 11. 12. I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 2008 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with the Seahawks Facility The Fawcett Plat P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Assignment 2. 6. 7. 9. 2008 PM Peak Hour Volumes The Fawcett Plat Completed 10. List of Tables I II The Fawcett Plat Trip Generation Levels of Service Site Plan ITE LUC 210 Summary & Data LOS Computations Appendix Corridor Accident Frequencies (3-years) 5. II. Chrislopher Brown i?5 J\ll!lociale~ 9688 Rainier J\ve. ~. &allie. W J\ 98118-5981 7'2.2-1910 faX (206) 7'2.2-1909 The Fawcett Plat a TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for a 12-Lot Single Family Residential Plat in the North Quadrant of the City of Renton Purpose Briefly, the purpose of this study is to determine the horizon year (2008) traffic impacts that may be anticipated with the completion of the referenced 12-lot single-family residential plat that is to be constructed on a parcel ofland located in the northerly quadrant of the City of Renton. More specifically, the location of the development is on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard about haIfa block north of its intersection with North 40th Street and south of the existin~ Pan Abode mill on the southwest quadrant of the 1-405 interchange with NE 44 Street More particularly, this traffic study is to obtain current traffic volume data on Lake Washington Boulevard and NE 44th Street, the arterial facilities expected to be impacted by ten (10) or more p.m. peak hour trips, to derive a traffic forecast of year 2008 traffic conditions both without and with the development, include forecast traffic from the presently developing Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility (Planning File LUA-06-073) as a part of the background traffic, and assess the traffic circulation impacts that may be produced by site related traffic. The location of the plat is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1, page 2. The trip generation data for the development is based on the 7th edition of the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). -1-Christopher Brown {?f IIssociBtes 9688 Rainier live. ~. &altie, W II 98118-5981 7'22-1910 rex FIGURE 1 Vicinity Map -2- COLEMAN POINT fJ Brown i!f A&!lOciales 9688 Qainicr fIVc. &. &calllc, WA 98118-5981 7'22·1910 faX • It may be noted that the p.m. peak hour typically is the highest peak hour of the average weekday since it contains work, school, shopping and social-recreation travel demands. Accordingly, for residential developments, it represents the worst case when traffic congestion is at its most severe levels. This TlA bases its conclusions and recommendations on the p. m. peak hour of the average weekday. The inclusion of a background traffic growth rate for assessing horizon year volumes is in accordance with the recommended practice of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Traffic Access and Impact Studies for Site Development, Transportation Engineering, August 1988. Background traffic was obtained from the traffic impact analysis (TlA) of the previously noted Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility prepared by The Transpo Group, Bellevue, Washington (September, 2006). This traffic study uses the p.m. peak hour trip distribution model from the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility TlA. Location and Access The location of the proposed 12 new single-family residences was briefly noted earlier on page 1. As shown in the appended copy of the site plan, these lots are all placed on a single parcel of land that will access a residential street with a cul-de-sac and enter Lake Washington Boulevard in a STOP sign controlled, "Tee" intersection. Entering sight distance (ESD) to both the north and south from the proposed "Tee" intersection on Lake Washington Boulevard is in excess of 1,000 feet -more than sufficient for traffic safety purposes. The City of Renton, Department of Public Works, will define the geometric design and design standards for the plats access along with nighttime illumination requirements. For the purposes of this traffic study the scope of the work considers the 12 new single- family residences in concert with the traffic generated by the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility. For the proposed Fawcett Plat development the key intersections expected to be impacted by 10 or more site generated p.m. peak hour trips include the following. -3- Chrislopher Brown (f) A&!lOciales 9688 Rainier Ave. &. &allle. W A 98118-5981 TZ2-1910 faX • NE 44th Street at the 1-405 Southbound Ramps. • NE 44th Street at Ripley LanelPan Abode Access Driveway. • Lake Washington Boulevard at the Site Access Street These intersections are described schematically in the following traffic diagrams and are analyzed later in this study. In general, the scope of the study is to address potential design needs and/or capacity restrictions, and potential traffic safety impacts on those arterial facilities receiving ten of more p.m. peak hour trips. Adjacent Land Uses The adjacent, presently developed land uses to the south of the plat are residential and conform to the R-8 zoning of the neighborhood. To the north, on the former Baxter Mill site is the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility now under construction. To the northeast, on the east side ofl-40S, there is a local neighborhood shopping center. Accordingly, for the immediate neighborhood, the plat will conform to the existing land uses as they have developed in the past and are currently developing. From a traffic engineering perspective this is not a conflicting land use. Phasing The project will be developed in a single phase of 12 lots. For the purposes of this study the total development is expected to be fully built-out and occupied by the end of2008. Thus, 2008 defines the horizon year for this TIA in terms of background traffic growth. Street System The adjacent arterial street serving the site is Lake Washington Boulevard. This is a 2- lane facility with a posted speed limit of 25 mph. It has bike lanes on both sides and at the site, along its street frontage, curb, gutter and sidewalk facilities will be required. On both the Ripley Lane and 1-405 SB ramp intersections STOP sign control is used. -4- Christopher Brown @ A!\SOcietes 9688 Qainier Ave. 6. &allle. WA 98118-5981 7'2'2-1910 rai. The various intersection geometries, grades and related lane assignments are included in the appended level of service analyses Traffic Characteristics Current (2006) peak hour traffic volume data were obtained from the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility TIA. Current p.m. peak hour traffic volumes are shown schematically on Figure 2. As a traffic diagram no scale is assumed: the respective arrowheads note the direction of travel Horizon Year Traffic Figure 3 shows the 2008 horizon year traffic forecast with the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility completed along with background traffic growth but without the proposed 12-Lot, Fawcett Plat residential development. The data of Figure 3 was produced from the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility TIA. Trip Generation Trip generation for the proposed 12-Lot, Fawcett Plat residential is based on the 7th edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE) Trip Generation Manual, for Land Use Code 210, the applicable reference for single-family residential developments. As a relatively small development the published average trip rates are used. -5- TABLE I Fawcett Plat Trip Generation A.W.D.T. A.M. Inbound A.M. Outbound PM Inbound PM Outbound 115 Trips/Day 2 vehicles/hour 7 vehicles/hour 8 vehicles/hour 4 vehicles/hour Christopher Brown <i1 Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. Cl. &attle, WA 98118-5981 7'22-1910 faX . 'Cl ~ .... tr) s:: ~j ~ 0 +' 01 s:: • ..-j .r: !J) I~ (G III ~ (j) ~ III H FIGURE 2 :Al fo" 'Cl r-' ro '< l:"' III ::l ro o \.1' ,NE ~ _8"3"3 ~~ \ /i ~ ~ ~ f B Site Access , , , , 1 '" III :;l ~ o 0. ro t:I ~ fo" <: ~ ~ Current P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes -6- ~ III H I ""' ""' 0 tr) U) 44th Street IV /~ Brown ({f fl8SOCiales 9688 Qainier five <!I_ <!\caltle, W fI 98118·5981 722-1910 fax-('206) 72'2-1909 fJ ';xl \-'- '"0 f-' (1) >-<: t" III :;l (1) {Y ",'X jJ \JNE 405 ... . 'Cl ;> rl trj C 10: 0 .j.l 0"> ,:: -r! ~j .,:: (J) Site Access r~~ C(l ~ Q) ~ <!l H FIGURE 3 2008 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with the Sea hawks Facility Completed -7- &' <rJ H I 'I-J 'I-J 0 trj C/J ~00 44th Street 1:!/ -< 25'7 Christopher Brown 0' ABSOciates 9688 Rainier Ave. &. &aUle. WA 98118-5981 722-1910 fax- fJ Trip Distribution & Assignment The new traffic generated by this residential development will be distributed onto the adjacent roadway system and then onto the regional transportation network. The traffic distribution and assignment of site-generated traffic is derived from the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility TIA which, it may be noted, was based on the trip model prepared for the Port Quendall development prepared by CH2M1HiIL A schematic diagram showing the future design hour (p.m. peak hour) trip assignment for the subject Fawcett Plat is shown on Figure 4. Year 2008 Horizon Year Traffic Figure 5 shows the estimated 2008 P.M Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with the Fawcett Plat Completed. The data is made up of the data of Figure 4, the baseline p.m. peak hour 2008 volume data developed from the Sealtle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility TIA and Figure 4, the subject Fawcett Pial p.m. peak hour traffic assignment The peak hour data assumes no traffic diversion due to inadequate traffic conditions (such as congestion) nor presumes any geometrically or capacity inadequate linkages by the horizon year of2008. Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis is in accordance with the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) publication by the Transportation Research Board. The analysis was accomplished using the software entitled RCS 3, produced by the McTrans Center at the University of Florida, and used under license to Christopher Brown, PE The results of the analysis are noted in Table II on the next page. When reviewing the following LOS tabulated summaries, note that the computer input and results are included in the Appendix. The appendix computations show the average delays, maximum queue lengths and approach LOS values as well as the overall LOS values at the signalized intersection. Note that at these STOP controlled intersections only the worst leg LOS and delay and is listed. Finally, intersection comments with respect to the LOS are noted directly below Table II. -8-Christopher Brown !1J Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. &. &attle. WA 98118·5981 7'22-1910 fax. . '0 !> .... III l'l t::: ~j 0 .... 0' t::: 'M .c: Ul r~~ '" :;: Q) ."! '" ...:l FIGURE 4 J ~NE o -j'-... » .3 o~\C o , 0 , Site Access , \ I , P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Assignment The Fawcett Plat Completed -9- 44th Street U I ... ~ Christopher Brown (15 A&'lOCiates 9688 Qainier Ave. c:I). &altle, WA 98118·5981 7'22·1910 fax (206) 7'22·1909 fJ • . '"d :> ..., o:l .: j 0 .j.J tJ; .: . .., ..c: "' '" t 8: C]) .><: '" >-1 FIGURE 5 ,:; ~ (' \ /18 .. , \~ \ r:\~ \Q , \\) , Site Access I , I I 2008 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with the Fawcett Plat Completed -10- 44th Street ! , ""' ""' o fJi JOV 223 ... Christopher ~rown ({J Associales 9688 Rainier Ave. 6. <!\cattle, W A 98118-5981 722-1910 fElli. fJ TABLE II Levels of Service Intersection 2008 2008 2007 Current (WID Project) With Project NE 44th Sul-405 SB Ramps E F F See next line. STOP Controlled intersection 41.8 sec. 53.8 sec. 54.1 sec. NE 44th St.lI-405 SB Ramps B See Note A 4-Way, STOP Controlled intersection 12.6 sec. NE 44th St.lRipley LanefPan Abode B C C STOP Controlled intersection 12.8 sec. 20.2 sec. 20.5 sec. Lake Washington Blvd.lSite Access NA NA B STOP Controlled intersection 10.4 sec. LOS Note A Without mitigation this intersection will continue to operate at LOS 'F'. If the intersection is assumed to be operating as a 4-Way STOP, the LOS increases to 'B'. The Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training FaCility TIA does not propose any traffic mitigation apart from the mitigation fee at $75 per ADT trip. From the foregoing, clearly there are no significant impacts that will alter the level of service. Accordingly, as recommended for the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility the only mitigation is for the imposition of a general traffic mitigation fee at the rate of $75 per new site generated ADT. Traffic Mitigation Fee The adopted standard traffic mitigation fee at the rate of$75 per added ADT for the city's street improvement program may be anticipated at lIS Trips/Day X $75 = $8,625. -11- Brown i!5 A~ciateil 9688 Qainier Ave. ~. &catlle. WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 FIlX Conclnsions The following conclusions may be considered with respect to the proposed 12-10t single- family residential Fawcett Plat. • The development, as a single-family residential project, will conform to the neighborhood as it is currently developing. • The road network under review in this TIA includes the adjacent arterial -Lake Washington Boulevard -and NE 44th Street at both Ripley Lane/Pan Abode access driveway and NE 44th Street at the 1-405 southbound ramps that receive up to 10 p.m. peak hour trips from the development. • Based on the 7th edition of Traffic Generation the development will generate some 115 trips per day with 9 of these trips taking place during the morning peak hour and 12 in the p.m. peak hour. • For analysis purposes the time when the project is complete and fully occupied is taken at the year 2008. This is the horizon year for the TIA. • For the horizon year the presently under construction Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility is included in addition to the background growth rate for defining the 2008 year baseline forecast. • The traffic assignment of site-generated traffic shows 15 percent of the peak hour trips will go to and from the south along Lake Washington Boulevard and 85 percent will go the north through the 1-405 interchange.' • In the horizon year of 2008 both without or with the project the worst-case LOS will be found only at the NE 44th StreetfI-405 southbound ramps that will be at LOS 'F'. • Since the project does not cause a shift in the LOS at any of the defined intersections no mitigation measure is required although it was determined that converting this intersection to a 4-Way STOP would make a marked improvement by raising the LOS 'F' to LOS 'B'. • With an ADT of 115 Trips/Day per the trip generation table on page 5, the city's standard mitigation fee of$75 per new ADT will require a fee of$8,625. • A review of the Lake Washington Boulevard corridor accident data from Burnett Avenue North to Ripley Lane shows only one (l) accident in the last three (3) years. There is no reason to assume there is any accident hazard on this facility that would be exacerbated by this s-f development. • No other traffic mitigation on the local and principal arterial street network is required considering the adequacy of current and forecast traffic operations. • No other traffic mitigation measures are recommended on the basis of the findings of this traffic impact analysis. -12-Chrislopher Brown @ Associales 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. &allle. WA 98118·5981 ('206) 7'22·1910 fax The Fawcett Plat Appendix Table of Contents Site Plan • ITE LUC 210, Single-Family Detached Housing-Definition • ITE LUC 210, Single-Family Detached Housing-weekday traffic • ITE LUC 210, Single-Family Detached Housing-a.m. peak traffic • ITE LUC 210, Single-Family Detached Housing-p.m. peak traffic Levels of Service NE 44th St./I-40S SB Ramps Current Volumes HP-C1P 1. NE 44th St./I-40S SB Ramps Horizon Year wlo Project HP-HIP 2. NE 44th St./I-40S SB Ramps Horizon Year with Project HP-P1P 3. NE 44th St./I-40S SB Ramps Horizon Year with Project 4-Way STOP 4. NE 44th St.lRipley LanelPan Abode Current Volumes HP-C2P 5. NE 44th St.lRipley Lane/Pan Abode Horizon Year wlo Project HP-H2P 6. NE 44th St.lRipley LanelPan Abode Horizon Year with Project HP-P2P 7. Lake Washington Blvd.lSite Access Horizon Year wlProject HP-P3P 23. Lake Washington Boulevard Corridor Accident Data Christopher Brown (l5 Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. &. &cattle. WA 98118-5981 7'22-1910 fax , ;? -l / / <' , '-, Christopher Brown 115 Associates 9688 Rainier Ave, ,1\, &attle, WA 98118;5981 72.2-1910 fax Land Use: 210 Single-Familv Detached Housing Description Single-family detached housing includes all single-family detached homes on individual lots. A typical site surveyed is a suburban subdivision. Additional Data The number of vehicles and residents have a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip ends. The use of these variables Is limited, however, because the numbers of vehicles and residents was often difficult to obtain or predict. The number of dwelling units is generally used as the independent variable of choice because it is usually readily available, easy to project and has a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip ends. This land use Included data from a wide variety of units with different sizes, price ranges, locatlons and ages. Consequently, there was a wide variation in trips generated within this category. As expected, dwelling units that were larger In size, more expensive, or farther away from the central business district (CBD) had a higher rate of trip generation per unit than those smaller in size, less expensive, or closer to the CBD. Other factors, such as geographic location and type of adjacent and nearby development, may also have had an effect on the site trip generation. Single-family detached units had the highest trip generation rate per dwelling unit of all residential uses, because they were the largest units in size and had more residents and more vehicles per unit than other residential land uses; they were generally located farther away from shopping centers, employment areas and other trip attractors than other residential land uses; and they generally had fewer altemate modes of transportation available, because they were typically not as concentrated as other residential land uses. The peak hour of the generator typically coincided with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. The sites were surveyed from the late 1960s to the 2000s throughout t/he United States and Canada. Source Numbers 1.,4,5,6,7,8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19,20,21,26,34,35,36,38,40,71,72,84,91,98, 100, 105, 108,110,114,117,119,157,167,177,187,192,207,211, 246, 275, 283, 293,300, 319, 320, 357,384,435,550,552,579 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 268 Institute of Transportation Engineers Single-Family Detached Housing (210) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 350 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 197 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.57 4.31 -21.85 3.69 Data Plot and Equation 30.000 .,--------------------------------, ] c. ." >- <II ~ .r: g <II '" j \I f- 20.000 10.000 x X Actual Data Point.. .. ' .... , .. .... _ ........ -: .... :."-: . x x . x 1000 X ; Number of Dwelling Units ---Fitted Curve . /. 2000 , ~""", ------AvarageRate' x 3000 Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.92 Ln(X} + 2.71 R2 = 0.96 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 269 Institute of Transportation Engineers ~ingle-Family Detach~"" Housing (210) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 274 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 201 Directional Distribution: 25% entering, 75% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.75 0.33 2.27 0.90 Data Plot and Equation 3.000 -,-----------------------------~ 2.000 1.000 .... o o . X Actual Data Po(na x x . .. ','. x 1000 X ; Number of Dwelling Units . -Fitted Curve FIHedCuFY8 Equation: T = O.70(X) + 9.43 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 270 .' ... " ...... , ...... --x 2000 3000 - - - - - -AVlrag. Rata R2; 0.89 Institute of Transportation Engineers Single-Family Detached Housing (210) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 302 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 214 Directional Distribution: 63% entering, 37% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.01 0.42 2.98 1.05 Data Plot and Equation 3.000 .,-----------------------------,-, x / 2.000 ................... 1,000 o o X Actual Data Points x . x)( ,/.'" >/(. x 1000 , , . . , x X = Numb"r of Dwelling Units Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln<n = 0.90 Ln(X) + 0.53 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 271 .' . 2000 3000 ------Average Rata Institute of Transportation Engineers Two-Way Stop Control Page I of I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY r... ,I II II VII II ion Site II lan~lvd c_ V_ Brown Inter' NE ; sa R~mno f':n Ju City of Date ' Year ~ IP,M~~~HDur 10 !File HP-C1P I ~trppt-NE 44th Street ~or Street: 1-405 SB On & Off ramps C IStudy Peliod (hrs): 1_00 IV Volumes and Adlll Major Street El lund 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 152 8 252 189 0 Jr PHF 0_92 0,92 0,92 0_92 0,92 0,92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 165 8 273 205 0 , Heavy Vehicles 0 ---0 --- Type U' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 COl I :ion TR L T I Signal 0 0 und Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 0 0 0 177 0 J42 PHF 0,92 0,92 0,92 0,92 0,92 0,92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 192 0 154 • Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Grade (%) 0 0 Flared N N 0 0 RT '-'''a''' .cllized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 L _ R Delay. Queue • and Level of EB WB .nn Soul"uuu"u .vve. ,t 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane ion L L R v (vph) 273 192 154 C (m) (vph) 1416 245 841 vic 0_19 0.78 0,18 ,95% queue length 0,72 8,28 0,67 Ir:nntrnl Delay 8_1 67. 1 10,2 ILOS A F a lann"'~ch Delay --41,8 ~ppro~ch LOS --E HCS2000™ Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kF2EO,TMP 2/6/07 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information !Analyst C, V. Brown Intersection NE 44th/l-405 SB Ramps lAgency/Co. Hanson Planning Uurisdiction City of Renton Date Performed 2/6/07 Analysis Year 2008 w/Seahawks Facility !Analysis Time Period P.M. Peak Hour Project 10 File HP-H1P EastlWest Street: NE 44th Street North/South Street: 1-405 SB On & Off ramps Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 1.00 l\Lehicle Volumes and Adiustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 222 63 260 259 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 236 67 276 275 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 --0 --- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 150 0 200 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 159 0 212 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 ConfiQuration L R Delay, Queue LenQth and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 276 159 212 C (m) (vph) 1269 186 769 vic 0.22 0.85 0.28 95% queue length 0.83 10.10 1.14 Control Delay 8.6 110.2 11.5 LOS A F B Approach Delay --53.8 Approach LOS --F HCS2000™ Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 file//C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kF2EO.TMP 2/6/07 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst C. V. Brown Intersection NE 44thll-405 S8 RamDs Agency/Co. Hanson Planning Wurisdiction City of Renton Date Performed 216/07 ~nalysis Year 2008 w/Seahawks & Proiect Analysis Time Period P.M. Peak Hour Project 10 File HP-PI P, no mitigation EastlWest Street: NE 44th Street North/South Street: 1-405 SB On & Off ramps Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 100 Vehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 223 65 260 263 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 237 69 276 279 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 150 0 206 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 159 0 219 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay. Queue Length and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (vph) 276 159 219 C (m) (vph) 1266 185 765 vic 0.22 0.86 0.29 95% queue length 0.83 10.26 1.20 Control Delay 8.6 112.7 11.6 LOS A F 8 Approach Delay --54.1 Approach LOS --F Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8384.TMP 217107 All-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS II Site ~ !'Inalyst Ie. V. Brown I i INE i SB Ramos ~anson i i ~itv of Renton IDate 1216107 I , Year 12008 ,& Pm;ect Time Period IP.M. Peak Hour IProject ID ' 4-Wav ~t: NE 44th Str~t ,Street: 1-405 SB Ramps r.tolume 4 . and Site rh~r~, T R R Volume 0 223 65 260 263 0 %Thrus Left Lane 50 50 R R Volume 0 0 0 150 0 206 %Thrus Left Lane 50 50 L' L2 L1 L2 L 1 L2 L1 L2 i TR L T L R PHF 1.00 1.0.0. 1.0.0. 1.0.0. 1.0.0. Flow Rate .~ 260. 263 150 206 ,'k Heavy Vehicles a 0 0 a a INo. Lanes 1 2 0 2 I Group 3b 5 1 .tion, T 1. 0- ~ 4, Prop. Left-, "",. 0..0 1.0 0..0 1.0. 0.0 Prop. ~igm-' uros 0..2 0..0 0..0. 0..0 1.0. 1 Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0..0 0..0 0..0 0..0 0.0 I hLT·""L 2~ 0..2 0..2 0..2 0..2 0.2 ! ,RT-adj -0.6 -0..6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0..6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 -1.7 hadj. 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 ~, initial value ' ani I Service Til ne 3.20. 3.20. 3.20. 3.20. 3.2 0 • inttial 0..26 0.23 0..23 0..13 0. 8- hd, final value 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 <. final value 0.,46 0.,44 0.,43 0..25 0..30 ,"me,m 2.1 2.: 2.0. Service Time 3.8 I 3.8 I 3.8 I 3.8 I and Level of L1 L2 L 1 L2 L 1 L2 L 1 L2 ro. dN 538 510. 513 40.0. 456 Delay 13~ 13.50. 12.97 11.11 to.51 LOS B B B B B , Delay 13.73 13.23 10..77 LOS B B B ~y 12. ,a L()S B HCS2000™ Copyrisht © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kllE1.TMP 2/6/07 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Ii ,"VII II ISite III1UllllaLion C. V. Brown NE ' I lAb. r.n I" City of Date <.tOIU, i Year ~ Time Period IP.M. Peak Hour ID Ripley Drive • Street NE 44th Street i ,C i IStudy Period (hrs): 1.00 rvehicle Volumes and Arti. II' IMajor Street 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R ~olume 5 136 4 8 333 25 IPeak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Flow Rate, HFR 5 147 4 8 361 27 IPercent Heavy \/ch;rlc~ 0 --0 --- Type .. IRT Ch", 0 0 ~n~~ 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR LTR F nal 0 0 md Sou 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 7 0 8 17 0 7 '''Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 ~n"'I" Flow Rate, HFR. 7 0 8 18 0 7 t Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,I G@.de(%) 1 2 'Iarea N N Storage 0 0 RT "nc" 0 0 ~n~~ 0 1 0 0 1 0 r.nn~n'Hatioll LTR LTR -'nth a nd Level of EB WB ",u,,,,uuund Southbuu"u 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane "onfiguration L LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 5 8 15 25 C (m) (vph) 1182 1442 ~05 487 vic 0.1)0 0.01 0.02 0.05 95% queue length 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.16 Control Delay 8.1 7.5 11.1 12.8 LOS A A B B , Delay --11.1 12.8 ,LOS --B B HCS2000™ Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kA330.TMP 2/6/07 Two-Way Stop Control TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY '"'"VI II IAnalvst c. V. Brown ,Oi i ~Str~~lumes and Arliustments 1 I Flow Rate, HFR I Heavy \J1prii'3n Type RT r.h~, Lanes Configuration Signal Minor Street L 12 0.92 13 o 1 L 7 L 10 . Factor, PHF 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 Heavy a Grade (%) RT Chanl i a ue,ay. . I .,"nth anc Level of EB Lane r., , v (vph) C (m) (vph) vic 95% queue length I Delay LOS 1 L 13 1086 0.01 A Delay - LOS - 2 T 165 0.92 179 - 1 a 8 T a 0.92 a a 1 N a 1 LTR WB 4 LTR 10 1397 0.01 0.02 7.6 A - - md Site ,,".nion 111A1 i Year tie Ripley Study Period (hrs): 1.00 7 3 4 R L 10 10 0.92 0.92 10 10 - a a a a TR LTR 9 10 RL- 10 105 0.92 0.92 10 114- o a o a 8 LTR 20 480 0.04 0.13 12.8 B 12.8 B o 9 HCS2000™ Copyright 10 2000 University of Florida, All RJghu Reserved file1IC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kA330.TMP Page 1 of 1 INI City of 12008 , Drive 5 6 T R 405 44 0.92 0.92 440 47 - - o 1 0 a Southbound 11 12 T R a 25 0.92 0.92 o 27 o 0 2 N o 1 LTR """ --0 a rAb 10 11 12 LTR 141 378 0.37 1.76 20.2 C 20.2 c Version 4.1 2/6/07 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ~nalvst C, V, Brown Intersection NE 44th/Ripley LanelPan Ab, ~Qency/Co, Hanson Planning Wurisdiction City of Renton Date Performed 216/07 ~nalysis Year 2008 w/Seahawks & Project ~nalysis Time Period P.M. Peak Hour Project 10 HP-P2P EastlWest Street: NE 44th Street NorthlSouth Street: Ripley Lane/Pan Abode Drive Intersection Orientation; East-West Study Period (hrs); 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 12 168 10 10 412 44 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 13 182 10 10 447 47 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 --0 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 10 0 10 105 0 25 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 0 10 114 0 27 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade ('!o) 1 2 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service lAPP roach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LTR LTR LTR (vph) 13 10 20 141 C (m) (vph) 1080 1394 473 373 Ie 0.01 0,01 0.04 0,38 95% queue length 0.04 0.02 0.13 1.80 Control Delay 8.4 7.6 12.9 20.5 LOS A A B C Approach Delay --12.9 20.5 Approach LOS --B C HCS2000™ Copynght 10 2000 Univer51ty of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vt;rsion 4.1 file:lIC;\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kA330,TMP 2/6/07 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY IG""t"dll,lu,,".:uion Site IIIIu","clLion l-. V. Brown I Site ~h.BIvd r.n :ion Citv of Date (fOIUI , Year 2008 & Time P~';nrl IP.M. Peak Hour tiD Site : Street ;outh Lake Blvd. linter C on: IStudy Period (hrsF 1.00 !Vehicle Volumesand .drti, IMajor Street Northbound Southbound 1 2 3 4 5 -6 L T R L T R rvolume 0 187 1 7 440 0 IPeal . Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 ~n",lv Flow Rate, HFR 0 203 1 7 478 0 IPercent Heavy Vehicles 0 ---0 -- IMedian Type IRT Channelized 0 0 M~~ 0 1 0 0 1 -0 '';~n TR LT Upstream Si~nal 0 0 IMinor Street "nn 7 8 9 10 11 -12 L T R L T -R \Inl"m~ 1 0 3 0 0 -0 IPeal . Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0~92 Flow Rate, HFR 1 0 3 0 0 0 . Heavy I, I 0 0 0 0 0 -0 • Grade (%) 3 0 ,a,eu N N 0 0 RT",,,,.,, ."lized 0 0 _anes 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~, ~ LR I I cnnth a Level of Service ~" .. " udch NB_ SB " und md IL 1 4 7 -8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 7 4 C (m) (vph) 1380 665 vic 0.01 0.01 95% queue length 0.02 0.02 '-"""'" Delay 7.6 10.4 LOS A B Approach Delay --10.4 ~"". ,ch LOS --B HCS2000™ QJpyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 file:llC\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k3 50. TMP 2/6/07 , , • 3 • l , , o , o • o " • .., < • , ~ ~ ~ , , ~ , ~ , , ~ , Crash Record System J8 Technology Inc. Corridor: Corridor Report City of Renton Monday, January 08, 2007 LAKE WASH BLVD N from THIRTY THIRD ST. N to RIPLEY LN N Report Period: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 to Monday, July 31, 2006 SEGMENT 2006 2005 At THIRTY THIRD ST. N 0 0 Between THIRTY THIRD ST. N and BURNETT AVE N 1 0 -----. At BURNETT AVE N 0 0 Between BURNETT AVE N and THIRTY SIXTH ST. N 0 0 -. At THIRTY SIXTH ST. N 0 0 -,-,---. f--. . Between THIRTY SIXTH ST. N and THIRTY SEVENTH ST. N 0 0 --------_ .. At THIRTY SEVENTH ST. N 0 0 . Between THIRTY SEVENTH ST. N and THIRTY EIGHT ST. N 0 0 --_ .. At THIRTY EIGHT ST. N 0 0 Between THIRTY EIGHT ST. N and FORTIETH ST. N 0 0 At FORTIETH ST. N 0 0 . ---- Between FORTIETH ST. N and RIPLEY LN N 0 a At RIPLEY LN N a 0 TOTALS 1 0 -----.---. Page 3 --_. -_._- 2004 OTHERS TOTALS . __ . ~-----_ .. _-- 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 1 p , , , , , , • , • e .. , , -; -; , , " , o , , " , Crash Recnrd System JB Techn%pIne Corridor Report City of Renton Monday, January 08, 2007 Corridor: LAKE WASH BLVD N from THIRTY TIllRD ST. N to RIPLEY LN N Report Period: Wednesday, January 01,2003 to Monday, July 31, 2006 SEGMENT FATALS INJURIES At THIRTY THIRD ST. N 0/0 010 Between THIRTY THIRD ST. N and BURNETT AVE N 0/0 1/5 At BURNETT AVE N 0/0 0/0 Between BURNETT AVE N and THIRTY SIXTH ST. N 010 0/0 - At THIRTY SIXTH ST. N 0/0 010 Between THIRTY SIXTH ST. N and THIRTY SEVENTH ST. N 0/0 0/0 At THIRTY SEVENTH ST. N 0/0 0/0 Between THIRTY SEVENTH ST. N and THIRTY EIGHT ST. N 0/0 0/0 --~-,---"-~ At THIRTY EIGHT ST. N 0/0 0/0 Between THIRTY EIGHT ST. N and FORTIETH ST. N 0/0 0/0 At FORTIETH ST. N 0/0 0/0 ------- Between FORTIETH ST. N and RIPLEY LN N 0/0 010 1----- At RIPLEY LN N 0/0 0/0 TOTALS 0/0 1/5 Page 2 --- PD~ TOTALS a 0 _.-------.. -.. ---- 0 1 0 a a 0 a 0 a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 .- 0 a j 0 0 --~~-. 0 1 I ---I Crash Record System JB Technology Inc. • , , , Corridor Report City of Renton Monday, January 08, 2007 Corridor: LAKE WASH BLVD N from THIRTY THIRD ST. N to RIPLEY LN N Report Period: Wednesday, January 01,2003 to Monday, July 31, 2006 Between TlllRTY THIRD ST. N and BURNETT AVE N Case Number Report Day Of Crash Number Week Date Crash Time Location Type of Crash < 5 Between THIRTY THIRD ST. N and BURNETT AVE N 3 , a < 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 " ~ .., < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 " '" , '" " , -< " Case Nwnber Report Day Of Crash Number Week Date Crash Time Location Type of Crash 06-0562 0000000 Fri 0612312006 12:19 PM LAKE WASH BLVD N, 530 ft. South ofBURNETIRear End Page' Direction Severity Vehicle INehilce 2 Fat Inj PDO Dim;tion Severity Vehicle INehilce 2 Fa' Inj PDO 58 Thru I S8 Thru 5 Tot Veh Tot Veh 3 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting & Planning 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mount Vernon W A 98274 Re: Proposed Fawcett Plat Tramc Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Hanson: Christopher Brown f!5 Associales 9688 Qainier Ave. 6. &allle. WA 98118-5981 7'22-1910 fax February 7'h, 2007 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN -9 2008 RECEIVED I am enclosing three copies of the referenced tramc impact analysis for your review, use and files. As you will see in the Conclusion section there are no significant direct site related traffic impacts resulting from the development. There is one intersection that will be operating at a very low level of service, NE 44th Street at the 1-405 SB ramps. By 2008 with the Seahawk's project in full operation it will be at LOS T. But, since this project does not change the LOS there is no responsibility for mitigating that low level. We have noted in the study, however, that by making this a 4-way STOP it will improve to LOS' B'. But, as a WSDOT intersection they can make their own assessments. There are no entering sight distance (ESD) issues nor does a review of the 3-year accident data along Lake Washington Boulevard from Burnett Avenue to Ripley Lane suggest any hazard potential. Indeed, the absence of any accidents at all implies just the opposite. The tramc mitigation fee, based on the standard traffic mitigation rate of $75 per added average daily trip (ADT), is $8,625. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Yours truly, C V Brown, P.E. encl. Trame Engineers f!5 Transportation Planners CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE APPLICATION NO(S): APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: (M ITIGATED) DEVElOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM Volarehigh Land Development, LLC JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval, Environmental (SEPA) Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located within the Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling unit per acre zone, into 13 lots. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family residences. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,167 square feet to 15,173 square feel. Two streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 42XX Lake Washington Blvd N (parcel no. 322405-9081) The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on November 14, 2007. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8·110.8. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: AJeJwJt7 _~ Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Planning/Building/Public Works T$r)!Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services October 31, 2007 October 22, 2007 l \)! ,;oJ CJ 7 Date HANSON CONSULTING May 23, 2008 City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton W A. 98057 360-422-5056 Subject: Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat application Dear Development Services Staff: DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON JUN -9 2008 RECEIVED This letter outlines the application for the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat in the vicinity of the 4100 block of Lake Washington Blvd N, Renton WA. The proposal is to subdivide one parcel totaling 5.5 acres into 13 residential lots. Nearly the same subdivision was submitted and reviewed under application LUA07-039. The current zoning of the site and surrounding area is R -8. The property fronts on Lake Washington Blvd on the west and on N 40th Street on the south. Access for lots 1 thru 12 will be from a newly constructed City street with turn-around within the plat. Access for lot 13 will be via a private drive off ofN 40th ST May Creek runs along the northerly property line of the parcel. A 50 foot buffer is proposed rather than the 25 foot buffer required by the existing Shoreline regulations. No construction is anticipated near May Creek. Three wetlands are located on the site. The wetland report attached classifies wetland # I and #2 as category 3 wetlands requiring a 25 foot buffer which is provided. Wetland #3 is classified as a category 2 wetland, requiring a 50 foot buffer, which is also provided. Under the previous application peer review was requested and provided. Wetland #2 was increased in size and a revised wetland mitigation plan was submitted and approved. We have combined the wetland report in one document for submittal with this application. No changes have been made to the plan previously approved. A Shoreline management is also being requested since a small portion of the work is within 200 feet of May Creek. During the review of the previous application city staff was concerned about the flood elevation of May Creek. At this time the FEMA maps show that no portion of the developed lots are within the 100 year flood zone. The staff was concerned that this could change and have asked that an additional flood study be performed prior to the Construction Permit. We have revised the grading plan to show that in the event that it is proven that the flood elevation is somewhat higher, the lots can and will be modified in elevation to ensure that the houses are outside the potential 100 year flood elevation. A street modification is being requested to allow a 42 foot right of way for the new street. The frontage along Lake Washington Blvd will be improved to City standards in the area of the developed lots. A City sanitary sewer is located within Lake Washington Blvd to the south of the property but it is at such an elevation that it will not serve the development. Metro has a main adjacent to Lake Washington Blvd that will provide sanitary sewer service. A 12 inch water main will be extended along the frontage of Lake Washington Blvd. The City will pay for the over-sizing in this area. An 8 inch line will be constructed within the new street right of way. Storm water from the site will be collected from the new street, treated and released into the wetland buffer. Storm water from individual houses will be dispersed along the rear lots adjoining the buffer areas. The construction of the street and utilities will be by a balance of cut and fill. Very little material will be imported or exported from the site other than some structural material for the street and utility bedding. A retaining wall will be constructed along the west and north property line oflot I and 2 to allow for the street construction. The existing parcel totals 5.53 acres in size. 12 additional lots will be created. The lots will be more than the minimum of 4500 square feet. The density allowed is eight units per net acre. The proposed density is 4.9 units per net acre for this application subdividing the existing parcel into a total of 13 lots and I open Space tract. (See Density Worksheet) The majority of the upland area of the site is wooded. No clearing will take place within the buffers or steep slope areas. Areas for the new street and individual building sites will be cleared as shown on the drawings. The general soil type in the area has been identified as "Alderwood Series", "Indianola loamy fine sand", and "Norma sandy loam" soils. Portions of the site contain regulated and protected slopes. Those areas have been evaluated by Bergquist Engineering and their report is attached with the application. (See wetlands and Geo-tech reports) A Cultural Resources Review has been completed and is part of the application materials. The review indicates that there is a moderate to high probability to contact culturai resources based on the natural setting and proximity to a Native American village site. A Cultural Resources Assessment is being proposed to take place at the beginning of construction on the site. (See Environmental Checklist for details) We appreciate the city's review and approval of this application for a 13 lot subdivision. If you have any questions please contact me at 360-422-5056. Si~ely, // ~d~{ /ja~ ....... · -- / James C. Hanson HANSON CONSULTING May 23, 2008 City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton W A. 98057 360-422-5056 DEVELOPMENT pl{~ING CITY OF RIO.NT JUN -92008 RECEIVEO Subject: Lake Washinb'lon View Estates, Shoreline Permit application Dear Development Services Staff: This letter supplements the application for the Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat to discuss the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the project. The following are the three items required when projects are within 200 feet of May Creek: • The closest construction to the ordinary high water mark of May Creek is a bio- filtration swale which is outside the proposed 50 foot buffer. A 25 foot buffer is required by the City's Shoreline regulations but a 50 foot buffer is being proposed. No work is anticipated within the buffer other than enhancement. • The May Creek channel is a man made channel. The area around the channel has been disturbed in the past. At this time the vegetation is described as "unevenly aged deciduous forest" by the stream study attached to the application for the plat. • Eight lots are within the 200 foot shoreline area. The City allows a 30 foot maximum height for buildings in this zone. It is unlikely that any of the future houses will exceed 35 feet above the average grade. We appreciate the city's review and approval of this application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. If you have any questions please contact me at 360- 422-5056. Sincerely, James C. Hanson ~~IIIII.J'~ft • .... ' .. "l1li1' .... ~,Y-I",,~ Bergq~ist Engineering Services 27207 8th Avenue S P.O. Box 1 3309 Des Moines, Washington 98198 Des Moines, Washington 981 98 Phone: 253.941.9399, Fax: 253.941.9499, e-mail: RBergqu510@aol.com Mr. Dave Pany Heritage Homes, Inc. 4325 SW 323'" Street Federal Way, Washington 98023 March 19,2007 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services Preliminary Site Evaluation of 5.53-Acre Site Lake Washington View Estates Portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E, Willamette Meridian Renton, Washington King County Tax Parcel Number: 3224059081 BES Project Number: 200703, Report 1 Dear Mr. Parry: DEVI~W~~~WE~tJl\NG JUN - 9 2008 RECEIVED This report presents the results of ou(-p;e~~:~~geotechnical evaluation for the proposed residential development on approiitmetely--S:53 acres of land in the northwest quarter of Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E, of the Willamette Meridian as shown on the Vicinity Map on page A 1 of this report. Mr. Parry authorized our work on this project by signing and returning a copy of BES Proposal Number 1372006 on January 15, 2007. The preliminary geotechnical evaluation was performed by Bergquist Engineering Services (BES) to provide information regarding: • topographic features on the site, • geologic setting of the site, • readily identifiable geotechnical constraints to the project, • preliminary foundation, and earthwork recommendations. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION Lake Washington View Estates Renton, Washington Project Number: 200703, Report 1 March 19, 2007 The scope of services included: a reconnaissance of the project site and surrounding area by Richard Bergquist, P.E., principal geotechnical engineer; a review of readily available geologic and soil survey maps and literature; and review of a topographic survey prepared by Hansen Surveying and dated November 20, 2006. During the field reconnaissance, probes with a one-half-inch diameter steel T -probe were made to estimate the consistency and relative density of the near-surface soils. / BES personnel gathered the information presented in this report for(preliminary geotechnical engineering purposes only. This site characterization was not int~lldea to provide fina I design recommendations nor was it to address the presence or likelihood of contamination on or around the site. Specialized methods and procedures, which were not a part of this scope of services, are required for adequate final geotechnical design recommendations and environmental site assessment. Prior to final deSign, (In odequate. subsurface exploration should be performed to determine the actual soil conditions at the site. According to Mr. Jim Hanson of Hanson Consulting, the property will be divided into 13, individual, single-family, residential lots. As shown on the attached Site Plan, Lots 1 through 12 are located in the westem third of the property and Lot 13 is located near the southeast comer of the property. Access to the contiguous lots, Lots 1 through 12, will be provided from Lake Washington Boulevard N. Access to the Lot 13 will be from the comer of Meadow Avenue Nand N 40th Street. Relatively deep cuts will be required to provide access from Washington Boulevard. Minimal cuts will be required to access Lot 13. Where possible, it is anticipated that rock- facings (rockeries) will be used to protect the required cuts. Design plans for the residential structures were not available at the time this report was prepared, therefore, we assume that the buildings will be two to three stories in height. The structures will be wood-framed and supported on cast-in-place concrete foundations. The property is bounded on the west by Lake Washington Boulevard N., May Creek to the north, Interstate 405 to the east, and residential properties to the south. Lots 1 through 5 will border a two-story condominium complex immediately to the south. Lots 5 through 7 will Bergquist Engineering Services Page 2 of 7 Lake Washington View Estates Renton, Washington Project Number: 200703, Report 1 March 19, 2007 border a wetland buffer along their eastem property line. Lots 7 through 9 will border a 50- foot stream buffer to the north. Lots 10, 11, and 12 will border a wetland buffer to the north. Lot 1 3 borders a steep slope to the east and north, a wetlands buffer to the northwest, and new residential construction to the south and southwest. Overall, the ground surface of the property slopes down from south to north towards Moy Creek. In the westem portion of the site, which will be developed into Lots 1 through 12, the high elevation of 62 feet MSL is along the south property line. The ground surface declines initially at about 16 percent for a horizontal distance of about 90 feet then the gradient flattens slightly to about 1 1 percent for a horizontal distance of about 92 feet. The ground surface then steepens to about 24 percent for a distance of about 42 feet beyond which, the ground surface nearly flattens to a slope of about 2 percent over a horizontal distance of about 110 feet to the edge of May Creek. There are numerous south to north rills and gulleys in this portion of the site that indicate significant surface runoff towards the creek. The ground surface at Lot 1 3 slopes down from a high elevation of about 1 00 feet MSL at the south side of the buildable portion of the site to a low elevation of about 72 feet MSL at the north boundary of the site. The ground surface to the north, beyond the property line steepens to about 54 percent down to May Creek. The entire site is sparsely covered with primarily second and third growth alder and maple trees with an occasional large cedar tree. The ground cover consists primarily of dense blackberry bushes. kcording to Sheet Number 5 of the So,lSuf\oev of King CounfyAroa, Washington, published by the United S101es DefXlrtment of Agriculture, the near-surface soils (upper 30 inches) at the site consist of the Alderwood series AgC, which classify as "gravelly sandy loam" according to the USDA Textural Classification System. AgC soils classify as "SAND-SILT (SM) with gravel" according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and have a reported 20 to 30 percent, respectively fXlssin9 the Number 200 sieve. The Puget Sound region has been subjected to erosion and deposition by glacial processes during the last one million years. The most recent glaciation, referred to as the Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation, ended about 11,500 years ago. Vashon glaCial Bergquist Engineering Services Page 3 of 7 Lake Washington View Estates Renton, Washington Project Number: 200703, Report 1 March 19, 2007 processes formed area landforms. According to the 2002 Geologic Map of King County. Washington comp/Jed by Derek 8. Booth, Ralph A. Haugerud and HI 8. Socket, the soils an the upper elevations of the site are Quaternary recessional outwash (Qvr). Qvr soils are characteristically described as "Stratified sand and gravel moderately to well sorted and well bedded silty sand to silty clay." Based on observations at the site, the exposed soils on the slope appear to be GRAVEL-SANO-SILT (GM), occasional cobble according to the Unified Soil Classification System. The upper one to three feet of soil on the site are relatively loose based on probes with a one-half-inch diameter steel T -probe. The underlying soils are medium dense to dense and they feel granular with the probe. The soils at the lower elevations of the site along May Creek are alluvial deposits from the meandering of the creek. The uppermost soils are medium dense based on probes. Since about 1853, coal has been mined in Washington. Prior to around 1970, nearly all coal came from underground mines. Since the early 1900s, state law required mine operators to submit detailed plans of all underground coal operations on an annual basis. About 1,100 individual maps representing about 230 mines comprise the Washington State coal mine map collection. Obviously not mapped, are the locations of illegal or unreported mines and mines or explorations completed prior to the requirements for mapping. Histarically, based an review of the available coalmine maps at the Department of Natural Resources in Olympia, Washington, there has been ex1ensive mining far to the east of the project site. There are; however, no mapped mines beneath the subject property according to the King County records. The Puget Sound area is seismically active. Low magnitude earthquakes occur nearly every year within a 50-mile radius of the site. On April 13, 1949, the Olympia area experienced an earthquake having a Richter Magnitude 7.1 and, on February 28, 2001, a Richter Magnitude 6.8 earthquake occurred near the same location. On April 29.1965, a Richter Magnitude 6.5 earthquake occurred between Seattle and Tacoma (Rogers, Walsh, Kockelman and Priest, 1991). Recent studies by Brian Atwater (1987) conclude that much larger (perhaps larger than magnitude 8) subduction-zone earthquakes occur periodically along the Washington Coast; the last subduction-zone earthquake occurred approximately 300 years ago. The site is in seismic design category 01 based on the probabilistic ground motion Bergquist Engineering Services Page 4 of 7 Lake Washington View Estates Renton, Washington Project Number: 200703, Report 1 March 19,2007 values predicted by the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program and the 2003 Intemational Residenfial Code. Based on this preliminary geotechnical evaluafion of the property it appears that the site can be developed if the improvements are kept out of or above the potential flood plain of May Creek. A::cording to the geologic review and visual observations at the site, it is our opinion that conventional spread footing foundations will likely be suitable for support of the proposed structures if they are placed on either the native, undisturbed, medium dense to dense recessional soils or on suitable, imported, and properly compacted granularfill. Typically, allowable bearing capacities of these soils are at least 2,000 psf with settlements estimated to be less than one-inch. All exterior footings shall be placed at least 18 inches below grade for frost protection. Minimum widths of 24 inches for individual column footings and 18 inches for continuous wall footings are generally recommended. Any SILT-rich, SM soil at the site may be moisture sensitive; therefore, major earthwork at this site would best be performed during the dry, summer months of the year. These soils may not be suitable for use as structural fill or structural backfill. Any native, SILT-lean (GP or Sp) soils are probably not moisture sensitive and may be used for structural fill or structural backfill. Surface water runoff will need to be managed during construction and during the entire life of the project. Drainage behind retaining walls and perimeter footing drains will need to be instolled and they will need to be directed to suitable discharge points. No collected water shall be allowed to discharge on to any of the steep slopes at this site. The site soils are classified as highly erodable, therefore, during the earthwork and construction phases, great care must be exercised to control the migration of soils off the site. This can be accomplished with properly placed and installed silt fences, straw bales, and temporary sediment ponds. All soil stockpiles will need to be covered with heavy plastic sheeting and placed far from declining slopes and foundation and utility excavations. According to Chapter 296-1 55, Part N of the Safety Standards for Construction Work in the State of Washington, most of the site soils classify as Type C. Therefore, side slopes of excavations deeper than four (4) feet should be no steeper than one and one-half (1.5) horizontal to one (1) vertical (1.5H: 1 V). If the dimensions of the site prevent the use of Bergquist Engineering Services Page 5 of 7 Lake Washington View Estates Renton, Washington Project Number: 200703, Report 1 March 19,2007 maximum slopes of 1.5H: 1 V, the slopes must be stabilized or shored to facilitate safe excavations. A roughly 10-foot deep cut will be required in the southwest comer of the site to provide access from Lake Washington Boulevard and to provide relatively level building pads. The cut face along the south boundary will need to be retained with a retaining structure which may be either; a cast-in-place, concrete retaining wall; a soldier pile and lagging wall; a soil-nailed wall; or other proprietary system depending upon the geometry of the cut and the engineering properties of the underlying soils. Rock facings (rockery walls) are being used to protect near-vertical cuts on the adjacent property south of this project properly; however, they are used on less critical slopes that are relative~, easily accessible for repair and maintenance. The final choice of the system to retain or protect the cut slopes should be made after an appropriate subsurface exploration and engineering ana~is is completed. The placement of a single-family residence on Lot 13 in the southeast comer of the property appears to be feasible even with a 25-foot buffer from the steep slope and a 15-foot building setback. The 25-foot buffer may be reduced bosed on an appropriate subsurface exploration and slope stability analysis. If the building is snuggled into the slope on the south side of the lot, the uphill portions of the foundation could be designed as a retaining wall to maximum the clearance between the foundation and the steep slope to the north and east. The preliminary recommendations presented in this report are not based on subsurface explaration at the project site and should be verified before final design and construction. Final geotechnical engineering recommendations shall be based on an adequate subsurface exploration program, which may include borings and or test pits. )ibn addition, any successful construction project relies on adequate observation and testing af construction materials and procedures by the geotechnical engineer or his qualified representative. At a minimum, the testing program should include: • Observation and review of site clearing and review of all foundation excavations to evaluate whether actual conditions are consistent with those encountered during exploration. Bergquist Engineering Services Page 6 of 7 Lake Washington View Estates Renton, Washington Project Number: 200703, Report 1 March 19,2007 • Full-time observation and testing of placement and compaction of all fill and backfill materials to evaluate compliance with specifications. • Field inspection and laboratory testing of materials and field inspection of methods as required by the appropriate Building Code. Typically, this includes inspection of placement of reinforcing steel; inspection and testing of portland cement concrete to evaluate compliance with specifications regarding slump, temperature, air content, and strength. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. I EXPIRES: July 2008 Attachmen1s: Al A2 Vicinity Map Site Plan Bergquist Engineering Services Sincerely, Bergquist Engineering Services Richard A. Bergquist, P.E. Principal Page 7 of 7 'Y---~I-~ L __ J <.l' ,. -Y " • " ) ~' '" Proiect Name: Lake Washington View Estates Locotion: Portion of Gov't Lot 1, Section 32, Twp. 24 N, Rge. 5 E, WM Date: March 2007 .' , / ~ VICINITY MAP For: Heritage Homes, Inc. Bergquist Engineering Services BES Proiect Number: 200703-1 Al LOTS 1 IProiect Name: Lake Washington Estates Portion of Gov't Lot" on 32, T wp. 24 N, Rge. 5 E, March 2007 N SITE PLAN Bergquist Engineering Services Of' ...... y eRE£)( """'" For: Heritage Homes, Inc. BES Proiect No: 200703-1 .-.. ~ Of' ...... y CREEK """'" :... >: • , City of Renton STAFF REPORT Department of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DA TE Project Name: Owner: Applicant: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Description: Project Location: Exist. Bldg. Area gsf: Site Area: RECOMMENDA TlON: Project Location Map October 22, 2007 Lake Washington View Estates Preliminary Plat The Rob-Clarissa Partnership & Clarissa M. Fawcett, PO Box 402, Fall City, WA 98024 Volarehigh Land Development, LLC, PO Box 58877, Renton, WA 98055 Jim Hanson, Hanson Consulting, 17446 Mallard Cove Ln, Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 LUA-07-039, PP, ECF, SM Jill K. Ding, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval, Environmental (SEPA) Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the subdivision of a 241,053 square foot (5.53 acre) parcel located within the Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling unit per acre zone, into 13 lots. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family residences. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,167 square feet to 15,173 square feet. Two streams (including May Creek, a shoreline of the state), 3 wetlands, and steep slopes are located on the project site. Access to proposed lots 1-12 would be provided via a new street off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and access to lot 13 would be provided via a driveway off of Meadow Avenue N. (Project Description continued on next page). 42XX Lake Washington Blvd N (parcel no. 322405-9081) N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area: N/A 241,053 sq. ft. (5.5-acres) Total Building Area gsf: N/A Staff recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of-Mitigated (DNS-M). ercrpCLakeWashingtonViewEstates.doc City of Renton PIBlPW Department E ?nmental Review Committee Staff Report LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA T L' E,;;:L;;/;;:M;;;IN;:;A;;;R~Y,.;P.:;L;;;A:,;,T======~ LUA07-039, PP, ECF, SM REPORT OF October 22. 2007 Page 2 of 9 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (CONT.) The proposal would result in the creation of 13 lots and one open space tract (Tract A). The project site is located east of Lake Washington Blvd N between N 40'h Street and N 44'h Street and is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) dwelling units per acre. The proposed lots would range in size from 5,167 to 15,173 square feel. A wetland report, stream study, and geotechnical report were submitted with the project application. The wetland report identified 3 wetlands (Wetlands 1, 2, and 3). Wetland 1 is a 6,093 square foot category 3 wetland, Wetland 2 is a 3,831 square foot category 3 wetland, and Wetland 3 is a 23,756 square foot category 2 wetland. Wetlands 2 and 3 are connected via a class 4 stream. The stream study identified a class I stream (May Creek), which flows along the north property line and is also identified as a Shoreline of the State. The geotechnical report identified two protected slope areas on the east portion of the project site. All of the critical areas located on-site would be located within Tract A. The grading would be limited to the construction of the proposed street and utilities. A balance of on-site grading and fill is proposed. Required bedding for utilities would be imported. Access to proposed Lots 1-12 would be provided via a new public road off of Lake Washington Blvd N, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Access to proposed Lot 13 would be provided via a pipestem off of N 40'h Street. B. RECOMMENDA TlON Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINA TION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. C. MITIGA TlON MEASURES DETERMINA TlON OF XX NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGA TED. XX Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services, dated March 19, 2007. 2. Major earthwork on-site shall be conducted during the dry, summer months of the year. 3. The construction of a residence on proposed Lot 13 shall maintain a 25-foot buffer from the protected slope and a 15-foot building setback from the edge of the buffer, unless based on appropriate subsurface exploration and slope stability analysis a geotechnical engineer concludes that the 25-foot buffer may be reduced. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the 2005 Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 5. The buffer required from the Ordinary High Water Mark of May Creek shall be 50 feel. ercrpt_LakeWashjngtonViewEstates.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA REPORT OF October 22, 2007 PRELIMINARY PLA T onmental Review Committee Staff Report LUA07-039, PP, ECF, SM Page 3019 6. The storm drainage system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 7, The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,899,88. 8. Work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation shall be contacted at (360) 586-3065 if any archeological artifacts are discovered during earthwork activities. 9, The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 for each new net daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. It is antiCipated that the proposed project would result in the payment of $9,330.75. 10. The applicant shall pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488,00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. The fee is estimated at $6,344. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the fol/owing project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Earth With the project application, the applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services, dated March 19, 2007, According to the report the site topography slopes down to the north at an average grade of 13 percent. A slope with a grade in excess of 40 percent is located on the east portion of the project site (abutting Lot 13) and meets the City's criteria for classification as a Protected Slope. No development is proposed on the Protected Slope area. Vegetation on the project site consists primarily of alder trees, maple trees, a few cedar trees, and black berries, The information provided by the applicant indicates that soils on-site consist of Alderwood series (AgC) gravelly sandy loam. The 2002 Geologic Map of King County identifies the soils on the upper elevations of the site as Quaternary recessional outwash (Qvr), The applicant indicates that grading on-site would be limited to the construction of the new public-right-of- way and utilities that would be required for the plat. A balance of on-site grading and fill is proposed. Required bedding for utilities would be imported. The geotechnical report indicates that an approximately 10-foot deep cut would be required on the southwest corner of the site to provide access from Lake Washington Blvd and to provide relatively level building pads, The report recommends that the selection of an appropriate retention system for the cut be made after subsurface exploration and an engineering analysis is completed. The report concludes that the proposed development of the site appears feasible and provided recommendations for foundations, drainage, erosion control, retaining walls, and a subsurface exploration of the site including borings and/or test pits, It is recommended that due to the soils present on-site that major earthwork be accomplished during the dry, summer months of the year. The report also recommends a 25-foot buffer from the Protected Slope area for the residence proposed on Lot 13 and a 15-foot building setback from the edge of the buffer. The buffer may be reduced based on an appropriate subsurface exploration and stability analysis. Due to the potential for impacts that could occur during construction, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that construction of the project be required to comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services, dated March 19, 2007 that was submitted with the project application. Staff also recommends that major earthwork on-site be conducted during the dry, summer months of the year. ercrpt _ LakeWas hin glon ViewE stales.doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA 1 <- REPORT OF October 22, 2007 'ELIMINARY PLA T f nnmental Review CammiNee Staff Report LUA07-039, PP, ECF, SM , Page 4 of 9 Due to the potential impacts that the construction of a single family residence on proposed Lot 13 could have on the stability of the abutting protected slope, staff recommends that a 25-foot buffer be maintained from the protected slope and that a 15-foot building setback be maintained from the edge of the buffer, unless based on appropriate subsurface exploration and slope stability analysis a geotechnical engineer concludes that the 25-foot buffer may be reduced. Due to the potential for erosion to occur from the subject site, staff recommends a mitigation measure that requires the applicant to comply with the Department of Ecology's EroSion and Sediment Control Requirements as outlined in Volume II of the 2005 Stormwater Management Manual. Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services, dated March 19, 2007. 2. Major earthwork on-site shall be conducted during the dry, summer months of the year. 3. The construction of a residence on proposed Lot 13 shall maintain a 25-foot buffer from the protected slope and a 15-foot building setback from the edge of the buffer, unless based on appropriate subsurface exploration and slope stability analysis a geotechnical engineer concludes that the 25-foot buffer may be reduced. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's ErOSion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the most current Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, 2005 Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual 2. Water -Wetlands/Streams A Wetland Assessment prepared by Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC, dated March 20, 2007 and a Wildlife Habitat Assessment and Stream Review prepared by Almann Oliver Associates, LLC, dated March 26, 2007 were submitted with the project application. The submitted reports identified 3 wetlands on the project site, and a Class 1 stream (May Creek). Wetland 1 was identified as a 6,093 square foot Category 3 wetland, Wetland 2 was identified as a 3,831 square foot Category 3 wetland, and Wetland 3 was identified as a 23,756 square foot Category 2 wetland. A Class 1 stream requires a 25-foot buffer, a Category 2 wetland requires a 50-foot buffer, and a Category 3 wetland requires a 25-foot buffer. Due to discrepancies between the submitted reports and previous reports that were submitted with previous pre- application materials staff required that secondary review be conducted by a biologist from the City's list of approved wetland/stream consultants. The applicant selected Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. to conduct the secondary review. A secondary review letter dated May 17, 2007 and a follow up email dated June 6, 2007 were submitted to the City by Herrera. Herrera concurred with the classification of wetlands 1-3 and May Creek. Herrera also reviewed the boundaries of the wetlands as delineated by Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants and concurred with the flagged boundaries, with the exception of two areas. One of the areas was the northwest corner of Wetland 3, which extended approximately 35 feet west of the previously delineated wetland edge. The other area was the southwest corner of Wetland 2, which extended approximately 30 feet to the west of the previously delineated wetland edge. In addition, a Class 4 stream was identified connecting Wetlands 2 and 3. Additional streams and drainages were identified within the wetland areas, however as these stream and their associated buffers were entirely contained within the wetlands and their associated buffers delineation and classification of these streams was not required, A revised wetland assessment was submitted by Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, dated September 18, 2007. The revised assessment included a revised delineation, a discussion of the Class 4 stream connecting Wetlands 2 and 3, and an enhancement plan for the 25-foot buffers of Wetlands 1 and 2. ercrpt_LakeWashingtonViewEstates.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA REPORT OF Odober 22, 2007 PRELIMINARY PLA T onmenlai Review Committee Staff Report LUA07-039, PP, ECF, SM Page 5 of 9 No impacts are proposed to the onsite wetlands, streams, or their associated buffer areas. Staff has concerns that the required 25-foot buffer from the Class 1 stream (May Creek) would not adequately protect the streams habitat functions from the proposed plat. The City Council has adopted an updated Shoreline Master Program, which would impose a 100-foot buffer from the edge of Class 1 water, however the Department of Ecology has not approved the new regulations, therefore the City is operating under the previous Shoreline Master Program. To provide better protection to May Creek, staff recommends a mitigation measure increasing the buffer required from May Creek to 50 feet. Mitigation Measures: The buffer required from the Ordinary High Water Mark of May Creek shall be 50 feet. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Shoreline Master Program 3. Water -Stormwater A Technical Information Report prepared by Site Development Associates, LLC, dated March 23 2007 was submitted with the application materials. According to the report the existing drainage currently discharges to May Creek. The proposed method of drainage control as indicated by the storm drainage report would be direct discharge into May Creek. The City's Plan Review Section has reviewed the submitted drainage information and has noted that May Creek is not an approved water body for direct discharge. A modification request has been submitted by the applicant to direct discharge the stormwater to May Creek, the request is currently being reviewed by the Surface Water Department. The City's Plan Review Section has reviewed the submitted drainage report. Due to potential downstream drainage problems, staff recommends a mitigation measure that would require the project to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Mitigation: The storm drainage system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, King County Surface Water Design Manual 4. Vegetation Vegetation on the project site consists primarily of alder trees, maple trees, a few cedar trees, and blackberry bushes. The applicant proposes to remove vegetation from the location proposed for the new public street and the areas required for utility installation. A total of 63 trees are located on the project site outside of a critical area or its buffer. Per a Determination issued by the Development Services Director, a total of 25 percent of existing trees located outside of critical areas and their buffer are required to be retained or replaced on-site. Based on a total of 63 trees that are located on-site, a total of 16 trees are required to be either retained or replaced. The replacement trees shall be a minimum 2-inch caliper tree. Mitigation: No further mitigation is recommended Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 5. Recreation The proposal does not provide on-site recreation areas for future residents of the proposed plat. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future demand on existing City parks and recreational facilities and programs. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring that the applicant pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single-family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,899.88 (13 new lots x $530.76 = $6,899.88) and is payable prior to the recording of the final plat. Mitigation: The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot. The fee is estimated at $6,899.88. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations ercrpl_LakeWashingtonViewEstates.doc E onmental Review Committee Staff fleport City of Renton PIBlPW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA 1L REPORT OF October 22, 2007 ;;;EL;;;I;,;;M:;;,IN;;,A;;,R;,;Y",;P.,;L;;,A;,;T======= . LUA07·039. PP. ECF. SM Page 60f9 6. Historic and Cultural Preservation A Cultural Resources Review. prepared by Northwest Archaeological Associates. Inc .• dated March 19. 2007 was submitted with the project application. The submitted report concludes that the project site has a moderate to high probability for pre-contact cultural resources based on the natural setting and proximity to a Native American village site. The highest probability would be on the western half of the project site due to the gentle slope and proximity to Lake Washington. It is not anticipated that the site was utilized by Native Americans for long-term habitation. due to the slopes that are present. Activity areas could be represented by concentrations of fire-modified rock and charcoal-stained sediments. Isolated artifacts. or concentration of artifacts could also be present. The report also concludes that the project site has a high probability for historic cultural resources based on early settlement and historic maps showing buildings within and adjacent to the parcel. Expectations for historic cultural resources within the project parcel include refuse pits and privy middens (abandoned outhouses). These features can contain historic artifact assemblages that are considered significant under Federal criteria and can contribute to the understanding of historic settlement in the region. Due to the level of probability for both pre-contact and historic cultural resources. the report recommends that a cultural resources assessment be conducted prior to project construction. Staff recommends a mitigation measure reqUiring that work immediately cease and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation be contacted at (360) 586-3065 if any archeological artifacts are discovered during earthwork activities. Mitigation: Work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation shall be contacted at (360) 586-3065 if any archeological artifacts are discovered during earthwork activities. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 7. Transportation Access to Lots 1-12 would be provided off of a new public right-of-way off of Lake Washington Blvd N. and access to Lot 13 would be provided off of N 40 th Street. It is antiCipated that the proposed project would result in impacts to the City's street system. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the payment of a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 for each new net daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in the payment of $9,330.75 (124.41 net new daily trips x $75 = $9,330.75), Mitigation: The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 for each new net daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in the payment of $9.330.75 (124.41 net new daily trips x $75 = $9.330.75). Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 8. Emergency Services The proposal will add new residential units to the City that will potentially impact the City's Police and Fire Emergency Services. Staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee, based on $488.00 per new lot prior to the recording of the final plat. The fee is estimated at $6,344 ($488 x 13 = $6,344). . Mitigation: Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. The fee is estimated at $6,344 ($488 x 13 = $6,344). Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations ercrpt_LakeWashingtonViewEstates.doc · City-of Renton PIBIPW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA J REPORT OF October 22, 2007 E ',mmentai Review Committee Staff Report 'RELIMINARY PLA T LUA07·039, PP, ECF, SM Page 7 of 9 E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Advisory Notes to Applicant. -.L Copies of aI/ Review Comments are contained in the Official File. __ Copies of aI/ Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p,m, November 14, 2007, Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75,00 application fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, Appeals to the Examiner are governed by the City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4·8·110,B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office at (425) 430·6510, Advisory Notes to Applicant: The fol/owing 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. Planning 1. RMC section 4-4-030,C,2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division, 2, Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a,m, and eight o'clock (8:00) p,m" Monday through Friday, Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a,m, and eight o'clock (8:00) p,m, No work shall be permitted on Sundays, 3, Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1 st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit 4, Two ornamental trees, a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches (deciduous) or 6 - 8 feet in height (conifer), shall be planted or retained within the 15-foot front yard setback area for the proposed lots. 5, The minimum amount of landscaping required for sites abutting a non-arterial public street is 5 feet provided that if there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5 feet, this shall also be landscaped, A determination has been made that if no additional area is available within the public right-of-way due to required improvements, the 5-foot landscaped strip may be located within private property abutting the public right-of-way, The landscaping proposed shall either consist of drought resistant vegetation or shall be irrigated appropriately, 6, A detailed landscape plan complying with the requirements set forth under RMC 4-8-1200 shall be submitted at the time of Final Plan review for review and approval by the Development Services Division Project Manager, Washington State Department of Natural Resources 1, A forest practice application may be needed if timber will be harvested, Please call Department of Natural Resources, Forest Practices at 360-825-1631, for assistance. Fire 1, A fire hydrant with 1,000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3,600 square feet in area (including garage area), the minimum fire flow increases to 1,500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structures, 2, Street address must be visible from a public street. 3, Existing and new hydrants will be required to be retrofitted with a Storz "quick disconnect" fitting, 4, Fire de artrnent access roads are re uired to be aved, 20 feet wide, ercrpt_ LakeWashingtonViewEstates. doc City of Renton PIB/PW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTAJe- REPORT OF October 22, 2007 Plan Review -Surface Water lELiMINARY PLA T E Dnmental Review Committee Staff Report LUA07-039, PP, ECF, SM . Page 80f9 1. Surface Water System Development Charge is $759 per new dwelling unit. This fee is due with the construction permit. 2. Drainage requirements must meet the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The report and design submitted with the application appear to have complied with the 2005 design requirements. A more through and comprehensive review will be completed with the formal plan review. Plan Review -Water 1. All fire protection shall comply with City Code (i.e. hydrants with storz fittings, 1,000 gpm min required for homes less than 3,600 square feet in area, etc.). In accordance with the Fire Department requirement (prior to recording the subdivision), at a minimum, one hydrant within 300 feet of any proposed single family structure is required. Additional fire flow and hydrants are required if the total square footage of the new single family structures are greater than 3,600 square feet. 2. Installation of individual pressure reducing valve for each domestic meter is required with static pressure over 75 psi. 3. Water main improvements for this new development will entail improvements to provide the minimum fire flow (1,000 gpm for homes less than 3,600 square feet, or 1,500 gpm for homes greater than 3,600 square feet). The improvement will include the following: a) A water main extension along the frontage of the project (Lake Washington Blvd) to the north property line. Depending on the fire-flow requirements (as mentioned above) the City will reimburse the developer to oversize the water main to a 12-inch diameter line; b) A water main extension of an 8-inch minimum (10-12 inch possible for increased fire flow requirements) within the new street. Note: The maximum flow rate for an 8-inch line is 1,250 gpm (unless the line is "looped"); c) Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters are required to be in place prior to recording of the plat. Plan Review -Sanitary Sewer 1. City Code requires this development to extend the sanitary sewer along the frontage of the site. However, the plat can also be served by a connection to the Metro Sewer line; parallel to Lake Washington Blvd. (as shown on the land use application). If this is the preferred method of service, then verification of acceptance must be provided from Metro King County sewer (contact Eric Davidson). 2. The Sewer System Development Charge is $1,017 per new single-family residence. This fee is due with the construction permit. Plan Review -Transportation 1. The traffic impact analysiS is acceptable. 2. All new electrical, phone and cable services must be underground. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. 3. Per City of Renton code this project is required to install curb, gutter, streetlights and sidewalks, along the frontage of the parcel being developed. Note: The plans submitted with the application do not show street improvements along the entire portion of the existing right of way (Lake Washington BlVd.). 4. As a condition of plat approval, we will be requesting that the Lake Washington View Estates reconfigure the intersection with Lake Washington Blvd so as to align with the Barbee Mill site Lake Washington intersection. (A cursory review shows that it will require that the intersection centerline for the Fawcett site be relocated approximately 18-feet to the south). 5. The curb return radius with Lake Washington Blvd should be 35-foot; not 25-foot as shown on the subrnittal. 6. The vertical curves for the roadway profile should be revised to a 100-foot curve; not 50-foot as shown on the submitted plan. ercrpt_LakeWashlngtonVlewEstates.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTA REPORT OF October 22, 2007 Plan Review -General PRELIMINARY PLA T f 'onmental Review Committee Staff Report LUA07-039, PP, ECF, SM Page 90f9 1, 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, 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the current City of Renton horizontal and vertical control network. 3. Permit applications must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,000 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. Property Services 1. See attached. ercrpt LakeWashingtonViewEstates.doc " !!, s !! i , " m ' , ~z-.: " ~I! ~ n~~d ~ ~ !I!g , ' ill " ~Ii I ._IJOilQ 'I , " Ii Ii < ' NO.lONI!-tSYM 'NO.LN3t1 .... _ ........ "<T' .... -... -... -_ .. _ n~."'''''''' ...... ........, . ...-.... """ 8NIA3MfnS N3SNVH I Y NO.lN3t:t y~ ~o AU~ er; HoJ.~N1H--NOJ..Hlll J,N3ndmJA30 H8!H3HV1OA S3.LV.Ls:3 M.31,\ ,0 .LVld ,-~ >ooo"">.~ NO ,IHSVN. },J:lVNIYtn3Hd I no.::,. 1_ :: -:: ,O!;-.~ 3)l1f1 , " • j - I, ~I , , LUA-LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES LND-__ ._-___ _ PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP, 24 N" RGE 5 E., W,M, CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON i -S- I / / / .\:i"f} " / 0' I" ~ 40' 40' 12 E:A5TP{1RT SHORES CONDO VOL ~5 pes 69-72 1ST AJotEHDWE!iT VOL ~7 PCS 20-23 80' ~~SlS [If B<:""IH~S I~ P£~ ClTr ()f ~£~rOH LOT Uti!: .t..CVU"51"~"IT ...-. fl(CORO N\iUOCR lliO-)(I-02!1 AUDIlQR'S flLE _OCR :roo~lO'lPCJ0G09 LEGEND + • ~[cTIOH CDU«:R I e $ o • rN~_ PRIlP CI;I1. AS ..rllED / / / I , OPEN SPACE TRACT" A" 137.951 SF :.J17At ./- iiS'~_ 10 6.H" S t" 015Ac t/ '" 9 5608 SF 013 I.e +/- B 6,934 Sf O.IS"'c +/- :~ 6.:n~ SF ;; ~~a14Ac_+I- 5 7,967:.>r 0,16 k 1/- 8 7 • -'!r. \'" 6,6~O S.F 015 Ac +/- S 67'-5~. IQ'~J"o' , 6 ' , §~1 , .. 6,631 SF '" " 'I, :,"'''.,.,: ,,, ,.,'> , , • .~~ .. ., , . ~ C'(>"N J ~ LIN" f,Hn MATCH SHEET 2 ------ LINE SHEET 3 VOL!PG :1: l:llfj OPEN SPACE ~'" TRACT "A" ~I'" 1:17.951 " xl J 1"7 Ac , i- t!1~ <::1 ~I I I ---_.J LUA-__ -__ _ LHD-_-__ LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES PORTION OF GOVERNllENT LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP. 24 N .. RGK 5 E.. W.U. CITY OF RENTON. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON • 1.031 S.,. 0.16 ok. -+/-/ . "" 157.~1 S,,.. 3.17 M:. +-/- "'I" tilti !il!;! 001 00 .,1 1'1"' ~!l "I 1 1 ----~ YATCH SHEET :2 lINE -~iiEif3- e e 1" = 40' O' 40' 80' -......,.;""",-= ~ LEGEND 8 e , e • l' C>.174 s.r. 0.36 I.e. +/- 8 , I i A 8 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 :.0' -.a: SMIIr__ I 1 '" M~~":N~ 6" I 'JJ"':". "lIS-". I 1 ""- OPEN' SPACE TRACT -A- 137.i51 S" 3.17 k. -t-/- S .. 41'54' E ,,.. , ..... 134 . .5 8 , 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I", ic YOL!PG -e-.. .. S£CTDI aItIO I .. QUMTtR aJIlf£Jt a .. FlJ.NI -. 111 CA$£ 4B -S£l_"'c.os:c HANSEN S URVEYING 1---~I!'.!!~'""-irPr.P~;;-;;:=:::-:-1 UIfD ~ • COK9UU'A.II"I'! rrua. U8nJ .I. ........ -. ... _ til: ~~-_ ".IIZo __ ~ r o .. nu. ..... CQIl.ASIIlTU ... 1tT ~ ut '>IFeN' ~ :i. z ii 0 ,., ~ • c w ~ • ~ w 6 ~ "~ "' S~ " z ;;it:-~ " ", Qw Z >, • 6~ ,,~ .. • ;; ~ z ~ 0 0- " ~ z 0 ;= " "' " '" 0-0 ~ t-> 0 .. .. 0 z 0 ~ 0 • ~ " 0 a ~~ ~ ~ . ~ , /" l t ~ L' j' m I , " 9 , = , , ,. ~ NOl~IHSVIII. "NQLN]1:j S]1VlS3 M3111 N01~NIHS'f'M J>IVl . .-.-./ f /' , I I <0 \, I I I • i -~ (2)~'!! NO~N3:M. ~ .010 ALI;) Wi ( 1\ I I .OC_.1 ',OOl-Zl:-a 03S1113<l III ----------"-..,~""-'-"'" i .., NI'S3~OH 3€>\f!1l:l3H _, i ~ S3.i\f!S3 M3111 NO!~NIHS\fM 3~'v'l !:: N - , N ':;jAY loIoav:;j1'l r------ I COR R-B If 31st 3t I)=-;,;~==-l ER-BN30thst R:-;Bd ~-C-N--l ~F==11 R--8 N 29th St R...:t9 f--C_N---, I R-•. 8. b,;,;.~ _ N . 2tlth PI R-B R-8· R-B D4 . 5 T23N R5E W 112 A ZONING e +~. = T!CIINlCAL SD.V1C1!S ~ - --Rell.t.on Cit,' UmltI CD I '" '-"='7'",.1 ',', if " <I U I· u i) fr: I. CN o 200 400 1,41!100 CA OA NE 43 ~ <IJ ~ CA C4 32 T24N R5E W 112 5-132 .' Printed: 06-09-2008 Payment Made: CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA08-057 06/09/2008 11 :08 AM DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON Receipt Number: JUN -92008 RECEIVED R0802988 Total Payment: 2,500.00 Payee: ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check #10131 2,500.00 Account Balances Amount 500.00 2,000.00 Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 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 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, Hobbyk, Fence 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 Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00