Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Report 02
r, " , " ~ i . Denis Law, Mayor , , October 9, 2013 ,': [)epartment of Community an'd Economic Development", , , CE::Chip"\!incent,Administrator '~onia Binek cimwest '" " 9720 NE 120u1 ,PI, Ste 100 Kirkland, WA98034 RE: , S,,!rety Device Amount, , ,Claremont Mitigatio'n Project . City of Renton File LUA09-100 '" ".. ". ' , Dear M's, Binek:' J ".'. " ' , -, , Based on the two contt~c~s:(attach~d)lre'c~ived for maintenance and mO~itori~g for, the Claremont mitigation project', the tbtal amount of yci~r surety device is $26,056.25, , Thespecific or~akdown is as foUows:' , " , : : ' .' ,', " :,' , " Monitoring' _ , Plant Replacel)1ent jMaintenance TOTAL , $8,800,00 $i2,04S,OO " $8,855.00 " @125% ,$26,056.25 , ' This amount is deemed sufficient to guarantee th~t structures, improvements, anci ' , -' ,mitigation required by p~~mit condition will perform' satisfa~torilyfor a minimum cif five, ' , (5) years after they ,have'beencompleted .. Please' come to the 6th'Floo~of Re~tontity, ," , Hall to pay th'e. ~urety deiiice, a~d as, a r.~mincier, the City does not accept bonds, , Thank'you for your diligent work i~ protecting Rerit~n's critical areas, 'Once I have .- , reteiv~da rei:~ipt for thes~rety d~viceand installation ofthe mitigation project, I will issue a letter signalingthe'start yourfive-year monitoring program. If you hilVeany' question~ plea'se feel free to conta~t,n;e at (425)430,7219.,' " " , " " . ~ " . .," -' '> Since'rely, ~~~. ;oJle Timmons, Planner Curre'nt Planning Division', " " ~ .. cc: -Carrie Dlsan,'Engineering S~~cialisi' City of Renton F.ileLUA09-100· ,,' .. Renton City Hall, : 1055 South'Grady Way • Renton, was~ingion' 98057 ' ;rent~n;"~,g'~v .. . , . " .' . .' . . .' '. "", . '-, . ..... October 2, 2013 Aaron Kopet CamWest 9720 NE 120"'Place KiI'kland, Washington 98034 RE: East Renton Monitoring Agreement Deal' Aaron, • Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. 27641 Covington Way SE #2 Phone: 2.S3"S'J9"U5l5 Covington W A 980!12 Fax: 253-852-4732 In reviewing the monitoriIlg requirements for the East Renton/Rosemont project the site must be monitored as follows; Installation sign .. off and as .. built if needed Year 1 4 site visits and 4 reports Year 2 1 site visitand 1 report Year 3 1 site visit and 1 report Year 4 1 site visit and 1 report Year 5 1 site visit and 1 report $700 .. $1,500 $3,000 $700-$1,000 $700 .. $1,000 $700 .. $1,000 $900 .. $1,300 On each site visit we will be inspectfug,installed vegetation for survival as well as vegetation coverage and monitoring the created wetland, hydrology as described in the approved Mitigation Plan, Total monitoring costs over this pedod are estimated to be $6,700 .. $8,800 We look forward to working with you, Please call me at (253) 859-0515 if you have any questions, SEWALL WETLAND CONSULTING, INC. Ed Sewall President • Art By Nature, Inc 11032 159th Ave NE Granite Falls, W A 98252 Toll WAL.P Cam West 9720 NE .I20th Place # 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Wetland Maintenance (pel' year): Includes: Description . plant maintenance and replacement in compliance with ,survival rates noted in the approved plans ~ Maintenance to guarantee that structures, improvements, and mitigation perfonn satisfactorily for a period of 5 years, ~ Removal of inv8sive'species • Bid Date Bid# 10/212013 2971 Project East Renton Wetlnnd Qty Rate Total 5 , 2,200,00 II,OOO.OOT . Sales Tax (9.5%) $1,045.00 Total /'\ $12,045.00 • Phone # Fax# II IJ.L8"Y\. / ...ILl J--Signature of Acceptance (360)69 J.181 0 (360)691·1819 ....., V-f , CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: November 19, 2009 To: City Clerk's Office From: City Of Renton Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office Project Name: East Renton Preliminary Plat LUA (file) Number: LUA-09-100, ECF, PP Cross-References: King Co. File # L02P0005; Rosemonte Preliminary Plat LUA09- 099/King Co. File #L03POO18 AKA's: Project Manager: Rocale Timmons Acceptance Date: April 17, 2002 Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Development Owner: Same as applicant Contact: Same as applicant PID Number: 1023059023 ERC Approval Date: December 29, 2006 ERC Appeal Date: January 22, 2007 Administrative Denial: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: Ma~ch 22, 2007 Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Approved with conditions Date: AprilS, 2007 Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: 66-lot plat on 17.01 acre site vested to King County R-4 zoning development standardds. Average lot size 5,000 sf with wetlands on site. Abutting plase is Rosemonte LUA09-099 Location: Comments: , Denis Law Mayor September 14, 2009 Sara Slatten Camwest Real Estate Dev., Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Department of Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: EAST RENTON PRELIMINARY PLAT -WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN (FILE NO. LUA09-100 & L02POOOS) Dear Ms. Slatten, A partial file for the East Renton Preliminary Plat was recently forwarded on to the City of Renton from King County Department of Development and Environmental Services (KC DDES). On AprilS, 2007, the King County Hearing Examiner approved the 66" lot plat with conditions. Since the approval of your preliminary plat application the subject property has been annexed into the City of Renton and is now within the City's jurisdiction and will be processed accordingly. It appears you have submitted plans for engineering review in order to proceed to the Final Plat process. A proposed wetland mitigation plan, for proposed impacts to the wetland buffer,"was not included in the materials submitted for engineering review. Please forward three copies of your proposed wetland mitigation plan to my attention as soon as possible. In addition the project file forwarded onto the City did not include the wetland delineation and report. If possible, could you please send three .copies of any additional information you have related to the wetlands to my attention. I appreciate your patie'nce as we work through this transition process. Please note that the Plat application has vested to King County standards. and thus, will be evaluated and processed to the King County development sta·ndards. I would be happy to sit down with you and all"interested parties to discuss your plat,.please feel free. to contact meat (425) 430-7219. Sincerely, 'j.:m~~ Associate Planner cc: Jennifer Henning, Current PI.anning Manager Kayren Kittrick, Engineering Supervisor File LUA09-100, PP, ECF Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor October 23, 2009 John Harkness Cam West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Ste #100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Department of Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Request for Extension of Project's Period of Validity Rosemont/East Renton Preliminary Plats City of Renton File LUA09-099 and LUA09-100 Dear Mr. Harkness: This office has reviewed your request ,tdated September 30, 2009) to extend the validity period of the above' referenced preliminary plats (File No. LUA09-099 and LUA09-100), which will expire on April 5, 2012. 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: Requests for one-. year extensions are reviewed closer to, b.ut at least' 30 days in advance, of the expiration date in order for the applicant to demonstrate that he/she has attempted in good faith to submit the final plat within the five year period. Therefore, your request for the standard one-year extension is hereby denied. Under Ordinance No. 5452 (RMC 4-1-080F) authorization has been given tothe 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. Asthe single one-year extension has not been exercised your extension under Ordinance No. 5452 is also hereby denied. . Please note that your application remains active and you still have the right to seek extensions underthe terms specified. You may call Rocale Timmons at (425) 430-7219 should you have any further questions. Sincerely, C.~.V~ C.E. "Chip"Vincent Planning Director cc: City of Renton File No. LUA09~117 Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov -- --- O\M·WEST '0 I).V. ~ l¥ 0 ,P' M.( N JT )lf~I~ N'O ' September 30, 2009 " Chip Vincent Planning Director City of Renton 1055 -S, Grady, Way R~nton, WA 98057, , . CifyOfRe ~ , Planning 0' ~,fOI1 " IVISIon OCT ~~ 21009 ~ 1flJ~({;~U~~{f)) SUBJECT: EAST RENTON/ ROSEMONT -PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL- , EXTENSION REQUEST' ' Cam West Development is resp'ectfully requesting ,extension of the Prelimirary Plat Approval for the project known as East Renton, I ~ill start with some background related to this projedas you l1]ay not be fainiliar with it. The project was approved by the King County Hearing ,Examiner on April '5; 2007 and, subsequently has, been in the engineering review process with King County, In Spring of 2009 the property was annexed into thl' City of Renton and Cam West has been working with staff to get all the information together and hopefully move the project'to'review,and ultimately approval of the engineering:As you know, this is a difficult and long process since a significant amount of information ;md history 'must come from King County and be deciphered by the City of Renton before moving forward with review, . For the~e re~sons, as well 'as the continued poor economic climate, Camwest would like to extend the Preliminary Plat approval to the maximum timeframe allowable by the City of Renton, This added t'ime will allow Camwest to work through the transfer of info,rmation, review and approvai process with the City,of Renton that is along with flexibility in stillting . site development at a more economically beneficial time. Development Inc., Cc: Jennifer Henning, Rocale Timmons, , , MINUTES OF THE MARCH 22, 2007, PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L02P0005 James N. O'Connor was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Karen Scharer, Pete Dye and Kristen Langley, representing the Department; Robert Johns representing the Applicant; and Renee Engbaum. !-..:. E"hibit Ne. 1 --f-: -Ilxhibit No 2 DDES file L02P0005 DDES preliminary report for L02P0005, prepared 12/29/2006 with attachments as follow: 2.1. Plat Map w/66 Lot Plat Design 2.2. City of Renton Sewer Availability 2.3. Road Variance/L03V0049 2.4. Surface Water Management VarianceIL02V0089 2.5 Surface Water Management VarianceIL04VOlO3 2.6. Density Calculations w/R-4 zoning 2.7 Recreation cross section for Tract G (previously labeled Tract C) ,Exhibit No, 3 . Application for land use permit no. AOlP0071 received 4/3/2002 ~ Environmental checklist received 4/3/2002 ~Revised SEPA Mitigated Determination of Non significance, date of revised issuance: 12/29/2006 c~ IIltRib;t No.6 A:ffidavit of posting of Notice of Application indicating posting date of 5/312002, received by DDES on 5/312002 --f-..:, Exhibit 1'19 7 Revised Site plan (66 lot preliminary plat map) received 311 7/2006 ''-J..-.l t!Xhtblt No. 8 1\ssessor's maps (2) SE 10-23-05 & SW 11-23-05 "j.J Exlnblt No. 9---Revised Levell Downstream Analysis by Triad & Associates, received 11124/2004 ----r-E"hibit No. 16 ~ -i!xmblt No.1 i Traffic Impact Analysis by Gary Struthers Associates received 4/312002 Request for School Information form from the Issaquah School District, received 4/25/2002 ~ ~Exbjbjt NO J 2 King County Certificate of Water Availability, received 4/03/2002 ~ ~ Vicinity Map for L05POOI9, L03POOl8 & L02P0005, prepared by KC staff on 3119/2007 ~XRib;t No. 14 DDES Field Report and GIS Information dated 51112002 Bxhibit Wo 1 L Revised Wetlands Determination and Habitat analysis by C. Gary Schulz dated 9112/2002 '--j--BE":xhRiiihbriit-l'NOlor.-t\'lI(j-Watertype/stream Classification Survey comments from Washington Trout, dated 10/1512004 ---f.., -fubjbjt W9. 17-Drainage outfall report by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., dated 9124/2002 '-f-Exhibit No. 18 Boundary line adjustment proposal with attached map, dated 5/3/2004 Exhibit No. 19 Not entered -P Exlrtblf No. '20 Response to East Renton Transportation Comments by Gary Struthers Associates, Inc., dated 1123/2003 '-I--J E..:hibit No. 2~ Washington State Department ofTranportation comments regarding Traffic Impact Analysis, dated 11113/2002 '-f.-J Exhiblt No. 22 • Letter from Claudia Donnelly dated 6/\3/2003 regarding basin plan, with 2 attachments Exhibit Ne. 2.1 Note from Claudia Donnelly with attached copy of 11112/03 newspaper article regarding transportation model Bxlublf No. 2'1 City of Renton comments, regarding sewer service, dated 3/28/2002 i ~ --p Exhibit 1'Ia. 25-Revised language for Condition 6 .-~ Exhibit No. 26 COJ'ceptual recreation plan by Triad Associates -y Bxmbn No. 27 Revised preliminary plat received March 22, 2007 ~ -r:xIlJbi! No. 28 better from Renee and Mark Engbaum dated March 22, 2007, with attached map . indicating the location of their property \ \'<\ l' ..... , "" " -R~;,;,", '" """1;,,,", 20, 21 Md 22 ~ ~~ ~ I ~~ \~ \V ~ #N 11' •• ~' • TYPES 3 and 4 LOG SHEET (Format Plat, Rezone, Special Use, Shoreline Redesignation) FILE NUMBER: L02P0005 HEARING DATE(S): 3(cra./Oq PLAT/PROJECT NAME: EAST RENTON Subdivision CONTINUANCE HEARING DATE(S) _____ _ PLANNER: Lanney Henoch PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.: <!)(jJ '1-('010 ENGINEER: ~Pe~te~D~y~e _____ __ RELATED APPLICATION & FILE NO. AOIP0071 EXAMINER DECISION/REC: Y \ () S\ \J'J APPLICATION FILED (date): 04/03/2002 . , COMPLETE APPLICATION (date): ~/ z.. O,;J... APPEAL FILED: ~O 0 YES date: _____ _ A. COUNCIL ACTION: ________ ORDINANCE NO.: ___ EFFECTIVE DATE: _____ _ HEARING DATE(S) ________ ----''---_________________ _ 1. 0 NOTICE OF APPEAL 2. 0 APPEAL ARGUMENTS ~HEARING EXAMINER'S ACTIONS 1. o PREHEARING CONF. NOTICE date(s): \\-:>..~\\)~ 2. ~ HEARING NOTICE date(s): \ \ 3 o PREHEARING ORDER date(s): 4 o CONTINUATION date(s): 5. )il-.REPORT. date(s): ~ \ (',5\ \::)"'\ \ \ 6 o RECONSIDERATION date(s): 7. o APPEAL SUMMARY date(s): '\. ......... -0. DDES STAFF ACTIONS 1. 0 CONTINUATION NOTICE 2 .. ~ REPORT date mailed: date mailed: _.,.-_-+' __ /(})2lS !ole r f o ADDENDUM REPORT date mailed: _____ _ 3. "-4. ~. -n TRANSMITTAL TO EXAMINER (POR's/DOCS/STUDIES) date sent: 121 I ) ':ll~j 0 tL PROPOSED ORDINANCE NUMBER EMAIL TO THE KC CLERKS OFFICE date sent:;; \ ~ I (J \0 \ LV SEPA REOUIREMENTS l? (,,).., J ) /_ . l,\~\lI~Ui I d.. (}.q Olp ::0 THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: m"l::>0· S \l1DNS Is.sLt~ /'d-i&q 16(p DATE ISSUE~~\~ \5 \0\0 (i \ 2. SEATTLE TIMES PUBLICATION DATE: ______ _ DATE AFFIDAVIT REC'D: ___ _ DATEAFF AVI REC'D: ___ _ 3. DATE POSTED PER AFFIDAVIT: _-""~"--____ .,---\ ,~ DATE 500' RADIUS/AGENCIES/PORS/STAFF SENT: --':><-+-='f'-"'b,--4+-!...) ..:.d.--f-'d"'-!q+--=O:....z:.. ____ _ 5. APPEAL FILED: 0 YES 0 NO a. APPELLANTS: _____________ _ date received: _______ _ date received: _______ _ date received: _______ _ b. APPEAL ARGUMENTS: __________ _ date received: _______ _ date received: _______ _ date received: _______ _ ,-- • :":-". i'\PES 3 AND 4 LOG SHEET L02P0005 (rev. 081600) page2of3 •• E. PUBLIC NOTICE REOllREMENT 1. NOTICE OF APPLICATION . / / a) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTINGIPOSTING PACKAGE SENT ~/.7'1 ~ b) LEGALAD SEATTLE TIMES date(s)sent: ~A-d,;:z. date published: ~-dr,c:::h< LOCALS date(s) sent: .y-.,2 $I-~ date published: Cf..,;;<l-o;;;2..... c) 500' RADiUS/AGENCIESIPOR's/STAFF date(s) sent: 5/3/41"?- 2. NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION/PUBLIC HEARING SEATT'tl~E~. ~ate(s) sent::..l2O!!.J.-Ir::l1-I,lJ2 __ date published: I LOCAL~~ate(s) sent::-L"4J...:l{.i.l!:Jf-_ --1~f9''-t-;:::-->-''-- a) LEGAL AD b) 500' RADIUS/ AGENCIESIPOR's/ST AFF date sent: -'-''4-'-'"'c.p.''-''''L...CI'-L.l<! F. APPLICATION Date received: April 3. 2002 1. ~INTAKE CHECKLIST 2. 0 APPLICATION FEE 3. liiiI' APPLICANT DESIGNATION FORM 4. ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION 5. ~SSESSOR'S MAPS: SE 3-23-05; SE 10-23-05; NE 10-23-05;NW 11-23-05; SW 11-23-05 6. ~ERTIFICA TE OF WATER AVAILABILITY 7. ~ CERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABILITY /at>i3/t"T"C' /!tL,() ~,17 rtJ.). 8. 0 PRELIMINARY HEALTH APPROVAL 9. 0 CERTIFICATE OF FUTURE CONNECTION 10. ~ FIRE DISTRICT RECEIPT 11. ttrSITE PLAN/PLAT MAP 12. ~LEGAL LOT PROOF -t1IA,t!~1:'t;;7Y ,(JillJ /nn£~;Il:T'5;e.ze.,o ~~/7-#.,] 13. ~SENSITIVE AREA AFFIDAVIT I 14. II! ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST SQ.£. ().~·n, sr\'rIt.,Q f,\' r 0.1&. 9/ <:9"'7/ O~ , ' 15. I:ifTRANSPORTA TION CONCURRENCY 16. I!l LEVEL ONE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS -A'e;,/)/.5e.o ;f!f~.tJ 7',,.{n/IJ:;~. t'" 07/.J '1'~ 4";) ) I?elflsJ " ~ om, if!f&.f/!/(# f;j& l:rv& / dj i'.lulp fioJ)j,j 1/ tl'lirYi ~fC'/ 18. 0 WAIVER(S) ____________ _ [9 ADDITIONAL PLANSIMAPS DATES RECEIVED: 1. CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN 2. WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN @REVISIONNO. 1 =,.9.., ~ REVISION NO. 2 ~~..:3 ~. REVISION NO.3 7 /II 4 3 6. REVISION NO.4 ~1 r~ ~ + 7. OTHER MAPS R\'.~~\\)1\~(\/&. ~q/O aJ /Jp"/v/.)A~Y /To/Jh Q-/7-'I'eJ_ .-;--------~-y' - --------- 0-'0.;._ ~PES 3 AND 4 LOG SHEET (rev. 081600) page 3 00 •• L02POOOS &SPECIAL STUDIES DATES RECEIVED V WETLAND/STREAMREPORT ~M02-hEV,.se-/J ,t2&2{J 9~4!df. LJTZJ't-1OZ-dp.... I . . l.~ (f' ,:,:,.,. .:. ~. I' , ' 2. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT J<,1)(I'-': " '. '.', :,' '.' & TRAFFIC STUDY d3 :.6..z.. : ' 4. WILDLIFE STUDY l: n' ,\ Om D ~ \ t ~ ,1:1 \(j OTHER (document title) '&\\ \tCJ~ 151 \(j»S\~q §\~§~m ~. "'" 'r\OJA \ (d v I • •• '. " ' .. . ' .'. '. ' ------------------------ . " • ,. • OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 400 Yesler Way, Room 404 Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 296-4660 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 Email: hearex@metrokc.gov January 31, 2007 NOTICE OF HEARINGS SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services Preliminary Plat Applications Proposed File No. & Name Location Ordinance No. Applicant Information L02POOOS West of 148th Avenue Southeast 2007-00 I 0 East Renton at approximately Southeast I 20th Street, Renton L03P0018 West of 148th Avenue Southeast 2007·0011 Rosemonte at approximately Southeast I 17th Street, Renton LOSP0019 120 feet west of 148th Avenue 2007-0082 Martin Southeast, 100 feet south of Southeast 125th Street and 100 feet north of Northeast 5th Street, Renton CamWest Real Estate Dev., Inc. Attn: Sara Slatten 9720 Northeast I 20th PI., Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: (425) 825-1955 CamWest Real Estate Dev., Inc. Attn: Sara Slatten 9720 Northeast I 20th PI., Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: (425) 825-1955 CamWest Real Estate Dev., Inc. Attn: Sara Slatten 9720 Northeast I 20th PI., Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: (425) 825-1955 King County: Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) represented by Karen Scharer 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwes!AAIN .<= Renton, Washington 98055 j irlLE COpy Telephone: (206) 296-7114 Facsimile: (206) 296-7051 A public hearing has been scheduled on these proposals for 9:30 a.m. on March 22, 2007, in the Department of Development and Environmental Services Hearing Room, 900 Oakesdale Avenne SW, Renton, Washington. Any primary party wishing to reschedule the hearing for a different time or location must make a request in writing to that effect and must obtain the written concurrence of all other primary parties, which shall be submitted to the Hearing Examiner's Office at the above address within 7 days of the date of this notice. Primary parties include the applicant, property owner, and responsible -L02POOOS, L03POOl8 & LOSPOOl9 • Page 2 on County agency. (Other persons likely to be directly and substantially affected by County action on this proposal may request "party" status by submitting an intervenor petition to the Hearing Examiner.) Agreement to reschedule this proceeding shall constitute waiver by the parties of procedural time limits for its occurrence. A pre-hearing conference may be requested by any primary party prior to March 8, 2007. Hearing Examiner Rule VID, which is included with this notice, governs pre-hearing conferences. If you are a party to this proceeding and believe a pre-hearing conference should be held prior to the public hearing, submit your written request with specific reasons in support thereofto the King County Hearing Examiner. To promote efficiency in the conduct of hearings and to eliminate surprise, pre-hearing exchange of information is encouraged by the Rules of Procedure. Any person is entitled to receive, at cost, copies of documents in the County file. Application may also be made to the Examiner to direct exchange of other significant information by any person or agency. Mediation of disputes is available pursuant to King County Code Section 20.24.330 and Rules of Mediation. Please contact the Office of the Hearing Examiner if you need a copy of the Rules of Procedure or Rules of Mediation, or obtain the Rules by visiting our web site at www.metrokc.gov/mkcc/hearingexaminer. ORDERED January 31, 2007. ~-- Peter T. Donahue King County Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED January 31, 2007, to the parties and interested persons listed above, and the following: Robert L. Anderson CamWest Devel., Inc. Kristine & Keith Childs POBox 353 Attn: Sara Slatten 12004 -148th Ave. SE Maple Valley WA 98038 9720 NE 120th PI. # 100 Renton WA 98059 Kirkland W A 98034 Claudia Donnelly John Graves Ralph Hickman 10415 -147th Ave. SE Lozier Homes 9720 NE 120th PI. # 1 00 Renton W A 98059 1203 I 14th Ave. SE Kirkland W A 98034 Bellevue W A 98004 Rebecca Lind Seattle KC Health Dept. Triad Associates City of Renton, EDNSP E. Dist. Environ. Health 12112 - I 15th Ave NE 1055 S. Grady Way 14350 SE Eastgate Way Kirkland W A 98034 Renton W A 98057 Bellevue W A 98007 Core Design Ursula Eggert Gregg Zimmerman Attn: Robert Stevens 15520 SE I 16th St. City of Renton -Planning 14711 NE 29th PI., #101 Renton, WA 98059-6014 1055 S. Grady Way Bellevue, W A 98007 Renton, W A 98057 · .. _----------------------------_.------- ./ . . 'i • L02POOOS, L03P0018 & LOSPOO19 Safit Basic 12601 -148th Ave. SE Renton, W A 98059 Kim Claussen DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO Nick Gillen DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO Karen Scharer DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO Kelly Whiting KC DOT, Rd. Srvcs. Div. MS KSC-TR-0231 Joel Delange 12438 -148th Ave. SE Renton, W A 98059 Lisa Dinsmore DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OiOO Shirley Goll DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO Steve Townsend DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OiOO Bruce Whittaker DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO • Page 3 of3 Keith & Cathy Gilbert 12609 -148th Ave. SE Renton, W A 98059 Peter Dye DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO Kristen Langley DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO Larry West DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO AnT. Phung 9333 -57th Ave. W Mukilteo, W A 98275 NOTE: If the Renton School District announces a district-wide school closure due to adverse weather conditions or similar area emergency, the proceeding on this matter will be postponed. Parties of record will be notified of the time and date of the rescheduled proceeding. Any questions regarding postponements and rescheduling can be directed to the Hearing Examiner's Office at (206) 296-4660. PTD:ms Sign language and communication material in alternate [onnats can be arranged given sufficient notice at 2964660 (TDD number is 296-1024). L02POOOS, L03POOl8 & LOSPOOl9 NOT Attachment Rule VIII. A. • • RULES OF PROCEDURE OF 11IE KING COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER PRE-HEARING CONFERENCES Purpose and Initiation Pre-bearing conferences promote efficient case management by providing an informal process for early identification of issues and resolution of procedural matters in complex cases. Evidence generally will not be received at a pre-bearing conference, except wben required in order for the examiner to rule on a motion. (pre-marking and introduction of exhibits to whicb there is no objection may occur at the discretion of the examiner.) The examiner, on motion of any party or upon hislber own motion, may convene a pre-hearing conference to: 1. Identify, clarify, limit or simplify issues. 2. Hear and consider pre-hearing motions. 3. Schedule hearings, identify parties and witnesses, determine the order of and limits upon testimony, obtain stipulations as to facts and law, identify and admit exhibits, order discovery, and consider and acl upon any other matter which may aid in the efficient disposition of the hearing. B. Requests for Conference A motion to convene a pre-hearing conference shall be made to the examiner as soon as the need for a conference is recognized by the moving party (at least 21 days prior to the scheduled hearing date), and shall slale the reasons for the requesl, including any motions 10 be presenled. For good cause stated in the motion, the examiner may consider a request that fails to meet the 2 I-day requirement. For hearings authorized under KCC 20.24.080, a motion by any party for a pre-hearing conference shall be granted if timely. However, unless consented to by all parties or otherwise ordered for good cause by the examiner, no pre-hearing conference on an appeal can be convened later than 45 days after receipt of the statement of appeal by the hearing examiner's office. C. Proceedings at Conference A party who has received timely notice of a pre-hearing conference shall identify at the conference any pre-hearing motions not previously made which helshe intends to make. Parties or interested persons may also file timely written pre-hearing motions for consideration at the pre-hearing conference. Failure to make or disclose a motion which was available to the party at the time of the conference may be grounds for its denial if subsequently made. D. Pre-hearing Order Following a pre-hearing conference, the examiner shall issue an order specifying all items determined at the conference. The order sball be binding upon all parties and interested persons who received timely notice of the conference. Revised March 31, 1995 ·' ./ . '-DlRECTI. TO DOES HEARING ROO_ 900 OAKESDALE AVE SW, RENTON SOUfHBOUND 1-5 EXIT 151 -Martin LUlher King Way Tum RIGHT onto 6S'" Ave. S. 68" Ave. S becomes MONSTER RD. SW Monster Rd. turns into OAKESDALE AVE SW DDES is on your left (building 900) NORTHBOUND I-S EXIT 15410 1-405IWA-5ISlBurienlRenlon Slay right to I -405/RentonlBellevue 1-405 EXIT 110 WA-ISIIW. Valley Hwy. LEFT onto W. Valley HwylSR lSI RIGHT onlo Easl Grady Way LEFT onto Oakesdale Ave. SW DOES is on your right (building 900) NORTHBOUND SR 167 SOUfHBOUND 1-405 EXIT 210 WA-161lAuburnlRainier Ave. Follow to SR-161 (Valley Fwy.) north LEFT onlo SW Grady Way RIGHT onto Oakesdale Ave. SW DOES is on your right (building 900) NORTHBOUND 1-405 EXIT I 10 Inlerurban Ave. SlWesl Valley Hwy LEFT al lighl al ramp boHom (north under 1-405) RIGHT onlo SW Grady Way • LEFT onlo Oakesdale Ave. SW DOES is on your right (building 900) SW 7IM Sl1l£ET ,. ~ ... Northbound under the 1-405 overpass LEFT at SW 1"' St (2nd light) LEFT onlo Oakesdale Ave. SW DOES is on your left (building 900) ~ Do! SViGRADYWAV· S G;\worting\Misc\Hex\DDES directions.doc -~~.--~--------~-----------------------• • OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER REPORT AND DECISION KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 400 Yesler Way, Room 404 Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 296-4660 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 Email: hearex@metrokc.gov April 5, 2007 SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File No. L02P0005 Proposed Ordinance no. 2007-0010 EAST RENTON Preliminary Plat Application Location: West of 148th Avenue Southeast at approximately Southeast 120th Street, Renton Applicant: CamWest Real Estate Dev., Inc. represented by Robert Johns, Attorney Johns Monroe Mitsunaga 1601 - 1 14th Ave. SE, # 110 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone: (425) 467-9960 Facsimile: (425) 451-2818 King County: Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) represented by Karen Scharer 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Telephone: (206) 296-7114 Facsimile: (206) 296-7051 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS/DECISION: Department's Preliminary Recommendation: Department's Final Recommendation: Examiner's Decision: EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS: Approve subject to conditions Approve subject to conditions (modified) Approve subject to conditions (modified) Hearing Opened: Continued for Administrative Purposes: MAIN FILE COPY March 22, 2007 March 22, 2007 March 23, 2007 Hearing Closed: • • L02P0005-East Renton 2 The public hearing on the proposed subdivision of East Renton was conducted concurrently with the public hearing on the proposed subdivision of Rosemonte (DOES File No. L03POOI8). Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached minutes. At 12:31 p.m. the hearing was continued for administrative purposes, to allow for the submission of proposed exh. no. 29, that would set forth the final recommendation of the department concerning revisions to recommended conditions #'s 6, 20, 21 and 22. Exhibit 29 was received by the Hearing Examiner on March 22, 2007, and the hearing was declared closed on March 23, 2007 A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the office of the King County Hearing Examiner. ISSUES AND TOPICS ADDRESSED: • • • Future development tract Red-tailed hawks nest Safe walking conditions SUMMARY: • Recreation area Wetland buffers Surface water drainage The proposed subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots in the urban area is approved subject to conditions. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: I. General Information: Developer: Engineer: STR: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Number of Lots: Density: Lot Size: Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE I 20th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Contact: Sars Slatten 425-825-1955 Triad Associates 12112115th AveNE Kirkland, W A 98034 Contact: Gerry Buck 425-821-8448 10-23-05 West of 148'h Ave SE at approximately SEl20th St. Parcel -1023059023 R-4 17.01 acres 66 Approximately 3.9 units per acre Approximately 5,000 square feet in size , I ~------------------------------------~--------------- L02P0005-East Renton Proposed Use: Sewage Disposal: Water Supply: Fire District: School District: • Single Family Detached Dwellings City of Renton Water District # 90 City of Renton Issaquah School District Complete Application Date: April 17, 2002 • 3 2. Except as modified herein, the facts set forth in the King County Land Use Services Division's preliminary report to the King County Hearing Examiner for the March 22, 2007, public hearing are found to be correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. The LUSD staff recommends approval of this subdivision, subject to conditions. 3. Development of this subdivision may affect, and lead to the abandonment of, a red-tailed hawks nest on the subject property. The red-trail hawk is not an endangered or threatened species, and no protection of the red-tail hawk is afforded by law or the King County Code within the designated urban area of King County. 4. The applicant has proposed the establishment of Tract E as a "future development" tract. DDES determined that there is no reasonable access available to Tract E that would not cross wetland or wetland buffer. At the hearing the applicant abandoned its request to designate Tract E as a "future development" tract, and proposes to establish that tract as recreation area, to be connected by trail with the designated recreation/detention Tract G within this subdivision and adjacent to the proposed plat of Rosemonte. 5. The applicant has submitted a revised recreation plan for this subdivision and the adjacent plat of Rosemonte (exh. 26). This plan provides adequate area within Tracts C, G and E and within the proposed recreation tract and trail within Rosemonte to serve these plats jointly with well conceived amenities for recreation and open space, consistent with the requirements of the King County Code. To the extent that a portion of the recreation area necessary to meet the requirements for the plat of Rosemonte is located on the East Renton property, that can be corrected by boundary line adjustment or recording the two plats as a single plat, ifDDES determines that it is necessary to do so. 6. Wetland buffers within this subdivision will need to be modified, utilizing the buffer averaging provisions of the critical areas code, to accommodate the proposed alignment of l45th Avenue Southeast in the vicinity of the north property line, and adding buffer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed trail corridor within Tract F (between Tracts E and G), in accordance with the provisions ofKCC 2IA.24.045.D.47.b. 7. The proposed subdivision will provide for safe walking conditions for students who will walk to Apollo Elementary School on southeast I I 7th Street by constructing urban improvements to l48th Avenue Southeast from the plat to Southeast ll7th Street. A school crosswalk (crossing l48th Avenue Southeast) is located on the north side of Southeast ll7th Street, where an existing walkway is used by students to travel along the north side of Southeast I I 7th Street east from l48th Avenue Soutneast to the school. This crosswalk also serves students walking from the area north of Southeast l17th Street. Consequently, the crosswalk should be maintained on the • • L02P0005-East Renton 4 north side of Southeast II 7th Street unless it is physically impractical to do so because of constraints resulting from the topography within the right-of-way for I 48th Avenue Southeast, south of Southeast I I 7th Street. If those constraints preclude extending curb, gutter and sidewalk from the plat of East Renton to the north side of Southeast I 17th Street, the crosswalk can be relocated to the south, and improvements made on the east side of 148th Avenue Southeast to Southeast I I 7th Street. 8. The conceptual review of drainage plans has shown that there are no downstream impacts likely to occur from development of the subject property if Level I flow control and basic water quality treatment improvements are designed and constructed in accordance with the 1998 King County Drainage Manual. The final drainage plan will include calculations to assure that the capacity of drainage facilities and discharge rates will be consistent with those flow control standards. CONCLUSIONS: I. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, the proposed subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan, subdivision and zoning codes, and other official land use controls and policies of King County. 2. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, this proposed subdivision will make appropriate provision for the public health, safety and general welfare, and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supply, sanitary waste, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and safe walking conditions for students who only walk to school; and it will serve the public use and interest. 3. The conditions for final plat approval recommended below are in the public interest and are reasonable and proportionate requirements necessary to mitigate the impacts of the development upon the environment. 4. The dedications of land or easements within and adjacent to the proposed plat, as required for final plat approval or as shown on the proposed preliminary plat submitted by the Applicant on March 17, 2006 and the conceptual recreation plan submitted March 22, 2007 (exh. 26), are reasonable and necessary as a direct result of the development of this proposed plat, and are proportionate to the impacts of the development. 5. No provisions are required to be made by this subdivision for the protection of the red-tail hawks nest(s) on the site. 6. The proposed future development designation for Tract E has been withdrawn by the applicant, and that tract shall be a portion of the designated recreation area for the current development. 7. The proposed conceptual recreation plan submitted as exh. no. 26 is a reasonable and appropriate plan to serve the plats of East Renton and Rosemonte jointly. Minor alterations may be made in the final design and review by DOES, and boundary adjustments, if necessary, may be made to comply with provisions ofKCC 2IA.14. 180-200. ,------------------------------------------------------------------• • L02P0005-East Renton 5 8. Revisions to the wetland buffers will be necessary to comply with the provisions of the King County Critical Areas Code, to permit construction of 145th Avenue Southeast in the vicinity of the north property line and to mitigate the impacts of the trail connecting Tracts E and G. 9. In order to provide for safe walking conditions for students walking from this development to Apollo Elementary School, urban improvements must be made to 148th Avenue Southeast north from the proposed plat to the north side of Southeast I 17th Street. These improvements should be made to the west side of 148th Avenue Southeast to the extent it is feasible to do so. In the event it is not practical to construct improvements extending to the existing crosswalk located at the north side of Southeast I 17th Street, a crosswalk may be established south of Southeast I I 7th Street and a safe walkway provided on the east side of 148th Avenue Southeast from the new crosswalk to the north side of Southeast I I 7th Street. 10. Calculations for surface water detention facilities shall assure that the release of storm water from the site does not exceed the rates allowed by the 1998 King County Drainage Manual for achieving Level I flow control. DECISION: The proposed preliminary plat of East Renton, as revised and received on March 17,2006, is approved, subject to the following conditions of final plat approval: I. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A of the King County Code. 2. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication that includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. 3. The plat shall comply with the base density and minimum density requirements of the R-4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the R-4 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environment Services. Anylall plat boundary discrepancy(ies) shall be resolved to the satisfaction of DOES prior to the submittal of the final plat documents. As used in this condition, "discrepancy" is a boundary hiatus, an overlapping boundary or a physical appurtenance which indicates an encroachment, lines of possession or a conflict of title. 4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department. 5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended (1993 KCRS). (Also see conditions 8 and 24.) • • L02P0005-East Renton 6. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. 6 All future residences constructed within this subdivision are required to be sprinklered (NFPA I3D) unless the requirement is removed by the King County fire Marshal or hislher designee. The Fire Code requires all portions of the exterior walls of structures to be within 150 feet (as a person would walk via an approved route around the building) from a minimum 20-foot wide, unobstructed driving surface. To qualify for removal of the sprinkler requirement, driving surfaces between curbs must be a minimum of 28 feet in width when parking is allowed on one side of the roadway, and at least 36 feet in width when parking is permitted on both sides. The road width requirement applies to both on-site access and roads accessing the subdivision. 7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location oflots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the following conditions of approval, which represent portions of the drainage requirements. All other applicable requirements in KCC 9.04 and the Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review. a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. DOES approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DOES Engineering Review shall be shown on the engineering plans. c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: "All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DDES and/or the Department of Transportation. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with the plans on file." d. Storm water facilities shall be designed using the KCRTS level one flow control standard. Water quality facilities shall also be provided using the basic water quality protection menu. The size of the proposed drainage tracts may have to increase to accommodate the required detention volumes and water quality facilities. All runoff control facilities shall be located in a separate tract and dedicated to King County unless portions of the drainage tract are used for recreation space in accordance with KCC 2IA.14.180. • • L02P0005-East Renton 7 e. The applicant has received approval for two drainage adjustment applications regarding designs for the discharge of storm water and a shared facility detention pond. The adjustment decisions are contained within file numbers L02V0089 and L04VOI03. During final review of the engineering plans, all applicable conditions of the adjustment approvals shall be satisfied including requirements for the shared facility located offsite within the plat of Rosemonte. f. As stated in the drainage adjustment decision, the offsite drainage pond shall be designed using the Level 1 flow control standard. Basic water quality standards are also required for design of the facility. Ifa wet pond facility is provided for water quality, the design shall comply with the 3: 1 flow length ratio as outlined on page 6-72 in the drainage manual. For evaluation of the onsite storm vault and the offsite detention pond, a soils report shall be prepared by a geotechnical engineer to evaluate the soils and groundwater conditions. g. For any proposed bypass of storm water from the flow control facility, the final drainage designs shall comply with applicable design requirements in the drainage manual as outlined on pages 1'36 and 3-52. h. As required by Special Requirement No.2 in the drainage manual, the IOO-year floodplain boundaries for the onsite wetlands shall be shown on the final engineering plans and recorded plat. Access and Roads 8. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS) including the following requirements: a. During preliminary review the applicant submitted a road variance application (File No. L03V0049), regarding the crest vertical curve and substandard stopping sight distance along the plat frontage. In response to the variance application, the King County Road Engineer provided a decision letter dated October 20, 2004 which approved the variance based upon specific design criteria for constructing 148'" Ave SE. As noted in the variance decision, the crest curve on 148 th Ave SE must be reconstructed to provide 455 feet of stopping sight distance based upon design criteria with a 2-foot target. The final road improvements and design plans for the project shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions of approval as stated in the variance decision. b. 148'" Avenue SE shall be improved along the frontage as an urban collector arterial including all design criteria from the road variance decision. In accordance with KCRS 2.02, the curb location shall be designed at 22-feet from the road crown to provide full width travel lanes and a bike lane. The preliminary design plans for East Renton shows road grading extending outside the right-of-way on the east side of 148'" Ave SE. During final engineering review, the applicant shall acquire easements for any proposed construction on private property or provide an alternative design which is acceptable to King County for road construction within the existing right-of-way. • • L02P0005-East Renton 8 c. The project entry road to 148'" Ave SE shall be improved as an urban neighborhood collector. As shown on the preliminary plat, the required right-of-way width is 56 feet. d. The proposed roads within the subdivision shall be improved using urban design standards and in accordance with the street classifications shown on the preliminary plat map. e. Tract D shall be improved as a private joint use driveway serving a maximum of two lots. The lots served shall have undivided ownership of the tract and be responsible for its maintenance. As specified in KCRS 3.01C, improvements shall include an 18 foot paved surface and a minimum tract width of 20 fee!. Drainage control shall include a curb or thickened edge on one side. f. Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements and shall comply with Section 5.03 of the KCRS. g. Street illumination shall be provided along the plat frontage and at intersections with arterials in accordance with KCRS 5.05. h. The proposed road improvements shall address the requirements for road surfacing outlined in KCRS Chapter 4. As noted in section 4.0IF, full width pavement overlay is required where widening existing asphalt, unless otherwise approved by King County. I. 148 th Ave SE is classified as an arterial street which may require designs for bus zones and tum outs. As specified in KCRS 2.16, the designer shall contact Metro and the local school district to determine specific requirements. J. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered by King County pursuant to the variance procedures in KCRS 1.08. 9. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. 10. The site plans for East Renton show the northerly road stub for 145'" Ave SE which may extend into the wetland buffer and associated setback within the Rosemont plat. During engineering review for East Renton, a revised road alignment and grading plan shall be provided which demonstrates that road construction within Rosemonte will comply with applicable sensitive area codes. The revised road design and grading plan may result in modification or loss of lots as shown on the preliminary pIa!. Alternatively, the applicant may seek approval to use buffer averaging as a means to revise the location of the buffer and BSLB to achieve code compliance within Rosemonte. II. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 148 th Ave SE from those lots which abut it. A note to this effect shall appear on the engineering plans and the final plat. 12. The applicant shall provide a safe walking access to Apollo Elementary School with urban improvements along the west side of 148'" Ave NE to the existing crosswalk on the north side of • • L02P0005-East Renton 9 SE 117"' St. This improvement includes urban frontage improvements along property frontage of the Plat of East Renton, urban improvements along frontage of Rosemonte and urban improvements north to the existing crosswalk on the north sid.e of SE 117"' ST. (It is noted that the adjoining plat of Rosemonte also will be subject to urban frontage requirements and urban improvements north to the existing crosswalk on the north side of SE 117"' ST.) In the event it is not practical to construct urban improvements on the west side of 148th Avenue Southeast extending to the existing crosswalk, a new crosswalk may be established south of Southeast 117th Street and a safe walkway provided on the east side of 148th Avenue Southeast from the new crosswalk to the north side of Southeast 117th Street. This alternative may use a graded surface on the east side of 148th Ave SE to ensure that school-age pedestrians are provided an acceptable-width walkway surface behind the curbing. The walkway shall be designed to the satisfaction of the school district and DOES. Mitigationllmpact Fees 13. The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either: (I) pay the·MPS fee at the final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as ofthe date of building permit application. 14. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 2IA.43, which imposes impact fees to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be assessed and collected immediately prior to the recording, using the fee schedules in effect when the plat receives final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit issuance. Wetlands 15. Preliminary plat review has identified specific requirements which apply to this project as listed below. All other applicable requirements from K.C.C. 21A.24 shall also be addressed by the applicant. a. The Class 2 wetland shall have a minimum 50-foot buffer of undisturbed vegetation as measured from the wetland edge. b. Sensitive area tract(s) shall be used to delineate and protect sensitive areas and buffers in development proposals for subdivisions and shall be recorded on all documents of title of record for all affected lots. • • L02P0005-East Renton 10 c. Buffer width averaging may be allowed by King County if it will provide additional protection to the wetland/stream or enhance their functions, as long as the total area contained in the buffer on the development proposal site does not decrease. In no area shall the buffer be less than 65 percent of the required minimum distance. To ensure such functions are enhanced a mitigation plan will be required for the remaining on-site sensitive areas. An enhancement plan shall be submitted for review during engineering review. d. A IS-foot BSBL shall be established from the edge of buffer and/or the sensitive areas Tract(s) and shown on all affected lots. e. To ensure long term protection of the Sensitive Areas a split-railed fence of no more than 4 feet in height shall be installed along the Sensitive Area Tract boundaries in the area of proposed lots. Sensitive Area signs shall be attached to the fence at no less than 100 foot intervals. f. If alterations of streams and/or wetlands are approved in conformance with K.C.C. 21A.24, then a detailed plan to mitigate for impacts from that alteration will be required to be reviewed and approved along with the plat engineering plans. A performance bond or other financial guarantee will be required at the time of plan approval to guarantee that the mitigation measures are installed according to the plan. Once the mitigation work is completed to a DOES Senior Ecologist's satisfaction, the performance bond may be replaced by a maintenance bond for the remainder of the five-year monitoring period to guarantee the success of the mitigation. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and monitoring of any approved mitigation. The mitigation plan must be installed prior to final inspection of the plat. g. Prior to commencing construction activities on the site, the applicant shall temporarily mark sensitive areas tract(s) in a highly visible manner, and these areas must remain so marked until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive areas are completed. h. During engineering plan review the applicant shall provide a wetland hydrology analysis to demonstrate how the wetland hydrology will be maintained post-construction. 1. Detention out-fall structures maybe permitted within the wetland/stream buffers, however, structures shall be located in the outer edge of the buffer, if possible. All buffer impacts shall be mitigated. 16. Development authorized by this approval may require other state and/or federal permits or approvals. It is the applicant's responsibility to correspond with these agencies prior to beginning work on the site. 17. During engineering review, the plan set shall be routed to the sensitive areas group to determine if the above conditions have been met. • • L02P0005-East Renton 11 Geotechnical 18. The applicant shall delineate all on-site erosion hazard areas on the final engineering plans (erosion hazard areas are defined in KCC 2IA.06.4IS). The delineation of such areas shall be approved by a DDES geologist. The requirements found in KCC 21A.24.220 concerning erosion hazard areas shall be met, including seasonal restrictions on clearing and grading activities. Sensitive Area 19. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: Other RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSITIVE AREAS AND BUFFERS Dedication of a sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. This interest includes the preservation of native vegetation for all purposes that benefit the public health, safety and welfare, including control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, and protection'ofplant and animal habitat. The sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer imposes upon all present and future owners and'occupiers of the land subject to the tract/sensitive area and buffer the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. The vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency, unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the tract/sensitive area and buffer and the area of development activity must be marked or otherwise flagged to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on a lot subject to the sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required IS-foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. 20. The plat design shall be revised to provide the minimum suitable recreation space consistent with the requirements ofK.C.C. 2IA.14.180 and K.C.C. 21A. 14.190 (i.e., minimum area, as well as, sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.), as shown on hearing exh. no. 26. a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., location, area calculations, dimensions, landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES prior to or concurrent with the submittal of engineering plats. • • L02P0005-East Renton 12 b. A perfonnance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. 21. Tract E shall be designated for recreational area, with an approved trail (across wetland buffers) extending from the recreational Tract G and functioning as an extension of recreation from Tract G. Plans for the tract -designation and design, shall comply with codes and shall be to the satisfaction of DDES prior to engineering approval. 22. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of DDES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation, open space and/or sensitive area trades) which combines usage of recreation area within L03P0018, the plat of Rosemonte, pursuant to hearing exh. no. 26. (See condition no. 25.) 23. Street trees shall be provided as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and K.C.C. 2IA.l6.050): a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and intersections. b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County Department of Transportation detennines that trees should not be located in the street right-of-way. c. If King County detennines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of-way line. d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners association or other workable organization unless the county has adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded plat. e. The species of trees shall be approved by DDES iflocated within the right-of-way, and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or stonn sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. f. The applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. g. The applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at (206) 684-1622 to detennine if I 48 th Ave SE is on a bus route. If 148 th Ave SE is a bus route, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro. h. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a perfonnance bond posted prior to recording of the plat. If a perfonnance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the • • L02P0005-East Renton 13 SEPA trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DDES has completed a second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving. I. A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection fee is subject to change based on the current county fees. 24. The following have been established by SEP A as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development. The applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. (I.) To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of East Renton will have on the intersections ofSR 900/148 th Ave SE and SR 900/1 64th Ave SE, the applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148 1h Ave intersection: • A traffic signal, and • Eastbound and westbound left tum lanes The design for the SR 9001148 1h Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of-way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April I" and September 30 th . This seasonal restriction shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. In lieu of the installation of the above-noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of East Renton. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for East Renton. If the above-noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of East Renton, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the applicant for East Renton shall pay a pro-rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements, in an amount proportional to the impacts of East Renton. The pro-rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the East Renton applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro-rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following: • The final East Renton lot count • The trip distribution for East Renton • • L02P0005-East Renton 14 • The total trips contributed to the intersection ofSR 900.148m Ave by the plats of Aster Park (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P300S), East Renton (L02POOOS), Shamrock (L02POO 14), Rosemonte (aka Ironwood -L03POO 18), Martin (L05POO 19) and any future land use applications submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/148ili Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164m Ave High Accident Location. In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the applicant, as long as at a minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above-noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of recording of the plat of East Renton. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21 A.2S.060A] (2.) Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction ofWSDOT that stopping sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148m Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the applicant, if necessary, so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition, the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900, east of 148m Ave., to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 2IA.28.060A] 2S. The recreation area may serve the adjacent plat of Rosemonte. Ifnecessary, boundary line adjustments may be approved to establish a portion of the East Renton plat recreation area as a part of the Rosemonte Plat, or the two plats may be recorded as a single plat. 26. Wetland buffer averaging or additional buffer are required to compensate for reduction of wetland buffers adjacent to 14Sth Avenue southeast, as proposed in the vicinity of the north property line, and to compensate for construction of the recreation tract trail through wetland buffer between Tracts E and G. ORDERED this Sth day of April, 2007. . O'Connor C unty Hearing Examiner pro tern TRANSMITTED this 5th day of April, 2007, to the parties and interested persons of record: Robert 1. Anderson PO Box 353 Maple Valley WA 98038 CamWest Devel., Inc. Attn: Sara Slatten 9720 NE I 20th PI. # I 00 Kirkland W A 98034 Kristine & Keith Childs 12004 -148th Ave. SE Renton W A 98059 • • L02P0005-East Renton 15 Claudia Donnelly Renee & Mark Engbaum John Graves 10415 -147th Ave. SE 5424 NE 10th St. Lozier Homes Renton W A 98059 Renton W A 98059-4386 1203 I 14th Ave. SE Bellevue W A 98004 Ralph Hickman Robert D. Johns Rebecca Lind 9720 NE I 20th PI. #100 Johns Monroe Mitsunaga City of Renton, EDNSP Kirkland W A 98034 1601 - I 14th Ave. SE, # 110 1055 S. Grady Way Bellevue W A 98004 Renton WA 98057 Seattle KC Health Dept. Triad Associates Kim Claussen E. Dist. Environ. Health 12112 -115th Ave NE DDESILUSD 14350 SE Eastgate Way Kirkland W A 98034 MS OAK-DE-OIOO Bellevue W A 98007 Lisa Dinsmore Peter Dye Nick Gillen DDESILUSD DDES/LUSD DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO MS OAK-DE-OIOO MS OAK-DE-OIOO Shirley Goll Kristen Langley Karen Scharer DDESILUSD DDES/LUSD DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO MS OAK-DE-OIOO MS OAK-DE-OIOO Steve Townsend Larry West Kelly Whiting DDESILUSD DDESILUSD KC DOT, Rd. Srvcs. Div. MS OAK-DE-OIOO MS OAK-DE-OlOO MS KSC-TR-023I Bruce Whittaker DDESILUSD MS OAK-DE-OIOO NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL In order to appeal the decision of the Examiner, written notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council with a fee of $250.00 (check payable to King County Office of Finance) on or before April 19, 2007. Ifa notice of appeal is filed, the original and six (6) copies ofa written appeal statement specifying the basis for the appeal and argument in support of the appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council on or before April 26, 2007. Appeal statements may refer only to facts contained in the hearing record; new facts may not be presented on appeal. Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of the Council, Room 1025, King County Courthouse, 516 3" Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the date due. Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event delivery prior to the close of business on the next business day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement. • • L02P0005-East Renton 16 If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of this report, or if a written appeal statement and argument are not filed within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date of this report, the decision of the hearing examiner contained herein shall be the final decision of King County without the need for further action by the Council. MINUTES OF THE MARCH 22, 2007, PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L02P0005 James N. O'Connor was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Karen Scharer, Pete Dye and Kristen Langley, representing the Department; Robert Johns representing the Applicant; and Renee Engbaum. Exhibit No. I Exhibit No.2 DDES file L02P0005 DDES preliminary report for L02P0005, prepared 12/29/2006 with attachments as follow: 2.1. Plat Map w/66 Lot Plat Design 2.2. City of Renton Sewer Availability 2.3. Road VarianceIL03V0049 2.4. Surface Water Management VarianceIL02V0089 2.5 Surface Water Management VarianceIL04VOI03 2.6. Density Calculations wIR4 zoning 2.7 Recreation cross section for Tract G (previously labeled Tract C) Exhibit No.3 Application for land use permit no. A01P0071 received 4/3/2002 Exhibit No.4 Environmental checklist received 4/3/2002 Exhibit No.5 Revised SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, date of revised issuance: 12/2912006 Exhibit No.6 Affidavit of posting of Notice of Application indicating posting date of 513/2002, received by DDES on 5/3/2002 Exhibit No.7 Revised Site plan (66 lot preliminary plat map) received 3117/2006 Exhibit No.8 Assessor's maps (2) SE 10-23-05 & SW 11-23-05 Exhibit No.9 Revised Level I Downstream Analysis by Triad & Associates, received 1112412004 Exhibit No. 10 Traffic Impact Analysis by Gary Struthers Associates received 41312002 Exhibit No. II Request for School Information form from the Issaquah School District, received 4/25/2002 Exhibit No. 12 King County Certificate of Water Availability, received 4/03/2002 Exhibit No. 13 Vicinity Map for L05POOI9, L03POOl8 & L02P0005, prepared by KC staff on 3119/2007 . Exhibit No. 14 DDES Field Report and GIS Information dated 51112002 Exhibit No. 15 Revised Wetlands Determination and Habitat analysis by C. Gary Schulz dated 9112/2002 • • L02P0005-East Renton 17 Exhibit No. 16 Exhibit No. 17 Exhibit No. 18 Exhibit No. 19 Exhibit No. 20 Exhibit No. 21 Exhibit No. 22 Exhibit No. 23 Exhibit No. 24 Exhibit No. 25 Exhibit No. 26 Exhibit No. 27 Exhibit No. 28 Exhibit No. 29 JNOC:gao L02P0005 RPT Watertype/stream Classification Survey comments from Washington Trout, dated 10/1512004 Drainage outfall report by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., dated 912412002 Boundary line adjustment proposal with attached map, dated 5/312004 Not entered Response to East Renton Transportation Comments by Gary Struthers Associates, Inc., dated 1123/2003 Washington State Department ofTranportation comments regarding Traffic Impact Analysis, daied 11/13/2002 Letter from Claudia Donnelly dated 611312003 regarding basin plan, with 2 attachments Note from Claudia Donnelly with attached copy of 11112/03 newspaper article regarding transportation model City of Renton comments, regarding sewer service, dated 312812002 Revised language for Condition 6 Conceptual recreation plan by Triad Associates Revised preliminary plat received March 22, 2007 Letter from Renee and Mark Engbaum dated March 22, 2007, with attached map indicating the location of their property Revisions to Conditions 20, 21 and 22 • • , King County DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER March 22, 2007 -PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 A.M. DOES Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98057-5212 Phone: (206) 296-6600 PROPOSED PLAT OF EAST RENTON FILE NO: L02P0005 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: 2007-0010 A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION: This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single- family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre based on gross area. Density based on net buildable area of 11.88 acres is 5.6 units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 square feet. See Attachment 1 for a copy of the proposed plat map. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: Developer: Engineer: STR: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Number of Lots: Density: Lot Size: Proposed Use: Sewage Disposal: Water Supply: Fire District: School District: Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sars Slatten 425-825-1955 Triad Associates 12112 115th Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Gerry Buck 425-821-8448 10-23-05 West of 148th Ave SE at approximately SE120th st. Parcel -1023059023 R-4 17.01 acres 66 Approximately 3.9 units per acre Approximately 5,000 square feet in size Single Family Detached Dwellings City of Renton Water District # 90 City of Renton Issaquah School District Complete Application Date: April 17, 2002 Exhibit NO'I~=::-:--_~~ Item No.-.b:~~~~4i Received 3 'C.z ~ King County Hearing Exam.i~gr . • • • C. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The Subdivision Technical Committee (STC) of King County has conducted an on- site examination of the subject property. The STC has discussed the proposed development with the applicant to clarify technical details of the application, and to determine the compatibility of this project with applicable King County plans, codes, and other official documents regulating this development. As a result of preliminary discussions, the applicant presented the Technical Committee with numerous revisions with the most recent plat revision on March 17,2006. The modifications from the initial submittal include: • Revised entrance to the plat • Revised location of recreational space • Clarification of the sidewalk improvements to be constructed along frontage and within the plat. • Adjustment to the buffer and BSBL lines associated with the on site wetlands. • Revised plat boundaries, eliminating the far west portion (2+ acres) from the plat application. Boundary revision was completed under file L04L0055 and recorded under # 20041223900001. The purpose of the boundary adjustment was to separate that portion of the site annexed into the City of Renton under Ordinance 5147, effective on July 6, 2005. • SWM Adjustment L02V0089 approved allowing the diversion of runoff to a single facility. • Subsequently SWM Adjustment L04V0103 was approved 3/24/05 for shared facility concept of the northeast corner of East Renton to utilize eastern drainage facility in Rosemonte. • Road Variance L03V0049 approved 10/20/2004 for a 620 -foot vertical curve with 455 feet of stopping sight distance, utilizing a two-foot target. Additionally approved is the slight grade break (under 1 %) at the north end of the vertical curve. D. THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C, the responsible official of LUSD issued a mitigated threshold determination of non- significance (MONS) for the proposed development on December 15, 2006. This determination was based on the review of the environmental checklist and other pertinent documents, resulting in the conclusion that the proposal would not cause probable significant adverse impacts on the environment provided mitigations measures are implemented. Subsequently, staff recognized incorrect references to other subdivisions and issued a REVISED MONS on December 29, 2006 referencing the following mitigations: 1. To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of East Renton will have on the intersections of SR 900/148 th Ave SE and SR 900/164 th Ave SE, the applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148th Ave intersection: • A traffic signal, and • Eastbound and westbound left turn lanes FILE NO L02P0005 Page 2 • • The design for the SR 900/148th Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of- way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April 1st and September 30 th • This seasonal restriction shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. In lieu of the installation of the above-noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of East Renton. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for East Renton. If the above-noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of East Renton, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the applicant for East Renton shall pay a pro-rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements, in an amount proportional to the impacts of East Renton. The pro-rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the East Renton applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro-rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following: • The final East Renton lot count • The trip distribution for East Renton • The total trips contributed to the intersection of SR 900.148 th Ave by the plats of Aster Park (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P3008), East Renton (L02P0005), Shamrock (L02P0014), Rosemonte (aka Ironwood- L03P0018), Martin (L05P0019) and any future land use applications submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/148th Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164th Ave High Accident Location. In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the applicant, as long as at a minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above-noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of recording of the plat of East Renton. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] 2. Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction of WSDOT that stop!?,ing sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148 th Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the applicant, if necessary, so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition, the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900, east of 148 th Ave., to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] An environmental impact statement (EIS) was not required as a result of issuing the MONS. The appeal period for the revised threshold determination ends at the close of business on January 22, 2007. The specific mitigation measures have been incorporated as part of the applicant's proposal and are included in the list of recommended conditions of preliminary approval. Agencies, affected Native American tribes and the public are offered the opportunity to comment on or appeal the determination until January 22,2007. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 3 ------------------------• • E. AGENCIES CONTACTED: 1. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks: Comments are incorporated in the discussion in this report regarding wildlife. 2. King County Fire Protection Engineer: Fire protection engineering preliminary approval has been granted subject to the standard code requirements and requirement for sprinklering of homes unless higher standards for road improvements are met. 3. Issaquah School District: The comments from this district have been incorporated into this report. 4. King County Water District #90: The comments from this district have been incorporated into this report. 5. City of Renton (sewer provider): See Attachment 2. 6. METRO: No response. 7. Washington State Department of Ecology: No response. 8. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife: No response. 9. Washington State Department of Natural Resources: No Response 10. Washington State Department of Transportation: The comments from WSDOT have been incorporated into the SEPA TO and in this report. F. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: 1. Topography: The site slopes from east down to the west with an overall elevation change of approximately 60 feet across the site with 20-30 percent slopes on the central1/3 rd of the site. 2. Soils: Two types of surfaces soils are found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973. a. The east 2/3rds of the site is classified as AgD -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 15-30% slopes. Runoff is medium and the erosion hazard is severe. This soil has a severe limitation for foundations due to slope, and a moderate slippage potential. It has severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability in the substratum. b. The west 1/3rd of the site is classified as AgB -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 0-6% slopes. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil type has a moderate limitation for low building foundations due to a seasonally high water table, and severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability in the substratum. Soil exploration was preformed by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. in April of 2001 and Technical Memorandum, dated September 24,2002 indicates slopes 15 % or over are moderately susceptible to erosion, however they concluded is that with the design of the outfall the storm water flows will not be susceptible to erosion. 3. Wetland/streams: A wetland/and or stream report was prepared by C. Gary Schultz dated April 3, 2001 and revised September 12, 2002. The wetlands (A, B & C) are classified together as Class 2 Wetlands. These wetlands are part of a wetland system exceeding one acre in size and include forested area as the headwaters of Honey Creek. Some buffer averaging is proposed along the east side of the on-site wetland. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 4 • • While this subdivision as presented has been determined to comply with sensitive area provisions, the adjoining plat of Rosemonte currently as designed will either need to shift the street east so that the retaining wall is outside of the BSBL (this would change the street alignment of 145th Ave SE) or instead propose additional buffer averaging in Rosemonte to allow the BSBL to be shifted west. According to the Conservation District maps, the site is characterized by a high water table. The site lies within the Honey Creek subbasin of the May Creek drainage basin. 4. Vegetation: The west third of the site is heavily wooded with a second and third-growth mixture of coniferous and broad-leafed trees native to the Pacific Northwest. Within the wetland itself, there is predominately Red Alder. The remaining portion of the site (east 2/3rds) is primarily covered in pasture grasses. Scattered evergreen/deciduous trees and brush occur in limited numbers. 5. Wildlife: Two Red Tall Hawk Nests were identified back in 2001 with the central one determined to be abandoned and the northerly one active. The applicant has proposed on the most recent plat plan location of lots at a minimum of 250 feet from the nest. Such birds are not listed as threatened or endangered species nor are they protected in the Urban area of King County. Other small birds and animals undoubtedly inhabit this site; and larger species may visit this site on occasion, however, the population of species is limited due to increased nearby development. 6. Mapped Sensitive Areas: The Sensitive Areas Map Folio indicates that there is a wetland which crosses over from this property onto the property to the north and south. G. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The property lies in southeast King County, north of the City of Renton on the west side of 148th Ave SE which provides arterial access to the site. The site is designated as Urban and is within the urban growth boundary. In recent years there have been numerous plats in the local area approved by King County. This East Renton area is in transition from a rural residential area to a low to medium density urban setting. On this site there is an existing residence and detached garage and the remaining upland portion is manly in pasture. The forested area on the west third is the lowest portion of the site and contains the wetland noted in this report. This property and other surrounding property in the Urban area are zoned R-4 (Residential-4 du's per acre). Properties east of 148th Ave SE and north of SE 120th St. are zoned RA-5 (Rural Afea - 1 du per 5 acres). Additionally, these properties are outside the Urban Growth Boundary. 148th Ave SE is a 60 foot public right-of way and the right-of-way is within the Urban Growth Boundary. H. SUBDIVISION DESIGN FEATURES: 1. Lot Pattern and Density: The proposed lot and street layout is in conformance with King County Codes (i.e. KCC 21A and the 1993 King County Road Standards. Density calculation for the plat average is 3.9 d.u.'s per acre based on total acreage of 17.01 acres. Code would allow 68 lots under the base density provisions. Minimum density code provisions require development of at least 35 lots. Density of the net buildable area of 11.88 acres would be 5.6 dwelling units per acre. The 66 lots are generally 5,000 square feet in area and have a width typically of 50 feet. See Attachment 6 for the Density & Dimension Calculation Worksheet for further details. Additionally, Tract E a future growth development tract is proposed between wetlands on the far west potion of the property. This tract is 48,128 square feet in size and is FILE NO L02P0005 Page 5 • • almost totally surrounded by sensitive arealwetlands except on the south tract boundary which also is the south property line of the plat. Future development of this tract would be subject to Critical Area Code requirements which could require additional property be set aside as buffers. 2. Internal Circulation: Lots will front onto the internal public streets that provide access within the subdivision and exits out to 148th Ave SE. Additionally street stubs connections are planned which would provide access to properties both north (145 th and 14ih Ave SE) and south (145 th Ave SE). See the proposed plat layout, Attachment 1 to this report. The applicant has stated that the future development tract could be served with access from the southerly abutting property, however though preapplication review of the abutting parcel, it appears access to the proposed future development tract on East Renton could not be provided due to the extent of wetlands to the south on the abutting parcel when applying code limitations of KCC 21A.24. 3. Roadway Section: As proposed by the applicant, 148th Ave SE frontage will be improved with urban improvements, including curb, gutter, and sidewalks. A road variance was approved allowing an alternative design for improvement (see Attachment 3. The internal public street planned as SE 119 th St. will be improved as a subcollector street, as will the proposed 145th Ave SE from SE 119 th to the south property line. SE 120th St and 14ih Ave SE south of SE 119th St will function as a subaccess street and 146th AveSE will be a minor access. 4. Drainage: The proposed subdivision includes an underground storm water vault located within Tract G shown on the preliminary plat. Since the drainage facility will be located below ground, the surface area will be utilized as a recreation space for the future homeowners. A portion of the subdivision drains northerly to the property currently proposed for development as the Rosemonte subdivision. Since the King County drainage manual requires storm water to be discharged at the natural location, the applicant requested a drainage adjustment to divert storm water from the northern portion of the site to the proposed storm vault. This adjustment was approved by King County in 2002; however, the applicant revised the proposed drainage plan in 2003 after the adjacent parcel of land was proposed for development as the Rosemont subdivision. The current drainage plan shows an offsite detention pond located within Rosemonte which is designed to accommodate drainage for Rosemonte and the northern portion of East Renton. To allow an offsite drainage facility, the applicant requested approval for a second drainage adjustment to allow a shared facility for both subdivisions. As shown on the preliminary plat map for Rosemonte, a detention pond is proposed within Tract C (per 3/8106 revised plan) which will provide designs for flow control and water quality treatment. The drainage adjustments for the original diversion and the subsequent adjustment for a shared facility are both shown in the staff report as Attachments 4 and 5. In accordance with the 1998 King County drainage manual, the drainage facilities will be designed for Level 1 flow control and basic water quality treatment. The site is located within the Honey Creek subbasin which drains to the larger May Creek watershed. The King County basin plan for May Creek has evaluated the Honey Creek basin and recommends that future development in this area use the . level one flow control standard as shown in the drainage manual. A review of the downstream corridor in the immediate vicinity of the project did not identify any specific drainage problems. After construction and acceptance of the storm water vault and detention pond for the subdivisions, the drainage facilities will be maintained in the future by King County. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 6 -------------------------------1 • • I. TRANSPORTATION PLANS: 1. Transportation Plans: The King County Transportation Plan indicates that 14Sth Avenue Southeast (adjoining east boundary) is designated as a collector arterial. The King County Non-motorized Transportation Plan indicates 14Sth Avenue Southeast as part of the plan and is to accommodate bicycles as a shared roadway. 2. Subdivision Access: The East Renton subdivision will provide urban road improvements with curb, gutter, and sidewalk for both the internal roads and frontage improvements along 14Sth Ave SE. During preliminary review of the roadways, King County determined that the existing crest vertical curve along 14Sth Ave SE did not meet design standards for stopping sight distance. Due to the substandard road design and the need for improving the property frontage, the applicant submitted a road variance application to evaluate design requirements for the roadway. As shown in Attachment 3, the road variance was approved by the King County Department of Transportation to allow reconstruction of the frontage road to provide 455 feet of stopping sight distance. To provide adequate walking conditions for school children, an offsite sidewalk will also be provided along 14S tli Ave SE, extending northerly from the site to an existing crosswalk at the intersection of SE 11 ih Street. Due to the topography and existing road improvements near the crosswalk, the applicants design for the sidewalk shows a rockery located outside the right-of-way on private property. The applicant has contacted the property owner regarding acquisition of a road easement, however this property owner has not clarified in writing a willingness to negotiate to allow easement rights, therefore final resolution has not been provided at this time. During final engineering, the applicant will need to obtain an easement for construction on private property or prepare an alternative walkway design which satisfies the design requirements within the existing right-of-way. It is possible that the applicant could design improvements on the east side of 14Sth that would meet the walkway requirements, as well. Access into the plat will be provided off 148 th Ave SE. The planned stub street to the south may someday provide for a secondary access out to 14Sth Ave SE. and will improve the connectivity between subdivisions. 3. Traffic Generation: It is expected that approximately 660 vehicle trips per day will be generated with full development of the proposed subdivision. This calculation includes service vehicles (i.e., mail delivery, garbage pick-up, school bus) which may currently serve this neighborhood, as well as work trips, shopping, etc. 4. Adequacy of Arterial Roads: This proposal has been reviewed under the criteria in King County Code 14.70, Transportation Concurrency Management; 14.80, Intersection Standards; and King County Code 14.75; Mitigation Payment System. a. King County Code 14.70 -Transportation Concurrency Management: The Transportation Certificate of Concurrency dated April g, 2002, indicates that transportation improvements or strategies will be in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six (6) years, according to RCW 36.70A.070(6). b. King County Code 14:S0 -Intersection Standards: The existing arterial system requires improvements to accommodate the increased traffic volume generated by this proposal. As a result, DOES issued a MONS which calls for the mitigation needed to address the impacts resulting from added traffic onto local intersections rather than requiring an EIS prior to action on the preliminary plat application, see Section 0 of this report. The appeal period for the Threshold Determination closes January 11,2007. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 7 I • • c. King County Code 14.75 -Mitigation Payment System: King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), requires the payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee (MPS fee) and an administration fee for each single-family residential lot or unit created. MPS fees are determined by the zone in which the site is located. This site is in Zone(s) 442 per the MPS/Quartersection list. MPS fees may be paid at the time of final plat recording, or deferred until building permits are issued. The amount of the fee will be determined by the applicable fee ordinance at the time the fee is collected. J. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Schools: This proposal has been reviewed under RCW 58.17.110 and King County Code 21A.28 (School Adequacy). a. School Facilities: Students from the proposed plats of East Renton and Rosemont will be served by Apollo Elementary, Maywood Middle, and Liberty High School. As a result of the passage of time (nearly 5 years between the April 2002/East Renton Request for School Information and the date of preparation of this staff report) following the receipt of the response from the District, the STC has reconfirmed the school service boundaries by checking the School District's web site, and the 'service area'/Attendance map pages for each of the applicable schools. b. School Impact Fees: Currently the Issaquah School District required that an impact fee per lot be imposed to fund school system improvements to serve new development within this district. Payment of this fee in a manner consistent with K.C.C. 21A.43 will be a condition of subdivision approval. c. School Access: Apollo Elementary School is located to the north of the subject subdivision, off of SE 117th Street, east of 148th Avenue SE. According to information provided by the Issaquah School District, students of this age group would be provided bus transportation to the school due to conditions along the walkway route unless sidewalk improvements would be provided along 148th Avenue SE (see Condition 12). The Subdivision Technical Committee (STC) has recommended that, in addition to the urban shoulder improvements across the frontage of the proposed subdivision, that urban improvements be provided across the frontage of the abutting (and, related by ownership, access and required off-site mitigation) proposed plat of Rosemonte (FKA Ironwood), DDES File # L03P0018. The existing designated crossing across 148 th Avenue SE is located immediately off-frontage from the northern subdivision boundary of Rosemonte, therefore, the STC believes that additional improvements -off-site to both plats' frontage -is necessary to provide adequate walkways for this age group. Such improvements should meet the urban standards for sidewalks and curbs due to location on the north side of the intersection, the need for a railing, and traffic volumes on 148th Ave SE. Additionally, due to the potential need to construct a curb and gutter section along the east side of 148th Avenue SE (to re-profile 148th Avenue SE, and maintain the resultant slope grading within existing right-of-way), the STC recommends that if the project proponent elects to implement this option, that a graded surface be provided to ensure that school-age pedestrians are provided an acceptable-width walkway surface behind the curbing. Maywood Middle School is located to the south of the proposed subdiviSion, on the opposite side of Southeast 128th Street, in the 14400 block of 168th Avenue SE. Students of this age group are provided bus transportation to/from the school due to distance and the traffic conditions along any potential walking routes. The District had requested that a safe waiting area be provided at the intersection of Southeast 120th Streetl148th Avenue SE. The STC recommends in the plat conditions that a level concrete 'pad' be constructed to augment the required sidewalk improvements atlnear the FILE NO L02P0005 Page 8 • • indicated intersection. See Condition 8.h. This improvement will serve the middle and high school-aged residents of both the subject subdivision and the proposed plat of Rosemonte. Liberty High School is located to the south of the proposed subdivision, on the opposite side of Southeast 128th Street, in the 16600 block of Southeast 136th Street. Students of this age group are provided bus transportation to/from the school due to distance and the traffic conditions along any potential walking routes. The Issaquah School District had requested, in its April 2002 response, that a safe waiting area be provided at the intersection of Southeast 120th Streetl148 th Avenue SE. The STC recommends in the plat conditions that a level concrete 'pad' be constructed to augment the required sidewalk improvements atlnear the indicated intersection. See Condition 8.h. This improvement will serve the middle and high school- aged residents of both the subject subdivision and the proposed plat of Rosemonte. 2. Parks and Recreation Space: K.C.C. 21A.14 requires subdivisions in the UR and R zone classifications to either provide on-site recreation space or pay a fee to the Parks Division for establishment and maintenance of neighborhood parks. At this time, it does not appear that the applicant's plan will provide suitable recreation space as required by code. Additionally, there are no nearby parks where a "fee in lieu" could be applied. In total 25,740 square feet of recreational area is required (390 square feet per lot). East Renton Tract C at the corner of 14ih Ave. SE. with SE 11 ih St. includes 9,335 sf and Tract G at the corner 145th Ave. SE. with SE 11 ih St. is shown to contain 16,407 sf. Together these tracts equal 25,742 sf., however all of Tract G currently does not fit the definition of flat, dry and usable area. With placement of a drainage vault on the tract, that recreation area on top the vault and any additional area in the tract contoured for recreational use (all 5% slope or less) would be counted towards the total needed square footage. Staff estimates that the vault has an 8,400 sf surface area and given the existing topography not all the remaining tract area could possibly be counted towards the total flat, dry, useable area due to topography beyond the tract. Attachment 7, shows the limiting factors in the cross section of an earlier configuration of Tract G (labeled Tract C). Options to comply with minimum area would include adding additional area to either the current Tract C or Tract G. Staff would not be in support of creating a third tract for recreation, except if such tract was connected to either Tract C or Tract G by trail (i.e. conversion of Tract E to recreation area minimally providing a trail). K.C.C. 21A.14.190 requires subdivisions to provide a totlchildren play area within the recreation space on site and two additional recreational facilities as listed in K.C.C. 21A.14.190 E.2. Staff would support a plan with at least one recreation facility on one tract and two on the other tract. Both recreation tracts are located on tracts easily accessible to plat residents. Tract C is near the plat entry on a corner so to provide good visibility and access. Tract G is at a location that takes advantage of the views into the sensitive area (wetland) west of the tract. Also the tract functions in providing storm detention. The request would not comply with all provisions of KCC 21.14.180 F. and therefore per code, KCC 21.14.180 C. applies to both recreation tracts. 3. Fire Protection: The Certificate of Water Availability from Water District # 90 indicates that water will be available to the site in sufficient quantity to satisfy King County Fire Flow Standards. Prior to final recording of the plat, the water service facilities must be reviewed and approved per King County Fire Flow Standards. All future residences constructed within this subdivision are required to be sprinklered NFPA 13D unless the requirement is removed by the King County Fire FILE NO L02P0005 Page 9 • Marshal or his/her designee. The Fire Code requires all portions of the exterior walls of structures to be within 150 feet (as a person would walk via an approved route around the building) from a minimum 20-foot wide, unobstructed driving surface. To qualify for removal of the sprinkler requirement driving surfaces between curbs must be a minimum of 28 feet in width when parking is allowed on one side of the roadway, and at least 36 feet in width when parking is permitted on both sides. K. UTILITIES 1. Sewage Disposal: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision by public sewer of the City of Renton. The City conditioned the extension of sewer to the requirement that the developer sign a covenant allowing for future annexation of the property into the City. (See Attachment 2). 2. Water Supply: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision from a public water supply and distribution system managed by Water and District # 90. A Certificate of Water Availability, dated April 4, 2004, indicates this district's capability to serve the proposed development. Dedication of easements to the district for extension of water mains will be required. L. COMPREHENSIVE AND COMMUNITY PLAN: 1. Comprehensive Plan: This plat is governed by the 1994 King County Comprehensive plan which designates this area as Urban Residential 4-12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivision is not in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Community Plans: The subject subdivision is located in the Newcastle Planning Area and does not conflict with the goals, guidelines, and policies of the Community Plan. M. STATUTES/CODES: If approved with the recommended conditions in this report, the proposed development will comply with the requirements of the County and State Platting Codes and Statutes, and the lots in the proposed subdivision will comply with the minimum dimensional requirements of the zone district. N. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The subject subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning Codes and other official land use controls cif King County, based on the conditions for final plat approval. 2. Beyond the typical plat requirements, conditions are proposed which would require the applicant to provide design plans and documentation that address the items below to the satisfaction of DOES: a. Acquisition of easements from private property owners with property adjacent to 148th Ave SE are needed to construct road improvements to 148th Ave SE. as proposed. Acquisitions includes an easement for a retaining wall to support sidewalk improvements to the existing crosswalk on the north side of at SE 11 ih St., and from property owners on the east side of 148th Ave SE for side slope easements to support the planned profile/elevation change to 148 th Ave SE. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 10 • • Urban road improvements on the west side of 148th Ave SE along the property frontage ( and frontage of Rosemonte) north to the north side of SE 11 ih St. will satisfy the need for safe walkway access to the school. Should the applicant be unable to obtain easements, urban road improvements could feasibly be provided on the east side of 148th Ave SE as a means to eliminate the need for slope easements on the east side of the road and provide an alternative for a safe walking to the school. b. As designed, the plat does not provide for sufficient area to meet code minimum for recreation area. As a means to enlarge either Tract C and/or G, lots proposed could be reduced in size, if needed, and still comply with the minimum standards for size and width without lose of density. Revision to the plat design will be needed to adjust the size recreation area tract(s) to meet code minimum for recreational area. c. Tract E (proposed as a future development tract) can not under all reasonable scenarios actually be developed for lots in the future. When development of the south abutting property occurs, access from the south will unlikely be proposed. Such access would require crossing wetland and/or buffer on abutting property that is not allowed by the code criteria for critical areas in KCC 21A.24. Alternatively, staff would support adding Tract E: 1) into the sensitive area tract surrounding, 2) designating the tract as open space, or 3) designing the tract as recreational area, if served by trail extending from the recreational Tract G to Tract E, whereby Tract E would function as an extension of recreation from Tract G. d. Buffer averaging is the preferred alternative to assure the retaining wall in Rosemonte off 145th Ave SE is outside of the wetland buffer and BSBL. Should buffer averaging not provide complete relief from buffer and BSBL limitations, then 145th Ave SE must be shifted east. Alignment of 145th Ave SE within East Renton and within Rosemonte should be coordinated to assure a workable alignment of 145th Ave SE for the two plats. O. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended ,that the subject subdivision's East Renton Preliminary Plat Page 1, revised and received March 17, 2006, be granted preliminary approval subject to the following revisions to the plat design and conditions of final approval: 1. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A of the King County Code. 2. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication that includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. 3. The plat shall comply with the base density and minimum density requirements of the R-4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the R-4 zone classification or shall be shown on the face of the approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environment Services. Any/all plat boundary discrepancy shall be resolved to the satisfaction of DOES prior to the submittal of the final plat documents. As used in this condition, "discrepancy" is a boundary hiatus, an overlapping boundary or a physical appurtenance which indicates an encroachment, lines of possession or a conflict of title. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 11 • • 4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department. 5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended (1993 KCRS). 6. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. 7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the following conditions of approval, which represent portions of the drainage requirements. All other applicable requirements in KCC 9.04 and the Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review. a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. DOES approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DOES Engineering Review shall be shown on the engineering plans. c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: "All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DOES and/or the Department of Transportation. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with the plans on file." d. Storm water facilities shall be designed using the KCRTS level one flow control standard. Water quality facilities shall also be provided using the basic water quality protection menu. The size of the proposed drainage tracts may have to increase to accommodate the required detention volumes and water quality facilities. All runoff control facilities shall be located in a separate tract and dedicated to King County unless portions of the drainage tract are used for recreation space in accordance with KCC 21A.14.180. e. The applicant has received approval for two drainage adjustment applications regarding designs for the discharge of storm water and a shared facility detention pond. The adjustment decisions are contained within file numbers L02V0089 and L04V0103. During final review of the engineering plans, all applicable conditions of the adjustment approvals shall be satisfied including requirements for the shared facility located offsite within the plat of Rosemonte. f. As stated in the drainage adjustment decision, the offsite drainage pond shall be designed using the Level 1 flow control standard. Basic water quality standards are also required for design of the facility. If a wet pond facility is provided for water quality, the design shall comply with the 3:1 flow length ratio as outlined on page 6-72 in the drainage manual. For evaluation of the onsite storm vault and the offsite detention pond, a soils FILE NO L02P0005 Page 12 • • report shall be prepared be a geotechnical engineer to evaluate the soils and groundwater conditions. g. For any proposed bypass of storm water from the flow control facility, the final drainage designs shall comply with applicable design requirements in the drainage manual as outlined on pages 1-36 and 3-52. h. As required by Special Requirement No.2 in the drainage manual, the 1 OO-year floodplain boundaries for the onsite wetlands shall be shown on the final engineering plans and recorded plat. Access and Roads 8. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS) including the following requirements: a. During preliminary review the applicant submitted a road variance application (File No. L03V0049), regarding the crest vertical curve and substandard stopping sight distance along the plat frontage. In response to the variance application, the King County Road Engineer provided a decision letter dated October 20, 2004 which approved the variance based upon specific design criteria for constructing 148th Ave SE. As noted in the variance decision, the crest curve on 148th Ave SE must be reconstructed to provide 455 feet of stopping sight distance based upon design criteria with a 2-foot target. The final road improvements and design plans for the project shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions of approval as stated in the variance decision. b. 148th Avenue SE shall be improved along the frontage as an urban collector arterial including all design criteria from the road variance decision. In accordance with KCRS 2.02, the curb location shall be designed at 22- feet from the road crown to provide full width travel lanes and a bike lane. The preliminary design plans for East Renton shows road grading extending outside the right-of-way on the east side of 148th Ave SE. During final engineering review, the applicant shall acquire easements for any proposed construction on private property or provide an alternative design which is acceptable to King County for road construction within the existing right-of- way. c. The project entry road to 148 th Ave SE shall be improved as an urban neighborhood collector. As shown on the preliminary plat, the required right-of-way width is 56 feet. d. The proposed roads within the subdivision shall be improved using urban design standards and in accordance with the street classifications shown on the preliminary plat map. e. Tract D shall be improved as a private joint use driveway serving a maximum of two lots. The serving lots shall have undivided ownership of the tract and be responsible for its maintenance. As specified in KCRS 3.01 C, improvements shall include an 18 foot paved surface and a minimum tract width of 20 feet. Drainage control shall include a curb or thickened edge on one side. f. Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements and shall comply with Section 5.03 of the KCRS. g. Street illumination shall be provided along the plat frontage and at intersections with arterials in accordance with KCRS 5.05. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 13 • • h. The proposed road improvements shall address the requirements for road surfacing outlined in KCRS Chapter 4. As noted in section 4.01 F, full width pavement overlay is required where widening existing asphalt, unless otherwise approved by King County. i. 14Sth Ave SE is classified an arterial street which may require designs for bus zones and turn outs. As specified in KCRS 2.16, the designer shall contact Metro and the local school district to determine specific requirements. j. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered by King County pursuant to the variance procedures in KCRS 1.0S. 9. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. 10. The site plans for East Renton show the northerly road stub for 145 th Ave SE which may extend into the wetland buffer and associated setback within the Rosemont plat. During engineering review for East Renton, a revised road alignment and grading plan shall be provided which demonstrates that road construction within Rosemonte will comply with applicable sensitive area codes. The revised road design and grading plan may result in modification or loss of lots as shown on the preliminary plat. Alternatively, the applicant may seek approval to use buffer averaging as a means to revise the location of the buffer and BSLB to achieve code compliance within Rosemonte. 11. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 14Sth Ave SE from those lots which abut it. A note to this effect shall appear on the engineering plans and the final plat. 12. The applicant shall provide a safe walking access to Apollo Elementary School with urban improvements along the west side of 14Sth Ave NE to the existing crosswalk on the north side of SE 11 yth St. This improvement includes urban frontage improvements along property frontage of the Plat of East Renton, urban improvements along frontage of Rosemonte and urban improvements north to the existing crosswalk on the north side of SE 11 yth ST. (It is noted that the adjoining plat of Rosemonte will be subject to urban frontage requirements and urban improvements north to the existing crosswalk on the north side of SE 11yth ST.) Alternatively, due to the potential need to construct an urban curb and gutter section along the east side of 14Sth Avenue SE (to re-profile 14Sth Avenue SE, and maintain the resultant slope grading within existing right-of-way), the applicant may elect to provide a graded surface on the east side of 14Sth Ave SE to ensure that school-age pedestrians are provided an acceptable-width walkway surface behind the curbing. The walkway shall be designed to the satisfaction of the school district and DOES. Mitigation/Impact Fees 13. The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either: (1) pay the MPS fee at the final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System FILE NO L02P0005 Page 14 • • (MPS), have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the date of building permit application. 14. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes impact fees 'to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be assessed and collected immediately prior to the recording, using the fee schedules in effect when the plat receives final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit issuance, Wetlands 15. Preliminary plat review has identified specific requirements which apply to this project as listed below. All other applicable requirements from K.C.C. 21A.24 shall also be addressed by the applicant. a. The Class 2 wetland shall have a minimum 50-foot buffer of undisturbed vegetation as measured from the wetland edge. b. Sensitive area tract(s) shall be used to delineate and protect sensitive areas and buffers in development proposals for subdivisions and shall be recorded on all documents of title of record for all affected lots. c. Buffer width averaging may be allowed by King County if it will provide additional protection to the wetland/stream or enhance there functions, as long as the total area contained in the buffer on the development proposal site does not decrease. In no area shall the buffer be less than 65 percent of the required minimum distance. To ensure such functions are enhanced a mitigation plan will be required for the remaining on-site sensitive areas. An enhancement plan shall be submitted for review during engineering review. d. A 15-foot BSBL shall be established from the edge of buffer and/or the sensitive areas Tract(s) and shown on all affected lots. e. To ensure long term protection of the Sensitive Areas a split-railed fence of no more than 4 feet in height shall be installed along the Sensitive Area Tract boundaries in the area of proposed lots. Sensitive Area signs shall be attached to the fence at no less than 100 foot intervals. f. If alterations of streams and/or wetlands are approved in conformance with K.C.C. 21A.24, then a detailed plan to mitigate for impacts from that alteration will be required to be reviewed and approved along with the plat engineering plans. A performance bond or other financial guarantee will be required at the time of plan approval to guarantee that the mitigation measures are installed according to the plan. Once the mitigation work is completed to a DOES Senior Ecologist's satisfaction, the performance bond may be replaced by a maintenance bond for the remainder of the five-year monitoring period to guarantee the success of the mitigation. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and monitoring of any approved mitigation. The mitigation plan must be installed prior to final inspection of the plat. g. Prior to commencing construction activities on the site, the applicant shall temporarily mark sensitive areas tract(s) in a highly visible manner, and these areas must remain so marked until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive areas are completed. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 15 ._._-_._----------- • • h. During engineering plat review the applicant shall provide a wetland hydrology analysis to demonstrate how the wetland hydrology will be maintained post-construction. i. Detention out-fall structures maybe permitted within the wetland/stream buffers, however, structures shall be located in the outer edge of the buffer, if possible. All buffer impacts shall be mitigated. 16. Development authorized by this approval may require other state and/or federal permits or approvals. It is the applicant's responsibility to correspond with these agencies prior to beginning work on the site. 17. During engineering review, the plan set shall be routed to the sensitive areas group to determine if the above conditions have been met. Geotechnical 18. The applicant shall delineate all on-site erosion hazard areas on the final engineering plans (erosion hazard areas are defined in KCC 21A06.415). The delineation of such areas shall be approved by a DOES geologist. The requirements found in KCC 21A.24.220 concerning erosion hazard areas shall be met, including seasonal restrictions on clearing and grading activities. Sensitive Area 19. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSITIVE AREAS AND BUFFERS Dedication of a sensitive area tracUsensitive area and buffer conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tracUsensitive area and buffer. This interest includes the preservation of native vegetation for all purposes that benefit the public health, safety and welfare, including control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The sensitive area tracUsensitive area and buffer imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the land subject to the tracUsensitive area and buffer the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tracUsensitive area and buffer. The vegetation within the tracUsensitive area and buffer may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency, unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the tracUsensitive area and buffer and the area of development activity must be marked or otherwise flagged to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on a lot subject to the sensitive area tracUsensitive area and buffer. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required 15-foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 16 • • Other 20. The plat design shall be revised to provide the minimum suitable recreation space consistent with the requirements of K.C.C. 21A.14.180 and K.C.C. 21A. 14.190 (i.e., minimum area, as well as, sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., location, area calculations, dimensions, landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES prior to or concurrent with the submittal of engineering plats. b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. 21. Tract E shall be revised as a tract which is: a} combined with Track F (sensitive area), b} designated as an open space tract, or, c} designated as recreational area, if served by an approved trail (across wetland buffers) extending from the recreational Tract G and functioning as an extension of recreation from Tract G. Plans for the tract -designation and design, shall comply with codes and shall be to the satisfaction of DOES prior to engineering approval. 22. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of DOES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s}. 23. Street trees shall be provided as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and K.C.C. 21A.16.050): a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and intersections. b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located in the street right-of-way. c. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of-way line. d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners association or other workable organization unless the county has adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded plat. e. The species of trees shall be approved by DOES if located within the right-of-way, and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. f. The applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DOES prior to engineering plan approval. g. The applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at (206) 684-1622 to determine if 148th Ave SE is on a bus route. If 148th Ave SE is a bus route, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro. FILE NO L02P0005 Page 17 SEPA • • h. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance bond posted prior to recording of the plat. If a performance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DOES has completed a second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving. i. A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection fee is subject to change based on the current county fees. 24. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development. The applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. (1.) To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of East Renton will have on the intersections of SR 900/148 th Ave SE and SR 900/164 th Ave SE, the applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148 th Ave intersection: • A traffic signal, and • Eastbound and westbound left turn lanes The design for the SR 900/148 th Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of- way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April 1st and September 30 th • This seasonal restriction . shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. In lieu of the installation of the above-noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of East Renton. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for East Renton. If the above-noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of East Renton, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the applicant for East Renton shall pay a pro-rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements, in an amount proportional to the impacts of East Renton. The pro-rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the East Renton applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro-rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following: • The final East Renton lot count • The trip distribution for East Renton • The total trips contributed to the intersection of SR 900.148th Ave by the plats of Aster Park (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P3008), East Renton (L02P0005), Shamrock (L02P0014), Rosemonte (aka lronwood- L03P0018), Martin (L05P0019) and any future land use applications FILE NO L02P0005 Page 18 ----------------• • submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/148 th Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164 lh Ave High Accident Location. In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the applicant, as long as at a minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above-noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of record ing of the plat of East Renton. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] (2.) Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction of WSDOT that stopping sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148 th Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the applicant, if necessary, so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition, the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900, east of 148th Ave., to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] Q. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The subdivision shall conform to K.C.C. 16.82 relating to grading on private property. 2. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division. 3. Preliminary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responsibility to obtain any required permit or license from the State or other regulatory body. This may include, but is not limited to the following: a. Forest Practice Permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. b. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from WSDOE. c. Water Quality Modification Permit from WSDOE. d. Water Quality Certification (401) Permit from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. R. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Preliminary Plat Map 2. Renton Sewer Availability letter 3. Road Variance/ L03V0049 4. Surface Water Management Variance/ L02V0089 5. Surface Water Management Variance/ L04V0103 6. Density Calculation Worksheet 7. Recreation cross section for Tract G (previously labeled Tract C) FILE NO L02P0005 Page 19 • • S. TRANSMITTED TO PARTIES LISTED HEREAFTER: ANDERSON, ROBERT L. , PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98038 CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT RALPH HICKMAN 9720 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 CHILDS, R. KRISTINE & KEITH, 12004 -148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 CLAUSSEN, KIM SR. PLANNER, DDESI LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 DALRY, MIKE, 11524 -148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 DINSMORE, LISA CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DOES 1 LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 DONNELLY, CLAUDIA, 10415 147TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 DYE, PETE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER, DOES ILUSD MS: OAK -DE 0100 GILLEN, NICK WETLAND REVIEW, DOES 1 LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GOLL, SHIRLEY CURRENT PLANNING SECTION, DOES 1 LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GRAVES, JOHN LOZIER HOMES CORPORATION 1203 -114TH AVE. SE BELLEVUE, WA 98004 KC HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE, ATTN: MARKAIGINGER MS, YES-CC-0404 LANGLEY, KRISTEN LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DOES 1 LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 LIND, REBECCA CITY OF RENTON EDNSP DEPT. 1055 S. GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98058 SCHARER, KAREN PROJECT MANAGER II, DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 SEATTLE KC HEALTH DEPT E ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 14350 SE EASTGATE WAY BELLEVUE WA 98007 SLATTEN, SARA CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 TOWNSEND STEVE SUPERVISOR, LUIS DOES MS OAK DE 0100 TRIAD ASSOCIATES, 11814 115TH AVE NE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 WEST, LARRY GEO REVIEW, DOES 1 LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 WHITING, KELLY, KC DOT RD SERV DIV MS KSC-TR-0231 WHITTAKER BRUCE SR ENGR, ERS/LUSD MS OAK DE 0100 CORE DESIGN INC., 14711 NE 29TH PL, #101 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 CRULL, RICK & DEBRA, 11813 148TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 EGGERT, URSULA, 15520 SE 116TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059-6014 ZIMMERMAN, GREGG CITY OF RENTON PLANNING 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98055 12/21/2006 AM FILE NO L02P0005 Page 20 o i ! ! • ~~,...,.... -I-t_ ~"""""'C"'\"""_~\tAI''''''''fIW\''''_, ... ii iI , I ! ~ , , if 1--__ -+-_+_ ,,' "I i ~! I-- _ .. ~_...L. -:-..L :........ ___ -l ___ . _~ \\ ,/ ,Ii /' , ,. i i !-I J L.:_( ; -, • • , " 0 = 0 ." ~ ili z m -: • 0 ." ~ % m '" m -: • .. ~ % m '" m -: • 0 " ~ % m Z m -: ,. • r r Z '" m " 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ,z = " '" ~ 1" ;IE !I' PRELIMINARY PtA T I' U! II \1~/ I "II' . r I ~ WA8H1NQTON CAMWE'ST DEVELOPMENT EAST RENTON KCI L02P0005 KIHQ COUNTY, L02P0005 ATTACHMENT 1. 1 o} Z. Preliminary Plat Map ;(hibit No. 2, f 'm No. Lf02AmS5§'" ."hled ~'U 3t9- ,nil"',: dearing Examiner " • -'~"","-",,'''' , ....... .-~ .. \"''''.\""7 ..................... \' ... _ .... _\' .. ~ .. , ..... ~<~. ~~.'''.\ ~. 'f. ."; .-----r--T---·--:--:-"--, ------t--<-----.. -.. ---._------------" ... ---": -:----.-\~ -.- ---:. ...... '-. 0 i ! i I • • • ;. c I. II> .,. Ii • C II> ... I '" 'I 'f', 1 . \ .... ' ., , ... ' i$lll!I'" l " _ ..... -.. _ ... _- 1-;.,.'=-··----_ ............ KING COUNTY. L02P0005 ATTACHMENT 1_ 'l'! z,. • PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN KINe:; COUNTY R·4 LA YOUT CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT EAST RENTON ..--.. ' . .... , .. I!: WABImIOTON 1'1 1I!!i \~~/ I .. II' , r I ~ • Jesse Tanner, Mayor March 28, 2002 Sara Slatten Camwest Development 9720 NE 1 20th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 CIT~F RENTON Planning/Bl'ilamglPublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator ReCEIVED APR 172002 LAN~~~fOSEUNTY RVICES SUBJECT: SANITARY SEWERAVAILABILITY -EAST RENTON PROPERTY KCPID NO 102305-9017,9023 PROPOSED 68 LOT PLAT This letter shall serve as a supplement to the sewer availability form prepared for the subject site dated March 28, 2002. The City 01 Renton can provide sanitary sewer serVice to this proposed development as submitted to the City on July 26, 2001 and as indicated on the preliminary plat drawing prepared by Triad and Associates with a production date of August 13, 200 I. This submittal meets the City's basic criterion for zoning and land use required to receive sewer availabilIty. Sewer service to this proposed plat may come from two different portions of the City's system. The first alternative would be for this development to flow to the south and connect to the City'S East Renton Interceptor system. Another option would be for the development to flow to the north into the City's Honey Creek system. The exact means for service to be provided will be determined as you proceed with the platting process. As you are aware, the methodology may also be predicated upon when the adjacent properties proceed with development. This sewer availability is also conditioned upon the requirement that a covenant to annex document be executed prior to the issuance of any City permits for the installation of sewer to serve this plat. The format of this document is currently being developed by the City and will be forwarded to you upon its completion. Fees for this plat will include System Development Charges of $760.00 per lot, Special Assessment District charges foreither the East Renton or Honey Creek Systems, $60 per lot side sewer permit fees, right-of,way fee and bond to be determined upon submittal, inspection and plan review fee of 5% of estimated construction cost, and a King County permit fee equal to 100% of costs billed by the County to the City. If you ha.-,-ve~", qU~j.GnS-ieg i g this availability, please contact me at (425) 430-7212. / / __ --:;.T'7.V--.. -·· .. cc: Rebecca Lind, EDNSP ____ ~H~·UDI~y~IS~JQ~N~S~!IllJTU!~IIUTllIE~S~/D~Q~C~SaalliQQU2~-1~93WdmQ~dDllM~C'lllf ______________ ~ ____________ ~~ 1'J 1L ~ 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 * This paper contains 50% re;cled material, 30% post consumer AHE.AD OF THE .cURVE L02P0005 ATTACHMENT 2. Renton Sewer Availability letter txhlbit No. ~2r:::u..; .... 2. _____ _ Item No. LQ 2.PC)~O S Received ~ • 2.2 -~7 ~"_ I'dna County Hearing Exap" " .j ® • KIng County Road Services Division Department of Transportation 201 SouthJackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3856 October 20, 2004 CamWest Development CIO Chris Bicket, P.E. P.O. Box 65254 Seattle, WA 98155 • RE: Road Variance L03V0049 East Renton Property Plat Related File L02P0005 Dear SirlMadam: Thank you for submitting your application for a road variance from the King County Road Standards (KCRS). You requested a variance from Section 2.12 of the KCRS concerning the stopping sight distance (SSD) along the plat frontage on 148 th Avenue SE. l48th Avenue SE is a collector arterial with posted speed limit of 3 5 MPH. The original proposal to match the curb and sidewalk section to the existing vertical alignment has been revised to a 620-foot vertic,al crest curve that will lower the alignment by up to 3.5 feet and improve SSD. The revised design will utilize the twocfoot target criteria in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official's (AASHTO) manual. The proposal will provide 455 feet of SSD along the crest curve that will meet KCRS with a downgrade cOf{ection for the average 6% grade. I approve a variance to allow the 620-foot .. vertical curve with 455 feet of SSD, utilizing a two-foot target. The slight grade break (under 1 %) at the north end of the vertical curve is also acceptable. No variance is required for the vertical crest curve 400 feet to the. west of the site because the SSD meets KCRS approaching the west property line. A copy of the staffs analysis, findings and conclusions is enclosed. If you have any questions, please call Craig Comfort, Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, at 206c263-6109. ~erely A. \ . <-...#.:;;a(bIU~47'~ Paulette Norman, P.E. . County Road Engineer PN:CC:kc L02P0005 ATTACHMENT 3. Exhibit No . .....=2..:... 3.J-. __ _ Item No. '-'» 2.ft\N)S Rer.llivcd :-. "2 ~ ~'+ ~,ini) County Hearing Examiner Road Variance/ L03V0049 • • ® King COunty Department of Development and EnvirOnmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SIN Renton, WA 98055-1219 December 19, 2002 Cam West Development 9720 NE 120th Place Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Todd A. Oberg, P,E. Triad Associates 11814 _llSlh Avenue NE Kirkland, W A 98034 RE: East Rentop Subdiyjsion KCSWDM Adjustment Reauest (File No. L02V0089) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Divisio~ Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment request for the East Renton subdivision. You are requesting approval for an adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Core . Requirement No.1, Section 1.2.1, Discbarge at the Natural Location. Our review afthe infonnation and a site visit provides the following findings: 1. The proposed East Renton subdivision is located on the west side of 148 th Avenue SE at SE 1201h Street. The 66101, 19.6 acre, proposed East Renton subdivision is filed under Lan~ Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02POOO5. 2. The East Renton subdivision is located in the Honey (Dew) Creek subbaSin of the May Creek basin. The site is subject to the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The large, rectangular site oriented in an east-west direction is characterized by an upland area to the east adjacent to 148th Avenue SE and a low, -wetland area to the west. The lower, western area contains two hawks nests and associated buffers within the wetland area tbat"encompasses two separate drainage paths that cross the north property line through existing culverts. The developable, eastern portion ofthe site containS a low ridge that traverses that portion of the site from northwest to southeast. The southwest portion sheetflows to the wetland area to the west and the northeast portion sheetflows across the north property line onto the adjacent parcel. All drainage paths converge on the adjacent parcel to the north and fonn the headwaters to Honey Creek that flows north. At least a quarter mile downstream, Honey Creek eventually turns west just to the south of SR900. The western side of 148 th Avenue SE is the only upstream area that contributes flow to the site. I East RentonIL02V0089 December 19,2002 Page 2 of3 4. The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention and water quality facility located in the north central portion of the site. The allowed releases would then be disp~ed to the wetland/stream buffer area. Nuisance flows across the north property line would be significantly curtailed. Conceptual drainage plans show that frontage improvements are included in the storm drain system. 5. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversion. 6. The Level One Drainage Analysis did not identify any restrictions or problems associated with the proposed discharge location or downstream path. 7. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. • Based on these fmdings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow the diversion ofrunoffto a single facility draining to the onsite wetland/stream buffer area with the following conditions: 1. The release rates for-the detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility. 2. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the facility at fuJI development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be reduced by. any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. AID to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all stann events requiring detention. The design Technical Infonnation Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination. 3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements. 4. All onsite or offsite drainage facilities must be located in a public right-of-way or stonn drainage tract dedicated to-King County. 5. Additional stOtm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing review ·will apply to this project. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270. ~ James Sanders, P.E. Development Engineer Engiiteering Review Section . Land Use SetVices Division ~ Supervising Engineer Site Engineering arid Planning Section Building Services Division cc: Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stonnwater Services Section., KCDNR Randall Parsons, P .E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Pete Dye, P .E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Lanny Henocb.. Planner II, Current Planiring Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Semor Engineer, Engine~g Review Section, LUSD Q) U C CO -;:: CO > .... C <D E <D Ol CO C CO ~ '-<D .... CO ci z "" .c -<= ~ S~ <DO UO CO> 'eN ::JO CJ)-I ..q I- Z ill LO~ OI 00 8:< "II-01--1« a Z E '" == E en x LU C> c::: -c '" '" :c :>, E "0 == '" co :> C> -ii3 0-'-' c::: '" a: ~ , . • • ® King County Deparbnent of Development and Environmental Servlces 900 Oakesdale Avenue &N Renton, WA 98055-12t9 March 24, 2005 Sara, Slatten CamWest Development 9720 NE 120111 Place #100 Kiddand. W A 98034 Rebecca S. Cuslunan, P.E. Triad Associates 11814-11Sth AvenueNE Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: . East Renton Subdivision 1998"KCSWDM Shared Facility Plan: DDES Project File No. L02FOO05 and Adjustment File No. L04VO I 03 Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, ,has completed review of the Shared Facility Plan request for the East Renton and adjoining Rosemonte subdivisions.' This request addresses the 1998 King County Smfaee Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), Special Condition No.1, Section 1.3.1, Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements and the Shared Facility Plan Guidelines published in a memo dated September IS, 1999 describing the . Shared Facility Plan approval process. Our review of the preliminary plat plans provides the following findings:- 1. The East Renton subdivision is iocated on the east side of 148th Avenue SE at approximately SE 120th Street. The 66 lot, 19.6 acre, East Renton subdivision is undergoing preliminary revieW under LUSD file nVID-ber L02P0005. The East Renton subdivision had previously processed 1998 KCSWDM adjustment L02V0089 for a diversion to consolidate subbasin flows into a single, on-site facility. 2. The proposed Rosemonte subdivision is located adjacent to East Renton along the north property line. The 41 lot, 14.7 acre Rosemonte subdivision is also undergoing preliminary approva11U1der LUSD file number L03POO 18. At this time, Cam West (developer of East Renton),is in negotiation to purchase the eastern portion of Rosenionte. The developer of Rose monte is also in negotiation with the City of Renton to ~ex the western portion ofRosemonte into the city. 3. The East Renton and Rosemonte subdivisions are located in the Honey Creek subbasin of the May Creek basin. Both sites are subject to the Level One flow control and Basic wateiquality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 4. The proposal is to officially acknowledge the acconunodation of the northeast portion of the East Renton subdivision that is natijrally tributary to the north property line into East RentoniL02P0005 and 1,,-osemonte/L03P0018 Ma>ch 24, 2005 Page 2 of3 the shared facility design of the Rosemonte subdivision, This approach would abandon the diversion adjustment (L02V0089) previously processed that would have diverted flows from this area into the East Renton's on-site drainage facility. 5. IfCamWest purchases the easte.m portion of Rose monte, as previously indicated, then these two projects could be designed and reviewed concurrently. Construction could . then either occur concurrently or in phases with.the understanding that the shared drainage facility would be constructed before the development of the two contributing portions of each site. If the two projects remain with separate applicants, the shared drainage facility in the Rosemonte subdivision would still need to be constructed first to its final cocliguration. 6. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivisions will be more economical in long tenn maintenance. . Based on these findings, we hereby approve this request for a shared drainage facility with shared facilitY plan for the East Renton and Rosemonte subdivisions with the following conditi~ns: 1. The developer of the shared drainage facility is responsible for any cost sharing agreements that may need to be set up as part of the implementation of the shared facility plan. 2 .. Engineering plans for both the East Renton and Rosemonte subdivisions shall note this approved shared facility plan. 3. If the two projects are phased separately in time, the shared drainage facility must be constructed first and operational before any lots tributary to the facility can be recorded. 4. If there is a change of design standards or project design that requires modification of the shared facility design, an update to the shared facility plan shall be provided as part of the trailing project's engineering review submittal. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM Shared Facility Plan approval or its conditions, please contact Mark Bergam -at (206) 296·7270. Sincerely, ~ James Sanders, P .E. Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division' ~ Supervising Engineer Site Engineering and Planning Section Building Services Division ~ <P '" ~ UJ C> <= .;::: '" '" :J: .. I I Z, o .:C' :oz " -';0 :::.- • iQ::DO ~ ~ ~.~ <Cf .-!E ~ "" »=""C: I..(Jj ~ o:r: SE --Q) () C C\l 'C C\l > ..... C Q) E Q) Ol C\l C C\l :::'2! L.. Q) ..... C\l sC'? 0 Q)..- ()O ~> :J"<t (1)5 LO I- Z UJ LO:::'2! OI o 0° 0..« C\l1-01-...1« • • ® King County Oeparbnent of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 2()s'29!)..$6()() TIY 206-296-7217 Web date: 09/2712006 Sl!JBElIVISION DENSllfY & DlMENSI(:)NCALCULA HONS For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600, File Number (To be filled in by DOES) 1---PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION WORKSHEET RELATING TO DENSITY AND DIMENSIONS Several development regulations playa role in the creation of a subdivision within King County. Determining the allowable density, minimum density, and a lot width on a piece of property can be confusing. This worksheet will assist you in correctly applying specific portions of the code and will be used to determine if a proposed subdivision or short subdivision meets the density and dimensions provisions of the King County Zoning Code (Title 21 A). This worksheet is designed to assist applicants and does not replace compliance with adopted local, state and federal laws. Pre-application conferences are required prior to submittal of a subdivision or short subdivision. These conferences help to clarify issues and answer questions. They may save you both time and money by eliminating delays resulting from requests for additional information and revisions. You may call 206-296--6600 to find out how to arrange for a pre-application conference. Worksheet Prepared By' Me.i -lhjo~ L;" / T I"t~oi tlss.o<-1 .. 1es Date, /2// B/zoof, (P!ntName) Subdivision Name: c:;t:(":lt ~ Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: .;" ~ I.e £",~I, I&d,um Lf-r 2-PtJIAC. I • Zoning: i?-4- If more than one Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation or zone classification exists for the property, show the boundary between the land uses or zones and the area within each on the preliminary plat map. If a single Jot is divided by a zone boundary, transferring density across zones on that lot may be permitted subject to the provisions of K.C.C. 21A.12.200. PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY THE APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THIS FORM I. Site Area (K.C.C. 21A.06.1172) also see (K.C.C. 21A.12.080): Site area (in square feet) is the TOTAL horizontal area of the project site. Calculation: -::-:_--;;,-;;--;-__ Gross horizontal area of the project site 740 8"3 fa Site area in square feet 17,01 NOTE: To continue calculations, convert sile area in square feet to acres by dividing by 43,560 Site area in acres NOTE: When calculating the site area for parcels in the RA Zone, if the site area should result in a fraction of an acre, the foliowing shall apply: Fractions of .50 or above shall be rounded up to the next whole number and fractions below .50 shall be rounded down. Example: If the site area in acres is 19.5 acres (less the submerged land and less the area that is required to be dedicated on the perimeter of a project site for public right-of-way) the site area can be rounded up to 20 acres. No further rounding is allowed, (See K.C.C, 21A.12.080) II. Base Density (K.C.C. 21A.12.030· .040 tables): The base density is determined by the zone designations(s) for the lot. 4-du/acre III. Allowable Dwelling Units and Rounding (K.C.C. 21A.12.070): The base number of dwelling units is calculated by multiplying the site area by the base density in dwelling units per acre (from K.C.C. 21A.12.030 -.040 tables). I 7.0 I site area in acres (see Section 1.) X 4 base density (see Section 11) = ~ 5 allowable dwelling units Except as noted below, when calculations result in a fraction. the fraction is rounded to the nearest whole number as follows: A Fractions of .50 or above shall be rounded up; and B. Fractions below .50 shall be rounded down . NOTE: For parcels in the RA Zone. no rounding is allowed when calculating the allowable number of dwelling units. For example, if the calculation of the number of dwelling units equaled 2.75. the result woukl be 2 dwelling units. Rounding up to 3 is not allowed. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.070(E).) IV. Required On-site Recreation Space (K.C.C. 21A.14.180): This section must be completed only if the proposal is a residential development if more than four dwelling units in the UR and R zones, stand-alone townhouses in the NB zone on property deSignated Commercial Outside of Center if more than four units, or any mixed use development if more than four units. Recreation space must be computed by multiplying the recreation space requirement per unit type by the proposed number of such dwelling units (K.C.C. 21A.14.180). Note: King County has the discretion to accept a fee in lieu of all or a portion of the required recreation space per K.C.C. 21A14.185. Apartments and town houses developed at a density greater than eight units per acre, and mixed use must provide recreational space as follows: 90 square feet X 170 square feet X 170 square feet X _____ proposed number of studio and one bedroom units proposed number of two bedroom units ===== proposed number of three or more bedroom units Recreation space requirement + + co Z a ;2 z E ~ '" =: ~ '" <:: "E '" x LU ..... OJ Q) <:: Q) "'" '" .c <I> <Jl :c .::t:. .2;> "-, ,-:: 0 -:::; -::l S '" ::oc' '0 <.:> "" CC 0 t.) ·c OJ <:: 0 ~. :;::; (\J ::J U (\J () >.~ ..... "00 a3.~ 0 co I- Z W l!)~ OI o ,0 () 'a.. « gJ~ . ...J « • • Required On-site Recreation Space Continued Residential subdivisions, townhouses and apartments developed at a density of eight units or less per acre must provide recreatiqnal sp'ace as follows: 390 square feet X biP proposed number of units z>,74-0 5f Mobile home parks shall provide recreational space as follows: 260 square feet X ______ proposed number of units V. Net Buildable Area (K.C.C. 21A.06.797): This section is used for computing minimum density and must be completed only if the site is located in the R-4 through R-48 zones and designated Urban by the King County Comprehensive Plan. The net buildable area is the site area (see Section I) less the following areas: () + 117,"8't areas within a project site which are required to be dedicated for public rights-of-way in excess of sixty (60') of width critical areas and 'their buffers, to the extent they are required by King County to remain undeveloped + f) + Z~,740 areas required for above ground stormwater control facilities including, but not limited 10, retention/delention ponds, biofiltration swales and setbacks from such ponds and swales areas required by King County 10 be dedicated or reserved as on-sile recreation areas. + + 0 Deduct area within slormwaler control facility if requesting recreation space credit as allowed by KC.( 21A.14.180 (see Section IV) regional ulility corridorn, and ___ --'0"'-other areas, excluding setbacks, required by King County to remain undeveloped Z. 2.-3 ( 4 z..4-Total reductions Calculation: 74o,8'"K/o site area in square feet (see Section1) ZZ3&~ ~'7HZ /1,88' Total reductions Net buildable area in square feet NOTE: convert site area is square feet to acres by dividing by 43,560 Nel buildable area in acres VI. Minimum Urban Re~ldentlal Density (K.C.C. 21A.12,060): The minimum density requirement applies Q!lli to the R-4 through R-48 zones. Minimum density is determined by multiplying the base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section 11) by the net buildable area of the site in acres (see Section V) and then multiplying the resulting product by the minimum density percentage from the K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. The minimum density requirements may be phased or waived by King County in certain cases. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.060.) Also, the minimum density requirement does not apply to properties ioned R-4located within the rural town of Fall City. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.030(B)12.) Calculation: ~ base density in dulac (see Section II) X /1. if' Net buildable area in acres (see Section V) 47.52-X minimum density % set forth in K.C.C. 21A 12.030 or as adjusted in Section VII . minimum dwelling units required (~5) . •.. "~~--.. ~~--.. --...... " ..... ~ .--_ ....... _-- VII, Minimum Density Adjustments for Moderate Slopes (K.C,C. 21A.12.087): Residential developments in the R-4, R·6 and R-8 zones may modify the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 based on the weighted average slope of the net buildable area of the site (see Section V). To determine the weighted average slope, a topographic'survey is required-to cal~ulate the net buildable area(s) within each of the following slope increments and then multiplying the number of square feet in each slope increment by the median slope value of each slope incres:nent as follows: ______ sq. ft 0-5% stope increment X 2.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 5-10% slope increment X 7.5% median slope value = ------+ + sq. ft 10-15% slope increment X 12,5% median slope value = -----+ + sq. ft 15-20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = -----+ + SQ. ft 20-25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 25·30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 30-35% slope increment X 32.5% median slope value = + • + sq. fI 35-40% slope increment X 37.5% median slope value = ______ Total square feet in net buildable area ______ Tolal square feel adjusted for slope Calculation: ______ total square feel adjusted for slope divided by tolal square feet in net buildable area -=====:: weighted average slope of net buildable area _ % (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent -round up to nearesl whole percent) Use the table below to determine the minimum density factor. This density is substituted for the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table when calculating the minimum density as shown in Section VI of this worksheet Weighted Average Slope of Net Minimum Density Factor Buildable Area(s) of Site: 0% less than 5% 85% 5% less Ihan 15% 83%, less 1.5% each 1% of average slope in excess of 5% 15% less than 40% 66%, less 2,0% for each 1% of average slope in excess of 15% EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR MINIMUM DENSITY ADJUSTMENTS FOR MODERATE SLOPES: sQ. ft 0-5% slope increment X 2.5% median slope value = 0,000 sq. ft 5-10% slope increment X 7.5% median slope value = 0,000 sq. ft 10-15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = sq. ft 15-20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = sq. ft 20-25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = sq. fl25-30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = sq. ft 30-35% slope increment X 32.5% median slope value = ~+ 2,500 + ==: ----+ -----+ ___ sq. fl 35-40% slope increment X 37.5 % median slope value = 0,000 Total square !eet in net buildable area 3,250 Total SQuare feet adjusted for slope 3,250 Total square-feet adjusted for slope divided by 30,000 Total SQuare feet in net buildable area -=~.1=0=8=3i33ill= Weighted average slope of net buildable area _ 11% (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent-round up to nearest whole percent) Using the tabla above, an 11% weighted average slope of net buildable area falls within the 5% -less than 15% range which has a minimum density factor of 83%, less 1.5% for each 1% of average slope in excess of 5%. Since 11 % is 6% above 5%, multiply 6 times 1.S which would equal 9%. Subtract 9% from 83% for an adjusted minimum density factor of 74%. This'replaces the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table . <:" ..... ~.n-..;h,N __ ......... § .... "n<> ......... ...... _l.e .. ",.~"'" no"'''''''''''' D_"~'~ ..... (l) (l) .s:: en ~ ..... a S c a :;:::; til :J U ro U ~~ en a5~ 0 c.o I- Z LU 1O~ .OI '0 iO~ l~ I- '0 I-...J« ~ ' ... ". \--, . , • /~~ ..... .~~ ... ~, . ;, ~. ~~ .. , . L02P0005 ATTACHMENT 7, , . ",~~ ..... '. '.~. : ..... ~ '. -if .... , :~ . '-J i~ t ' .. ~ " I~ I~ I~ . '. l , .•.... '-;:' "'1\,. . . , ... [ ." •' , \ I 1\1 ~ . ~. I "";::--#+---1 . .. ''''''' . \\ . ~ I . .. ~ .. ~~.' .. . I. Uyy . 'H"Y " DOGE 13r~3S~' dH Wd5E:t GaDG DG d3S Exhibit No, -:=2.=-:,~']=~ __ _ Item ['10. Lt')ZPODOS Received 'P, 22 . (;) ~_ Recreation cross sectio~if~Founty Hearing EXal1lliler . Tract G (previously labeled Tract C) GolI, Shirley From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: • GolI, Shirley Thursday, December 14, 20063:48 PM Council, Clerk Proposed Ordinance requests • L02P0005 East Renton Subdivision cover memo. doc; L02P0005 East Renton Subdivision Ord.doc; L02P0005.East Renton Subdivision Agenda.doc; L03P0018 Rosemonte Subdivision Agenda.doc; L03P0018 Rosemonte Subdivision cover memo. doc; L03P0018 Rosemonte Subdivision Ord.doc Please let me know if any questions hopefully I did these right they are being heard together same date & time -thanks L02POOOS East L02POOOS East L02POOOS.East L03P0018 L03P0018 L03P0018 Renton Subdivisi ... Renton Subdivisi ... Renton Subdivisi... semonte Subdlvlsiorsemonte Subdivlsiorsemonte Subdivisior MAIN FILE Copy 1 ... • • ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton WA 98057-5219 DATE: TO: FM: RE: December15,2006 Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council King County Council Lisa Dinsmore, Planning Supervisor Land Use Services Division Introductorv Ordinances for Preliminarv Plats Attached are Introductory Ordinance(s) for the Hearing Examiner's agenda scheduled for public hearing, as follows: File No. L02P0005 -EAST RENTON SUBDIVISION scheduled to be heard on March 22, 2007 A copy of the hearing agenda for each item is also attached for your information. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 296-7171. Attachments .. title .. body • • AN ORDINANCE authorizing a subdivision on certain property located west of 148 hAve SE at approximately 120th St. Postal City Renton, at the request of Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. department of development and environmental services file no. L02P0005 l • • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton WA 98057-5212 PRELIMINARY PLAT AGENDA HEARING EXAMINER FOR METROPOLITAN-KING COUNTY COUNCIL LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION, BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK KING COUNTY DDES HEARING ROOM 900 OAKESDALE AVE SW, RENTON WA March 22, 2007 -PUBLIC HEARING 9:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible FILE NO. L02POOOS EAST RENTON PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST Owner: Address/Phone: STR: Location: Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120'h Place Suite 100, Kirkland WA 98034 Phone: 425-825-1955 10-23-05 Located west of 148'h Ave SE at approximately 120'h Street Postal City Renton Land Measurement: 17.01 acres Proposed Use: Fire District: School District: This is a request for a subdivision for 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings in the R-4 zone. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. No. 0010 #411 Issaquah • • GolI, Shirley From: Masuo, Janet Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 12:49 PM GolI, Shirley To: Subject: RE: Proposed Ordinance requests L02P0005 is 2007-0010 and L03POOl8 is 2007-0011. -----Original Message----- From: Gell, Shirley Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 3:48 PM To: Council, Clerk Subject: Proposed Ordinance requests Please let me know if any questions hopefully I did these right they are being heard together same date & time - thanks « File: L02P0005 East Renton Subdivision cover memO. doc » «File: L02P0005 East Renton Subdivision Ord.doc » «File: L02P0005.East Renton Subdivision Agenda.doc» «File: L03P0018 Rosemonte Subdivision Agenda.doc» «File: L03P0018 Rosemonte Subdivision cover memo. doc » «File: L03P0018 Rosemonte Subdivision Ord.doc » / 1 • • TO: FAX NO.: PHONE NO.: King County Dept. of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 Fax No. 206-296-6613 or 206-296-7051 FAX COVER SHEET Gingerl Marka 206-296-1654 206-296-4660 Total numbers of pages including this cover sheet: 4 Date: 12/18/2006 From: Shirley Gall Sender'S Name Time: 11:40 Phone: 206-296-6796 Sender's Phone Permit Name/Number: L02P0005 -East Renton Parties of Record list. applicant name & address. property location. COMMENTS: Hearing date is set for March 22. 2007. SEPA appeal period will end on January 11, 2007 .. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NUMBER· # 2007· 0010 ExaminerFaxCover.doc , ANDERSON. ROBERT L. PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY. WA 98038 CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT RALPH HICKMAN n20 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 . ' CHILDS, R. KRISTINE & KEITH 12004·148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 98059 CLAUSSEN, KIM SR. PLANNER DDES/ LUSD MS: OAK· DE· 0100 CRULL, RICK 11813148THAVESE RENTON, WA 98059 DALRY, MIKE 11524· 148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 98059 DINSMORE, LISA CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DOES / LUSD MS: OAK ·DE· 0100 DONNELL Y, CLAUDIA 10415147TIIAVESE RENTON, WA 98059 DYE, PETE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER DOES /LUSD MS; OAK ·DE 0100 • L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 • GILLEN. NICK WETLAND REVIEW DOES / LUSD MS: OAK ·DE· 0100 GOLL. SHIRLEY CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDES/LUSD MS: OAK ·DE· 0100 GRA VES, JOHN LOZIER HOMES CORPORATION 1203· I 14TH AVE. SE BELLEVUE, WA 98004 98004 KC HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE ATTN: MARKNGlNGER MS YES·CC·0404 LANGLEY, KRISTEN LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES/LUSD MS: OAK· DE· 0100 LIND, REBECCA CITY OF RENTON EDNSP DEPT. 1055 S. GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98058 SCHARER, KAREN PROJECT MANAGER II MS: OAK ·DE· 0100 DDES/LUSD SEATTLE KC HEALTH DEPT E ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 14350 SE EASTGATE WAY BELLEVUE WA 98007 SLATTEN, SARA CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 -------------------------------.----------------------------- • roWNSEND STEVE SUPERVISOR LUIS DOES MS OAK DE 0100 fRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814115THAVENE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 WEST, LARRY GEO REVIEW' DDES I LUSD MS OAK -DE-0100 WHITING, KELLY KC DOT RD SERV DIV MS KSC-TR-023I WHITTAKER BRUCE SR ENGR ERS/LUSD MS OAK DE 0100 • • L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 L02POOO5 ·. • Notee of Decision- SEPA Threshold Determination and Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division Notice of Recommendation & Hearing 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 File No.: L02P0005 Project Name: East Renton (Type 3) Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Development" Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten Phone No.: 425-825-1955 DDES Project Manager: Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager II Phone No.: 206-296-7114 Email: karen.scharer@metrokc.gov Project Location: West of 148th Ave SE at approximately 120th St. STR 10-23-05 Parcel No.: 1023059023 Project Description: This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 square feet. Permits Requested: Formal Subdivision Department Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner: Approve, subject to conditions SEPA Threshold Determination: Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance Issued: December 15, 2006 Date of Public Hearing: March 22, 2007 at 9:30 AM DDES Hearing Room -firstfloor 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 The Department of Development and EnVironmental Services (DOES) will Issue a written report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Persons wishing to receive a copy of the report should contact ODES at the address listed below. Following the close of the public hearing" the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County Council. Appeal procedures will be stated in the Examiner's written decision. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact the Project Manager at the phone number listed above. Written comments may also be submitted to DOES. A public hearing as required by law will be held to consider the approval of this application. If the Renton School . District announces a district-wide school closure due to adverse weather conditions or similar area emergency, the public hearing on this matter will be postponed. Interested parties will be notified of the time and date of the rescheduled hearing. Any questions regarding postponements and rescheduling can be directed to the Hearing Examiner's Office at (206) 296-4660. Comment/Appeal Procedure on SEPA Threshold Determination: Comments on this SEPA determination are welcome. This SEPA determination may also be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. A notice of appeal must be filed with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007, and be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 payable to the King County Office of Finance. If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed, the appellant shall also file a Statement of Appeal with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11,2007. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision being appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that decision. Further, the Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal, appeal fee or Statement of Appeal, deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Appeals must be submitted to the Department of Development and Environmental Services (ODES) at the following address: Date of Mailing: December 15, 2006 DDES--Land Use Services Division Attn: Permit Center 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 If you have any questions regarding the appeal procedures, please contact the Planner at the phone number listed abov~, If you require this material in Braille, audio cassette, or large print, call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). You are receiving this notice because our records indicate that you own property within approximately 500 because you requested to receive notice of the decision. ------------------------------------.-King County • Department of Development and Environmental Services REVISED State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for East Renton! L02P0005 Date of Revised Issuance: December 29, 2006 Date of Issuance: December 15, 2006 Project: Location: Appl icant/Contact: King County Contact: This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 square feet. West of 148th Ave SE at approximately SE 120th St. Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten Phone # 425-825-1955 Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager II Phone # 206-296-7114 or email at karen.scharer@metrokc.gov Formal Subdivision Exhibit No . .---=5~ __ _ Item No. I-t;;:,U 0 t) S) !5 King County Permits: Received ~. Z2. -Q':t Existing Zoning: R-4 Community Plan: Newcastle Basin: May.Creek SectionlTownship/Range: 10-23-05 King County Hearing Examiner Parcel # 1023059023 Notes: The mitigations have been revised to reference the subject plat of East Renton rather than the previous incorrect reference to other plats. A. This finding is based on review of the site plan showing the revised proposed development received 3/17//2006, SEPA Environmental Checklists, dated 4/3/2002, Revised Level 1 Downstream AnalysiS by Triad & Assoc., dated 11/24/2004, Traffic Impact Analysis by Garry Struthers Associates, Inc., received 4/3/2002, Garry Struthers Memorandum dated 1/23/2003, WSDOT correspondence of 2/27/2003 and 3/14/2003, Certificate of Water Availability, dated 4/4/2002, Certificate of Sewer Availability, dated 3/28/2002, Revised Wetlands Study with wildlife habitat study by C. Gary Schulz dated 07/28/2005. B. Issuance of this threshold determination does not constitute approval of the formal subdivision. The application will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County Comprehensive Plan Policies and King County Codes which regulate development activities, including the Uniform Fire and Road Standards, Surface Water Design Manual, and the Sensitive Areas Regulations. C. The Residential designation on the Land Use Map of the King County Comprehensive Plan allows for the proposed density. Additionally, this density is within the range per the R-4 Zone. The plat with 66 lots would yield an average density of 3.9 dwellings per acre (based on the site area). The lots will mostly be 50 feet by 100-105 feet with about 5,000 square feet. n-\ .. '. ... L02P00051 REV/SED ~ TO • December 29, 2006 Page 2 D. SWM Adjustment L04V0103 was approved 3/24/05 for a shared facility concept allowing the northeast corner of East Renton to utilize the eastern drainage facility in Rosemonte, the proposed plat immediately north of the subject property. E. The subject property is located southwest of the intersection of State Route 900 and 1481h Ave. SE. According to the applicant's traffic analysis, this intersection will operate at Level-of- Service "F" following the development of the proposed plat (unless improvements to the intersection are made). Per the applicant's traffic analysis, approximately 51% of the P.M. peak hour trips from the proposed plat will pass through this intersection. The proposed plat will have a significant adverse impact on this intersection per KCC 14.80.030. F. A horizontal curve exists on the east leg of the SR 900/148 1h Ave SE intersection. Based on data provided by the traffic engineer for the plat of Shamrock, which was reviewed by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), the available stopping sight distance on the east leg of the intersection meets the standards of the Washington State Highway Design Manual. G. WSDOT has concluded that, based on turn lane warrants from the Washington State Highway Desi~n Manual, eastbound and westbound left turn lanes should be constructed on SR 900 at the 148 h Ave. intersection. The proposed plat will add vehicular trips to the hazardous westbound left turn movement at this intersection. H. In order to address traffic impacts from the proposed plat, WSDOT has requested that the applicant (along with other development projects that will contribute traffic to the SR 900/146 1h Ave. intersection) improve this intersection with a traffic signal and eastbound and westbound left turn lanes. I. The intersection of SR 900/1641h Ave SE is located approximately one mile east of the subject property. This intersection of SR 900/1641h Ave SE. is located approximately one mile east of the subject property. This intersection has been identified by WSDOT as a High Accident Location, and lies within a High Accident Corridor. The subject plat will contribute approximately 10 peak hour trips to this intersection and WSDOT and the King County Department of Transportation have concluded that the subject plat will have a significant adverse impact at the intersection. The installation of a traffic signal at the 1481h Ave. SE/SR 900 intersection will mitigate the impact of the proposed plat on the 164lh Ave. intersection, by diverting traffic away from the 1641h intersection to the 1481h intersection, where following signalization, certain turning movements can be made more safety. J. King County Road Engineer reviewed and granted road variance approval on 10/20/2004 for Road Variance L03V0049 the variance approved approval was for a 620 -foot vertical curve with 455 feet of stopping sight distance, utilizing a two-foot target. Additionally approved is the slight grade break (under 1 %) at the north end of the vertical curve. Threshold Determination The responsible official finds that the above described proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment, provided the mitigation measures listed below are applied as conditions of permit issuance. This finding is made pursuant to RCW 43.21 C, KCC 20.44 and WAC 197-11 after reviewing the environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency and considering mitigation measures which the agency or the applicant will implement as part of the proposal. The responsible official finds this information reasonably sufficient· to evaluate the environmental impact of this proposal. Mitigation List The following mitigation measures shall be attached as conditions of permit issuance. These mitigation measures are consistent with policies, plans, rules, or regulations designated by KCC 20.44.080 as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this L~2PO~05 I REVISED a TO December 29, 2006 • Page 3 threshold determination is issued. Key sources of substantive authority for each mitigation measure are in parentheses; however, other sources of substantive authority may exist but are not expressly listed. 1. To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of East Renton will have on the intersections of SR 900/148th Ave SE and SR 900/164th Ave SE, the applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148th Ave intersection: • A traffic signal, and • Eastbound and westbound left turn lanes The design for the SR 900/148th Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of-way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April 1st and September 30 th • This seasonal restriction shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. In lieu of the installation of the above-noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of East Renton. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for East Renton. If the above-noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of East Renton, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the applicant for East Renton shall pay a pro-rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements. in an amount proportional to the impacts of East Renton. The pro-rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the East Renton applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro-rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following: • The final East Renton lot count • The trip distribution for East Renton • The total trips contributed to the intersection of SR 900.148 th Ave by the plats of Aster Park (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P3008), East Renton (L02P0005). Shamrock (L02P0014), Rosemonte (aka Ironwood -L03P0018), Martin (L05P0019) and any future land use applications submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/148th Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164th Ave High Accident Location. , In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the applicant, as long as at a ,--------------------------------_._._------------- ~~~P~~05 / REVISED Il TO December 29. 2006 Page 4 • minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above-noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of recording of the plat of East Renton. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] 2. Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction of WSDOT that stopping sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148 1h Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the applicant. if necessary. so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition. the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900. east of 1481h Ave .• to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] Extended Period for Comments and Appeals The SEPA determination may be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. Written co'mments or a notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 22, 2007 be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 payable to the King County Office of Finance .. Please reference the file numbers when corresponding. If a SEPA Appeal is filed, the appellant must also file a Statement of Appeal with DDES at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 22,2007. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that SEPA decision. The Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant. and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal. appeal fee or Statement of Appeal. deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Comment/appeal deadline: Appeal filing fee: Address for comment/appeal: Lisa Dinsmore. Current Planning u ervisor Current Planning Section Land Use Services Division 4:30 PM on January 22, 2007 $250 check or money order made out to the King County Office of Finance King County Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98057-5212 ATTN: Current Planning Section December 29, 2006 Date Signed r I • -.-. -:'"~ • (E Renton) FD25 (Spring Glen) FD40 Fire Protection Dist #25 Fire Protection Dist #40 P.O. Box 2925 10828 SE 176th St Renton WA 98056-0925 Renton WA 98055 MS: KSC-TR-0431 KC27 U15 Gary Kriedt Fairwood Library KC Metro Envirn. Planning 17009 -140th Av SE Renton WA 98058 mo U23 Highlands Library Kent Regional Library 2902 NE 12th St 212 - -2nd Av N Renton WA 98056 Kent WA 98032-4482 Documents Dept. Librarian U24 ATTN: Edward White PL18 King County Library System Kent Engineering Dept 960 Newport Way NW 220 -4th Av S Issaquah, WA 98027 Kent WA 98032 PL19 City of Renton PL33 Kent Planning Dept Economic Development Dept. 220 -4th Av S 1055 S. Grady Way Kent WA 98032 Renton WA 98055 Clinton G. Marsh, Director Fac. & Const. Dept SD9 R. Stracke, Facilities & Ping SD13 Kent School District # 415 Renton School Dist # 403 12033 SE 256th St. Bldg B 1220 N 4th St Kent WA 98031-6643 Renton WA 98055 Administrator SE5 Environmental Review Section ST2 Kent Sewer Utility WA State Dept of Ecology 220 -4th Av S PO Box 47703 Kent WA 98032 Olympia WA 98504-7703 Habitat Biologist, Rod Malcom TRI Russ Ladley, Fisheries Biologist TR2 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Puyallup Tribe 39015 -172nd Av SE 6824 Pioneer Wy E Auburn WA 98002 Puyallup WA 98371 TR3 Fisheries Habitat/Environment TR5 Snoqualmie Tribe Suquamish Indian Tribe PO Box 280 PO Box 498 Carnation WA 98014-0280 Suquamish WA 98392 Richard Young TR4 WD12 Tulalip Tribe Cedar River Water/Sewer Dist 7615 Totem Beach Rd 18300 SE Lk Youngs Rd Marysville WA 98271 Renton WA 8058-9799 -c ,-" Public Works Dtr Kent Water Dist 220 -4th Av S Kent WA 98032 Soos Creek Water/Sewer Dist PO Box 58039 Renton WA 98058-1039 Coal Creek Utility District 6801 132nd Place SE Newcastle, WA 98059. WA State Dept. of Wildlife 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. Mill Creek, WA 98012 WA State Dept. of Ecology NW Regional Office 3190 -160th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 WA St. Ecology DeptjWQSW Unit Linda Matlock PO Box 47696 Olympia, WA 98504-7696 Eleanor Moon KC Executive Horse Council 12230 NE 61st Kirkland, WA 98033 • WD23 WD41 WD57 • City of Renton, Public Works Dept. Development Services Div. 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98055 Water Dist #90 15606 SE 128th St Renton WA 98059-8522 Water Dist # 111 27224 -144th Av SE Kent WA 98042-9058 WA State Dept. of Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. Division P.O. Box 43155 Olympia, WA 98504-3155 WSDOT NW Region SnoKing Area MS-240 15700 Dayton Ave No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 Roger Dorstad PO Box 375 Redmond, WA 98073 WD32 WD55 WD58 _______ -'-_________ ~ ____ __l • • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services State. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for Date of Issuance: Project: Location: Applicant/Contact: King County Contact: King County Permits: East Renton! L02P0005 December 15, 2006 This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 square feet. West of 148th Ave SE at approximately 120th St. Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten Phone # 425-825-1955 Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager \I Phone # 206-296-7114 or email at karen.scharer@metrokc.gov Formal Subdivision Existing Zoning: R-4 Community Plan: Newcastle Basin: May Creek Section/Township/Range: 10-23-05 Parcel # 1023059023 Notes: A. This finding is based on review of the site plan showing the revised proposed development received 3/17112006, SEPA Environmental Checklists, dated 4/3/2002, Revised Level 1 Downstream Analysis by Triad & Assoc., dated 11124/2004, Traffic Impact Analysis by Garry Struthers Associates, Inc., received 413/2002, Garry Struthers Memorandum dated 1/23/2003, WSDOT correspondence of 2/27/2003 and 3/14/2003, Certificate of Water Availability, dated 4/412002, Certificate of Sewer Availability, dated 3/28/2002, Revised Wetlands Study with wildlife habitat study by C. Gary Schulz dated 07/28/2005. B. Issuance of this threshold determination does not constitute approval of the formal subdivision. The application will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County Comprehensive Plan Policies and King County Codes which regulate development activities, including the Uniform Fire and Road Standards, Surface Water Design Manual, and the Sensitive Areas Regulations. C. The Residential designation on the Land Use Map of the King County Comprehensive Plan allows for the proposed density. Additionally, this density is within the range per the R-4 Zone. The plat with 66 lots would yield an average density of 3.9 dwellings per acre (based on the site area). The lots will mostly be 50 feet by 100-105 feet with about 5,000 square feet. D. SWM Adjustment L04V0103 was approved 3/24/05 for a shared facility concept allowing the northeast corner of East Renton to utilize the eastern drainage facility in Rosemonte, the proposed plat immediately north of the subject property. I MAlNFll.ECOPY ~ ! .. L02P0005/SEPA TO December 15, 2006 Page 2 • • E. The subject property is located southwest of the intersection of State Route 900 and 14Sth Ave. SE. According to the applicant's traffic analysis, this intersection will operate at Level-of-Service "F" following the development of the proposed plat (unless improvements to the intersection are made). Per the applicant's traffic analysis, approximately 51 % of the P.M. peak hour trips from the proposed plat will pass through this intersection. The proposed plat will have a significant adverse impact on this intersection per KCC 14.S0.030. F. A horizontal curve exists on the east leg of the SR 900/14S'h Ave SE intersection. Basedon data provided by the traffic engineer for the plat of Shamrock, which was reviewed by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), the available stopping sight distance on the east leg of the intersection meets the standards of the Washington State Highway Design Manual. G. WSDOT has concluded that, based on turn lane warrants from the Washington State Highway Design Manual, eastbound and westbound left turn lanes should be constructed on SR 900 at the 14S'h Ave. intersection. The proposed plat will add vehicular trips to the hazardous westbound left turn movement at this intersection. H. In order to address traffic impacts from the proposed plat, WSDOT has requested that the applicant (along with other development projects that will contribute traffic to the SR 900/146'h Ave. intersection) improve this intersection with a traffic signal and eastbound and westbound left turn lanes. I. The intersection of SR 900/164'h Ave SE is located approximately one mile east of the subjecf property. This intersection of SR 900/164'h Ave SE. is located approximately one mile east of the subject property. This intersection has been identified by WSDOT as a High Accident Location, and lies within a High Accident Corridor. The subject plat will contribute approximately 10 peak hour trips to this intersection and WSDOT and the King County Department of Transportation have concluded that the subject plat will have a significant adverse impact at the intersection. The installation of a traffic signal at the 14S'h Ave. SE/SR 900 intersection will mitigate the impact of the· proposed plat on the 164'h Ave. intersection, by diverting traffic away from the 164'h intersection to the 14S'h intersection, where following signalization, certain turning movements can be made more safety. J. King County Road Engineer reviewed and granted road variance approval on 10/20/2004 for Road Variance L03V0049 the variance approved approval was for a 620 -foot vertical curve with 455 feet of stopping sight distance, utilizing a two-foot target. Additionally approved is the slight grade break (under 1%) at the north end of the vertical curve. Threshold Determination The responsible official finds that the above described proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment, provided the mitigation measures listed below are applied as conditions of permit issuance. This finding is made pursuant to RCW 43.21C, KCC 20.44 and WAC 197-11 after reviewing the environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency and considering mitigation measures which the agency or the applicant will implement as part of the proposal. The responsible official finds this information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of this proposal. Mitigation List The following mitigation measures shall be attached as conditions of permit issuance. These mitigation measures are consistent with policies, plans, rules, or regulations deSignated by KCC 20.44.0S0 as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this threshold determination is issued. Key sources of substantive authority for each mitigation measure are in parentheses; however, other sources of substantive authority may exist but are not expressly listed. ,------------------- L02P0005/SEPA TO December 15, 2006 Page 3 • • 1. To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of East Renton will have on the intersections of SR 900/1481h Ave SE and SR 900/164'h Ave SE, the applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148'h Ave intersection: • A traffic signal, and • Eastbound and westbound left turn lanes The design for the SR 900/148'h Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of-way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April 15 ' and September 30'h. This seasonal restriction shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. In lieu of the installation of the above-noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of Martin. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for East Renton. If the above-noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of East Renton, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the applicant for Shamrock shall pay a pro-rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements, in an amount proportional to the impacts of East Renton. The pro-rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the East Renton applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro-rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following: • The final East Renton lot count • The trip distribution for East Renton • The total trips contributed to the intersection of SR 900. 148'h Ave by the, plats of Aster Park (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P3008), East Renton (L02P0005), Shamrock (L02P0014), Rosemonte (aka Ironwood -L03P0018), Martin (L05P0019) and any future land use applications submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/148'h Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164'h Ave High Accident Location. In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the applicant, as long as at a minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above-noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of recording of the plat of East Renton. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] --------------------- L02P0005/SEPA TO December 15, 2006 Page 4 • ----------------------• 2. Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction of WSDOT that stopping sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148'h Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the applicant, if necessary, so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition, the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900, east of 148'h Ave., to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T -303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] An environmental impact statement (EIS) was not required prior to proceeding with the review process. Agencies, affected Native American tribes and the public were offered the opportunity to comment on or appeal the determination for (21 days). Neither the MDNS nor the specific mitigation measures were appealed by any party, including the applicant, and they have been in~orporated as part of the applicant's proposal. Comments and Appeals The SEPA determination may be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. Written comments or a notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007 be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 payable to the King County Office of Finance .. Please reference the file numbers when corresponding. If a SEPA Appeal is filed, the appellant must also file a Statement of Appeal with DDES at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that SEPA decision. The Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or antiCipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal. appeal fee or Statement of Appeal. deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Comment/appeal deadline: Appeal filing fee: Address for comment/appeal: Isa insmore. Current Planning Supervisor Current Planning Section Land Use Services Division 4:30 PM on January 11, 2007 $250 check or money order made out to the King County Office of Finance King County Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98057-5212 ATTN: Current Planning Section December 15, 2006 Date Signed • Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division Noti.f Decision- REVISED SEPA Threshold Determination and Notice of Recommendation & Hearing 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057 M S212 File #: Applicant: L02P0005 Project Name: East Renton (Type 3) Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten Phone # 425-825-1955 DOES Project Manager: Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager II Phone # 206-296-7114 Email: karen.scharer@metrokc.gov Project Location: West of 148th Ave SE at approximately SE 120th St. STR 10-23-05 Parcel # 1023059023 Project Description: This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 sq u a re feet. Permits Requested: Formal Subdivision Department Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner: Approve, subject to conditions REVISED SEPA Threshold Determination (correcting a typing error): Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance Issued: December 15, 2006 & REVISED December 29, 2006 Date of Public Hearing: March 22, 2007 at 9:30 AM DOES Hearing Room -first floor 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 The Department of Development and EnVironmental Services (DOES) will issue a written report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Persons wishing to receive a copy of the report should contact DOES at the address listed below. Following the close of the public hearing. the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County Council. Appeal procedures will be stated in the Examiner's written decision. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact the Project Manager at the phone number listed above. Written comments may also be submitted to DOES. A public hearing as required by law will be held to consider the approval of this application. If the Renton School District announces a district-wide school closure due to adverse weather conditions or similar area emergency, the public hearing on this matter will be postponed. Interested parties will be notified of the time and date of the rescheduled hearing. Any questions regarding postponements and rescheduling can be directed to the Hearing Examiner's Office at (206) 296-4660. Comment/Appeal Procedure on SEPA Threshold Determination REVISED: Comments on this SEPA determination are welcome. This SEPA determination may also be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. A notice of appeal must be filed with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 22, 2007, and be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 payable to the King County Office of Finance. If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed. the appellant shall also file a Statement of Appeal with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 22, 2007. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the deCision being appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that decision. Further, the Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal, appeal fee or Statement of Appeal, deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Appeals must be submitted to the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DOES) at the following address: Date of Mailing: December 29, 2006 DDES--Land Use Services Division Attn: Permit Center 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 If you have any questions regarding the appeal procedures, please contact the Planner at the phone number listed above. If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). You are receiving this notice because our records indicate that you own property within approximately 500 feet or because you requested to receive notice of the decision. 1023059361fL02P0005 ANDERSON PATRICK D+ANGELINE R 14406 SE I 16TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059366fL02P0005 ATCHISON SEAN P+NICOLLE L 5526 NE 10TH ST RENTON WA 98059 1023059350/L02P0005 BERG BRIAN 0 12035 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059360/L02P0005 BRETZKE DANIEL P+FUMILO K 1313 33RDAVE S SEAHLE WA 98144 1123059071/L02P0005 CHILDS KEITH L+RITA K 12004 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059346/L02P0005 DAUGHERTY GREG 12201 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98056 I I 23059034/L02P0005 ELLIOH TIMOTHY A+BARBARA 14855 SE I 20TH ST RENTON W A 98059 UAC-FC/L02P0005 FOUR CREEKS UNINCORPORATED AREA COUNCIL PO BOX 3501 RENTON W A 98056 1023059352fL02P0005 GERSPACH DAVID F 965 NILE AVE NE RENTON W A 98059 I I 23059066fL021'0005 HILLS WALTER W 28300 35TH AVE NE ARLINGTON W A 98223 • I I 23059065/L02P0005 ANDERSON ROBERT PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY WA 98027 1023059246/L02P0005 BASIC VENTURES INC CIO EXECUTIVE HOUSE INC 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N SEATTLE W A 98103 1023059060/L02P0005 BINDER PATRICIA M 980 HOQUIM AVE NE RENTON WA 98059 06422000 I OfL02P0005 BROOKS CHRIS & LISA 11524 1481'H AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 PL33/L02P0005 CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION lOSS SOUTH GRADY WAY RENTON W A 98055 I I 23059084/L02P0005 DO STEVEN+NAGATO l' AMAKI 5317 NE 4TH CT RENTON W A 98059 1023059365/L021'0005 • ENGBAUM MARK L+KORSMO RENEE M 14522 SE I 16TH ST RENTON W A 98059 0638100196/L02P0005. FRANDSEN GARY B 14815 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059347fL02P0005 GERSPACH MICHAEL JOSEPH+LlN 5615 NE IOnl ST RENTON W A 98059 I I 23059053/L021'0005 HOOVER RODDIE 12012 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059344fL02P0005 ASPENWOODS ALSO 102305-9058 AND 9435 2007 ADV DEI' PO $25,620.84 2008 PLAT NEW MAJOR 02938 I 00000 0638100210fL02P0005 BEHAN TERRA C 11920 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059362fL02P0005 BLANKENSHIP JAMES 14418 SE I 16TH RENTON W A 98059 1023059023fL02P0005 CAM WEST EAST RENTON LLC ATTN: ERIC CAMPBELL 9720 NE I 20TH PL # 100 KIRKLAND W A 98034 0638100199fL02P0005 COLLINS LARRY R+TAMMY J 14912 SE I 17TH ST RENTON WA 98059 0638100193fL02P0005 DODDS BRIAN+MICHELLE I 1249 SE 286TH ST KENT W A 98030 I I 23059032/L02P0005 FAEHNRICH JARROD 14831 SE I 20TH S1' RENTON W A 98059 1023059368fL02P0005 GACEK THERESA 2823 16TH AVE S SEAHLE WA 98144 0638100215fL02P0005 HARDING ROBERT A 11822 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98056 0638100189/L02P0005 HSU ROGER TING+LlL Y I' 752 BREMERTON PL NE RENTON W A 98059 1023059370fL02P0005 HULL JOHN R 5514 NE 10TH ST RENTON WA 98059 1023059092fL02P0005 KBS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 12320 NE 8TH ST # 100 BELLEVUE W A 98005 I I 23059086fL02P0005 KUBISKY JOHN A 14825 SE I 20TH ST RENTON WA 98055 I I 23059087/L02P0005 MENDOZA ANGEL D+SANCHEZ MOl 12050 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 I023059113fL02P0005 PRUMMER FRANCIS J 12227 142ND AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 10230591 88/L02P0005 REED DAVID NORMAN+BARBARA A 174 NILE PL NE RENTON W A 98059 I023059363fL02P0005 RODENBERG LONNY K 5340 NE 10TH ST RENTON W A 98059 7708200790fL02P0005 SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS 9720 NE I 20TH PL STE 100 KIRKLAND WA 98034 1023059093/L02P0005 SMOCK JULIA LEE+ROBERT E 920 HOQUIAM AVE NE RENTON W A 98059 CG2/L02P0005 SUSAN SULLIV AN 24311 SE 47TH ST ISSAQUAH WA 98029 • 0638 I 00076fL02P0005 HURLOCKER CHARLES JR+NORMA A 14816 SE 1I6TH ST RENTON WA 98059 1023059337fL02P0005 KLEPPEN WYNDI L+ARTHUR L II 11808 142ND AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 0638I00192/L02P0005 LAWLER CONSTRUCTION LLC 25015 SE 200TH ST MAPLE VALLEY WA 98038 I023059153fL02P0005 O'HARA THOMAS P+VANEVA A 11441 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 SD13/L02P0005 • R. STRACKE, FACILITIES & PLANNING RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT #403 1220 N 4TH ST RENTON W A 98055 0638I00188fL02P0005 RICE DAVID 10418 169TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059357/L02P0005 ROGERS LARRY W 14701 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1123059002/L02P0005 SHENK DAVID 12206148TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 SD8fL02P0005 . STEVE CRAWFORD, NEW CONSTRUCTION ISSAQUAH SCHOOL DISTRICT #411 565 NW HOLLY ST ISSAQUAH WA 98027 0638100180/L02P0005 THOROUGHBRED RANCH LLC POBOX 146 RENTON W A 98055 0638100212fL02P0005 INTERNATIONAL CHURCH OF THE FOURSQUARE GOSPEL 11840 I 48TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 0638100198fL02P0005 KOE RANDOLPH J MARKS SUSAN E PO BOX 2663 RENTON W A 98056 1023059354fL02POOOS MCCLEASE CHRIS E+GWENNA 11625 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059259/L02P0005 POWERS JACK M+DENISE T 12207 I 48TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059353/L02P0005 RAYMOND TIMOTHY D+RA YMOND KIMBERLY J 11615 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 10230S9391fL02P0005 RICK BURNSTEAD CONSTRUCTION 11980 NE 24TH ST STE 200 BELLEVUE WA 98005 1023059364fL02P0005 SCHAUT GEORGE L 10119 SE 206TH ST KENT WA 98031 102305940lfL02P0005 SHEPHERD ROBERT DD +JOAN K 22059 SE 188TH MAPLE VALLEY WA 98038 0638IOOl97fL02POOOS SULLIVAN EFFIE 14823 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 I 1374001 10/L02P0005 TRAN NGUYET HUU 1020 ILWACO PL NE RENTON W A 98059 0638100195fL02P0005 UEDAAKIRA 14837 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059179/L02P0005 WATERS THOMAS M 12220 142ND AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 0642200020fL02P0005 WIEHOFF AL VERNA J 1612 KENNEWICK AVE NE RENTON W A 98056 • 10230591 89/L02P0005 WALTOSZ JAMES H 12021 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059051/L02P0005 WEDGEWOOD AT RENTON INC 1560 140TH AVE NE#100 BELLEVUE WA 98005 1123059061/L02P0005 WOO RAYMOND 14404 SE 87TH ST NEWCASTLE WA 98059 • 1023059382fL02P0005 WARNES SUELLEN 14620 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059021/L02P0005 WEGNER BRETT+MARY K 12211 148TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 r----- •• • ANDERSON, ROBERT L. PO BOX 353 MAPLE V ALLEY, WA 98038 CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT RALPH HICKMAN n20 NE I 20TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 CHILDS, R. KRISTINE & KEITH 12004 -148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 98059 CLAUSSEN, KIM SR. PLANNER DDESI LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 ULL ICK . 118 48THAVESE~~ RE 0, A98059 L'0 ~ ",1::5 ~ ~~LRY 'IKE % \. 115)~_148THAVE.SE \"'~', ~ R T WA 98059 .'J, __ "-,,, 98059 ""-<:> <:S •. ~~ ; DINSMORE, LISA CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DOES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 DONNELLY. CLAUDIA 10415147THAVESE RENTON, WA 98059 DYE, PETE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER DOES lLUSD MS: OAK -DE 0100 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02POO05 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 GILLEN, NICK WETLAND REVIEW DOES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GOLL, SHIRLEY CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DOES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GRAVES, JOHN LOZIER HOMES CORPORATION 1203 ;114TH AVE. SE BELLEVUE, WA 98004 98004 KC HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE ATTN: MARKA/GINGER MS YES-CC-0404 LANGLEY, KRISTEN LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDESILUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 LIND, REBECCA CITY OF RENTON EDNSP DEPT. 1055 S. GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98058 SCHARER,KAREN PROJECT MANAGER II MS: OAK -DE-0100 DDES/LUSD SEATTLE KC HEALTH DEPT E ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 14350 SE EASTGATE WAY BELLEVUE WA 98007 SLATTEN, SARA CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 L021'0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L021'0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L021'0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 . TOWNSEND STEVE SUPERVISOR LUIS DOES MS OAK DE 0100 rRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 II5THAVENE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 WEST, LARRY GEO REVIEW' DOES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 WHITING, KELLY KC DOT RD SERV DIV MS KSC-TR-023 I WHITTAKER BRUCE SR ENGR ERS/LUSD MS OAK DE 0100 • • L02POOO5 L02POOOS L02POOO5 L02POOOS L02POOOS -" " I , " .. ---,..., ~i • ,i Notic.f Decision· SEPA Threshold Determination and Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057·5212 Notice of Recommendation & Hearing File No.: L02P0005 Project Name: East Renton (Type 3) Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten Phone No.: 425-825-1955 DDES Project Manager: Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager II Phone No.: 206-296-7114 Email: karen.scharer@metrokc.gov Project Location: West of 148th Ave SE at approximately 120th St. STR 10-23-05 Parcel No.: 1023059023 Project Description: This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 square feet. Permits Requested: Formal Subdivision Department Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner: Approve, subject to conditions SEPA Threshold Determination: Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance Issued: December 15, 2006 Date of Public Hearing: March 22, 2007 at 9:30 AM DOES Hearing Room -first floor 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) will issue a written report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Persons wishing to receive a copy of the report should contact DDES at the address listed below. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County Council. Appeal procedures will be stated in the Examiner's written decision. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact the Project Manager at the phone number listed above. Written comments may also be submitted to DDES. A public hearing as required by law will be held to consider the approval of this application. If the Renton School District announces a district-wide school closure due to adverse weather conditions or similar area emergency, the public hearing on this matter will be postponed. Interested parties will be notified of the time and date of the rescheduled hearing. Any questions regarding postponements and rescheduling can be directed to the Hearing Examiner's Office at (206) 296-4660. Comment/Appeal Procedure on SEPA Threshold Determination: Comments on this SEPA determination are welcome. This SEPA determination may also be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. A notice of appeal must be filed with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007, and be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 payable to the King County Office of Finance. If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed, the appellant shall also file a Statement of Appeal with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision being appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that decision. Further, the Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal, appeal fee or Statement of Appeal, deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Appeals must be submitted to the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) at the following address: Date of Mailing: December 15. 2006 DDES--Land Use Services Division Attn: Permit Center 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 UlIM fiLE COpy If you have any questions regarding the appeal procedures, please contact the Planner ~t the phone number listed above. If you require this material in Braille, audio cassette, or large print, call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). Yo, .m re,."'" ~;. ,"';" 'k"" '" moo"" "d .... ~ .. Y" 0.' '"PO''' "h;, .ppro.;m .... '" '::\~ because you requested to receive notice of the decision. __ _____ _ _______ ____ \ 0 ~ r---- ? 10230593611L02P()005 ANDERSON PATRICK D+ANGELINE R 14406 SE I 16TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059246iL02P0005 BASIC VENTURES INC CIO EXECUTIVE HOUSE INC 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N SEATTLE WA 98103 1023059060lL02P0005 BINDER PATRICIA M 980 HOQUIM AVE NE RENTON WA 98059 10230590231L02P0005 CAM WEST EAST RENTON LLC ATTN: ERIC CAMPBELL 9720 NE I 20TH PL #100 KIRKLAND W A 98034 PLSOiL02P0005 CITY OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY RENTON W A 98055 I I 230590341L02P0005 ELLIOTT TIMOTHY A+BARBARA 14855 SE I 20TH ST RENTON W A 98059 UAC-FCIL02P0005 FOUR CREEKS UNINCORPORATED AREA COUNCIL PO BOX 3501 RENTON W A 98056 0638 I 002 I 5iL02P0005 HARDING ROBERT A 11822 I 48TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98056 1023059370iL02P0005 HULL JOHN R 5514 NE 10TH ST RENTON W A 98059 10230593371L02P0005 . KLEPPEN WYNDI L+ARTHUR L II 11808 142ND AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 I I 230590651L02P0005 ANDERSON ROBERT PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY WA 98027 0638 1002 IOIL02P0005 BEHAN TERRA C 11920 148TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 10230593621L02P0005 BLANKENSHIP JAMES 14418 SE 116TH RENTON W A 98059 11230590711L02P0005 CHILDS KEITH L+RITA K 12004 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 10230593461L02P0005 DAUGHERTY GREG 12201 I 48TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98056 1023059365iL02P0005 ENGBAUM MARK L+KORSMO RENEE M 14522 SE I 16TH ST RENTON W A 98059 10230593681L02P0005 GACEK THERESA 2823 16TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98144 I I 23059066iL02P0005 HILLS WALTER W 28300 35TH AVE NE ARLINGTON W A 98223 06381002121L02P0005 INTERNATIONAL CHURCH OF THE 11840 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 I I 230590861L02P0005 KUBISKY JOHN A 14825 SE I 20TH ST RENTON WA 98055 10230593661L02P0005 ATCHISON SEAN P+NICOLLE L 5526 NE 10TH ST RENTON WA 98059 1023059350iL02P0005 BERG BRIAN D 12035 148TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 1023059360iL02P0005 BRETZKE DANIEL P+FUMILO K 1313 33RD AVE S SEATTLE WA 98144 PL33iL02P0005 CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 1055 SOUTH GRADY WA Y RENTON W A 98055 I I 230590841L02P0005 DO STEVEN+NAGATO TAMAKI 5317 NE 4TH CT RENTON W A 98059 I 1230590321L02P0005 FAEHNRICH JARROD 14831 SE 120TH ST RENTON W A 98059 10230593441L02P0005 HARBOUR HOMES INC 33400 9TH AVE S # 120 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 I I 23059053iL02P0005 HOOVER RODDIE 12012 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059092iL02P0005 KBS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 12320 NE 8TH ST #100 BELLEVUE W A 98005 10230593541L02P0005 MCCLEASE CHRIS E+GWENNA 11625 I 48TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 ,-", I I 230590871L02P0005 MENDOZA ANGEL D+SANCHEZ MOl 12050 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 SD I3/L02P0005 R. STRACKE, FACILITIES & PLANNING RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT #403 1220N 4TH ST RENTON W A 98055 10230593571L02P0005 ROGERS LARRY W 14701 SE I 16TH ST RENTON W A 98059 I I 230590021L02P0005 SHENK DAVID 12206 148TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 SD81L02P0005 STEVE CRAWFORD, NEW CONSTRUCTION ISSAQUAH SCHOOL DISTRICT #411 565 NW HOLL Y ST ISSAQUAH W A 98027 1137400110/L02P0005 TRAN NGUYET HUU 1020 ILWACO PL NE RENTON W A 98059 10230591791L02P0005 WATERS THOMAS M 12220 142ND AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 1123059061fL02P0005 WOO RAYMOND 14404 SE 87TH ST NEWCASTLE W A 98059 • 10230592591L02P0005 POWERS JACK M+DENISE l' 12207 148TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 10230593911L02P0005 RICK BURNSTEAD CONST CO 11980 NE 24TH ST STE 200 BELLEVUE W A 98005 10230593641L02P0005 SCHAUT GEORGE L 10119 SE 206TH ST KENT W A 98031 102305940lfL02P0005 SHEPHERD ROBERT DD +JOAN K 22059 SE 188TH MAPLE V ALLEY W A 98038 CG21L02POO05 SUSAN SULLIVAN 24311 SE 47TH ST ISSAQUAH WA 98029 10230591 891L02P0005 WALTOSZ JAMES H 12021 148TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 10230590511L02P0005 WEDGEWOOD AT RENTON INC 1560 I 40TH AVE NE #100 BELLEVUE W A 98005 • 1023059113fL02P0005 PRUMMER FRANCIS J 12227 142ND AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 10230593631L02P0005 RODENBERG LONNY K 5340 NE 10TH ST RENTON W A 98059 77082007901L02P0005 SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS 9720 NE I 20TH PL STE 100 KIRKLAND W A 98034 10230590931L02P0005 SMOCK JULIA LEE+ROBERT E 920 HOQUIAM AVE NE RENTON W A 98059 0638100180lL02P0005 THOROUGHBRED RANCH LLC POBOX 146 RENTON W A 98055 10230593821L02P0005 WARNES SUELLEN 14620 SE 116TH ST RENTON WA 98059 I 02305902 IfL02P0005 WEGNER BRE1T+MARY K 12211 I 48TH AVE SE RENTON W A 98059 -, • ANDERSON, ROBERT L. PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98038 CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT RALPH HICKMAN 9720 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 CHILDS, R. KRISTINE & KEITH 12004 -148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 CLAUSSEN, KIM SR. PLANNER DDESI LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 CRULL, RICK 11813 148THAVESE RENTON, WA 98059 DALRY, MIKE IIS24 -148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 980S9 DINSMORE, LISA CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 DONNELLY, CLAUDIA 1041S 147TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 DYE, PETE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE 0100 ---:, ---~------ • L02P0005 L02POO05 L02POO05 L02POO05 L02POO05 L02POOOS L02POOOS L02POOOS L02POOOS ------ • GILLEN, NICK WETLAND REVIEW DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GOLL, SHIRLEY CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GRA VES, JOHN LOZIER HOMES CORPORATION 1203 - I 14TH AVE. SE BELLEVUE, WA 98004 KC HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE ATTN: MARKA/GINGER MS YES-CC-0404 LANGLEY, KRISTEN LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDESILUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 LIND, REBECCA CITY OF RENTON EDNSP DEPT. lOSS S. GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 980S8 SCHARER, KAREN PROJECT MANAGER II MS: OAK -DE-0100 DDESILUSD SEA TILE KC I·IEAL TH DEPT E ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 143S0 SE EASTGATE WAY BELLEVUE WA 98007 SLATTEN, SARA CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE I 20TH PL, # 100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 L02P0005 L02POO05 L02POO05 L02POO05 L02POO05 L02POOOS L02POOOS L02POOOS L02POO05 ) TOWNSEND STEVE SUPERVISOR LUIS DOES MS OAK DE 0100 TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115TH AVE NE KIRKLAND. WA 98034 WEST. LARRY GEO REVIEW' DOES I LUSD MS: OAK ·DE· 0100 WHITING, KELLY KC DOT RD SERV DIV MS KSC·TR·023I WHITTAKER BRUCE SR ENGR ERS/LUSD MS OAK DE 0100 • • L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 . , (E Renton) Fire Protection Dist # 25 P.O. Box 2925 Renton WA 98056-0925 MS: KSC-TR-0431 Gary Kriedt KC Metro Envirn. Planning Highlands Library 2902 NE 12th 5t Renton WA 98056 Documents Dept. Librarian King County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 A TIN: Edward White Kent Engineering Dept 220 -4th Av 5 Kent WA 98032 City of Renton • Economic Development Dept. 1055 S. Grady Way Renton WA 98055 R. Stracke, Facilities & Ping Renton School Dist # 403 1220 N 4th St Renton WA 98055 Environmental Review Section WA State Dept of Ecology POBox 47703 Olympia WA 9B504-7703 Russ Ladley, Fisheries Biologist Puyallup Tribe 6824 Pioneer Wy E Puyallup WA 98371 Fisheries Habitat/Environment Suquamish Indian Tribe PO Box 498 Suquamish WA 98392 • FD25 KC27 LI20 LI24 Pl18 PL33 SD13 SI17 TR2 TR5 (Spring Glen) • Fire Protection Dist #40 10828 SE 176th St Renton WA 98055 Fairwood Library 17009 -140th Av SE Renton WA 98058 Kent Regional Library 212 - -2nd Av N Kent WA 98032-4482 Renton Library 100 Mill Av S Renton WA 98055 Kent Planning Dept 220 -4th Av S Kent WA 98032 Clinton G. Marsh, Director Fac. & Canst. Dept Kent School District # 415 12033 SE 256th SI. Bldg B Kent WA 98031-6643 Administrator Kent Sewer Utility 220 -4th Av S Kent WA 98032 Habitat Biologist, Rod Malcom Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 -172nd Av SE Auburn WA 98002 Snoqualmie Tribe PO Box 280 Carnation WA 98014-0280 Richard Young Tulalip Tribe 7615 Totem Beach Rd Marysville WA 98271 / FD40 LI15 LI23 LI36 Pl19 SD9 SE5 TRI TR3 TR4 .. . > Cedar River Water/Sewer Dist 18300 SE Lk Youngs Rd Renton WA 8058-9799 City of Renton, Public Works Dept. Development Services Div. 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98055 Water Dist #90 15606 SE 128th St Renton WA 98059-8522 Water Dist # 111 27224 -144th Av 5E Kent WA 98042-9058 WA State Dept. of Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. Division P.O. Box 43155 Olympia, WA 98504-3155 • WD12 WD32 WD55 WD58 Public Works Dtr Kent Water Dist 220 -4th Av 5 Kent WA 98032 • 5005 Creek Water/Sewer Dist PO Box 58039 Renton WA 98058-1039 Coal Creek Utility District 6801 132nd Place SE Newcastle, WA 98059 WA State Dept. of Wildlife 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. Mill Creek, WA 98012 WD23 W041 WD57 • • TRANSMITTED TO THE FOLLOWING PARTIES OF RECORD FOR L02P0005: ANDERSON, ROBERT L. PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98038 CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT RALPH HICKMAN 9720 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 CHILDS, R. KRISTINE & KEITH 12004" 148TH AVE. SE RENTON, WA 98059 CLAUSSEN, KIM SR. PLANNER DDESI LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 CRULL, RICK 11813 148TH AVE SE RENTON, W A 98059 DALRY, MIKE 11524 -148TH AVE. SE RENTON, W A 98059 DINSMORE, LISA CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DDES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 DONNELLY, CLAUDIA 10415 I 47 TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 DYE, PETE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER DDES ILUSD MS: OAK -DE 0100 GILLEN, NICK WETLAND REVIEW DDES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-OIOO GOLL, SHIRLEY CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 GRA VES, JOHN LOZIER HOMES CORPORATION 1203 - I I 4TH AVE. SE BELLEVUE, W A 98004 KC HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE ATTN: MARKA/GINGER MS YES-CC-0404 LANGLEY, KRISTEN LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES I LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0 I 00 LIND, REBECCA CITY OF RENTON EDNSP DEPT. 1055 S. GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98058 SCHARER, KAREN PROJECT MANAGER 11 DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-DIDO '-~ • SEATTLE KC HEALTH DEPT E ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 143S0 SE EASTGATE WAY BELLEVUE WA 98007 SLA TTEN, SARA CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT 9720NE 120TH PL #100 KIRKLAND, WA98034 TOWNSEND STEVE SUPERVISOR LUIS DDES MS OAK DE 0100 TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 IISTH AVE NE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 WEST, LARRY GEO REVIEW DDES / LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 WHITING, KELLY KC DOT RD SERV DIV MS KSC-TR-0231 WHITTAKER BRUCE SR ENGR ERSILUSD MS OAK DE 0100 • March 22, 2007 RE: F;L..., N~. LDY'OO/I? ,J.-f::,LcNo Ud-ftJ65 My name is Renee Engbaum. My husband, Mark Engbaum, and I live at 5424 N.E. 10th Street in Renton. Our home and property (1 Y. acres) fronts the south border of the large wetland on the west edge of the Camwest properties (parcel #1023059023 and parcel(<!J~~) #1023059395). A good portion ofland in these parcels slopes naturally toward this EOo.s+ wetland. We are specifically concerned with the possibility of an increase in surface water draining into the wetland as these properties are developed. Presently the overflow from this wetland passes through a drainage culvert under N.E. lOth Street, and then flows through the southwest corner of our property, toward the northwest, as Honey Creek. In the past, the runoff from this wetland has been seasonal and our home and property have never been jeopardized by flooding in well over 20 years. There should not be any detriment to our property due to development of surrounding properties. We respectfully request that a close review be made of the plans for surmce/storm water retention on the previously mentioned Camwest properties to insure that adequate surface/storm water retention facilities, with flood capacity, will be in place allowing the least impact on the existing wetland and ultimately to the flow of water passing through our property. E"hibit NO. -£:2 ... ~~ __ _ Item No. L~2..P\)SlOS Received 3'2.2· C3- King County Hearing Examiner ) , Revised DOES Recommendations to the Hearing Examiner L02P0005 -East Renton Exhibit # 29 March 22, 2007 Public Hearing Exhibit # 29 20. The plat design shall be revised to provide the minimum suitable recreation space consistent with the requirements of K.C.C. 21A.14.180 and K.C.C. 21A. 14.190 (Le., minimum area, as well as, sport court[s]. children's play equipment, picnic table[s]. benches, etc.}. as shown on Hearing Exhibit #26. a. A detailed recreation space plan (Le., location, area . calculations, dimensions, landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES prior to or concurrent with the submittal of engineering plats. b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. 21. Tract E shall be revised as a tract wl:!iel:! is: a) eomlaiA9d witl:! TraciE r (sensiti'le araa), b) €Ia&ignatad as an open spaee tFaet, OF, e) designated a& for recreational area, if S9FV9d lay with an approved trail (i3cross wetland buffers) extending from the recreational Tract G and functioning as an extension of recreation from Tract G. Plans for the tract -designation and design, shall comply with codes and shall be to the satisfaction of DOES prior to engineering approval. 22. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of DOES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s).-which combines usage of recreation area within L03P0018, the Plat of Rosemonte, pursuant to Hearing Exhibit #26. Exhibit No. ~z.==-~7=-__ _ Item No. L02.PoOO,. Received B· 2?-~~ King County Hearing Examiner 1~0 . """':"""" ~,-~t 1 .......... \ , , - 2_ ,-------- All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication that includes the langua e set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. 3. at shall comply with the base density and minim density nts of the R-4 zone classification. All lots all meet the minimum dimensiona ~uirements of the R-4 zone classi' tion or shall be shown on the face of t proved preliminary plat, Ichever is larger, except that minor revisions to t lat which do not re t in substantial changes may be approved at the disc . n of the D rtment of Development and Environment Services. All plat boundary discrepanc all esolved to the satisfaction of DOES prior to the submittal of th nal plat do ents. As used in this condition, "discrepancy" is a bou ry hiatus, an over ing boundary or a physical appurtenance whic . dicates anencroachmen , 'nes of possession or a conflict of title. . 4. must obtain final approval from the King Coun 5. construction and upgrading of public and private r ne in accorda r s established and adopted y inance No. 11187, as amended (1993 KCRS). 6. . The applicant must obtain the approval pf the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. All future residences constructed within this subdivision are required to be sprinklered NFPA 13D unless the requirement is removed by the King County Fire Marshal or his/her designee. The Fire Code requires all portions of the exterior walls of structures to be within 150 feet (as a person would walk via an approved route around the building) from a minimum 20- foot wide, unobstructed driving surface. To qualifyJor removal of the sprinkler requirement driving surfaces between curbs must be a minimum of 28 feet in width when parking is allowed on one side of the roadway, and at least 36 feet in width when parking is permitted on both sides. The road width requirement applies to both on-site access and roads accessing the subdivision. Storm Drainage 7. I plat approval shall require full compliance with the drai ge provisions . King County Code 9.04 .. Compliance may res in reducing the location of lots as shown on the preli . ry approved plat. Preliminary revi as identified the following con . ons of approval, which represent portions 0 drainage. requiremen . II other applicable . requirements in KCC 9.0 the Surface atar Design Manual (SWDM) must also be satisfied during e nd final review. a. b. es and a construction sequence King County draina manual shall be shown on the engineen 78). A st water pollution prevention and spill (SWPPS) plan shall be Ith the project engineering plans as required in Chapter 2 of the e manual. Exhibit No. l'5 . Item No. bQ? e~t)~ Received 1>. 22 -S)=t King County Hearing Examiner FII!214d t65POO 19 ,.------ • ~~i!:.!bl~k~!~~ March 28, 2002 Sara Slatten Cam west Development' 9720 NE 120'h Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator !RECEIVED _APR 172002 LAN~t~iOS[UNTY RVIC[S SUBJECT: SANITARY SEWER AVAILABILITY -EAST RENTON PROPERTY KCPID NO 102305-9017,9023 PROPOSED 68 LOT PLAT This letter shall serve as a supplement to the sewer availability form prepared for the subject site daled Jvbrch 28, 200l. The City oj' Renton can provide sanitary sewer service to this proposed development as submitted to the City on July 26, 2001 and as indicated on the preliminary plat drawing prepared by Triad and Associates with a production date of August 13,2001. This submittal meets the City's basic criterion for zoning and land use required to receive sewer availability. Sewer service to this proposed plat may come from two different portions of the City's system. The first alternative would be for this development tl> flow to the south and connect to the City's East Renton Interceptor system. Another option would be for the development to flow to the north into the City's Honey Creek system. The exact means for service to be provided will be determined as you proceed with the platting process. As you are aware, the methodology may also be predicated upon when the adjacent properties proceed with development. This sewer availability is also conditioned upon the requirement that a covenant to annex document be executed prior to the issuance of any City permits for the installation of sewer to serve this plat. The format of this document is currently being developed by the City and will be forwarded to you upon its completion. Fees for this plat will include System Development Charges of $760.00 per lot, Special Assessment District charges for either the East Renton or Honey Creek Systems, $60 per lot side sewer permit fees, right-of,way fee and bond to be determined upon submittal, inspection and plan review t'ee ot' 5% ot' estimated construction cost, and a King County permit fee equal to 100% of costs billed by the County to the City. qUestiol1S-feil'jYg this availability, please contact me at (425) 430-7212. ~.1L----Exhibit No. ~2.fI=....!....-=-__ _ Item No. / <::)z.e~~es Received 3 . 2.c..-<:)3=- cc: Rebecca Lind, EDNSP King County Hearing Examiner __ JH~·DllII.YY:J.:ISil!IQ~N~SilJ/\LLJIllll.J!.IllIjj;lE,,:;sLLIQ!LQ!LC::;'S/"'2QI!lQ~2-oJ:J9!i.:JW:dIllJQccLJlQI.lIM\1!CI::;·lllf ______________ R E N T ~ 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OP THE ,CURVE -------------------------------------~ SITE ENGINEERING & PLANNING . STRUCTURAL REVIEW TRANSMITTAL TO: Hou-Ching Chow, Plan Review Services *FM: Ted Cooper, Review Engineer ~ C- * \. ' DATE: September 24: 2008 . " , I. * RE: East Renton & Rosemonte Plats (L02P0005, L03P0018) , * ActivitylCharge #L07SR054 (Project) Please accept and review the attached Structural Review Package. The Engineering Review Section has begun reviewing the engineering plans for the road and storm system; we anticipate completion in October 2008. Your efforts in assisting us with this deadline are greatly appreciated. Please contact me at (206) 296-7163 when your review begins or at any time you require additional information. Upon structural approval, please return the plans and approval documentation to the Site Engineering and Planning Section with an approval memo stating any required fees. *Description of Structures: 1) Structural block walls built on geogrid reinforced fills on Tract K and Lots 9,76,77 78 and 67. 2) Rockeries on or adjacent to Lots 19 through 23, 28 and 53 through 59. IMPORTANT NOTES: A NOTE AT THE BOTTOM OF EVERY CALCULATION SHEET STATES, "THESE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER" *Locations of Structures (Page # and/or describe location): On civil plans see the "GEOTECHNICAL PLANS" sheets for structural design details. Public ROW: Public Tracts: Private Tracts: Easement (Joint-Use Driveway) (Type) Existing _______ _ Existing, ______ _ Existing ______ _ Existing, ______ _ RestrictionslRequirements Related to the Structure: (None) (e.g. other approvals (HPA, DOT), ordinances, elevations) *Submittal Package Includes: Engineering Plans (Road/Drainage) Structural Drawings and Plans Manufacturing Specifications (if necessary) Design Calculations Soils Report List of Key Contacts: 1 3 NA ---3 InTIR Future ______ _ Future __ -= ___ _ Future ___ X~ ____ _ Future ______ _ minimum: copies (1) copies (2) copies (2) copies (2) copies (1) King County Sensitive Area Staff: _.,-,-'N.!!i':'ck"--':'G"'il""le:!2n _______ _ Design Engineer: Structural: Kurt D. Merriman Engineering Plans: Sheri Hideko Murata Other: -----: _________________________ _ Installationllnspection Inspection Responsibility of Commercials: ________________ _ Contractor License # (if needed) ____ _ Structural Value $ -'? ___ _ Attachments ____________________________ _ REVISION DATE: _____________ _ SIGNATURE:, _______________ _ s:\bsd\site _ eng\fonns\hou chow's structual.doc J 0/23/02 I I I I I '. I I J .' I • II )1 I I -I' I I ~ .' t c WETLAND DETERMINATION IRECEWEO FOR St.? 27 lQQl EAST RENTON PROPERTY l~~~3s~Os~~1cES, Residential Subdivision King County, Washington Prepared for: Ms. Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th PI. Suite #100 Kirkland, Washington 98034 425-825-1955 Prepared by: C. Gary Schulz Wetland/Forest Ecologist 7700 S. Lakeridge Dr. Seattle, Washington 98178 206-772-6514 Exhibit No, /5 Item No, fa 2 .0 D~\:)'~ (April 3, 2(01) Received '3 '2-2 -Cl3-Revision September 12, 2002 King County Hearing Examine I I I I I I I I I I " 1\ I I' I I I I : ' I , -~~--.~----------------------------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Sensitive Area Review Status Project/Site Description Purpose Methodology Wetland Determination Soils Hydrology Wetland Description * Wetland Classification/Connectivity * Wetland Buffer Averaging * Wildlife Habitat Presumption of Salmonid Use * Red-Tail Hawk Nest * Appendix A Data Plot Forms List of Figures Preliminary Plat -EAST RENTON Intlekofer / Schirman Property Aerial Photograph -enlarged copy (10-7-00) Boundary / Topographic Survey map for East Renton (Attached) I 1·1' I, I I' I 1/ ,I - I )1 I" I' , I I I I I' INTRODUCTION Sensitive Area Review Status This report is a revised version of the preliminary report (Preliminary Wetland Determination for East Renton Property, Schulz 4/3/01) that was submitted with the subdivision application in April, 2002. Most of the first submittal report contents have been retained with no changes to delineated wetland area. King County issued technical review comments (Plat Screening Transmittal, Lanny Henoch 7/1/02) for this project and requested additional information that pertains to wetland/wildlife protection and regulations. Responses with additional information and field data are included in this report to be more complete related to the proposed site plan. Wetland data sheets are included with the report. SpecifIc responses to the Screening Transmittal are noted (*) in the Table of Contents and within the written report. Project/Site Description The East Renton Property is comprised of 2 parcels with a total size of approximately 19.6 acres situated east of Renton in unincorporated King County. The property is located on the west side of 148th Avenue S.E. near S.E. 120th Street, King County (Section 10, Township 23 N., Range 5 E., WM). The subject property is situated in an area that is zoned for single-family development. The southern parcel (Schirman property) has been developed for a single-family residence and includes a house and garage/shed. The north parcel (Intlekofer property) has been used for pasture' land but includes no improvements except a small shed. The current, project site design has a total of 66 single-family lots clustered on the eastern, upland portion of the property. The project roadway is proposed as a circular access that fronts all of the lots. Surface water runoff from new development would be conveyed to a detention and water quality facility to be located west of the development. Site plan layout has avoided significant impacts in order to preserve existing wetland areas and associated functions. Please refer to Figure 1 taken from the Preliminary Plat East Renton (IntlekoferlSchirman Property-Triad Associates, Inc. 4/3/02). The upper, eastern half of the site is proposed for new, single-family development. This area has flat to gentle sloping topography. Slopes steepen as the site falls to a basin area on the west half of the site. A natural drainage system is present within this basin. Although wetland hydrology is present on-site as groundwater discharge, some surface water flow originates off-site from the south. Seasonal surface water flows through the property to the north boundary where it has been observed to be a seasonal drainage feature. I I 'I, I I' I, I ~ I 1 ,J J I' I I' I! " I I I The majority of the eastern, upland portion of both parcels is pasture land that has not been recently maintained or'used. The area includes old apple trees and few, scattered individuals of native bigleafmaple (Acer macrophyllum), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) trees. There is extensive shrub cover of clumps of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) including one area dominated by Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius). Waste areas include small trees -crabapple (Malus sp.) and Douglas' hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii). The groundcover is dominated by common pasture grasses and includes areas of bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide the applicant a complete wetland determination study and respond to requests for additional information. Professional observations are included to assist with determining natural resource classifications and functions. Wildlife observations, related to red-tail hawk and salmonid fish use, are included in this study. Methodology Typically defined, wetlands are ... "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas". Through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the Growth Management Act (GMA), the County reviews proposals which may potentially impact wetland and other sensitive areas. Because of observed site conditions, combined with jurisdictional wetland regulations, wetland presence and extent must be determined for the permitting process. The methodology used for wetland determination was based on the presence of dominant hydrophytic vegetation (i.e .. plant species adapted to, or tolerant of, growing in saturated soil conditions), hydric soils, and observed wetland hydrology as described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Dept. of Ecology Pub. #96-94, 1997) was used, for consistent regional wetland determinations. The State manual was developed to address regional conditions and is consistent with the 1987 Corps Manual methodology. The three technical criteria for vegetation, soils, and hydrology are mandatory under normal conditions and must all be met for an area to be identified as wetland. Because the site has relatively distinct wetland plant communities, the Routine On-site Determination Method was used in this investigation. The current wetland boundaries were professionally land surveyed by Triad Associates, Inc. and mapped onto a base topographic map I , II II II I; -,\ it t , II 'I' t t , I 'I I' :1 (Intlekofer/Schinnan Property 3/9/01), Wetland data plots (9), approximately 0,01 acres in size, were installed within wetland and upland areas as a relative sampling of the property's existing conditions, The associated data plot fonns are included in Appendix A, I I 1 I I ,I t, ., I I, .,' t ! 'I t , , Ii I I I ------------- WETLAND DETERMINATION Wetland investigations were conducted during middle to late February of 2001 to delineate the portions of wetland areas existing on the East Renton Property. Three wetlands (A, B, & C) are identified on the west side of the property and are within the natural drainage corridor that runs from south to north through the property. A total of nine wetland data plots were installed on the project site and this information is found in Appendix A. The Boundary 1 Topographic Survey map for East Renton (Triad Associates, 3/9/01) includes wetland boundaries and related wetland data plot locations and is attached to this report. To supplement the first submitted wetland study (Schulz 413101), additional investigations of the project site and surrounding drainage basin area were conducted in August, 2002. Several site visits in the immediate area, related to the adjacent Shamrock subdivision proposal, also occurred this summer. Additional information collected from recent site investigations and research is provided in the following sections of this report (*). Soils The SCS (USDA 1973) Soil Survey -King County Area has mapped two soil series on the subject property. The soil map units are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam -0 to 6 percent slopes (AgB) and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam - 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC). The Alderwood series is comprised of moderately, well-drained soils associated with a glacial till at depths of 20 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands but have inclusions of other soils that are not large enough to map. Some included soils are Norma, Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila, and Shalcar series. Investigation of portions of the site's upland area confirmed soil that closely resembles the Alderwood series. The soil inclusions mentioned above are poorly drained and found in depression areas and drainage ways on till and outwash plains. These soil map units are listed in the Hydric Soils of Washington (1985). Hydric soils are generally associated with wetland habitats. Hydric mineral soils observed in soil pits excavated within the wetland areas appeared to be the Norma series. Organic soils present in ponded areas could be the Seattle, Tukwila, or Shalcar series. Hydrology King County's Map Folio includes one wetland on the East Renton Property. This wetland is identified as May Creek #24b. The letter "b" indicates the wetland was mapped in the US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory but is not included in the King County Wetlands inventory (1983). This wetland drains to an off-site "Unclassified" stream identified northwest of I j I " I I I t, Ii I ._.J " 'I j .11 , I I the subject property at a distance of more than one mile. This stream appears to be Honey Creek, a . tributary to May Creek. Observed hydrology on the site appears directly influenced by local, shallow groundwater that is moving through the area from south to north. There is strong near-surface hydrology within this lowland basin and much of the water may originate on the site. However, contiguous wetland area appears to be present on both south and north sides. Old farm roads, crossing the wetland drainage basin, have caused blockage. As a result, a small and shallow pond has formed on the southwest side of the site. Stream-like channels are present within Wetlands A & B and convey seasonal flows. The concentrated, surface water observed flowing in both of these channels leaves the subject property in two separate culverts placed under an old farm road along the north boundary. Wetland Description * Wetlands A. B and C Wetlands A. B. and C are described together as part of a headwaters wetland system due to their close proximity and similar habitats. On-site wetland drainages have been crossed and separated by fill from old farm roads built on the south and north portions. They are no longer connected by hydric soils but are supported by the same groundwater hydrology through culverts and groundwater seepage. Wetland B is not directly connected to Wetlands A and C on the site; however, surface flows from A and B join just north of the site boundary. The wetland system is within a distinct basin and also receives surface runofffrom adjacent slopes. Overall, the wetland areas are characterized as forested habitat dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) trees. Several small groves of western red cedar are present along the wetland edge. Big leaf maple and black cottonwood dominate the forest cover in uplands surrounding the wetland drainages. Douglas fir and western hemlock individuals are scattered throughout the basin area. The southern most portion of wetland (Schirman property) has standing red alder trees throughout; however, the majority are dead and dying and do not constitute significant cover for a forested wetland classification. The shrub cover in the wetland is dominated by salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and Himalayan blackberry. Past land clearing activities have caused Himalayan blackberry to thrive and dominate in the southern portion of the wetland drainages. Most of Wetland C is affected by blackberry cover. Vine maple (Acer circinatum), red elderberry(Sambucus racemosa), Douglas' spirea (Spiraea douglasii), and prickly currant (Ribes lacustre) shrubs were also observed in wetland areas. The adjacent upland has dominant shrub cover of Indian plum (Oem/eria cerasiformis), vine maple, and western hazelnut (Cory/us cornuta) shrubs. Associated upland groundcover is dominated by sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus). " I I I, I I I I I , I, I I I I, I " I The wetland has diverse emergent vegetation dominated by skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum), lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina), and piggy-back plant (Tolmeia menziesii). Significant cover of speedwell (Veronica sp.), and hedgenettle (Stachys sp.) were observed emerging in the small wetland drainage channels. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub/shrub, persistent and non-persistent emergent, and is influenced by seasonalIy flooded conditions *. Some trees are rooted in the wetland drainages. As noted above *, the.term "semi permanently flooded" has been revised to "seasonally flooded". Per the USFWS classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats, the term "semipermanently flooded" can used to describe freshwater, wetland emergent habitats. Recent investigations indicate the more correct term is "seasonally flooded" because "the surface water is present for extended periods especially early in the growing season, but is absent by the end of the season in most years" (USFWS 1979, page 22). The term "Submerged land" * as defined in KCC 21A.06.1265 does not refer to the seasonally flooded, wetland conditions that are present on the East Renton property. Surface water does not persist throughout the growing season. Most of the observed hydrology is characterized as wetland seasonal ponding / inundation from local groundwater discharge and does not cause a ordinary high water mark associated with long-term, water movement and presence. Wetland Classification/Connectivity * With or without the presence of a forested wetland class, the wetlands would be rated as Class 2 for the following reasons. The wetland system exceeds one acre in size when offsite area is considered and these wetlands have present raptor nesting trees (KCC 21A.06.1415). The standard buffer setback distance for Class 2 wetlands is 50 feet. This area is considered a "headwaters" wetland system mostly supported by groundwater discharge. The Boundary / Topographic Survey map for East Renton (Attached) shows the location of wetland data plots related to wetland boundaries. Data plots 2, 4, & 7 found non-hydric' Alderwood soil conditions separating Wetland C from Wetlands A & B (Appendix A). No surface water channels were observed in these areas that could be determined as a "hydrologic connection". Topographic relief is also a factor in the separation of on-site wetland areas. Recent information was collected combining site visits and aerial photography interpretation. A stereo pair of color aerial photographs (KC-OO Flight Line 9-16 & 9-17, 10mOO) were reviewed at original scale (1" = 2000') using a US Army CE issue stereoscope. These aerial photos were enlarged 4 times (1" = 500') for improved ground detail and use with the stereoscope. The watershed area north of the project site was reviewed in detail to the intersection of N.E. Sunset Blvd. and 138th Avenue S.E. in Renton. Significant urban development and continuous piping of approximately 2000 linear feet of the Creek has separated the upper, Honey Creek natural drainage from the lower portion. The East Renton site is near the top of a drainage basin that drains to May r rl I, I j I I I , 'I I I I I· . , I I I I I Creek. Due to potential wetland connection to the south, the photos were used to review wetland area to N.E. 4th Street in Renton. Figure 2 is a copy of a photograph used and is included only to display the scale (1" = 500'), and the watershed area. The results of the aerial photography interpretation are that no areas of pennanent open water exist in the wetland system either on-site or off-site. As mentioned in the wetland description, a small area of standing water was observed on the southwest side of the site. This wetland area has dominant cover of emergent vegetation and is a blocked drainage situation. Also, a small wetland pond exists on the west side of the Shamrock site located to the south. Both of these wetland areas have shallow and seasonal inundation. Recent site visits continned these areas are currently dry. Although the wetland system may exceed 10 acres in total size, no pennanent open water is identified and plant associations of infrequent occurrence are not evident. Therefore, because habitat features required for a Class 1 rating do not appear present, this investigation identifies the on-site wetland ratings as Class 2. Wetland Buffer Averaging * The Preliminary Plat site plan proposes a limited amount of buffer reduction along the edge of Wetlands A & B. Per the County's sensitive area standards (KCC 2IA.24.320B & Public Rules 21A-24-016), buffer averaging is being proposed in one location on the project site (Figure 1). The written analysis to support the buffer averaging is presented as follows. Total Buffer Encroachment 2.575 sq, ft. Total Buffer Added 4.683 Sa, ft. The existing site conditions are relevant to this buffer averaging proposal. The Preliminary Plat Map (Figure 1) shows the proposed buffer reductions and additions. Lots 53, 54, & 55 are proposed for buffer reduction. The additional buffer area (4,683 sq. ft.) would be added to Lots 48 thru 52 and adjacent to Tract C . The proposed buffer reduction area is comprised of open forest with dense blackberry understory. This area has few trees most of which are dead and dying red alder trees. More significant tree cover including mature bigleaf maple is present upslope but outside of the 5O-foot buffer zone. The reduced buffer area is relatively small and would not cause a loss of many trees or native shrub vegetation. In addition, the adjacent wetland area was cleared and possibly used as pasture. Currently, it is also an area dominated by Himalayan blackberry. I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I The majority of buffer replacement is located within forested areas adjacent to Wetland C. This buffer area is a uniform stand of young to medium age red alder and black cottonwood trees. The added area adjacent to the lots provides a higher level of buffer function with potential to increase at maturity. Many trees are present ranging from 4 to 8 inches in diameter that were not surveyed on the topographic map. The buffer averaging, for 2,575 square feet of area reduction, would provide an increase in buffer area that exceeds a ratio of 1.5 : 1. As a requirement, the buffer averaging would maintain the minimum buffer setback distance of 32.5 feet or 65 percent of the standard buffer width (SO feet). The additional buffer areas are contiguous to the standard buffer. The minimum building setback would be maintained between any structure and the reduced buffer (Public Rule 2IA-24-016 C). The intent of the proposed buffer averaging is to allow various site design features to occur and meet the code criteria. After site conditions are verified by the County, the buffer averaging demonstrates that total area of buffer does not decrease, some additional wetland protection would be provided, and wetland functions would be enhanced (Public Rule 2IA-24-016 A). As part of the buffer averaging analysis, the criteria issues listed in Public Rule 2IA-24-016 B were reviewed and are being addressed as follows: I. Preserving the functions of the existing buffer on the parcel and adjoining parcels; 2. Not impacting the stability of a stream bank, if any; 3. Not creating a risk of hazardous trees as a result of development; 4. Providing the opportunity for additional protection or enhancement to the wetlands; 5. Not impacting the location of a floodway and lOO-year floodplain; 6. Not impacting the presence of any migrating river channel; 7. Preserving on-site natural resources (wetlands) and not impacting their functions and values; 8. Health Department requirements for on-site sewage disposal are not applicable to this proposal; 9. Will provide other information to be reasonably necessary to analyze the proposal. In summary, the proposed buffer averaging would provide more buffer area than required by code. Portions of increased buffer area would provide the same or higher function due to existing habitat conditions. No wetland impact is anticipated from the limited reduction of buffer distance in proposed location. II , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I WIWLIFE HABITAT The project site has four distinct plant communities that could be important to wildlife for providing food and cover. These are grassland, shrub, wetland emergent, and forest. The majority of forest area on the project site will not be impacted by the proposed development. King County has identified protection measures for red-tail hawk use and recently requested information regarding the potential presence of salmonids within the wetland / stream system. Red-tail hawk (RTH) use has been identified as a nesting pair using an active nest site within the wetland system (Schulz 4/3/01). Red-Tail Hawk Nest * The preliminary site investigations located two RTH nests (Schulz 4/3/01). These have been surveyed and will be shown on the revised Preliminary Plat map. The nests are referred to as the "central" nest and "north" nest. The central nest is in the largest black cottonwood tree on the project site but appears to be old and not an active nest (possibly abandoned). During April, 2001 the observations confirmed the RTH were using the north nest. In July, 2002 a site visit verified the RTH pair were using the north nest tree. No activity was observed around the central nest. Upon approach to the north nest tree, at a distance of about 200 feet, both RTH were exhibiting defensive and excited behavior. fledglings were not observed but it could be assumed that at least one offspring was present. Presumption of Salmonid Use * Field observation in early August, 2002 found both wetland channels on the site to be dry. These channels are seasonal drainages, vegetated, and lack gravel habitat and significant erosion features. Although these channels are vegetated with emergent and shrub species, the width of the channels and water influence are greater at the north boundary of the site. It appears that blockage from the old farm road and smaIl culverts causes water to back up at the points of discharge and has widened the channels. Wetland B's channel is very shallow and has evidence of sheet flow rather than a well-defined stream channel. A limited investigation just north of the project site boundary found an artificial channel to divert and combine wetland surface water flows. The off-site channel is approximately 2 feet wide but at about 30 feet downstream is not evident and becomes wetland pasture. Further investigation observed an shallow swale that is not continuously connected and is disturbed by livestock use. It is not known if barriers to fish movement exist on downstream, private properties. However, this area is the uppermost part of the watershed and lacks typical stream features such as perennial hydrology, a gravel bottom, and adequate refuge area, that even resident trout species normally occupy for survival. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Downstream at the crossing of 142th Avenue S.E., a forested shrub wetland habitat is present in the depression at about 120 feet wide. A 24" concrete culvert conveys water flow but no distinct channel was observed. This wetland area was also dry in August, 2002. The State Department of Fish and Wildlife was contacted on 8112102 (Telephone Communication -Larry Fisher, Habitat Biologist) and indicated that it is likely there are no fish in upper Honey Creek but this time of year is not appropriate for an instream fish survey. There is a significant fish barrier downstream at 138th Avenue S.E. In summary, using the Public Rilles section of the code pertaining to Salmonid use -Presumption and rebuttal of presumption (KCC 21-24-013) portions of the wetland drainage meet the criteria related to channel width and gradient. Under Public Rules KCC 21-24-013, B., a waiver to the presumption applies using criteria B3., B.4., & B.5.. In summary, these criteria state there is sufficient infonnation about the geographical region from Dept. of Fish & Wildlife to support a departure from the presumption characteristics related to channel width and gradient, and that there is evidence of a complete fish barrier particularly when the stream has intermittent or ephemeral flows. Additionally, there may be record of an issued HPA permit from the Dept. of Fish & Wildlife that would confinn the stream area is not used by salmonids. I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I REFERENCES Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, United states Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79-31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1977. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. University Press, Seattle, Washington. King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. King County. 2002. King County Code -Chapter 21A.24 Environmentally Sensitive Areas: Presumption of Salmonids, Sensitive Area and Buffer Modifications, and Mitigation Requirements. King County. 2000. King County Code -Chapter 21A.24 Environmentally Sensitive Areas. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. King County Area Soil Survey, Washington. Prepared in cooperation with the Soil Conservation Service, King County, and the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. United States Department of Interior, Fish, and Wildlife Service. 1988. National Wetland Inventory. Prepared for the Office of Biological Services. Washington State, Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #96-94. Washington State, Department of Fish & Wildlife. 2002. Telephone Communication on 8112102. " I~ I " .. ' '\-,. I .~~ , I I , I I I I I • I I I I I I I I ,. DATA FORM ,"-" UTlNE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1 .., / r J Field b,vestlgator(s)' .?-Date:#/ t'1. tJ / ProjedlSite:' . State: Coun~ . ~ l! go; AppIicanllOwner: Plant Community ./Name:! 7 /1 Note: K a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. ~o-n~r;~;'~r~n~~n~a~ ~~it~~s :;is~ a~ t;e-p~~ ;o;;u~~; - -'"'Ji)..ti /;; J -g-= ------- Ves :..l.L.. No -.-:.. (H no, explain on back) . -J LL5 Has the v8getati on"sblls, andIor hydrology been signifICantly disturbed?' 1/ f r fd.-c:r 11=' T Ves _ No ~ (H yes, explain on back) J ----------------------------------------------~---- VEGETATION Indir.ator Indicator Dominant Plant ~ Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species 'ti1. ~:~ HkJ?I:~. ~~t~::1 ~~: ;; t ii7t;g~i f%cu Ii ~~::_ -==_ -==_ -==_ -:=_ -==_ -==_ -: Status Stratum ~9Jj, ~:A7ft~JibI.6~!:----19.~OttW '1 19. ______ _ B-2 10. 20. Percent 01 dominant speCies that ara OBl, FACW, a~d1n4C Imib Is the hydrophytic vegetation crfterion met? Ves E No'_'_ Ratlonale: _______________________________ _ Series/phase: .' A Icfu. ~~ . SOilS < su~roup:2" ' . Is the soil on theliydric soils list? Ves / No V Undetermined / Is the soli a Histosol? Ves __ No ~istic epipedon prasent? Ves:-7"'" No K Is the soil: Mottled? Ves __ No.J2:: Glayed? Ves __ No -t,..C Matrix Color: . Mottle Colors: Other hydric soli indic2tors: Is the hydric: soli criterion ~t? R . n' -6t~1 /6 ILf--/(/ v.. ". .Is the groundurtacelnundated?. ;u& __ . . Is the 8011 saturated? Ves __ ~_., .; N Noo _ . 'I II Depth to Iree-standing water In pit/soli probe hole: _____ ~ ____________ _ list other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil sa ation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Ves Rationale: ______________________________ ~ __________________________ ___ . JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATI9I<AND RATIONALE. Is the plant community a wetland? Ves No..-V Rationale lor'jurlsdic:tional declslo • I' 1 This data lorm can be used for the Hydric oil Assessment Procedure a the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 ClassKlc:atlon according to "Son Taxonomy." I· .... I I I I ······ .. . ; .... I:',: I. I I I , •.... I I I.', I I I' I ", ~ I: . -' , "",. ------------ DATA FORM NEJNSITE DETERMINATION METHOD" field Invea1lga1or(s): LA.. '2-Data: .. ......;.:~&;;:.L--,.--- Projec:tlSlte: . State: Coluu:nty~::':-:!-~:'C~~:t~ AppIlcant.'Owner: Plant Community.lName: _ . Note: Namora detalled alta'de8criptlon Is necessary, use tha back of data form or a field note ~-';riij~;n~;nt. -al.-.~~;.:;Is~ a~t~e-p~; ~~~u~;; -. --~! ~~-;g ~ -. ---- Vas No~ (If· no, explain on back) . :, r"1 / Lb Has theVagatati~Is,andlor hydrology bean significantly alSturbad? )J f' r /'-IF."'-7 .. Yas _ No (lfye., explain on back) . .' . . . .. ----~--~-~----------------------------------------- VEGETATION· ,>' .' 'Incfoeator Dominant,Plant Sp:cJ::,L Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Indicator Status Stratum /d 1 .. AI be {~td., flIe -jfiL11. _____ _ ;t~t 1t1ot,:r6~ti!i ~~~~~--' - - 6. ,c,: 16. ________ _ , . B-2 7. . ""'.'.' 17. _______ ---,- B. le. ________ ~ 9. 19. ;,.' ________ _ 10. . . . .. . 20. . Pereant of doininant spades that are OBL. FACW, aodlefFAC / ouz, Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion mat? V e8...t::.-No _ . Rationale: . '. Sa~~h~: .. -~-A'1Ji;~;t : .' SOIls <' s~~r~u~:i ...-,;;...;". __ ::'_" _.:.:-_____ '_. _ -;:;; Is the soil on theI\ydric soils list? Vas ---L No V Undetermined' / fa. the acills' Hla1osol? Ver~ _ No l::::=_.1;limic apipedon prasent? V 85,...::.",L No ~ Is the loll: Molll8crt-Yes· No' V"Gleyed? Ves No~, ' M~tOr;,.'~::~···'~ --Mattia POlo :---... Other hydric~sC)U ~tor,s;' . .' Istha,hydric son' erlonmet?"·Yl't.~_ Ration ..... ~',., -II. .. , DROL . Is the grounclaurf~ Inunclatad?::~ __ . No Surface water depth: ----.,.----- Isthesollsaturatad? Ve •. ~ ~o_ ;;Jj' Depth to frae-a1andlng water In pitlsoll probe hole:;..· ___ .!:::!!~ ____________ _ list other fleld'ev!dencaof surf_Inundation or soU salu tlon. =::n:aod hydroiogycritarlon'met? va.' fa -.} jdf~f?iV ¥i- tk .$4 d$"/1fh ddJ rL ~(2lr~~~. . '. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMIN9'0N AND RATIONALE. .' . Is lhe·plant community a wetland? . Yes --No ~. ~ r:Jw l.., -51:/ t I Rationale for'lurlsdlctlonal decision: . I This deta lorm can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment PrciceduniJ. . . 2 CIassKicatlon accordlnlllO ·SoH Taxonomy.· • I I I I I··· ; .'-I,: I I I I I ". '. I I I I I I I I , DATA FORM ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD! F'181d Investlgator(a): ~~at;,e~: ~~~i~~~~= ProjedlSlte: State:-H~l- AppUcant.Owner: Plant Community .lName: Note: W a more detailed site descripllon Is necessary, use the back of dala fonn or · ~-n:r~;;;;:m~;aI-;~rt~~a -:;Is~'-; I;.-P~;' ~;~u~;; - --. J -,1/ ~f'k-J-Ii : ------ · V •• --k::.. No _ (H no, explain on back).r;r.e.. 701 . Has thevegelalion,.J8I!S., andlor hydrology been signifICantly disturbed? , L t!'1~# S' / .. Vea _ No ..K. (Hyes, .xplain on back) /I' T riO .. . --~----------------------------------------------- Indic-.alor VEGETATION · Domy!Plant=~ Slatus Stratum Dominanl!lant Species· , 71 ~$ 1.~ (~, r/iv iFu 11. /&,1tJJ!.ri.J.Jrf""IU < . . ~~ -I'dilL., ..A-! 12. . ~ \.71:' :tJ tfj; ~ii = ~ ~:: ... · . . ------i~ lo~;: .ra;;;ki!l'M.( j'iU41rpf",J r.lCll JI ~;: -------- /~:: l$1i;6k1J' a, f)P u, II ~:: ______ _ 1~ ~ B-2 Percent of dominant specie8that are OBL. FACW, ~AAC . 4' ~ Is \he hydrophytic vegelatlon crfterion m.t? Ve. EN~__ . Ratlona~: ______________ ~ ____________________ ~ ______________________ __ ... /.6-:.1.. . Serieslphasa: yr:u-I ~ , . ~bgroup::t ' . « . . lath. '011. on th. ~ydric soils list? V.s ----..AIo ___ Undel.nnined t2 /' Is tIM! .oila H1stosol? Vea ~ No ~HI;Il6 .plpedon prasent? V.5c,.........L No :u lath •• oil: Mollied? V.. No~~ed? Ves_ No~ , Matrb"CoIor:' . MOIII. POlors: Other hydriC soD irJ<flCPlors: Ia the hydric son crlter' n ""I? Rationale: - SOILS II . ,,' HVDR~V . . . .Is \he ground 8Urface InUnda~? e. _ ' No 1::::::-. Surface wat.r depth: ------------------ Is \he loll saturated? Ves No _ /I Depth to fre.-standlng water n pit/soli probe ho~: ~--~-.7~----------------------------- list other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation. . Is the wetland hydrology criterion'mel? V.s =v No ___ Ratlona~: , . JURISDICTIONAL .9ETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a w.lland? V.S _V"_ t.I Nfto _ Rationale foqurlsdlctlonat decision: __________________________________ __ t This data form can be used for the Hydric soa Ass.ssm.nt Procedure and the Planl Community Assessinent Procedure. . . 2 ClassKlcatlon according to "SoIl Taxonomy.· .~. DATA FORM R,OU]1NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOOl Field Investlgator(s): I".... Date: --'~iciM~-=-L-,---- ProjedlSlte: State: County: -Jfrl41f#'-';~6'-__ (j /) ApplicantJOwner: Plant Community #/Name: ' Note: H a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field note Do-n~i3n~r~n~~n~a~~~H:'~s ~;~; a~ t~e-p~~ ;o~~u~;; - -M'~;;:';'" W 1';-;£}g - Yes No ___ (H no~ explain on beck) , , I Has the vegetatio~, andlor hydrology been significantly disturbed? ~ c.., , Yes __ No __ (H yes, explain on back) , --------------------------------------------------- • VEGETATION Indk.ator Indicatar':-'''' Do~ant Plan~ ~~" Status Stratum Domi cias Status ':~...,... + 5( O~ 1.1'I/i1( ,ICJu../dI)i< /'lie 71"44 -~11~. ~~w.@~= f:l'll JMJlJL I ~$~ i p;tK. ~~~: $11. Ykir o1.,l~: Wu .. 1/ ~~: ______ _ A_ 6. . , -;., -d....-J_ 16. /,'7. , f~'tf2¥$117. -------r1o,::~JiJ/y-f,;J;wfhvl'j ~~: ------ 8-2 10.-:::::z.-20.. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/.(FAC _-I-J'-a7.=..!:.'JI"-__ _ Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Ves L No __ v Rationa~: _____________________________________________________________ _ Series/phase: A/Ji.r'w/,;iJ J/ SOILS/ Subgroup:2 ___ ..:.' ___ ~_-- Is the soil on the nydric soils list? Yes ~oV Undetermined <' Is the soil a Histosol? Yes ___ No ~~don present? Yes ----",No E Is the soil: Mott~? Ves __ No~yed?' Ves __ No_~_ Matrix Color: ' Mottle Colors: _________________ ...,.-________ __ Other hydric soil indicptors: -----------------~""----------------------'+___.---- Is the hydric soil criterion Ration . : HVDROLgaV " Is the ground surface inundated? 'P'S __ No ~ Surface water depth: --------------- Is the soil saturated? Yes -V' No __ J II Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe ho~: ____ -L_~ _____________________ _ list other field evidence of surface inundation or 5011 saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Ves V /' , Rationa~: I :&.L DETERMIN~ON AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Ves --No ~ ~~ I G WIt -+ ~R~a~tio~n:a~~~fo:r~'~~,,~S~d~~io~n:a~I~~is~i~O~.~~~'~~:2~~~~~~==~::~==~::::~~~::~:'( 1 This data form can be used for the Assessment Procedure. 2ClassKication according to ·Soil Taxonomy." ent Procedure and the Plant Community I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . - ;.: .------.-----.:. .. , ,. DATA FORM ,_. R Ul1NE·ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1 F .. 1d Investlgator(s)' 2-. :.... Date: -.::~'-!..=t---::.j",A~-r-- ProiacVS~e: State co)uu:n~ty~: ~'1.flj~~~'~= AppIicantlOwner: Plant Community '!Name: _ .. ----.--. Note: H a more detailed s"e description is necessary. use the back of data form or a fie notebo ~-n:r~r:n~~n~a~;~n~~s ~;is~ a~ t-.he-p~~ ;.,~~u~~; - - -~.r;, -,;;?,:J. -C--; Yes No __ . (H no. explain on back) . . r fOt{--j Has the vegetatk'n. s9M..' andlor hydrology been signifICantly disturbed? .' . . Yes __ No ...k::: (H yes. explain on back) ',:-::-::'- --------------------------------------------------- VEGETATION Indir.ator Indicator . Dominant Plant Species ~~ Status Stratum Domi ~ ~~. . l~ ~:~ n7?~ f7bl .. ~D /~~~: ~~, ~ r/JU4. /lfW:L1 Jrb3.~~Jif,t ~ 1/ 13.~~ItilJ;;dijCf~ diiif" (I 4. ..h--/. 14. -jI $?b ~ 15. ---___ _ )O~ 7f\!.1 ,~~:------ . ~ 8. 3:ikb,!: ____ _ B·2 10. 20.' Ti Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACW. ~dln4C _.LA,.!,'(JrJ=~i?~ __ _ Is the hydrophy1ic: vegetation cr"erion met? Yes _V __ N Noo ~ _'_ . Rationaie: ________________________________________ __ SOILS Series/phase: o!,!,/~:=:"' __ ~-,.",,--Subgroup:2 _______________ _ Is the soil on Ihe flydric: . list? Yes ~o Undetermined .J....-/" Is the soil a Histosol? Yes __ No ~ Iji:Ric epipedon present? Yes ~o e.. Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No ~ieyed? Yes __ No ~ Matrix Color: _______ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-:-~M~o~tt~le~CO;I~o~rs~: ;:;======;===::;::::;;::::=== Other hydric soil indicptors: - Is the hydric soillOliterion met? Ratlona: C/-." .. " HY~Rgl.OGY '. $I .Is the ground surface inundated,? ~__ No~ __ SIJ SlJrface water depth: _____________ _ Ia the soil saturated? Yes ~ No .__ d-II Depth to free-standing water in.pillsoil probe hoie: ---...,L~----------------- List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology cmetion met? Yes No Ratlonaie: ___ --'''-____________________________ __ . JURISDICTIONAL DETERMIN~ON AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes __ No_I/' __ ~ _ / IG ~'i-~-f Rationale fo(jurisdictional decision: _-===-_-==:"~~d.:~/)~J~~~~~'!...!.::!:A~~~~ 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure'and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2ClassHication according to 'Soil Taxonomy: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATA FORM rt.-I1TINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1 Date: _"::':;"-'~~'-_--:-__ -Prol~.: State: -¥I'~~-County: --~.f-i.,~~Ib~~ AppIocant.()wner: . Plant Community '!Name: -~::-:--:-~,.--.,.t-..,..... Note: K a more detailed s"e description is necessary, use tne back of data form or a field notebook. Field Investigalor(s)' Do-n~r~r~n~:';a~~~"~~::':is~ a~ t~e-p~~ ~~~u~;; - - - -(iifs i ;& -q;/i-:c.--;- Yea No l~o, explain on back) '-II CO Has the vegetation, ' and/or hydrology been signifICantly disturbed? . Yes _ No (H yes, explain on back) .... ------------~-------~------------------------------ VEGETATION .. Indk.ator Indicator Status Stratum Dom. Plant.Sp;cies/ Status ~b ;>f3o~ 1 flkU -1fJM 11./CRrc.iifT'Ilrj7''ii,AiV f/J(;-., . }O~ ~ . . f/Jv II ~~II:+/~lIbratk yt fJlcwf!:i1L//h * ~$li: ~;pAM:W pm < " li: ___ . 517~~(J; lkR :liruil17. -----S~ ::~t" t;/;s(ok"., file)), i1 ~:: ------ 10.. 20. -----.er,----- B-2 Percent of dominant species that are OSLo FACW, anellor FAC~_ ...... ~!.!i~O<:~~= __ _ .Is the hydrophytic vegetation cr~erion mel? Yes _ No 2. Rmiona~: ___________________________________ _ Sarieslphase: _£:.tL(tj2J:~~~Jb~::· _"_'-_-;S_O~IL ... SLSubgroup:2 _______ ~ __ _ Is the soil on the flydric soils list? Yes ~No Undetermined ./ Is the soil a Histosol? Ves No ....k::.j:jisC1C epipedon present? Ye~ -.L No zz. Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No ~G~yed? Yes __ No.it:::::.. MalrixColor: . Mottle Colors: ___________ ..,-______ _ Other hydric soillndic~tors: ------""7"-----7"T-------=--------,.--,.--.---,---- Isthehydric~~$O:ijl~·e~r~ioln~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~JJ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rationa;': .., . HYDROj.t1GY No _t/' __ C Surface water depth: __________ _ .Is the ground surface inundaled? fls __ Is the soil saturated? Yes -k:: No ___ _ Depth to free-standing water in pitlsoil probe hole: ___ ==::=-________________ _ List other lield evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. <' Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Ves :..z No __ Rmiona~: ______________________________________________________________ __ JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINAjJON AND RATIONALE Ist~eplant~m~u.nityawetla.nd? Yes __ No_~ __ -u J~It~ Ie. ~"i/fA-""'O RatlOna~ for lurlsdicllonal deciSion: .IV (?, t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2CtassKJcation according 10 "Soil Taxonomy: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATA FORM NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD' Field Investlgato '2-Date: -=-:~:.:...!~-.J'.+..~-- Projec:t/S~e: State: County: AppIican\JOwner: Plant Community .!Name: _~~ No'e: ft a more detailed s~e description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field;"'n'":a~t;::t.f-a;-k.-~--, - Do"n~~i~n:';n;aJ-~~it~~S ~;is~ !'~t~e-p~~ ~o:~u~;; ,-- -(j ;;;}f/l~-1';;11'---;;_-!~;.. Ve. No __ (H no, explain on back) \,....: .:> Has the v"lletatlo;;:-~ andlor h~droiogy been signifICantly disturbed? ' , ' , Yes __ No K.. (H yes, explain on back) . , --------------------------------------------------- VEGETATION Indir.atar Indicator DOJmi t!la!,~ieS ~i!ltu Stratum Daminan\f'lanISJ:cies ·0 Status 'S:i,t~t6Q ~3#1; 1. ~ ~{llItJrr "1JdL.l11(k"jy4 Cii5Pd4= FlCJ.t '5.fP *~~ ~.iJ flIC< Ii ~~~iidi.,44;h!..Ikl-~ r ~~~=;i~¥j~~ "-- '~ :·t\',,/,OJ,Al c,.. f/1XL /:t ~~: ~ _____ _ 10. ~o Percent of dominant sPecies that are OBL FACW, and.' AC " 17 Is the hydrophytic: vegetation cr~erion met? Ves No __ Rmlonale: _____________________________ _ series/phase: A/~II/tTOt-SOILS Lsubgroup:2 _______________ _ Is the soil on the Faydric: soils list? ve~No =z Undetermined G Is the soil a Histasai? Yes No . 'tic: epipedan present? Yes ~a Z?' Is the soil: Mottied? Yes No· Gleyed? Ves_,_' __ Na~, Matrix.Color: Mottle COlars:, __________ -,-____ _ -.-::' HVDROLgGV ' Is the ground surface inundated? Ves ~_~_ ~ S"urface water depth: _________ _ Is the soil saturated? Ves ___ No ~ -._ Depth to free-standing water in pillsoii probe hole: ____________________ _ List other lIeld evidence of surface inundation or saii saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Ratlonale: ____________________________________ _ , , JURISDICTIONAL DETERMIN90N AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Ves __ No _l/' __ Rationale fOr'jurisdic::lional decision: __________ .,-_____________ _ 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community As.essinent Procedure. ' 2 ClassKication according to ·Soil Taxonomy: B-2 I':"<C I'" I I. I -' : . , .. ".- 1·< I I I I I;, " , ~: ) ..•.. I I',';' ." I:,,:T,.: I I I I I ~ I" -. 0"';;;"" .--:-<. -,~."""", _ .. -'-'. _ DATA FORM ... , ROUllNE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD" ,,;,. 1/ ~~=,~ator(a~iii!r-z;-.' S~te/WJ1' g:~~~:~~1 . AppIIcanIJOwner: r Plant Communily,/Name:¥Ptf@ Note: • a more detailed site-description Is necessary, usellle back 01 data lorm or a field notebook. ---------------------------------;7--------Don0k"::nYilCl~men,tai.COndltio~S exist aI the plant community? /11 ~~ rhr ~~------- Yes' .. No ~ (H-no, explain on back) :; Has the·vegetatlon~ .9iIt. and/or hydrology been signiflC8l1tly disturbed? In.... t'J S ~ • . V .. ~No ....JL' (H yes, explain on back) . , . .'. ,', . . --~:~.[~.~----.--:: ::--:::--------V;~~~;~~ --------------------- '., ... ..-;' IncflCalor Indicator . Domin!'l!P1ant W~· Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species' Status Stratum -1(7 oio1. /ffI'y5 t.J4.ln;L Oe-l1,pe 11. ___ . ___ _ *·lo~:~1&~&dl<c.t/aiC .' .. f1w ~~~ --'-----4;' ................. ~"'"'' . 14. -~ __ :-__ ~ --,' --.. -'.' . ::. -,;:'., ~:: ------~-- 7. .. .• , ...... , _.' .17. ---___ '-_---,. 8. 18. --~ ____ _ 9. 19. --______ _ 10, . '. , . 20. --:::::;-"1:''''---''''--- . Percent of dominant species thai a;;' OBL. FACW, and/or FA9L~",",IJ,,-,,1J,--__ _ Is \he hydrophytic vegetalion eriterion met? Vas --'-No I!!::.-•... Rationale: . .' .' e""~ .HYDRO~Y ._; " .i:.; .... . .Is lIIe grOund SUrfaceinuildated?'~'_' __ . No JL:. Surface 'water depth; ::'-.---....,------ Is \he soH aaturaled?·;·Ve •. .-k::" No .I Alt Depth to lree.mndl"gwater In pit/soil piOtiehole: . LV . . list other Ileldevidenceol surface inundation or soil saturalion. . ..''/ . Is lIIe wetland hydrology"Criterlon-met? Yes V No __ r ,L~ ~'?~ r . Rationale:' . ':, ~~ fL.... . '..,'.. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMIN~N AND RATIONALE. . . . .' ' lalhe.planloommunlty·awetland? Ves __ NoK" ,A/,,'" In"-SrI;h. 'lei~ Rationale lor'lurisd"ldlonal clecis !-:-::t.:. ... ·-::-:~"'2;:--...c.=Vk.!.Tl~~-=:....:.._.=..~=-6'----'-- 1 This data lorm can be used lor the Hydric soa Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community· Assessment Procedu.... . . . 2Clasdlcallon accordl"g to ·SoHTaxoriomy." -.. -.,." 8·2 -..... . 1'\'· -.,'" I' .'; , I I.· 1:(· .' . ,.-'- I'~::- ,. I I I I;~:»~ 'c .'. _ .. ,~~~.:'::t~~~:-.:-, ,:~.=-~-:. -.~ .. "".e:L . . ::-.,....." .:" :~., ,~, .. -:. '~: . :' .. ;"-'-..... -~; . " .... ," " DATAFORM . / NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD,1 ;(j; 'I/O I Field Inveatigalor(s)' Data: to PfaJectISlta: Stale: Coun\Y'~_p..!"":!:!.2:...g....-(f)~-- AppIIc:anLOwner: Plant Communfty .!Name: ~ iFL Note: • a more datalled site description Is necessary. use the back 01 data form or a field notebook. -----~------------~--------------------------------.. ;Do.~~~JR?i~~mental conditiona exist althe plant community?· :Ye.,~ N()~(If·no. explain on back). ., "'" , . ,-HaS ~.yegetation • ....as. and/or hydrology been signiflCBl1tly distu rbed? . _ : .. _:Yes~ No _. _1'_ (If If yes. explain on back) ~~:-~::~::~~;.':.:.;:-~~~-.--~-.-' -_. __ ._---------~'--------------- -- -- ----. . ~:;/fk{.~?~yt ' ::::"I";;'~tor VEGETATION, Indicator . i~~AM;:t hlhli; ;;~s .. ··lRt;m ~;.minant Plant Speckls Status Stratum .. #'~;Ei.J,~~, i/;'j&f&; '. '~-$th~~~ __ ',-1 .:...--- :.' ., '.' ",~j~~D;,~-,..~ .' " ,,, , .' ~;: -----...,---- 8 •. '.'"'' 18; ---_____ _ ::9.. 19. '---_____ _ 10, 20. . Peiceni ~'dominant spedesthal are OBl. FACW;. and/or FAC . j;:; Pb Is tI1e hydrophytic wg.talloncrftaricin met? Yaa~ No ...JZ..~,,;. ____ •• n. -----_ .... • Rationale: . .. .' .. I ~;.,' . .: '.~··~,~'."f-'·:1.1:~.~~ ;.-::,c;::. 'of'" . ' .. -,. -:'" .'." . . •• -.. .l~- ',t.:; .. '"'' .' "·:,"i,._ ... ':';. __ ~ ;"'. "'""Jl!.r.L . _ .:. -'~.,,,:,, ,., ·• ... ·;.-: .. ··:'zt:.., -_ ;. "~ ., • ..-.~t·:(f~~:·.;.:..::;~}:.h I · .• ~.t.,.' ',~:' ~c:.:· ,~:f.~:f!i~~~~?!£Jft;!" 1.f ~·:;~~~;:5.i·:~£~~~ -::, --> ... :~:~:,.:o~i .. ;:z:~~~~ ' .. : ~ Is the scilla Hiatosol? Yes" • No· Z7"'" ~ic apiP,adon present? ,'y~5,~ Noz:::::::"' . "c'.i. ,,-,: <,.:', 'c'";.".' '~·lath.80iI: MottI8d~'~-NO~~ed?.:;"yes_ ·NO~, .. ,:··"::':··'·. " . . ,_':':;'~',.~ >~air~!or: /~. . Moltl?lora: .. ", '::n"1 I .. '. "'~:j':.:.~{.", .. ':!,~.!',~y'~ric,80Ui . tora: ,_ , .. :' .. ::~;:rllY~~f'n·cr~ .. rionrt?,Ja,,~~~,.I'I I.···· ~ . . ~, . ' " " " , . . '. ': I ~ ... ' .":.' I···: I '. I I"<~ .. ".' B·2 "'.' . lathewetf~hydroiogycriterlon'mat? YeS;Z'No_ 5''s~~ Ralionale:' . ...., ct· --" . . : 'j., .. :.~. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE l.the,pi8iit~mmunityawetland? Ya8~ No V--rf Ralionale forJurladlclional decision: _______ ~OI.'..L.lI..:::.J':!}.:.y"I:../.~_'l(Ej:..L#Z!"'"'~:7l. .~_~_.:._ _____ _,_---'--~---__:1C-------'--'''------'- I This data lorm can be used fortha Hydric SoR Assessmant Procedura aiId the Plant Community· As.asament Procedure. . . . .' .. . ZCIaaaKication according to 'SoH Taxonomy.' : ',' ~"~ 'I RENTON, /fA :1tJUO:1 , j ",,/ .--" ~ ~ "-.~ I i ----! I ----J / / . '\. RICK M lit DEBRA L CRULL ''\ 11813 148TH AVE SE ,,~ ....... ~~,--~---- ! I I 1 , I i I I / / ,"P J /~ -';'" \J \ . . " '-If " , .' , "r.:~}:. '-:'}'.,J '" \ i~y / "\il:'~i/ 50~ /'_) ....... _.~ 7JfACT'E .~' , .. ;.: --'~ ....... ~, ..... : ,I ; •. ::r:," .. \ RENTON. WA 98059 \ \ ,. ~ ADDtnONAL BUFFER AREA f/77/1 r ~ l/~j /41~. , ..... ..•.. LOT 1 .-.. , Figure 1 - Site Plan r/77/7771 ~~/..LUL-LL;.\ F"'> r. ~ , ~/LU~ I " ;;: ~" .... 450 ., ..... I I .Au E lit TINA M KIGER ;':6 142ND AVE SE RENTON. WA 98059 .4 ./ \ ',' FUru'''~ ,..,. '/ . '.' ,; .. "'''', :.... ." '-1 ' . 'LOPMENt '''»' ;!:' ,. .)' < r ..' i' j . __ " ~ ~'.~ ..... ~/" ;'.' "" _:' w, "-' ... /" • ...v0li!.- '';,: / '.' \ i'~",.".,,1"" ,.; . I ","":/ J'-"'/ '" ). : , .,' /' ! .. . ~~'J8'" . sa' ;lOot "50'" / 50' (. .. ··50·· +~·50·"'I"~"50·"l·<~"'. :.<li/ .' , .--. . ." ~ ftB' _.' i " r...; •.... :;",~ ··· .. :f.'-·;.,.·,1-·-A·_··-··~-·-·······--··-...... _. ___ .. ___ ... -." . ~;::f:.-->~. I IKe I I I I R~·4 fl M lit KATHRYN M JOHNSON f 06 142ND AVE SE 'NTON, WA 98059 J M lit KATHRYN M JOHNSON 12006 142ND AVE SE I REiv70N. WA 98059 '\~.! ...... ~' I .1"",:"-•• \ .' ,,' . ' ~ :' ~ . /' '/ / '\. (TYPE'I!) /: / / . " , " :/ " '. ..... ............ ; JRAOTiC! . , ' 1: .'. ,'" ' ~n.AND.vB • . I' .. \. .' , .,-', '" "'-:" . .' • .' ,. -. $)v,i;\ .. ,.' 450 .' :".~. :' ,'off<, ~ (. ..' "':' / TRACT.O / "'~ t(,~':il ' .. ~ .' .' SENSInVE AREA/ . \, ...... :., '\\"0".1 .. ,: .. :'-.. OPel SPACE ~ ,...... '" . ~.~ .... ' -. ").:' .. ,>,' ./" ./ ; f'-" ' / . ~~ ~ " ~ ~.. /: ... ~-"-.. .,.-........"./' .' lJETF;Nif/ON/ • iREOREAJ7ON / i 28.98.1 sP i : J:QnifTtLj" . '~0'· / ..... , .: ":\"\' J '" :" (.:~ -'; ! ;,~ "<~:.,<,' \ ..... ~~~:;:;p// " ,;' .1 .1. ". ;.,.,--~'~;;;;:;':';':'~ :-.": ~-4--: ... t ./ ;( .v\: \,.50·M;n.AND f ~ ... (/ ". " .'. ". BUFFER. (TYP) f ." '\' " "\:'. . '.. '" '" . .\~ ... ,'...,.:' .. }:' ';;': .? \r"w'Y . '/-"1' :<. ~ . '" ",' ," ~ .: . ~ F» 1 ;flr"'£:'~-~ "", .......... I .• ~.4'~~~ ~t?.. ",.. W .' /'1 . ". '" ~H~",,=._. i "v". ) / i <. ) C-" _.~ . __ . .).,'7/*.1/ :~!. '" '~\ : .• :::" . . ... "".. ......;, . ." w: .. / " . • ' . . . ; r:· 50' WETLAND: '.... \ '" ~ \.'~: ·1 ..... L '\"'. :. ..._~,' ,..'. • w • --... 1 ") ~. ;'-~' ,~:A,. \w~n.A"ND c'!'J ; :p .# EiM'''' -.:. "' (tYPE 11)':\ w •• § ~ ;"1< l"H/,~PjI~ ! 2. tv '" .• /~ '" '" ;. • ~ '" v ... \ WEn.AND A ;. '" (Pr'PE I/)-' • ....,...'. w -:....... "-. '" '" THERESA HELEN GACEK, ET AL 2823 16TH S .~1?ATTr.R. WA .QRI44 75. 26 27 28 29 /' ~ '.' <0 APPROXIMA 1F LoeA nON OF )r/n;. EXISnNG STRUCTURE (TYP) ilL • .J n u 7 . '\~7',< '61 • 105·.·· '5 :1 .... ;._ .. 70S: '-. ....... 7·T77 ~ g LL/Ui ~~') ~ J 2 7 I ~ .1\ Jl ., '. \' . -j: . '. ~ :J,{ ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055·1219 December 19, 2002 Cam West Development 9720 NE 120th Place Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Todd A. Oberg, P.E. Triad Associates 11814-115th AvenueNE Kirkland, W A 98034 RE: East Renton Subdivision KCSWDM Adjustment Request (File No. L02V0089) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment request for the East Renton subdivision. You are requesting approval for an adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KC~WDM) Core Requirement No.1, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location. Our review of the . information and a site visit provides the following findings: 1. The proposed East Renton subdivision is located on the west ,side of 148 th Avenue SE at SE 120th Street. The 66 lot, 19.6 acre, proposed East Renton subdivision is filed under Land Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02P0005. 2. The East Renton subdivision.is located in the Honey (Dew) Creek subbasin of the May Creek basin. The site is subject to the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The large, rectangular site oriented in an east·west direction is characterized by an upland area to the east adjacent to 148 th Avenue SE and a low, wetland area to the west. The lower, western area contains two hawks nests and associated buffers within the wetland area that encompasses two separate drainage paths that cross the north property line through existing culverts. The developable, eastern portion of the site contains a low ridge that traverses that portion of the site from northwest to southeast. The southwest portion sheet flows to the wetland area to the west and the northeast portion sheetflows across the north property line onto the adjacent parcel. All drainage paths converge on the adj acent parcel to the north and form the headwaters to Honey Creek that flows north. At least a quarter mile downstream, Honey Creek eventually turns west just to the south ofSR900. The western side of 148 th Avenue SE is the only upstream area that contributes flow to the site. ., East RentonIL02Y0089 December 19,2002 Page 2 00 4. The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention and water quality facility located in the north central portion of the site. The allowed releases would then be dispersed to the wetland/stream buffer area. Nuisance flows across the north property line would be significantly curtailed. Conceptual drainage plans show that frontage improvements are included in the storm drain system. 5. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversion. 6. The Level One Drainage Analysis did not identifY any restrictions or problems associated with the proposed discharge location or downstream path. 7. A consolidation offacilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. • Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow the diversion of runoff to a single facility draining to the onsite wetland/stream buffer area with the following conditions: 1. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility. 2. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the facility at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical Information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination. 3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements. 4. All onsite or offsite drainage facilities must be located in a public right-of-way or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County. 5. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing review will apply to this project. Jfyou have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270. -' j East RentonIL02V0089 December 19, 2002 Page 3 of3 Sincerely, James Sanders, P.E. Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division ------------ Jim Chan, P .E. Supervising Engineer Site Engineering arid Planning Section Building Services Division cc: Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stormwater Services Section, KCDNR Randall Parsons, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Pete Dye, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Lanny Henoch, Planner II, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engine~ring Review Section, LUSD ·' ---------------------------------------------------------- "J , .' King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Surface Water Design Manual Requirements I Standards Adjustment* Request Project Name: East Renton Project Address: 12D13-148th Ave SE . Renton 98059 ApplicanVAgent: Phone: CamWest Development 425-825-1955 Signature: Date: Address: City, State, Zip Code: 9720 NE 120th Place #100 Kirkland 9803 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: DOES Project File No.: LD2PDDD5 DOES Engineer/Planner Name: Pete Dye,LannyHen~ch' ~~~ Design Engineer: Phone: Todd A. Oberg 425-821-8448 ate: City, Stale, Zip Code: 11814-115th Ave NE Kirkland WA 9 Please ~e~s;u~re~to~in~c~lu~d~e~a~II;PI~a~nS~(T~.I~.R~.,~if~~~~S~ke~t~ch~e~s~. P~h~O;,lo~s~a~nd;,m~a~ps~t~h;,at may assist in complete review and consideration of this· request. Failure to information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please to the DOES Intake Counter, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue I, Randall Parsons, P.E., at (206) 296~7207. RBFBR TO SBCTION 1.4 IN CHAPTBR 1 OF THB SURFACB WATBR DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: 0 Standard 6 Complex 0 Experimental 0 Blanket o Pre-application Core requirement #1 Disoharge at the natural location. North Basin discharge to be combined with South basin discharge. APPLICABLE VERSION KCSWDM: 01990 (11/95)' [)I 1998 (9/98) 0 ____ _ • (Note: the term "variance" replaced by "adjustment") RECEIVED APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: 1998 KCSWOM 1 .2. 1COR'E Requirement #1 JUSTIFICATION PER KCSWDM SECTION 1.4.2 III See aHachments listed below. Adjustment letter't Topographlc ~X"lbl Level 1 down stream analysis ,AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES: DETERMINATION. rIr-. SEP 272002 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES o Denial o Approval r.. onditional Approval (see below) o DNR/WLRD Approval Signed _ Date: ____ ---.-,: (Experimental & Blanket variances only) ODES Staff Recommendation Signed: Date: ~., ()'2--- I Conditions of Approval: ee attached Memo Dated: DOES DIRECTOR/DESIGNEE: se Services Div., Engineering Review Supervisor: F9 9/ERS/SWDM-AOJ. doe F96/ERS/SWDMR-S.cpy22.doc 11/17J99 clc OCT -9 2002 K.C. D.D.E.S. I O.:2~ qOd-3 QO(7 September 18, 2002 Mark Bergam King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave MS lB Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: East Renton KC Project # L02P00005 Triad Job No. 01-047 Dear Mark: " 118141lSthAvenueNE Kirkland, WA 98034·6923 4ZS.8Z1.B448 425.821.3481 fax 800.488.D756 toll free W'MN .triadassoc.com This request is to approve an adjustment to Core Requirement 1 to provide for a diversion of , storm water discharge from the natural location. To assist in the review of the variance, please see the enclosed exhibit and Level I Downstream Analysis. The site consists of two natural sheet flow discharge locations; one located on the north property line and the other located on the west property line. The topography on the southern drainage basin slopes to the west and then drains to the north into an existing wetland. The topography on the north basin slopes north and then drains west into the same basin area forming a project site with multiple natural discharges that combine within one-quarter mile forming a single threshold discharge area. ' , The project proposes to construct one detention/water quality facility to be located in the northwest comer of the site. This location is approximately 230' southeast of the point where the two basins converge. The top of the detention/water quality facility will be used as a recreation area for the families in the future homes. Benefits to the public are the provisions of a single detention/water quality facility for maintenance and a recreation area adjacent to undeveloped land. The exposed portions ofthe vault would not be visible to the public due to the location next to the wetland. Benefits to the neighboring property are elimination of possible nuisance sheet flows, and potential concentrated flow from a detention/water quality facility. Furthermore, the neighboring property to the north is preparing a preliminary plat and their development will not have to pipe the flows through their site if only one facility is constructed, Please review the supporting material provided to assist you in your decision and let me know if you require any further information for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, OO~~~~:@ T T ad A. Oberg, P.E. K.C. D.D.E.S., ' . ® Surface Water Design Manual King County Requirements I Standards Department or Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Adjustment* Request Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Project Name: DDES Project File No.: L02POO05 East Renton DOES Engineer/Planner Name: Pete Dye, Lanny Henoch Project Address: Design Engineer: Phone: 12013-14Bth Ave SE Renton 9B059 Todd A. Oberg 425-821-8448 ApplicanVAgenl: Phone: -J~tgr't1/ (]/ ~ '11 'Sr~'Z-CamWest Development 425-B25-1955 Signature: Date: ~ti,neering Firm Name: ~{ T iad Associate Address: City, State, Zip Code: Address: . City, Slate, Zip Code: 9720 NE 120th Place #100 Kirkland 9B03 11B14-11Sth Ave NE Kirkland WA 9~ INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans (T.I.R., if available), sketches. photos and maps that may assist in complete review and consideration of this adjustment request. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please submit two complete copies of this request application form and applicable fee to the ODES Intake Counter, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest. Renton, Washington 98055-1219. For additional information, phone Randall Parsons, P.E., at (206) 296-7207. REFER TO SECTION 1_4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: 0 Standard 6 Complex. 0 Experimental 0 Blanket o Pre-application . Core requirement #1 Disoharge at the natural location. North Basin discharge to be combined with South basin discharge. APPLICABLE VERSION KCSWDM: 01990 (11/95)· ~ 1998 (9/98) 0 _____ _ • (Note: the term "variance" replaced by "adjustment") APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: 199B KCSWDM 1.2.1 CORE Requirement #1 JUSTIFICATION PER KCSWDM SECTION 1.4.2 fR/ECEDVED SEP 272002 Gf. See attachments listed below. Adjustment lst~er't Topograph~c ~X,,~b~ Level 1 down stream analysis LAN~~~fW~J/bES AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES: DETERMINATION: o Approval o Conditional Approval (see below) o Denial o DNRf\toILRD Approval Signed: _. ____ . _________ Date: _______ (Experimental & Blanket variances only) DOES Staff Recommendation Signed: Date: Conditions of Approval: o See attached Memo Dated: ___ _ ODES DIRECTOR/DESIGNEE DOES. Land Use Services Div,. Engineering Review Supervisor: DOES, Bldg. Servo Div., Site Engineering & Planning Supervisor: Signed: Signed: Date: Dale: F99/ERS/SWDM-A!JJ .doe F96/ERS/SWOHR·S.epyl2.doe 11/11/99 cle September 18, 2002 Mark Bergam King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave MS IB Renton, WA98055-1219 RE: East Renton KC Project # L02P00005 Triad Job No. 01-047 Dear Mark: 11814 1 15thAvenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034·6923 425.821.8448 425.821.3481 fax 8004880756 toll free www triadassoc.com This request is to approve an adjustment to Core Requirement I to provide for a diversion of storm water discharge from the natural location. To assist in the review of the variance, please see the enclosed exhibit and Level I Downstream Analysis. The site consists of two natural sheet flow discharge locations; one located on the north property line and the other located on the west property line. The topography on the southern drainage basin slopes to the west and then drains to the north into an existing wetland. The topography on the north basin slopes north and then drains west into the same basin area forming a project site with multiple natural discharges that combine within one-quarter mile forming a single threshold discharge area. The project proposes to construct one detention/water quality facility to be located in the northwest comer of the site. This location is approximately 230' southeast of the point where the two basins converge. The top of the detention/water quality facility will be used as a recreation area for the families in the future homes. Benefits to the public are the provisions of a single detention/water quality facility for maintenance and a recreation area adjacent to undeveloped land. The exposed portions of the vault would not be visible to the public due to the location next to the wetland. Benefits to the neighboring property are elimination of possible nuisance sheet flows, and potential concentrated flow from a detention/water quality facility. Furthermore, the neighboring property to the north is preparing a preliminary plat and their development will not have to pipe the flows through their site if only one facility is constructed. Please review the supporting material provided to assist you in your decision and let me know if you require any further information for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, T T od A. Oberg, P.E. .. ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98055-1219 December 19, 2002 Cam West Development 9720 NE 120 th Place Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 --e-_ -- Todd A. Oberg, P.E. Triad Associates 11814-11Sth AvenueNE Kirkland, W A 98034 RE: East Renton Subdivision KCSWDM Adjustment Request (File No. L02V0089) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment request for the East Renton subdivision. You are requesting approval for an adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Core Requirement No. I, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location. Our review of the information and a site visit provides the following findings: 1. The proposed East Renton subdivision is located on the west side of 148 th Avenue SE at SE 120th Street. The 66 lot, 19.6 acre, proposed East Renton subdivision is filed under Land Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02POOOS. 2. The East Renton subdivision is located in the Honey (Dew) Creek subbasin of the May Creek basin. The site is subject to the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The large, rectangular site oriented in an east-west direction is characterized by an upland area to the east adjacent to 148 th Avenue SE and a low, wetland area to the west. The lower, western area contains two hawks nests and associated buffers within the wetland area that encompasses two separate drainage paths that cross the north property line through existing culverts. The developable, eastern portion of the site contains a low ridge that traverses that portion of the site from northwest to southeast. The southwest portion sheetflows to the wetland area to the west and the northeast portion sheetflows across the north property line onto the adj acent parcel. All drainage paths converge on the adjacent parcel to the north and form the headwaters to Honey Creek that flows north. At least a quarter mile downstream, Honey Creek eventually turns west just to the south of SR900. The western side of 148 th Avenue SE is the only upstream area that contributes flow to the site. .. • • East RentonIL02V0089 December 19,2002 Page 2 of3 • 4. The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention and water quality facility located in the north central portion of the site. The allowed releases would then be dispersed to the wetland/stream buffer area. Nuisance flows across the north property line would be significantly curtailed. Conceptual drainage plans show that frontage improvements are included in the storm drain system. 5. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversion. 6. The Level One Drainage Analysis did not identify any restrictions or problems associated with the proposed discharge location or downstream path. 7. A consolidation offacilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. Based on these findings, we hereby' approve this adjustment to allow the diversion of runoff to a single facility draining to the onsite wetland/stream buffer area with the following conditions: 1. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility. 2. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the facility at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical Information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination. 3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements. 4. All onsite or off site drainage facilities must be located in a public right-of-way or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County. 5. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing review will apply to this project. . If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270. • • East RentonlL02V0089 December 19, 2002 Page 3 of3 S' ly, James Sanders, P .E. Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division • Jim Chan, P .E. Supervising Engineer Site Engineering and Planning Section Building Services Division cc: Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stormwater Services Section, KCDNR Randall Parsons, P .E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Pete Dye, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Lanny Henoch, Planner II, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD . . • • • • ® Surface Water Design Manual King County Requirements I Standards Department of Development and Environmental Sen-ices 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Adjustment* Request Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Project Name: DOES Project File No.: L02POO05 East Renton DOES EngineerlPlanner Name: '.rn.V Pete Dye. Lanny ·HenDch ra Project Address: Design Engineer: Phone: 12013-148th Ave SE Renton 98059 Todd A. Oberg 425-821-8448 AppticanVAgent: Phone: Jtuy/(]/~ '11 \SI~'2-CamWest Development 425-825-1955 Signature: Date: fElli,neerin g Firm Name: =1 T iad Associate Address: City, State, lip Code: Address: City, Slale. Zip Code: 9720 NE 120th Place #100 Kirkland 9803 11814-115th Ave NE Kirkland WA 9~ INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include alt plans (T.I.R .. jf available), sketches, photos and maps thaI may assist in complete review and consideration of this adjustment request. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please submit two complete copies of this request application fOnTI, and applicable fee to the DOES Intake Counter, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, Washington 98055-1219. For additional information, phone Randall Parsons, P.E., at (206) 296-7207. REFER TO SECTION 1.4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: 0 Standard rn Complex 0 Experimental 0 Blanket o Pre-application . Core requirement #1 Disoharge at the natural location. North Basin discharge to be combined with South basin discharge. APPLICABLE VERSION KCSWDM: 01990 (11/95)' d) 1998 (9/98) 0 _______ _ * (Note: the term "variance" replaced by "adjustment") APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: RECEUVED 199B KCSWDM 1.2.1 CORE Requirement #1 JUSTIFICATION PER KCSWDM SECTION 1.4.2 i2! See attachments listed below. Adjustment lethte~'t Topograph1c tx 101 Level 1 down stream analysis AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES: DETERMtNATlON: o Approval ~onditional Approval (see below) SEP 272002 LAN~~~f~~~J/~ES o Denial o DNRlWLRD Approval Signed: I. A" A Date: _____ (Experimental & Blanket variances only) DOES Staff Recommendation Signed: 1/ A,Ug/hd' IJ. ("_1"'_"" ~ Date: '" -I v-- Conditlons of Approval: , ~ See attached Memo Dated: IV---{q ...... 0 'L--" __ _ DOES DIRECTOR/DESIGNEE. nd Use Services Div,. Engineering Review Supervisor: DOES, Bldg, Servo Div •• Site Engineering & Planning llWfgf[5' OCT -9 2002 ~ K.C. D.D.E.S. F9~ /ERS/SWDM-1UlJ. doc F96!ERS/SWDMR-S.<:py22.doc 1l/17!~9 de /. . . . . September 18, 2002 Mark Bergam King County DOES 900 Oakesdale Ave MS IB Renton, WA 98055-1219 • • RE: East Renton KC Project # L02P00005 Triad Job No. 01-047 Dear Mark: • • !'tIjJNd .. 1181411S1hAvenueNE Kirkland, WA 98034-6923 425.821.8448 425821.3481 fax 800 488.0756 toll free wwwtriadassoccom This request is to approve an adjustment to Core Requirement 1 to provide for a diversion of storm water discharge from the natural location. To assist in the review of the variance, please see the enclosed exhibit and Level I Downstream Analysis. The site consists of two natural sheet flow discharge locations; one located on the north property line and the other located on the west property line. The topography on the southern drainage basin slopes to the west and then drains to the north into an existing wetland. The topography on the north basin slopes north and then drains west into the same basin area forming a project site with mUltiple natural discharges that combine within one-quarter mile forming a single threshold discharge area. The project proposes to construct one detention/water quality facility to be located in the northwest corner of the site. This location is approximately 230' southeast of the point where the two basins converge. The top of the detention/water quality facility will be used as a recreation area for the families in the future homes. Benefits to the public are the provisions of a single detention/water quality facility for maintenance and a recreation area adjacent to undeveloped land. The exposed portions of the vault would not be visible to the public due to the location next to the wetland. Benefits to the neighboring property are elimination of possible nuisance sheet flows, and potential concentrated flow from a detention/water quality facility. Furthermore, the neighboring property to the north is preparing a preliminary plat and their development will not have to pipe the flows through their site if only one facility is constructed. Please review the supporting material provided to assist you in your decision and let me know if you require any further information for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, T ... --o ASSOCIA U/CJ s \O)~©~~~~@ LnJ OCT -9 2002 T ad A. Oberg, P.E. K.C. D.D.E.S. King County Department of Development and Environmental SelVices Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave. Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 15, 2002 CamWest Development 9720 NE l20th Place Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 • Todd A. Oberg, PE Triad Associates 11814-115th AvenueNE Kirkland, W A 98034 RE: East Renton Preliminary Plat. L02P0005: KCSWDM Adjustment No. L02V0089 Notice of Complete Application Dear Applicant/Engineer: The purpose of this notice is to infonn you that on October IS, 2002 the Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section staff has detennined this September 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) adjustment application is COMPLETE under the requirements of King County Code (KCC) Title 20. This detennination establishes the beginning of the l20-day time period for your application processing. Supplemental infonnation may be required by the Engineering Review Section staff for the continued review and processing of this September 1998 KCSWDM adjustment request. Our goal is to process your application within 120 days. However, the complexity of your project, level of analysis required, the quality of your submittal and available resources will affect the actual review time. The time line can be impacted by one or more of the following actions that will stop the l20-day clock: • Any request made by the Engineering Review Section staff for additional infonnation. • Changes or revisions requested by the applicant( s). • Mutually agreed upon request to stop the 120-day clock. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (206)-296-7270 and FAX (206)-296-6613. Sincerely, Jjdd~L9~-';;ar;;'r~':m:t.[ Senior Engineer Engineering Review SectionlLand Use Services Division 21A.28.120 -21A.28.140 ZONING 21A.28.120 Adequate vehicular accessrAII·new·aevelopmentShall be served by adequate vehicular ~ J access as follows: . A. The property upon which the development proposed is to be located has direct access to: __ "C"":""...,1.~,..A -~l!.~1i9:""6r:1'5riv.at~.",~~e~n.h]t meets county road standards or is fOriiiaIlYdeClaredy> ecceptable by the county road engineer; ~ 2-. -The property has access-to such a street over a private driveway approved by the county; B. The proposed circulation system of a proposed subdivision, short subdivision or binding site plan shall intersect with existing and anticipated streets abutting the site at safe and convenient locations, as determined by the department and the county road engineer; and C. Every lot upon which one or more buildings is proposed to be erected or traffic generating use is proposed to be established, shall establish safe access as follows: 1. Safe passage from the street right-of-way to building entrances for transit patrons and other pedestrians, in accordance with the design standards set forth in K.C.C. 21A.18; 2. Direct access from the street right-of-way, fire lane or a parking space to any part of the property as needed to provide public services in accordance with adopted standards (e.g. fire protection, emergency medical service, mail delivery or trash collection); and 3. Direct access from the street right-of-way, driveway, alley or other means of ingress/egress approved by King County, to all required off-street parking spaces on the premises. (Ord. 10870 § 522, 1993). 21A.28.130 Adequate fire protection. All new development shall be served by adequate fire protec- tion as set forth below: A. The site of the development proposed is served by a water supply system that provides at least minimum fire flow and a, road system or fire lane system that provides life safety/rescue access, and other fire protection requirements for buildings as required by K.C.C. Title 17, Fire Code and K.C.C. Title 16, Building and Construction Standards; B. For a zone reclassification or Urban planned development, the timing of installation of required fire protection improvements shall be stated in the approving ordinance as specified in K.C.C. 20.24.230, secured with a bond or similar security, and deposited with King County; and C. A variance request from the requirements established by K.C.C. Title 17, Fire Code, shall be reviewed as set forth in K.C.C. 17.08.090 or K.C.C. 17.10.040, and/or in Article 2 of the currently adopted edition of the Uniform Fire Code and does not require a variance from this title unless relief is requested from a building height, setback, landscaping or other development standard set forth in K.C.C. 21A.12 through K.C.C. 21A.30. (Ord. 10870 § 523, 1993). 21A.28.140 School concurrency -Applicability and relationship to fees. A. The school concurrency standard set out in Section 21A.28.160 shall apply to applications for preliminary plat or Urban Planned Development (UPD) approval, mobile home parks, requests for multifamily zoning, and building permits for multifamily housing projects which have not been previously evaluated for compliance with the concurrency standard. B. The county's finding of concurrency shall be made at the time of preliminary plat or UPD approval, at the time that a request to actualize potential multifamily zoning is approved, at the time a mobile home park site plan is approved, or prior to building permit issuance for multifamily housing projects which have not been previously established for compliance with the concurrency standard. Once such a finding has been made, the development shall be considered as vested for purposes of the concurrency determination. C. Excluded from the application of the concurrency standard are: 1. building permits for individual single family dwellings; 2. any form of housing exclusively for senior citizens, including nursing homes and retirement centers; (King County 3-2001) 21A-222 ATTACHMENT 6 Date: October 16, 2001 Subject: East Renton Property Concerning Sight Distance Voice Mail Message To: Gary Norris, Garry Struthers Associates From: Aileen McManus, King County Traffic Hi Gary this is Aileen McManus umm I got a answer back it looks like no we will not be requiring the stopping sight distance through that north section. We will require umm meet entering and stopping sight distance and the access point but not at the frontage umm as you I believe it was the north part of the frontage so umm if you have any further questions. I guess that means no variance required either so give me a call a (206) 263-6102. Thanks. Bye. RECEIVED JAN 24 2003 LAN~t~f~UNTY ERVICES GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: January 23. 2003 To: Bruce Whitaker King County DOES. From: Gary A. Norris. P.E. Subject: Response to East Renton Transportation Comments Mcmonlndum 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, W A 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Project Name: East Renton Property Project No.: __ P: __ T: __ The following memorandum was prepared to provide additional information relating to the traffic issues stated in the October 24, 2002 request for additional Information from King County DOES. 1. Intersection Spacing Originally, CamWest proposed the plat entrance location at the south end of the property, adjacent to SE 1201h Street. Upon review, King County Roads requested intersection alignment with the SE 120lh Street centerline. Subsequently, an affected property owner who resides directly south of 1201h Street requested relocation of the plat entrance further north, away from their home. The applicant's proposal to relocate the entrance to the center of the plat did not provide adequate Entering Stopping Sight Distance or Intersection Spacing requirements per the King County Road Standards. After discussing the likelihood of receiving variance approval for this deviation with Craig Comfort, King County Roads, it was determined that a variance would likely not be granted given the fact an alternative access proposal exists which complies with the KCRS. As a result, the plat entrance is revised and now aligns with the centerline of SE 120lh Street. ') 7 1$/ ~~ 2. Sight Distance • ~ fill ~ Previously, King County requested a road profile for 1481h Avenue SE across the entire property frontage and beyond to determine if the plat proposal complies with the entering and stopping sight distance requirements per KCRS (Sections 2.12 and 2.13). It was stated that the applicant shall comply with entering and stopping sight distance at the site access intersection as well as provide adequate stopping sight distance across the entire plat frontage. The stopping and entering sight distance was measured at the new entrance location. Below are the results of the field measurements, presented in Table 1 for the plat entrance location. RECEIVED JAN 242003 KING COUN"I Y LAND USE SERVICES c:\documents and settings\sslatten\local settings\temporarv internet files\olk1 c\norris traffic memo 1-17- 03.docs:\te"'I>\"s"islrallis ",e",e 1 17 ga1.<lee ~3-1123/Q3 W!ti) -------------------------------- Memorandum January 24, 2003JOHUOFY 23, 2gg3 Page 2 Table l, Sight Distance for the proposed plat entrance for East Renton Plat entrance alignment with SE 120th St centerline FromITo North FromITo South Stopping Req.' / 400 V> 425// Obs. 425+ 425+ Entering Req.2 , 620"''>- 620// Obs. 635+ 620 1) Required Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) -Based on KCRS, 1993 Section 2.12. and Table 2.1 using a Design Speed of 45-mph (Posted Speed of35 mph plus 10). SSD from the south is adjusted to account for the 3 percent down ade ecHon 2.12. - 2) eqUlre ntering Sight Distance (ESD) -Based on KCRS, 1993 Section 2.13 and Table 2.1 using a Design Speed of 45 mph (Posted Speed of35 mph plus 10). As shown in Table 1, the sight distance at the new plat entrance meets or exceeds the current King County Road Standards. These values are confirmed in Attachment 1 and 2 that depicts the topography of 148'h Avenue SE across the site frontage. Also, please refer to the revised preliminary plat by Triad & Associates for the revised entrance location. Secondly, it was stated that the applicant shall as part of the frontage improvements provide stopping sight distance across the entire plat frontage consistent with the King County Road Standards or request a variance for the deviation. As noted before, this issue first came up in April 2001 when CamWest attended a pre-application conference with King County. After further anal~ng the impacts of complying with the condition, a memorandum was submitted, dated Augus~ 2001, outlining why the applicant is not required to provide stopping sight distance as part of the plat frontage improvements and why the King County staff is able to reach this determination outside the variance process. The August 6, 2001 memo is Attachment 5. After a few months of consideration, King County Roads members including the County Road fngineer and Variance Engineer met to discuss this issue and determined that CamWest would not be re uired to comply with this requirement, nor would a variance be required to deviate from the current s op g distance standards. On October 16,2001 Aileen McManus left a voice l!lrul confirming the County's new position and stated this decision. This message has been transcribed for your review and is presented in Attachment 6. Upon receipt of the telephone message, Aileen McManus was contacted for a written documentation of the decision. Unfortunately, this was the time when Aileen transferred jobs and no longer was addressing these issues. For months the applicant and I requested written confirmation of this decision from King County Roads. Eventually, we did receive the attached email from Kristin Langley on March IS, 2002. We took issue with Ms. Langley's email memo, as it did not completely coincide with our understanding of the department's decision conveyed by Aileen McManus. It is still our belief that this issue was addressed and decided by King County Roads in 2001. The decision that CamWest is not required to address stopping sight distance along the plat frontage and that a variance is unnecessary was relayed to us as a King County Roads Division decision and not one coming from an individual reviewer. Our contention as stated in the August 6, 2001 memo and agreed to by King County Roads is as follows: • The SSD condition is created by a dramatic vertical grade change approximately 50 to 75 feet north of the plat's north property line. Memorandum January 24. 2003JaRll8fY 23, 2()()3 Page 3 • There is adequate SSD on 148th Avenue SE across the entire site frontage if the \ calculatIOns documented il! AASlITO are used in conjunction with prevailing traffic ) operations on 148th Avenue SE • Roadway reconstruction necessary to provide 400 feet of SSD across the site frontage would extend well beyond the north 'boundary of the plat that is beyond the King County Code requirements for frontage improvements. • The Applicant believes and King County Roads concurred that the extent of frontage improvements required of any land development is determined by the Reviewing Agency without a variance. Subsequent to the August 6, 2001 memorandum, there have been several discussions with King County staff regarding the application of stopping sight distance standards to King County roads. One concept under consideration is the use of a two-foot target height as considered in the 2001 AASlITO standards. Conversations with Craig Comfort, King County Variance Engineer indicated the County standards did not use this concept although it was considered in variance applications. It should be noted that with the application of the two-') fo t tar et hei ht an acce table sto ing sight distance is achieved across the entire site J frontage with the exce tion of the north 100 to eet. grap IC representation 0 t e two oot target analy IS IS presen e 10 e a ac e 148 Avenue SE road profile (Attachment 3) The information submitted and reviewed by King County Road members in 2001 is included for your review. Again, we request that the past decision which Ms. McManus conveyed on behalf of the Road's department stand. 3. Sight Distance at SR 900114S th Avenue SE It has been stated by King County that a sight distance deficiency exists on the east approach to the SR 9001148th Avenue SE intersection. A survey by a licensed surveyor was requested. As a result, a survey of the roadway and an analysis of stopping and entering sight distance per the WSDOT criteria were requested of the applicant. This survey has been conducted and can provide the following analysis: Stopping Sight Distance (SSm East Approach: Entering Sight Distance (ESm North Approach Looking East: South Approach Looking East: Available -500 feet Required -345 feet Available -551 feet Required -761 feet Available -441 feet Required -761 feet Please refer to the attached sight distance exhibit for further detail. (Attachment 4) Based on this analysis, there is sufficient stopping sight distance. The entering sight distance is inadequate if the rural level design standards are applied which takes the premise that a vehicle can enter the roadway and not require an approaching vehicle to reduce their speed more than 5 mph below the posted speed. However, recent research by the NCHRP has c;\documents and settings\sslatten\local settings\temporarv internet fi!es\olk1 c\norris traffic memo 1-17- ~.:\t.",p\A.FFi6 t,allis ",.",.1 17 Gaul •• ~3-\1231Q3 (gig) .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~- Memorandum Januaty 24, 2003Jaftllary 23, 2QQ3 Page 4 conducted significant studies in the area of intersection sight distance, In NCHRP report #383, intersection sight distance is measured by entering sight distance standards set at 331 feet for a 45-mph design speed, which is what exists on SR 900, Based on this criteria intersection sight distance is fully achieved as follows: Entering Sight Distance IESDl North Approach Looking East: South Approach Looking East: Available -551 feet Required -331 feet Available -441 feet Required -331 feet It is my contention that the NCHRP criterion is the appropriate one to consider for this intersection, The intersection is in an urban area of King County, The intent of providing entering sight distance such that a driver doesn't have to slow down more than 5 mph below the posted speed is inconsistent with urban traffic operations and current operational conditions along SR 900 where existing signals require traffic to reduce the operating speed at intersections, We hope this information addresses the noted transportation comments that have been noted to date, Should you have any questions or need any additional information, please let me know, c:\documents and settings\sslatten\local settings\temporarv internet fi1es\olk1 c\norris traffic memo 1·17- 03.docs:'JempIRoFfiB I,allis memo 1 17 ga1.~oo 112410~ ~g) GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: August 8, 2001 To: Bruce Whittaker King County DOES From: Gary A. Norris, P.E. Subject: Road Improvements lVICI110nlndul11 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, W A 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Project Name: East RentonflnteIkofer- Shirman Property Project No.: __ P:_-T:..!BEcfEDV/ED JAN 242003 CamWest Plat LAJgj1~fOUNTY CamWest is proposing the development of a 68 unit single family plat on 19.57 acres 10cate~ff?VICES 12013 148th Avenue SE. The plat will have approximately 650 feet of frontage on 1481h Avenue SE. 148th Avenue SE is a two-lane arterial with a 6-8 foot shoulder on the west side and a 3-5 foot shoulder on the east side. The roadway maintains a continually increasing downgrade from the south property line of the proposed plat to the north property line. The percent grade at the south property line is 2.4% whereas at the north property line it is 4.6 %. North of the north property line, the percent grade increases dramatically to 9 percent with a grade break 50 to 75 feet north of the site. This change in grade creates a potential substandard stopping sight distance (SSD) condition according to the King County Road Standards (KCRS, 1993) for southbound vehicles on 1481h Avenue SE approaching the site. Need for Road Improvements or Variance for Stopping Sight Distance This memorandum responds to King County's preliminary request for CamWest Development to reconstruct 1481h Avenue SE along the plat frontage and to the north of the proposed plat, or obtain a variance to meet KCRS for stopping sight distance. This issue was first raised in 1999 with Harbour Homes, the previous project applicant for the property, and was raised again in a meeting between the CamWest Development Design Team and King County staff on Thursday April 19, 2001. CamWest believes there is a question of whether there is an actual sight distance problem under the King County Road Standards. A substandard SSD condition arises under the KCRS because of an administrative decision to use a design speed of 10 mph over the posted limit, although this definition of design speed is not specified by the KCRS. Utilizing a 40-mph design speed (the 85- percentile speed on 1481h Avenue SE based upon a recent speed study) results in an acceptable SSD. Assuming it is appropriate to use a 45-mph design speed, the substandard SSD condition is preexisting and unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat. Reconstructing 1481h Avenue SE to meet SSD would be extremely burdensome and cost prohibitive. The KCRS provide that the extent of frontage and off-site improvements must be tied to the impacts of the proposed development, as required by Washington law. The proposed plat did not create and will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage road. Additionally, there are no known safety issues associated with the present grade. Therefore, any requirement to regrade this roadway to improve the SSD would not be consistent with the KCRS and Washington law. j:\079 east renton\jurisdictions\bruce whittaker memo from norris 8-8-01.doc 1/24/03 (cd) Memorandum January 24, 2003 Page 2 Because requiring these improvements would exceed the County's authority, a variance is unnecessary. Existing Stopping and Entering Sight Distance Conditions Garry Struthers Associates (GSA) performed a field study of stopping and entering sight distance on April 18, 2001. The proposed access to the plat at that time was approximately 120 feet south of the north property line. The SSD at that access point and its intersection with 1481h Avenue SE was observed to be 318 feet for southbound vehicles and 425+ feet for northbound vehicles. The posted speed limit on 1481h Avenue SE is 35mph. The KCRS does not stipulate the design speed to be used to calculate SSD. King County has administratively chosen to use posted speed plus 10 mph for design speed. Based upon a 45mph design speed, SSD of 425 feet would be required for northbound vehicles and 400 feet for southbound vehicles under the KCRS. (The increase of 25 feet in the SSD for the northbound direction is the result of a correction for downgrade specified in KCRS 2.12. The KCRS does not identify an adjustment to reduce SSD for the upgrade condition.' Adding 10 mph to the posted speed to calculate design speed increases the required SSD by 150 feet over what would be required for a 35mph design speed. If a 35-mph design speed is used 'then the required SSD per the KCRS is 250 feet in the southbound direction and 265 feet in the northbound direction. It should also be noted that the KCRS adopted the highest value stopping distance for a 45-mph design speed -400 feet -established by AASHTO. AASHTO is the agency that establishes national standards, including SSD, upon which the KCRS is based. According to ASHTO, the assumed speed for a 45-mph design speed ranges between 40 and 45 mph, with a calculated SSD ranging from 325 feet to 400 feet. Based on a recent speed study on 1481h Avenue SE in the vicinity of the proposed plat, the 85- percentile speed is 40 mph.' The computed SSD for 40 mph is 318.7 feet and 325 feet when rounded for design. This suggests that a SSD of 325 feet would be adequate in this section of 1481h Avenue SE. There is currently 318 feet of SSD available 100 feet south of the north property line that increases heading south as the percent grade decreases. Additionally, the KCRS, unlike ASHTO, does not adjust the required SSD to reflect the reduced stopping distance required for the upgrade condition (southbound approach to the plat). Since the SSD deficiency on 1481h Avenue is a result of the vertical curve to the north of the site with a downgrade to the north of approximately 10 percent the average running speed should be used in the SSD calculation for southbound vehicles. According to the recent speed study, the average running speed is 33.7 mph. This results in a SSD of 212 feet. Therefore, applying the upgrade correction per AASHTO analysis procedures to this situation results in more than sufficient SSD at the originally proposed site access intersection and across the remainder of the plat to the south. Adequate SSD may also exist to the north property line but has not been validated by field observation. , According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book (1984), page 143, "Design Speed is used in calculating downgrade corrections, average running speed in calculating upgrade corrections." 2 The speed study was taken from 12:00 AM Tuesday May 7 to 12:00 AM Wednesday May 8, 2001. The counters were stationed 50 to 75 feet north of the north property line. j:\079 east renton~urisdictions\bruce whittaker memo from norris 8-8-01.doc 1/24/03 (cd) Memorandum January 24, 2003 Page 3 An analysis of the entering sight distance (ESD) at the initially proposed access indicated that the project would not meet the KCRS required entering sight distance (ESD) for vehicles approaching from the north (the critical ESD movement). In the field study of sight distance discussed above, 390 feet of ESD was observed at the proposed site access compared to the KCRS requirement of 620 feet. To provide the 620 feet of ESD, CamWest will relocate the site access intersection with 148th Avenue SE to the south property line. At this location, acceptable ESD can be achieved. SSD is also acceptable at this location using a 45-mph design speed. Scope of Improvements Needed to Achieve SSD Based upon 4Smph Design Speed Changing the grade of SE 14Sth Avenue SE to provide 425 feet of stopping sight distance along the entire frontage of the proposed plat would require lowering the profile of 148th Avenue SE for at least 700 feet and possibly much more. This improvement would necessarily extend beyond the plat frontage. Cuts of 2 Yz to nearly 4 feet would be necessary for over 300 feet. Several hundred feet of a 12-inch water main would need to be dug up and lowered. At least two power poles would need to be relocated, water meters, dry utilities, ditches and culverts along this road reconstructed and several driveway approaches to 14Sth Avenue SE rebuilt. The areas where the cuts would be greatest would probably need low retaining walls or rockeries at the edge of the right-of-way in order to accommodate the drainage ditch on the side of the street opposite the proposed project. Some of this work would require easements from the abutting property owners. These improvements would be extremely costly and burdensome for the proposed plat. Furthermore, although limited survey data is currently available to make a definitive assessment, it appears that it may be necessary to reconstruct the SE 116th Place/148th Avenue SE intersection to meet the reconstructed 14Sth Avenue SE centerline profile. King County Road Standards Governing Frontage and Off-site Improvements The 1993 King County Road Standards addressing frontage and off-site road improvements require these improvements to be based upon the impacts of the proposed development. To the extent improvements are necessitated by the development impacts, they must be done in conformance with the KCRS. These standards are set out in Section 1.03 Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land develapment by the Reviewing Agency B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. CamWest's attorney has advised them that the bolded language set out in these two provisions reflect Washington law regarding governmental authority to require roadway improvements as a condition of approving development proposals. Washington law limits the extent of required improvements to those that are directly related to the impact of proposed development. Even if the impact test is met, any required improvements must be proportional to the impacts of the development. (See Benchmark Land Company v. City of Battle Ground, 94 Wash. App. 537 (1999).) j:\079 east renton~urisdictlons\bruce whittaker memo from norris a-8-01.doc 1/24/03 (cd) Memorandum January 24, 2003 Page 4 It order to determine whether CamWest can be required to provide SSD improvements across the entire plat frontage and beyond, the impacts of the proposed plat and the costs of such improvements must be assessed. (It should be noted that CamWest, as part of the plat development process, would provide frontage improvements on 1481h Avenue SE to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks.) The SSD issues associated with this area of 1481h Avenue SE are preexisting and completely unrelated to the impacts of the proposed CamWest plat. There is no data that suggests the SSD condition on 1481h Avenue SE has created a safety problem or has significantly affected operational conditions.3 As discussed previously, road improvements to improve the existing SSD would be extremely costly and burdensome. Requiring the plat to fix the existing SSD condition when it did not create the condition, and when there is no safety issue associated with the condition would violate Washington law. Therefore, there is no legal basis to require frontage and off-site improvements on 1481h Avenue SE to improve SSD. Need for Variance A variance is unnecessary since Staff does not have the legal authority to require frontage and off- site improvements of the magnitude discussed in this memo. A variance would be needed only if the County had the authority to require the improvements for which a variance is sought. Conclusion Based on the foregoing information, we respectfully request you determine that the proposed development should not be required to reconstruct the 1481h Avenue SE along the project frontage and off-site to correct a pre-existing SSD condition, and that a variance is not needed to meet the King County Road Standards. 3 The most pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard would be impact on safety. To address this issue, the latest available three-year accident history was obtained from King County Department of Transportation which included the period between January 1, 1996 and December 31,1999. According to the data provided, three accidents have occurred in the vicinity of the plat between 1996 and 1999. South of the proposed plat, at the SE 124th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection, there was one accident in 1996 and one in 1997; both involving a vehicle striking a fixed object off the roadway. North of the plat, at the SE 116th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection, one accident occurred in 1999 involving a vehicle colliding with a bicyclist. None of the accidents were related to sight distance conditions across the plat frontage.) j:\079 east renton~urisdictions\bruce whittaker memo from norris a·a-01.doc 1/24/03 (cd) ---------- I I e ~J j! , ~. I~I! --~---~---~--_~A __ ~ f . . ~ . ~~ "l': il.., --- ATTACHMENT 1 SSD PER KING COUNTY AT SITE ACCESS / v 1-- _1 -----------------------:.::.---r---=10---- -n-" ' r....... : 15"" 1 _' ....... : '" 1f1: Jr.. ~: " , -', 'i, " ! ............ " " " , ,--+---+--+---+----+--+--+----+--+--lMrs~ lD"O : i 1-r I • ; ..... ~ l l l l l l l l (ll l l ill ~ o+~ 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 ASSUMPnONS 1) J,£RTlCAL CURVE OESIGN BASED ON 425 FEET SSD PER THE MEMORANDUM FROM JOAN SIIELS£R DA TED 4/18/01 TO SARA SLATTEN _AI)fJ!11Jl!!AE1~~_pHiCi{SURVE:yTo~TFi£ Ndiij;:rr"lL)_ .f!!CREOUIREP . ro" VERIFY :SSD "Ii .. 'to ". AUACHMENT 1 SSD PER KING CO. A T 51 FE ACCESS ./ REOUIRED SSD NORTHBOUND:: 425' V.....- REOUIRED SSD SOUTHBOUIjP = 400' ."r EYe HEIGHr = 3_5' V /' OB.ECT HEIGHT = 0.5' ....... OBSERVED SSD NORTHBOUND = 425+' OBSERVED SSD SOU THBOUND = 425+' DISCLAIMER EX. GRAIJE PROVtDED BY TRIAD ASSOQA TES ESD AND SSD CALCULA TlONS PROVtDED BY GARY STRUTHERS ASSOCIA TES, INC. REceHveo JAN 242003 KfNG COUNTy LAND UsE SERVICES '-' -- ATTACHMENT 2 ESO PER KING COUNTY AT SITE ACCESS 620' 626' --------------------j I ~~ --' -r----+L ! : -----r---1--..---1-- I .J,ve--- ----------:- - , . r - ---i [---··----r--------r··-----1 ,----, - - . • , rnuuJlliht ~ ~L~ca(/f(~i~ 14 e~f~' ~-----~.----------., .'r+-~a-u: U I ~i I!! J ,~ I ~ 1 T:::.:h! ! ~T i, -l----~--J:__... -"\i-_ ........... ~ --I t--..... :! 1>- I tm_o.-,~, ;1 ·------------------l------------il-------T-------l ... ---------~! --~ . .....j ! ! !:! I '-'---,! §~ 1--.... I ___________ __ ___ _ _____ • _________ • __________ ,___________ "--J -~---------~-----+-______ ~ ______ J~~~_~l ___ L_ -, , JOn ...... l : ...... (..... j ! ................... l .r. , . ~ , i " " Ti . ~ ASSUMP710NS 1) VfRTlCAL CURVE DESIGN BASED ON 425 FEET SSD P£R THE MEMORANDUM FROM .K)AN SMELSER DA TED 4/18/01 TO SARA SLATTEN 2) ADDITIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVf:Y TO THE NORTH KfLL BE REQUIReO TO VERIFY 5SD ATTACHMENT 2 ESD PER KING CO. AT SITE ACCESS ReOUlRED £SO LOOKING NORTH = 620' REQUIRED ESO LOOKING SOUTH = 620' EYe HEIGHT = 3.5' OBJECT HDGHT "" 4.25' OBSERVED [SO LOOKING NORTH = 626' OBSERVUJ £SO LOOKING SOUTH = 620' DISCLAIMER EX GRADE PROVIDED BY TRIAD ASSOCIA res [SO AND SSD CALCULA nONS PROVIDED BY CARY STRUTHERS ASSOCIA ~s. INC ATTACHMENT 3A ----" --~ (SO PER NEW AASHTO ACROSS _ENmANCEP,!_Of'fR~Y F'l.oIY..[AGE.(NQR_TH_80~NO) t.o' ptjd jp nIP f------425·-----1 v .r ~n£lS v 1frIi II II i ~4n)I~04 0 __ ,-"'. . .l --- L~~' iT , rr· ... , -I-. : ~ ~~! 425· -·-·-·--;-·--·-·-·I·-···-··-·:;'r"'·":O>y-·---·--·----·-·-. ! i r1lio/ I l J 425' ~---.---+-------T------.-....j-.-.-.----+---.-.--+-------t_--------+·--·-·---·1----·---·~·-·----·-·-j-·-·-----7-------1------t--------1----------t---·-----t-·------t-------1-'--·' =1 TTACHMENT JA Ii! ! ! ! I i I I ! I I iii iii i : ! 1 ! ! ; : 1 i 1 : i : ' : 1 : l SSD PER NEW AASHTO ACROSS ENTRANCE PROPERTY FRONTAGE (NB) . i : ! i j . til . i ! ! ' 1 . ! ; REOUIRED SSD NORTHBOUND = 425' ~ .-.-L.. ;! i : 1! . ! Ll j REOUIRED SSD SOUTHBOUND = 400' -, --: ~---1 ! t---·'--1 -~ ! . -I 1~--; E'fc HE/GHT "" J.S· . ! . ! ~ ~ 08.ECT HEIGHT -2.0' : : ,: ;/ f) =~~g ~ ~~:::~Zg : :~~;: . ,----+·---·--t·----+-----l-----·i----·--i-----·l -..-+--·-·-+-----i +l'tl-t;7-·----- 1iE1f17CAL: : at:5rwc ..i....", ; DISCLAIMER EX. GRADE PROVIOW BY mtAD ASSOCIA TES £50 ANO SSD CALCULA nONS PROVIDED BY GARY STRUTHERS ASSOCIA TES. INC , il ~';! ! . ~' ; : 1 ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i)~ ~ I ~ 0+00 1+00 2+00 J+OO 4+00 5+00 .{ 6+00 17+00 _ 8+00 9+00 :!: \, ~(~~~ ~Ylv'~' c------;--.--'---. • ~, •••• :.. ..;.... • •••• J ••••••••••••••••• ;............ : ..... f---------4-f)+-----l / .. -,. _...L_ ASSUMPTIONS I} Vffil1CAL O.iRl/f: DESIGN BASED ON 425 FEET SSD PER THE MEMORANDUU FROM JOAN SIrI£LS£R OA TED 4/18/01 TO SARA SLA'TEN 2) A{)OmONAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVf:Y TO THE NORTH 1M'LL BE REQUIRED TO Vf:RlFY SSD ATTACHMENT JB SSD PER NEW AASHro ACROSS ENTRANCE PROP£RTY FRONTAGE (58) RE(}UIREO SSD NORTHBOUND =-425' REQUIRED SSD SOU TH80UND :2 400' EYL HEIGHT = 3.5' OB.ECT HEIGHT = 2.0' OBSERVfD SSD NORTHBOUND = 425+' 08SERVfD SSD SOU TH8OUNO = 425+' ":--- DISCLAIMER ~~ EX. GRAO£ PROVIOED BY TRIAD ASSOCIA 1£5 ESO AND SSD CALCULA nONS PROVIDED BY GARY STRUTHERS ASSOCIA TES, INC. 0+00 >--+---+u . -- ioo< , ~ ~ ~ ~ 1+00 2+00 ~ ___ -=---ATTACHMENT 38 . ,~_~ sso eER NEW AASHTO ACROSS ENTRANCE PROPERTY FRONTAGE (SOUTH BOYNO) V--'-~ 1-----8--------1 l~) l---:l P. . -~-! i ----;----k_ I ". ~ ~ ~ ~ 3+00 <+00 ~ 5+00 ... ......... i/-"''''1 ~ 6+00 • 17 +00 § ~aJt~a U(iVOft1~ 400' ! I 1\ I, I ! I ---~----+------.-f-----+----t---t--t--T-~ ~F...I .~~. ~ I : _ 'X=-~.!~~l " ;: 8+00 (~ \! ~ .l. .-~: <:-r----r-\ ! ,,! . 'I .. ___________ 1"'-_ '\ 's;:: 9+00 § . ~ IOtoo '-l "~ : " , " l ,,! 1 'J "~ "" i --, " I I ,t 13' ''-1:::..1 "" ..... ~ L ....... .............. ) ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 February 27, 2003 TO: Paulette Norman, P .E., Acting County Road Engineer FR:~ers, P.E., Dev~lopment Engineer . RE: Preliminary Plat of East Renton, File L02P0005 Our office is currently reviewing the preliminary ~lat of East Renton located on the west side of l481h Avenue SE in the vicinity of SE 1201 Street. During the evaluation of required road improvements for 148th, it was determined by DDES that the existing vertical aligmnent along the plat frontage does not meet King County Road Standards and existing stopping sight distances are below desired minimums because of a substandard crest curve. We have informed the applicant that urban road improvements are required along the plat frontage, which would involve reconstruction of the existing aligmnent to meet County standards. However, the applicant indicates they are not required to perform the improvements nor are they required to seek approval of a road variance application based on discussions they had with a County Traffic Engineer prior to making application. To assist in resolving this matter, I would like to receive your comments regarding the applicable code requirements and variance procedures. As shown in the attached letters from the applicant's traffic engineer, Mr. Gary Norris indicates that County staff from the Department of Transportation evaluated this matter during the pre-application process and determined that the applicant would not need to reconstruct the road aligmnent and a road variance application would not be required. The road profile and sight distance analysis prepared by Mr. Norris shows that the entrance to the project is located along the southern portion of the crest curve to allow compliance with sight distance standards. A note shown on the plat map indicates that the entering sight distance is less than the required 620 feet, but this note may be incorrect. King County designates 148th Avenue SE as a collector arterial with a design speed of 45 mph. The enclosed road profile shows the existing road aligmnent and the notable change in grade along the northern portion of the plat frontage.· Several existing driveways are located on the east side of 1481h Avenue SE which may be affected by our decision for , Paulette Nonnan February 27, 2003 Page 2 the frontage improvements. I should also note that a developer recently met with our office to discuss a new subdivision on the northerly parcel adjacent to East Renton and the frontage improvements for this project involve the same substandard vertical curve on 148 th Avenue SE. . As outlined in King County Code 21A.28.120Al, all new development shall be served by a public or private street that meets County road standards, or is formally declared acceptable by the County Road Engineer. I have attached a copy of this code citation for your convenience. Also, would you consider the adoption of the County's arterial road map constitute a 'formal' declaration? To proceed with our review of the East Renton plat, I would appreciate receiving either your written conclusion on the acceptability of this roadway or a statement indicating a road variance is required to evaluate the design requirements. I appreciate your help in resolving this matter and if you desire to meet or discuss these issues further, please contact me at 296-7178. Enclosure CC: Lanny Henoch Pete Dye Kristen Langley Craig Comfort ® King County Road Services Division Department or Transportation 201 S. Jackson St. MS: KSC-TR-0231 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 March 25, 2003 TO: Jim Sanders, P.E., Development Engineer . /. V FR: Paulette Norman, P.E., Acting County Road Engineer ~(} RE: Preliminary Plat of East Renton, File L02P0005 In response to your February 27,2003 written request for a formal declaration by this office on whether 148 th Avenue SE adjacent to the proposed subdivision is or is not acceptable, I offer the following. 148 th Avenue SE, adjacent to the site does not meet 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS) with respect to available stopping sight distance (SSD) for the entire length of the frontage area. The 1993 KCRS sets specific design elements for "constructing or modifying road facilities that require County approval". Variances can be granted if they provide a compensating or comparable result. In my opinion, this is a modification to an existing road facility and any construction that does not meet the latest (1993) King County Road Standards would first require an approved variance from those standards. Cc: Gary Samek, Supervising Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, Road Services Division, Department of Transportation (DOT) Lanny Hennoch, Planner, Land Use Services Division (LUSD), Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) Pete Dye, P.E., Senior Engineer, LUSD, DDES Kristen Langley, Development Review Supervisor, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD,DOT Craig Comfort, P.E., Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT .,.,"'" 22617·8'" Dr. SE BotheU. WA 98021 Lanny Henoch ~ CENTIJRION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES· May 14, 2002 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Re: Aster Pari< (DOES File #LOOPO024) Traffic Impacts Mitigation Dear Lanny: (425) 486-2563 OFF (425) 486·3273 FAX This correspondence is in response to your request that we provide you with altematives for mitigation of traffic impacts attributable to the Aster Park project. In our letter dated April 16'h, 2002 in response to your February 12, 2002 Request for Additional Information we established several points. Specifically: 1. Using the 85'h Percentile Speed as determined from field study existing conditions meet warrants for installation of traffic signal at the intersection of SR 900 and 148'h Ave. SE; 2. Installation of a traffic signal, as required by the King County Hearing Examiners Conditions of Plat Approval for the plat of Stone Ridge, improves the level of . service at the subject intersection to LOS A including traffic attributable to Aster Park; 3. . Aster Park will consume approximately 2.54% of the additional intersection capacity that will result from the signal improvement. In addition, we assert that, since the plat of Stone Ridge vested prior to the plat of Aster Park, Aster Park is only'required to mitigate Significant adverse impacts that occur after the significant adverse impacts of Stone Ridge have been mitigated. Given the above we would not oppose a condition requiring the developer of Aster Park to participate in the cost of the signal improvement in an amount equal to 2:54%. Such payment could be evidenced prior to final plat approval by provision to King County of a copy of the payment made to the Stone Ridge developer. We believe this mitigation meets the rough proportionality standard, is reasonable and is capable of being accomplished. "Ler u., rake rhe.load ....• A Ff/..J /111 /<L.. Lanny Hennoch May 14, 2002 Page 2 of 2 We recognize that it is possible, though not likely, that construction of the plat of Aster Park could precede development of Stone Ridge. In this scenario Aster Park could provide improvements sufficient to mitigate its' traffic impact assuming 2004 conditions witho'ut Stone ) Ridge. ___ , " Attached please find 8 copies of a memo from Gary Struthers Associates dated May 10, 2002. The memo provides the results of an analysis designed to determine what mitigation,would be appropriate in the above-described condition. Based on this analysis we find that construction of a left tum lane in the south leg of the 1481h/ SR 900 intersection provides a level of service . better than the pre-project condition satisfying codified King County mitigation requirements. We have reviewed the possibility of constructing the referenced left-tum lane and have determined that it can be accomplished within the existing right of way with minimal variation from the conceptual road improvement plans we have already provided. We therefore accept that this mitigation would be reasonable and would not oppose its' imposition as an approval condition under the given scenario. Please call me at (425) 486-2563 if you have any questions regarding the information submitted via this transmittal or if you wish to discuss the matter further. We look forward to a favorable SEPA Determination on this project and, hopefully, a near-term public hearing date. Thank you. Enclosures Sincerely, CENTURION DEVELOPMENT RVICES Michael J. Romano Land Consultant "Let us take the load ... ·- ) ) GARRVSTRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. 'klllora lid U III 3 150 Richards Road. Suite 100 Bellevue, W A 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Date: Mav 10. 2002 To: Mike Romano Centurion Development From: (}an. A. Norris. P.E. Project Name: Aster P~k Prq;ect No: 01-002.11 P:.1 T: R~C~",£O . HAY 7 4 2002 LAN~t~fcOUNTY _S_Ub_~ect __ :_Aste ___ r_P_~_k_Le_v_e_Io_f_S_enn __ '~ ____________________________________ S __ fR~CfS As requested, the folio" ing summarizes the additional analysis peiformed to address mitigation for Aster P~k. Specifically, the County had requested an indication of what mitigation would be appropriate in the event that Stoneridge did not pr~. To address that question, GSA performed an analysis oithe level of servi~ at the SR 900/148th Avenue SE intersection under several alternative s~narios. The results of the level of servi~ analysis ~e provided in Table I. Table I -Level of Service Intersection 2004 Without 2004 Without 2004 With 2004 With 2004 With Project Project Project Project Project Without With Without With Without Stone Ridge Stone Ridge Stone Ridge Stone Ridge Stone Ridge 2004 With Project With Stone Ridge WithNBLT WithNBLT Lane SR-9001 F (102.7) F (I·B.8) F (156.1) F (224.2) F (66.6) 148th Ave SE As sho"n in Table I, the SR 900/148th Avenue SE intersection "ill operate at LOS F under all s~os. With. construction of a northbound left tum lane. Aster P~k can provide an intersection level of servi~ better than the p're-projeci condition satis~ing the King County mitigation requirements. If you have any questions. please give me a call. Thanks. c:\windows~emplmemomay' 02002._ 5/' 0102 (mir) Lane F (88.2) . .~ '0::::::::::=, )8 ;4 IT),Julf #f II -1-':; -~ . ~ " ..... 1 -I' '=' '.:~ -. -_. )..! J\. , '·'l ~ I trj <U ::l . • 'l ! ,~ I' .~ • , '~ I .~ I .~ , -'~ L i , , , ;~ ,~ Sunnyside Manor ~ ~ GRAPHIC SCALE 1-.30' ----. 1? 01? 301 60??? 90 " ! ';'';;".\;'' ; .J", > .. ' . ------.-' ",,:-. . :':-~~ ".'-:",' -! ;: J; i -: ,.~:- REQESD NOR' ~. TH=761'~ L ESD NOR~ ~ _..' -. '. fi ____ , ". ~51' '.' (;4,. .~. /.... \ . ,1.5' /, "' .,.-"' .. / !3 ' ' ' ,', >;. 'C '~. "'.,·C .;",ElJ ECc.. " , " ?L/ ' " '''' l0 OBJECT'·";;. ~ " . " 1" .. ,<,'.' /. ,;..;;< //t~'!i$::;"?~~~~~= ,..=l';;'~'·· -"-._ '''/ '. ';;//':.-CfY''::~' REO ESD'S~ .2:'~/f--:------_ _' . ," ' ., ..... ,.. ~ .... ···I •. ·O .. ·· ... B .. j .. ECT~-.. ::·-. ,: /* ,,/' :"k " ,', . . "-,,,ll¥;", ' .," , .:,,''-1 ' , " .. , ,:/.:' -------,;.-.'",- , ; , - - , '/"//t:.-A"'/'P /;:'. :-~ <:/~.:.;;~s socrn., o'O'LI"O\ 510"' ")-"-',,-, "';":"C;:'. /,/.., ' .. /on "' ", , .. ,,, /~ .. ' " ' " 1 • V' ' ,,' """,",IC ,,'. ' ' c;,,,.s,,,o\'., / .. ~ 0\ SIC"' (5) , "L '-'" /. . ' " ,,0 LI" (EXPIRES 08J28't'f -( ,/C / >//~--'" ;' /.c:/,,/-'-'7 .::-Y::M· .' r~/~ ENTERING SIGHT DISTANCE (ESD) APPROACH ESD (FT) REQ(l) AVL(2) NORTH LOOKING EAST 761 551 ~'. COMMENT ENTERING SIGHT DISTANCE NOT MET HORIZONTAL CURVE ON SR 900 SR 900 -,;: POSTED SPEED: 40 MPH EAST OF 148TH AVE SE 35 MPH WEST OF 148TH AVE SE DESIGN SPEED: ~ N , - ";,-,~.- SOUTH LOOKING EAST EYE _.e. -.:~ ::;~A. Sf. _~t ~;; ,,',-,"'-' "",'0 • 761 441 ENTERING SIGHT DISTANCE NOT MET HORIZONTAL CURVE ON SR 900 45 MPH EAST OF 148TH AV SE 40 MPH WEST OF 148TH AVE SE (WSDOT DESIGN MANUAL 2001) PER FIGURE 440-1 ?/J -Ii I . "j i. I , . I I ~~;;t;:.; ';::.:'> !. '."~ :' ~!" ',' ,~ ,: :.,." , ',' ;-!::,_;:;~:lC ,~S£: ... .'--' ,~.'. ·'~~r c"; '~'.; ·· .. ;·t~. ".~-- .,! f:iECEIIIl:O I ~AN 24 2003 ! =;:.l)."-'i~ ;;-,';.~;:,< '::'~'-'.:'.: " >,'. "'-' .--,,~,', :." Ij"c:,: ," -I.' "-. ": '>,.,:!';-s; -;..,,~- ',.-.-;:-;; 'j, . ':~,,:.:.' '.:~ ,. " LAN~tGS COUNTy . ! E SERVICES ': •• ;,.1;" ·.·.t '>'. ., .. :: ,,' -',~~: '.-. ~ .. -,,--,.:- ,:,.~ .>,:>u 1'<'''''''''''' "'","U. :>UIU, ''''' BeJlev\Je •• ;:~ ;.::;;:;;:;~;:; Phone: ("25) 519-0300 F,"",(425) 519-0309 E-mail: gsa@gsa$sOC-01'ic.com http-Jlwww.gsassoc:-irn;:.com (1) REQUIRED (REQ) ENTERING SIGHT DISTANCE PER WSDOT DESIGN MANUAL (MAY 2001), FIGURE 910-180, USING A DESIGN SPEED OF 45 MPH AND A SU DESIGN VEHICLE. (2) AVAILABLE (AVL) ENTERING SIGHT· DISTANCE PER· TANGENT WITH . "448' COUTOUR ·WITHIN ROW, SD=1.47(V)(tg) SD=1.47(45)(11.5)=761 FEET WHERE: V=45 MPH SD=SIGHT DISTANCE IN FEET t g =11.5 SEC V=DESIGN SPEED IN MPH- FIGURE 440-1 WSDOT DESIGN MANUAL (MAY 2001) tg=TIME GAP FOR THE MINOR ROADWAY TRAFFIC TO ENTER OR CROSS THROUGH ROADWAY DESIGN SPEED: 45 MPH PER FIGURE 440-1 DESIGN VEHICLE: . . ..... SINGLE UNIT TRUCKS AND BUSES (SU & BUS) VERTICAL VIEW: UNOBSCURED-CONSTANT GRADE ON SR 900 HORIZONTAL VIEW: CUTS ACROSS SHOULDER AND DITCH ALONG LINE, BRUSH TO BE REMOVED, SURVEY INFORMATION FOR THIS DRAWING WAS PROVIDED BY DRYCO SURVEYING INC. ROW (G. PHIL SARGENT P.L.S. 34145 SURVEY ATIACHED) SR 900/148TH AVENUE SE WSDOT REQUIREMENTS SIGHT DISTANCE SURVEY FIGURE 1 ... '.e- , , St .~'-= > {'~ -,}" -= '"-" .. ... \ . " ,--, .til '.,' .. Sunnyside Manor ') . ~; .. ------- ~ ;' Q) .~ . ...: :S <::> It) .... ' ... '~---- Q) ::I . 'l .Q) ~ Cf --;:0 ...... ..•... \.. ...... "'-' -- J} &:,.: -----...: :S --.: ~., .- 1'-1 ~ , ~ /' :;.-EYt .---/ - <c .," 0 .... , .l i .•. i"';~- : AVL SSO=500' . ~ ~> ..;\f;YE ,.' .' . . ... "/c ~ '<{,x ..... ,,//<"j ;;cc ;;:;;c::=~~-::-- EQ SSO='345' b ./~ , . //;;: /"> "" /' ,~. !// .. ' .. ,~/,>-.. -/:--/[' / -;/ .. " /.;;;''/ . / / ~. ./','.7 . </ "' c c', ~ ;:: ,,1, --/ .-.·'·/S\G"· " ~ / . /' /",S /' O~ ~ .. .. / 'C"/ ,\~ . /' , .. .-// /.C., 0\~ ,/" / / / ~-'" . / r /' l // ~ ",::, -.-/ ~ . .. ... ~ /~ /' "', y' .-~ ~/ . " ~ . ~ /' . " OBJECT' .,': .~ ~ .,/0' ______ I ,:.\~ 1.!.'- STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE (SSD): APPROACH EAST SSD (FT) REQ(1 ) 345 -~ .... ----=-,:- -:..~ ---"--------.-,-- AVL(2) 500 . ' COMMENT SSD MET , ,~, -, ,:-., .. ' .,,: i'-::,' "'';:!,-•. :.' :;, <,' (1) REQUIRED (REQ) STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE PER WSDOT DESIGN MANUAl (JUNE 1999), F1GURE 650-3, USING A DESIGN SPEED OF 45 MPH. ., '. - ..:::.. - !: (2) AVAILABLE (AVL) STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE PER TANGENT WITH "444" CONTOUR WITHIN ROW. ".".:: ::;. ,'. ...(i '" ~ , , , I' ;'.-::." -,~:>[" -,~. ,0" . ;,_':.9 ___ _ " -:1, .... , .. l.~: i) .., "'-.. ;~ "," --' :",,- • --!- "' ,,' " GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES. INC. 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Behevue. WA 98005-4-446 Phone: (425) 519-0300 Fa_: (425) 519-0309 E-mail: gsaCgsassoc-inc.com hnp:f~_gsas&oc-inc_com :', ... ~-~. -> ~ GRAPHIC SCALE '-=30' N ;=-----0 11 JO ? ---, 60 111 90 ! ' . ;~' . . i' T -----~-,---.... -.. _-. ----::~, --,.: ---"---~ -.:,13:".-......... " State!lOll..te 9f!O . ~ --.. ,;';. ,!. - ., :----'. "~ ':, -I/iiii-___ _ ', . IEXPIRES O8I2BIN I , SR 900 POSTED SPEED: 40 MPH EAST OF 148TH AVE SE 35 MPH WEST OF 148TH AVE SE DESIGN SPEED: 45 MPH PER FIGURE 440-1 (WSDOT DESIGN MANUAL-MAY 2001) DESIGN VEHICLE:' SINGLE UNIT TRUCKS AND BUSES (SU & BUS) VERTICAL VIEW: UNOBSCURED-CONSTANT GRADE ON SR 900 HORIZONTAL VIEW: CUTS ACROSS SHOULDER AND DITCH ALONG ROW LINE. BRUSH TO BE REMOVED . SURVEY INFORMATION FOR THIS DRAWING WAS PROVIDED BY DRYCO SURVEYING INC. (G. PHIL SARGENT P.LS. 34145 SURVEY ATIACHED) SR 900/148TH AVENUE SE WSDOT REQUIREMENTS SIGHT DISTANCE SURVEY FIGURE 2 ' .. '. --------------------------------: <2) ____ ." ------------------- ----------- -.--. ---- , i _____ :-- i ! I! /'- /-- I I I I . I , en ! , , I 'J ' , J I /, . I "~ , /' 'i 1/ ,~ ,;( ;/ ,- // Sunnyside Manor ~ ~ i I I I ~ ~ :::----. ~ --\--~--~------___ L~/_ --c:-~.~--==:-~ ~ ~ '" " ~ "6...... / \ , : I / --~ ~~';:"---_----'/ \ ~ ~ / --~~---=-~ 1..--I ) / / ~_____ ~_____ __ < ____ ~ , / / / / -::::------~ /// v-_.~ .-.... ~ ------------- ~~ ,>' / ~/' ./ /' / / / .. --~---~~ ./ " / ~ ~..<?1' ; ....;/"...-? __ (It"" 431_/ / ---/~ .. /' -t!:~s' ... \_e3 """-=.r-" "-OS' ~'<_\' b /,- "-..L~[t2·"CP UI.7~ / . /' ~ ~ I --_. / I / ~~ ~-~~~~ "-,--,,,,./ ~ ____________ ~'--_______ ',---~ "-~"---------I' -'" ,-' ./ ,,- ~ N ! CRAP""C SC .. L£ 1" .. 30' ... -.M_ O~? .30? 60??? gO / / ---~ -, --~ ------................ 5 ---", ______ ,;---.. ----~. • ".1., ~JO -.... <I' '.~ -... ----_____ 7 . --_442 .. ~ ~_ClllllY_,.... ...... na. _~aII!ID ..,. _ ...... 1IIlWII _ .... -----~_II--_~ J ..-...,._ ,--1--. _ .... )3 ........ ---'...!.! ...... .-&.-. P ..... ~wu. __ <-- J' =::. _ .......... ---( -.... -~AJ.I a..:_...- 1")" ........ ----.,--~--.... -.... ---:.tUII( c:war R(V , sY" ~" Project N.mr LJ DRYCO .''io\L"'~'''''. "'W-:::$#~ ••• E(i t \\~ 'I SURVEYOR'S C::FlTIFICAiE: I""S lIN' COIi?(Gl v 'lEP"'(SE~IS A 5V~ .. -.or iJ'r .. ( OR I u~O{'" .. y oo""C1K1~ oN co~rOll""""'E WllH l~( R£OlJUl["EN'S ) Df 1>'( SU~ "<.::ORD'NC "C1. SIt. DiItazlce 8urYey . DRYCO; Project Loc.llon NOT TO SCALE (SCALED TO FIT 11 x17) CeuturiCIJI D.molOJUDeut 22617 Bt11 DrIve S1l Bothell, irA 1IBOZ1 ~. Surveying, Incorporaled '-.-Y ;271.! VALLEY AVENUE EAST SUMN::R, WA ge.39C I 253~825~03GO FAX 253~825~9703 , ______ ------- ,'",.", ,,'0,--,,- ;-;;.,./ £..:: \~~.& .. ••• ;~.4T'Liji'tl •••• , .... ,.,iOI ..... ~:.,S 3.,.~ iiO;U" .... ~~~~~±~L_~sr.: t. RDUt. fIOO -Bauton r.aqud Il<Md if;;;-,.... ... ,. _ , ~o,~o alJd I! ""If _rro ·i'·'/~ i .lOa "0' 200114' 14Btb A....,ue S1l ___ ll~~=,,-~~=::::'c==== ~ ~~Gf"l i SC.ll.t· ,-~ !o· i I I Qesign speeds for each functional class are given in Figures :1:. ~a. Qa. and Ia. It is desirable that the design speed and the posted speed correlate as shown in Figure 440-1 and that the design speed be not less than the operating speed. Posted Speed 35 mph or less 40 mph . :. to 50 mph 55 mph or higher Desirable Design Speed Not less than the posted speed. 5 mph over I· ." the postedsp.eed . 10 mph over the posted speed Desirable Design Speed Figure 440-1 Sdect a design speed for urban arterial streets and highways with some access control and fairly long distances between intersections as discussed above. However. highway arterials thal have obvious "street-like" characteristics. operation- ally and physically. do not require a design speed determination. In such instances. closely spaced intersections and other operational constraints usually limit vehicular speeds. negating the design speed factor. 440.08 Traffic Lanes Lane width and condition has a great intluence on safety and comfort. The added cost for wider lanes is offset. to some extent. by the reduction in shoulder maintenance cost due to the lessening pf wheel load concentrations at the edge of the lane. Lanes 12 ft wide provide desirable clearance between large vehicles where traffic volumes are high and a high number of large vehicles are expected. Highway capacity is also affected by the width of the lanes. With narrow lanes. drivers must operate their vehicles closer (laterally) to each other than they normally desire. To compensate for this. Lirivers reduce their speed unu increase the headway. rl.!sulting in reduced capacity. Figures 440-:1: through 440-Ib give the minimum I lane width for the various design classes. See Chapter 640 for guidance on width requirements on turning roadways. 440.09 Shoulders The shoulder width is controlled by the functional classification of the roadway. the traffic volume. and the function the shoulder is to serve. The more important shoulder functions are to: (I) Provide space for: . ...• Stop'ping oU[' of thetrot'fic lanes: ... • Escaping potential accidents or to reduce their severity. • Lateral clearance [0 roadside objects. such as guardrail (see Chapters 700 and 710). · Pedestrian and bicycle u,:;.e. • Large vehicle off tracking on curves (see Chapter 6-l0 and 91 OJ. · Maintenance operation,:;.. · La\venforcement. · Bus stops (see Chapter 1(60). · Slow vehicles turnouts and shoulder driving (see Chapter 1010). • Ferry holding lanes. · A sense of openness contributing to driver ease ~l11d freedom from strain. • For LIse as a lane during reconstruction of the through lanes. (2) Provide structural support for the traveled way. (3) Improve sight distance in cut :;ections (see Chapter 650). (-I) Improve capacity. (5) Relluce seepage adjacent [0 the traveled way by di:;charging storm \Vat~r farther away. For minimum ""erall shoulder widths based on functional dassificiltion and traffic volume. see Figures -l-lO-:± through lb. I Full Design Level Page 440-4 English Version Design Manual May 2001 I -_~~ ____________________ --,---'-,--'-_~_--'-____ ---J Design Stopping Design Sight Speed Distance VCLm (mph) (tt) KC KS (tt) 25 165 20 28 75 30 200 30 36 90 35 260 51 52 105 40 330 82 70 120 50 460 159 105 150 60 655 323··· ·159 180 70 855 550 215 210 80 1,050 830 271 240 Design Stopping Sight Distance Figure 650-2 Existing stopping sight distam:e (Figure 650-3) is uSed when the vertical and horizontal align- ments are unchangeu and the sight obstructiun is existing. Existing Stopping Design Sight Speed Distance (mph) (It) KC Ks 25 165 20 28 30 200 30 36 35 230 40 44 40 295 65 61 50 395 117 88 60 525 207 123 70 625 294 151 80 755 429 187 Existing Stopping Sight Distance Figure 650-3 (2) Effects of Grade The grade of the highway has an effect on the stopping sight distance. The vehicle stopping distance is increased on downgrades and decreased on upgrades. Figure 650-4 gives the stopping sight distances for grades steeper than three percent. When evaluating sight distance with a changing grade. use the grade for which the longest sight distance is needed. Design Stopping Sight Distance (ft) Speed Down Grades Up Grades (mph) . 25 30 35 40 50 60 70 80 3'50/, '6~8% .~% .. 3:5%" 6:8% . 165 165 165 150 150 195 215 230 180 180 260 280 295 215 215 330 360 375 260 260 490 540 590 360 345 690 740 785 460 445 920 1 000 -575 540 1.130 --690 - Design Stopping Sight Distance on Grades Figure 650-4 (3) Crest Vertical Curves -;::9%" . 150 165 215 245 330 425 - - Use Figure 650-7 to find the minimum crest vertical curve length to provide stopping sight distance vlhen given the algebraic difference in grades. The length can also be determined by multiplying the algebraic difference in grJdes by the KC value from Figure 650-2 fur design or 650-3 for existing (L=KC* A). Both the figure and the equation give approximately the same length of curve, Neither the figure nor the equa- tion uses the sight distance greater than the length of curve equation. When the Sight distance i~ greater than the length of curve and the length of curve is critical. the S>L equation given on Figure 650-7 may be used to find the minimum curve length. Design Manual June 1999 English Version Sight Distance Page 650-3 .' ~ I I , ____________ -==_ V-... ___ -... ~ --.. ---~ __ r==-B=;;2.;;: ... ::~~:..:v~ \. (\e ....... . '" . s·gnl. \ -----+---····Slghtline ...... ' , / ................. \ '-~-Sight di~tance '" .... ::Jr-o. :;:.. Sight distance---... ·..j IL '1 SD = 1.47Vtg Where: SD = Sight Distance (tt) V = Design speed of the through roadway (mph) tg = Time gap for the minor roadway traffic to enter or cross the through roadway (s) Intersection Sight Distance Equation Table 1 Design Vehicle Passenger car (P) Single unit trucks and buses (SU & BUS) Combination trucks Time Gap (t g) in seconds 9.5 11.5 (WB-40, WB-50. & WB-67) 13.5 Note: Values are for a stopped vehicle to turn left or right onto a two·lane two·way roadway with no median and grades 3% or less. Includes 2 sec for perception/reaction time. Intersection Sight Distance Gap Times (tg ) Table 2 The tg values listed in Table 2 reauire the following adjustments: Crossing maneuvers: All vehicles Multilane roadways: subtract 1.0 s Left·turns. for each lane In excess of one to be crossed and for medians wider than 4 ft: Passenger cars All trucks and buses add 0.5 s add 0.7 s Crossing maneuvers. for each lane In excess of two to be crossed and for medians wider than 4 ft: Passenger cars add 0.5 s All trucks and buses add 0.7 s Note: Where medians are wide enough to store the deSign vehicle. determine the sight distance as two maneuvers. Crossroad grade greater than 3%: All movements upgrade. for each percent that exceeds 3%: All vehicles add 0.2 s Sight Distance for Grade Intersection With Stop Control Figure 910-1f1a Intersections At Grade Page 910-36 English Version Design Manual May 2001 .. ----------------------------.,;;-- King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, \VA 900.55-1219 January 28, 2003 John Collins . Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT Northwest Region 21851-84th Ave. S. Kent, W A 98032 RE: Proposed Preliminary Plat of Aster Park. File No. LOOP0024 Dear Mr. Collins: In response to our request, the applicant for the plat of Aster Park has submitted sight distance information for the intersection of SR 9OO/148 th Ave. SE. This information, which is enclosed, addresses both "stopping sight distance" and "entering sight distance," as noted by the applicant. Please review the enclosed materials and then advise us as to the following: ~ Do you concur that the WSDOT required stopping sight distance for the east leg of the intersection is 345 feet? (In this regard, did the applicant apply the appropriate figure from the Washington State Design Manual to determine design speed?) Do you concur that 500 feet of stopping sight distance is currently available on the east leg of the intersection? We have the following related questions: • Was the correct "object" height and "eye" height used? • Is the 444 topographic contour the appropriate location for the. available line of sight? Is the information provided by the applicant for "entering sight distance" applicable to the sight distance regulations found in Section 910.10 of the Washington State Design Manual? . Do you concur with the "entering sight distance" values noted by Mr. Romano in the enclosed January 16, 2003 letter? Aster Park January 28, 2003 Page 2 of2 Please provide your comments to me on the above questions, as well as any other comments you may have, by February 11, 2003. II there are any matters regarding Aster Park that you would like to discuss, I can be reached at (206) 296-7168. Thank you for you assistance with this matter. Sincerely, Lanny enoch, Planner II Current Planning Section, LUSD Enclosures cc: Mark Bergam, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Pete Dye, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Road Services Division, KCDOT Kim Claussen, Planner ill, Current Planning Section, LUSD I" 1; .. I ~ ;:-.:n . .£ Washington State Department of Transportation Douglas B. MacDonald Secretary of Transportation Northwest Region 15700 Dayton Avenue North P.O. Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 LpIJ pl?t7?4 1113 Kl-. fj) February 27,2003 Lanny Henoch Current Planning Section King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Dear Mr. Henoch, RECEIVED MAR 07 2003 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES 206-440-4000 TTY, 1-800-833-6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov I am responding to your recent letter to John Col1ins regarding sight distance infonnation provided to you by the applicant for the Aster Park plat. In your letter, you asked that we respond to several specific issues. Our responses fol1ow below. Design Speed The applicant has referenced the appropriate section of the Design Manual in detennining the design speed. We concur that a 45 mph design speed should be used in an assessment of stopping sight distance and entering sight distance. , Stopping sight distance The applicant has not utilized the most current Design Manual guidance for stopping sight distance. WSDOT issued a Design Manual supplement for Chapter 650 in 2002. This supplement is in effect as of October 9, 2002 and materially changes our policy on stopping sight distance. A copy of this supplement is attached for your reference_ An assessment of the stopping sight distance requirements for this segment of SR 900 must be viewed under two scenarios: (a) no changes are made to the roadway as defined under 650.05(5) and (b) changes are made to the roadway. Under scenario (a), the required stopping sight distance would be 345 feet per Figure 650-3. Under scenario (b), the required stopping sight distance would be 360 feet per Figure 650-2. For the available sight distance calculation, you asked if we agreed with the use of the 444 contour line and with the eye and object height used. We agree with the use of the 444 contour line assuming tree foliage and other vegetation can be cleared to this line. The applicant did not identifY the eye and object height and that is acceptable since they perfonned a graphical assessment rather than a mathematical one. Further, knowing these is not necessary for us to detennine the adequacy of the available sight distance. The applicant stated that 500 feet of stopping sight distance is available on the eastern leg approaching the intersection at 148th Ave SE. We cannot agree with the specific number of 500 feet, however, we do agree that the available stopping sight distance would meet or exceed the requirements under scenario (a) and scenario (b) described above. We cannot agree with the applicant's value because it is based solely on an object in the middle of the intersection. To truly identify the minimum sight distance value the assessment would need to vary the object location, for example to the eastern edge of the intersection to account for a vehicle waiting to turn left. Entering sight distance The applicant has referenced the appropriate section of the Design Manual for entering sight distance requirements. We concur that 761 feet is the required distance for this intersection. We do not agree with the applicant's assessment of the available entering sight distance. The applicant's assessment is based on an eye location approximately eight to ten feet from the edge of traveled way. Design Manual guidance states that the sight triangle should be determined based on an eye location IS feet from edge of traveled way. Moving the eye location back from the edge of traveled way would decrease the available sight distance for the southern approach while increasing that for the northern approach. The applicant stated that WSDOT's guidance was for rural highway situations and referenced ITE guidance in support of a lower distance. We were unable to verify that ITE has published such guidance. As an additional, and in our opinion a more appropriate, external reference, AASHTO's Policy on Geometric Design 2001 identifies the following guidance for entering sight distance: left turn from stop -500 feet; crossing or right turn from stop -430 feet (assuming a passenger car, on a minor approach to a two-lane highway). The southern approach of 14S'h Ave SE would not meet AASHTO's left turn guidance. We should note that the installation of a signal at this intersection would mitigate entering sight distance deficiencies for left and crossing maneuvers from the side streets because the signal would provide the necessary gaps. Right turn movements should still be provided adequate sight distance, as vehicles will make a permitted right turn even with a signal. We hope that we have adequately responded to your questions and the subject of sight distance at the SR 900 -14Sth Ave SE intersection. Should you have any questions on this matter, please don't hesitate to call me at 206.440.4710. Sincerely, ~~. Ramin Pazooki King Area Planning Manager \ J Washington State Department of Transportation /s/ Harold Peterfeso State Design Engineer Design Manual Supplement Effective Dafn~ee.We02 Stopping Sight Distance MAR 07 2003 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES I. Introduction A. Purpose To revise Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) policies on stopping sight distance. B. References A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (Green Book), 200 I, American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Design Manual, M 22-01, WSDOT C. Background The 2001 edition of A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets revised the method of calculating and applying stopping sight distance. Changes were made to the calculation of the stopping distance and to the object height. The stopping distance calculation changed from an assumed tire/pavement coefficient of friction to a constant deceleration rate. Previously, the stopping distance was based on a coefficient of friction (j) that varied from 0.40 at 20 mph to 0.28 at 70 ml'h. The new distances are based on a deceleration rate of 11.2 ftlsec (f=0.35) for all speeds. Both methods include 2.5 sec perception/reaction time. Changes at low speeds resulted in only minor changes. At high speeds, the distance is reduced by as much as 140 ft. The new AASHTO stopping sight distances are adopted by WSDOT. AASHTO increased the object height from 6 in. to 2 ft. However, because objects with a height between 6 in. and 2 ft may be perceived as hazards that would likely result in an erratic maneuver, the new object height is not adopted by WSDOT. The 2 ft height will only be considered on a case- by-case basis with a deviation. The stopping sight distances on grade were changed to use the new deceleration rate. The new stopping sight distances on grade are adopted byWSDOT. Design Manual Supplement, October 9, 2002 Stopping Sight Distance The decison sight distances have changed as a result of the change in the method of calculating the stopping distance. The new decision sight distances are adopted by WSDOT. D. Implementation This change is effective on the date of this supplement and will expire when the changes are incorporated in the Design Manual. These changes apply to Design Manual Chapter 650, "Sight Distance" . only. II. Instructions Revise Design Manual Chapter 650 as follows: I. Replace Figure 650-2 with the following: Design Stopping Design Sight Speed Distance VCLm (mph) (ft) Kc K. (ft) 25 155 18 25 75 30 200 30 36 90 35 250 47 49 105 40 305 70 63 120 45 360 98 78 135 50 425 136 96 150 55 495 184 115 165 60 570 244 136 180 65 645 313 157 195 70 730 401 180 210 80 910 623 231 240 DesIgn Stopping Sight Distance FIgure 650-2 2. Revise Figure 650-3, by changing the "Existing Stopping Sight Distance (ft.)" at 25 mph to 155, Kc=18, K,=25. Values for other speeds are unchanged. 3. Do not use the graphs on Design Manual Figures 650-7 through 650-9 because the stopping sight distance values used are no longer correct. The equations listed on these figures are unchanged and are to be used with the distances in revised Figure' 650-2. 2 \ , ,: .... ' Design Manual Supplement, October 9, 2002 Stopping Sight Distance 4. Replace Figure 650-4 with the following: Design Stopping Sight Distance (ft) Speed Down Grade Up Grade (mph) -3% -6% -9% 3% 6% 9% 25 158 165 173 147 143 140 30 205 215 227 190 184 179 35 258 271 288 237 229 222 40 315 333 354 289 278 269 45 378 401 428 345 331 320 50 447 474 508 405 389 375 55 520 553 594 470 450 433 60 599 638 687 539 515 495 65 683 729 786 612 585 561 70 772 826 892 690 658 631 80 966 1037 1123 860 818 782 Design Stopping Sight Distance on Grades Figure 650-4 For stopping sight distances on grades between those listed, interpolate between the values given or use the following equation: V' D=l.47Vt+ 30[(3;.2)± i~O] Where: V = Design speed (mph) t '" Perception/reaction time (2.5 sec) a '" Deceleration rate (ll.2 ftlsec') G '" Grade (%) 5. Replace Figure 650-5 with the following: Design Speed (mph) 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 80 Decision Sight Distance for Maneuvers (ft) A B C D 220 490 450 535 275 590 525 625 330 690 600 715 395 800 675 800 465 910 750 890 535 1030 865 980 610 1150 990 1125 695 1275 1050 1220 780 1410 1105 1275 970 1685 1260 1455 Decision Sight Distance Figure 650-5 3 E 620 720 825 930 1030 1135 1280 1365 1445 1650 y' ® King County Road Services Division Dcp':lrtmcnt of Transportation 201 SOlllhJ<lckson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3856 October 20, 2004 CamWest Development C/O Chris Bicket, PE. P.O. Box 65254 Seattle, WA 98155 RE: Road Variance L03V0049 -East Renton Property Plat -Related File L02P0005 Dear SirlMadam: Thank you for submitting your application for a road variance from the King County Road Standards (KCRS). You requested a variance from Section 2.12 of the KCRS concerning the stopping sight distance (SSD) along the plat frontage on 148th Avenue SE. 148th Avenue SE is a collector arterial with posted speed limit of3 5 MPH. The original proposal to match the curb and sidewalk section to the existing vertical alignment has been revised to a 620-foot vertical crest curve that will lower the alignment by up to 3.5 feet and improve SSD. The revised design will utilize the two-foot target criteria in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official's (AASHTO) manual. The proposal will provide 455 feet of SSD along the crest curve that will meet KCRS with a downgrade correction for the average 6% grade. I approve a variance to allow the 620-foot vertical curve with 455 feet of SSD, utilizing a two-foot target. The slight grade break (under 1%) at the north end of the vertical curve is also acceptable. No variance is required for the vertical crest curve 400 feet to the west of the site because the SSD meets KCRS approaching the west property line. A copy of the staff's analysis, findings and conclusions is enclosed. If you have any questions, please call Craig Comfort, Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, at 206-263-6109. ~er~ .. ~' . '-ff~LW/U~.47\av.---' . Paulette Norman, P.E. County Road Engineer PN:CC:kc / CamWest Development October 20, 2004 Page 2 cc: James Sanders, P.E., Development Engineer, Land Use Services Division (LUSD), Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) Pete Dye, P.E., Senior Engineer, LUSD, DDES Linda Dougherty, Division Director, Road Services Division (RSD), Department of Transportation (DOT) Matthew Nolan, P.E., County Traffic Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD,DOT Fatin Kara, P.E., Supervising Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT .' ® King County Road Services Division Department. of Transportation Traffic Engineering Section MS KSC'TR-0222 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104 October 20, 2004 TO: Variance File FM: Craig Comfort, P.E., Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section RE: Road Variance L03V0049 -East Renton Property Plat -Related File L02P0005 Applicant's Presentation: 1. The proposed 66-lot plat is on the west side of 148 th Avenue SE at SE 120th Street. 148 th Avenue SE is a collector arterial with a 35 MPH posted speed limit. The existing vertical alignment along the plat frontage is a long crest vertical curve that extends for hundreds of feet beyond the site in both directions. The crest curve has more severe curvature changes . beyond the site frontage that restrict the stopping sight distance (SSD) sightlines. 2. King County Department of Transportation (KCDOT) staff made a decision subsequent to a pre-design meeting on 4/19/01, and a memo dated 8/8/01, that the developer, CamWest would not be required to reconstruct 148th Avenue SE, and a variance would not be required. The decision was not in writing and the County subsequently changed their position and requests a road variance to leave the vertical alignment and be allowed to match to the alignment with the curb and sidewalk improvements. The applicant's opinion is that this variance is unnecessary because the SSD deficiency is pre-existing and unrelated to impacts of the proposed plat. The cost of installing frontage and offsite improvements to correctthe"condition is unreasonably high and unrelated to impacts of the East Renton Property Plat. The proposed plat did not create, or will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage. Changing the grade of 148th Avenue SE to provide 400 to 425 feet ofSSD along the entire frontage would require lowering the profile of 148th Avenue SE for at least 700 feet. Cuts of2.5 to 4 feet would be necessary for over 300 feet. Several hundred feet of 12-inch water main would need to excavated and lowered. Two power poles would need to be relocated and water meters, utilities, ditches, culverts and driveways adjusted and reconstructed. Retaining walls and rockeries would probably be necessary for the deeper road cut sections. Easements would be necessary from the adjoining property owners. 3. There are pre-existing substandard SSD conditions at both the north and south ends of the East Renton Property. There is a grade break in the vertical alignment of 148th Avenue SE, 120 feet north of the site and the grade increases from 5 to 9 percent. As a result of the grade break, SSD at the north property line for north and southbound traffic is below King County Road Standards (KCRS). The SSD is 75 feet below KCRS for the northbound · . Variance File October 20, 2004 Page 2 direction, and 160 feet below KCRS for the southbound direction. At the south property line, there is adequate SSD that meets the KCRS minimum of 400 feet for a design speed of 45 MPH (10 over posted). 4. There are not any known traffic related safety issues associated with the present roadway. There have been any accidents on 148th Avenue SE between SE 117th Street and SE124th Street during the latest three-year period, for which accident data is available. 5. The applicant revised the proposed design to a 620 foot crest curve that would result in a maximum of three foot of cut on 148th Avenue SR justto the north of the site. The proposed vertical curve would provide 455 foot of SSD utilizing a two-foot target. 455 feet of SSD is the minimum KCRS downgrade adjusted SSD fora design speed of 45 MPH (10 over posted). 6. The access point of the subdivision was also moved approximately 480 feet to the north where KCRS requisite 620 feet of entering sight distance (ESD) can be provided. 7. A speed study was performed Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. on 5/8/01. The 85 th percentile speed northbound was 43.6 MPH and the southbound was 40.4 MPH. Staff's Findings and Conclusions· 1. The proposed entering sight distance in both directions for the new revised intersection location onto 148th Avenue SE meets KCRS minimum of 620 feet for the design speed of 45 MPH (10 over posted speed limit). 2. The SSD along the frontage is limited by the sharper curvature of the horizontal curves to the west and east of the site. The SSD southbound as one approaches the south property line is around 400 feet, which meets KCRS. There is sufficient SSD at the south end of the 650-foot frontage. There is KCRS compliant SSD along the middle portion of the frontage. However, the northbound SSD is not adequate through the northerly 250 feet of frontage. The measured SSD northbound at the north property line is 230 feet and the KCRS requires a minimum of 455 feet of SSD for the design speed of 45 MPH (with a downgrade correction). Even with a 2-foot target, the SSD only increases to 290 feet. The applicant's proposed re-grade with the 620-foot vertical curve should be acceptable. The entering sight distance (ESD) for the existing driveways along the road would meet a minimum of 545 feet, which exceeds American Association of State Highway and Transportation (AASHTO) minimums for the 45 MPH design speed. The SSD (6 inch target), approaching the new access from the south, would exceed 500 feet and from the north exceed 360 feet. The 360 feet meets AASHTO SSD criteria for the 45 MPH design speed. The SSD beyond the new access intersection would meet a minimum of 455 feet utilizing a 2-foot target. ® King County Road Services Division Department of Transportation 201 SouthJack.son Street SCclttle, WA 98104-3856 October 20, 2004 CamWest Development CIO Chris Bicket, P.E. P.O. Box 65254 Seattle, WA 98155 RE: Road Variance L03V0049 -East Renton Property Plat -Related File L02P0005,} Dear SirlMadam: Thank you for submitting your application for a road variance from the King County Road Standards (KCRS). You requested a variance from Section 2.12 ofthe KCRS concerning the stopping sight distance (SSD) along the plat frontage on 148 th Avenue SE. 14Sth Avenue SE is a collector arterial with posted speed limit of35 MPH. The original proposal to match the curb and sidewalk section to the existing vertical alignment has been revised to a 620-foot vertical crest curve that will lower the alignment by up to 3.5 feet and improve SSD. The revised design will utilize the two-foot target criteria in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official's (AASHTO) manual. The proposal will provide 455 feet of SSD along the crest curve that will meet KCRS with a downgrade correction for the average 6% grade. I approve a variance to allow the 620-foot vertical curve with 455 feet of SSD, utilizing a two-foot target. The slight grade break (under 1%) at the north end of the vertical curve is also acceptable. No variance is required for the vertical crest curve 400 feet to the west of the site because the SSD meets KCRS approaching the west property line. A copy of the staffs analysis, findings and conclusions is enclosed. If you have any questions, please call Craig Comfort, Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, at 206-263-6109. ~ ... -p~.~' <-'#~UD/U6>r4?\~ . Paulette Norman, P.E. County Road Engineer PN:CC:kc " CamWest Development October 20, 2004 Page 2 cc: James Sanders, P.E., Development Engineer, Land Use ServicesDivision (LUSD), Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) Pete Dye, P.E., Senior Engineer, LUSD, DDES Linda Dougherty, Division Director, Road Services Division (RSD), Department of Transportation (DOT) Matthew Nolan, P.E., County Traffic Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD,DOT Fatin Kara, P.E., Supervising Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT ® King c"unty Road Services Division Department of Transportation Traffic Engineering Section MS KSC·TR·0222 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104 October 20, 2004 TO: Variance File FM: Craig Comfort, PE, Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section RE: Road Variance L03V0049 -East Renton Property Plat -Related File L02P0005 Applicant's Presentation: L The proposed 66-lot plat is on the west side of 148th Avenue SE at SE 120th Street. 148th Avenue SE is a collector arterial with a 35 MPH posted speed limit. The existing vertical alignment along the plat frontage is a long crest vertical curve that extends for hundreds of feet beyond the site in both directions. The crest curve has more severe curvature changes beyond the site frontage that restrict the stopping sight distance (SSD) sightlines. 2. King County Department of Transportation (KCDOT) staff made a decision subsequent to a pre-design meeting on 4/19/01, and a memo dated 8/8/0 I, that the develpper, Cam West would not be required to reconstruct 148th Avenue SE, and a variance would not be required. The decision was not in writing and the County subsequently changed their position and requests a road variance to leave the vertical alignment and be allowed to match to the alignment with the curb and sidewalk improvements. The applicant's opinion is that this variance is unnecessary because the SSD deficiency is pre-existing and unrelated to impacts of the proposed plat. The cost of installing frontage and offsite improvements to correct the condition is unreasonably high and unrelated to impacts of the East Renton Property Plat. The proposed plat did not create, or will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage. Changing the grade of 14Sth Avenue SE to provide 400 to 425 feet ofSSD along the entire frontage would require lowering the profile of 148th Avenue SE for at least 700 feet. Cuts of2.5 to 4 feet would be necessary for over 300 feet. Several hundred feet of 12-inch water main would need to excavated and lowered. Two power poles would need to be relocated and water meters, utilities, ditches, culverts and driveways adjusted and reconstructed. Retaining walls and rockeries would probably be necessary for the deeper road cut sections. Easements would be necessary from the adjoining property owners. 3. There are pre-existing substandard SSD conditions at both the north and south ends of the East Renton Property. There is a grade break in the vertical alignment of 148th Avenue SE, 120 feet north of the site and the grade increases from 5 to 9 percent. As a result of the grade break, SSD at the north property line for north and southbound traffic is below King County Road Standards (KCRS). The SSD is 75 feet below KCRS for the northbound ----------~--------------------------------- Variance File October 20, 2004 Page 2 -------------------------------~ direction, and 160 feet below KCRS for the southbound direction. At the south property line, there is adequate SSD that meets the KCRS minimum of 400 feet for a design speed of 45 MPH (10 over posted). 4. There are not any known traffic related safety issues associated with the present roadway. There have been any accidents on 148 1h Avenue SE between SE 1171h Street and SE 124th Street during the latest three-year period, for which accident data is available. 5. The applicant revised the proposed design to a 620 foot crest curve that would result in a maximum of three foot of cut on 148 1h Avenue SR just to the north of the site. The proposed vertical curve would provide 455 foot of SSD utilizing a two-foot target. 455 feet ofSSD is the minimum KCRS downgrade adjusted SSD for a design speed of 45 MPH (10 over posted). 6. The access point of the subdivision was also moved approximately 480 feet to the north where KCRS requisite 620 feet of entering sight distance (ESD) can be provided. 7. A speed study was performed Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. on 5/8/01. The 85 1h percentile speed northbound was 43.6 MPH and .the southbound was 40.4 MPH. Staffs Findings and Conclusions: I. The proposed entering sight distance in both directions for the new revised intersection location onto 1481h Avenue SE meets KCRS minimum of 620 feet forthedesign speed of 45 MPH (10 over posted speed limit). 2. The SSD along the frontage is limited by the sharper curvature of the horizontal curves to the west and east of the site. The SSD southbound as one approaches the south property line is around 400 feet, which meets KCRS. There is sufficient SSD at the south end of the 650-footfrontage. There is KCRS compliant SSD along the middle portion of the frontage. However, the northbound SSD is not adequate through the northerly 250 feet of frontage. The measured SSD northbound at the north property line is 230 feet and the KCRS requires a minimum of 455 feet of SSD for the design speed of 45 MPH (with a downgrade correction). Even with a 2-foot target, the SSD only increases to 290 feet. The applicant's proposed re-grade with the 620-foot vertical curve should be acceptable. The entering sight distance (ESD) for the existing driveways along the road would meet a minimum of 545 feet, which exceeds American Association of State Highway and Transportation (AASHTO) minimums for the 45 MPH design speed. The SSD (6 inch target), approaching the new access from the south, would exceed 500 feet and from the north exceed 360 feet. The 360 feet meets AASHTO SSD criteria for the 45 MPH design speed. The SSD beyond the new access intersection would meet a minimum of 455 feet utilizing a 2-foot target. --------------------------------- ,. '. ® King Countv ~~ Department of Development and E"'1""'~pdl Land Use Service. DIvision 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 20&-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 Project Name: East Renton Project Address and Parcel Number ,.23.5'.,7 t IO:L~.~~':ll 12013 148th Ave SE ApplicanUDesign Engineer Name: CamWest Development Ad rass. . . 3150 Richards Road, #100 City, State Zip: Bellevue, WA 98005 Alternative formats available upon request DOES File No. Garry Struthers Associates Telephone: (425) 519-0300 x.228 o a Route lication to LutS Q Check here if ro'ect en ioeerin lans are a roved and construction has be un. tNSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans, sketches, photos and maps which may assist in complete review and consideration of your variance request. For a complete list of road variance submittal requirements. refer to separate list from DOES. Failure to provide all pertinent Information may result in delayed processing or denial of request. Please submit this request and applicable fee to the Department of Development and Environmental Services, Building or Land Use Services Intake Counters, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, WA 98055-1219. To make an appOintment for permit submittal, please call 206-296-6797. For more information see http://www.metrokc.gov/ddesl. kmlli%ill1!ifi'ie:Il1!l§!tifidlllitlil!tbittilHl!il~~ON1¥j~l>fAliJrsAfflP~l\'lj!$VAAIiIfjj¢itit@WNM DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST: Please see attached APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: , see attached JuSTIFICATION (see aHachments, pages ___ to ___ -1): see attached new I~r dAd 1JJ5Jo~) AUTHORIZATION Wrllln; fIlNIl7lfttff ;1' ItlJitlJt (jvfAWIi1l~ I!J tfJ616;1f Ifff'J dna L 0 3 \l f\ 1\ Ii 9,:eck DDES Web site ., www.melrokc.govlddes oaUnUa~R st to the County Road EngIneer Ie-rqu-rdvar.pdf 05129103 ,<tiLl, ~ ;!! \D) ICC. O.O.E.S •. '. • Date: October 16, 2001 Subject: East Renton Property Concerning Sight Distance Voice Mail Message To: Gary Norris, Garry Struthers Associates From: Aileen McManus, King County Traffic Hi Gary this is Aileen McManus umm I got a answer back it looks like no we will not be requiring the stopping sight distance through that north a::r section. We will require umm meet entering and stopping sight distance <p1ll the access pojnt but not at the frontage umm as you I believe it was the north part of the frontage so umm if you have any further questions. I guess that means no variance required either so give me a call a (206) 263-6102. Thanks bye Sara Slatten From: Gary, Norris [garyn@gsassoc-inc.coml Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:15 PM To: . Sara Slatten Subject: FW: CamWest fyi -----Original Message----- From: Langley, Kristen [mailto:Kristen.Langley@METROKC.GOVj Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:55 AM To: 'Gary, Norris' Subject: RE: CamWest Any challenges with this? Mr. Norris: • Page 1 of 2 We have reviewed the documentation that you have provided, reo the extent of off-site reconstruction required by the provision of a vertical alignment built to continuously achieve stopping sight distance along the plat frontage of 148th Avenue SE. You have suggested tbat a proportionality issue may be at hand in this instance, due to the proximity of the crest vertical curve in question, relative to the currently proposed plat boundary. The grade differential at this crest curve results in a lengthy reconstruction of the roadway, much of which would be off-site to the plat. Historically, the County bas required both options available: (1) require the developer to reconstruct the entire frontage of the roadway as required to provide the design speed based alignment --even if the reconstruction extends beyond the frontage, and beyond the limits required merely to provide sight distance for the plat intersection(s), and (2) Reconstruct only that portion of the frontage as required to achieve sight distance at any plat intersection(s), and retain existing non-engineered alignments outside of those limits. Reconstruct the alignment at the time of other development in the area, as necessitated by the need for adequate sight distance for that (future) project's intersections. It would appear that in the case under consideration, that --absent new information or a revision in this plat that might alter our opinion --we agree that the extent of off-frontage improvements could be disproportionate. The Applicant shall provide the full sight distance requirements from the King County Road Standards [KCRS] at the plat entrance(s), or apply for a Variance to the KCRS as provided for in KCRS 1.08. I expect, however, and will request of DDES, that appropriate provisions will be made in the design of the frontage improvements to facilitate the future reconstruction of this crest curve by others: developers, King County, successor agencies, etc .. It is a reasonable exercise of our discretion to make provisions for the eventual reconstruction of this roadway --even if the actual requirement to reconstruct the roadway is not placed upon your client. Please contact me at 206 263-6121 if you bave any questions: Kris Langley Supervising Engineer ~" Development Review Ul)~,. King Count.Y DOT . . 6f. 263-6121 .': . . . . . .: I 7/11/2003 • • GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. 11,2003 Craig Comfort, P.E. Road Variance Engineer King County Roads Division 210 South Jackson Seattle, W A 98104 RE: Traffic Variance Request East Renton Property: L02P0005 Dear Craig: ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Enclosed is a road standards variance request for the frontage improvements associated . with the proposed East Renton Property plat application. The East Renton proposal consists of 66 single-family lots situated on 19.57 acres and is located at 12013 148th Avenue SE in the Renton area of King County. The variance request is submitted in an attempt to expedite a decision in regards to required frontage improvements. The applicant, CamWest Development, has pursued resolution of this issue for approximately two years. At one point a decision was reached only to find that due to staff changes and insufficient documentation, the issue remained. The history is summarized below: History • On A ril 19 2001 re resentatives from CamWest and its design team attended t~ pplication meetin th King County staff. At this meeting, County staff stated'tn1ir"" . am est wou be required to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE to the extent necessary to provide Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) across the entire plat frontage. Staff based this request upon the SSD requirements of the King County Road Standards ("KCRS") as implemented by the application of administrative policy which uses the posted speed '-00'01>17 plus 10 mph as the design speed for calculating SSD. Alternatively, staff indicated CamWest could apply for a variance to this requirement. • On August 8, 2001 CamWest submitted a memorandum to Bruce Whittaker, King County DOES, summarizing critical policy, technical, and legal issues pertinent to the County's request to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE in order to correct the pre-existing sight distance deficiency. The memorandum analyzed applicable KCRS SSD 71111. 5 requirements. It explained why reconstruction of 148 th Avenue SE as proposed was JlY~ not required by the KCRS and why there were no impacts from the proposed plat that warranted improvements of the magnitude and cost associated with the reconstruction. It concluded that a variance was unnecessary since the County did not have the legal authority to require front ff-site improvements of the scope discusln~~ [E ~ ~ [E ~ memo. ThIS memo IS enclosed for your revle. . J1-A-,,,/ __ /J .n. ....... I:""£l~~~.......,,~.---'fOg &n~ JUL ·11 2003 ~-4~~~~~~~~~~~~f---~--~--~--~~~~~----------I' \\gsa n amwesl easl renlon variance final.doc 7/11/03 Gl K..C n D.E.S. 3150 R WA 98005·4446 • (425) 519-0300 • Fax (425)'5\'9-OJ09 ",~~,,-: •• '~'·J.lG,,, ~ ... " .... ::, ,,,!..! ......, ~~~-.:.. -.~, .c • • , - .... ~ iii '"'" ~ .... "," " A""\l.1-.:Al': . ~ (-~ " , r * .:-I, I , , ~. .,. :' '" " .... , .. .lI ~ ... ~, , '!Ia ''''' ........... --'lI ~", v",.' ", .. , .-------~~--------~--~~ ------------ July II, 2003 Page 2 • -~~-~~ -----~----------- • + In response to the August 8, 200 I memorandum, we were informed that King County staff including the County Road Engineer visited 148'h Avenue SE adjacent to the plat and considered the various issues presented in the memorandum. Aileen McManus, (then King County Development Review Engineer) left a voicemail on October i 6, ) 200 I with Gary Norris indicating that staff had considered all of the issues and determined that Cam West would not be re uired to reconstruct 148 m Avenue SE and a variance would not be required. copy of this transcribed voice mail is included for your revtew. + Subsequently, CamWest and I tried on numerous occasions to get formal documentation of Aileen's telephone message without success. A formal response was promised but never received. Subsequently, Aileen McManus moved to a new position in King County and was no longer involved in Jhe process. After months of requesting this decision in writing, Kristen Langley emailed ,a decision on behalf of the County which differed significantly from Ms. McManus's voice mail as she only indicated a conditional acceptance of CamWest's request. + On February 27, 2003, as a part of the SEPA review process for the East Renton proposal, James Sanders, DDES Engineer, wrote to Paulette Norman, King County Road Engineer, requesting written documentation that this area of 148'h Avenue SE met the criteria set out in KCC 21 A.28.120.A.II. The County Road Engineer was unwilling to provide such documentation. In a recent telephone conversation, Gary J)am~, Acting Development Review Engineer asked CamWest to submit a formal variance request. ~ Although we still contend that a variance is not necessary, it is our expectation that through this process we can reach an expeditious and satisfactory conclusion. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this variance request. Should you have any questions, please call me at (425) 519-0300 ext. 228 Si01~~MtJ~ 'Gvr '& /Wrns Gary A. Norris, P.E. Garry Struthers Associates Enclosures 1 KCC 21A.28.120 Adequate vehicular access. All new development shall be served by adequate vehicular access as follows: A. The properly upon which the development proposed is to be located has direct access to: I. A public or private street that meets county road standards or is formally declared acceptable by the county road engineer: ... \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01·Q02.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) July 11,2003 Page 3 • Description of Variance Request • As part of the development review process of the East Renton plat, King County has taken the position that existing SSD deficiency on 148'h Avenue SE along the plat frontage shall be eliminated as part of the required frontage improvements for the plat. The pre-existing SSD is deficiency is based upon an administrative policy that calculates SSD based upon a design speed of the posted speed plus 10 mph. Because of the existing topography, utility locations and probable impacts beyond the site, CamWest seeks a variance to eliminate the condition to reconstruct 148'h Avenue SE to meet County SSD standards. The pre-existing substandard SSD condition exists at the north end of the East Renton property. 148'h Avenue SE has an increasing downgrade from the site's south property line to the north property line. The percent grade at the south property line is 2.4 percent increasing to 4.6 percent at the north property line. At approximately 120 feet north of the north property line there is a grade break where the percent rade increases to 9 percent. s a resu t of t e gra e rea ,SSD at the nort property line or nort oun an south bound traffic is below the KCRS standard with application of the administrative policy to as the desi n s 1<\t the south property line, where the site access will be provided. there is adequate stopping and entering sight distance per the KCRS requirements. ased on t e applicatIOn 0 tea mmlstra Ive y g vermng e calculation of SS ,SSD is approximately 160 feet below the standard for the southbound direction and 75 feet below the st ard for the northbound dIrectIOn measured at the north property me. "-' Granting the variance request would allow frontage improvements to be installed without changing the vertical alignment of 148'h Avenue SE. Applicable Section of Standards The variance request is subject to the following sections of the KCRS, 1993 I) KCRS Section 1.03: Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. 2) KCRS Section 2.05: Horizontal Curvature and Sight Distance Design Values- Table 2. I Stopping Sight Distance. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\Ol-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) July 11,2003 Page 4 • Justification of Variance Request • Our contention remains that a '(1lfiii-n-c-e-:i-s-u-n-n-ec-e-s-sa-~-cause the SSD deficiency is pre- existing, unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat, and the cost of installing frontage and off-site improvements to correct this condition is unreasonably high and unrelated to impacts of the East Renton plat. Additionally, there are no safety concerns with this existing condition based on past and recent accident data. However, in order to expedite this process, there are several pertinent factors that justify a variance request. The legal issues associated with requiring reconstructing l48 th Avenue SE and the basis for this variance request are discussed below: I) The 1993 King County Road Standards addressing frontage and off-site road improvements require these improvements to be based upon the impacts of the proposed development. Section 1.03 Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements provides as follows: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. Cam West's attorney has advised them that the bolded language set out in these two provisions reflect State and Federal law regarding governmental authority to require roadway improvements as a condition of approving development proposals. ¥ Washington statutes, as well as State and Federal constitutional reguirements limit the f!l:. extent of reguired improvements to those that are directly related to the impact of proposed development. Even if the impact test is met, any required improvements • must be ro omonal to the impacts of the develo ment. A detailed legal analysis was provided in the August 8, 2001 memo . cluded for your revIew. --/l/d-/~ {v~e.tf.? Even assuming it is appropriate to use a 45-mph design speed per the administrative policy, the substandard SSD on 148 th Avenue SE across the plat frontage is a preexisting condition and unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat. Reconstructing 148 th Avenue SE to meet SSD would be extremely burdensome and cost prohibitive, as is discussed below. The KCRS provides that the extent of frontage and off-site improvements must be tied to the impacts of the proposed development, as required by Washington law. The proposed plat did not create and will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage. Therefore, any reqUIrement to regrade this roadway to improve the SSD woulanot be consistent with the KCRS and Washington law. A variance is unnecessary because requiring these improvements would exceed the County's authority. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\Ol-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 (j) r----------------------------------------------------------------------- July II, 2003 Page 5 • • 2) Changing the grade of 148 th Avenue SE to provide 400 to 425 feet of stopping sight distance along the entire frontage of th~(i plat would require lowering the profile of l48 th Avenue SE for at leas~d possibly much more. This improvement would necessarily extend beyond the plat frontage. Cuts of 2 V2 to nearly 4 feet would be necessa for over 300 feet. Several hundred feetof a 12-inch water i wou nee to be excavate an owered. At least two power poles_would need to be/relocated and water meters, dry utilities, ditches and culverts along this road which serve adjacent property owners would need to be reconstructed and several neighboring driveway approaches to 148 th Avenue SE rebuilt. The areas where the cuts would be greatest would probably need low retaining walls or rockeries at the edge of the right-of-way in order to accommodate the drainage ditch on the side of the street opposite the proposed project. Portions of this work would require easements from the abutting property owners. Furthermore, although limited survey data is currently available to make a deFinitive assessment, it appears that it may be necessary to reconstruct the SE I 16 th Place/148'h Avenue SE intersection to meet the reconstructed 148 th Avenue SE centerline profile. These improvements would be extremely costly and burdensome if required for the proposed plat. 3) The most important aspect of a variance is the maintenance of a safe roadway environment for vehicles and pedestrians. Currently, there are no known traffic related safety issues associated with the present roadway. According to King County Transportation staff, there have been no accidents on 148 th Avenue SE between SE I 17 th Street and SE 124th Street during the latest three-year period for which accident data is available.2 Access to the proposed plat will be located at the south property line approximately 500 feet from the location of the substandard stopping sight distance. Therefore, site generated traffic should not create any additional impacts in terms of SSD. 4) A substandard SSD condition exists under the KCRS only because of an administrative decision to U,' ad' gn speed qual to the posted speed plus 10 miles per hour (mph). /4// A ~ This definiti . d is not required by the KCRS or documented in (7 AASHTO and is contrary to WSDOT Design Manual which specifies the use of the posted speed for this application. (See Figure 440-1, WSDOT Design Manual, May 2001). 'The I1\O,t pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard would be impact on safety. To addre» this is,ue. the latest available three-year accident history was obtained from Jodi Scanlon King Coumy Department of Transportation which included the period between January I. 1999 and December 31. 200 I. According to the data provid,'d. there is no record of any accidems on 143'" Avenue SE between SE 117'h Street and SE 124'" Street. ) The 1110st pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard would be impact on safety. To address this issue. the latest availahle three-year accident history was obtained from Jodi Scanlon King County Departmem of Transportation which included the period between January I. 1999 and December 31. 2001. According to the data provided. there is no record of any accidents nn \48'" Avenue SE between SE 117'h Street and SE 124'" Stree!. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance finaL doc 7/11/03 U) July 11,2003 Page 6 • • 5) Application of the posted speed as the design speed, which is 35 MPH, results in a required SSD of 250 feet rather than 400 feet as outlined in Table 2.1 of the KCRS. Currently, 240 feet of SSD exists in the southbound direction at the north property line and 318 feet of available SSD in the southbound direction measured at a point 100 feet south of the north property line that increases heading south as the percent grade decreases. In the northbound direction, 425 feet of SSD exists at the south property line. At the north property line there is 350 feet of SSD. Please refer to the following table: Stopping Sight Distance KCRS KCRS KCRS AASHTO Location (35 mph) (40 mph) (45 mph) (33.7 mph)' Observed North Property Line Southbound Northbound 100' south of North Property Line Southbound Northbound South Property Line Southbound Northbound 250,2 265,2 250,2 265" 250'2 250'2 325,2 400,2 345 2 425'2 325,2 400'2 345' 425" 325,2 325,2 I -average running speed based on speed survey for southbound direction. 2 -using a O.S-foot object 3 -using a 2.0-foot object 4 -Per 1994 AASHTO using a O.S-foo! object 5 -Per 200 I AASHTO using a 2.0-foo! object 212"/188" 272" 212"/188" 272" 212" 237" 318,2 325'+2 425" f)~tIr~ 4" 6) Application of a 2.0-foot height of target as opposed to the 0.5 height of target required $/Jllj;, fL per KCRS Section 2.12 provides an acceptable SSD per KCRS requirements for the northbound direction across the entire plat frontage. However, application of the 2.0 height of target provides only 275 feet of SSD for southbound vehicles at the north property line. The available southbound SSD would be acceptable with application of the use of the operating speed for upgrade conditions per AASHTO policy. Recently, King County has accepted assuming a 2.0 high target, similar to AASHTO's standards, in lieu of a O. high target in processing variance applications. speed stud was conducted in May 200 I on 148'h A venue SE to identify actual . . ee s along this section of the 148'h Avenue SE corridor. The speed study was conducted approxi y ee th of the East Renton north property line. The results indicate t 8 'percentile speed (t pic ally the posted speed) in the southbound \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\Ol-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) • • July II. 2003 Page 7 ~ direction i 40 m If 40 MPH (5 MPH above the existing posted speed) was used as the design s , an acceptable SSD per KCRS would exist in the northbound direction across the entire plat frontage and in the southbound direction across the entire plat frontage. The only exception would be for the section of the roadway adjacent to the north 100 feet of the plat (100 feet south of the north property line). The required SSD for 40 mph is 325 feet per KCRS. (The computed SSD for 40 mph is 31S.7 feet and 325 feet when rounded for design.) See Table (above) for existing SSD at various noted locations. The KCRS. unlike AASHTO. does not adjust the required SSD to reflect the reduced stopping distance required for the upgrade condition (southbound approach to the plat). According to AASHTO. the average running speed should be used as the speed to calculate SSD corrections for upgrade conditions 5 Since the SSD deficiency on 14S th Avenue is a result of a grade break in the centerline profile north of the site where the grade changes to approximately 9 percent, the average running speed should be used in the SSD calculation for southbound vehicles. According to the recent speed study, the average running speed is 33.7 mph. This results in a calculated SSD of 212 feet. Therefore, application of AASHTO policy results in an acceptable sight distance across the plat's entire 14S th A venue SE frontage in both the northbound and southbound direction. Conclusion In order to determine whether CamWest can be required to provide SSD improvements across the entire plat frontage and beyond. the impacts of the proposed plat and the costs of such improvements must be assessed. (It should be noted that Cam West, as part of the plat development process, would provide frontage improvements on 14Sth A venue SE to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks.) The SSD issues associated with this area of 14S th Avenue SE are preexisting and completely unrelated to the impacts of the proposed Cam West plat. There is no data that suggests the SSD condition on 14S th Avenue SE has created a safety problem or has significantly affected operational conditions 6 As discussed previously, road improvements to improve the existing SSD would be extremely costly and burdensome. Requiring the plat to fix an existing SSD condition which it did not create, and when there is no safety issue associated with the condition violates State and Federal.law. Therefore. there is no legal basis to require this pre- existing SSD deficiency be corrected. 'The speed study was taken from 12:00 AM Tuesday May 710 12:00 AM Wednesday May 8. 2001. The counters were stationed 50 to 75 feet north of the north property line 5 According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book (1984). page 143. "Design Speed is used in calculating downgrade corrections. average running speed in calculating upgrade corrections," \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01·002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 Ul " . . ' " .' July 11,2003 Page 8 • • Based on the foregoing information, a variance to the King County Road Standards (1993) is sought to eliminate any requirement that Cam West reconstruct 14Sth Avenue SE along the East Renton frontage to provide stopping sight distance based upon current administrative policy to use a design speed of IOmph over the speed limit standards. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01·002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance finaLdoc 7/11/03 (j) '. : -------------• ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 February 27, 2003 TO: Paulette Nonnan, P.E., Acting County Road Engineer FR:~ers, P.E., DevelopmentEngineer . RE: Preliminary Plat of East Renton, File L02P0005 .. Our office is currently reviewing the preliminary ~Iat of East Renton located on the west side of 148 1h Avenue SE in the vicinity of SE 1201 Street. During the evaluation of required road improvements for 148th, it was detennined by DDES that the existing vertical alignment along the plat frontage does not meet King County Road Standards and existing stopping sight distances are below desired minimums because of a . substandard crest curve. We have infonned the applicant that urban road improvements are required along the plat frontage, which would involve reconstruction of the existing alignment to meet County standards. However, the applicant indicates they are not required to perfonn the improvements nor are they required to seek approval of a road variance application based on discussions they had with a County Traffic Engineer prior to making application. To assist in resolving this matter, I would like to receive your comments regarding the applicable code requirements and variance procedures. As shown in the attached letters from the applicant's traffic engineer, Mr. Gary Norris indicates that County staff from the Department of Transportation evaluated this matter during the pre-application process and detennined that the applicant would not need to reconstruct the road alignment and a road variance application would not be required. The road profile and sight distance analysis prepared by Mr. Norris shows that the entrance to the project is located along the southern portion of the crest curve to allow compliance with sight distance standards. A note shown on the plat map indicates that the entering sight distance is less than the required 620 feet, but this note may be incorrect. King County designates 148th Avenue SE as a collector arterial with a design speed of 45 mph. The enclosed road profile shows the existing road alignment and the notable change in grade along the northern portion of the plat frontage.' Several existirig driveways are located on the east side of 1481h Avenue SE which may be affected by our decision for ,I' i . ' .'. '. Paulette Nonnan February 27, 2003 Page 2 • .. the frontage improvements. I should also note that a developer recently met with our office to discuss a new subdivision on the northerly parcel adjacent to East Renton and the frontage improvements for this project involve the same substandard vertical curve on l48th Avenue SE, . As outlined in King County Code 2IA.28J20Al, all new development shall be served by a public or private street that meets County road standards, or is formally declared acceptable by the County Road Engineer, I have attached a copy of this code citation for your convenience, Also, would you consider the adoption of the County's arterial road map constitute a 'formal' declaration? To proceed with our review of the East Renton plat, I would appreciate receiving either your written conclusion on the acceptability of this roadway or a statement indicating a road variance is required to evaluate the design requirements, I appreciate your help in resolving this matter and if you desire to meet or discuss these issues further, please contact me at 296-7178. Enclosure CC: Lanny Henoch Pete Dye Kristen Langley Craig Comfort -, -rl ® King courity ~~ Department of Development and E"'iro<lin~:P"i Land Use Service. Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055--1219 206-296-<;600 TTY 206-296·7217 Project Name; East Renton ProDertv Project Address and Parcel Number ,.13.5'.,7 t IDJ.~.!>~.~:J 12013 148th Ave SE ApplicanUDeslgn Engineer Name; CamWest Development ,.,. . " .'" '" Adaressf . .,. ., • • 3150 Richards Road, #100 City, State Zip: Bellevue, WA 98005 ----------------- Alternative formats available upon request DDES File No. L02POO05 SI~Y}/'.LA (rfAltz.t.. Date; 7/1 () / ()3 ¥'vv, 7,". En~eerlng FIm4 Name; Garry Struthers Associates Telephone: (425) 519-0300 x.228 ~. ILl?<;! ""n n .. nn DOES Engineer lnltials; Q Route Application to LUts . Q Check here if proiect enaineerlna plans are approved and construction has beaun. INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans, sketches, photos and maps which may assist in complete review and consideration of your variance request. For a complete list of road variance submittal reqUirements, refer to separate list from DOES. Failure to provide all pertinent Infonnation may result in delayed processing or denial of request. Please submit this request and applicable fee to the Department of Development and Environmental Services. Building or Land Use Services Intake Counters. at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, WA 98055·1219. To make an appointment for permit submittal, please call 206-296-6797. For more information see http://www.metrokc.qov/ddes/. \JJiWiiiin,fiBEmift1D,$j§fJ.J;Jlit:mimE_mOMi_;i>iAlil~#6tt9AUIABl#ifjm\7m DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST: Please see attached APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS; , . see attached JUSTIFICATION (sea attachments, pages ___ to __ -l): see attached nM I~r clAd '/J~Jo~) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION AUTHORIZATION fIJ~(~m!,Jf ,Gr ItlJitl)~ efl610;If Ifff'J ,(Ina L 0 3 ' 1 {} 1\ II neCk DDES Web site at www·metrokc.aovlddes Voa nUa~R~'to the County Road Engineer le-rqu-rdwr.pdf 05129103 --- I ® King county Department of Development and t!....,lronmenlal Services Land Usa Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TTY 206~296~7217 Project Name: East Renton Property Project Address and Parcel Number 1013&51017 4 1t'J.~OS,\o:a.3 12013 148th Ave SE ApplicanUDesign Engineer Name: Alternative formats available upon request DDES File No. L02POO05 Si~ ~/ii;:..ate: 'VV' -1\' 7/10/03 En~eering FImI Name: CamWest Development Garry Struthers Associates ,.. ~ Adifress~ . n.v. . , Telephone: (425) 519-0300 x.228 3150 Richards Road, #100 ". I A',.;: \ "', n n.,nn City, State Zip: DDES Englneer Imtials: Bellevue, WA 98005 o Route Application to LUIS o Check here if oroiect encineerinQplans are approved and construction has beaun. INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include aU plans, sketches, photos and maps which may assist in complete review and consideration of your variance request. For a complete list of road variance submittal requirements, refer to separate lisl from DDES. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of request. Please submit this request and applicable fee to the Department of Development and Environmental Services, Building or Land Use Services Intake Counters, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, WA 98055-1219. To make an appointment for permit submittal, please call 206-296-6797. For more information sea hltp:/lwww.metrokc.govlddesl. I;W'1RiiF.igttfj$ebtlI!iN1f;mrlll}tlltlil!klN$d6Ukt%~IWA!i~1"'dR'Y~fii&bit~Wtml DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST: Please see attached APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: see attached K.G. 0.0.E.5. JUSTIFICATION (see attachments, pages ___ to ___ ): L03V0049 see attached AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES' DDES STAFF RECOMMENDATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION AUTHORIZATION I 1 APproval I 1 Conditioned Approval I I Denied County Design Engineer Date Development EngineerlDesignee: Date County Road Engineer Date CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Check out the DOES Web site .t www.metrokc.govlddes Roads Standards Variance Request to the County Road Engineer le-rqu-rdvar.pdf 05129/03 Page 1 of 1 I Craig Comfort, P.E. Road Variance Engineer King County Roads Division 210 South Jackson Seattle, W A 98104 RE: Traffic Variance Request East Renton Property: L02POOOS Dear Craig: I GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES L03V0049 Enclosed is a road standards variance request for the frontage improvements associated with the proposed East Renton Property plat application. The East Renton proposal consists of66 single-family lots situated on 19.57 acres and is located at 12013 148th Avenue SE in the Renton area of King County. The variance request is submitted in an attempt to expedite a decision in regards to required frontage improvements. The applicant, CamWest Development, has pursued resolution of this issue for approximately two years. At one point a decision was reached only to find that due to staff changes and insufficient documentation, the issue remained. The history is summarized below: History • On April 19,2001 representatives from CamWest and its design team attended the pre- application meeting with King County staff. At this meeting, County staff stated that Call1West would be required to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE to the extent necessary to provide Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) across the entire plat frontage. Staff based this reLluest upon the SSD requirements of the King County Road Standards ("KCRS") as implemented by the application of administrative policy which uses the posted speed plus 10 mph as the design speed for calculating SSD. Alternatively, staff indicated CamWest could apply for a variance to this requirement. • On August 8,2001 CamWcst submitted a memorandum to Bruce Whittaker, King County DOES, summarizing critical policy, technical, and legal issues pertinent to the County's request to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE in order to correct the pre-existing sight distance deficiency. The memorandum analyzed applicable KCRS SSD requirements. It explained why reconstruction of 148 t r. Avenue SE as proposed was not required by the KCRS and why there were no impacts from the proposed plat that warranted improvements of the magnitude and cost associated with the reconstruction. It concluded that a variance was unnecessary since the County did not have the legal authority to require frontage and off-site improvements of the scope discussed in the memo. This memo is enclosed for ¥our review. 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ WI ~ ~ "\\-gs-a-m-a""in-:_o::'\e-n-g\C:2':COO::':1-p-ro""je-c""ts"'\O"'1-=:O':;02"'.o"'4;"'e-a-:st-re-n"'to-n""\c-am==w-es"'t -ea-s7t r-e-:nt-on-v-a-:ri-an-c-e'::'fin-a7I.d"'o-C-:7::/1~1-:/O~3U:-U~) .l.-_~~J-j. 2003 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 • Bellevue, WA 98005-4446 • (425) 519-0300 • Fax ~?e! SO~J9~%. July II, 2003 Page 2 I , • [n response to the August 8, 2001 memorandum, we were informed that King County staff including the County Road Engineer visited 148 th A venue SE adjacent to the plat and considered the various issues presented in the memorandum. Aileen McManus, (then King County Development Review Engineer) left a voicemail on October 16, 200 I with Gary Norris indicating that staff had considered all of the issues and determined that CamWest would not be required to reconstruct 148th Avenue SE and a variance would not be required. A copy of this transcribed voice mail is included for your review. • Subsequently, CamWest and I tried on numerous occasions to get formal documentation of Aileen's telephone message without success. A formal response was promised but never received. Subsequently, Aileen McManus moved to a new position in King County and was no longer involved in the process. After months of requesting this decision in writing, Kristen Langley emailed a decision on behalf of the County which differed significantly from Ms. McManus's voice mail as she only indicated a conditional acceptance of Cam West's request. • On February 27, 2003, as a part of the SEPA review process for the East Renton proposal, James Sanders, DOES Engineer, wrote to Paulette Norman, King County Road Engineer, requesting written documentation that this area of l48th Avenue SE met the criteria set out in KCC 21 A.28.120.A.I'. The County Road Engineer was unwilling to provide such documentation. [n a recent telephone conversation, Gary Samek, Acting Development Review Engineer asked CamWest to submit a formal variance request. Although we still contend that a variance is not necessary, it is our expectation that through this process we can reach an expeditious and satisfactory conclusion. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this variance request. Should you have any questions, please call me at (425) 519-0300 ext. 228 Siq;~~UtJ~ 'Gvrrt /Ufmj. Gary A. Norris, P.E. Garry Struthers Associates Enclosures , KCC 21A.28.120 Adequate vehicular access. All new developmenl shall be served by adequale vehicular access as follows: A. The property upon which the development proposed is to be located has direct access to: I. A public or private street that meets county road standards or is formally declared acceptable by Ihe county road engineer; ... \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 (j) July II, 2003 Page 3 I Description of Variance Request As part of the development review process of the East Renton plat, King County has taken the position that existing SSD deficiency on 148 th Avenue SE along the plat frontage shall be eliminated as part of the required frontage improvements for the plat. The pre-existing SSD is deficiency is based upon an administrative policy that calculates SSD based upon a design speed of the posted speed plus 10 mph. Because of the existing topography, utility locations and probable impacts beyond the site, CamWest seeks a variance to eliminate the condition to reconstruct 148 th A venue SE to meet County SSD standards. The pre-existing substandard SSD condition exists at the north end of the East Renton property. 148 th Avenue SE has an increasing downgrade from the site's south property line to the north property line. The percent grade at the south property line is 2.4 percent increasing to 4.6 percent at the north property line. At approximately 120 feet north of the north property line there is a grade break where the percent grade increases to 9 percent. As a result of the grade break, SSD at the north property line for north bound and south bound traffic is below the KCRS standard with application of the administrative policy to use the posted speed plus 10 mph as the design speed. At the south property line, where the site access will be provided, there is adequate stopping and entering sight distance per the KCRS requirements. Based on the application of the administrative policy governing the calculation of SSD, SSD is approximately 160 feet below the standard for the southbound direction and 75 feet below the standard for the northbound direction measured at the north property line. Granting the variance request would allow frontage improvements to be installed without changing the vertical alignment of 148 th Avenue SE. Applicable Section of Standards The variance request is subject to the following sections of the KCRS, 1993 I) KCRS Section 1.03: Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or opermional efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. 2) KCRS Section 2.05: Horizontal Curvature and Sight Distance Design Values- Table 2.1 Stopping Sight Distance. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renion\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) July II, 2003 Page 4 I Justification of Variance Request , Our contention remains that a variance is unnecessary because the SSD deficiency is pre- existing, unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat, and the cost of installing frontage and off-site improvements to correct this condition is unreasonably high and unrelated to impacts of the East Renton plat. Additionally, there are no safety concerns with this existing condition based on past and recent accident data, However, in order to expedite this process, there are several pertinent factors that justify a variance request. The legal issues associated with requiring reconstructing 148 th A venue SE and the basis for this variance request are discussed below: 1) The 1993 King County Road Standards addressing frontage and off-site road improvements require these improvements to be based upon the impacts of the proposed development. Section 1.03 Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements provides as follows: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed lalld development by the Reviewing Agency. B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. CamWest's attorney has advised them that the bolded language set out in these two provisions reflect State and Federal law regarding governmental authority to require roadway improvements as a condition of approving development proposals. Washington statutes, as well as State and Federal constitutional requirements limit the extent of required improvements to those that are directly related to the impact of proposed development. Even if the impact test is met, any required improvements must be proportional to the impacts of the development. A detailed legal analysis was provided in the August 8, 200 I memo included for your review. Even assuming it is appropriate to use a 45-mph design speed per the administrative policy, the substandard SSD on 148 th Avenue SE across the plat frontage is a preexisting condition and unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat. Reconstructing 148 th Avenue SE to meet SSD would be extremely burdensome and cost prohibitive, as is discussed helow. The KCRS provides that the extent of frontage and off-site improvements must be tied to the impacts of the proposed development, as required hy Washington law. The proposed plat did not create and will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage. Therefore, any requirement to regrade this roadway to improve the SSD would not be consistent with the KCRS and Washington law. A variance is unnecessary because requiring these improvements would exceed the County's authority. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) ~--------------- July II, 2003 Page 5 ------------------------------ I I 2) Changing the grade of 148 th A venue SE to provide 400 to 425 feet of stopping sight distance along the entire frontage of the proposed plat would require lowering the profile of 148 th Avenue SE for at least 700 feet and possibly much more. This improvement would necessarily extend beyond the plat frontage. Cuts of 2 Y2 to nearly 4 feet would be necessary for over 300 feet. Several hundred feet of a 12-inch water main would need to be excavated and lowered. At least two power poles would need to be relocated and water meters, dry utilities, ditches and culverts along this road which serve adjacent property owners would need to be reconstructed and several neighboring driveway approaches to 148 th Avenue SE rebuilt. The areas where the cuts would be greatest would probably need low retaining walls or rockeries at the edge of the right-of-way in order to accommodate the drainage ditch on the side of the street opposite the proposed project. Portions of this work would require easements from the abutting property owners. Furthermore, although limited survey data is currently available to make a definitive assessment, it appears that it may be necessary to reconstruct the SE I 16 th Placel148 th Avenue SE intersection to meet the reconstructed 148 th Avenue SE centerline profile. These improvements would be extremely costly and burdensome if required for the proposed plat. 3) The most important aspect of a variance is the maintenance of a safe roadway environment for vehicles and pedestrians. Currently, there are no known traffic related safety issues associated with the present roadway. According to King County Transportation staff, there have been no accidents on 148 th Avenue SE between SE I I 7th Street and SE 124th Street during the latest three-year period for which accident data is available 2 Access to the proposed plat will be located at the south property line approximately 500 feet from the location of the substandard stopping sight distance. Therefore, site generated traffic should not create any additional impacts in terms of SSD. 4) A substandard SSD condition exists under the KCRS only because of an administrative decision to use a design speed equal to the posted speed plus 10 miles per hour (mph). This definition of design speed is not required by the KCRS or documented in AASHTO and is contrary to WSDOT Design Manual which specifies the use of the posted speed for this application. (See Figure 440-1, WSDOT Design Manual, May 2001). 2 The lIlost pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard would be impact on safety. To address Ihis issue, the latest available three-year accident history was obtained from Jodi Scanlon King Connty Department of Transportation which included the period between January I. 1999 and December 31, 2001. According to the datr: prcn'idcd, there. is no record of any accidents on J <lSlh A YCllllC SE between SE 1 ! 7th Street and SE 124111 Street. J The most pertinent factor applicable to the S5D standard would be impact on safety. To address this issue. the latest available three-year accident history was obtained from Jodi Scanlon King County Department of Transportation which included the period betlYeen January I. 1999 and December 31. 200 I. According to the data provided, there is no record of' any accidents on 148'" Avenue SE between SE l17 ili Street and SE 124'" Street. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) July II, 2003 Page 6 I , 5) Application of the posted speed as the design speed, which is 35 MPH, results in a required SSD of 250 feet rather than 400 feet as outlined in Table 2.1 of the KCRS. Currently, 240 feet of SSD exists in the southbound direction at the north property line and 318 feet of available SSD in the southbound direction measured at a point 100 feet south of the north property line that increases heading south as the percent grade decreases. In the northbound direction, 425 feet of SSD exists at the south property line. At the north property line there is 350 feet of SSD. Please refer to the following table: Stopping Sight Distance KCRS KCRS KCRS AASHTO Location (35 mph) (40 mph) (45 mph) (33.7 mph)t Observed North Property Line Southbound 250,2 325,2 400'2 212'4/188" 240" / 275" Northbound 265" 345 2 425" 272" 350'2/272'+' 100' south of North Property Line Southbound 250'2 325,2 400" 212"/188" 318" Northbound 265,2 345 2 425" 272,5 325' +' South Property Line Southbound 250" 325" 400,2 212,4 325'+' Northbound 250,2 325" 400'2 237" 425" I -average running speed based on speed survey lor southbound direction. 2 -using a O.5-fool ohjecl 3 ~ using a 2.0-foot ohject 4 -Per 1994 AASHTO using a O.5-fool objecl 5 -Per 2001 AASHTO using a 2.0-1'001 objecl 6) Application of a 2.0-foot height of target as opposed to the 0.5 height of target required per KCRS Section 2.12 provides an acceptable SSD per KCRS requirements for the northbound direction across the entire plat frontage. However, application of the 2.0 heigh I of target provides only 275 feet of SSD for southbound vehicles at the north property line. The available southbound SSD would be acceptable with application of the use of the operating speed for upgrade conditions per AASHTO policy. Recently, King County has accepted assuming a 2.0 high target, similar to AASHTO's standards, in lieu of a 0.5 high target in processing variance applications. A speed study was conducted in May 200 I on 148 th Avenue SE to identify actual vehicle speeds along this section of the 148 th A venue SE corridor. The speed study was conducted approximately 50 feet north of the East Renton north property line. The results indicate the 85 th percentile speed (typically the posted speed) in the southbound \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01·002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 (j) July II, 2003 Page 7 I , direction is 40 mph4 If 40 MPH (5 MPH above the existing posted speed) was used as the design speed, an acceptable SSD per KCRS would exist in the northbound direction across the entire plat frontage and in the southbound direction across the entire plat frontage. The only exception would be for the section of the roadway adjacent to the north 100 feet of the plat (100 feet south of the north property line). The required SSD for 40 mph is 325 feet per KCRS. (The computed SSD for 40 mph is 318.7 feet and 325 feet when rounded for design.) See Table (above) for existing SSD at various noted locations. The KCRS, unlike AASHTO, does not adjust the required SSD to reflect the reduced stopping distance required for the upgrade condition (southbound approach to the plat). According to AASHTO, the average running speed should be used as the speed to calculate SSD corrections for upgrade conditions 5 Since the SSD deficiency on 148 th Avenue is a result of a grade break in the centerline profile north of the site where the grade changes to approximately 9 percent, the average running speed should be used in the SSD calculation for southbound vehicles. According to the recent speed study, the average running speed is 33.7 mph. This results in a calculated SSD of 212 feet. Therefore, application of AASHTO policy results in an acceptable sight distance across the plat's entire 148 th Avenue SE frontage in both the northbound and southbound direction. Conclusion In order to determine whether Cam West can be required to provide SSD improvements across the entire plat frontage and beyond, the impacts of the proposed plat and the costs of such improvements must be assessed. (It should be noted that Cam West, as part of the plat development process, would provide frontage improvements on 148 th A venue SE to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks.) The SSD issues associated with this area of 148 th Avenue SE are preexisting and completely unrelated to the impacts of the proposed CamWest plat. There is no data that suggests the SSD condition on 148 th Avenue SE has created a safety problem or has significantly affected operational conditions 6 As discussed previuusly, ruad improvements to improve the existing SSD would be extremely costly and burdensome. Requiring the plat to fix an existing SSD condition which it did not create, and when there is no safety issue associated with the condition violates State and Federal law. Therefore, there is no legal basis to require this pre- existing SSD deficiency be corrected. 1 The speed study was taken from 12:00 AM Tuesday May 7 to 12:00 AM Wednesday May 8, 2001. The counters were stationed 50 to 75 feet north of the north property line , According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book (1984), page 143, "Design Speed is used in calculating downgrade corrections, average running speed in calculating upgrade corrections." \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 m · ' , . July 11,2003 Page 8 I , Based on the foregoing information, a variance to the King County Road Standards (1993) is sought to eliminate any requirement that Cam West reconstruct 14S'h A venue SE along the East Renton frontage to provide stopping sight distance based upon current administrative policy to use a design speed of IOmph over the speed limit standards. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 (j) -----------------_ ... I I Date: October 16, 2001 Subject: East Renton Property Concerning Sight Distance Voice Mail Message To: Gary Norris, Garry Struthers Associates From: Aileen McManus, King County Traffic Hi Gary this is Aileen McManus umm I got a answer back it looks like no we will not be requiring the stopping sight distance through that north section. We will require umm meet entering and stopping sight distance and the access point but not at the frontage umm as you I believe it was the north part of the frontage so umm if you have any further questions. I guess that means no variance required either so give me a call a (206) 263-6102. Thanks bye L03V0049 ITJ)~~~~W~f[}I lnl JUL 1 1 2003 I1dJ K.C. D.D.E.S. RE: CamWest I Sara Slatten From: Sent: To: Gary, Norris [garyn@gsassoc-inc.coml Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:15 PM Sara Slatten Subject: FW: CamWest fyi -----Original Message----- . From: Langley, Kristen [mailto:Kristen.Langley@METROKC.GOVj Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:55 AM To: 'Gary, Norris' Subject: RE: CamWest Any challenges with this? Mr. Norris: Page 1 of 2 We have reviewed the documentation that you have provided, re: the extent of off-site reconstruction required by the provision of a vertical alignment built to continuously achieve stopping sight distance along the plat frontage of 148th Avenue SE. You have suggested that a proportionality issue may be at hand in this instance, due to the proximity of the crest vertical curve in question, relative to the currently proposed plat boundary. The grade differential at this crest curve results in a lengthy reconstruction of the roadway, much of which would be off-site to the plat. Historically, the County has required both options available: (1) require the developer to reconstruct the entire frontage of the roadway as required to provide the design speed based alignment --even if the reconstruction extends beyond the frontage, and beyond the limits required merely to provide sight distance for the plat intersection(s), and (2) Reconstruct only that portion of the frontage as required to achieve sight distance at any plat intersection(s), and retain existing non-engineered alignments outside of tbose limits. Reconstruct tbe alignment at tbe time of otber development in tbe area, as necessitated by the need for adequate sigbt distance for tbat (future) project's intersections. It would appear that in the case under consideration, tbat --absent newinforrnation or a revision in tbis plat that might alter our opinion --we agree tbat tbe extent of off-frontage improvements could be disproportionate. The Applicant shall provide tbe full sigbt distance requirements from the King County Road Standards [KCRS) at the plat entrance(s), or apply for a Variance to the KCRS as provided for in KCRS 1.08. I expect, bowever, and will request of DOES, tbat appropriate provisions will be made in the design of the frontage improvements to facilitate the future reconstruction of this crest curve by others: developers, King County, successor agencies, etc .. It is a reasonable exercise of our discretion to make provisions for the eventual reconstruction of this roadway .-even if the actual requirement to reconstruct the roadway is not placed upon your client. Please contact me at 206 263-6121 if you bave any questions; Kris Langley Supervising Engineer Development Review Unit, King County DOT 206/263-6121 L03V0049 7/11/2003 lli)1E~tE~~tE~ \f\l JUL 1 1 Z003 KC. D.D.E.S. • Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Transportation Engineenng/Operations • Impact Studies. Design Services. Transportation Planning/ForecastJng Seattle Office: PO Box 65254 • Seattle, WA 98155 • Office/Fax (206) 361·7333 • Mobile (206) 999·4145 PMB 323 • WA 98052.0fflce 485·4663. Fax 398·5779 September 9,2004 King County Department of Transportation Attention: Craig Comfort, P.E. 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104 Subject: East Renton Property Variance L03V0049 -Variance Addendum Dear Craig, The following is an addendum to the July 11, 2003 Variance Request previously submitted on behalf of Cam West for the East Renton & Wedgewood properties on 148th Avenue SE. This addendum includes proposed vertical profile drawings for sight distance improvements to 148 th Avenue SE along portions of both project frontages. We provided King County with a "preferred" option (Option 2) vertical profile and cost estimate at our February 20, 2004 meeting. The preferred option included a proposed vertical profile that would provide a continuous 425 feet of stopping sight distance (SSD), based on a 45mph design speed, 3% grade factor, with a 2.0-foot object height The 2.0-foot object height represented a variance to current King County standards, which require a 0.5-foot object height. As a follow-up to that meeting, we have been asked to submit a profile that would provide a continuous 455 feet of stopping sight distance (SSD), based on a 45mph design speed, 6% grade factor, with a 2.0-foot object height We have included that profile, along with additional justification supporting the 2.0-foot object height versus the King County standard O.5-foot object height. Also, please note that Camwest has entered into contract with Northward Development to purchase the easterly 25 lots contained within the Wedgewood Plat (L03POOI8), located directly north of East Renton. CamWest & Northward are seeking a boundary line adjustment with DDES to eventually combine the easterly 25 lots to the East Renton Proposal. Combining portions of both projects results in a single plat with a consolidated access point at approximate Station 14+00. The following attachments are included with this submittal: ~ 148 th Avenue SE Vertical Roadway Profile, Option 28 (preferred), 455-foot SSD, 2.0' object height) Seattle Office (206) 361-7333 Come Visit Us at: www.tenw.com East Side Office (425) 485-4663 r '~ Transportation !neering Northwest • Page 2 ~ 14Sth Avenue SE Vertical Roadway Profile, Option 2C (Full Standard), 455-foot SSD, 0.5' object height) ~ Alternatives Cost Estimate Sight Distance Summary As shown in the attached "Option 2B" drawing, a continuous SSD of 455 feet wou1q be provided along the roadway for the length of the proposed vertical curve, including the site access location (Sta 14+00 approx.) based on a 2.0' object height. Full Entering Sight Distance (ESD) would be provided at the site access, with 620 feet in both directions along 14Sth Ave SE. Existing driveways that would be impacted by the proposed project were examined, to determine ESD under existing, Option 2B, and Option 2C conditions. Results are summarized below: Location ESD Looking ESD Looking North South EX Dwy A (9+95) Ex. Condition 545' 620' Preferred Option (2B) 600' 620' Full KCRS Option (2C) 620' 620' EX ~ B (11+94) Ex. Condition 517' 620' Preferred Option (2B) 545' 620' Full KCRS Option (2C) 620' 620' Ex D~ C (13+81) Ex. Condition 401 ' 620' Preferred Option (2B) 620' 620' Fu11 KCRS Option (2C) 620' 620' Ex Dwy D (16+71) Ex. Condition 620' 570' Preferred Option (2B) 620' 545' Fu11 KCRS Option (2C) 620' 620' In summary, ESD for existing driveways A, B, and C would be improved with the preferred option over the existing condition. ESD would slighdy decrease at Driveway D for vehicles looking south as a result of the significant roadway cut in this area. This distance would decrease by only 25', and www.tenw.Com PO Box 65254. Seattle, WA 98155 Office/Fax (206) 361-7333. Mobile (206) 999-4145 • • Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 3 would still exceed AASHTO minimum recommended ESD requirements. Note that at all existing driveways, including Driveway D, the preferred option would provide ESD that exceeds the proposed upcoming KCRS 2004 ESD Standards (500 feet minimum, 45mph design speed, Table 2.1). ] IIstificatio n The preferred option, (2B), which would require roadway reconstruction to provide for a continuous 455-foot SSD with a 2.0-foot object height, would include reconstruction of approximately 700 feet of roadway, with a maximum roadway cut of 3.0'. The improvement would impact thee existing driveways on the east side of 148th • The fuJI standard option, (2C), which would require roadway reconstruction to provide for a continuous 455-foot SSD with a 0.5-foot object height, would include reconstruction of approximately 1200 feet of roadway, with a maximum roadway cut of 5.1'. The fuJI standard option would also include a 4.4' fill at the sag vertical curve in the vicinity of NE 10 th Street, approximate Sta 20+00. The improvement would impact four existing driveways on the east side of 148th , and well as residents served by NE 10th Street. The fuJI standard option would require significantly more utility relocations than the preferred option, including 870 If of water line (vs. 640 If with preferred), 250 If of gas line (vs. 100 If with preferred), and 1170 If phone/overhead line (vs. 650 If with preferred). Further, the 5.1' roadway cut with the full standard option occurs at the existing residential driveway at Station 16+71. This deeper cut would require re-grading much further up the driveway than the preferred option, creating additional impact to the home owners. Per the attached cost estimates, the preferred option cost is estimated at $232,000, with the full standard option estimated at $381,000, representing a cost difference of nearly $150,000. The significant cost differential is due to the extensive street section that would need to be lowered (and raised to the north) if the fuJI King County standard option were implemented. Additional cost differential is due to the significant utility relocations associated with the fuJI standard option. Conclusions In summary, this Variance Addendum proposes construction of Option 2B, which would include a vertical curve along 148th Ave SE providing a continuous SSD of 455', based on a 2.0' object height. Safety would be significantly improved over the existing condition, for future East Renton & Wedgewood residents, as well as for through-vehicles and residents along 148th Ave SE. Entering Sight Distance at the site access would exceed the current KCRS ESD requirement of 620'. Entering Sight Distance at the existing driveways affected by the project would exceed the proposed www.tenw.com PO Box 65254 • Seattle, WA 98155 Office/Fax (206) 361-7333. Mobile (206) 999-4145 East Renton & Wedgewood Properties 148th Avenue SE Sight Distance Deficiency Cost Comparisons for Correction Alternatives Total Cost Cost per lot Option 28 $ 232,402 $ 2,554 Option 2C $ 381,453 $ 4,192 Cost Difference: $ 149,05_1 _ -- Notes King County guidelines with AASHTO object height King County guidelines with 6 inch object height ----------• • ~ EasfRenton & W8dgeWood Frontages 148th Avenue SE Road Lowering Option 28: Single entrance access to both properties KC Guidelines with AASHTO objeet height f4s MPH design speed. 6% downgrade ,SSD Required G 455 feet, Drivers eye a 3.5 feet Objeet· 2.0 Iaet rMlsc~c~c"',.; .;"', • , . , .', ,.J " I 11New drivewav tie-ins 2 EA 1.200.00 2,400. ,I wood fence 190 LF 3.50 665.uu I 3jWood fence replacement 190 LF 15.00 2.650 nn • • ~ ·-.r·O.OO 250. !EsUmated Tot;! i3i.402.ul • • East Renton & Wedgewood Frontages 148th Avenue SE Road Lowerlng Option 2C:~ngle entranc~~cceaa to botlljlrol"'rtles 4728 SY UtlUtles 1 12 inch Waterline removal 870 LF 10.00 2 12 inch Wate~ine replacement 870 LF 25.00 3 Wate~ine -misc fittings 1 LS 1,500.00 4 Water -Import 638 Ton 15.00 5 Relocate Fire Hydrant 1 EA 1500.00 6 Meter retocates 3 EA 725.00 7 Gas replacement 250 LF 20.00 8 Gas -ImPOrt 183 Ton 15.00 9 Pole relocatas 4 EA 8,000.00 10 Phone replacement 1170 LF 40.00 11 Culvert replacement 108 LF 20.00 12 Existina Culvert removal 108 LF 10.00 13 Coble 1V 1150 LF 15.00 14 Traffic control 1 LS 9,750.00 Subtotel [Misc· 1 New driveway tie-ins 3 EA 1,200.00 2 Removal wood fench 190 LF 3.00 3 Wood fence reolacement 190 LF 15.00 4 MaH box relocations 1 LS 500.00 Subtotel 8,700.00 21,750.00 1,500.00 9,570.00 1,500.00 2,175.00 5,000.00 2,750.00 32,000.00 46,800.00 2,160.00 1,080.00 17,250.00 9,750.00 161,885,00 3,600.00 570.00 2,850.00 500.00 7520,00 /&1---------~-~ij Estimated T otel 381,453,34 KC GUIdelines With 6 incli Object heIght 45 MPH design speed, 6% downgrade SSD Required = 455', Drivers eye = 3.5' Obiect = 6 inch Assume waterline adjustment can be edjusled w/o removal past scope of worK 15 days • • . . T ransportationtgineering Northwest • Page 4 upcoming KCRS 2004 ESD requirement of 500'. The Option 2B estimated construction cost is significantly less than that associated with Option 2C, with nearly the same benefit, and far less impacts to residents and the motoring public during construction. We appreciate your review of the attached materials. Please feel free to call me with any questions at (425) 806-9236. Sincerely, Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC Chris Bicket, P.E. Design Manager www.tenw.com PO Box 65254 • Seattle, WA 98155 Omce/Fax (206) 361·7333. Mobile (206) 999·4145 . , • -. GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: To: September 12, 2003 Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. From: Gary A. Norris, P.E. Subject: Variance for Sight Distance, Response to Comments Memorandum 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, W A 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Project Name: East Renton Project No.:01-002.04 P: __ T: RECEIVED SEP 1 51003 KINGCOUNlY LAND USE SERVICES The following memorandum was prepared in response to the July 29, 2003 letter from Pete Dye of King County to Camwest Development regarding Road Variance File No. L03V0049 for the East Renton Subdivision Project. The letter requested the following additional information: a. Please submit a road proji'lefar 148 '11 Ave. SE to address the sight distance issues along the frontage (!fthe subdivision. The road profile should be prepared onfu" size plan sheets showing the entering and stopping sight distances at various locations along the frontage as described in the letterform Mr. Gary Norris dated July 11, 2003. Please note that the letter from Mr. Norris indicares that both entering and stopping sight distance meets County standards at the south propert>' fine; however, the data shown in the sight distance table indicates that stopping sight distance is below standards at 325 feet. Please clarifv and demonstrate u'hellIer or /lot County standards are satisfied at the south property lille (projeCT entrance). h. The sight distance evaluation and profile should also address the sight distance design standards and potential impacts for existing driveways along 148'" Ave, SE in the immediate I'icinitv of the proposed subdil'ision. On the road profile, shOl\' the location of existing driveways 011 the east side of 148th Ave. SE and rhe existing driveway to the hOlnwJOd subdivision. Stopping and entering distances along the 148 th Avenue SE frontage of the East Renton subdivision were calculated in CAD, according to the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS), using the 148'" Avenue SE profile provided by Triad Associates. Table I below summarizes the stopping and entering sight distances, as calculated using this profile. The road profile was established to illustrate sight distance for those driveways impacting the site frontage. Where the available profile didn't provide sufficient data, sight distance was not provided for access locations that did not impact the plat frontage. At those locations, N/M (not measured) is indicated in the table. Please note that the profile analysis for entering sight distance i.'i only an approximation as only the centerline profile is provided and entering sight distance is measured 10 feet from the traveled way. Those locations with stopping and entering values below the required KCRS values are highlighted. e:12001 projeclsI01-002.04 easl rentonlsighl distance memo 09-11·03.doc 9112103 (g) Memorandum September 12, 2003 Page 2 • Table LSight Distance Location on 148 th Avenue SE Driveway Sta 2+ 11.85 L T NorthboundlLooking North SouthboundlLooking South Driveway Sta 8+33.99 RT NorthboundlLooking North SouthboundlLooking Sooth Sooth Property Line (Sta 8+52) NorthboundlLooking North SouthboundlLooking South Driveway Sta.8+79.60 LT NorthboundlLooking North SouthboundlLooking South Req.' 400' 400' 400' 400' 400' 400' 400' 400' SE 120" Street (Site Access) Sta 10+00.00 NorthboundlLooking North 400' Southbound/Looking South 400' Driveway Sta II +83.60 RT Northbound/Looking North 400' Southbound/Lookiog South 400' Driveway Sta 13+80.97 RT NorthbouodlLooking North 425' Southbound/Looking South 400' Stopping 100' south of North Property Line (Sta 14+ II) Northbound 425' Southbound 400' North Property Line (Sta 15+ II) NorthboundlLooking Nonh 425' SouthboundlLooking South 400' Driveway (Ironwood) Stu 16+42.92 L T NorthboundfLooking North 425' SouthboundlLooking South 400' SE 117'h Street (Sta 19+95) NorthboundlLooking North 425' SouthboundlLooking South 40()' -. Entering Prolile Req. 2 Prolile NIM 620' 569' 400' 620' NIM 395' 620' 620' 400' 620' 547' 405' 620' 620' 400' 620' 555' - 425' 620' 620' 400' 620' 567' 425' 620' 620' 400' 620' 620' 425' 620' 523' 355' 620' 620' 425' 620' 404' 326' 620' 620' 425' NIM N/M 310' NIM N/M 367' 620' 620' 244' 620' 620' 385' 620' N/M 400' 62()' 616' 425' 620' NIM N/M 620' 553' I) Required Slopping Sight Distance (SSD) -Based on KCRS, 1993 Section 2.12. and Tublc 2.1 using a Design Speed of 45-mph (Posted Speed of 35 mph plus 101. SSD from the south is adjusted to account for the J percent uO\I,'ngraue per Section 2.12, where applic~lble. 2) Required Entering Sight Distance (ESD) -Based on KCRS. 1993 Section 2.13 an<.i Table 2.1 using a Design Speed of 45 mph (Posted Speed of 35 mph plus 10l. Nn'l Nol Measured. A~ shown in Table L in response to Item '-l. stopping and entering sight Jistance requirements are met at the proposed site access (SE 120'" Street) and stopping sight distance (SSD) is met at the e:\2001 projects\01·002.04 east renton\sight distance memo 09-1 1·03.doc 9/12/03 (g) r--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.. .. Memorandum September 12, 2003 Page 3 • -. south property line. Entering sight distance (ESD) is measured from the profile as 555 feet with a required amount of 620 feet. Again please note that the vertical profile can only provide an approximation of the entering sight distance. In response to Item b, stopping and entering sight distance is provided at other driveway locations along 148'" Avenue SE. Per the KCRS, SSD standards are not met at the following driveways: Station 8+33.99 RT, Station 11+83.60 RT, Station 13+80.97 RT, 100 feet south of the north property line (Station 14+11), the north property line (Station 15+11), and Station 16+42 LT (Ironwood). Entering sight distance is not met at the following driveways: Station 2+ 11.85 L T, Station 8+33.99 RT. Station 8+79.60 LT, south property line (Station 8+52), Station II +83.60 RT, Station 13.80.97 RT, Station 16+42.92 LT (Ironwood), and SE 117'" Street. Please note that the proposed variance requested in the July II memo was only for stopping sight distance as requested by King County, not entering sight distance. Also note that application of the 40-mph design speed will result in acceptable SSD values at all driveway locations represented in Table I. As indicated in the July 11,2003 variance request. a design speed of 40 mph requires an SSD value of 325 feet without grade and 345 feet with grade. Where the required value in Table I is 400 feet the SSD value for 40 mph is 325 feet and where the value is 425 feet the 40- mph value is 345 feet. Since application of the 40-mph design speed provides acceptable SSD at all driveway locations and the 85'" percentile speed along the 148'" Avenue SE corridor as measured in the speed study noted in the July 11,2003 memo is 40 mph, the impact of the substandard SSD values along the plat frontage on traffic operations is should be negligible. This conclusion is further substantiated by the fact that even though the SSD condition currently exists, there have been no recorded accidents on this section of 148'" Avenue SE. Comparing the field measurements provided in the July II. 2003 variance request memo and the profile values indicates a close correlation. A comparison of the field profile data is presented in Table 2. Table 2, Comparison to Field Observed SSD Location on 148 th Avenue SE Profile l Obscrved1 Required 3 South Property Line (Sta 8+52) Northbound 405' 425' 400' Southbound 400' 325'+ 400'- 100' south of North Property Line (Sta 14+11) Northbound 425' 325'+ 425' Southbound 310' 318' 400' North Property Line (Sta 15+ I I) Northbound 367' 350' 425' Southbound 244' 240' 400' I) Protile. Calculated using Auto Cadd profile provided by Tri'ld Associates. 2) Observed. SSD observed in the field by GSA. Observed values with a "+" indicate additional sight distance available but was not measured at the lim\.! field measurements were comluctcu . .3) Rcquireu Slopping Sighl Distance (SSD) -Based on KCRS. 1993 Section 2,12. and Table 2.1 using a Design Speed (If 45-mph (posted Srccd of 3S mph plus 10). SSD from the south is adjusted to account for the 3 pcn:cnI downgrade per Section 2.12. whc["I.,' applicable. e;\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\sight distance memo 09-11-03.doc 9/12/03 (9) . ~ '. Memorandum September 12, 2003 Page 4 • -. As shown in'Table 2, there is a very close correlation between the field observed values and the profile values with the exception of the values where the field measurements were attempting to illustrate a reduced standard could be achieved, The reduced standard was to provide 325 feet of SSD assuming a design speed of 40 mph that is 5 mph over the posted speed, In reviewing the table, it appears that required SSD in the southbound direction using a 45-mph design speed can be achieved at the south property line. In addition, according to the profile, acceptable SSD exists in the northbound direction 100 feet south of the north property line. Therefore, the locations identified in the July 11 memo where we continue to have an unacceptable SSD condition is 100 feet south of the north property line in the southbound direction and in both directions at the north property line. Again, this is created by the break in the centerline roadway grade at Station 16+50 (approximately). Conclusions In reviewing the information presented in the memorandum the following conclusions are reached. 1) There is a close correlation between the field observed data presented in the July II memo and the profile information presented in this memo. In most cases the field observed values understate the values obtained from the profile. Therefore. the information presented previously is valid. 2) Stopping and entering sight distance per KCRS is provided at the site access intersection with 148'" Avenue SE. 3) Stopping and Entering Sight Distance values per the KCRS are not achieved at other access locations along the plat frontage. However. with application of the 40 mph design speed acceptable SSD is achieved at all driveway locations. 4) The East Renton plat is not expected to create a significant impact on SSD at the other driveway locations along the 148'" Avenue SE frontage. Since the 85'" percentile speed in this section of 148'" Avenue SE is 40 mph, application of the 40-mph design speed eliminates the substandard SSD conditions at the other driveways. Furthermore. there is no accident history to document that safety is an issue along this section of the 148'" Avenue SE corridor. 5) The plat of East Renton should not be required to design and construct frontage improvement to meet SSD. per KCRS standards, across the entire plat frontage Recommendation Based 011 the foregoing evaluation, there does not appear to be a significant design deficiency in the 148'" Avenue SE roadway in relation to the proposed plat that would require reconstruction of the entire 148'" Avenue SE frontage. Furthermore. the substandard SSD per the 1993 KCRS is a pre-existing condition that is not subject to mitigation by the applicant. Therefore. it is recommended that the King County Department of Transportation grant a variance to the SSD design standards on 148'" Avenue SE in regards to the plat of East Renton. I believe this addresses your request. If you have any questions. please give me a call. Thanks. e:\2001 projecls\Ol-002.04 east renton\sight distance memo 09-11-03.doc 9/12103 (9) !1i scanlon,!jOdL) ~~~~: t To: ~ SUbje~ ---------------- • Comfort, Craig Friday, March 26, 2004 11 :52 AM Scanlon, Jodi East Reton Property Plat Variance L03V0049 • @ Please check the accident history for the last 10 years on this plat frontage on 148th Avenue SE between SE 117th Street and SE 122 Street. Thanks, Craig C. 1 Intersection Magic VER 6.680 King County, WA 03/26/2004 Accident listing 01/01/1990 -12/31/2000 148th Ave Se 1170.000 to 1220.000 Sorted by <DATE;TIME;ACC#> QUADRANT CASE ID DATE TIME ACC SEVERITY PED AGE 4 4 90-130521 01/26/1990 22:55 Injury Acc 0 93-150257 04/18/1993 13:10 Property Damage 0 WEATHER LIGHTING ROAD COLLISION TYPE Clear/Partly Cleu Dark no street Ii Dry OD all others Clear/Partly Cleu Daylight Dry Entering driveway Page: 1 DISTAN STREET 1 o 600 148m AVE SE 148m AVE SE ~\ STREET 2 SE 120TH ST SE 120TH ST t • • , Comfort, Craig From: Sent: To: Subject: Sara and Chris: • Comfort, Craig Friday, March 26: 2004 11 :42 AM 'sslatten@camwest.com'; 'bicket@tenw.com' East Renton Property Variance L03V0049 • The variance committee and the County Road Engineer met on your project and reviewed the two proposed profile alternatives. We would like to see an additional profile: one meeting 455 feet of SSD (based upon KCRS downgrade adjustments for 6% and 45 MPH) and utilizing a 2 foot target. This profile will be slightly lower than your preferred alternative that I calculate meets 425 feet of SSD with the 2 foot target. You should prepare an addendum to the submitted road variance that includes: 1. The additional profile. 2. A reassessment of the alternative costs (the variance committee did not understand the minimal discrepancy between .the costs of the alternatives, 100K vs. 120K). 3. Please add justification to the variance in terms of potential difficulties in lowering the road to KCRS in terms of difficulUimpossible driveway adjustments and utility relocations (if applicable). Please assess the SSD and ESD impacts/changes for the future access for the plat to the north (Ironwood) and for the driveways along the lowered profile. 1 () • RE: CamWest • -----Original Message ---- From: Gary, Norris [mailto:garynta)gsassoc-inc.coml Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:40 AM To: kristen.Langley@metrokc.gov Cc: michael.romano@gte.net; Joan, Smelser Subject: Aster Park Hi Kristen, We have obtained the additional information necessary to respond to your comments dated January 18,2002. First, we found the 85th percentile speed to exceed 40 mph thereby justifying the 70 percent volume reduction in the signal warrant analysis. This condition may however change as improvements are installed and development occurs. At any rate, for the purposes of this analysis a signal would be warranted. This mitigation would be consistent with the request of the WSDOT. In regards to the pipeline project volume information, the difference between the two is simply what was requested. The Stone Ridge analysis requested all development proposals in the Newcastle Planning area. Aster Park used all projects in the vicinity of the subject intersection. There are several issues in regards to using the various sources. Pipeline projects are limited to projects that have an application date prior to the subject proposal and also projects that are expected to proceed. Use of all projects within a concurrency planning area does not meet this criteria. Therefore to rectify the difference between the two lists in an appropriate manner will take a considerable amount of additional time. The question is it really worth it when we are willing to concede a traffic signal is now warranted with the application of the 85th percentile speed on SR 900. Please advise. Thanks, Gary L03V0049 7/11/2003 Page 2 of 2 • f5)[E~[E~WlEro' ml JUl 11 2003 lVJ K.G. D.D.E.S. -----~------------------------------ East Renton Property varianCei3vo049 • Comfort, Craig From: Chris Bicket [bicket@tenw.comj Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:45 AM To: Comfort, Craig Cc: sslatten@camwest.com Subject: RE: East Renton Property Variance L03V0049 Hi Craig -please scratch the Monday .13th 10AM option -it turns out I have a conflict, tx. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Bicket [mailto:bicket@tenw.comj Sent: Monday, September 06,200411:02 AM To: Comfort, Craig Cc: Chris Bicket; 'sslatten@camwest.com' Subject: RE: East Renton Property Variance L03V0049 Page l.of 1 Hi Craig -Long time no talk. We'Ve gotten back in to this and would like to submit our Variance Addendum/materials. We thought it best to have a submittal meeting with you to go over every1hing and simplify your review if that's ok. What is your availability for the following options: . Thursday Sept 9th, 10AM or 2PM Friday Sept 10, 10AM Monday Sept 13, 10AM or 2PM Wed Sept 15, 3PM Thanks! -Chris. 09/07/2004 -----Original Message----- From: Comfort, Craig [mailto:Craig.Comfort@METROKC.GOVl Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 11:42 AM To: 'sslatten@camwest.com'; 'bicket@tenw.com'. Subject: East Renton Property Variance L03V0049 Sara and Chris: The variance committee and the County Road Engine.er met on your project and reviewed the two proposed profile alternatives .. We would like to see an additional profile: one meeting 455 feet of SSD (based upon KCRS downgrade adjustments for 6% and 45 MPH) and utilizing a 2 foot target. This profile will be slightly lower than your preferred alternative that I calculate meets 425 feet of SSD with the 2 foot target. . You should prepare an addendum to the submitted road variance that includes: 1. The additional profile. 2. A reassessment of the alternative costs (the variance committee did not understand the minimal discrepancy between the costs of the alternatives, 1 OOK vs. 120K). 3. Please add justification to the variance in terms of potential difficulties in lowering the road to KCRS in terms of difficulVimpossible driveway adjustments and utility relocations (if applicable). Please assess the SSD and ESD impacts/changes for the future access for the plat to the north (Ironwood) and for the driveways along the lowered profile. .' i ,... , .:.; .. r 4 <® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 February 27,2003 TO: Paulette Nonnan, P.E., Acting County Road Engineer FR:~ers, P.E., Development Engineer . RE: Preliminary Plat of East Renton, File L02P0005 Our office is currently reviewing the preliminary glat of East Renton located on the west side of 148 th Avenue SE in the vicinity ofSE 120 Street. During the evaluation of required road improvements for 148th, it was detennined by DDES that the existing vertical aligmnent along the plat frontage does not meet King County Road Standards and existing stopping sight distances are below desired minimums because of a substandard crest curve. We have infonned the applicant that urban road improvements are required along the plat frontage, which would involve reconstruction of the existing alignment to meet County standards. However, the applicant indicates they are not required to perfonn the improvements nor are they required to seek approval of a road variance application based on discussions they had with a County Traffic Engineer prior to making application. To assist in resolving this matter, I would like to receive your comments regarding the applicable code requirements and variance procedures. As shown in the attached letters from the applicant's traffic engineer, Mr. Gary Norris indicates that County staff from the Department of Transportation evaluated this matter during the pre"application process and detennined that the applicant would not need to reconstruct the road aligmnent and a road variance application would not be required. The road profile and sight distance analysis prepared by Mr, Norris shows that the entrance to the project is located along the southern portion of the crest curve to allow compliance with sight distance standards. A note shown on the plat map indicates that the entering sight distance is less than the required 620 feet, but this note may be incorrect. King County designates 148t1i Avenue SE as a collector arterial with a design speed of 45 mph. The enclosed road profile shows the existing road aligmnent and the notable change in grade along the northern portion ofthe plat frontage,· Several existirig driveways are located on the east side of 148th Avenue SE which may be affected by our decision for ,----rr---r.n-----------------------------------------------·· ---~. i '.... ,i., , " Paulette Nonnan February 27,2003 Page 2 '. • the frontage improvements. I should also note that a developer recently met with our office to discuss a new subdivision on the northerly parcel adjacent to East Renton and the frontage improvements for this project involve the same substandard vertical curve on 148 th Avenue SE. As outlined in King County Code 21A.28.l20Al, all new development shall be served by . a public or private street that meets County road standards, or is fonnally declared acceptable by the County Road Engineer. I have attached a copy of this code citation for your convenience. Also, would you consider the adoption of the County's arterial road map constitute a 'fonnal' declaration? To proceed with our review of the East Renton plat, I would appreciate receiving either your written conclusion on the acceptability of . this roadway or a statement indicating a road variance is required to evaluate the design requirements. I appreciate your help in resolving this matter and if you desire to meet or discuss these issues further, please contact me at 296-7178. Enclosure CC: Lanny Henoch Pete Dye Kristen Langley Craig Comfort • • , • , • • • • • • Lowering 2 • I Items Qty Unit Unit Cost Total I Notes 1 Road removal 2 Export demo pavina 3 Roadaradina-148th 4 Sub-base replacement 5 A TB-replacement 6 Class B-replacement Additional curb/thickened 7 edoe -East side 8 Traffic Control 9 Stripina 10 Reqrade swale 11 Swale rock Subtotal \Estimated Total 1104 809 296 340 1104 1104 0 1 1204 371 105 SY 5.00 5,518.33 Assume l' depth of pavement CY 10.00 8,093.56 BCY 5.00 1,480.00 Ton 15.00 5,104.46 .5' CSTC SY 11.50 12,692.17 5" depth SY 7.54 8,321.65 3" depth LF 2.00 0.00 LS 8,450.00 8,450.00 13 days LF 2.50 3,010.00 Foa line both sides, double center stripe LF 4.00 1,484.00 Ton 15.00 1,571.19 55,725.35 122,136.35\ 148th Lowering 2 • uu.JHems . Qty Unit Unit Cost Total I Notes I ~.'§:i·~5'·~":\Jiijil:l~~.~~.~~.i:.¥M·~r~::::i~~i;;:WM::.;:W~;:5t~:.:.#;:;.:ijj:;:.~;:.t=!:.~.~.::.0};W.;::;.:·:W·~·~{'W.~.~t,:·~·:t~j·0:.::i:?::.~.~:~::~~:miw:~~m:.:~::;:~~.~:~::~m~~~~~~J~~~m~~:.~:.:?..::.:~:?N..:m::~~::~::::::~m::~::::~::~~:;:~::M:~::~::::::;:~~~~~tH~~V{i.i~::WM:;::::::~:::::~!! :.;~:;:::;:)::::,,:' . .. :':':':':~':'. :.:.: .•• :::.::.~.::::::~:!::;::.::;,:;~.:::.:~: :::;:;.::;.:.::::~; :::·::::':::::::;:::::::::::'::~::·::~~:!:~~·:::~·::':·::i:!: ,::::·,·:W:::\ :::::':':=:::': :,:,.::-.. :::::::;:::::::.::,:-~::.::;::::::.::,::::::;:::::::.,"::::.:,::::,;: ":;::!:::::':;::=::~i:::::::;' .:::;:::::~:.:~:::::~ ::::::.;.:::~:~:.::::::::;:;:, :::::::::.::'::.:;:.:.,:.;.::: .:.:.:::.:.~;:.~:.: :;::::::::~:.:: 1 Road removal 1151 SY 5.00 5,756.67 Assume l' depth of pavement 2 Export demo pavinlL 844 CY 10.00 8,443.11 3 Road grading -148th 859 BCY 5.00 4,296.11 4 Sub-base replacem ent 355 Ton 15.00 5,324.92 .5' CSTC 5 ATB-replacement 1151 SY 11.50 13,240.33 5" depth 6 Class B-replacement 1151 SY 7.54 8,681.05 3' depth 7 Taper 62.5 SY 19.04 1,190.00 45:1 Taper on west side of 148th Additional curb/thickened 8 edge -West side 315 LF 2.00 630.00 9 Traffic Control 1 LS 7,150.00 7,150.00 11 days 10 Striping 1256 LF 2.50 3,140.00 Fog line both sides, double center stripe 11 Regrade swale 314 LF 4.00 1,256.00 12 Swale rock 89 Ton 15.00 1,329.79 Subtotal 60,437.98 :':~:.':::::::::: •• :;::,~.:> "::::::::;::':::';:::;:;:::-::':<::':::':;:::'::::::~: :;:::::::~ ::" ::;::!::';:.:"::: :':!:::':~:::::::::::::::::::::::::'::: .::;::;,::::;",:.:::::,:.:;:::~.:.:~:::::::::;:::;:,:;!:::" ;:';';::';;:;:::: .:.:::~.:.:.~ .. !:::;.::::;;!,.:: ::::;,:;:;:.:~.::~:::.:.:.:. .,.:.:.:.::::;!::;!,::: ':;;':;:':"';:':;:::::::;:~~::':"::':'" .': :.'.:.:.:.: .. ::,::::::::::::::':.::::: .•. :::.:.:.;.:.:.'.,: Assume waterline adjustment can be adjusted w/o removal past scope of 1 12 inch Waterline removal 265 LF 10.00 2,650.00 work 2 12 inch Waterline replacemen 265 LF 25.00 6,625.00 3 Waterline -mise fittings 1 LS 1,200.00 1,200.00 4 Water -Import 194 Ton 15.00 2,915.00 5 Relocate Fire Hydrant 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500.00 6 Meter relocates a EA 725.00 0.00 7 Gas replacement 0 LF 20.00 0.00 8 Gas -Import a Ton 15.00 0.00 9 Pole relocates 1 EA 8,000.00 8,000.00 10 Phone replacement 334 LF 40.00 13,360.00 11 Culvert replacement 35 LF 20.00 700.00 12 Existing Culvert removal 35 LF 10.00 350.00 13 Cable1V 0 LF 15.00 0.00 14 Traffic control 1 LS 4,550.00 4,550.00 7 days Subtotal 41,850.00 1 New drivewa tie-ins 1 EA 1,200.00 1,200.00 2 Removal wood fence 130 LF 3.00 390.00 3 Wood fence re lacement 130 LF 15.00 1,950.00 4 Mail box relocations 1 LS 250.00 250.00 Subtotal 3790.00 IEstimated Total 1.06,077.981 • 11/04/2003 22:29 425-519-0309 GARRV STRUTHERS ASSO PAGE 01/05 • • • GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. To: Craig Comfort King County DOT Phone: (206)263-6109 Fa" (206)296-0176 RE: Speed Study Fax Transmittal 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, W A 980054446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 5 I 9-0309 (fax) Date: Noveembcr 4, 2003 Project No,: P: T: Project Name: East Renton HMo Copy; 0 No D Yes. Via From; Gary A. Norris, P,E, Please find ,2 pages including cover sheet in this transmittal. [8J Review & Comment 0 For yom use 0 For yom approval 0 FYI ~ As requested Hi Cra.ig. Please find attached the speed study for 148'" Avenue SE south of SE 117" Street as requested for your variance analys;, ror Ea"t Renton, If you have any questions, please give me a call. Thanks, Gary This rax is considered PRIVILBGED and CONFIDENTIAL infllrmation int.ended only for the usc of the ~)ddTc:.;see. Plea.<:e nntify U!i\ at the numbe1' above If YOll have received thi~ fax hy mi~tak;e, Thank you. \\!1£.t1l'1\aln_O\en~I2QO' Ololoet~01·00::!,04 1'I:1~ r..,ron\I.,~ trOln~ml!tlll .~h'*t • 4pMl:iaMIy 11""O~.doc 1 l/1t'OJ (g) 11/04/2003 22:29 425-519-0309 • Titlel BE 148th Street Titlc2 SE 117 Street ~. __ .:....;;Ren;;;: ton Bb 'lea Cia .. Gap [Sec'l SIB Errors . __ ..... Data File : R<nton GARRY STRUTHERS ASSO Traffic Count Consultants, IDe. 13623·1 84th Aw:nue NE Woodinville, WA 98072 Direction: SB • PAGE 02/05 Site: 27 Prit1tCd : 31 ?161 Pi&<: I ~--- --- ,/ GARRV STRUTHERS ASSO PAGE 03/05 11/04/2003 22:2g 425-51g-030g • Traffic Count Consultants, Inc .• 13623·184th Avenue NE Woodinville, WA 98072 Titlel Site: 27 1}t1el .' Date: 05/08/01 Tit Beg;,,· 01:00 2 0 0 0 I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 02:00 I 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 03:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 04:00 II 0 0 0 I S 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 37 05:00 24 0 0 I 3 7 6 6 1 0 ° 0 0 0 35 06:00 40 0 0 I 7 14 9 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 35 07:00 S7 I 1 0 11 12 17 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 08:00 43 0 0 I 8 17 7 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 34 09:00 66 0 0 9 23 19 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 10:00 36 0 0 1 8 12 9 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 34 11:00 65 1 1 7 12 26 12 5 1 ° 0 0 0 0 31 i2:PM 73 0 0 8 17 23 14 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 32 01:00 40 ° 1 2 4 19 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 02:00 57 0 I 1 7 26 17 4 0 0 0 0 0 I 34 03;00 102 I 3 9 26 27 22 11 3 ° 0 0 0 0 32 04:00 98 I 0 2 10 41 28 15 I 0 0 0 0 0 34 05:00 108 0 1 1 12 39 39 12 2 I I 0 0 0 35 06:00 108 1 0 4 10 34 39 17 I 1 0 0 0 1 35 07:00 71 0 0 7 16 23 17 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 32 08:00 58 0 3 3 16 19 • 7 0 0 ° 0 I I 33 09:00 3. 0 0 4 3 II 7 8 3 ° 0 0 0 0 35 10:00 20 0 3 0 1 6 3 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 36 1,1:00 10 a 1 0 I 3 2 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 34 Daily 1,135 5 15 61 199 388 284 145 27 2 3 2 1 3 33 Total. -OA 1.3 5.4 17.5 34.2 25,0 12.8 2.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0,3 ofT""" Pet< Spcods 10"0. 15% 50% 85% 90% 25.8 27.3 33.7 40.4 42.4 10 MPH PA .. Speed 30·40 Number in pace 672 %inp3C8 59.2 Speed I!Ja:eeded ru!!!ll ~ ~ -Ilf 3.3 0 .• 0.4 Totals 38 9 4 Oata File: Rttlton Printed: 519101 Page : Titlel Titl02 11/04/2003 22:29 BE 148th Street BE 117 Street Title, Renton ir . '':Ies Clu. Cap[S-j 425-519-0309 • GARRY STRUTHERS ASSO PAGE 04/05 TrafI'ie COIlllt Consultant.1. Inc. • 13623-I84th Avenue NE Woodinville, WA 98072 Site: 27 Direction: NB Tae!day V.bide. 1,391 !AIIPeakHour: 07:15 Faclor: 0.91 I PM P •• kHour: 04:45 Factor: 0.86 5/8 Erron I Axle. lfJed: A: 98.00 % B : 98.00 % I AYR AxIes1Vehicl. 2.02 I AYR Two Axle Spacll 9.2 fl. Sl)eed I Avg Speed: 37.0 MJ>[, I PerceDIiI.,.IO%: 30.5 15%: 31.4 50%: 37.S 85%: 43.S ~O%: 44.5 0.4 75.4 16.7 O.~ 6.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1).4 B.o 8.2 8 . .2 ~.8 ~.3 :;., 4.1 3.1 3.9 3.'1 2.2 2~.2 . -.,' DAI4 File: RonIOn P,..: 1 ------------------------ 11/04/2003 22:29 425-519-0309 GARRY STRUTHERS ASSO PAGE 05/05 • Traffic Count Consultants, Inc .• 13623-184th Avenue NE Woodinville, WA 98072 Title! : SE 148th Street Site: 27 Title2; : SE 117 Street Date: 05108101 Ti~ : Renton Direction: NB Beg>.... To!lIl 1.14 15-19 20·24 25-29 3()'34 3S-39 40-44 45-49 SO-54 '5-5. 60-64 65-69 70-99 Avg Tima MPH MPH MPII MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH 12:AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 01:00 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 .7 02:00 I 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 03:00 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 47 04:00 • 0 0 0 I 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 05:00 21 0 0 0 0 1 6 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 41 06;00 116 0 1 1 2 15 34 4<i 9 6 2 0 0 0 40 07:00 191 0 1 0 • 25 67 72 17 2 2 I 0 0 39 08:00 161 0 0 0 • 52 48 43 4 4 1 0 0 0 37 O9:QO 75 0 0 4 7 24 24 13 2 1 0 0 0 0 35 10:00 46 1 0 0 0 10 18 13 3 1 0 0 0 0 38 11:00 68 0 0 3 • 23 23 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 35 lUM 54 0 0 1 6 20 16 9 0 2 0 0 0 0 35 01:00 ,2 0 0 0 5 17 18 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 36 02:00 63 0 1 2 4 16 27 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 35 03:00 77 1 0 1 • 29 27 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 04:00 80 1 1 0 4 22 27 22 2 1 0 0 0 0 3. 05:00 103 0 1 I 9 21 39 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 3. 06:00 91 1 2 0 8 26 29 18 S 0 0 1 0 1 30 07:00 60 1 0 0 4 18 11 14 4 0 1 1 0 0 37 08:00 56 1 0 0 3 20 ," S 4 1 0 1 0 0 36 09:00 40 0 0 0 0 9 10 19 I 0 0 0 1 0 39 10:00 12 0 0 0 0 5 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 11:00 11 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 4\ baily 1.392 6 7 14 16 361 461 364 6. 22 • 4 ! 1 37 T"",10 -D .• 0,5 1.0 5.5 25.9 33.\ 26.1 S.O 1.6 0.' 0.3 0,1 0,1 of Tot&! Pen: Spo<da 10% 15% SO% §ill 90% 30.5 31.5 37.S 43,6 44.S 10 MPH Pnce Speed 35 ·45 N\lnlbu' in pact! 825 % inp:tCle 59.3 SpeedE_ed .rum! SSMPH !l5MPH P~ 7,4 0,9 0,1 ToW, \03 12 2 Dato. File: Renkll\ Printed: 519101 Page : • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Ave. Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 July 29, 2003 Sara Slatten Camwest Development 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite \00 Kirkland, W A 98034 RE: Road Variance File No: L03V0049 Project: East Renton Subdivision Description: Variance for Sight Distance Dear Ms. Slatten: • The purpose of this notice is to request additional information regarding your road variance application. In order to continue review of your application, please address the following information and submit three copies of any required design drawings or technical analysis. a. Please submit a road profile for 14Sth Ave. SE fo address the sight distance issues along the frontage of the subdivision. The road profile should be prepared on full size plan sheets showing the entering and stopping sight distances at various locations along the frontage as described in the letter from Mr. Gary Norris dated July 11,2003. Please note that the letter from Mr. Norris indicates that both entering and stopping sight distance meets County standards at the south property line; however, the data shown in the sight distance table indicates that stopping sight distance is below standards at 325 feet. Please clarify and demonstrate whether or not County standards are satisfied at the south property line (project entrance). b. The sight distance evaluation and profile should also address the sight distance design standards and potential impacts for existing driveways along 148 th Ave. SE in the immediate vicinity ofthe proposed subdivision. On the road profile, show the location of existing driveways on the east side of 148 th Ave. SE and the existing driveway to the Ironwood subdivision. \ Sara Slatten July 29, 2003 Page 2 • • The Land Use Services Division will hold your application in abeyance pending receipt of the above infonnation. The deadline for submitting the required infonnation is September 30, 2003. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 206-296-7185. Sincerely, flit(j)~ Peter Dye, P.E. Senior Engineer , • '. King County Department of Development and Environmental Sarvlce. Land Usa Service. Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-2_00 TTY 206-296-7217 Project Name: East Renton Property Project Address and Parcel Number '.'3.S'.'7 t 'D"~.$'1.~3 12013 l48th Ave SE ApplicanUOesign Engineer Name: Altemative formats available upon request DOES File No. L02POO05 SI\)Z..A C#AIit7" Date: 7/10/03 . ('VV' -1\' En~eering FImI Name: CamWest Development Garry Struthers Associates ~. s Adaress~ . . Telephone: (425) 519-0300 x.228 3150 Richards Road, #100 ~. (A.,,,, \ ", a._n"nn City, State Zip: DOES Eng.neer lnltials: . C Bellevue, WA 98005 a Route Application 10 LUIS a Check here ff Droiect enaineerina Dlans are approved and construction has beaun. INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans, sketches, photos and maps which may assist in complete review and consideration of your variance request. For a complete list of road variance submittal requirements, refer to separate list from DOES. Failure to provide all pertinent Information may result in delayed processing or denial of request. Please submit this request and applicable fee to the Department of Development and Environmental Services, Building or Land Use Services Intake Counters, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, WA 98055-1219. To make an appoinlmentfor permit submittal, please call 206-296-6797. For more infonnation see http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/. DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST: P1ease see attached APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: K.C. O.O.E.S. see attached JUSTIFICATION (see atlachments, pages ___ to ___ ..J): L03V0 049 see attached AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES' DOES STAFF RECOMMENDATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION AUTHORIZATION I 1 ADDroval I I Conditioned Aooroval I 1 Denied County Design Engineer Date Development EngineerlDeslgnee: Date County Road Engineer Date CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.qovlddes Road. Standard. Variance Requellt to the County Road Engineer .... rqu-fdvar.pdf 05129103 Page 1 of 1 ------------------------------------------------- \ RE: CamWest ., • Sara Slatten From: Gary. Norris [garyn@gsassoc-inc.coml Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:15 PM To: Sara Slatten Subject: FW: CamWest fyi -----Original Message----- From: Langley, Kristen [mailto:Kristen.Langley@METROKC.GOVI Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:55 AM To: 'Gary, Norris' Subject: RE: CamWest Any challenges with this? Mr. Norris: • Page 1 of 2 We have reviewed the documentation that you have provided, reo the extent of off-site reconstruction required by the provision of a vertical alignment built to continuously achieve stopping sight distance along the plat frontage of 148th Avenue SE. You have suggested that a proportionality issue may be at hand in this instance, due to the proximity of the crest vertical curve in question, relative to the currently proposed plat boundary. The grade differential at this crest curve results in a lengthy reconstruction of the roadway, much of which would be off-site to the plat. Historically, the County has required both options available: (1) require the developer to reconstruct the entire frontage of the roadway as required to provide the design speed based alignment --even if the reconstruction extends beyond the frontage, and beyond the limits required merely to provide sight distance for the plat intersection(s), and (2) Reconstruct only tbat portion of tbe frontage as required to acbieve sight distance at any plat intetsection(s), and retain existing non-engineered alignments outside of those limits. Reconstruct the alignment at tbe time of otber development in the area, as necessitated by the need for adequate sigbt distance for that (future) project's intersections. It would appear that in the case under consideration, that -absent new information or a revision in this plat that might alter our opinion --we agree that tbe extent of off-frontage improvements could be disproportionate. The Applicant shall provide tbe full sight distance requirements from the King County Road Standards [KCRS) at the plat entrance(s), or apply for a Variance to tbe KCRS as provided for in KCRS 1.08. I expect, however, and will request of DDES, tbat appropriate provisions will be made in the design of the frontage improvements to facilitate the future reconstruction of this crest curve by others: developers, King County, successor agencies, etc .. It is a reasonable exercise of our discretion to make provisions for the eventual reconstruction of this roadway --even if the actual requirement to reconstruct the roadway is not placed upon your client. Please contact me at 206263-6121 if you bave any questions. Kris Langley Supervising Engineer Development Review Unit, King County DOT 206/263-6121 L03V0049 7/11/2003 K.C. D.D.E.S. \ --------- RE: CamWeli1 • ----Original Message----- From: Gary, Norris [mailto:garyn(a)gsassoc-inc.com) Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 20029:40 AM To: kristen.Langley@metrokc.gov Cc: michael.romano@gte.net; Joan, Smelser Subject: Aster Park Hi Kristen, We have obtained the additional information necessary to respond to your comments dated January 18,2002. First, we found the 85th percentile speed to exceed 40 mph thereby justifying the 70 percent volume reduction in the signal warrant analysis. This condition may however change as improvements are installed and development occurs. At any rate, for the purposes of this analysis a signal would be warranted. This mitigation would be consistent with the request of tbe WSDOT. 10 regards to the pipeline project volume information, the difference between tbe two is simply wbat was requested. The Stone Ridge analysis requested all development proposals in tbe Newcastle Planning area. Aster Park used all projects in tbe vicinity of the subject intersection. There are several issues in regards to using the various sources. Pipeline projects are limited to projects that have an application date prior to the subject proposal and also projects that are expected to proceed. Use of aU projects within a concurrency planning area does not meet this criteria. Therefore to rectify tbe difference between tbe two lists in an appropriate manner will take a considerable amount of additional time. The question is it really worth it when we are willing to concede a traffic signal is now warranted witb tbe application of tbe 85tb percentile speed on SR 900. Please advise. Thanks, Gary 7/11/2003 L03V0049 • Page 2 of2 KC. D.D.E.S. • Date: Subject: • • October 16, 2001 East Renton Property Concerning Sight Distance Voice Mail Message To: Gary Norris, Garry Struthers Associates From: Aileen McManus, King County Traffic Hi Gary this is Aileen McManus umm I got a answer back it looks like no we will not be requiring the stopping sight distance through that north section. We will require umm meet entering and stopping sight distance and the access point but not at the frontage umm as you I believe it was the north part of the frontage so umm if you have any further questions. I guess that means no variance required either so give me a call a (206) 263-6102. Thanks bye L03V0 049 K.G. 0.0.E.5. • Craig Comfort, P.E. Road Variance Engineer King County Roads Division 210 South Jackson Seattle, W A 98104 RE: Traffic Variance Request East Renton Property: L02POOOS Dear Craig: • GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES rB)[E~~~W[EfQl I.n1 JUL 1 1 2003 l1dJ K.C. D.D.E.S. Enclosed is a road standards variance request for the frontage improvements associated with the proposed East Renton Property plat application. The East Renton proposal consists of66 single-family lots situated on 19.57 acres and is located at 12013 148th A venue SE in the Renton area of King County. The variance request is submitted in an attempt to expedite a decision in regards to required frontage improvements. The applicant, Cam West Development, has pursued resolution of this issue for approximately two years. At one point a decision was reached only to find that due to staff changes and insufficient documentation, the issue remained. The history is summarized below: History • On April 19,2001 representatives from CamWest and its design team attended the pre- application meeting with King County staff. At this meeting, County staff stated that Cam West would be required to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE to the extent necessary to provide Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) across the entire plat frontage. Staff based this request upon the SSD requirements of the King County Road Standards ("KCRS") as implemented by the application of administrative policy which uses the posted speed plus 10 mph as the design speed for calculating SSD. Alternatively, staff indicated CamWest could apply for a variance to this requirement. • On August 8, 2001 CamWest submitted a memorandum to Bruce Whittaker, King County DOES, summarizing critical policy, technical, and legal issues pertinent to the County's request to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE in order to correct the pre-existing sight distance deficiency. The memorandum analyzed applicable KCRS SSD requirements. It explained why reconstruction of 148 th Avenue SE as proposed was not required by the KCRS and why there were no impacts from the proposed plat that warranted improvements of the magnitude and cost associated with the reconstruction. It concluded that a variance was unnecessary since the County did not have the legal authority to require frontage and off-site improvements of the scope discussed in the memo. This memo is enclosed for your review. J,03V0049 \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 Ul 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 • Bellevue, WA 98005-4446 • (425) 519-0300 • Fax (425) 519-0309 July II, 2003 Page 2 • • • In response to the August 8, 2001 memorandum, we were informed that King County staff including the County Road Engineer visited 148'h Avenue SE adjacent to the plat and considered the various issues presented in the memorandum. Aileen McManus, (then King County Development Review Engineer) left a voicemail on October 16, 2001 with Gary Norris indicating that staff had considered all of the issues and determined that CamWest would not be required to reconstruct l48'h Avenue SE and a variance would not be required. A copy of this transcribed voice mail is included for your review. • Subsequently, Cam West and I tried on numerous occasions to get formal documentation of Aileen's telephone message without success. A formal response was promised but never received. Subsequently, Aileen McManus moved to a new position in King County and was no longer involved in the process. After months of requesting this decision in writing, Kristen Langley emailed a decision on behalf of the County which differed significantly from Ms. McManus's voice mail as she only indicated a conditional acceptance of CamWest's request. • On February 27, 2003, as a part of the SEPA review process for the East Renton proposal, James Sanders, DDES Engineer, wrote to Paulette Norman, King County Road Engineer, requesting written documentation that this area of 148'h Avenue SE met the criteria set out in KCC 21 A.28.120.A.!I. The County Road Engineer was unwilling to provide such documentation. In a recent telephone conversation, Gary Samek, Acting Development Review Engineer asked Cam West to submit a formal variance request. Although we still contend that a variance is not necessary, it is our expectation that through this process we can reach an expeditious and satisfactory conclusion. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this variance request. Should you have any questions, please call me at (425) 519-0300 ext. 228 Si01~ SnUlJ*,- ~1' c& /UIm~S" Gary A. Norris, P.E. Garry Struthers Associates Enclosures , KCC 2IA.28.120 Adequate vehicular access. All new development shall be served by adequate vehicular access as follows: A. The property upon which the development proposed is to be located has direct access to: I. A public or private street that meets county road standards or is formally declared acceptable by the county road engineer; ... \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east rentan\camwest east renton variance fina1.doc 7/11/03 (j) July II, 2003 Page 3 • Description of Variance Request • As part of the development review process of the East Renton plat, King County has taken the position that existing SSD deficiency on 148 th Avenue SE along the plat frontage shall be eliminated as part of the required frontage improvements for the pIaL The pre-existing SSD is deficiency is based upon an administrative policy that calculates SSD based upon a design speed of the posted speed plus 10 mph. Because of the existing topography, utility locations and probable impacts beyond the site, Cam West seeks a variance to eliminate the condition to reconstruct l48 th Avenue SE to meet County SSD standards. The pre-existing substandard SSD condition exists at the north end of the East Renton property. 148 th Avenue SE has an increasing downgrade from the site's south property line to the north property line. The percent grade at the south property line is 2.4 percent increasing to 4.6 percent at the north property line. At approximately 120 feet north of the north property line there is a grade break where the percent grade increases to 9 percent. As a result of the grade break, SSD at the north property line for north bound and south bound traffic is below the KCRS standard with application of the administrative policy to use the posted speed plus 10 mph as the design speed. At the south property line, where the site access will be provided, there is adequate stopping and entering sight distance per the KCRS requirements. Based on the application of the administrative policy governing the calculation of SSD, SSD is approximately 160 feet below the standard for the southbound direction and 75 feet below the standard for the northbound direction measured at the north property line. Granting the variance request would allow frontage improvements to be installed without changing the vertical alignment of 148 th Avenue SE. Applicable Section of Standards The variance request is subject to the following sections of the KCRS, 1993 I) KCRS Section 1.03: Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. 2) KCRS Section 2.05: Horizontal Curvature and Sight Distance Design Values- Table 2.1 Stopping Sight Distance. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 U) July 11,2003 Page 4 • Justification of Variance Request • Our contention remains that a variance is unnecessary because the SSD deficiency is pre- existing, unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat, and the cost of installing frontage and off-site improvements to correct this condition is unreasonably high and unrelated to impacts of the East Renton plat. Additionally, there are no safety concerns with this existing condition based on past and recent accident data. However, in order to expedite this process, there are several pertinent factors that justify a variance request. The legal issues associated with requiring reconstructing 148 th Avenue SE and the basis for this variance request are discussed below: 1) The 1993 King County Road Standards addressing frontage and off-site road improvements require these improvements to be based upon the impacts of the proposed development. Section 1.03 Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements provides as follows: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. B. Any land development abutting and impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. CamWest's attorney has advised them that the bolded language set out in these two provisions reflect State and Federal law regarding governmental authority to require roadway improvements as a condition of approving development proposals. Washington statutes, as well as State and Federal constitutional requirements limit the extent of required improvements to those that are directly related to the impact of proposed development. Even if the impact test is met, any required improvements must be proportional to the impacts of the development. A detailed legal analysis was provided in the August 8, 200 I memo included for your review. Even assuming it is appropriate to use a 45-mph design speed per the administrative policy, the substandard SSD on 148 th Avenue SE across the plat frontage is a preexisting condition and unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat. Reconstructing 148 th Avenue SE to meet SSD would be extremely burdensome and cost prohibiti ve, as is discussed below. The KCRS provides that the extent of frontage and off-site improvements must be tied to the impacts of the proposed development, as required by Washington law. The proposed plat did not create and will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage. Therefore, any requirement to regrade this roadway to improve the SSD would not be consistent with the KCRS and Washington law. A variance is unnecessary because requiring these improvements would exceed the County's authority. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01·002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 (j) July 11,2003 Page 5 • • 2) Changing the grade of 148 th Avenue SE to provide 400 to 425 feet of stopping sight distance along the entire frontage of the proposed plat would require lowering the profile of 148 th Avenue SE for at least 700 feet and possibly much more. This improvement would necessarily extend beyond the plat frontage. Cuts of 2 Y2 to nearly 4 feet would be necessary for over 300 feet. Several hundred feet of a 12-inch water main would need to be excavated and lowered. At least two power poles would need to be relocated and water meters, dry utilities, ditches and culverts along this road which serve adjacent property owners would need to be reconstructed and several neighboring driveway approaches to l48th Avenue SE rebuilt. The areas where the cuts would be greatest would probably need low retaining walls or rockeries at the edge of the right-of-way in order to accommodate the drainage ditch on the side of the street opposite the proposed project. Portions of this work would require easements from the abutting property owners. Furthermore, although limited survey data is currently available to make a definitive assessment, it appears that it may be necessary to reconstruct the SE I 16 th Piacell 48 th Avenue SE intersection to meet the reconstructed 148 th Avenue SE centerline profile. These improvements would be extremely costly and burdensome if required for the proposed plat. 3) The most important aspect of a variance is the maintenance of a safe roadway environment for vehicles and pedestrians. Currently, there are no known traffic related safety issues associated with the present roadway. According to King County Transportation staff, there have been no accidents on 148 th Avenue SE between SE I I 7th Street and SE I 24th Street during the latest three-year period for which accident data is available.2 Access to the proposed plat will be located at the south property line approximately 500 feet from the location of the substandard stopping sight distance. Therefore, site generated traffic should not create any additional impacts in terms of SSD. 4) A substandard SSD condition exists under the KCRS only because of an administrative decision to use a design speed equal to the posted speed plus 10 miles per hour (mph). This definition of design speed is not required by the KCRS or documented in AASHTO and is contrary to WSDOT Design Manual which specifies the use of the posted speed for this application. (See Figure 440-1, WSDOT Design Manual, May 200 I). 'The most pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard would be impaci on safety. To address Ihis issue. the latest available three~ycar acciJent history was ubtained from Jodi SL'alllon King Coumy Department or Transportation which included the period bel ween .Ianuary I, 1999 and December 31. 200 I. According 10 the dala provided. there is nl) record of In)' accidents on 148 " Avenue SE between SE 117" Street and SE 124'1> Street. J The most pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard would be impact on .,afety. To address this issue. [he late~t available three-year accident hi:'tory was obtained from J()di Scanlon King County Department of Transportalion which inclu(kd Ihe period between January I. 1999 and December 31. 2001. Accurding to the data provided, Ihere is no record of any accidenlS on 148" Avenue SE between SE 117" Sm~et and SE 124'h Street. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\Ol-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final. doc 7/11/03 m I . , July II, 2003 Page 6 • • 5) Application of the posted speed as the design speed, which is 35 MPH, results in a required SSD of 250 feet rather than 400 feet as outlined in Table 2.1 of the KCRS. Currently, 240 feet of SSD exists in the southbound direction at the north property line and 318 feet of available SSD in the southbound direction measured at a point 100 feet south of the north property line that increases heading south as the percent grade decreases. In the northbound direction, 425 feet of SSD exists at the south property line. At the north property line there is 350 feet of SSD. Please refer to the following table: Stopping Sight Distance KCRS KCRS KCRS AASHTO Location (35 mph) (40 mph) (45 mph) (33.7 mph)' Observed North Property Line Southbound 250,2 325,2 400,2 212"1188,5 240" / 275" Northbound 265" 345 2 425,2 272,5 350"/272,+3 100' south of North Property Line Southbound 250,2 325,2 400'2 212"/188,5 318" Northbound 265" 345 2 425" 272,5 325' +' South Property Line Southbound 250,2 325,2 400,2 212,4 325'+' Northbound 250'2 325,2 400,2 237'5 425'2 I -average runnmg speed based on speed survey for southbound direction. 2 -using a O.5-foot object 3 -using a 2.0-foot object 4 -Per 1994 AASHTO using a 0.5-foot object 5 -Per 2001 AASHTO using a 2.0-foot object 6) Application of a 2.0-foot height of target as opposed to the 0.5 height of target required per KCRS Section 2.12 provides an acceptable SSD per KCRS requirements for the northbound direction across the entire plat frontage. However, application of the 2.0 height of target provides only 275 feet of SSD for southbound vehicles at the north property line. The available southbound SSD would be acceptable with application of the use of the operating speed for upgrade conditions per AASHTO policy. Recently, King County has accepted assuming a 2.0 high target, similar to AASHTO's standards, in lieu of a 0.5 high target in processing variance applications. A speed study was conducted in May 200 I on 148'h Avenue SE to identify actual vehicle speeds along this section of the 148'h A venue SE corridor. The speed study was conducted approximately 50 feet north of the East Renton north property line. The results indicate the 85'h percentile speed (typically the posted speed) in the southbound \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance finaLdoc 7/11J03 U) . , • • July II, 2003 Page 7 direction is 40 mph.4 If 40 MPH (5 MPH above the existing posted speed) was used as the design speed, an acceptable SSD per KCRS would exist in the northbound direction across the entire plat frontage and in the southbound direction across the entire plat frontage. The only exception would be for the section of the roadway adjacent to the north 100 feet of the plat (100 feet south of the north property line). The required SSD for 40 mph is 325 feet per KCRS. (The computed SSD for 40 mph is 318.7 feet and 325 feet when rounded for design.) See Table (above) for existing SSD at various noted locations. The KCRS, unlike AASHTO, does not adjust the required SSD to reflect the reduced stopping distance required for the upgrade condition (southbound approach to the plat). According to AASHTO, the average running speed should be used as the speed to calculate SSD corrections for upgrade conditions.s Since the SSD deficiency on 148'h Avenue is a result of a grade break in the centerline profile north of the site where the grade changes to approximately 9 percent, the average running speed should be used in the SSD calculation for southbound vehicles. According to the recent speed study, the average running speed is 33.7 mph. This results in a calculated SSD of 212 feet. Therefore, application of AASHTO policy results in an acceptable sight distance across the plat's entire 148'h Avenue SE frontage in both the northbound and southbound direction. Conclusion In order to determine whether CamWest can be required to provide SSD improvements across the entire plat frontage and beyond, the impacts of the proposed plat and the costs of such improvements must be assessed. (It should be noted that Cam West, as part of the plat development process, would provide frontage improvements on 148'h Avenue SE to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks.) The SSD issues associated with this area of 148'h Avenue SE are preexisting and completely unrelated to the impacts of the proposed CamWest plat. There is no data that suggests the SSD condition on 148'h Avenue SE has created a safety problem or has significantly affected operational conditions.6 As discussed previously, road improvements to improve the existing SSD would be extremely costly and burdensome. Requiring the platto fix an existing SSD condition which it did not create, and when there is no safety issue associated with the condition violates State and Federal law. Therefore, there is no legal basis to require this pre- existing SSD deficiency be corrected. 'The speed study was taken from 12:00 AM Tuesday May 7 to 12:00 AM Wednesday May 8. 2001. The counters were stationed 50 to 75 feet north of the north property line , According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book (1984), page 143. "Design Speed is used in calculating downgrade corrections. average running speed in calculating upgrade corrections." \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 Ul .. July 11,2003 Page 8 • • Based on the foregoing information, a variance to the King County Road Standards (1993) is sought to eliminate any requirement that CamWest reconstruct 148'h Avenue SE along the East Renton frontage to provide stopping sight distance based upon current administrative policy to use a design speed of IOmph over the speed limit standards. \\gsamain_O\eng\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwest east renton variance final.doc 7/11/03 (j) King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 formats available request FOR CURRENT OWNER: L 0 3 V 0041}Numbe~: --- I, , (print name) hereby certify that I am an/the owner of the property which is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If I am not the sole owner of the property, I certify that I am authorized by any and all other owners of the property to make this certification and transfer any an all rights I/we have to apply for this permit or approval to the person listed below. I, therefore certify that (print name) is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. By being the "applicant," that individual assumes financial responsibility for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Owner Date Signed FOR INDIVIDUALS: I, , (print name) hereby certify that I am the "applicant" for this permit or approval. I shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. I accept financial responsibilitv for all fees associated with this permit or approval and will receive any refunds. My mailing address is: I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Applicant Date Signed OR FOR CORPORATIONS/BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS: , hereby certify that I am an authorized }VI , a corporation of other business· association authorized in teState of Washington a d that this business association is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and is financially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This association shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. The mailing address of this business association is: CMlWGST I certify u er penalt of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc. L, 11 2003 o Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status Ic-cer-trapstat 05/21103 Page 1 of2 K.C. D.D.E.S. NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: By law, this department returns all engineering and other plans to the applicant. If, however, you wish to authorize the department to return engineering and other plans directly to the engineer, architect, or other consultant for the limited purpose of making corrections, please designate below: co <" :.", n :';" (r Y' 'i, I.'-I D I authorize this departme~t tei return ~s directi y' t~; ~y ~~XsM~nt(s) for the limited purpose of making corrections, as designated on this fOnTI, " CONSULTANTS: , \ 1.., • , , Check out the DOES Web site at www.metrokc.govlddes Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status Ic-cer-trapstat 05/21103 " , Page 2 of 2 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Usc Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, W A 98055·1219 April 24, 2002 ,.~ ~ •. ' Notice Board & Posting Procedures Instruction Package Notice of Application In accordance with King County Code Section 20,20,060, enclosed you will find instructions, specifications, and materials in order to meet the notice of application posting requirements of the County, Please read these instructions carefully and take action quickly to order your notice board sign. Your notice board sign can be ordered through a sign painter, using the information supplied on page 2 of the enclosed "Notice Board Requirements," The cost of the sign is the responsibility of the applicant. Further processing of your application is dependent upon fulfilling the notice of application posting requirement. When your sign is in place, attach the colored laminated notice of application along with the plastic envelope (containing extra copies of the notice of application) to the notice board as depicted on page 1 of the instructions, Maintain a supply of notices within the plastic envelope throughout the comment period, The posting sign/notice board must remain in place throughout the duration of your application. Immediately upon completion of the above instructions. complete the enclosed affidavit of posting and return to the Department of Development and Environmental Services. Land Use Division. Current Planning Section. at the address shown above (envelope ynclosed2. Failure to comply with posting requirements may be cause for a delay in the J2rocessing of your application, If you have any questions, please call the Land Use Services Division at (206) 296-6600, Enclosures: Notice Board Requirements-Application Laminated Notice of Application Waterproof Vinyl Envelope containing copies of the Notice of Application Affidavit of Notice of Application Posting formJLUSD return envelope Notice Board & Posting Procedures Instruction Pkg,-NOA 8/8/01 • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton. WA 98055-1219 L02POOOS -East Renton Subdivision DDES Project Number 1, ____ -----:-:--_---: ______ , hereby affirm that I have posted the following: (print name) X Notice of Permit Application .0 Other _____________ _ on the day of , 2002, in accordance with the Department of Development and Environmental Services' requirements. I further affirm that the notice will remain in place and visible during the full required notice period. Notice was provided at the following location(s): 1) 2) ____________________________________________ _ 3) I hereby affirm that the above is a true and correct statement. Signature This affidavit must be completed and returned to the Land Use Services Division within 7 days of posting. Improper posting or failure to return the affidavit within 7 days shall be cause for the final decision regarding your permit to be postponed. CPSFORMS/AFFlDAVIT OF POSTING. DOC 7/27/99 ---------------------------- • NOTICE BOAR"REQUIREMENTS- NOTICE OF APPLICATION King County Dcpt. of Development and Environmental Services l.:lIld Usc S"n'iu's Divisioll 000 O:lkc~da1c Avenue Southwest i{1.:11l01l, Washington 98055-1212 Per King County Code Section 20.20.060, a notice board must be prepared and posted for your land use application. Please prepare and post in the following manner: Notice Board Size and Text Specifications The notice board shall be constructed to the specifications described below. The notice board shall display the information shown in the figure. Board Construction: The notice board shall be constructed with 4' x 4' plywood. Professionally prepared plastic notice board overlays, permanently affixed to the board are permissible. Notice boards may be reused but they must be clean and show no evidence of former wording. 1. Lettering style: Helvetica or similar standard typeface 2. Lettering size: Title should be 3" capital letters (NOTICE OF PROPOSED LAND USE ACTION). Other letters should be 2" letters except on the 8%" x 14" laminated paper providing the details of the proposal. See illustration below for use of capital and lower case letters, and placement of laminated paper and vinyl jacket. 3. Lettering: Black (permanent ink or silk-screen) 4. Background Color: White 5. Logo: King County emblem, in black 6. Laminated Notice of Application on a legal size sheet which provides information regarding the proposed land use application. TO BE SUPPLIED BY Land Use Services Division (LUSD) (see enclosed). 7. Legal size waterproof vinyl jackets with a fold flap, and wrap string. TO BE SUPPLIED BY LUSD (see enclosed). The applicant must make copies of the Notice, place them in the vinyl jacket, and maintain a supply of copies throughout the posting period. NOTICE OF PROPOSED LAND USE ACTION King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Call (206) 296-6600 Type of Action: 4 FT Proposal: File No.: Notice Board Requirements-NOA 8/8/01 NOTICE OF APPLICATION 8.S" X 14" LAMINATED 4 FT EXAMPLE COPIES OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION IN VINYL JACKET Pg 1 ..-----------------------------~---------------- The notice board shall be located and installed to the specifications described below. Number of Notice Boards required for this application: ONE Special Instructions: To be located on 148th Avenue SE Notice board shall be located: Midpoint on the site street frontage or as otherwise directed by LUSD staff to maximize visibility. • At a location 5 feet inside from the street property line; a notice board structurally attached to an existing building shall be exempt from the setback provisions, provided that no notice board is. located not more than 5 feet from the property line without approval from LUSD staff. So that the top of the notice board is between 7 to 9 feet above grade. So that it is easily accessible and totally visible to pedestrians. The applicant shall erect the notice board by solidly setting the post 12 to 18 inches into the ground; or structurally attached it to an existingbuilding. Two 4" x 4" 8-foot-long (minimum) posts and four washers, bolts and nuts (3/8-inch diameter and bolts are 5-inches long) shall be used to install the notice board. Installation Certification The notice board(s) must be installed within 14 days after Land Use Services Division has determined that the application is complete. The enclosed "Affidavit of Posting" must be signed, and returned to the Land Use Services Division within 7 days following the date of posting. Maintenance and Removal of the Notice Board The applicant shall maintain the notice board in good condition throughout the application review period, which shall extend through the time of the final county decision on the proposal and the expiration of any applicable appeal periods. If the notice board is removed, LUSD review of the land use application may be discontinued until the notice board is replaced and has remained in place for the required period of time. TO BE FILLED OUT BY LUSD STAFF ============================================================================ NOTICE BOARD TEXT INFORMATION (To Be Given to the Sign Painter) Type of Action: Formal Subdivision Proposal: Subdivide 19.6 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family residences. File No.: L02P0005 East Renton Subdivision NOTE: If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call 206-296-6600 (voice) or for hearing impaired 206-296-7217. Notice Board Requirements-NOA 8/S/01 Pg 2 f • NOTICE INSTRUCTIONS 1. Number of sign boards required: 1 2. Location of sign boards: On 1481h Ave. SE 3. Cities located within one mile: Renton 4. Airports located within two miles: None 5. Mail Notice to: • Affected tribes • Applicant • Community groups • WSDOT • Above-noted cities • ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Usc Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 L02P0005 -East Renton Subdivision DDES Project Number • [' __ S-'-Af-A-'--''----c--'51'''--''!.k~1f.,_~-----, hereby affirm that [have posted the following: (print name) RECeIVED X Notice of Permit Application o Other _____________ _ MAY 0 j 2002 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES 2,(01 M ~ ., on the J -day of PI ,2002, In accordance with the Department of Development and nVlronmental Services' requirements. I further affirm that the notice will remain in place and visible during the full required notice period, Notice was provided at the following location(s): 1) 2) --'.?1:.'....!..I::....:..:pn:...::...jl-----'I--+4....IL0_-t_h ~ALLV=-e_S=-"E.=--____ _ 3) I hereby affirm that the above is a true and correct statement. s;~ This affidavit must be completed and returned to the Land Use Services Division within 7 days of posting, Improper posting or failure to return the affidavit within 7 days shall be cause for the final decision regarding your permit to be postpon1&hibit ~~O, ;--:"':(p~'--___ _ Item No. L.D2."\;)t>~S RecG ived --1"3",,--' -=~:.::e.=--....:c:s:.!a.::I:.-_ King County Hearing Examiner CPSFORMSIAFFIDAVIT OF POSTING. DOC 7127199 MAIN FILE Copy ~. --------------------- • • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Barbara Alther, first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 a daily newspaper published seven (7) times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court olthe State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South County Journal (and not in supplemental form) which was regularly distributed to the subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a L02P0005 as published on: 4/29/02 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $96.51, charged to Ace!. No. 8030903. The cost above includes a $6.00 fee for the printing of the affidavits. Legal Number 10293 ~~~~ . v Legal Clerk, South County Journal Subscribed and sworn before me on this~day of r))U 1 \\\',,'" If r, ", ""<I.. \" M, ,.."" ~~ '\.'" ......... t I, ... ~4..~ ••• ~~\~S'ON·"i.t:·.~< '-:,. S"r/~ P4.,,/~ :-l ,'0· (~~" ~ _. ,,< T.,l1i' '." ... = : '.CJ1~ \cP\" PU;LI" .. j I ~ ., .• ~C' I'., .. " ;;: , .... ') ....... , ........ '" -; ...... ~ •••• <"Ii <').q ..• ~"V.;i' '" 0 ...... ' ... ' \ =;;.,. • " " r t ••. >\\\ ....... '> IJJ ••• ," \)" IJJHHH\\\\\ Notary Public of the State of Wash'ihgton residing in Renton King County, Washington vr u~ ........ ...,,/n.-.' ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton; WA 98055-1219 ~QE LAND U§!; mM!I'APPLICATION REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0005 File Name: East Renton Subdivision Applicant: Cam West Development Location: Located on the west side of " 148th Ave. SE, at approx.· SE I 12OthSt. '. I Proposal: To subdivide 19.6 acres ! into 66·single-fa:mily residentic;tllots. Project Planner: Lanny Henoch, I I (206) 296-7168 COMMENT PROCEDURES: I , Comments on the above tile are now i I being accepted by King County' ! DOES, Land Use Services Division, ' at the address listed above. Phone: I 206-296-6600. __ "."'j &.-. ~. ~~ ~ fi ~ u: z C 5 • ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 DATE: TIME: FAX TO: April 24, 2002 9.' /7 A. /fA. SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL ATTN: KATHY FEHLINGS / Legal Ads FAX #: 253-854-1006 • NOTE: NO HARD COPY WILL BE SENT # OF PAGES (INCLUDING THIS PAGE): 2 SENDERS NAME: SENDERS PHONE: Carol Rogers Current Planning Section, Land Use Services Division 206-296-7116; (Fax: 206-296-7051) Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on MONDAY. April 29. 2002. which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice cc: Accounts Payable, Administrative Services Division, DDES Application File(s): L02P0005; East Renton application notice MAIN fiLE coPy .. ------~., .. • KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0005 File Name: East Renton Subdivision • Applicant: Cam West Development Location: Located on the west side of 148 th Ave SE, at approx. SE 120th St. Proposal: To subdivide 19.6 acres into 66 single-family residential lots. Project Planner: Lanny Henoch, (206) 296-7168 COMMENT PROCEDURES: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DOES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Phone: ·206-296-6600. Published this 29'" day of April, 2002. • Rogers, Carol From: Sent: To: Subject: Rogers, Carol Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:14 AM 'ggreen@seattletimes.com' Legal ad for publ on Monday, 4/29 Please confirm receipt. Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on MONDAY. April 29. 2002, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable, as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter • legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0005 File Name: East Renton Subdivision Applicant: Cam West Development Location: Located on the west side of 148'" Ave SE, at approx. SE 120lh St. Proposal: To subdivide 19.6 acres into 66 single-family residential lots. Project Planner: Lanny Henoch, (206) 296-7168 COMMENT PROCEDURES: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DOES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Phone: 206-296-6600. Published this 29 th day of April, 2002. cc: Accounts Payable, Administrative Services Division, DOES Application File(s): L02P0005; East Renton Subdivision application notice. Page 1 ® • Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055·1219 Not~e of Application (Type 3) Applicant: Cam West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120'h PI., Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Phone: (425) 825-1955 File #: L02POOOS Application Name: "East Renton Property" DDES Planner: Lanny Henoch Planner Telephone No.: (206) 296-7168' Date Application Filed: April 3, 2002 Date of Complete Application: ApriI17,,2002 Project Location: Lying on the west side of 148'h Ave. SE, at approximately SE 120th St. " •. -",.>: . . ." . ..' . . Project Description: Subdivision of 19.6 acres into 66 lots for the develop!1lent of de'tached single-family, residences. The subdivision includes a 1.52 acre "Future DeveloPIJ1ent" tract: and a ' 6.72 acre" Sensitive Area/Open Space" tract. The applicant has indicated tbatthe , average lot size of the proposed lots is 5,000 sq. ft. (+/-). ' . ' . Permits requested in this application:' Formal Plat Relevant environmental documents are available at the address below: DN/A .' " Development regulations to be used for project mitigation, known at this time: KCC 21A including sensitive area regulations, Road Standards, Surface Water Design Manual' ' Consistency with applicable County plans and regulations: This proposal will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County codes, including those noted above. ",' , Other permits not included in this application, known at this time: building permits·' A public hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner is required for this application. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) will issue a report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two (2) weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County Council. Details of the appeal process will be included in the notice of recommendation. , , ,,' Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact DDES at the address and/or telephone number listed below. Written comments may also be submitted to DDES. You may review the, application and any environmental documents or studies in our Renton office. NOTE:-If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or for hearing impaired (206) 296-7217 (TTY). Mailing Date: May 8. 2002 Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 Please send me notification of the public hearing and other official notices concerning this application. File No. L02P0005 -East Renton Subdivision ( Please print) Name: ______________________________________________________________________ __ Address: ________________________________________________________ -,-__________ _ _____________________ Telephone No.: _______ __ LUSDIFORMS/LUSD Forms Staffffype 3 Notice of Application Updated 8/9/01 ... .:' : .. ," ., •..... , '.' . ",": ..... : : .. '. -.;:,,' .,". -.:::::" .... ': .:::"..: ', .. ';' ... "'. :: .. . -';':.: .... 0 -.J • , • • ." .:': ", •••••••• :.. ~: :. • : ',I :,.,:' '-;"':-(;:":': ~n .... Ill I .. ~~ It ill~~ ~ ~i;1 r'''11;i t...._1 ~~. ;il ~ '" I :;j Ia ~ ; "il ~~ ;i~ I~ • • • ~ ~ ,/'-. ,.,/ . . / ' .' ",' " «, ".' ..,-' -;-. -,_ . • • • • • • • • ~ -. ;.> :-' .; . , ", ,,:~ .. ~ ~~i I~! lOt ~i~ ~~ ~~I i~" .. ~ ,,~ ~ ~ I .. ; ~ ~ I;' i~: ii • • .. ~ . • . -"+ ..---------------------------------- ® " • Department of Development and Environmcmal Services Land Usc Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Remon, Washington 98055·1219 Applicant: Cam West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th PI., Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 Phone: (425) 825-1955 Notite of Application File #: L02P0005 Application Name: "East Renton Property" DDES Planner: Lanny Henoch Planner Telephone No.: (206) 296-7168 Date Application Filed: April 3, 2002 Date of Complete Application: April 17, 2002 Project Location: Lying on the west side of 148'1> Ave. SE, at approximately SE 120'1> St. (Type 3) Project Description: Subdivision of 19.6 acres into 66 lots for the development of detached single-family residences. The subdivision includes a 1.52 acre "Future Development" tract, and a 6.72 acre" Sensitive Area/Open Space" tract. The applicant has indicated that the average lot size of the proposed lots is 5,000 sq. ft. (+/-). Permits requested in this application:' Formal Plat Relevant environmental documents are available at the address below: IRl Yes DN/A Development regulations to be used for project mitigation, known at this time: KCC 21A including sensitive area regulations, Road Standards, Surface Water Design Manual Consistency with applicable County plans and regulations: This proposal will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County codes, including those noted above. Other permits not included in this application, known at this time: building permits A public hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner is required for this application. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) will issue a report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two (2) weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County Council. Details of the appeal process will be included in the notice of recommendation. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact DDES at the address and/or telephone number listed below. Written comments may also bc submitted to DDES. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies in our Renton office. NOTE:-If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or for hearing impaired (206) 296-7217 (TTY). Mailing Date: Mav 8, 2002 Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Usc Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenne Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 Please send me notification of the public hearing and other official notices concerning this application. File No. L02POOOS -East Renton Subdivision ( Please prillt) Namc: ______________________________________________________________________ _ Address: __________________________________ _ _____________________ Telephone No.: ________ __ I.USf)JFORMS/LtJSD Forms StafflType 3 Notice of Application Upuat..:d RN/O 1 • • ~ I ~. ~ . ) ~ ;\\~ i ~ • I ," . \ • 71iERESA HEIEN GACEK; ET AL f' '" '" -. '" Z823 18TH S . '" ",.' '" I SEAf77A'. irA 98144 LOT 1 APPRO_ATE LOCA TION ~ lr4 EXlS71NC S1RUC1UR£ (71'P. uud LA F1 L=1 "" L~ ~..n-~1 ! J Lj InVl'Iv"VnDlUI.U .......... n ......... 1800 SE 7TH CT RENTON, irA 98065 0638100220' INTiRNATfONAL CHURCH OF THE FOUR SQUARE CROlJP I1lUO 148f1l A VB' SE RENTON. irA 980M1 0638100212 JLlCHAEL A .t' BARBARA J pAXHIA 11920 148TH .AVE BE RENTON. irA 0:':..l59 0638100210 nJLJ , 14841 tl.<rr-----1 RE1I'n KC R-4 I IAJI. J484J RENf ___ +~_....,,_....j________ 1.-1-~ ~ ~ '. . -----}:-\ ------------------,---------\ .. J ~ \ ' KING CQUNTY ,-r -, J ..... ---~ I LJO'LJO'l / " '" '" '" "'"\ l~RIAf~SE KC R 4 -.... . RENTON. WA 98069 - ~ALAN D k IUNE lEA. HontQUIST lZ050 148TH AVE BE RENTON. irA 98059 ~ ". ~ • ~ . ~ ~\ ~ ~ ,.. ~ '\.'" . .:-', '" .~ • ...-------=:-:-:=,....,,-,---,. "" ~ i "'''Tr'. 1"\trC'ITJ:'" LlC77 AUn b'" ~ • ':'> • ·k ______ ••• '" ..... ~ ... Du • .......u7IV ROBERT L ANDERSON PO BOX 363 JlAPU vAUET, rA 98038 \--------------I I ',(", ;. ,." ~ .' I L I \ ... ' .. ,"," " BORBA,GREG CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DDESILUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT RALPH HICKMAN 9720 NE 120TH PL, # I 00 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 CLAUSSEN, KIM SR. PLANNER DDESI WSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 DORSTAD, ROGER POBOX 375 REDMOND, WA 98073 DYE, PETE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER DDESIWSD MS: OAK -DE 0100 GILLEN, NICK WETLAND REVIEW DDESI WSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 IIENOCH, LANNY PROJECT PLANNER DDES/CPLN MS: OAK -DE-0100 KC EXECUTIVE HORSE COUNCIL ELEANOR MOON 12230 NE 61ST KIRKLAND, WA 98033 LANGLEY, KRISTEN LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES/WSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 • L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 L02P0005 • ROGERS, CAROL CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDESIWSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 SLATTEN, SARA CAM WEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL, #100 KIRKLAND, W A 98034 TRIAD ASSOCIATES !l814 !15TH AVE NE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 WEST, LARRY GEOREVIEW' DDES/WSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 L02POOOS L02P0005 L02P0005 LOZP0005 ------- .... --.- " • • (E Renton) FD25 (Spring Glen) FD40 Fire Protection Dist #25 Fire Protection Dist #40 P.O. Box 2925 10828 SE 176th St Renton W A 98056-0925 Renton W A 98055 MS; KSC-NR-0600 MS; KSC-TR-0431 KC27 Water & Land Res. Div Gary Kriedt King County Dept. of Natural Res. KC Metro Envirn. Planning Steve Foley LII5 LI20 Fairwood Library Highlands Library 17009 -140th Av SE 2902 NE 12th St Renton WA 98058 Renton W A 98056 LI23 Documents Dept. Librarian LI24 Kent Regional Library King County Library System 212 - -2ndAvN 960 Newport Way NW Kent W A 98032-4482 Issaquah, W A 98027 LI36 ATTN: Edward White PLl8 Renton Library Kent Engineering Dept 100 Mill Av S 220 -4th Av S Renton W A 98055 Kent W A 98032 PLl9 City of Renton PL33 Kent Planning Dept Economic Development Dept. 220-4thAvS J055 S. Grady Way Kent W A 98032 Renton W A 98055 Clinton G. Marsh, Director Fac. & Const. Dept SD9 R. Stracke, Facilities & Ping SDJ3 Kent School District # 415 Renton School Dist # 403 12033 SE 256th SI. Bldg B 1220 N 4th St Kent W A 98031-6643 Renton W A 98055 Administrator SE5 Environmental Review Section ST2 Kent Sewer Utility W A State Dept of Ecology 220 -4th Av S PO Box 47703 Kent W A 98032 Olympia W A 98504-7703 Habitat Biologist, Rod Malcom TRI Russ Ladley, Fisheries Biologist TR2 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Puyallup Tribe 39015 -172nd Av SE 6824 Pioneer Wy E Auburn W A 98002 Puyallup WA 98371 TR3 Fisheries Habitat/Environment TR5 Snoqualmie Tribe Suquamish Indian Tribe PO Box 280 PO Box 498 Carnation W A 98014-0280 Suquamish W A 98392 ~-.,---\ ~ .' Richard Young Tulalip Tribe 7615 Totem Beach Rd Marysville W A 98271 Public Works Dtr Kent Water Dist 220 -4th Av S Kent W A 98032 Soos Creek Water/Sewer Dist PO Box 58039 Renton WA 98058-1039 Coal Creek Utility District 6801 132nd Place SE Newcastle, W A 98059 WA State Dept. of Wildlife 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. Mill Creek, W A 98012 W A State Dept. of Ecology NW Regional Office. . 3190 -160th Ave SE Bellevue, W A 98008-5452 W A St.Dept. of Transportation Mail Stop 240 15700 Dayton Ave. No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, W A 98133-9710 WASt. Ecology DeptlWQSW Unit Linda Matlock PO Box 47696 Olympia, W A 98504-7696 • TR4 WD23 WD4l WD57 • Cedar River Water/Sewer Dist 18300 SE Lk Youngs Rd Renton W A 8058-9799 City of Renton, Public Works Dept. Development Services Div. 1055 South Grady Way Renton W A 98055 Water Dist #90 15606 SE 128th St Renton W A 98059-8522 Water Dist #111 27224 -144th Av SE Kent WA 98042-9058 WA State Dept. of Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. Division P.O. Box 43155 Olympia, W A 98504-3155 W A St.Dept. of Transportation Mail Stop 230 15700 Dayton Ave. No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 WA St.Dept. of Transportation Mail Stop 250 15700 Dayton Ave. No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 WD12 WD32 WD55 WD58 " 9477947777/L02P0005 1023059246/L02P0005 BAGLEY EVERETT OR ELEANOR 11860 142ND SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059060/L02P0005 BINDER PATRICIA M 980 HOQUIAM A V NE RENTON W A 98059 1023059357/L02P0005 CORMIER STEVE D+DANA D 14701 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059345/L02P0005 DAUGHERTY GREGORY WAYNE 12201 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059004/L02P0005 FAIN GARY D & DEBORAH L 14429 SE I 16TH ST RENOTN W A 98056 0638100215/L02P0005 HARDING ROBERT A 11822 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98056 I I 23059066/L02P0005 HILLS WALTER W 28300 35TH A V NE ARLINGTON W A 98223 0638100212/L02P0005 INTERNATIONAL CHURCH OF THE FOURSQUARE GOSPEL 11840 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059257/L02P0005 JOHNSON WALTER MIKA THR YN M 12006 142ND AV SE RENTON W A 98059 ~3059065/L02P0005 ANDERSON ROBERT PO BOX 353 MAPLE VALLEY W A 98027 1023059350/L02P0005 BERG BRIAN D 12035 148TH A V SE RENTON W A 98059 1123059084/L02P0005 CAMPBELL DON R 12022 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059390/L02P0005 CRULLRICKH 11813148THSE RENTON WA 98055 I I 23059032/L02P0005 DAVISON MATHEW J+KIMMI R 14831 SE I 20TH ST RENTON W A 98056 UAC-FC/L02P0005 FOUR CREEKS UNINCORPORATED AREA COUNCIL PO BOX 3501 RENTON W A 98056 1023059179/L02P0005 HAWORTH CASEY D 4108 NE 9TH PL RENTON W A 98059 1123059087/L02P0005 HOLMQUIST ALAN D+JUNE LEA 12050 148TH SE RENTON W A 98055 1023059017/L02P0005 INTLEKOFER MICHAEL J 4472 I 19TH AV SE BELLEVUE W A 98006 1023059344/L02P0005 KIGER KENNETH E & TINA M 11826 142ND AV SE RENTON W A 98059 ~3059317/L02P0005 ANDERSON WESLEY V & VERDA W 12028 142ND AV SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059145/L02P0005 BIGELOW CAROLYN 6929 37TH SW SEATTLE WA 98126 I 123059038/L02P0005 CHILDS RITA KRISTINE 12004 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059346/L02P0005 DAUGHERTY GREG 12201 148TH A V SE RENTON W A 98056 1123059034/L02P0005 ELLIOTT TIMOTHY A+BARBARA 14855 SE 120TH ST RENTON W A 98059 1023059368/L02P0005 GACEK THERESA HELEN ETAL 2823 16TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98144 1023059337/L02P0005 HELSBY WYNDI L 11808 142ND A V SE RENTON W A 98059 1123059053/L02P0005 HOOVER RODDIE 12012 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98059 1023059158/L02P0005 JOHNSON WALTER M+KA THR YN M 12006 142ND AV SE RENTON W A 98059 10230593911L02P0005 KING COUNTY 500 KC ADMIN BLDG 500A SEATTLE WA 98104 I -'-::.. .'. . 11230590861L02POO05 .3059039/L02POO05 .3059061/L02POO05 KUBISKY JOHN A LEMMA JAMES P LEMMA JAMES P 14825 SE 120TH ST 14841 E 120TH ST 14841 SE 120TH RENTON WA 98055 RENTON W A 98055 RENTON W A 98055 10230591411L02POO05 1023059354/L02POO05 10230590301L02POO05 MATTHEWSON TROY JON MCCLEASE CHRIS E+GWENNA PALANCHUK GEORGIY +NA TAL Y A 12014 142ND AV SE 11625 148TH AV SE 12205 148TH A V SE RENTON W A 98059 RENTON W A 98059 RENTON W A 98059 06381 0021 0/L02P0005 0638100220/L02POO05 06381001801L02POO05 PAXHIA MICHAEL A+BARBARA J PESTL LUEDER K PESTL LUEDER K 11920 148TH AV SE 10423 19TH S 10423 19TH S RENTON W A 98059 SEATTLE WA 98168 SEATTLE WA 98168 1023059259/L02POO05 1023059113/L02POO05 SDl31L02POO05 POWERS JACK M+DEN1SE T PRUMMER FRANCIS J R. STRACKE, FACILITIES & PLANNING 12207 148TH A V SE 12227 142ND AV SE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT #403 RENTON W A 98059 RENTON WA 98056 1220N 4TH ST RENTON WA 98055 1023059358/L02POO05 10230593591L02POO05 1023059360/L02POO05 RYNNING DAVID L+HEIDI A RYNNING DAVID L+HEID1 A RYNNING DAVID L+HEIDI A 14619 SE 116TH ST 14619 SE 116TH ST 14619 SE 116TH ST RENTON W A 98059 RENTON W A 98059 RENTON W A 98059 1023059023/L02POO05 1023059319/L02POO05 I 1230590021L02P0005 SCHIRMAN MICHAEL+WOLF CYNTH SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC SHENK DAVID 12013 148H AV SE 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 12206 148TH A V SE RENTON W A 98059 KIRKLAND W A 98034 RENTON W A 98059 1023059401/L02POO05 1023059093/L02POO05 1023059058/L02POO05 SHEPHERD ROBERT DD + JOAN K SMOCK WLIA LEE SPIRY DENNIS G+WDITH E 22059 SE 188TH 920 HOQUIM A V NE 11832 142ND AV SE MAPLE V ALLEY WA 98038 RENTON W A 98059 RENTON W A 98059 SD8/L02POO05 CG21L02POO05 1123059071/L02POO05 STEVE CRA WFORD, NEW SUSAN SULLIVAN WAlDMANN GUSTAV H CONSTRUCTION 24311 SE 47TH ST 720N ELLST ISSAQUAH SCHOOL DISTRICT #411 ISSAQUAH WA 98029 CAMANO ISLAND W A 98292 565 NW HOLLY ST ISSAQUAH WA 98027 1023059189/L02POO05 1023059021/L02POO05 WALTOSZ JAMES H WEGNER BRETT+MARY K 12021 148TH AV SE 12211 148TH AV SE RENTON W A 98059 RENTON W A 98059 I • 'i .... {lJe Seattle ~trees ~1W~ REPRESENTING THE Seattle'ost-Jlntelligencer Re Advertiser Account #78871004 Ad TEXT:KING COUNTY DEPT. Ad # 732273900 OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DOES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98057-5212 NOTICE OF PERMIT HEARING & RECOMMENDATION LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION Request: Formal (Subdivision) File # & Name: L02P0005 East Renton Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Dev" Inc. Location: West of 148th Ave SE at epprox Imately 120th 51 Proposal: Subdivide approx. 17.01 acres into 66 lois for detached single- family dwellings Project Manager: Karen Scharer, 206-296-7114 Hearing Date and Time: March 22, 2007 at 9:30am Location of Public Hearing: ODES, Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Dept. Recommendation to Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County ODES, Land Use -Services Division, at the -address listed above. Published this 22nd day of December, 2006 ... <lJe Seattle (![l .. es ~~ \ 1 REPRESENTING THE 'seattJe'oot-lnteUigencer PO Box 70, Seattle, WA 98111 K C /DEV & ENVIRON ATTN JACQUIE GONDOLA 900 OAKESDALE AVE SW RENTON, WA 98055 Re: Advertiser Account #78871004 Ad #: 732273900 3619902/3 STATE OF WASHINGTON Counties of King and Snohomish Affidavit of Publication The undersigned, on oath states that he/she is an authorized representative of The Seattle Times Company, publisher of The Seattle Times and representing the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, separate newspapers of general circulation published daily in King and Snohomish Counties, State of Washington. The Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer have been approved as legal newspapers by orders of the Superior Court of King and Snohomish Counties. The notice, in the exact form annexed, was published in the regular and entire issue of said paper or papers and distributed to its subscribers during all of the said period. 12122106 Subscribed an (D TE) (NOTARY SIGNAT R) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle • • ./ .. STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Daniele M Ledvina, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily 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 daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County 10urnal 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 King County 10urnal (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 December 22, 2006. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum, . of $211.00. .,rY"'·'·'·· '." "'. .,~~.1.' :f. .... .."..; .'J .' \\\\111 II il//II/. ,.~~" ." .. ,\,\ 0 CO. 'I, "!,, .,' <0 ....... /1/ /';, ,~ i. .::::' •• ;.. om r,·I.!':.:-/'. c~ 'l t~ , .... • v '0 .. 0 -:,. '" Legal Advertising Representative, King County Journal ,:..-:: 1·!-,':;'} /1" ,) (;'.;) ~ ~ -.. "'0' ,', .. -'( Subscribed and sworn to me this 26'" day of December, 200? ::: :,,., /en 1: ~ -.-') . , '; .-.0 <;0, ""'. == ~ , .-.~.. 0 ' . -'" -:;....,.0 • ~"" -. . ''''''.0 ~ ..... 1 ------ - -""." .~ 0 0 .. 'J'l~ \oc::-..::;-}· B 0 Cantelon ~.: ·~)tO ··.:'c:~:",?.· $' Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Kent, Wa~hirtgt.'}?Y ,D~b\\c.~\,\~' if PO Number: ""'" /J/IJIIII!\I\\' ~,?,'" ..,. ....... < •• r..~""'"> .. "'"~ . ..,. ... ~:..J ,.,.. 0:)~VW\~ Daniele M Ledvma fbi) CZY2~y 07/ KING COUNTY DEPT.OFD~OPMENT & ENVIRONMEl'.'TAL SERVICES (DDES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, . _Rellton, WA98057·5212 Name: L02P0005 East Renton Applicant: Camwest Real Est.:'1te Dev., Inc. Location: West of 148th Ave SE at approximately 120th St Proposal: Subdivide approx. 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached sin~ gle~family dwellings Project Manager: Karen Scharer, 206·296·7114 Hearing Date and Time: March 22, 2007 at 9:30am Location of Public Hearing: DDES, Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057·5212 Dept. Recommendation to Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County ODES, Land Use Services Dhision, at the address listed above. Published this 22nd day of December, 2006 Published in the King County Journal December 22, 2006. #862529 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ----------------- GolI; Shirley From: Sent: To: Subject: Thanks again Please confirm receipt. •• GolI, Shirley Tuesday, December 19, 2006 8:56 AM 'Legals'; 'Iegals.bellevue@kingcountyjournal.com' Another one please •• Please publish legal notice in your newspaper on Friday, December 22,2006, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please fax or call me as soon as possible. Please submit your invoice with 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to DOES Accounts Payable as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. . Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DOES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98057-5212 NOTICE OF PERMIT HEARING & RECOMMENDATION LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION Request: Formal (Subdivision) File # & Name: L02P0005 East Renton Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Dev., Inc. Location: West of 148'h Ave SE at approximately 120'h St Proposal: Subdivide approx. 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings Project Manager: Karen Scharer, 206-296-7114 Hearing Date and Time: March 22, 2007 at 9:30am Location of Public Hearing: DOES, Hearing Room Dept. Recommendation to 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DOES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Published this 22nd day of December, 2006 c.c. Accounts Payable/Admin. Services/ DOES Application File: L02P0005 S.Times Ace!. No. 078871004 1 • • Page 1 of2 GolI, Shirley From: Jody Barton Uody.barton@kingcountyjournal.comj Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 9:28 AM To: GolI, Shirley Subject: RE: Another one please Hi Shirley, I have received your 2nd notice (re: File# L02P0005) to publish in the King County Journal on Friday December 22, 2006. Thanks, Dani for Jody Jody Barton Legal Advertising Representative King County Publications, Ltd. 600 Washington Ave. S. PO Box 130 Kent, WA 98035 253-234-3506 (Phone) 253-859-9737 (Fax) "We come to love not by finding a perfect person, but by learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -----Original Message----- From: GolI, Shirley [mailto:Shirley.GolI@METROKC.GOVl Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 8:56 AM To: Legals; legals.bellevue@kingcountyjournal.com Subject: Another one please Thanks again Please confirm receipt. Please publish legal notice in your newspaper on Friday, December 22, 2006, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please fax or call me as soon as possible. Please submit your invoice with 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to DOES Accounts Payable as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DOES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98057-5212 12/19/2006 • !II~HLC_I:_QU!:RMIT HEARING_& RECQMIIIlENOAIIQN LAND US!: SERVICES DIVISION Request: Formal (Subdivision) File # & Name: L02P0005 East Renton Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Dev., Inc. Location: West of 148 th Ave SE at approximately 120th St • Proposal: Subdivide approx. 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings Project Manager: Karen Scharer, 206-296-7114 Hearing Date and Time: March 22, 2007 at 9:30am Location of Public Hearing: DOES, Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Dept. Recommendation to Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DOES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Published this 22nd day of December, 2006 c.c. Accounts Payable/Admin. Services/ DOES Application File: L02P0005 S.Times Acct. No. 078871004 12/i9/2006 Page 2of2 Page I of2 ! . • • GolI, Shirley From: Legals [Iegals@seattletimes.comj Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:44 AM To: Goll, Shirley Subject: RE: Another one please Hi Shirley, Your Legal Notice is scheduled to run on Friday, 12/22 ( Times & PI ) under AD#3619902 at the cost of $151.36. Thanks, Jared From: GolI, Shirley [mailto:Shirley.GolI@METROKC.GOVl Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 8:56 AM To: Legals; legals.bellevue@kingcountyjournal.com Subject: Another one please Thanks again Please confirm receipt. Please publish legal notice in your newspaper on Friday, December 22, 2006, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please fax or call me as soon as possible. Please submit your invoice with 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to DOES Accounts Payable as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DOES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98057-5212 NOTIC~OF PEBMIT I-U=ABU.j~~~ECOMMENDATIO~!I! LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION "Request: Formal (Subdivision) File # & Name: L02P0005 East Renton Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Dev., Inc. Location: West of 148 th Ave SE at approximately 120th St Proposal: Subdivide approx. 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings Project Manager: Karen Scharer, 206-296-7114 Hearing Date and Time: March 22, 2007 at 9:30am Location of Public Hearing: DDES, Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Dept. Recommendation to Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DDES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. 12/19/2006 ----------------------------------------------------- • Published this 22nd day of December, 2006 c.c. Accounts Payable/Admin. Services/ DOES Application File: L02P0005 S.Times Ace!. No. 078871004 12/19/2006 • Page 2 of2 • Noti~ of Decision- SEPA. Threshold Determination and Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 Notice of Recommendation & Hearing File No.: L02P0005 Project Name: East Renton (Type 3) Applicant: Camwest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten Phone No.: 425-825-1955 DDES Project Manager: Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager II Phone No.: 206-296-7114 Email: karen.scharer@metrokc.gov Project Location: West of 148th Ave SE at approximately 120th St. STR 10-23-05 Parcel No.: 1023059023 Project Description: This is a request for a subdivision of 17.01 acres into 66 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The proposed density is 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The lot sizes are predominately 5,000 square feet. Permits Requested: Formal Subdivision Department Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner: Approve, subject to conditions SEPA Threshold Determination: Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance Issued: December 15, 2006 Date of Public Hearing: March 22, 2007 at 9:30 AM DOES Hearing Room -first floor 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 The Department of Development and EnVironmental Services (DOES) will Issue a written report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Persons wishing to receive a copy of the report should contact DOES at the address listed below. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County Council. Appeal procedures will be stated in the Examiner's written decision. . Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact the Project Manager at the phone number listed above. Written comments may also be submitted to DOES. A public hearing as required by law will be held to consider the approval of this application. If the Renton School District announces a district-wide school closure due to adverse weather conditions or similar area emergency, the public hearing on this matter will be postponed. Interested parties will be notified of the time and date of the rescheduled hearing. Any questions regarding postponements and rescheduling can be directed to the Hearing Examiner's Office at (206) 296-4660. Comment/Appeal Procedure on SEPA Threshold Determination: Comments on this SEPA determination are welcome. This SEPA determination may also be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. A notice of appeal must be filed with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007, and be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 payable to the King County Office of Finance. If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed, the appellant shall also file a Statement of Appeal with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 11, 2007. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision being appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that decision. Further, the Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal, appeal fee or Statement of Appeal, deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. .( •.. Appeals must be submitted to the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DOES) at the'following address: DDES--Land Use Services Division Attn: Permit Center ~A'N flLJ;CoPt 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 Date of Mailing: December 15. 2006 If you have any questions regarding the appeal procedures, please contact the Planner at the phone number listed above. If you require this material in Braille, audio cassette, or large print, call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TIY). You are receiving this notice because our records indicate that you own property within approximately r fi,r because you requested to receive notice of the decision. ~ " . , . .-:,.-:--..... ' King County Dept ofDeveJopment and Environmental Services Lalit! Use Services Divisioh 900 Oakesdale A venu'e Southwest . ~' .. ' Renton, Washington 9~055~1219 .,,1 , . , , .' Application Number( s): _' -,I. A,-,-,,-O-l-I '--P-"O'-"O<-7-1--1-1 ____ --i-__ _ ( STR: _____ _ Date Filed: LJ-3-02. '. '. . ... -" . \ ... ~ ., ~ , . A pp I ication Name: -"='-"'-I-----'='-"'==+-''-'--'----'----'''''''''-'--'''''''-'------'----jf--=--------- ... '" .' ' .; ". . '.:'.' . . :. " . '., . . I (We) reqliest the'followmg permIt(s) or approval(s): " , ' . . . ~. ! •• • r .. , o Building,pen:nit '. , " " o Shoreline SubstaIltial Development Permit '0 Clearing &. Gniding Pennlt o Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, o Temporary Use Perniit o Shoreline Variance o Binding Site Plan o Shoreline Redesignation • o Site,De,vel9pment P~i"rr\it" o Zoning V arian~e' " , '. o Boundary Line Adjustmeut o Short Subdivision. ;. ,', )!(;' Ft'nrlal' Subd.i.~i~iol) "',' ," b' U l:ban PlanrlecLIi'evelophlfait [J Conditional Use Permit o Reuse Of Public Schools 0, Special Use Pennit OZone Reclas'sification '. ('.' ,.' ... ' .. o Plat AlbatioIl . , ' o Plat Vacation ~ ., . 0. Site Specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment o P-Suffix Amendment o Road VariaIIce . • 0' Drainage VariaIICe, ", '" "0 Rigllt~of-WayUse Permii' o Shorelin~j:lxelI)ption" '" , , . , ' . ... . " .. , , o Reasonable Use Exception 0, Public Agency 8r.. lltility'Iixception o Periodic Review fof Miiling S'ites " ,~ .l " , ., ,: ' 1, '\?a,Ij2r<' th'~'I~~K')" '. ...' being duly sworn, state lhat I am the owner or ,... " (prznt name) T""'an' GC." ..... "c::t ' " . . ' , officer ofthe corporation owning property des'9l"Jbed in the legal description filed with tiris appli-' cation and that I have reviewed tire rules and r6gulation~ of the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) regarding the preparation aIld filing ofthis applicat,ion aIld that all , statements, aIISWerS and inf9rmation submitted with is application are in all respects true, accurate and complete to the be~t of my knowledge and, belief. , r<) During the review of this application, it may b'e necessary for DDES staff to make OIle or more site :ii r visits, By signing this application fonn,You are givirig pennission for these visils" Ifit is rental;g ii ~ (3 property, lhe ownerher.eby'~grees to notify tenants of possible site visits, ~ li'i '~ g .~.~ .' .. ' ,_.: -:~ /.:...:~ ~ \:>~ ... ,'" ~ tt ~ liar: "b';'-;-A1~~A:tJ ~ -/~ , i·J? . printed na/lie ~ : . signature qJ20~ \Ne..I~.th pL •. moo 'I V/}Ii r;::J r-, ,I !2f[-'\ '-' ~iU! ,APR 0 ~ 2002 ,,:-j IfllPp,\icable: state below, the name, address and telephone number of the anthoriz~.~~nt1?D,E.S. tins appltcatlon as shown cin the CertlficatLOl1 and Transfer of ApphcatLOn Status form filed WItli. ( I this application, ... MAIN FILE COP name· telephone city, state zip , ,-L.D~PPOO!> . F96\spr5\J.UPermit.app 7/24/98 clc Application forLa Use Permit(s) Page Two For l?orllJal Subdivisions only: E4 S T "Q./:EAJ TOt\J Na,me oj Subdivision Jiegistered Land Surveyor CLAY L.OOHIS Engineer €/<.J6 Developer Land Surveyor's Certification: I hereby certify that the accompanying plat has been inspected by me and conforms to all rules and regulations ofthe platting resolution and stalldards for King County, Washington. Date: . 4j-2,,,2. .. • , . , , • 77<IAD AS-SO CIA-n=..s Name / /8/~ j /5 ~ AYE ;I-J.E ;fddress and Zip l«1R..JcLA:~ ttAlI Q803Y '~S)'.'SU-8W8 ' ',Telephone # '" " , .... ",. '!/<..IAD A~O::::4A -reS Na~l~ - '//8'<1 II~ AJE AJC . Address and Zip'K/~ In tvA q8!:>~r' ,(~~) 8~/~6W-8 TelephOli# Land Surveyor Seal "", , . . .;, ~ , ~ote: Application forms and submittal requirements are subject to revisionwithciut notice. ''''';" ~' iH!lllIoo. ',WiliE . . ·:1 . ~ ~~~~ ~U'il~ • '. ',' April 3, 2002 Trishah Bull King County Departll1 ent of· .. Development & Environmental Services 90b.Qakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: East Renton Property Preliminary Plat Application Dear Ms. Bull, • -. . ~ f;:;' r0l f;:;' ~ \11'/' r::J ~\ I.~ \1:7 L~, J i IV, ! i~ II n \ __ w:-' Ui \ AP~ 0 32002 L~j , K.C. D.D.E.S. CamWe~t Deveiopment,Inc. is pleased to submit a Preliminary Plat Application for the East Renton Property, located at 148\h Avenue SE. The site consists of two " parcels totaling ],9.57 acres. One ofthe parcels is currenily occupied by one single- family residence and the' second parcel is vacant. The propos,al is to develop a 66 lot single-family home community. Currently, two parks are proposed, totaling 33,963 square feet. The required parksj:Jacefor the development is 25,740 square feet. We previously met last year at a pre~applicationmeeting to discuss the proposal. . ' ' . Enclosed are the following required documents as outlined in King County's Instruction for Subdivision Applications: I. One (I) original Application fonn.' 2. One (I) copy of the current Assessor's map.' The 'map shows the, property to be subdivided, outlined in red, and the surroundingprciperties.' The properties . located within 500 feet of the subject property are highlighted in ,yellow. 3. Three (3) copies of the Legal Descriptions, two parcyls, for the subject site. 4. One (I) copy of the legal lot status documentation .. 5. Twenty (20) copies of the 'Environmental Checklist. . . .6. Three (3) copies of the Certificate of Water Availability·Fonn issued by King,' County water district 90. ' 7. Three (3) copies of the Certificate of Sewer Availability Fonns issued by the cit~ of Renton. .' '. . " " . ,!W~gNtf:uILE 8.' Thirty five (35) copies of the proposed Prehmmary Plat.created by Tnad & ' reolPY Associates dated April 3, 2002 .. 9. One (I) copy of the reduced plat map: 8 \1," x 14" created by Triad & Associates dated April 3, 2002. 10. Three (3) copies of the Fire District Receipt. The ~eceipt was issued by Fire District 10. - ,.~ . ,lID . . . 0:' .. ~ M~~~ ~2f!ljhW~ •• • , 11. Eight (8) copies of the Level~One Drainage Analysis created by Triad & Associates dated March 27, 2002. . - 12. Three (3) copies of the Transportation Certificate .ofConcurrency. 13. Three (3) copies of the Densjty and DimensionsCalculation Worksheet. 14. Three(3) copies of the Certificate/affid\lvit of sensitive areas compliance fonn. ·15. Three (3) copies'ofthe Applicant Status Form.. . . ." 16. Three (3)copies of the Title Reports for both parcels. . 17. Eight (8) copies of the Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Garry Struthers & . Associates dated January 16,2002. 18. Eight(8) copies of the Geotechnical test logs prepared by Associated Earth Sciences. CamWest looks forward to working with you on this proposaL Should you have any questions or need any additi'onal information, please contact me at (425) 825-' 1955 or sslatten@camwestcom. Sara Slatten. Cain West Development, Inc. enclosures . , • • ............. ..... . .......•. filii;, x.i;;iNST.RUCTJ d N' King Coumy ·i,! ............. ,..:"·~·9R····· •• · ." ......• '. ".. .........•. , .. ' . Ocrl. of D,:\,elopment and Environ."Tlcn:al Services Land l~s:-Sc:r.-iccs Division 9:() Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Reruon. Washington 98055·1219 ,SUBDlV1S10NiAPPLlCATIONS .... The information sought herein is necessary in or'der to .evaluate the merits of your proposed. subdivision and to assess the environmental impact. The en\"i~onmental checklist will be the basis for determining if an environmental impact statement will be required prior to any approval of this request. Your application wil1 be evaluated on the basis of the information you provide, the King County Comprehensive Plan, pertinent provisions of the King County Code, site inspection,. testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing, and conunents submitted by interested public agencies. Copies of the King County Comprehensive Plan and King County Code are available for inspection at the public counter in our office, at the Main Branch of the Seattle Public Library, and in the Governmental Research Library, 307 Municipal Building, Seattle, Washington. PRE-APPLICA TION MEETING AND FILING OF APPLICATION Prelimin~ discussions must be held with the Land Use Services Division staff prior to filin~ the plat. A filing fee is required, the amount to be determined at the time of filing and based .~ .. on the latest adopted fee schedule. If payment is by check, the check shal1 be made payable to the King County Office of Finance. HEARING . A public hearing will be held by the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner at which all evidence supporting or opposing the proposal mil be heard. If other applications, such as a rezone, shoreline substantial development permit, and/or street vacation is proposed or required in conjunction with the subdivision, it (they) may be scheduled for the same hearing. The . Zoning and Subdivision Examiner wil1 render a written decision, which is appealable to the King County Council. APPEAL The Examiner's report includes information on the method of appeal available and the time limit within which an appeal must be filed. . PRELI1\1INARY APPROVALIDISAPPROVAL Preliminary approval or disapproval is final unless appealed to the King County Council. If appealed, the King County Council ",ill render a decision FINAL APPROVAL The final plat must be recorded within' Si>..1y (60) months of the date of the preliminary approval. D\STRUCTIONS FOR SUBt'lSION APPLICATIONS (Colltillul Application Documents Z Application: complete and submit one original. 2.: Assessor's Mapes): Submit one set of current Assessor's maps of the property to be subdivided, including adjoining properties under the same ownership as the property being V subdivided. The map(s) must cover all properties within 500 feet of the subdivider's ownership. Outline the bO!lndaries of t~oposed subdivision in red. Outline adjoining .Qwnership in yellow. If Assessor's maps are stamped "see enlargement," include the enlargement copy with your application. Prints of Assessor's maps must be ordered from the Department of Assessments, Room 700A, King County Administration Building, 500 -4th Avenue, Seattle (206) 296-7300. Legal Description: Submit two copies, typewritten on sheet size 8~ x 11" paper. . V The legal description of your property may be obtained from the office of Assessor. BE ABSOLUTELY SURE that the legal description is correct and rt;orre!;ponds precisely with property you outlined in red on the Assessor's map. Proof of "legal" Lot Status: Documentation method of segregation of the ~ subject property. • Applicant'S Environmental Checklist: / All items should be answered as concisely and candidly as If information requested does not apply to the proposed project, enter "n/a" (not applicable). Additional sheets may be used if desired. The applicant will be contacted by the Land Use Services Division if additional --information is required. Failure to respond may cause postponement of consideration of your request, or if an environmental impa'ct statement has been prepared for your proposal, you must submit same with your application. Water availability ~ Submit I set. Preliminary approval for the creation of a new water system in accordance with the provisions of the applicable Coordinated Water System Plan, or for connection with a private well from the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health; or The attached form concerning water availability to the site must be 'given to the appropriate existing water purveyor to complete (water district; city; water association) and then returned with this application. At the top of the form a space is provided for a description of the site. In this space the legal description of the site should be inserted or attached on a separate sheet if it is too lengthy. For sites located in the Service Planning Area of the Urban Growth Area, if the development is not proposing to be served by an existing or new Group A water system at the time of construction, a Certificate of Future Connection must be given to the appropriate Group A water purveyor to complete and then returned with this form. Certificate of Sewer Availability/Septic Availability -Submit 1 set. Preliminary approval for individual or community on-site sewage disposal systems from the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health must be submitted with this application; Q[ . The attached form concerning sewer availability to the site must be given to tlie appropriate agency to complete (sewer district) and then returned with this application. At the top of the form' a space is provided for a description of the site. In this space the legal description of the site should be inserted or attached on a separate sheet if it is too lengthy. r961:opu\120.1p\:n,~-Sub.120 2/19/9'-11;00 ~/dj Page 2 • • • • > .' L""STRUCTIO:\S FOR SL'BDtSION APPLICA TIO:\S (Continue. ~c:f"'" 14. ~ ~6. 17. If the site is located in the Sen1ce Planning .'\rea of the Urban Gro"'1h Area, and an interim on-site sewage system is proposed, the following information is also required: a. The sewer availability form must be submitted to the most logical sewer pun'eyor to complete sewer district) and returned with this application along with a letter which demonstrates to the satisfaction of the director of the Department of Development and Environmental Services that the requirement to receive sewer service from the purveyor is unreasonable or infeasible at the time of construction; and b. A certificate that the system will be managed by the purveyor or other authorized public agency as defined by R.CW. 39.24.020; and c. A Certificate of Future Connection must be given to the appropriate agency to complete and then returned with this application. / Preliminary Plat: SUbmi1strints of the proposed plat. ~'::> / All prints shall be folded so they will fit into a legal file folder with the name of the subdivision visible. The information on the plat checklist must be shown on the face of the preliminary plat. Fire District Receipt: Obtain from the·fire district. . ,0 . Level-One Drainage Analysis: Submit eight rj) c ~op Transportation Certificate of Concurrency Submit ~~~~~ . Density and Dimensions: Submit one copy. V'" Certificate/affidavit of sensitive areas compliance: Submit one copy. Applicant Status Form: Submit one copy. ./ ~ Copies of variance decisions required per King &Zode 21A. A list of other issued or pending permits or decisions related to the proposal. Preliminary Application Fees: Consult the current fee schedule or discuss with DDES staff for the appropriate fees to be paid at time of application. ." 18. Additional Information: You may submit any additional information (i.e. sketches, engineering reports, petitions, photographs, etc.) which you believe will justifY, c1arij)', or explain your request or will assist in assessing the potential impact of granting your request. The Land Use Services Division or the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner may at any time j/if;ofirAi li)fl¥?f· p,,,,,, ciSh, (8) cop;" '3 The following mu t 1. Nam_e...,n 2. Name, a engineer . . 3. Name, address, and phone number of developer. 4. Name, address, and phone number of owner. or registered Page 3 ;' ',' '1> , ~ .. . . " . ~"" .;. • " , • 'Il • • . , .' ~STRucnONS FOR SlJBDtSION APPLICA nONS (COmiln/Cd). 5. Section, Township, Range of subdivision .. 6. Acreage of subdivision. 7. Number oflots, units, and proposed density. 8. Existing zone classification. 9. Proposed use (i.e., townhouse single-family, detached). 10. Means of sewage disposal; if sewer district, include name .. 11. Source of water; if water district, include name. 12. School district. 13. Fire district. 14: Telephone service. IS. Power source. 16. Legal description--type or print. 17. Field topography and verification. 18. . Vicinity map showing sufficient area and detail to cl~arly locate the subdivision in relation to surrounding roads, parks, rivers, and municipal boundaries together with its scale. (Include Section, Township, and Range lines.) . Graphic representation shall show the following: I. North arrow and scale. Recommended scale -1" to 1 00'. . . 2. . Indicate by a heavy line the boundaries of the subdivision . . 3. Use heavier line weight for streets so they will stand out from the lots and contour lines. 4. Dimension alllotsand streets to the nearest foot. 5. Label all streets, existing and proposed. 6. Verified field survey, with contour intervals of either 2-feet or 5-feet (see drainage manual for specifics) within the boundaries of the proposaL . 7. Show boundary lines of adjacent tracts within 500 feet of the subject subdivision together with property ownerships. 8. Show all existing structures in their appropriate; locations both within the proposed subdivision and within 200 feet of the boundaries of the proposed subdivision. 9. Number lots consecutively from 1 to the total number oflots. 10. Locilte and show all sensitive areas and hydrologic features within 500 feet of the boundaries. Indicate if streams are intermittent and the limits of any swamps or wetlands. Estimate the limits of the 25-year floodplain for streams andlOO-year floodplain for rivers. Provide names of all water features and all drainage basins served by or containing these features. n6/5ptlll\110.1p\ In,t·Sub.120 2119/9'-11: 00 MId) Page 4 , , • . . I:'STRUCnOl'lS FOR Sljlm'SIOl'I APPLICA nol'ls (ContiI1Ued)- I J. If parcels ofland are set aside for nonresidential or reserved for future development, indicate proposed use . . 12. If electrical transmission lines cross the subject property, show locations of poles and towers. 13. Provide adjacentexisting zoning. 14. Identify substantial grading outside the proposed right-of-way. I s. Show sight distance for entry to all County Roads. 16. Existing sewers, waterrnains, culverts, or other underground facilities within tract, indicating pipe sizes,grades exact location, as obtained from public records. 17. Show location, widths and names of all existing or prior platted streets or other public ways, railroad and utility rights-of-way, parks, and other public open spaces. 18. Show any existing easements on the subject property. Page 5 ®~ .-----------.~------- King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Awnuc Southm:st Renton, WA ~m055-1219 Application No. I, . , hereby certify that 1 am an/the owner of the property which is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If 1 am not the sole owner of the property, I certify that I am authorized by any and all other owners of the property to make this,certification and transfer any and all rights I1we have to apply for this permit or approval to: _______________ _ I, therefore certify that is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. By being the "applicant," that individual assumes financial responsibility for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. 1 certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Owner Date Signed I, , hereby certify that 1 am the "applicant" for this permit or approval. 1 shall remain the "applicant" for the duration ofthis permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. I accept financial responsibility for all fees associated with this permit or approval and will receive any refunds. My mailing address is: _________________ _ -OR- I, ,9&)r GkA-rrD+i , hereby certify that I am an authorized agent of C/r1Vl itVe4f. {>GVf2UJf? , a corporation or other business association authorized to do business in the State of Washingto and that thiS bus mess associatIOn IS the "applicant" for thiS permit or approval and IS finanCially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This association shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. . Ot''' ,"00.,"'., .ddre$ _hhl, b",,,,, =oc'.';oo" ~~Dif"'11 f\\.£ C I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing isOOn~@ectq "\\Ij /',':--15'-'VLSI , . 1 ~ 2 -02 APR 0 3 ., . Date Signed 20 - S:\P_TECH\Tara D\Forms\Certification & Transfer of App Status. doc 09/21/00 K.C. D.! i~ 4' .'It I' , 1l:\'~.' :, NOTICE TO APPLICANT.y law, this department returns all eng in. and other plans to the applicant. If, however, you wish to authorize the department to return engineering and other plans directly to the engineer, architect, or other consultant for the limited purpose of making corrections, please designate below: I authorize this department to return plan directly to' my consultant(s) for the limited purpose of making corrections, as designated on this form. CONSULTANTS: Signature of Applicant Date Signed .. ~:-" to -'I ... ' "t S:\P TECH\Tara D\Forms\Certification & Transfer of App Status.doc ...... ',/ -09/21/00 ~-.. ~ ~M~~'.t~~~ • , EAST RENTON 0 I INTLEKOFERISCHIRMAN PROPERTY / . Legal Descrip tion PARCEL 1 FROM TRANSNA 770N 77TLE INSURANCE CO. ORDER No. 3120487; LOT 2 OF KING COUNTY SHORT PLA T NO. 1177003, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 7806130632, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STA TE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL 2 FROM TRANSNA 770N 77TLE INSURANCE CO. ORDER No. 3120486; THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SEC770N 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, w.M. ~/N KING COUNTY WASHINGTON;' EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD, (148TH A V£ S.E.) '-,-'-: _ •. _ ,'"~r' -.," . " ~ .• . . : .... ".:, • 'c-;" '" .. ~. ',-' .. -.. -",,. . ..' .':: ,- . .~. .. . : ... ~ .:: -.. : .... ~m©mWJ[i 1'\\ , I . I . , I , APR 0 '3 2002'-~ K.C. D.D.E.S, Mar 29 02 1Q:Ola KCbJD SO 42527741 p.2 • ® KIng County ODES This certfficate provldes the SeatUe King County Department of Public Health and the Department of Development and Environmental Services with Information necessarj to evaluate development proposals. DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES goO oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Wa 98055--1219 King County Certificate of Water Availability 00 not write in this box number name o Building Permit ~ Preliminary Plat or PUD o Short Subdivision o Rezone or other _______ _ ApplICant's name; Cam West -East RentPD Proposed use: SJngle Family R§idence l.ocatlOn; 12013 148111 Apl( 68 lots (attach map and legal descrlption if necessary) Water purveyor information: 1. 0 a. Water will be provided by service c:onnectfon only to an existing {slze} water main that Is fmnt!ng the site. 2. 3- 4. OR ~ b. Water service wHl require an Improvement to the water system of: ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ •• OR D. a OR D. a. ,0 (1) feet of water main to reach the site; and/or o (2) The construction of a dIStrIbution system on the site; and/or ~ (3) other. D.E. Required The water system Is In conformance with a County approved water comprehensive ptan. The water system improvement Is not in conformance with a county approved water comprehensive ptan and will require a water comprehenSIve plan amendment (This may cause a delay in issuance of (l pennlt or approval). The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district, or has been granted Boundary Review Boan:! approval for extension of service outside the district Or CIty, or Is within the County approved service area of a private water purveyor. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (eRB) approval wHl be necessary to provide service. Water wUl be availabl@ at the rate of flow and duration Indicated below at no less than 20 psi measured at the nearest fire hydrant feet from the building/property (or as marked on the attached map): Rate of Row ilt Peak Demand Duration o lesS than 500 gpm (approx. gpm) 0 less than 1 hour J 2 o 500 to 999gpm 01 hour to 2 hours Exllibit No. . ~ LOOO gpm or more ~ 2 hours or more ;-;~-~~~ ____ .... _ o flowtestof gpm 0 Item No. L..()~~S o calOJlation of gpm other - _ Roceived 3 -2.'2..-..... 7" (Note: Commerd.I bUilding permits which indudes multlfamlly structures require flow test lil' -'-'.z:: OR calarl.lion.) King County Hearing Examiner r:J b. Water system is not G!pable of providing fire nOW. s. ~ a. Water system has certificates of water right or water right daims suffiCient to provide service. OR o b. Water system does not ClJrreI1tly have necessary water rights or water light dalms. Comments/conditionS! 0 E required easements to diU_ Water malo will heve to be !@IJed in Plat OIS'TRlcr MANAGER Title \\RECEPTION\C\My Documents KrIs\Water AvaiJabillty\cam West East Renton.doc Dare 4/04/02 , • Jesse Tanner, Mayor March 28, 2002 Sara Slatten Cam west Development 9720 NE 120'h Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 CITY. RENTON PlanningIBuildinglPub lic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator APR 17 2002 KING LAND USfOUNTY SERVICES SUBJECT: SANITARY SEWER AVAILABILITY -EAST RENTON PROPERTY KCPID NO 102305-9017,9023 PROPOSED 68 LOT PLAT This letter shall serve as a supplement to the sewer availability form prepared for the subject site dated March 28, 2002. The City 01 Renton can provide sanitary sewer service to this proposed development as submitted to the City on July 26, 2001 and as indicated on the preliminary plat drawing prepared by Triad and Associates with a production date of August 13,2001. This submittal meets the City's basic criterion for zoning and land use required to receive sewer availability. Sewer service to this proposed plat may come from two different portions of the City'S system. The first alternative would be for this development to flow to the south and connect to the City's East Renton Interceptor system. Another option would be for the development to flow to the north into the City'S Honey Creek system. The exact means for service to be provided will be determined as you proceed with the platting process. As you are aware, the methodology may also be predicated upon when the adjacent properties proceed with development. This sewer availability is also conditioned upon the requirement that a covenant to annex document be executed prior to the issuance of any City permits for the installation of sewer to serve this plat. The format of this document is currently being developed by the City and will be forwarded to you upon its completion. Fees for this plat will include System Development Charges of $760.00 per lot, Special Assessment District charges for either the East Renton or Honey Creek Systems, $60 per lot side sewer permit fees, right-of,way fee and bond to be determined upon submittal, inspection and plan review iee of 5% oi estimated construction cost, and a King County permit fee equal to 100% of costs billed by the County to the City. que~ions'regaig this availability, please contact me at (425) 430-7212. / II----- . Wastewater Utility Supervisor cc: Rebecca Lind, EDNSP MAIN IFllE COpy __ JH",· PL.!JILYV"IS",IO"IJN"SlLjliw..JIuij,Jilu.Tjj;IE..,S/",p""o""c",sa,.,OIlJ,O""2.",19",3,,,dlllJoc;niDI.IJM""C"'·Uff______________ R E N. T~ 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 * ThiS paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE .cURVE , . .-• ~ANIT ARY SEWER A V AILILITY FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CITY OF RENTON \055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: (425) 430·7200 Fax: (425) 430·7300 E. i2.-6-NTDN f1Z.Of aT TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT: Date of Request 7-..?,(, -01 %:~~~~",NO L~fQS~14g; City ~,~ State V#t-= ZiPcode0W1" Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: . Check one: Proposed Single Family Home Existing Single Family Home On Septic' .". At:::.Arr: J 0... I nlS' Other (Specify) /\EVIl $1T\){;zl£ E;ArV!1L.-y~OrJV"""I'1 -"" ....... '-"~ •. Location/Address: /:2.013 1±e, {'h ,A-vE:-'SE King County Tax Account No: 1023 oS'1Q \ 7 ~ I 02-36S~02-3 Legally Described as: THIS APPLICATION SHALL INCLUDE A COPY OF THE PROPOSED SITEIPLOT PLAN. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CITY: I. o Sanitary Sewer Service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing _"'-_ size sewer main located within ________________________ --'-_ City records show a side sewer stub to the property 0 YON or 0 Sanitary sewer service will require an extension of approximately ____________ _ or 0 of size sewer main located within ___________________ _ service area; therefore, the The proposed deyelopment lies within C applicant shall contact The District! Agency at ~ (phone)for sewer availability. See anached letter dated Ik.6!k:Z61 1..A:07 ___ 7 Payment of all applicable system development fees:! L. __ f5..r1l. ~) (Fees are subject to change without notice) ~ r::> · System Development Charge: · Residential building sewer permit: -Latecomers, special assessment fees: · Right of Way Fee · Right of Way Bond (Refundable) $ 760 $ 60 $_-- $_-- $._-- $_-- $_-- $_-- $_-- per single family residence per single family residence (over) • • ".~. • ;\ r ~ ... Sanitary Sewer Availability Form Page 2 3. 4. 5. 6: 7. 8. 9. o o . )f-- 0 or '}l(' j(. or 0 f- or 0 Reference data --------------------~--------~---------- Applicant shall abandon the existing septic system in accordance with Section I I 19 of the current Uniform Plumbing Code and Seciion 4-6-040.1.6 of the City Code. Customers connecting to sanitary s~wersin King County, including Renton's Sewer Service Area, after February I, 1990, are subject to a sewage treatment capacity charge. The purpose of this King County charge is ·10 pay for building sewage treatment capacity to serve newly connected customers. Single- family customers pay $10.50 a month (billed by King County as $63 every six months) for 15 years. At the customer's choice, this fee may be paid to King County as a lump sum of $1,089.40. This fee is in addition to the monthly charge for treatment that Renton is required to collect and pass to King County . The Renton portion of th~ Wastewater Utility Rates for tustomers outside the .. city limits is 1.5 times the standard rate for customeis inside the city limits. (City Code section 8-S-15C) The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the City of R,enton C!r has been granted. King County Boundary Review Board (ERB) approval for extension of service outside the City .. Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary for lbe provision of sanitary sewer service. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. The sewer system improvement will require an amendment to the Renton Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan. The sewer system improvement will be within an existing franchise from King County allowing the installation of facilities in the County Right(s)-ofWay. The sewer system improvement will require that Renton obtain a franchise from King County to install the facilities in the County Right(s)-ofWay. CONDITIONS OF CERTIFICATION: I) It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to verify, by an engineering study, whether it is possible to connect by gravity line to the existing City sewer system (a private lift station may be installed, but is not. desirable). The City may require, at it's option, the verification to be in the form of a letter signed by a professional civil engineer. 2) When new sanitary sewer lines are installed; the City typically installs or requires to have installed stub-outs to the property line. This is done as a courtesy to the property owners. The City does not guarantee a stub for all properties nor does it guarantee the condition or location of the stub. It is the responsibility 'if the owner/contractor to have an approved connection from the building sewer to the City's sewer main. If there is a stub,. it is in good condition, and the owner/contractor can locate it, then it is available for use. The determination of condition of existing sanitary sewer stubs shall be the sale responsibility of the City and the City's decision shall be final. If the stub is broken or the City inspector determines that the stub's condition is not acceptable, itshall be the owner/contractor's responsibility to repair the stub, replace the stub at the. existing tee, or to install a new stub and tee directly into the main. The method of repairlreplacement to be determined by the City's inspector. I hereby certify that the above sanitary sewer information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. (Fee information is subject to change without notice). . CITY OF N1lThi -STEW tTILITY < ~g;p At (iul!-l~ Signatory Name ... ~(£l 1,,- Wastewater Utility Section --~.e,f-/~~~""".I\If//l2","c.-<.L-_- oate /wwavail.doc FORM DC905400 I 11120/00 • Jesse Tanner. Mayor March 28, 2002 Sara Slatten Cam west Development 9720 NE 120tl• Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, W A 98034 CITVe>F RENTON PlanningIBuildinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E;, Administrator SUBJECT: SANITARY SEWER AVAILABILITY -EAST RENTON PROPERTY 'KCPID NO 102305-9017,9023 PROPOSED 68 LOT PLAT This letter shall serve as a supplement to the sewer availability form prepared for the subject site dated lvbrch 28, 2002. The City of Renton can provide sanitary sewer service totilis proposed development as submitted tothe City on July 26,2001 arid as indicated on the preliminary plat' ,drawing prepared by Triad and Associates with a production date of August 13, 2001. This submittal meets the City's basic criterion for zoning and land use required to receive sewer availability, Sewer service to this proposed plat may come from, two different portions of the City's system', The first alternative would be for this development to flow to the south and connect to the City's East Renton Interceptor system. Another option would be for the developmentto flow to,the north into the City's Honey Creek system. Th'e exact means for service to be provided will be determined as you proceed with the platting process. As you are aware, the methodology may also be predicated upon when the adjacent properties proceed with 'development. . . ~ . This sewer availability is also conditioned upon the reqllirement that a covenant to annex document be executed prior to the issuance of any City permits for the installation of sewer to serve this plat. The format ofthis document is currently being developed by the City and will be forwarded to you upon its completion., ' ' , Fees forthis plat will include System-Development Charges of $760.00 per lot, Special Assessment District charges for either the' East Renton or Honey Creek Systems, $60 per lot side sewer permit fees, right-of:way feeand bond to be determined upon submittal,.inspection and pian review fee of 5% of estimated construction cost, and a King County permit fee equal to 100% of costs billed by the County to the City. ' If you ha:.-ve_-., questwnsreg'jg this availability, please contact me at'(425) 430-7212. / ~~ ~---:r.J 00 Rr0lR rl -,-o L5,\..0l5h '\l, 1_" APR 0 3 2002 • I cc: Rebecca Lind, EDNSP ~fN.tiBI!.Ii· ©OPV ~ __ ~H~'D~N~ISillIQ~N~S~a~!TllI~IIUTllIE~SaID&Q&C~S/u2~QOu2-~I~93wdmQ~dD~M~C~'~!f ____________________________ 18L~ 1'l,ir ~ 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 -;..';1"" * Thi, pa""""o,"l" 50% ,eeyel.d meterial, 30% po"""o"me, , At:D~6D'~ , , , • SANITARY SEWER A V AIaILITYFOR SINGLEFAMIL Y RESeNTIAL BUILDING CITY OF RENTON 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: (425) 430-7200 Fax: (425) 430-7300 E-Q.-s.NTON frWp~T TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT: Date or Request 7-2b-OI S~~I Applicant's Name: (AM~ D~ SLA-irIPnone No. C4dS) a).S -14% Mailing Address: . Cj] dO ~e lJ»fV'fJkt 81J1U 100 .. . City /VltUvl Ar\J) State VI{A---= Zip Code qfQ34 Check one: Proposed Single Family Home Existing Single Family Home On Septic' V?, /leA rr I a. I n-r:s' Other (Specify) N5 W $11\J{;z(£ ptqVll L-Y ~D r;v ,<--"" -t:>"&' ,--,":,~. • Location/Address: 1201'S l1-e,-t'h,A-vE... 'SE King County Tax Account No: I 02"3 oS q 0 \ 7 i. 102.. 3&:;,/ 02.-3 Legally Described as: . . 1· THIS APPLICATION SHALL INCLUDE A COPY OF THE PROPOSED SITEIPLOT PLAN. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CITY: 1. o Sanitary Sewer Service will be .provided by side sewer connection only to an existing _~_ size sewer main located within ________________________ --'_ City records show a side sewer stub to the property 0 YON or 0 Sanitary sewer service will requir~ an extension of approximately ____________ _ or 0 of size sewer main located within ________________ --,-__ _ The proposed deyelopment lies within service area; therefore, the applicant shall contact The District/Agency at ... .. (phone) for sewer availability .. . Seeattached letter ~ated . Ivk-iW--Z1;Wt ___ Payment of all applicable system development fees:.! :.-. __ /s':"-r'-. ~) (Fees are subject to change without notice) . ~. £) -System Development Charge: ·'·Residential building sewer pennit: -Latecomers, special assessment fees: -Right of Way Fee -Right of Way Bond (Refundable) $ 760 $ 60 $_-- $_-- $_-- $_-- $,--- $_-- $,--- per single family residence per single family residence (over) • • Sanitary Sewer Availability Form Page 2 3. 4. 5. 6: 7. 8. 9. o o . ~ 0 or}l(' . ~ or 0 f- or 0 Referencedata ________________________________________________ ~ ________________ _ Applicant shall abandon the existing septic system in accordance with Section 1119 of the current Uniform Plumbing Code and Section 4-6-040.1.6 of the City Code. Customers connecting to sanitary s~wers "in King County. including Renton's Sewer Service Area, after February I, 1990, are subject to a sewage treatment capacity charge. The purpose of this King County charge is ·to pay for building sewage treatment capacity to serve newly connected customers. Single- family customers pay $10.50 a month (billed by King County as $63 every six months) for IS years. At the customer's choice, this fee may be paid to King County as a lump sum of $1 ,089.40. This fee is in addition to the monthly charge for treatment that Renton is required to collect and pass to King County . The Renton pOlfion of th~ Wastewater UtilitY Rates for tustomers outside the, city limits is I.S times the standard rate for customers inside the city limits. (City Code section 8-S-15C) The proposed project is within the ,orporate limits of the City of Renton or has been granted. King County Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval for extension of service outside the City .. Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary for the provision of sanitary sewer service. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. The sewer system improvement will require an amendment to the Renton Long-Range Wastewater Manageinent Plan. The sewer system improvement will be within an existing franchise from King County allowing the installation offacilities in the County Right(s)-ofWay. The sewer system improvement will require that Renton obtain a franchise from King County to install the facilities in the County Right(s)-ofWay. CONDITIONS OF CERTIFICATION: I) It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to verify, by an engineering study, whether it is possible to connect by gravity line to the existing City sewer system (a private lift station may be installed, but is not. desirable). The City may require, at it's option, the verification to be in the form of a letter signed by a professional civil engineer. 2) When new sanitary sewer lines are installed; the· City typically installs or requires to have installed stub-outs to the property line. This is done as a courtesy to the property owners. The City does not guarantee a stub for all properties nor does it guarantee the condition or location of the stub. It is the responsibility 9f the owner/contractor to have an approved connection from the building sewer to the City's sewer main. lfthere is a stub, it is in good condition, and the owner/contractor can locate it, then it is available for use. The determination of condition of existing sanitary sewer stubs shall be the sole responsibility of the City and the City's decision shall be final. If the stub is broken or the City inspector determines that the stub's condition is not acceptable, it. shall be the owner/contractor's responsibility to repair the stub, replace the stub at the existing tee, or to install a new stub- and tee directly into the main. The method of repair/replacement to be determined by the City's inspector. I hereby certify that the above sanitary sewer information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. (Fee infonnation is subject to change without notice). CITY OF N STEW;r (()TILITY < ~p Ai ~~~ Signatory Name ?~(}f(!?, _ Wastewater Utility Section <£. ~~_ ( Date Iwwavail.doc FORM DC90;4001 11120/00 ". , ,. , * Department ofDeveloplllent and Environmental Services • ® King County. • 900 Oakesdale Avenue F· D· t . t R . Renton.WA98D55-1219 lre lS,nc ecelpt Fire District #---..:\u,DL-___ _ Name of Project / Proposal _F.t:..c"'''-.,;5U:.,...-:R~.",.",,,,,,,X=o:!:'0-~ ______________________ _ Location of Project! Proposal \ cl "\ 3 \ LI, '0 h... p,.. Ii(... ~ £;. v., ... ", ,,"0'" \,J t>s Cj $$ 05<1 (Address, parcel number, tax account number, legal description), 'One of these required for processing of application ?o.Ct", \ \. ",'r fl ?\=-\<';"':::' C.(),,~l,.i '5~oc 3; 'S?\o-.t -\;';.\\]'1 003 \.7", '\ .... f" Qe ~ .\;\;.Jfl.oy,\)oCo3"d. 0c.. ... ",,; :;J .. :\\", NQ r r\.. ,\, ,,\ 'i-I;) f \\ ..... t-:lon lo \D,. \\... 0 \'-\\...'" 100 r\..\.., \",!>. If-~ e '1lj of. \"'<. :s e:. I SEC _-'-\ -'=D'---__ TWN ---,Q=-c3>L-__ 5 RNG._-=~ ___ _ KROLLPAGE _____ _ Name of Applicant \<-YI<-Go"\~'I:" C Q,'O--\DI~:S"l-'V"'-'I'e...\"e",,~\r, 'l:.",<... Address of Applicant CjT:Jo "-':.E Q",\-\..... "'?\ 'f,'.C£\o..",d, \ ),,)9., S$v3Y.. Telephone Number L\ 'd-5" ... 'D.5-\ "I 5S Description: Type of Project I Proposal Check appropriate box(es) o Apartment / Multifamily o Duplex o Conditional Use o Commercial/Industrial IJit Subdivision o Unconditional Use o Retail o Short Subdivision / Short Plat o Planned Unit Development o Residential: Single Family Residence o Rezone o School/Classroom OOther (describe) _____________________________ _ o Storz couplings required on. Fire Hydrants Issuance of this receipt does not imply an approval, disapproval nor review'of referenced project / proposal. This receipt shall be valid.for 30 d!:',S fro~ date~f signature. Q4=) . -t;;"'t:8~ cdlL \b "i; tJuC,W<,.. ;!-fn---:---c,.---"-c.....::~=====c;.~· ~'''F=-----~~y Name I Signatory Name . ~(?(' eJ)~' D.]) .~ C-/YL r-) ~ , Title ~. Signature ~ Distribution: White: Applicant (see below) Yellow: King County Building Services Division Pink: Fire District Note Applicant: at the time of application to ODES the white copy must be presented , with project / proposal submittal. 017B (Rev. 9/97) Fire District: mail yellow copy to: King County Building Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue' (j'fJ;Of/. Renton, WA 98055-1219 ~ 'f\\.~ © Attn: Fire Engineering '"~~ Lo2-frXx)6 ~tVvM~\()2.~os~~git . D Jul 22-~5 It.apO 186261)_ .ful 13-55 $10.00 U.65 lr'$l,50 Ita Ralph J. Mulvlhl11 ADiLola M~lvlhl1~, bMt to Donalll I~. Lara.n and olady. Lar •• n, bWt 3. of the)it of theN, of theHl! ot tM sst of •• , 10-23-5 II lUI. , "XC co 1"1'111. aubJtlot to all ...... nt., r •• tl'l,'" I'erurrvatlona and exoeptions ot 1'('0, xcn 01{ ml !:) CldL" Sdtl n oont I , .. 1 j, ~l ~ '. ,. lV.-UiRA1'iTY· DEED InA",,-rottY N:NtIiIJ ,...". .... "" ........ De ....... ___ •• .4&11._ ••••••••••• ---_.-_ .. ..; ...... . '.~' . I saT, ,1. IH~I~~G!G~ ~t""T"I"1 (}I-M(~t"ut ",,,,,1111,1\0,, 1.1ol D!vlSlQlII 0I.''II''~,'''-'!I~,1t(l!()''~ ;:, • • Rtc(f~b2n \h1:;Wk: 1;; INHERITANCE TAX RETURN OcT 16 \I ~5 aM '81 I~, RESIDENT DECLARATION OF NO TAX DUE BYTf'E 01,;,1,"1 or hi o.c~1t NIlIT14f ILut, FI'!,. Mtdd!-l 00." (.JI DM.tr. ~ ... TO BE USEO ONLYFOR'EST~1"ES ~EETi~G A(t'RE6ill~EM~~A INTI::: DE~tARATI:~c;~~gMf~IOHS 'I"~ MULVlIIILL. Ralph 'J.", 81 'it' Rftodenoe ()o..,jc'Ie) aiOMiiI----"'''''.:=;.,:-----'''';.;.·;.:.;,:.c+~'-'-::.:;.;; . .::,~ l.I,.>('< .. mW' ",1'1 , ~I) 1_' thel lhof Inf-.rtloft, .... ...t on tN. ~ ~ tn. ~ ~.~ ... true."" Cl/I,1d 1\ 11'11 d.'. gf ".11'1 .Q on Of" aftaor ~.y 30 1.71; I., ,,::: 1"-dece.:»nl ..... ...ocs.nt ,,' W."lngton al I'" Gar. of c..trI. 81/1 0/ 16 .OS::! 3 E ~: 'If u ... ., ollh ••• ,ho" wtll GO to u. WfVI_Jng ICIOUM ~ ~~ ~~Ct~ F S. 00 ~,;¥if,",':-,j.,,' IF THtSESTAtE IS NOT PROBATED "'TT"'CHACOPYOf'TH£"'SSETSUEET.lISTINGAllST~i~ CASH ETC LlS"""'t't~:.l.. 011 .= PROPERlY LOCATED IN WASHINGTON., SHOWINO LEGAL DESCRIPTION. LATEST A$S[S5£D VAlUE AND FAIR ...... AK£~ v"'Lu~2 iW: t .... "roa:: •• Iue ot • ./I _:a 01 It",. est .. doet not uc:e«l $100 000 (1200 000 If commu .... ty ",operTy! ~~~ .1I1·.ns,..... 0' p~ for .. 1ft<I~ 'ulIlnd .cieQUlChI .. ~Iion ~ _. mtdle ... "'IlI """~" pr,or '0 dellt>"''' ~ IN:!U~ m ." , comput'ng the grou ... ,.,. of N _.ttl, :~!.r: no Fed,,,. lit ••• fl" "" ~ p..cI >l" " dUl on 11'11' H',hI ~:t TNI' RUVAN MUIT 81110HlD IT THt ~L RIPRllINTAnn 01' '"I UTATI-fl(fC\1TOIt. AO.HlITIUTOR, IURVlYINQ SPOU'E. ETC. ,,. AN ... TTOA .. I't .... CCOUNTAHTOR OntlA IIIA'ON ..... """"NU).' PRI"ARIIl 01'" nt:. RI"TURN" THf .. ntAT IIIRSON "UIT ALSO ItON Tltl! ftfTU"h. r".1,)., ~!!:. .~~ ~f~,: p:, r L L rAis E. Mulvihill 12013 H8th Avenue Renton, Washington S.E. 98055 Roger I. Lewis, Attorney P. O. Tlo" 273 Renton, Washington 98057 ..J , U~rd I,... "". ~ " aI.Ob!e<:' II> 'N , ••• ""ul«>l , .. ~ po'OV1t-1on. of RCW aJ ~ 020 Ind ~I ".nl"" ......... O. 'nfo,;;~: I IIOtI ..... .-.cI on '''' •• _, '. '"M. en ... , .... poHl.'N ..... ., 'Hult I Pw,"",n.! RepreMnlll ..... ·' S'gn~' .. ~ i... I \ .. /"~., .. ~ :17' ... LL ,. '-...... i... .. -I ! 011' Tlilptloroa No 1"'-" Cod .. ) .i'L ?~'! /'1 ___ ,i2_0~)2.!!5-6~!._,._,1 NOllry • ....,if1g .1 J MAIL ALL COPIES OF THIS R£TURN TO: Inheritance Tall Di~isiQn. PO Boll us, Oiv~pia, washint&E~8 For A~5l1nce WIth An), Inher::a;';ce Tt::o: Q-.:e::!~, C~!! ~205) 1S~~'!~~· ',,,;:r. 19~ .·",',,·, .. ,;v: I"J;( FOR CEPMITMENrS USE ONLY 1'<' ~if:'" "A::", ' .. " ";." :;. i. !' J !' J '(J I.) ," C) (v , .'- ;"' __ r.I .'."'~IfI"11 ",,,,II;o.1!'"f ~, tf .. ~~, tt.t..!~';fI~ tit t;1t~t:if ~If"";".: ... t;i;i,I~H "~!.\t ".,-. ',:, .:~ " .; .- , .. ' ,;, 01\'1'.8 (,ji fJ!i>I.TIl; o,R1NAt-, "_-C· NO rtHHW/'1i, ji,~'l'Ii'I;F) I.jf:' ii~giULi1tij,~!!m,L~ ·CO~ (iJU'i'f'il.lf Jili iii,,,,,cc==C'7_'OC_' hl·M· t~tJtt."Uf r;w~mj~···l;'-;1jQ.. -at;',) to "'V~"I~ r::,t", "et.',.,_ ~ko~ltll .... l ,,~ r-;jblp~' 1l,lfell 0" 'i"'~Jl1 ~~"ift ','~illlll). .' II"" , .. ,'; "CII:lf,"~tl"t alill 'l.rt'" j,a" "r lloe 1l •• "Ji f.~I' ';' IIiI!' tf',i,H, 'ilill ~.t n •• tl.l,eQQt 'I,j", '11>,. 'i' """" " .... If''''CI;QI 'lli"f1at' ,,1 CS~fI,,,t If). "';moe:l,lt' )~ N.,,.,;, ""''lta ~ r.atr' , W,tA, 1\1:C:~IXIQ.ll ytti'fttfi·",;.;; '.tt".1 t1:i,lfJfj, hj.\t::, ,:i),alilj ".,h,1 '71,lfjf, ~.!,.i'''',\~ ,"!~!,i fl'.Jf1L'~~ :;~-'cJ,,iit-c.:4·"~~.Jit··l!~;bf;.i·i~1-I~ ~ -/, ~.i"t,II .. 1 ol"lfl-() t 17 t">J' $iotll: '1 h .!1 I{ .. ¥ .:, ~~:t'l} t.!:~,~_ .. ~, t.~J(J~!.iJ:!1 !:~f r ti) . f!"iii'~o -ti;l~i'i,iji,1 "i, I 'pe.;';.(jJ.,.C;' TJ t:i I i';li,,1 'io,.!· Ii t WMhit~lliti, "';lHnlHl fill, fJiltl~HUU' (j III'IM ill 11,11: 1I~lrielli '" ,l~jj~'l"h' .... , t:il'ni~h," WI(tt, IJrJl"lIf~" "ti or .1atl::l tit .1"hlt. (I!) f:hr."~l,,« n .. ,./lunl "1 "'~)JJIf"ft nnnk. Account Nil, 11110· 440HH,l, 11"111 III lh" /I"nl"JI nr .1ru·f"dr.1I1 1111" lIurvlvllll! wlrn, IIalnll"" lUI Ii' .tnttt lit o1"nth (.~) !ha'/II"lI 'lr:rIHiI~tdoQ al I'clliLIIe.::. Nali'lllal Ii am·: (It Wn~hlllH'!t)II. Nil, nll ... ··:l'tti,~:! ... tHI' tri,lInrl.lHl liii.l NI), Ul1-4··f,-4III1-" fur ti,l1l11l,lIO halo1 ill 11113 I~!II~"" ,1enHII,.,nl 111\11 tltII'vlvhllf wire, letlla \1111 .. ", ut .Icflifil~alt;::i "l) .,1 .lllte I)r 1111alll f.ji r:tavif'l!Q ,,'J.l.tHhl N,., !j'/I·/jilti'*d:'j li~t.1 til Oill tlt1~J'll'lI>l h",.lo ,.f ~1oot'lilli4!l.nl i,; Ii;~ /lllt;ic,:o .j; .1':;':~"~'jl d.A ~lf".jYiJ"I! ,.,ito::. He;ldH..:g 8.'5 Iii ,jdlt; .~,. .'lei .. I'l ·f',fi::. H~~i.·: i."·'·")!ii'iiS 6' iMHHi:::! :";};;" i.'l fH} tt~:. !~~I:O!..~. !!~;~:sEi!~~L!J_ ~.H':!J!J§: ¥-i.;.::.fti.~':;-{ ";·:;-l';;;".~~.;; ~J:t :-,.::.:;.::;-r.:::-l::l ;::-::::r;. ~li,; .. ' .. J J.i; .. : ;' .... ~.i.~ •• : ,.J J .. ' ..... '..1 •• :.;: .. ,;~.: _:":.:: .1.;;~ ..,.;;..i):'; .. : I ~;J J.J t bti.'lIilJ,IIIj t j ',6ti l;.l,,1 ... J . !~.:. ::--::';'::'.,~:'!.:~ :~.,:~::.,:-: .... '~::. /~~~~~;~~t~t~its~r;[~~;7~~~~~j~~~~I*£U;jtf.~~.~~~1{f~lti1.~.·~ ... ·:,;~r.i~!f§mY[~ir~·;·. " . "", '.- " ,. 1111'1. '~I W"~'~'),. D~ofR ... nue InhefftanCe T .. Dtrkkw'l atrm.,t.. Waahlnrgton ~ '."; NO PROBATE ESTATE OF RALPH J. MUI.yJHJJ.[. OTHER PERSONAL PROPERTIES: 1968 Ford Econo/van bearing Washington· license No. OTB 475 registered in the name of decedent TOTAL COMMUNITY PROPERTY ..... -'--'" '1 DATE OF DEATH: 816181 COUNTY OF -Il.KIUNI.I.GL-___ _ ASS1!SSED VAWE $ 1,000.00 $\09,083.84 er- G o er- lf) o -D CO t ~IL~ I) Fa i£COI'IC A1' I'IeQUEST o,)F WHEN AEc.;CRCEO Fll'TUAN Ta HAY 19 3 5~ i 11 ·O~ o'('n ~rC(:i'.' ':/', ' KING COUNTY NO EXCISf r~x Neme ... }1.1.c.hae_1...D .... &. Lauri.e. K .. Mu 1.Y.i h j.u ." MAY 191986 ..;eOS"nZ5S1 1 A.W_ -··1201J. .. 148U· A·.e---S.-E.·· Cit.", Stue. ZIP-"Rent~tl'i" --Wash-,-.' . 98056· Quit Claim Deed THE CHANTOR Lois E. Mulvihi 11, an unmarried individual E:6/05-,' 1 '9 REeD F CQSHSL #10(;9 E ,·l-:>t:.-+'+5.00 55 lor and in con~ideration 01 love and affection from Grandmother to Grandson and Granddaughter- , - 1 conveysanJ~U1F!:'\aimsto 1'lichael D. r~ulvihill and Laurie K. f~ulvihl11. husband and wife the following described real e~late, :-;ituntctl in the County of K; ng State of \\-':1shington. together with all after acqllired title of the grnntor(:;;) therein: The North 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the NorthEast 1/4 of the SouthEast 1/4, Less County Road Section 10. Township 23 tlClrth, Range 5 East, Records of King County, State of Washington. \1 ~ Datt:J ___ ...J:IM.a':Ly...!9L ______ _ ~ X£H,6:)I\ 't~;,L'i' 11/~_ ~ ?l--::'~ 02 ~T"n: Ill' ~::·~rtf!'¥tli'·;';-'~ C01;:--.TY OF I)lu.L.:nU~JPI""H On (hj~ ,j;l\ p,.,."'",I1~ ''1'1'' .. r,-,' 1"·/,,,,· ~O'S -~ ;I)u< "/,,,;' '" "". 1.."""," I" h,. II,.. ",·r"j,III;.1 d",<,rll>,·(; in and ...... 10" .,x(,,'III.'.: ,I, ..... ilhi" ;lnd r"r,·~,'illl: ifl~lr"",.-nl. and llr'krl'.""I,.rlJ,:"cr 1], .. 1 S I)c....sil:r,..d Ih.· ~"m" ;l~ )1<:.,r If"" .1".1 \.,I"r'!.~r\ <lei ;lnri d,·",1. r"r II,,· "~"" ;",,1 1""1''''''' Ih,·t,·;n nwnlj"",'d C/\'I-::-: undo·, /3r~"\,,,[ Ill-" hand a,,·l "tli,',,,r ~",.I tt,is Il, __________________ _ Ih ___________________ _ ("IH,'NTY OF n.,M, d •• ,' I' I",/"rt, nl", II,,· und,·r-'J.:rJ"'1. :, :-';"tarv Puhlk In :lIH! r", tn£' State {'of \\'!.!~n: ~"J::t,,", c1ul\" r"mJ"i~,~."n,·,j >lnd ~""(>rn. p .. r~"n"lIy npp ... ,uer: ..d In m(' krl"W!1 1" I,,· Ih,' n·~p,'r!i .. t'ly. or _. . ' . _ rh., ,"r"~.tilli",, 11",1 ,·~,·"",.·d Ih,· f",q;:"'nl: InHrunlf'nl. "nrl nrknnwl,·dr;,·rl tl1o' ~ilid lI\~lnH)"'nl I" h,· II", f,,·,· flnd volunlarv ad an,/ d.'NI of ~Ald ('''rp"r, "linn. f .. [ It", lJ"'~ and r,,'rp,,~,·~ !l' .. r ... in rn'·nlf"nt·d. ;.,,<1 "n "alh "!,.It-d II,a! ;11J!h",i,,',j I" ,·",,'11( .. Il .. , Solid in~l:um"nl and Ih;!1 Ih.· ~"al "rl''''''''' ~"i:1 ..r ""i,j ,'""'.,,,,,1;"11. \\',il1"'" un h;"111 .,,,,1 "tli ... i.1 ~,,;.r :"·~'·I., affix.·oj Il,.· clnv and Y",n "1:.( ilL\ 'J- \1-)-)r..(.".,,(L ,r,c"'/ ~",-_~< 1_ -' _. ---_.--, ~"I;,,, /',,1.:,,· II' ',"'_~["t .I''': SF',rj:~'~-.-':.,l"n I',;;'I.,·~" .I".! {oor I' .. "(,lk .)/ \\'",h",-'"n. "t. ... , "'111>·1\ '1I1lIl"" "·,,,1,,,,· :11',,-1 (,1 'l "1'-.,-t. ~---< -. (. ____ ,_,,~~!.::!:~~I:.iltl , '~') ) -' :'::~ .~L,·.':::':. ' I , -------------------- ) • TRANSNATION TITLE 14450 N.E. BELLEVUE, Prepared for: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL. #ll&<ECEIVED KIRKLAND, WA 98034 Attn: 3/1 SARA 'I • INSURANCE COMPANY 29TH PLACE WA 98007 Transnation No. : 3120486 Customer Reference: Escrow No. Seller Shirman Buyer/Borrower Camwest APR 1 72002 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES For serVlce on thlS order call: (425) 646-8583/1-800-441-7701 HARRY O. DREW, CHRIS SCURTI or ERIN CROWDER (FAX # 425 646-8576) THIRD COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A EFFECTIVE DATE: March 27, 2002 at 8:00 A.M. 1. Policy or policies to be issued: Amount ALTA Owner's Policy $450,000.00 Standard Policy (Residential Resale Rate) Proposed Insured: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT ALTA Loan Policy Extended Policy Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED TO BE DETERMINED Premium Tax $928.00 $ 79.81 Premium (SEE NOTE 1) Tax 2. Title to fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: CYNTHIA A. WOLF AND MICHAEL H. SCHIRMAN, AS JOINT TENANTS WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP 3. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD, (148TH AVE. S.E.); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. MAltI!! f:llE COpy ~----------------------------------------------- • • Order No. 3120486 SCHEDULE B REQUIREMENTS. interest to be duly filed for Instruments necessary to create the estate or insured must be properly executed, delivered and record. EXCEPTIONS. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. B. Standard exceptions set forth in inside of back cover. C. Special exceptions: 1. Real Estate Excise Tax pursuant to the authority of RCW Chapter 82.45 and subsequent amendments thereto. As of the date herein, the tax rate for said property is .0178. 2. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent, May 1; 2nd half delinquent, November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid 102305-9023-00 2002 $4,121.52 $0.00 Total amount due, not including interest and penalty: Levy Code: Assessed Value Land: Assessed Value Improvements: 6855 $152,000.00 $173,000.00 Balance $4,121. 52 $4,121.52 3. NOTICE OF TAP OR CONNECTION CHARGES WHICH HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE DUE IN CONNECTION WITH DEVELOPMENT OR RE-DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND AS DISCLOSED BY RECORDED INSTRUMENT. INQUIRIES REGARDING THE SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF THE CHARGES SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY. CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : City of Renton June 21, 1996 9606210966 4. Declaration of Covenant imposed by instrument recorded on September 23, 1986, under Recording No. 8609231227. 5. Declaration of Covenant imposed by instrument recorded on September 23, 1986, under Recording No. 8609231228. Page 2 • • Order No. 3120486 6. The effect on the title and the description of the land due to the location of "County Road (148th Ave. S.E.)" contained in the legal description in Schedule A. 7. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : REGARDING: February 20, 2001 and April 3, 2001 20010220000703 and 20010403000355 Memorandum of Agreement 8. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : REGARDING: June 2 0, 2 001 20010620000881 Real Estate Assignment Agreement 9. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: ADDRESS: LOAN NO.: ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : Cynthia A. Wolf and Michael H. Schirman, both unmarried individuals, as joint tenants with right of survivorship, and not as tenants in common Chicago Title Insurance Company, a Missouri corporation Continental Savings Bank, a Washington State chartered savings bank 2000 Two Union Square, 601 Union St.; Seattle, WA 98101 $152,000.00 February 1, 1994 February 8, 1994 9402081367 Investigation should be made to determine the present balance owing with the appropriate lender/agency/individual. Page 3 " , __ ."." <;-_" ~"., __ ,,4 • "_., , __ ,__ • ..,.. ,,~ ~ ••• ,------------------------------------ J • • Order No. 3120486 10. DEED OF TRUST SECURING A LINE OF CREDIT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: ADDRESS: LOAN NO. : ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : Cynthia A. wolf and Michael H. Schirman, both unmarried individuals, as joint tenants with right of survivorship, and not as tenants in common Rainier Credit Company Seattle-First National Bank Regional Loan Service Center, PO Box 3826, Seattle, WA 98124-3826 $12,000.00 May 28, 1996 June 17, 1996 9606171067 NOTE: CAUTION SHOULD BE EXERCISED TO ENSURE THAT A RECONVEYANCE WILL BE OBTAINED. Investigation should be made to determine the present balance owing with the appropriate lender/agency/individual. 11 . JUDGMENT: AGAINST: IN FAVOR OF: AMOUNT: ENTERED: KING COUNTY JUDGMENT NO. : SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. : ATTORNEY FOR CREDITOR: 12. JUDGMENT: AGAINST: IN FAVOR OF: AMOUNT: ENTERED: KING COUNTY JUDGMENT NO. : SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. : ATTORNEY FOR CREDITOR: 13. JUDGMENT: AGAINST: IN FAVOR OF: AMOUNT: ENTERED: KING COUNTY JUDGMENT NO. : SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. : ATTORNEY FOR CREDITOR: Cynthia Wolf Robert Whelpley $3,115.60; plus interest May 25, 1995 95-9-12842-0 92-3-09654-8 Thomas Masters Cynthia Wolf; Leslie Hanson Edward Bailey $2,188.97; plus interest December 4, 1995 95-9-30304-3 95-2-31559-3 Raymond Jay Walters Cynthia A. Wolf State of Washington; Cheryl Nichols; Wal-Mart $1,255.25; plus interest September 20, 1999 99-9-32488-4 99-1-03317-1 Roger Rogoff (DPA) IDENTITY QUESTION. The lien of the matters referred to in paragraph(s) 11, 12 and 13 depends upon the nature of the interest of Cynthia A. Wolf and whether that person is the same person as the debtors therein. Page 4 r--~------------------------------------------------------- • • Order No. 3120486 TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTS OF THESE MATTERS, IF ANY, ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE COMPANY MUST BE PROVIDED WITH A PROPERLY COMPLETED IDENTITY AFFIDAVIT PRIOR TO THE DATE OF RECORDING. After the Company examines the affidavit, a supplemental report will be issued. 14. The land described in this commitment appears to be residential in nature and may be subject to the provisions of R.C.W. 6.13.060 provided the land is occupied as a homestead. If the land is occupied as a homestead, all instruments conveying or encumbering the land must be executed by each spouse, individually, or by an attorney-in-fact. 15. MATTERS RELATING TO THE QUESTIONS OF SURVEY, RIGHT OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION, AND UNRECORDED LIEN RIGHTS FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL, IF ANY, THE DISPOSITION OF WHICH WILL BE FURNISHED BY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. NOTE 1: The Company has been asked to issue a lender's policy without disclosure of the liability amount. This commitment shall be effective only when the amount of the policy committed for has been inserted in Schedule A hereof. The Company may have further requirements if the. undisclosed amount to be insured exceeds the current assessed valuation. NOTE 2: According to the application for title insurance, the proposed insured(s) is/are Camwest Development. We find no pertinent matters of record against the name(s) of said party(ies) . NOTE 3: The tax assessor's records disclose the current property address to be: 12013 148th Ave. S.E., Renton, Washington 98059 NOTE 4: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per amended RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WITHIN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT. PTN OF NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SEC 10 TWN 23 N RNG 5 E END OF EXCEPTIONS Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for services rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. Page 5 . . ) • • ~ : --' N.,;e:i"~'S7W. -------.--------",,"'_rs_o-.32." . .!6---'---"'-::...c... ~,~. ! ~ : ~ +--------,r---------------_~_@_;_. -1; ~I; , . ~ I~ I • : ~ , .. ~ • .44. ~ @> · , • , -----~~~=" .. c--~~-- W -.--------~------------ a: 0.. I- frl " ... -.~ ,.--.-.--;; jl .. 10 ;;; , 9~ ! ... ~ .. -I! ~ .... "<, ; --__ >~_iL'~._-=~@_'_~ 1-------- ",.---;=-,." "'--'1 - ~I' l " ",. ~I ~ ... u,' .. ~0 ~! This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, ~asements, en. croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commianent or policy to which it is-attached. The Company assumes NO LIABIUTY for any matter related to this sketch. References should be made to an accurate survey for further information. TRAN~TION TITLE INSURANCE COMP~ 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. : 3120487 Customer Reference: Escrow No. CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL. #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 Attn: 3/1 SARA Seller Intlekofer Buyer/Borrower Camwest Dev. For servlce on thlS order call: (425) 646-8583/1-800-441-7701 HARRY O. DREW, CHRIS SCURTI or ERIN CROWDER (FAX # 425 646-8576) THIRD COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A EFFECTIVE DATE: March 27, 2002 at 8:00 A.M. 1. Policy or policies to be issued: Amount ALTA Owner's Policy Standard Policy Proposed Insured: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT $1,200,000.00 Premium Tax $2,725.00 $ 234.35 ALTA Loan Policy Extended Policy Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED Premium (SEE NOTE 1) Tax TO BE DETERMINED 2. Title to fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: MICHAEL J. INTLEKOFER AND KEIKO INTLEKOFER, HUSBAND AND WIFE 3. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: LOT 2 OF SHORT PLAT NO. 1177003, ACCORDING TO THE SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 7806130632; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. MAil'\\ !FILIE COpy • • Order No. 3120487 SCHEDULE B REQUIREMENTS. interest to be duly filed for Instruments necessary to create the estate or insured must be properly executed, delivered and record. EXCEPTIONS. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. B. Standard exceptions set forth in inside of back cover. C. Special exceptions: 1. Real Estate Excise Tax pursuant to the authority of RCW Chapter 82.45 and subsequent amendments thereto. As of the date herein, the tax rate for said property is .0178. 2. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent, May 1; 2nd half delinquent, November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid 102305-9017-08 2002 $3,193.21 $0.00 Total amount due, not including interest and penalty: Levy Code: Assessed Value Land: Assessed Value Improvements: 6855 $223,000.00 $0.00 Balance $3,193.21 $3,193.21 3. Liability for supplemental taxes for improvements which have recently been constructed on the land. Land improvements are not presently assessed, but may appear on future rolls. 4. ALL COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS, OR OTHER SERVITUDES, if any, disclosed by Short Plat recorded under King County Recording No. 7806150632. RIGHTS OR BENEFITS, IF ANY, WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSED BY THE RECORDED DOCUMENT(S) ABOVE AFFECTING LAND OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A. Page 2 • • Order No. 3120487 5. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : REGARDING: June 20, 2001 20010620000881 Real Estate Assignment Agreement 6. MATTERS RELATING TO THE QUESTIONS OF SURVEY, RIGHT OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION, AND UNRECORDED LIEN RIGHTS FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL, IF ANY, THE DISPOSITION OF WHICH WILL BE FURNISHED BY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. NOTE 1: The Company has been asked to issue a lender's policy without disclosure of the liability amount. This commitment shall be effective only when the amount of the policy committed for has been inserted in Schedule A hereof. The Company may have further requirements if the undisclosed amount to be insured exceeds the current assessed valuation. NOTE 2: According to the application for title insurance, the proposed insured(s) is/are Camwest Development. We find no pertinent matters of record against the name(s) of said party(ies). NOTE 3: The above captioned description may be incorrect, because the application for title insurance contained only an address and/or Parcel Number. Prior to closing, all parties to the transaction must verify the legal description. If further changes are necessary, notify the Company well before closing so that those changes can be reviewed. Closing instructions must indicate that the legal description has been reviewed and approved by all parties. NOTE 4: The current property address is not available at this time. NOTE 5: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per amended RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WITHIN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT. LOT 2 S.P. NO. 1177003 REC. NO. 7806130632 END OF EXCEPTIONS Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for services rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. Page 3 ------------------------ ) I'· ". "",' I • • • • • , n • . ' (p' \' ' ~' 1 N:z. ,"';J • '.,...,' i' "',; ~I ~" .. @I ______ ----L-_ /21'.1.7.3 LOT I LOT Z. • -~- \ , ".\ :~l C!~ o z 15: 2 .. '" ..; ~ ~- vi w > '" , I :l: l- F ,I n • -ZO-OIW----____ _ _ __ ~ _____ 13Z 4,60 "'i!.JI""~; __________________ .£3~. -23-5 This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en- croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO UABIUTY for any matter related to this sketch. References should be made to an accurate survey for further information. -------- 134/03/2082 !l9:52 4258275 .. AESI PAGE 03/14 • .. -.. " LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. Ep·1 r----.--------.--------------------------------------·--~----------~-~ € i o This log's p.art of the report pr)!p.an>d i1Y AssoCIated Ear1h Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for 1118 named project il/ld should be read tQgallier with that report fnr oomplot<> int.~l8tion. This summalY applies only to the loeaHon olth" trench at the Urn. of .xcavation. Subsurf:lc:e condition. may change .t thlGlocation IIIItn tn. paGSage of Hmo, The datapres"nteO are a slmplfication of adual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION f---{-.;;=i"'r<:":u;;;:::r...=::;:;r------·--.. --------·------~-_II-Forest Duff and Topsoil Weatherad Till 1 -Loose, mOist, brown, SILTY fine SAND with trace gravel and cobbles. 2 -t------.--------~----... T'iiIlJ.---------·-----'---------- 3 _ Medium dense, very moist, mottled gray and brown. SILTY fine SAND with gravel and little cobbles. 4 -Becomes uniformly dense and gray at 4'. 5 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 +---------------------------------------------------------- 10 - 11 12 • 13 14 . 15 - 16 - 17- Bottom of exploraUon pit at deptl1 Sleet Mod.",leseepago from 4'·7'. SOgh! caving from 0-7'. o ,~ ,,, 18 - (0) ~©~DW@@. Ln)!::'j APR 0 3 2002 MAIN !=Bl IE COP'l? K.C. D.D.E.S. i'-~ 19 - IntlekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA -, -~ ~\' \.. ;;: -~ Loggod ~y: SGH ~~:~~::::~: Project No. KE01244G ,. Approved by: i INC April 2001 ~------------------------------------------------~---1JJ~f)~~~ 0--- 4258275i AESI PAGE 04/14 04/03/2002 09:52 • LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP·2 ~---,------------------_._------------_._-- I '= This Ipg Is part of the report ","pa"'" t!Y A$soolaled Earth Sdences, InO. (AESI) lor !he namod pro)sct and should be i1 ~ ., M fO ~ read tal!eUier with that report for camplOle interpretation. Thl. summary aDplies only to the !ooaijon of tI1ls trench at the ill" time ot""cavatJcn. Subsurfaco COnditions may change .t this location WIth the passage of Urn •. The data pre .. nted a", o • slmpmeaVon of actual conditions encountered, DESCRIPTION Grass and Topl'oli 1 _~----.---------_.~:o.=~~----.-------.---Weathered Till LOf;lse, moist, brown, SIL TV fine SAND with coarse sand. gravel, trace cobbles. 2 . 3 Becomes medium dense at 2.5'. -------'-----------==-----------._-----_._-Tilt 4 -Dense, very moist, gray, SIL TV fine SAND with gravel, little cobbles, mottled from 3,5'"E)', 5 - 6 -Becomes very dense at 6', 7 - 8 - 9 -.------------------------------.. ------ Bottom of explorntion pit at daptl1 9 we' 10 -No ground water. No caving, 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 18 - 19 - 26 I.<lgg.d by; SGH Approved by: IntlekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA ac:ili;riicl=s. INC Projeet No. KED1244G April 2001 ~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PAGE 05/14 04/03/2002 09:52 4258275424 AESI • ----------.. --~----------~------------ ~ § ::t " c ~ LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. Ep·3 - This log Is part of tho report ,i'",pared by Associated Eartl1 Sciences, Inc, (AESI) for the named ~"'Jact and should bG read together ~ that repo for comt,1e interprotetion, This eummary a~Plies only to ~ loco 'on of thls!rench at tho time of excava n. SubsUrlaca eondi' s m~ change at this IOl:atfon WI the passage time. The data pl'9$ented are a slm~tficatlon of aetual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil j -Weathered Till . 1 . Loose, mois~ brown, SIL TV fine SAND, some coarse sand and fine gravel, trace cobbles. 2 3 -,JI.ecomE!1> medium dense at 2.5', Till 4 -Medium dense, very moist, brown and gray mottled, SIL TV fine SAND with gravel and cobbles. Becomes uniformly dense and gray at 4', 5 -Becomes very dense at 5', 6 - 7 - 8 9 - Bottom of GJ<ploration plt.t deplh 8 raot due to refusal on very don •• un, VeJY sligh! ••• page at 4'. No caving. 1 o - 1 1 - 1 2 - 1 3 - 1 4 - 1 5 - 6 - 1 7 - 1 8 - 1 9 - -;19 Intlekofer/Schirman Property Renton, WA -- '- Logged by: SGH Approved by; Project No. KE01244G Apr/120Dl ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42582751 AESI PAGE 06/14 04/03/2002 09:52 • ~ ~ " n ~ 1 2 3 4 5 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-4 ~.-. - TIl;" log I. part of the ,..pert orecarad by Assoclale(! E:arth Sciences, Inc, (AESI) lor the ""mod proJoct and should b. raad tcgeUisr with that repqri fOr com lete Interpretation, this summary a p. ies only to the loC3tiOn of this trench at the time of ~cavatlon. Subsurfece condrions may ohange at this location WltR t~e passage of time. The data pmsented am a gimplflcation of actual conditlQns encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and opsoil Weathered TIll Loose, moist. brown, SILTY fine SAND. some gravel and cobbles. Becomes medium dense at 1.5'. Till Medium dense, very moist, gray and brown mottled, SILTY fine SAND with gravel and cobbles. Becomes unifOrmly dense and gray at 4', : ~. Becomes very dense at 6'. B ----------------------------------------- 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 - 17 18 19 Bottom of exploration pit al depth 8 feel due to refusal. VOl)' .lightseepage .14'. Slight C2v1ng frOm 3'04'. --~~~e~------------------·-----·---------------------------------------·---- Logged by; SGM Approve(! by: Int/ekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA ASSOCIATED EARTH BCU5NCES, INC Project No. KE01244G Apli12001 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42582751 AESI PAGE 07114 04/03/2002 09:52 • - € .. iT C 1 - 2 - 3 4 - 5 - 6 - 7" 8 - 9 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - :<e LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-5 TIIislog I. POrt of the raport ,l'rep.rad by Assodate<l Earth Sciences, Inc, (AeSI) for Ihe named R"'ject and should be read ~eth0r with that rGPQ for ccm~ete Interpratation. This summary a~p.ties only to the loca on of this trench at the time of XC8Vatfon. Subsurface COtIdl ns may Change at this locaflQl'l Wit the passage of time. The data presented are a 3implflcatlon of actual conditiong onccunbrid. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil Weathered Till Loose, wet, brown, SILTY fine SAND with gravel, roots, and charcoal, trace Gobbles, . Till Medium dense, wet, gray and brown mottled, SILTY fine to medium SAND with gravel and cobbles. Becomes uniformly dense and 9l'lIY below 4'. Becomes "very dense below 5'. Bottom of 0""lora6011 ptt at deplh 91 ... t duo to relusal. Mod~r.a14 seepage from 3'004'. Slight oavfng from 3'-4', IntlekoferfSchirman Property Renton, WA Logged by: $GH Project No. KE01244G I Approved by; April 2001 ~-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42582754. AESI • PAGE 08/14 04/03/2002 09:52 -, -, ~ ~ ~ 1; ~ /; LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-6 g This log I. part of th~ report ,I',epared by Associate<! earth Seiences, Inc. (AESI) for tho nam~roJeot and should be .;; reed ~etl'iur with that ropo for comge\;! interpratation. T~ .ummru~pll" only!o tho I On of thl. trench .t tho " time e)[QavaUon. Subsurface eondi ens may change at t is location . the passage 01 time. The data presented are ~ 0 a Simplflcatlon of actual condlUons encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil 1 -. Weathered Till 2 -Loose. wet, brown, SILTY fine SAND with coarse sand, gravel, and trace cobbles. 3 .. ,Till 4 -Medium dense. wet, brown and gray mottled, SILTY fine SAND with grave) and cobbles. 5 -Becomes uniformly dense and gray at 5', B -Becomes vary dense at 5.5', 7 - 8 9 Bottom of ""ploration pit at depth e feet due to refusal. Modo"". seepage from 3'-4', Slight caving from 0.4', 10 - 11 12 13 -, - 14 - 15 - 16 -- 17 - 18 - 19 - 'is IntlekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA Logged by: SGH Approved by: ASSCCIATEC EARTH SCIENCES. INC ProJeet No. Ke01244G April 200,1 ~ --------------------------------------------------------- 04/03/2002 .09:52 42582751t AESI • PAGE 09/14 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-7 ~o:w Thlo log Is part of tho roport prepared by Associated Earth ScienCIIS, Ine. (AESI)!or the named project and should b. ':. ",ad together with that "'port for comtIlete Interpretation, This summary applies only to tho loco1ion of this french at tho 11.-------'--------------------.----------,-- time of excavation, Subsurfaoe condiUOl1S may enange at thIo location With the passogo of timo, Tho data pm.oOled are a simplfleation of acttJal condltlons encountered. DESCRIPTION I----;hc=::·:-;-;;=:-:=-----.---,,-----.----,---------+_~ Sod and Topsoil ~ ~ 8 § 1 -1------.---.---., Weathered Till .,---- Loose, mOist, hrown. SILTY fine SAND with little gravel, cobbles, and roots, trace charcoal. Becomes medium dense at 2'. 2 3 -l----------------""'T"'il,-' -----------------,,- 4 5 - 6 - 7 - Medium dense, very moist, mottled gray and brown, SILTY fine SAND with gravel and some cobbles. Becomes uniformly dense and gray at 4'. Becomes very dense at 5'. 8 --------------------------------~----------- 9 -j 10 11 12 - 13 14 - 15 - 16 17 18 19 - 29 Bottom of e""l"",tion pit at depth 8 reet Very slight seepage at 3', NO caving. -------------- IntlekoferlSc:hirman Property Renton, WA Logged by: SGH Ajlpfave<flly; aCliENICEB. INC Project No. KE01244G April 2001 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I .. <>, ..... ' 04/03/2002 09:52 4258275. AESI • PAGE 10/14 g 0; :0- Cl 1 2 - 3 4 - :; - 6 - 7 - 8 9 - 10 - 11 12 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17- 18 - 19 - 29 ~ :; LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP·8 Thi.log 1$ part 0/ the repo~ .. pared by !'jSOeiated EaMll Scion"" •• Inc. (AESI) for the named fo",Ie<:! and should be read tQYetlier With that re for ~~Iete nterpretat/on. This summary a~pIIG$ enly to !he looa on of this trench at the tfme of excavation. Subsurface con i 'ons may change at thlsloc:atlan wit the passage at time. The data presented are a slmplflcation of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil . , Waathered Till Loose, moist, brown, BIL TV fine SAND with little gravel. cobbles. and roots. tracB charcoal. Becomes medium dense at 2'. Till Medium dense, very mOist, mottled gray and brown. $IL TV fine SAND with gravel and some cobbles. Becomes uniformly dense and gray at 3', Becomes very dense at 6', 8ot/om of e>cploraHon pit at depth 10 fee! Moderat. seepage from 1'·2'. Sligh! caVing from 1'-2'. IntlekoferfSchlrman Property Renton, WA .. ,,- I ~ ~ Logged by: SGH ~~~~~;:;: Project No. KE01244G '" App",1I9d by: S INC Aprn 2001 ~-------------------------------------------- 04/03/2002 69:52 42582754, . AESI • PAGE 11/14 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO, EP·9 .----.----------------._----------------... _-,.---, ~ ~ ~ i' i s ~ 13 This log Is part of tho "'''''" pmpared by A_d Earth Selon",,", Inc. (AESI) lor the named projec:l and should b. ",ad lDilotHer wilh that report lor complete Interpretation. This summary applies only to the loca~ori of Itlls trenOh .t the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may Change at 1his location With the passage of time. The data presented are a simpfficatlon of ae1ual condlllons encountered. DeSCRIPTION ---+..-:-o-=:-::ro;;r::-::-:=-: ... ---... --------.. -----.. ----.-----t--j Sod and TOpsoil ' 1 -f----------------:,"W"e"'a"t·/I"=red=;n:>;I1;----------------''-- 2 -Loose, wet, brown, SIL iY fine SAND with gravel and some cobbles; some lenses of sandy gravel from 2'-3', 3 -j-------.-----------=----------.----,--nn 4 -Medium dense, weI, gray, SIL iY fine to medium SAND with gravel and cobbles. Becomes dense at 4', 5 -Becomes very dense at 0', 6 - 7 - 8 -, 9 "f-----------------------------,,------ 10 -SotlOm of explora1!on pit at deplh 9 flo.t due to refusal on very dense tlll and rapid ground water sa.pogo. Rapid seepage from 1'-3', Moclerate caving from 1'..0\', 11 - 12 - 13 14 - 15 16 - 17 16 19 :29 I..oggod by: SGH Approved by; IntlekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA ASSOCIATED EAPITH SCIENCES. INC Project No. KE01244G April 2001 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---~-~------------------ 42582751 AESI 04/03/2002 0'3:52 • PAGE 12/14 iI. 7 ..: 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-10 This log is part of t~ report prepared by Associatod e:al1h Sci"",: ••• Inc. (AESI) for the named project and shO\lld b. iliad tolIether with at report lOt ocmplote Inl&rp,"1::I60n. This summary aPIJIi ... only to the location of this trenCll at the time orexcavatfon. L1bsUrface conditions may Change at this {ocaUo" \\lith-the peseage of time. The data p11!Sented are • slmplfication of.ctual conditio", enoountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil fill Medium dense, wet, mottled brown and gray. SIL iY fine to medium SAND with gravel and cobbles. Becomes uniformly dense and gray at 3'. Becomes very dense at 5'. Color changes to blue-gray and extremely well-<:emented below 6' Bottom of .xploratlon pit at doplh e feet duo tr:> refusal on cemonted tiU. Med.rate .. epag" frQrn 1· •• •• No .. Ioing. ---~~--------------------------------------------------------------- IntlekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA '" ~ lDgged by: SGH Project No. KE01244G S INC ~ ____ A_PP_~ __ d_b_Y. __________________________ ~ _______________________________ Ap __ ri_12_0_0_1 __ ~-"'"'''' ... ,._-----~----~ . _ .. ~" 04/03/2002 09:52 425827511 AESI • PAGE 13/14 1 2 3 '4 5 6 lOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. Ep·11 ThI$I~' part of lhe ",port p"'P8fed by Associated Earlt1 Sciences, Inc. ~AeSI) rnr the named project and Should be raad t flier with that repqn foi" oornplets Interpretatlon_ Thls summary a plies only to the location of thIs trench at thQ time 0 excavation. Subsurface (Ulditions may Change at thIs locatloo Wit the passage of time. The data presented are a simplftcation of actual oondItions encountered. DESCRIPTION od and Topsoil' Weathered TIll Loose to medium dense, very moist, gray and brown mottled, SILTY fine to medium SAND, some gravel, little cobbles. Becomes medium dense at 2'. Till Dense, very mols~ gray; SILTY fine to medium SAND with gravel, some oobbles. Becomes very dense at 5'. 7 -+-----.--------~----------------.----- 6 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 - 15 16 17 18 19 Bottom of expIora~on pit at depth 7 feet Very sligh! s""pa~ at Z. No caving. I ntlekoferlSch irman Property l Renton, WA ~ ASSDCIATED '" G ~ L09!)OIl by: SGH EARTH Project No. K .. 01244 ;; Approved by: SCIENCES. INC April 2001 ~------------------------------------------------ PAGE 14/14 04/03/2002 09:52 4258275, AESI • ~ 2 - LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP·12 ThI.IOg Is part of the report orepal'Qd bv _sted ~ Scion ... , In •. (AESI) fat tho named prnleclsnd sIIoul. be raad IwotHer With lhal repIlrt fot complete inlorpretat!Q!). ThIs summary "IIplies orily 10 111. localloo' 01 Ihis Irench at tho time of excavation. Subaurfa~ eondftlo:ns may change at this location WIth the passage gf tim;, The data presented are • s1mplfloatlon of actual eondlUona encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoi/·--··--"-· -- Weathered Till Loose, moist, brown, SILTY fine SAND with some gravel and cobbles. Becomes medium dense aI2.5'. 3 - f-------.----------------,:=--------.. -----nil 4 -Dense, moist, gray, SILTY fine SAND with gravel and cobbles. 5 - 6 -Becomes very dense at 6', 7 - 8 -+-----~---... ------- 9 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17- 18 - 19 - Bottom of exploration pit at depth 8 feet Very .light seepage at 2', No cavinQ. .-------------- 26 ---_._-._---------- IntlekoferlSchirman Property Renton, WA ~ Logged by: SGH ProJact No. KE01244G i ____ ~ __ m_._ed_b_Y._, _________________________________________ I_~_c: __________________ A_P_'_11_20_0_1 __ 04/03/2002 09:52 42582751 AESI • PAGE 02/14 " Cover • ISSUED By TRANSNATION TiTLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE' o Transnation A L\NDAME.RJC.~ COMPANY Transnation Title Insurance Company, an Arizona Corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed i(lsured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the exceptions and conditions and stipulations shown herein, the Exclusions from Coverage, the Schedule B exceptions, and the conditions and stipulations of the policy or pOlicies requested, (See reverse side of this cover and inside of back cover for printed Exclusions from Coverage and Schedule B exceptions contained in various policy forms,) This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and'the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsements and is subject to the Conditions and Stipulations on the back of this cover, This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company, IN WITNESS WHEREOF; TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. NOTE: THE POLICY COMMITTED FOR MAY BE EXAMINED BY INQUIRY AT THE OFFICE WHICH ISSUED THE COMMITMENT, AND A SPECIMEN COPY OF THE POLICY FORM (OR FORMS) REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT WILL BE FURNISHED PROMPTLY UPON REQUEST, IiIIAIN FlL.£ Co TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY p\, 2&3tlst\ 2L a~,:A. K.C. D,D.E.S. Form 1004-252 (3/93) ORIGINAL Prepared for: •• TRANSNATION TITLE 14450 N.E. BELLEVUE, INSURANCE COMPANY 29TH PLACE WA 98007 Transnation No. : 3120486 Customer Reference: Escrow No. Seller Shirman Buyer/Borrower Camwest CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL. #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 Attn: 3/1 SARA For servlce on thlS order call: (425) 646-8583/1-800-441-7701 HARRY O. DREW, CHRIS SCURTI or ERIN CROWDER (FAX # 425 646-8576) SCHEDULE A EFFECTIVE DATE: January 17, 2001 at 8:00 A.M. 1. Policy or policies to be issued: Amount ALTA Owner's Policy Standard Policy (Residential Proposed Insured: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT $450,000.00 Resale Rate) Premium Tax $928.00 $ 79.81 ALTA Loan Policy Extended Policy Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED Premium Tax (SEE NOTE 1) TO BE DETERMINED 2. Title to fee simple estate' or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: CYNTHIA A. WOLF AND MICHAEL H. SCHIRMAN,A9 JOINT TENANTS WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP 3. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD, (148TH AVE. S.E.); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. ---------------------- • • Order Noe 3120486 SCHEDULE B REQUIREMENTS. interest to be duly filed for Instruments necessary to create the estate or insured must be properly executed, delivered and record. EXCEPTIONS. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. B. Standard exceptions set forth in inside of back cover. C. Special exceptions: 1. "Real Estate Excise Tax pursuant to the authority of RCW Chapter 82.45 and subsequent amendments thereto. 2. As of the date herein, the tax rate for said property is .0178. GENERAL TAXES and related yet available or due, but Tax Account No. charges for the year are payable February 102305-9023-00 2001 are not 15, 2001. 3. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent, May 1; 2nd half delinquent, November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid 102305-9023-00 2000 $3,'604.28 $3,604.28 Total amount due, not including interest and penalty: Levy Code: Assessed Value Land: Assessed Value Improvements: 6855 $131,000.00 $124,000.00 Balance $0.00 $0.00 4. NOTICE OF TAP OR CONNECTION CHARGES WHICH HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE DUE IN CONNECTION WITH DEVELOP"MENT OR RE-DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND AS DISCLOSED BY RECORDED INSTRUMENT. INQUIRIES REGARDING THE SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF THE CHARGES SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY. CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : City of Renton June 21, 1996 9606210966 Page 2 ,,'.' " Order No, 3120486 5, EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDING NO, : Snoqualmie Falls White River Power Company, a corporation Pole line The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described 305589 6, Declaration of Covenant imposed by instrument recorded on September 23, 1986, under Recording No, 8609231227, 7. Declaration of Covenant imposed by instrument recorded on September 23, 1986, under Recording No. 8609231228. 8. The effect on the title and the description of the land due to the location of "County Road (148th Ave. S.E.)" contained in the legal description, in Schedule A. 9. ·DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: ADDRESS: LOAN NO. : ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : Cynthia A. Wolf and Michael,H. Schirman, both unmarried individuals, as joint tenants with right of survivorship, and not as tenants in common Chicago Title Insurance Company, a Missouri corporation Continental Savings Bank, a Washington State chartered savings bank 2000 Two Union Square, 601 Union St.; Seattle, WA 98101 $152,000,00 February 1, 1994 February 8, 1994 9402081367 Page 3 • • Order No. 3120486 10. DEED OF TRUST SECURING A LINE OF CREDIT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: . GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: ADDRESS: LOAN NO. : ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO. : Cynthia A. Wolf and Michael H. Schirman, both unmarried individuals, as joint tenants with right of survivorship, and not as tenants in common Rainier Credit Company Seattle-First National Bank Regional Loan Service Center, PO Box 3826, Seattle, WA 98124-3826 $12,000.00 May 28, 1996 June 17, 1996 9606171067 NOTE: CAUTION SHOULD BE EXERCISED TO ENSURE THAT A· RECONVEYANCE WILL BE OBTAINED. Investigation should be made to determine the present balance owing with the appropriate lender/agency/individual. 11. JUDGMENT: AGAINST: IN FAVOR OF: AMOUNT: ENTERED: KING COUNTY JUDGMENT NO. : SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. : ATTORNEY FOR CREDITOR: 12,. JUDGMENT: AGAINST: IN FAVOR OF: AMOUNT: ENTERED: KING COUNTY JUDGMENT NO. : SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. : ATTORNEY FOR CREDITOR: 13. JUDGMENT: AGAINST: IN FAVOR OF: AMOUNT: ENTERED: KING COUNTY JUDGMENT NO.: SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO.: ATTORNEY FOR CREDITOR: Cynthia Wolf Robert Whelpley $3,115.60; plus interest May 25, 1995 95-9-12842-0 92-3-09654-8 Thomas Masters Cynthia Wolf; Leslie Hanson Edward Bailey $2,188.97; plus interest December 4, 1995 95-9-30304-3 95-2-31559-3 Raymond Jay Walters Cynthia A. Wolf State of Washington; Cheryl Nichols; Wal-Mart $1,255.25; plus interest September 20, 1999 99-9-32488-4 99-1-03317-1 Roger Rogoff (DPA) IDENTITY QUESTION. The lien of the matters referred to in paragraph(s) 11, 12 and 13 depends upon the nature of the interest of Cynthia A. Wolf and whether that person is the same person as the debtors therein. Page 4 ,---- L • , • • Order No. 3120486 TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTS OF THESE MATTERS, IF ANY, ON THE . SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE COMPANY MUST BE PROVIDED WITH A PROPERLY COMPLETED IDENTITY AFFIDAVIT PRIOR TO THE DATE OF RECORDING. After the Company examines the affidavit, a supplemental report will be issued. 14. The land described in this commitment appears to be residential in nature and may be subject to the provisions of R.C.W. 6.13.060 provided the land is occupied as a homestead. If the land is occupied as a homestead, all instruments conveying or encumbering the land must be executed by each spouse, individually, or by an attorney-in-fact. 15. .MATTERS RELATING TO THE QUESTIONS OF SURVEY, RIGHT OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION, AND UNRECORDED LIEN RIGHTS FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL, IF ANY, THE DISPOSITION OF WHICH WILL BE FURNISHED BY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. NOTE 1: The Company has been asked to issue a lender's policy without disclosure of the liability amount. This commitment shall be effective only_ when the amount of the policy committed for has been inserted in Schedule A hereof. The Company may have further requirements if the undisclosed amount to be insured exceeds the current assessed valuation. NOTE 2: According to the application for title insurance,the proposed insured(s) is/are Camwest Development. We find no pertinent matters of record against the name(s) of said party(ies). NOTE 3: The tax assessor's records disclose the current property address to be: 12013 148th Ave. S.E., Renton, Washington 98059 NOTE 4: The following may be used as Em abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per amended RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WITHIN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT. PTN OF NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SEC 10 TWN 23 N RNG, 5 E END OF EXCEPTIONS Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for servlces rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. Page 5 CC/amh ENCLOSURES: Sketch Vesting deed All recorded encumbrances Page 6 , • Order No. 3120486 • ,-------------------------------------- • --'.Oi:r-------;;,,"'_"= ... 3Z ... S8.---""""_ :,.-f ~L---· --'--.1-----_________ . _____ '_@_;; __ .-j,1 J I.""~-~I~ @> 'I' I .. ,1~. ~e> ----~------------>~-=" ..• ~-=~---I • ! I-L:'~ , ! .. ~ ".-r ffi .1, ' I ; ..; e -.---.-----.~.----,---,-----_~@ .~·L~J~~ ~ a: • , a. i f ;1.3,A~. '~ ~ ---.~~g~---------~~r_----~~- · · • ,."... .. @~ -' -,--I~ I I C6 ::l UJ " .. -------,,=-----r---- '~r;l .'" ji " ,"" ~I '0 ~I ••• J "". This skerch is provided, without charge, for your infonnation. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en. croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO llABIUTY for any matter related to this sketch. References should be made to an accurate survey for further infonnation. i I f ! ! I r , " • --' N.":rw -'-~----'--------",,"'_'"'=r"132.4.56.---.c.:c..:::=-:_ l~ ~ -+-___ ' ___ ----..-________________ '_@_M_--j.1 .l-ii! ~I~ I • . . . , , , ,~" ~ & .. _. -----l~ 1 I ""------=- (' 11 ", ,'-l' '0 'I '''~" ,~ ,--=,,-;; j; ... 1-~ ~ ~!-----',I_"'._o-"!=;;:':=---I I : ,_ A. 1 . ___ '6],-' _~'~@_-I • ~-, ;1< '6 I 1 11 This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. lr is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en- croachments, or loeation of boundaries. It is not a pan of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to whith it is a1lllched. The Company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related to this sketch. References should be made to an accurate survey for funher information. .. CLTI .NDARD COVERAGE LOAN POLICY' • -The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage or tl1is policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attomeys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building or zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (il the occupancy, use;or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records a1 Date of Policy, . (b) Any govemmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or aUeged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of POlicy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Dale 01 Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) whether or not recorded in the public records at Date 01 Policy, but created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the_insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage Which would not have been sustained it the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage or for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. UnenforceabiJity of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequenl owner of the indebtedness, to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceabilily of Ihe lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate or interest insured by this policy or the transaction creating the interest of the insured lender, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency or similar creditors' rights laws. AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY (10-17-92) and AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LEASEHOLD OWNER'S POLICY (10-17-92) The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company win not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses Which arise by reason of: t. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownelShip or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (Iv) environmental protection, or the affect 01 any violation of these laws, ordinances or govemmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violalion affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any govemmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded h'l the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed 10 by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and nol disclosed in wnling to the Company by ttie insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this poley; (c) resultng il no loss or damage 10 the insured claimant; (dl attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resUlting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the Insured the estate or interest insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, thaI is based on: (a) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (b) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (i) to timely record the instrument of transfer; or (ii) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. SCHEDULE B STANDARD EXCEPTIONS SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN ALTA OWNER'S POLICY -STANDARD COVERAGE AND CLTA STANDARD COVERAGE LOAN POLICY 1 . Taxes or assessments which are not now payable or which are not shown a~ existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedlngs by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by perSons In possession, or claiming to be in possession thereof. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey of the tend would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. 5. Any lien, or right to a lien, for labor, material, services or equipment, or for contributions to employee benefit plans, or liens under workmen's compensation acts, not disclosed by the public records. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepled under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public reoords. 7. Right of use, control or regulation by the United,States of America in the exercise of powers over navigation; any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or improvement of the land resulting from the rights of the public or riparian owners to use any waters which may cover the land or to use any portion of the land which is now or may formerfy have been oovered by water. S. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage coUection or disposal, or other utilities unless disclosed as an existing nen by the public records. SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN ALTA OWNER'S POLICY -EXTENDED COVERAGE 1. Taxes or assessments which are not now payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Underground easements. servitudes or installations which are not disclosed by the public records. 3. ~a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d) watsr rights, claims or title to water. whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public records. 4. Right of use, control or regulation by the United States of America in the exercise of powers over navigation; any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or improvement of the land resulting from the rights of the public or riparian owners to use any waters which, may cover the land or to use any portion of the land which is now or may formerly have been covered by water. . 5. Any service, installation. connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electriCity, or garbage collection or disposal, or other utilities unless disclosed as an existing lien by th~ public records. 1004-252 -----------, .. ~-------------------,(. .. • Cover o ISSUED By TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Transnaiion A LANDA;'<!ER!CA COMPANY Transnation Title Insurance Company, an Arizona Corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the exceptions and conditions and stipulations shown herein, the Exclusions from Coverage, the Schedule B exceptions, and the conditions and stipulations of the policy or policies requested. (See reverse side of this cover and inside of back cover for printed Exclusions from Coverage and Schedule B exceptions contained in various policy forms.) This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsements and is subject to the Conditions and Stipulations on the back of this cover. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. NOTE: THE POLICY COMMITTED FOR MAY BE EXAMINED BY INQUIRY AT THE OFFICE WHICH ISSUED THE COMMITMENT, AND A SPECIMEN COPY OF THE POLICY FORM (OR FORMS) REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT WILL BE FURNISHED PROMPTLY UPON REQUEST. roJ ~©~~~7P2~ LrU APR 0 3 2002 . . Attest: K.C. D.D Form 1004-252 13-931 ORIGINAL --------~--------------~------------------ , • • TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. : 3120487 Customer Reference: Escrow No. CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT 9720 NE 120TH PL. #100 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 Attn: 3/1 SARA Seller Intlekofer Buyer/Borrower Camwest Dev. For serVlce on thlS order call: (425) 646-8583/1-800-441-7701 HARRY O. DREW, CHRIS SCURTI or ERIN CROWDER (FAX # 425 646-8576) SCHEDULE A EFFECTIVE DATE: January 17, 2001 at 8:00 A.M. 1. Policy or policies to be issued: Amount ALTA Owner's Policy Standard Policy Proposed Insured: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT $1,200,000.00 Premium Tax $2,725.00 $ 234.35 ALTA Loan Policy Extended Policy Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED Premium (SEE NOTE 1) Tax TO BE DETERMINED 2. Title to fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: MICHAEL J. INTLEKOFER AND KEIKO INTLEKOFER, HUSBAND AND WIFE 3. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: LOT 2 OF SHORT PLAT NO. 1177003, ACCORDING TO THE SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 7806130632; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. • • Order No. 3120487 SCHEDULE B REQUIREMENTS. interest to be duly filed for Instruments necessary to create the estate or insured must be properly executed, delivered and record. EXCEPTIONS. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. B. Standard exceptions set forth in inside of back cover. C. Special exceptions: 1. Real Estate Excise Tax pursuant to the authority of RCW Chapter 82.45 and subsequent amendments thereto. 2 . As of the date herein, the tax rate for said property is .0178. GENERAL TAXES and related yet available or due, but Tax Account No. charges for the year are payable February 102305-9017-08 2001 are not 15, 2001. 3. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent, May 1; 2nd half delinquent, November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid 102305-9017-08 2000 $l,079.32 $3,079.32 Total amount due, not including interest and penalty: Leyy Code: Assessed Value Land: Assessed Value Improvements: 6855 $223,000.00 $0.00 Balance $0.00 $0.00 4. Liability for supplemental taxes for improvements which have recently been constructed on ,the land. Land improvements are not presently assessed, but may appear on future rolls. , 5. ALL COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS, OR OTHER SERVITUDES, if any, disclosed by Short Plat recorded under King County Recording No. 7806150632. RIGHTS OR BENEFITS, IF ANY, WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSED BY THE RECORDED DOCUMENT(S) ABOVE AFFECTING LAND OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A. Page 2 • • Order No. 3120487 6. MATTERS RELATING TO THE QUESTIONS OF SURVEY, RIGHT OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION, .AND UNRECORDED LIEN RIGHTS FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL, IF ANY, THE DISPOSITION OF WHICH WILL BE FURNISHED BY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. NOTE 1: The Company has been asked to issue a lender's policy without disclosure of the liability amount. This commitment shall be effective only when the amount of the policy comm~tted for has been inserted in Schedule A hereof. The Company may have further requirements if the undisclosed amount to be insured exceeds the current assessed valuation. NOTE 2: According to the application for title insurance, the ~roposed insured(s) is/are Camwest Development. We find no pert~nent matters of record against the name(s) of said party(ies) . NOTE 3: The above captioned description may be incorrect, because the application for title insurance contained only an address and/or Parcel Number. Prior to closing, all parties to the transaction must verify the legal description. If further changes are necessary, notify the Company well before closing so that those changes can be reviewed. Closing instructions must indicate that the legal description has been reviewed and approved by all parties. NOTE 4: The current property address is not available at this time. NOTE 5: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per amended RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTIQN WITHIN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT. LOT 2 S.P. NO. 1177003 REC. NO. 7806130632 END OF EXCEPTIONS Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for serv~ces rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. Page 3 JLB/rr ENCLOSURES: Sketch Vesting deed Paragraph 5 • Page 4 ----------c------ • Order No. 3120487 " • , , . .. ~I Is , " i" 1 , 1 1-----_ "·'1' ,~~ .. • • ~ n • ,; " , " • I 1 LOT I LOT Z '" ---- III 6f!J Jr---------------------~~ <! . I :r ~ ,I • • :0'-01 W _________ _ 23 -5 --------1324.60 "'Z9~.& .. ------- - --------__ --1.:':::¢. This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all maners related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en· croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO UABIUTY for any matter related to this sketch. References should be made to an accurate survey for further information. 2 '. CLTA tANDARD COVERAGE LOAN POLICYlti The following matters are expressly excluded from the co~erage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building or zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use; or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (Iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extenllhat a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or aUeged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Data of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims Or other matters: (a) whether or not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for tile insured mortgage or for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the stale in which the land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate or interest insured by this policy or the transaction creating the interest o~ the insured lender, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency or similar creditors' rights laws. AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY (10-17-92) and AMERICAN LAND TITLE-ASSOCIATION LEASEHOLD OWNER'S POLICY (10-17-92) The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation Qncluding but not limited to building and zoning Jaws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) ?-separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the affect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or govemmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental pollce power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded ift the public records at Date Of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this pollcy; (e) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the Insured the estate or interest insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or simUar creditors' rights laws, that is based on: (a) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (b) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (i) to timely record the instrument of transfer; or (il) of such recordation 10 impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. SCHEDULE B STANDARD EXCEPTIONS SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN ALTA OWNER'S POLICY -STANDARD COVERAGE AND CLTA STANDARD COVERAGE LOAN POLICY 1. Taxes or assessments which .are not now payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Any .facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession, or claiming to be in possession thereof. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct sUNey of the land would disclose, and whk:h are not shown by the public records. 5. Any lien, or right to a lien, for labor, material, seNices or equipment .. or for contributions to employee benefit plans, or liens under workmen's compensation acts, not disclosed by the public records. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reseNations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal ~ghts, including, but not ~mHed to, easements or equHable seNitudes; or, (d) waler rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) 0( (d) are shown by the public records. 7. Right of use, control or regulation by the United States of America in the exercise of powers over navigation; any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or improvement of the land resulting from the rights of the public or riparian owners to use any waters which may coVer the land or to use any portion of the land which is now or may fonnerly have been covered by water. 8. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage collection or disposal, or other utilities unless disclosed as an existing lien by the public records. SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN ALTA OWNER'S POLICY -EXTENDED COVERAGE 1. Taxes or ~ssessments which are not now payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assess~ents on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records, 2. Underground easements. servitudes or installations which are not disclosed by the public records. 3. (8) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; {c) Indian treaty or aboriginal fights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; Of, (d) water rights, claims ortille to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public recards_< 4. Right of use, control or regulation by the United States of America in the exercise of powers ovef navigation; any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or improvement of the land resulting from the rights of the public or riparian owners to use any waters which may cover the land or to use any portion of the land which is now or may formerly have been covered by water: 5. Any service, installation: connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity, or garbage collection or disposal, or other utilities unless disclosed as an eXisting lien by the public records. 1004-252A ---------------------------- ,---------------------------------------- • • _ Kl:!: County ~partml!:nt or Development and Environmcnt.a.l .-~,--' Land Usc Services Division 900 Oakadale A vemc Soutbwc:n R<nuln, Wurungton 980:55-1719 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) File Number: Ao!p 0071 (pY-Aft #-) Application Name: EAST. ~P:NToN f~Df.8f2.ry Project Location: 12.0/3 } 4 ~ -fi, AI£. SE. The undersigned, being first duly sworn on 'oath deposes arid says: 1. That the affiant is competent to be a witness herein; 2. That the affiant is the app"iicant for the above project; 3. Tt)at to the best of the affiant's knowledge the sensitive areas on the development proposal site have not been illegally altered; and 4. That the affiant has not previously been found to be in violation of sensitive areas regulations for any property in King County, or alternatively, that if there have been any violations; such violations have been/are being. cured to the satisfaction of King County. . APPli~~. Lj-2-02 Date and Place (City & State) • ® • King County Executive ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the eilVironmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (ElS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an ElS is required. . Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or'give the best description you can, You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, sllch as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions.if YOll can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can' assist you. The checklisfquestions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels ofland. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse 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, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. Background 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: East Renton Property Exhibit No. ;--I-/~--.,-__ :-- Item No. L&2.e~s::..t'\S Received 3·2.2.' I;;):=t 2. Name of applicant: ~ [\ \\/1 King County Hearing Examiner @,@ CamWest Deve1opment, Inc. ~@,©\5l! ~ D 3. Address and phone number of applIcant and contact person: . CamWest Development, Inc. APR 03 2002 9720 NE 120th P1., Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 oDE S Contact: Sara Slatten, CamWest Development, Inc.K.C. , ... • • 4. Date checklist prepared: April. 2, 2002 5. Agency requesting checklist: King County Department of Devel.opment'"and Environmental. Services 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Infrastructure Construction: Summer 2003 7. Do you have any plans for future additions; expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Pl.ease Refer to the wetl.and del.ineation by C. Gary Schul.z dated 4/3/01. 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 . . None Known 10. List any government approvals or pennits that wilI be needed for your proposal, if known. Required Approval.s: Prel.iminary Pl.at, Site Devel.opment Permit, Final. Pl.at Approval., Individual. Buil.ding Permit Approval.s. II. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific infonnation on project description.) The East Renton property consists of two parcel.s total.ing 19.6 acres. CamWest proposes to subdivide into 66 singl.e-famil.y l.ots. 2 t,' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • • 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise locaiion of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The East Renton site is located at 12013 148th Ave SE Renton. A site map, topography map, legal descriptions, and parcel:I.D •. numbers are included in the enclosed submittal. SE 21-26-05 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS I. Earth EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, otl~er ..... The site slopes from east to west. b. What is the steepest slope on the'.site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope on site is approximately 32%. The upper, eastern half of the site is proposed for development. The slopes become less .. : .aradual ;;Is' tru. site falls to the west-half of the site. ' , c. What generall)']Jes 618011S arefounaon the sIte ~f6r exampfe, clay, sana, gravel, peal, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Please ,refer to the enclosedsoils logs from Associated Earth Sciences for soil type information. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None Known e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The site will be graded to provide appropriate provisions for: Roads, driveways, building pads, and yards. Outsidefill will need to be brough' onto the site~ f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion ·can"take place on site. However, the King County Surface Water Control manual will be follwed in order to minimize the amount of actual erosion. As necessary, filter fence and mulching of exposed, soils will b. implemented on site to control potential erosion problems. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 50% h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Filter fence, temporary ponds, hydro seed , straw bales, and other temporary erosion control meas~res will be utilized in accordance with King County development 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 constmction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust, diesel and gasoline emissions during construction. Natural gas em:j.ssions from fireplaces will increase after home. construction due to b. Wll~et'il1frl?:f~W~ne sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None Known c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: COnstruction vehicles will be inpropoer working order to minimiz~ . 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. eml.SSl.ons Yes, please see the attatched wetland determinatoion dated 4/3/01 prepared by C. Gary Schulz. 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. Single-family house construction will take place near the',site wetlands area. Please refer to the attached preliminary plat drawing by Triad for more detaited information. . 3) EstImate the amount 0 tIlT and oredge mafenat that would be placed 111 or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affecled. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Givc general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 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. Treated storm drainage will be discharged to the wetlad. 4 • • b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be 'served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 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 surface run-off 'from the site will be routed to an on-site storm detention vault or pond. The waterwill be collected, stored, and thendischarged. The storm water detention facility will be'designed and constructed to meet King County codes, regulations, and guidelines. 2) P~'nWasli:~,rr';iati;~ngP~olrtlttv&r krfac~fflb¥~i'f~o,I~HW<it~l(j~dlJJ'e. Tri ad As soci a tes :·Oil from automobiles could enter the ,storm system. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: A storm water detention vault will be designed for the proposed develop- ment that will meet or exceed the requirements, codes, and guidelines set forth by King County's Development Standards. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other Alder, Cottonwood, Maple _ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other Fir shrubs -X. grass _pasture _. crop or grain _ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other Skunk cabbage _ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, mil foil, other _ other types of vegetation Please refer to wetland report by Gary Schulz b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Trees and shrubs will be removed for development of streets, utilities and buildings sites. e. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None Known f. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Street trees will be installed along the internal roads within the.propert and along 148th Ave SE. Landscaping will be installed on all lots'. • • 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:--"SLLOUnl!9,JJbLU.i .Lr~dl..ts,----______ _ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: _____________ _ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: __________ _ Redtail Hawk b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on· or near the site. None Known c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The Red tailed hawk has previously nested on-site. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: On-going monitoring of the Red-tailed hawks nest to determine if in use. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity for lightingand natural gas for heating. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not aware of .any affects. 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: Construction will meet all codes, requirements, and guidelines that pertain to site developmentand singlefamily home construction. 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. The potential for a house fire is always a possibility. I) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Normal fire, medical, and police emergency services. 6 • • 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: All construction and development to, meet orexceed .. loca1:ccodes, requirements, and guidelines. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise from adjacent roadways may affect the project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-tenn basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise . would come from the site. Short term noise may be created by c.onstruction equipment and automobil Long term noise may be created by automobiles. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Short term measures include ke~ping all machinery in proper working order and on site work is to occur only within approved operating hours as determined by King County. 8. Land and Shoreline lise a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? One of the parcels is vacant and the other contains a single-family residence. Single family residences border the north, south, and west property lines. 148th Ave.SE is adjacent to the eastern prop. line b. nas the sIte been used for agnculture1 If so; descnbe. Not Known e. Describe any structures on the site. A single-family residence and garage are located on one of the parcels. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes. The single-family residence and garage will be demOlished. All proper permits and abatement work will be completed prior to demolition e. .What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-4 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Urban Medium g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify Yes, a portion of the site has been desigated as a wetland. 7 I. J. • • Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 165 people would reside at the East Renton Property Based on 2.5 residents pe~ unit. Approximately how many people woulil tlie completed project? N/A k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The site will be developed to meet King' County's zoning, comprehensive Plan designation, and building code to ensure complian'ce with the 9. Honsing , surrounding community. a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing, 66 middle income residences. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. One middle income residence. c. Proposed measures to reduce or co'ntrol housing impacts, if any: Conform to King County's guidelines. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building matenal(s) proposed? Approximately 30 feet tall structures with wood siding with brick or stone accents.' b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None would be obstructed. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Architectural continuity with the new homes. The homes will feature classic architectural elements such as front porches, pitched roofs, i ,',' , Natural materials, and craftsman elevations. 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Street lighting and house lighting will be constructed per King County standards. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not aware of any potential interference or hazard. 8 . . • • c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known d. Proposed measures to reduce or controll\ght and glare impacts, if any: Street lighting and house lighting will be constructed per King County standards. 12. Recreation a. Wh~t designated and infonnal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? May Valley County Park is within close proximity to the project. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? Ifso, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: . Over 33,000 square feet of recreational area will be provided as part 0: this proposal. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None Known b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None Known c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. 148th Ave SE is the entrance is proposed for the development. Please .. refer to the traffic study from Gary Struthers Assoc. dated January 16, 2002. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest translt stop? Not Known' c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Each residence will have parking available with the proposed plat. Please refer to the attached site plan for proposed locations. 9 • '. 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). Additional streets will need,to be constructed withinthe proposed plat. Please refer to the attached site plan for proposed locations. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How Inany vehIcular mps pel uay WOUIQ De generated by the complefeaproject'! lt Rnown-,-i'n~lCale ---.-- whi:n peak volumes would occur. Please refer to the traffic study from Gary Struthers Assoc., dated January 16, 2002 for more info. regarding anticipated vehicular trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Compliance with Kin~ County Codes:·and 'regulations. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. PcHice, F·ire, Anibulance' -, b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Impact fees may be imposed on the project as required by King County. ) 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water provided by King County District 90, sewer provided QY the City of Renton, telephone provided by Ver1zon. Electr1city and gas prov10ed by P.S.E. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relYlllg on them to make Its decision. . SIgnature: Q&ACC!£thh{ & h1l1;e4 DateSubmitted: __ ~(~~ ___ ~~~~~~ ______________________________________ __ 4-3-Dd\ 10 .. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES A. Would the project result in an increased need/or public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, general(v describe. Police, Fire, Ambulance B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Impact fees may be imposed on the project as required by King County. 16. UTILITIES A. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, . refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. B. Describe the utilities that are proposed(or the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water provided by King County District 90, sewer provided by the City of Renton, telephonc provided by Verizon. Electricity. and gas provided by Puget Sonnd Energy. Sewer is proposed to be routed to the south to connect to the existing main line within NE 4th Strect. This will require obtaining two off-site sewer easements and then running sewer through the Shamrock Property which is proposal recently submitted to King County by Cam West. The off-site sewer work will require cuts and fills in order to accommodate the future sewer line. A sewer trench will need to be excavated approximately 20-feet wide spanning the distance of the main line and will be filled once the pipe is installed. All off- site disturbances will be restored back to original or better condition. At this time there is no proposal to route sewer through any known off-site wetlands or corresponding buffers. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and. complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Si~nature: ~L V<'-'?I/I Date Submitted (revised): 1!,J.7 / c:;2, Relationship to signer to project: . ~( ~vJJ/.YC ' MA\M fiLE COPY 9 RECEIVED SEP 27 2002 LAN~~~{OUNTY P. 002 APR. -09',Di\MON) 16: 05 KG COMP LONG RANGE PLNG '-". , TEL:206,4750 r--------~~~~--------------------------------~----------------------~----------------------, U, C:L:;":# j "':-':=:/. KJ.):g Connl)' """d s.. ..... niIi DMolo" u.11;'rlnu.·H11,rTrm\,"I ..... I·(~'juli ;:01 l'il1ulh,l."\CIw.o" Sir,,,,. Sc::u 11", \\}\ :10 10·) .;IIUiG TYPE OF CERTIFICATE /81 ORIGINAL •. o CONDITIONAL April 09, 20Ql Certificate # 012189 Fila Number: 01-03-16-01 Expires: April 09 2002 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY 'II. PurSLlilOi ~(, King. Cuunty C.n(lc:. Ch!lrHC:f 1~.70 :11'\ :ulll,,"nd~,1. Ihis ':l!rTifll:all.: cnllnrm~ lh:lt Ih~ .".loplcd h:vel or ~ervi(;c :iLandlll'd fur Ih~ Transporr:lli~ln C~mcUl'I'Clh,:Y ~lilflil,!;l'ml!llI plul:!.r.un hilS been S:lIis-licd .1Rd sutlieil!"' (I);IU ~p:lciIY b' rcscrvt:u fur Ihl! !.h:vdoplllc:IU IJrI)jl.lci (Ic!I.:rihl!d l)cllIW. 'l\'IPOI{TAN1': Thi", ctrtin\!UI~ d\\cs nut ~U~\I"':lnlLX II devclupmclll p~rmir. Other rra.bpurUHi('1l jlllpruv~ln ... ms '1I1d OIiligUli(l1l will be required ro COmpJ)' w;lh JlUcnc~riill} .stal'lcfa(d~. Mi,iJ:olion Payment SYS(l!nl. King County road Sfllllu<LJ'ds. illlll/m safelY ncl!d~. I. Applicant Name ,1Ild /,,1drc,s: Sara Slatten, Camwest Development 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100, Klrklllnd. WA 981134 2. Pr,)pcrly Loc.uia"lJl: 'I. I'rtlflCny Add,,:.«: 12013 1481h Ave. SE b. [).ov.",I''''''"' N,j",o: Cam west Development c. ParCc:1 Numb.", 1023059023 J, Typo of Ocv."'pmcn! rormit Tn B.Requested: Formal Pia' 4. f>roposed I.and U.~: S, Lone LOC~lthm and RL:)Ol!rv~d UniL ... ; iI. Cum:urrency ZunI!: 442 Community Plannlll~ Arl!a: NewCast'e i. CUlnlI~icj;.11 Projt:cl • T,,)(al Sql./;'II·~ Fc:cl: 0 ii. Mulli-/:'mily· NumL'.r Ill' Unirs: 0 iii. Single family. Number nt' UnIts: 68 (I. '("hi:; Cc:nil'ic"lc i~ ~ulljer.:t [0 rile t'U/IllWlIll-! b!-cncl'alc.I.,nui\i\)!l:;: LI, This Certiri..::m(: nr ('om"UrrcnL'Y J Un)) with Ihe Ii.lnd ilt)d is [r!Jm.fe:l'lblc IIllly W SllhsC:QUl':T1f nWII~r:i or the same propeny (or Ih-.:: slalr,;d c1~velupl11=lH, subjccr ro' n,1! terms. c\)jldililHll' und ~~pir:1lion oalc, li~lcd herein. Th',s u;1,ifit::lh: of ("nJl~'urn:"~y is nul [ranslcr~lbr..: TO :Iny ulh~I' pru~y illill hQS Ill) a;u~I·';1I1 v;,,/uc. This CertifIcate ~pires: April 09, 2002 unlc~:'i yUll apply (ur lh~ de\ldopmel1l pc:rm;' d~:'icrihl!d in #3 ~h(\v'll. Thift .:tl'lili,,:ull! bc\:umc:o voia if YOII .Ire nut al)"! 10 lile fill' ;I1.l.C'vcl'lpmcnt permit by Lhc CXpir;Jlinll d"le, If you £.In nor Jlpply for a Lh;vc/t'prncnl permit by 'hI! ~.II.pjr:.Jlinn n{ Lhi~ ~crlj(il.:'~lLc. you will hilv~ lO 1'I!J.lPI)ly fur;1 J)ew c!:nif,calc. There: i .... nil K"ur:.If'lh!C \."'\1" issuan~e of a nl!w cl.!nHicore, WI ... 'n YhU ;'flpJy for If dl'VC'Jupfllt'fll penllil "'illll~ill&: Cuuney's Ih:pul'Llll\:UI of U,,·v,·hIIJnU.:Jll ;106 EOl'lrullIu('nl'll St'T\'ices (IlUt-:S). hrinll 'hi:, C~rlir."lI.LI.' ur 'rl"iln,.';purl.uiull c..:ulU:ul'I'cnry il~ plll'l uf tbe d&:,·clupnlcnl .. ppU,,'.uiun pat". Jr ynu h;ll"l' aay qUt'Slion.", r.k!~ can lW6} 2t.3·~7!~. ----.-- l.jruJ'Il)llu~hcny. AC:lin&: tvhlll:.Jl?~r, ~O:lJ St:I'\'i~!: llivi!oiun 1)~,,;u1mclll u( Tr!lIl:o..I)M1alion KJO;: <':UUIII). W<J~llinl:rCln , " • • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 • Web date: 09/27/2006 S'liJBDIVISION IilENS]itY & ElIMENSION CALCULATIONS For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. File Number (To be filled in by DOES) PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION WORKSHEET RELATING TO DENSITY AND DIMENSIONS Several development regulations playa role in the creation of a subdivision within King County. Determining the allowable density, minimum density, and a lot width on a piece of property can be confusing. This worksheet will assist you in correctly applying specific portions of the code and will be used to determine if a proposed subdivision or short subdivision meets the density and dimensions provisions of the King County Zoning Code (Title 21A). This worksheet is designed to assist applicants and does not replace compliance with adopted local, state and federal laws. Pre-application conferences are required prior to submittal of a subdivision or short subdivision. These conferences help to clarify issues and answer questions. They may save you both time and money by eliminating delays resulting from requests for additional information and revisions. You may call 206-296-6600 to find out how to arrange for a pre-application conference. Worksheet Prepared By: t1 e.i -5 hi()1A L", / T '(1~oI. AsSlivierfes Date: (2. / I M 1.-00 ft (P/int Name) Subdivision Name: -e~~t Rw. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Zoning: --I"R'---_4--'-____ _ If more than one Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation or zone classification exists for the property, show . the boundary between the land uses or zones and the area within each on the preliminary plat map. If a single lot is div'lded by a zone boundary, transferring density across zones on that lot may be permitted subject to the provisions of K.C.C. 21A.12.200. PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY THE APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THIS FORM I. Site Area (K.C.C. 21A.06.1172) also see (K.C.C. 21A.12.080): Site area (in square feet) is the TOTAL horizontal area of the project site. MAIN FILE Copy SubdivDensityDimensionCalcFORM.doc Ic-cal-subden.pdf 09/27/2006 Pa 10f6 r-------------------• Calculation: ___ -:--::--:--_ Gross horizontal area of the project site _7-'-4'-'O'-'.'--"~'-"g ........ fo'___ Site area in sq ua re feet • NOTE: To continue calculations, convert site area in square feet to acres by dividing by 43,560 ---'--' ...... 7'---,_0'------" ___ Site area in acres NOTE: When calculating the site area for parcels in the RA Zone, if the site area should result in a fraction of an acre, the foliowing shall apply: Fractions of .50 or above shall be rounded up to the next whole number and fractions below .50 shall be rounded down. Example: If the site area in acres is 19.5 acres (less the submerged land and less the area that is required to be dedicated on the perimeter of a project site for public right-of-way) the site area can be rounded up to 20 acres. No further rounding is allowed. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.0BO) II. Base Density (K.C.C, 21A.12.030 -.040 tables): The base density is determined by the zone designations(s) for the lot. 4: du/acre III. Allowable Dwelling Units and Rounding (K.C.C. 21A.12.070): The base number of dwelling units is calculated by multiplying the site area by the base density in dwelling units per acre (from K.C.C. 21A.12.030 -.040 tables). _',---7-'---'..:,0",-,-1 __ site area in acres (see Section 1.) X __ 4-'-___ base density (see Section II) = &; B allowable dwelling units Except as noted below, when calculations result in a fraction, the fraction is rounded to the nearest whole number as follows: A. Fractions of .50 or above shall be rounded up; and B. Fractions below .50 shall be rounded down. NOTE: For parcels in the RA Zone, no rounding is allowed when calculating the allowable number of dwelling units. For example, if the calculation of the number of dwelling units equaled 2.75, the result would be 2 dwelling units. Rounding up to 3 is not allowed. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.070(E).) IV. Required On-site Recreation Space (K.C.C. 21A.14.180): This section must be completed only if the proposal is a residential development if more than four dwelling units in the UR and R zones, stand-alone townhouses in the NB zone on property deSignated Commercial Outside of Center if more than four units, or any mixed use development if more than four units. Recreation space must be computed by multiplying the recreation space requirement per unit type by the proposed number of such dwelling units (K.C.C. 21A.14.1BO). Note: King County has the discretion to accept a fee in lieu of all or a portion of the required recreation space per K.C.C. 21A.14.1B5. Apartments and town houses developed at a density greater than eight units per acre, and mixed use must provide recreational space as follows: 90 square feet X 170 square feet X 170 square feet X ____ proposed number of studio and one bedroom units ____ proposed number of two bedroom units ____ proposed number of three or more bedroom units Recreation space requirement SubdivDensityDimensionCalcFORM.doc Ic-cal-subden.pdl 09/27/2006 + + = Page 2 016 -------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~---~--- '.' . • Required On-site Recreation Space Continued • Residential subdivisions, townhouses and apartments developed at a density of eight units or less per acre must provide recreational space as follows: 390 square feet X ~_b==-=(P~~_ proposed number of units = z~, 74-0 5F Mobile home parks shall provide recreational space as follows: 260 square feet X ~~~~~_ proposed number of units = V. Net Buildable Area (K.C.C_ 21A.06.797): This section is used for computing minimum density and must be completed only if the site is located in the R-4 through R-48 zones and designated Urban by the King County Comprehensive Plan. The net buildable area is the site area (see Section I) less the following areas: ~~~_tJ_ areas within a project site which are required to be dedicated for public rights-of-way in excess of sixty (60') of width + I q 7, b1ft critical areas and their buffers, to the extent they are required by King County to remain undeveloped + + ~~~_~_ areas required for above ground stormwater control facilities including, but not limited to, z~, 740 retention/detention ponds, biofiltration swales and setbacks from such ponds and swales areas required by King County to be dedicated or reserved as on-site recreation areas. Deduct area within stormwater control facility if requesting recreation space credit as allowed by K.C.C 21A.14.1BO (see Section IV) ~~~-'()~ regional utility corridors, and + + ~~~--'o~ other areas, excluding setbacks, required by King County to remain undeveloped = z,;;Q,4z4' Total reductions Calculation: 740,~e6 site area in square feet (see Section1) Total reductions = z..Z3,4:=2.1- ~I 7, 4-k2 Net buildable area in square feet NOTE: convert site area is square feet to ~---,/L.!/--,\-=8,-,8',,----~ Net buildable area in acres acres by dividing by 43.560 = VI. Minimum Urban Residential Density (K.C.C. 21A.12.060): The minimum density requirement applies only to the R-4 through R-48 zones. Minimum density is determined by multiplying the base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) by the net buildable area of the site in acres (see Section V) and then multiplying the resulting product by the minimum density percentage from the K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. The minimum density requirements may be phased or waived by King County in certain cases. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.060.) Also, the minimum density requirement does not apply to properties zoned R-4 located within the rural town of Fall City. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.030(B)12.) Calculation: ~:-=4!--:=-=-_ base density in dulac (see Section II) X II, 2ft Net buildable area in acres (see Section V) 47.52 X minimum density % set forth in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 or as adjusted in Section VII ~~~~_ minimum dwelling units required = = (35) SubdivDensityDimensionCatcFORM.dOC ~ tc-cat-subden.pdf 0912712006 Page 3 of6 • • VII. Minimum Density Adjustments for Moderate Slopes (K.C.C. 21A.12.087): Residential developments in the R-4, R-6 and R-8 zones may modify the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 based on the weighted average slope of the net buildable area of the site (see Section V). To determine the weighted average slope, a topographic survey is required to calculate the net buildable area(s) within each of the following slope increments and then multiplying the number of square feet in each slope increment by the median slope value of each slope increment as follows: _____ SQ. It 0-5% slope increment X 2.5% median slope value = + SQ. It 5-10% slope increment X 7.5% median slope value = -----+ + _____ sq. It 10-15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = -----+ + _____ sq. ft 15-20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = -----+ + _____ sq. ft 20-25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = + ----- + _____ sQ. ft 25-30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = ------+ + _____ sq. ft 30-35% slope increment X 32.5% median slope value = + ----- + -----+ _____ sQ. ft 35-40% slope increment X 37.5% median slope value = Total square feet -----in net buildable area ______ Total square feet adjusted for slope Calculation: _____ total square feet adjusted for slope divided by total square feet in net buildable area = weighted average slope of net buildable area = _____ % (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent -round up to nearest whole percent) Use the table below to determine the minimum density factor. This density is substituted for the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table when calculating the minimum density as shown in Section VI of this worksheet. Weighted Average Slope of Net Minimum Density Factor Buildable Area(s) of Site: 0% --less than 5% 85% 5% --less than 15% 83%, less 1.5% each 1 % of average slope in excess of 5% 15% --less than 40% 66%, less 2.0% for each 1 % of average slope in excess of 15% EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR MINIMUM DENSITY ADJUSTMENTS FOR MODERATE SLOPES: 750 + 2,500 + -----+ -----+ -----+ -----+ -----+ ---,-,:--::-c:-:--SQ. ft 0-5% slope increment X 2.5% median slope value = _--'-',-",-,,,,,-_ sQ. ft 5-10% slope increment X 7.5% median slope value = _-='-""=-_ sq. ft 10-15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = _____ sq. ft 15-20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = _____ sq. ft 20-25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = _____ sq. ft 25-30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = _____ sq. ft 30-35% slope increment X 32.5% median slope value = _--::-::-:::=_ sq. ft. 35-40% slope increment X 37.5 % median slope value = Total square feet ---"-==-in net buildable area 3,250 Total square feet adjusted for slope 3,250 Total square feet adjusted for slope divided by 30,000 Total square feet in net buildable area = .108333 Weighted average slope of net buildable area = 11 % (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent -round up to nearest whole percent) Using the table above, an 11 % weighted average slope of net buildable area falls within the 5% --less than 15% range which has a minimum density factor of 83%, less 1.5% for each 1 % of average slope in excess of 5%. Since 11 % is 6% above 5%, multiply 6 times 1.5 which would equal 9%. Subtract 9% from 83% for an adjusted minimum density factor of 74%. This replaces the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. SubdivDensityDimensionCalcFORM,doc Ic-cal-subden.pdf 09/27/2006 Page4of6 ----------• • VIII. Maximum Dwelling Units Allowed (K.C.C. 21A.12.030 -.040): This section should be completed only if the proposal includes application of residential density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) or transfer of density rights (K.C.C. 21A.37). Maximum density is calculated by adding the bonus or transfer units authorized to the base units calculated in Section III of this worksheet. The maximum density permitted through residential density incentives is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II) of the underlying zoning of the development or 200 percent of the base density for proposals with 100 percent affordable units. The maximum density permitted through transfer of density rights is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II) of the underlying zoning of the development. _____ base density in dwelling units per acre see (Section II) X 150% = maximum density _---, __ ,-maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) _____ base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) X 200% = maximum density _---, __ ,-maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives with 100 percent affordable units (K.C.C. 21A.34) _____ base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) X 150% = maximum density _---,_----:_ maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum. dwelling units allowed utilizing density transfers (K.C.C. 21A.37) Calculation: + + ______ base allowable dwelling units calculated in Section III ______ bonus units authorized by K.C.C. 21A.34 ______ transfer units authorized by K.C.C. 21A.37 ______ total dwelling units (cannot exceed maximum calculated above) IX. Minimum Lot Area For Construction (K.C.C. 21A.12.100): Except as provided for nonconformances in K.C.C. 21A.32: A. In the UR and R zones, no construction shall be permitted on a lot that contains an area of less than 2,500 square feet or that does not comply with the applicable minimum lot width, except for townhouse developments, zero-lot-line subdivisions, or lots created prior to February 2, 1995, in a recorded subdivision or short subdivision which complied with applicable laws, and; B. In the A, F, or RA Zones: 1. Construction shall not be permitted on a lot containing less than 5,000 square feet; and 2. Construction shall be limited to one dwelling unit and residential accessory uses for lots containing greater than 5,000 square feet, but less than 12,500 square feet. (K.C.C. 21A.12.100) SubdivDensityDimensionCalcFORM.doc lc-cal-subden.pdf 09/27/2006 Page 5 of 6 • • X. Lot Width (K.C.C. 21A.12.050(B)): Lot widths shall be measured by scaling a circle of the applicable diameter within the boundaries of the lot as shown below, provided than an access easement shall not be included within the circle. (See K.C.C. 21 A.12.050). I 30 Feet Lot Width Circle I. .-.-.-.-.-.~ Lot Width Measurement Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.govlddes SubdivDensityDimensionCalcFORM,doc Ic-cal~subden.pdf 09/27/2006 Page 6 of6 o I ! I • ~,,"~_IJ_ ,~<",\.,,,,,'_~I£.<,O'-""'_\'''_'_ I ._. ___ _ I '~"'._'_'" , .1 i"T- :--~ ........ " -"-- I' : .... I i,-t-·-! ,~--':~ , , I . ...:... , .J •••• _ • .; , • • • • " • • • I' .-. . , " • 'I' •• , , •• . :, :!->~~:~:~. f-:": ~:l:~ ~. :·-':"·V ~i~ : . , ~ 0 : ~ iii : ~~~ i ~~: i i ii . ~: 'I " Ii " , i d~ 9· .. L ..... ~ , ~ ___ .l..-_+_. ,,' '>1 i ~ ~ ;-___ ~L --;----L.. _ ~. ___ -..J __ • __ \\ 'I 1/ I' " ,. !. .. ~ .. -:l Ii " I ~ ::::. ... =-..... ! --"_." . ..__ .. ~ ---_ .. __ ... 18 1 '" -r,-" ii' 1-------. • PRELIMINARY PLAT II III! \~~/ I "II -r : WABHINOroN CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT EAST RENTON KCI L02P0005 KINO COUNTY, , ,-• _"'JOIJo_IO"_ < "_~~"''"''''',r''~''' __ N''·_'''"_'.·''~'''''' . ---------_ . ...,--": --:---_._-.. --,- o I I I .. ~. ". , " ' :""1 ' , ,.... " "1,' 1 . . ,'. I g il 1"1 '" .~-'11 • n ... ,. :::=-'" ~ ~ H8JIl!" I'-~=:= :::::::. ..."... ~ KING COUNTY, • -,. ~- PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN KING COUNTY R·4 LA YOUT CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT EAST RENTON --.' WA8HJNtJtOH ·~.I , '". ," ,I ' " t.' ',' :J7--- III Ii! II \~~/ I .. II' , r I ~ p--- l ------.--',..- KiugCOlillty • Department ofDcvdopmcnt aud Environmental Services Land Use Services Divi8ion 9000akesdaleAvcIlucSW Renton, WA 98055·1219 (206) 296-6600 • PLAT DENSITY AND DIMENSION CALCULATIONS PHEUMINARY SUBDIVISION WORKSHEET RELATING TO DENSITY AND DIMENSIONS A great many ordinances playa role in the creation of a subdivision witliin King County, Detennining the allowable density, maximum density, minimum density, and lqt width on a piece of property can be confusing, This worksheet will assist you in correctly applying specific portion~ of the code aJld will be used to detennine if a proposed plat or short plat meets the density and dimensions provisions of the King County Zoning Code (Title 2IA), This worksheet is' prepared to assist applicants, and does not replace compliance with adopted local, state aJld federal ,laws, Preapplication conferences are recommended. These conferences help to clarify issues and answer questions, They , may save you both tinle and money by eliminating delays resulting from requests for additional infonnation and revisions, You may call (206) 296-6640 to find out how to arrange for a preapplication conference, DATE: 5 -2 --02 NAME OF PLAT: I;:AS--r j2.pi'-rT"oN :p(Lo("f flf I.f"" FILE NO,: T:' /&; D, I COMPREHEN~IVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: k( 12.!~ A 1\/ /VI f;: I:::> \ V M ZONING: _ gLI COMMUNITY OR SUBAREA PLAN: tVE"WCASrU=', , If more than one Comprehensive Plail Land Use designation or zone classification exists for the property, show the boundary between the land uses or zones and the area within each on the preliminary plat map" If a single lot is divided by a zope boundaty, transferring density across zones oil that lot may be permitted subject to the provisions ofKCC 2IA,[2,200, Please complete only the applicable portions of the form. 1. Sile Area (K.C.C. 21A.06,11721: Site area (in square feet) is the gross horizontal area of the project site, less submerged lands as defined by K.C,C, 21 A.06, 1265, and less areas which are required to be dedicated.on the perimeter of a proJect site for public rights-of-way, _-',0"',_" __ square feet in submerged land (any land below the ordinary high water mark + IlL . -see KC,C, 21A.06,825,) __ 'JTL..r __ square feet in perimeter rights-or-way which will be required to be dedicated =(1 ... . Cai6ulation: (area 30 feet from center line of road) Total 65J.,,1'h9 Gross horizontal ~rea of the project site ·e~ Total submerged lands and rights-of-way 662,4h9 Site area in square feet 19. 57 Site area in acres '" NOTE: To continue calculations, convert site area itfsquare feet to acres by dividing by 43,560 II, Base Density IK.C.C. 21A:12,030. ,040 ta~les): . .. \ The base density is determined by the zone designation(s) for the lot. . April 12,2000 Page 1 of 4 Ll dulacre ,. . 'PLAT DENSITY.D DIMENSION CALCULe'ONS I , III. Allowable Dwelling Units and Rounding (K.C.C. 21A.12.070): The base number of dwelling units is calculated by multiplying the site area by the base density in dwelling units per acre (from K.C.C. 2IA.12.030 -.040 tables). Jq. '5-' site .urea in acres (see Section 1.) X . = 78 allowable dwelling units ~.-"L=+I __ b,ase density (see Section II.) \Vhen calculations 'result in a fraction, the fraction is rounded to the nearest whole Dumber as follows: 1. Fractions of ,50 or above shall be rounded up; and 2. Fractions below .50 shall be rounded down. IV. Reg.iired On-site Recreation Space CKc.C. 21A.14.180): This scctioll must be completed only if the proposal is a residential development if more than "four dwel\ing units in the UR and R zones, stand-alone townhouses in the NB zone on property designated Commercial Outside of Center ifrnore than four units, or any mixed use development if more than four units. Recreation space must be computed by multiplying the recreation space requirement per unit type by the proposed number of such dwelling units (K.C.C. 2IA.14.180). NOTE: King County has the discretion to accept a fee in lieu of all or a portion of the required recreation space per K.C.C. 2IA.14.J8S. . Apartments and townhouses' developed at a den~ity greater than eight units per acre, and mixed use must provide re~reational space as followi>: - 90 square feet X __ pro;osed number of studio and one bedroom units +~_-";\.:-. __ _ 130 square feet X _._ proposed number of two bedroom tinits 170 square feet X __ proposed number of three or more bedroom units + \v. Recrea.tion space requirement ~ .. . '\ Residential subdivisions and to~nhouses developed at a density of eight units or less per acre must provide recreational space as follows: 390 square fe;t X -'it proposed number ofunits Mobile home parks shall P!ovide recreatioll':ll space as follows: 260 square fcet X __ proposed number of units \ V. Net Buildable Area (K.C.C. 21A.06.797): This section is ,used for computing minimum density and must be completed only if the site is located in the RA through R-48 zOIies and designated Urbali by the King County Comprehensive Plan. 11le net buildable area is tlle site area (see Section I.) less the following areas: .. -e'-areas within a project site which are required to be dedicated for public rights-of-way in ~ excess of siXty feet (60') of width. . + 215,tro sensitive areas and their buffers,,,to the extent they are reqUired by King County to remain ,. .' " unde,veloped (Appt: OX)· . + 2Jc>,9 ~')?. areas required for above ground stormwater control facilities including, but not limited to, retention/detention ponds, biofiltration swales and setbacks from such ponds and swales . + ~'I~ areas required by King County to be dedicated or reserved 'as on·site recreation areas. Deduct area within stonnw~lter control facility if requesting recreation space credit as· allowed by D KCC 2IA.l4.180. (see Section IV.) + __ "..:~~l-__ regional utility corridors, and . + __ --'e..~ __ oth~r areas, excluding setbacks, required by King County to remain undeveloped = 2A"~)a£';~ Total reductions Calculation: . . . 65214tljsite area_in square feet (s~'e Section I.) -2..1.~9Jg4'U'otal reductions = ~)3, Ot,jlet buildable area in square feet NOTE: convert site area in square . feet to acres by dividing by 43,560 13.\3,5 ne'! buil"able area in acres , , 2 ~-----~----------------------~--------------------------------------------------------------- PLAT DENSITY. DIMENSION CALCULA4lJNS VI. Minimum Urban Residential Density (K.C.C. 21A.12.060): 111e minimum density requirement applies only to the R-4 through R-48 zones. Minimum density is determined by multiplying the base density· in dwelling units per acre (see Section II.) by the net buildable area of the site iu acres (see ·Section V.) and then multiplying the resulting product by the minimum density percentage from the K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. The minimum density requirements may be phased or waived by King County in certain cases, See K.C.C. 21A.12.060. Calcul lion: i., II base density in dulac (see Section II.) X '. 13,fJS net buildable area i:i acres (see Section V.) X minimum density % set forth in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 or as adjusted in Section VI!. minimum dwelling units ~equired VII. Minimum Density Adjustme:its For Moderate Slopes (K.C.C. 21A.12.087): Residential developments in the R-4, R-6 and R-8 zones may modify the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 based on the weighted average slope of the net buildable area ofth,; site (see Section V.). To detemune tile weighted a vcrage slope, a topographic survey is required to calculate the net buildable area(s) within each of the following slope increments and then multiplying the number of square feet in each slope increment by the median slope value of ea~h slope increment as follows: sq. ft 0-5% slope increment X 2,5% median slope value = . + sq. ft 5 ~ 10% slope increment X 7,5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 10 -15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 15 -20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = + -1-sq. ft 20 -25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 2;; -30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 30 -35% 'slope increment X ,32.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 35 -40% slope increment X 37.5% median slope value = + Total square feet Total square feet in net buildable area, adjusted for slope Calculation: _______ total square feet adjusted fonlope divided by _________ total square feet in net buildable area _________ weighted average slope of net buildablearea % (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent-round up to uearest whole percent) Use the table below to determine the minimum density factor. This density is substituted for the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table when calculating the minhnum density as shown in Section VI. of this worksheet. Weighted Average Slope of Net Buildable Area(s) of Site: Minimum Density Factor: 0% -less than 5% 85% 5% -less than 15% 83%, less 1.5% for each 1 % of average slope in excess of 5% 15% -less than 40% 66%,.le55 2,0%' for each 1 % of average slope in excess of 15% EXAMPLE CALCULATION fOR MINIMUM DENSITY ADJUSTIvlENTS FOR MODERATE SLOPES: -c-:-c-----sq. ft 0 -5% slope increment X 2.5% median slope value = --'''''~'--_ sq. ft 5 -10% slope increment X 7.5% !nedian slope value = ""~""''--_ sq. ft 10 -15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = _____ sq. ft 15 -20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = _______ sq. ft 20 -25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = _________ sq. ft 25 -30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = ____ -'--_ sq. ft 30 -35% slope increment X 32.5% median slopev.alue = ________ sq. ft 35 -40% slope increment X 37.5% I\iedian slope value = _-""~"'-_ Total square feet in net buildable area 750 + 2.500 + + + + + ----+ 3,250 TotaI.square feet adjusted for slope tot~l square feet adjusted for slope divirIrd'lb'y 30,000 total square feet in net buildable area weIghted average slope cfuet buildable ar~a. (Note: multiply by 100 to convert .to·percent -round up to nearest whole percent) USi,ng the tabl~ ~boveJ an 1 ~.% weighted average slope of net bUiidable area falls within the 5% M less than 15% range wInch has a mmmlUm denSity factor of 83%, less 1.5% for each 1 % of average slope in excess of 5%, Since 11 % is 3 . -. .. PLAT DENSITY Aa DIMENSION CALCULA.NS 6% above 5%, multiply 6 times 1.5 which would equal ~%. Subtract 9% from 83% for an adjusted minimum density factor of74%. This replaces the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. VIII. Maxilllum Dwelling Units Allowed (K.C.C. 21A.J2.030 .. 040): This section should be completed only if the proposal includes application ofr~sic1ential density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) or transfer of density credit (K.C.C. 21A,36 or 21 A.55). Maximum density is calculated by adding . the bouu~s or transfer units authorized to the base units calculated in Section III. of this worksheet. . The maximum density pennitled through residential density incentives is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II.) of the underlying zoning of the development or 200 percent of the base density for proposals with 100 percent affordable units. The maximum density pennitted through tnmsfer of density credit is. I 50 percent of the base density (see Section Il.) of the underlying zonmg of the development. ____ base density-in dwelling units per acre (see Section Il.) X 150% = maximum density _-.,-__ maximum density in dwelling units per a~;e X site area in acres = ___ _ maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) ____ base density III dwelling units pel' acre (see Section II.) X 200% maximum density _-.,-__ maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = ___ _ maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives with 100 percent affordable units(K.C.C. 21A.34) ____ base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section 11.) X 150% _ = max,imum density _-.,-__ maximulll density in dwelling units per-acre _ X site area in acres = ___ _ maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density transfers (K.C.C. 21A,36 or 21A.55) Calculation: ____ base allowable dwelling units calculated III Section III. + bonus units authorized by K.C.C. 21A,34 + transfer units authorized by K.C.C. 21A,36 or 21A.55 ____ total dwelling units (cannot exceed maximums calculated above) IX. Minilll urn Lot Area For Construction: Except as provided for nonconformances in KCC 21A.32: A, In the UR and R zones no, construction shall be permitted on a lot that contains an area of less than 2,500 square feet or that does no! comply with the applicable minimum lot width, except for townhouse developments or zero~lot-line subdivisions; and B. In the A, F, or RA zones: 1, Construction shall not be permitted on a lot containing less than 5,000 square feet; and 2. Construction shall be limited to one dwelling unit and residential accessory uses for lots -containing grc"ter than 5,000 square feet, but less than 12,500 square feet. (KCC 21A. 12. 100) X. Lot Width; Lot widths shall be measured by scaling a circle.of the applicable diameter within the boundaries of the lot as shown below, provided that an access easement shall not be included within the circle. (See KCC 21A. 12.050). 30 fed . Loi; \oIld-th Circle ,- , LOT 'WIDTH MEASUREMENT ,:.',. 4 • • • SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARD, AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT IRONWOOD King County, Washington Prepared for: Northward Homes 1560 140'h A venue NE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 9115'" Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827 -770 I Fax: 425-827-5424 April 23, 2003 Project No. KE03173B • • • Ironwood King County, Washington Subsuljace Rrplorarion, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Project and Site Conditions 1. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnical engineering study for the Ironwood development located at 1183 148'h Avenue SE in King County, Washington (Vicinity Plan, Figure 1) for Northward Homes. The approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. The explorations were completed in the general areas of the proposed lots, detention ponds, and streets. If development plans change, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified, if necessary. 1. 1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface soil and ground water data to be utilized in the design and development of the above-referenced project. Our study included a review of available geologic literature, excavation of 19 exploration pits, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and ground water conditions. Limited geologic hazard evaluations and engineering studies were also conducted to determine suitable geologic hazard mitigation teChniques, the type of suitable foundation, allowable soil foundation bearing pressures, anticipated settlements, retaining wall lateral pressures, floor support recommendations, and drainage considerations. This report summarizes our current fieldwork and offers hazard mitigation and development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. 1.2 Authorization Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. Patrick Gilroy of Northward Homes. Our study was accomplished in general accordance with our scope of work letter dated March 31, 2003. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Northward Homes and their agents, for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on conversations with Mr. Gilroy of Northward Homes, review of proposed lot and street layout plans supplied by CORE Design dated April 7, 2003, and familiarity with our previous geotechnical work April 23, 2003 ,lSSOC/ATED URTJ! Sc/E.VCES. INC. JDe Ib -}lEUJ! 7381 -/'rl/J"m .::(()31 "!_IIKEi 1\'1' -\\:,": Page 4 • • • --------------------------- Ironwood King County, Washington SUDSlIiface £rploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Project Qnd Site Conditions performed in the site area. Present plans call for demolition of one existing house and several outbuildings and the construction of 41 single-family units, new streets, a detention pond, and associated development improvements. Access to the new development would be from 148"' Avenue SE. The site is located west of 148th Avenue SE and east of the Renton city limits, approximately v.. mile south of SR 900 in King County, Washington. A wood framed single-family house occupied the southeast corner the property. Two large outbuildings were located west of the house. A domestic water well that used to supply water to the house is located near the southeast site corner. The site sloped moderately down to the west to a wetland that occupied the west central portion of the site. The wetland had both standing and flowing surface water in it at the time of our site visit. Total evaluation change across the property was on the order of 80 feel. The east side of the site was predominately developed with pasture and lawns with some scattered trees and brush. The west side of the site was covered in brush and small trees. The central wetland separated the two sides. The site was surrounded by large tracts of rural property. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included advancing nineteen exploration pits on April 8, 2003 and performing a geologic reconnaissance to gain information about the site. The various types of sediments, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent gradational variations between sediment types. Our explorations were approximately located in the field by measuring from known site features shown on the Site and Exploration Plan and their locations and elevations should be considered approximate. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the exploration pits completed for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary coostraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re- evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. 3. I Exploration Pits The exploration pits were excavated with a trackhoe under subcontract to Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI). The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered In the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by an April 23, 2003 JlJe: If; _ "'l-:U3/7J81 -!'rujl'(/'\" :'uf!J I 731K£\ \\'!' -w:,g ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. tNC Page 5 • • • Ironwood King County, Washington Subsulface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Project and Site Conditions engineering geologist from our firm. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as necessary. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished for this study and visual reconnaissance of the site. As shown on the field logs, the exploration pits generally encountered large amounts of fill materials of various composition near the west side of the east portion of the site over various glacially derived sediments. We encountered less fill or no fill throughout the east end of the eastside of the site. Lodgement till was encountered west of the wetlands. Review of the Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington by D.R. Mullineaux (1965) indicates that the area of the subject site is underlain by Vashon lodgement till. Our interpretations of the sediments encountered during our study are in general agreement with this regional geologic map. The following section presents more detailed subsurface information organized from the shallowest (youngest) to the deepest (oldest) sediment types. 4.1 Stratigraphy Sod/Forest DUff/Topsoil A layer of organic rich soil classified as sod, forest duff, and or topsoil was encountered at the surface in all of the exploration pits. The organic rich soil was between 0.5 and 1.5 feet thick. This soil is not considered suitable for building support due to its compressive nature. Fill Approximately 2 to 10 feet of fill was encountered in the exploration pits located primarily west of the westerly outbuilding. The fill was encountered in exploration pits EP-ll, EP-12, EP-13, EP-17, and EP-18. Fill is also expected around the existing house, outbuildings, septic system, and other underground utilities. The fill generally consisted of loose, moist to wet, fine to coarse sand with variable amounts of silt, gravel, organic material, and debris such as concrete and asphalt chunks. The fill is not considered suitable for foundation support due to its loose state and the presence of scattered organic material. Vashon Recessional Outwash A recessional outwash deposit consisting of medium dense sand contalOlOg trace to few amounts of silt and variable amounts of gravel was encountered in exploration pits EP-12, EP- 13, and EP-14. Meltwater streams flowing off of the retreating Vashon age ice sheet that once occupied the Puget Sound area deposited the recessional outwash sand. The recessional April 23, 2003 }UC;/b _ ,,-EOJ/731J1 -l'rojf'<'15 ,::'W3I7JIKE:IV!' -W:K ASSOCIATED EARTII SCIENCES, INC Page 6 • • • Ironwood King County, Washing ron Subswface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Project and Site Conditions outwash is suitable for building support though some preparation and compaction may be needed prior to placement of structures on this material. The recessional outwash is estimated to have a high permeability rate. Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till Weathered Vashon lodgement till, consisting generally of medium dense, fine to coarse sand, containing little amounts of silt and gravel and trace amounts of cobbles and boulders was encountered near the surface in exploration pits EP-3 through EP-9, EP-16, and EP-21. The weathered till was also encountered below the fill in exploration pits EP-ll and EP-18. The lodgement till was deposited at the base of the Vashon age glacial ice sheet and was subsequently overridden by several thousand feet of ice. Consequently, these materials are generally dense to very dense, possess high shear strength, low compressibility characteristics, and are relatively impermeable. The upper portions of the till are generally weathered and less dense, oxidized brown and siltier than the lower unweathered portions of the deposit. The weathered till is suitable for direct foundation support. These sediments are considered moisture-sensitive and are anticipated to have a relatively low permeability rate. Vashon Lodgement Till Unweathered till was encountered below the weathered till in exploration pits EP-3 through EP-9, EP-16, EP-18, and EP-21. The till consisted of dense to very dense, fine to coarse sand containing little silt, few fine to coarse gravel and trace amounts of cobbles and boulders. The unweathered till is also suitable for structural support, is considered moisture-sensitive, and is anticipated to have a very low relative permeability rate. Vashon Advance OUMash An advance outwash deposit consisting of medium dense to dense sand and gravel to hard sandy silt was encountered below the recessional outwash in exploration pit EP-15, below the fill in EP-17, and below the till in EP-18. The advance outwash was also encountered at the surface in exploration pits EP-19, EP-20, and EP-22. Meltwater streams flowing off of the advancing Vashon age glacial ice sheet that once occupied the Puget Sound area deposited the deposit ahead of the ice and were subsequently overridden by several thousand feet of ice. The advance outwash deposit is suitable for building support. The advance outwash is estimated to have a wide range of permeability rates. 4.2 Hvdrology Varying amounts of shallow ground water seepage, ranging from very heavy to very slight was encountered in most of the exploration pits. The ground water seepage encountered in our exploration pits is interpreted to be perched in the looser soils or coarser grained soils such as the fill, the recessional outwash, the weathered till, and the advance outwash. As per the Killg April 23. ](XJ3 ASSOCIA TED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. ){)C;'lb ~ A:I::OJI7.lIJl -l'ro)(,fI.\',:'lj]J!7},Kf,,\~'I' -II:',..: Page 7 -. • • Ironwood King County, Washington Subsuljace Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Project and Site Conditions County Surface Water Design Manual (1998), Section 3,2.2.1, the site soils are till soils under the KCKTS Soil Groups. The quantity and duration of seepage of the perched ground water was quite variable and depends on topography, soil grain size, on-and off-site land usage, and seasonal variations in the amount of precipitation . April 23. 2003 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. JDC:lb -KEDJ! 73BI -Pro}erl5l:(Y)317]tKE\ WP -~V:K Page 8 ,---~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------------------ • • • Ironwood King COl/ney, Washington Subsurface Rtploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Geologic Hazards and Mitigations II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic conditions as observed and discussed herein, The King County Sensitive Areas Folio was reviewed and no Landslide Areas or Erosion Hazard areas were shown for the site. 5,0 SLOPE STABILITY HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION The site topography has moderate slopes, Due to the low slope angles the risk of landsliding is low and no mitigation efforts are needed, The slopes do not appear to exceed the King County criteria for steep slopes of greater than 40 percent inclination. 6.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity, The vast maJonty of these events are small and are usually not felt by people, However, large earthquakes do occur as evidenced by the 1949, 7.2-magnitude event, the 1965, 6.5-magnitude event, and the 2001, 6.S-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5,5 and 6,0 is every 25 to 40 years in the Puget Sound Basin, Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: I) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is discussed below. 6.1 Surficial Ground Rupture The nearest known fault trace to the project site is the Seattle Fault, located approximately 7 miles to the north. Recent studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (e.g., Johnson et aI., 1994, Origin and Evolwioll of the Sealtle Fauit alld Seattle Basin, WashingfOn, Geology, v. 22, pp. 71-74; and Johnson et aI., 1999, Active Tectonics of the Seattle Fault and Celltral ?uget Soulld Washington -Implications for Eanhquake Hazards, Geological Society of America Bulletin, July 1999, v. Ill, n. 7, pp. 1042-1053) have provided evidence of surficial ground rupture along a northern splay of the Seattle Fault. The recognition of this fault splay is relatively new and data pertaining to it are limited with the studies still ongoing. According to the USGS studies, the latest movement of this fault was about 1,100 years ago when about 20 feet of surficial displacement took place. This displacement can presently be seen in the form of raised, wave-cut beach terraces along Alki Point in West Seattle and Restoration Point April 23, 2003 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. JDClb -},'E03I7JHI .I'r(}},'C/s:;:m)17J',KE 1'>'1' -\\-:K Page 9 • • • Ironwood King CounTy, Washington Subsurface Rtploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Geologic Hazards and Mitigations at the south end of Bainbridge Island. The recurrence interval of movement along these fault systems is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess of several thousand years. Due to the suspected long recurrence interval and distance from the site, the potential for surficial ground rupture is considered to be low during the expected life of the proposed structures. 6.2 Seismically Induced Landslides It is our opinion that the potential risk of damage to the proposed development by seismically induced landsliding is low due to the lack of steep slopes, the density of the natural soil units and lack of ground water seepage in the project area. 6.3 Liquefaction The encountered stratigraphy has a low potential for liquefaction due to the dense state of the material at depth. 6.4 Ground Motion The project site is located within a Zone 3 rating for seismic activity on a scale of I (lowest) to 4 (highest) based on the Seismic Zone Map of the United Stmes, Figure No. 16-2 in the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). This zonation is based on past earthquake activity in the Puget Sound region. As such, design reconunendations should accommodate the possible effect of seismic activity in areas with a Zone 3 rating, corresponding to a seismic zone factor (Z) of 0.3 (a Richter magnitude 7.5 earthquake occurring directly beneath the site), using soil type Sc. This soil type corresponds to seismic coefficients: Co = 0.33 and C = 0.45. 7.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The sediments underlying the site contain substantial quantities of silt and fine sand and will be sensitive to erosion. The King County Sensitive Areas Folio was reviewed and no Erosion Hazard areas were shown for the site. In order to reduce the amount of sediment transport off the site during construction, the following reconunendations should be followed. I. All storm water from impermeable surfaces should be tightlined into an approved storm water drainage system or temporary storage facility. 2. If possible, construction should proceed during the drier periods of the year and disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. April 23, 2003 ASSOCIATED E,IRTII SCIENCES. !SC. JDC./v -KEOJ!7JHI -!'ro/"m':W317J;KE:WP -W"J.K Page 10 -e • • Ironwood King County, Washington Subsu1ace Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repol1 Geologic Hazards and Mitigations 3. Clearing beyond the areas to be developed should be avoided. Disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. 4. Temporary silt fences should be provided along the lower margins of cleared/disturbed areas. 5. Check dams should be provided along any swales or temporary ditches. 6. Temporary sediment catchment facilities should be cleaned out and maintained periodically as necessary to maintain their capacity and function. 7. Soils which are to be reused around the site, should be stored in such a manner as to reduce erosion from the stockpile. Protective measures may include, but are not necessarily limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, or the use of straw bales/silt fences around pile perimeters. 8. Temporary construction entrances should be constructed with quarry spalls or equivalent according to King County regulations . April 23, 2003 JDClb -KE03f73Bl -Projl'CI5'.:OO317J'K£\IVP -111:/\ ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC Page 11 • • Ironwood King County, WashinglOll Subsurface ErplorQ/ion, Geologic Hazard, alld GeotechllicaL Engineerillg Report Design Recommendations III. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 8.0 INTRODUCTION Our explorations indicate that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the proposed development provided that the recommendations contained herein are properly followed. The bearing strata ranges from approximately 2 to 10 feet in depth below the ground surface across a portion of the site generally located west of the outbuildings and east of the wetlands. The depth to bearing soils across the rest of the site was between about 0.5 and approximately 2 feet below existing site grades. The site soils were generally above their optimum moisture content for compaction thus their reuse as fill during all but the driest times of the year will be difficult. In addition, most of the exploration pits encountered significant amounts of shallow ground water. Some type of deep foundation such as small-diameter pipe piles (4-to 6-inch-diameter) and/or rock trenches bearing on the lower, dense natural soils is recommended for building support throughout the previously filled portion of the site. If the new buildings will have slab-on- grade floors, we recommend that the upper 2 feet of soil below the slab subgrade elevation consist of new, compacted, free draining structural fill. If the slabs are settlement sensitive then the floor slabs should also be pile supported. No new structural till would be required under the floors if the buildings utilize crawl space construction techniques. In addition we recommend that the new street and driveway sections in this fill area be placed on at least 2 feet of new, compacted, structural fill to limit settlement differential. Conventional shallow spread footings are anticipated for the remainder of the site. Ground water was encountered in almost all of the exploration pits with large amounts of ground water in various exploration pits scattered across the site. Some of the excavations for ponds, underground utilities, and general site grading are expected to encounter this ground water. The use of interceptor trenches, swales, sumps, and other methods of ground water control is recommended in these areas. 9.0 SITE PREPARATION Any existing structures presently on the site, which are located under new construction areas should be removed. Any buried utilities should be removed or relocated if they are also under new construction areas. The resulting depressions should be backfilled with structural till as discussed under the Srrucrural Fill section if they are located below new foundation or pavement areas. • Site preparation should also include removal of all vegetation. Additionally, the upper organic sod, forest duff, and topsoil should be removed and the remaining roots grubbed. Areas where April 23, 2003 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIE.\'CES. /,Vc. Page 12 -e • • ironwood King County, Washington SubslIIjace Exploration, Geologic Ha:ard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations loose surficial soils exist due to grubbing and demolition operations should be considered as fill to the depth of disturbance and treated as subsequently recommended for structural fill placement. Existing deep fill within the new building footprints could be left in place provided a deep foundation system is used to support the structure and no highly organic areas, areas of demolition waste, or other adverse materials or conditions are encountered when topsoil stripping is completed. Removal of shallow obstacles to facilitate pile driving is expected to be possible with a backhoe. In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined during construction. For estimating purposes, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes in the existing unsaturated fill above the water table can be made at a maximum slope of 1.5H: IV (Horizontal:Vertical). Temporary slopes in wet to saturated fill may have to be shored or laid back at very shallow angles. As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISH A/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. The on-site soils contain a high percentage of fine-grained material, which makes them moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. The contractor must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying soils are not softened. If disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade with structural fill. 10.0 STRUCTURAL FILL There is a possibility that structural fill will be necessary to establish desired grades and to provide a uniform subgrade below new floor slabs and pavement areas. All references to structural fill in this report refer to sub grade preparation, fill type, placement, and compaction of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this report, the value given in that section should be used. After overexcavation/stripping has been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. If the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain and should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical, placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of the free-draining layer by silt migration from below. April 23. 2003 JDC/a • KDJ.1I-:'.If1/ ~ !'mjl'("/.\ ,:(ljJ f ,.liKE', \~'I> -1.\.:'K ASSOCIATED EARTH SCiE.VCES. I.VC Page 13 • • Ironwood King CounC)!. Washing ron Subsurface £tplorarion. Geologic Hazard. and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations After the recompacted exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free-draining rock course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non- organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. In the case of roadway and utility trench filling in the county right-of-way, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the King County codes and standards. If fill is to be placed on slopes steeper than 5H: 1 V, the base of the fill should be tied to firm, stable subsoil by appropriate keying and benching which would be established in the field to suit the particular soil conditions at the time of grading. The keyway will act as a shear key to embed the toe of the new till into the hillside. Generally, the keyway for hillside fills should be at least 8 feet wide and cut into the lower, dense sand or stiff silt. Level benches would then be cut horizontally across the hill, following the contours of the slope. No specific width "'is required for the benches, although they are usually a few feet wider than the dozer being used to CUI them. All fills proposed over a slope should be reviewed by our office prior to construction. AESI should evaluate any proposed fill soils prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 72 hours in advance of filling activities to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus NO.4 sieve size) should be considered moisture-sensitive. Use of moisture-sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. The on-site soils generally contained significant amounts of silt and are considered moisture-sensitive. Construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during placement of structural till to observe the work and perform a representative number of in- place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses and problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or acceptable performance of a till. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a suitable monitoring and testing frequency. At the time of field study in April of 2003, most of the lodgement till exhibited moisture contents over the optimum for achieving maximum compaction. Generally, the very moist to wet portions of these sediments were encountered in the lower portions of the exploration pits, below depths of approximately 3 to 4 feet. Above these depths, these sediments generally exhibited lower moisture contents but contained substantial quantities of roots within • approximately I to 3 feet of the ground surface. Consequently, the contractor should be April 23. 2003 }{)C.lb -I\!JJ3I"J3HI -l'roJI'C/5,:mJI7N';pH'{' -II':K ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC Page 14 -e Ironwood King County, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Design Recommendations selective when using the on-site soils in structural fills and be prepared to provide moisture conditioning and screening of organic material if use of on-site soils is necessary. Ground water seepage occurred in all but one exploration pit completed at this site. Therefore, it should be anticipated that the need for moisture conditioning of the on-site soils for use in structural fills will be greater during the winter, spring, and early summer months. If fill is placed during wet weather, or if proper compaction of the on-site sediments cannot be obtained, a select on-site and/or import material consisting of a clean, free-draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free-draining fill consists of non-organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when measured on the minus No.4 sieve fraction and at least 30 percent by weight coarser than the No.4 sieve. No fill, structural or otherwise, should be placed on the existing fill, near the top of the slopes along the north side of the existing fill area. The addition of new fill (weight) could cause the existing fill to become unstable resulting in earth movement to the north and west. All new fill placement plans in the existing fill area should be reviewed by AESI prior to construction. 11.0 FOUNDATIONS • Due to the presence of loose fill soil below the proposed buildings in portions of the site, we recommend that they be supported on a deep foundation system that bears on suitable, natural soils at depth. We anticipate that deep foundation systems may be required in the vicinity of proposed Lots 13 through 18 or other areas when the existing fill is too deep to extend footings and stem wells. Conventional spread footings are anticipated for the remainder of the site, where existing fills are not present or are thin enough that foundation can be excavated to suitable bearing soil through the fill. • II. I Deep Foundations Two alternatives for deep foundation systems are recommended. Rock trenches, could be used in areas where existing fills are no greater than 8 feet deep. Pipe piles could be used where tills are deeper than 8 feel. Pipe (Pill Piles) Small-diameter pipe (pin) piles consisting of thick walled, 4-inch-diameter steel pipe driven by a hydraulic impact hammer mounted on an excavator or similar equipment are recommended. The 4-inch-diameter is recommended to add a degree of lateral support to the foundation system as piles will be located in moderately sloping fill soils. Pipes are typically provided in IO-foot sections and joined as needed with slip-or swage-fit couplers that are suitable for transmission of vertical compressive loads. Pipe type and schedule should be determined by the structural engineer for the project. Schedule 80 is typical for these piles. The pipe piles Apri123, 2003 JDCIIJ -KE0317JEI/ -f>rol!'m',~W.lI7J'Xf-."'\\'f' -IV::K ,lSS0ClATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC Page 15 ~----------------- • • • Ironwood King County, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations are driven until a suitable refusal criteria or penetration rate is achieved. The pipe piles are then incorporated into a system of pile caps and/or grade beams, which together act as the foundation system. The acceptable penetration rate (refusal criteria) depends on the driving equipment used. Four-inch nominal diameter, Schedule 80, galvanized-steel pipe piles driven to refusal, at least 5 feet into the bearing soils, should be capable of supporting loads on the order of 10 tons per pile. A refusal criteria of 16 seconds per inch is appropriate during sustained driving with a 850 foot-pound hydraulic hammer for 4-inch-diameter piles. Different hammer sizes/types may have different driving characteristics and refusal criteria. If an alternate hammer is used, AESI should be notified prior to pile driving activities: We estimate the specified refusal criteria will be reached within 10 to 20 feet below existing ground surface based on our explorations and reconnaissance completed for the project. Resistance to lateral loads for a pipe pile-supported foundation would be provided by passi ve soil resistance against the grade beams, and, if necessary, using batter piles. A passive equivalent fluid equal to 150 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) can be used for passive resistance to lateral loads on grade beams. Alternatively, if batter piles are used to resist lateral loads, the lateral resistance would be equal to the horizontal component of the axial pile load. The maximum recommended batter is 1 H:4 V. A structural engineer should determine the minimum spacing, location, and number of piles to be used. Pile Inspections The actual total length of each pile may be adjusted in the field based on required capacity and conditions encountered during driving and may be different than estimated above. Since completion of the pile takes place below ground, the judgment and experience of the geotechnical engineer or his field representative must be used as a basis for determining the required penetration and acceptability of each pile. Consequently, use of the presented capacities in the design requires that all piles be inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineering or engineering geologist from our firm who can interpret and collect the installation data and examine the contractor's operations. AES[ acting as the owner's field representative, would determine the required lengths of the piles and keep records of pertinent installation data. A final summary report would then be distributed following completion of pier or pile installation. As part of the foundation system design, a qualified structural engineer would determine the number of piles required and the minimum spacing between adjacent piles. We recommend that 10 percent of the piles, selected at random, be load tested to verify that the selected refusal criteria are appropriate, and that the assumed axial compressive capacity has been achieved. A dial gauge or other suitable instrument that is capable of measuring pile head displacements to 0.001 inch of accuracy should be used during load tests. Loads should April 23, 200] ASSOCIATED EARTif SCI£,\·CES. INC. )lJC Ib -KEOJI7JI/i -!'m}t'fIS :rX).Il7./',!\!:"\\\'!' -W:fo,.' Page 16 -e • e Irollwood King County, WashinglOli Subslliface Explorarion, Geologic Hazard, and GeOlechnical Engilleering Repon Design Recommendations be applied in increments of 25 percent of design load, beginning with 25 percent and increasing to 150 percent. Each load should be held for at least 5 minutes, or until pile movement has stopped, at the discretion of the geotechnical engineer. The maximum load should be held for at least 15 minutes. Excessive displacement or creep of the pile during load testing are grounds for rejection of the pile, Rejected piles may be spliced and re-driven, replaced, or assigned a lower allowable capacity. Pile installation and load tests should be performed by the contractor, and observed by AESI to record pile lengths, driving resistance, and load test performance. Rock Trenches In areas where the fill soils are considered too deep to economically extend the footings down to suitable bearing, but are less than 8 feet deep, rock trenches extended down to the medium dense to dense natural soils can be used for foundation support. The trenches should have a minimum width of 4 feet (or as determined by the geotechnical engineer or his representative) and be excavated down to the medium dense to dense natural soils. Because of the potential for caving, the actual trench width may be greater than specified. It would be appropriate to backfill the trenches as the excavation proceeds to reduce caving. The use of a larger, track-mounted backhoe will greatly speed trench excavation over the use of a conventional rubber-tired backhoe. In order to reduce disturbance of the bearing soils exposed in the trench, we recommend that the teeth of the backhoe bucket be covered with a digging plate. To determine when suitable bearing has been achieved and to verify proper rock placement, the AESI must be present on a full-time basis during rock trench excavation and backfill. A pump may be required to control seepage so that the bearing level can be visually determined. Seepage entering the excavation on an overnight basis must be removed prior to commencing trench excavation the following day. After the bearing stratum has been reached, the trench should be immediately backlilled. We recommend the use of quarry spalls or 2-to 4-inch size crushed rock for backfill. The crushed rock must be tamped into place to achieve a tightly packed mass; this may be done with either a "Hoepac" type compactor mounted on the excavator or more typically, with the bucket of the excavator itself. Staging areas should be maintained so that that rock is not contaminated by mud prior to placement in the trench. Equipment access to trench locations should also be maintained. Spread footings may then be used for building support when placed over properly constructed rock trenches that bear on medium dense to dense natural soils. Footings which bear on approved rock trenches may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2.000 pounds per square foot (psf) including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. However, all rock trenches must penetrate to the April 23. 2003 ,JSSOCIATED EART/I SCIE.YCES. 1,vC. JDC 1/1 _ AEOJ!7J!H ~ l)m)t'rr~',:'UiJI7J'KE',WI} -W:K Page 17 • • • Ironwood King County, Washington SubsUlface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations prescribed bearing stratum and no trenches should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils, In addition, all footings must centered over the trenches and have a minimum of 14 inches for one-story structure, 16 inches for two-story structures, and 18 inches for three-story structures, Anticipated settlement of footings founded on approved rock trenches should be on the order of 1 inch. However, disturbed material not removed from footing trenches prior to footing placement could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete, to verity that the rock trenches are undisturbed and construction conforms with the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required by the governing municipality. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. 11,2 Shallow Foundations In areas where existing fill is thin or absent, shallow spread footings may be utilized for building support when founded either directly on the medium dense to very dense natural glacial sediments, or on structural fill placed over these materials. Natural sediments suitable for foundation support were generally encountered in our explorations at depths of approximately 0.5 to 2 feet except in those areas described above where existing fill occurred. For footings founded either directly upon the medium dense to dense natural sediments or on structural fill placed over these materials, we recommend that an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf be utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings for the proposed buildings should be buried a minimum of 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection. Interior footings should be buried a minimum of 12 inches. All footings must penetrate to the prescribed stratum and no footings should be founded in or above loose or organic soils. All footings should have a minimum width of 14 inches for one-story structures, 16 inches for two-story structures, or 18 inches for three-story structures, It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending dow.nward at I H: I V from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. In addition, a 1.5H:IV line extending down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils. Anticipated settlement of footings founded as described above should be on the order of 3/4 inch. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing placement could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. Such April 23, 2003 ASSOCIATED £..IRTII SCIESCES, INC. JDClv -KI:"I))1738/ -ProJt'cw::'(OJI7.1 LKD\\'1' -W':K Page 18 _e • • Ironwood King COUIlIY, Washington SubslIIface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Qnd Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations inspections may be required by the King County. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. 12.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES All backfill behind walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally backfilled walls that are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height may be designed using an equivalent tluid equal to 35 pcf. Fully restrained, horizontally backfilled rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent tluid of 50 pcf. If roadways, parking areas, or other areas subject to vehicular traffic are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in determining lateral design forces. Walls that retain sloping backfill at a maximum angle of 2H: I V should be designed using an equivalent tluid pressure of 55 pef for yielding conditions or 75 pef for fully restrained conditions. The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform horizontal backfill consisting of the on-site, natural glacial sediments, or imported sand and gravel compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended as this will increase the pressure acting on the wall. Footing drains must be provided for all retaining walls (including detention vaults) as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum I-foot-wide continuous blanket drain using imported, washed rock or pea gravel, a Mira-Drain 6000 type drainage material, or equivalent to within 2 fect of the ground surface against the walls that ties into the footing drain. 12.1 Passive Resistance and Friction Factors Pile caps and grade beams cast directly against undisturbed, existing fill in a trench may be designed for passive resistance against lateral translation using an equivalent fluid equal to 150 pcf. At locations where foundations are placed on medium dense to dense natural soils, the passive resistance can be increased to 300 pef. The passive equivalent t1uid pressure diagram begins at the top of the footing; however, total lateral resistance should be summed only over the depth of the actual key (truncated triangular diagram). This value applies only to footings/keyways where concrete is placed directly against the trench sidewalls without the use of forms. If footings are placed on grade and then backfilled, the top of the compacteLi backfill must be horizontal and extend outward from the footing for a minimum lateral distance equal to three times the height of the backfill, before tapering down to grade . April 23. 2003 ASSOCl,ITED EARTH SCIEVCES. ISC Page 19 • • • [ronwood King County. Washingron Subsurface Etplomtioll. Geologic Hazard. and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Design Recommendations The friction coefficient for footings cast directly on the existing fill or native soils may be taken as 0.32. This is an ultimate value and does not include a safety factor. Since it will be difficult to excavate these soils without disturbance, the soils under the footings (if not pile supported) has to be recompacted to at least 9S percent of the above-mentioned standard for this value to apply. 13.0 FLOOR SUPPORT Concrete slab-on-grade floors may be used for the new buildings where the slabs are underlain by dense natural soils or structural fill. We recommend crawl spaces and structural t100rs be used where foundations are supported on piles. or rock trenches. A capillary break and plastic sheeting vapor barrier should be placed below slab-on-grade floors. The capillary beak material should consist of at least 4 inches of pea gravel. washed rock or other suitable material approved by the geotechnical engineer. An optional 2-inch-thick sand layer can then be placed over the vapor barrier to protect it during concrete placement. The t100r slab can then be cast on top of the sand layer. This sand layer must be kept dry prior to concrete placement. Slab-on-grade Iloors should not be tied into the building's foundation but should be free to settle independent of footings. Floating floor slabs should contain significant reinforcement bar ("rebar") to reduce the effects of differential movement across any cracks that might develop. Due to the variable site conditions and floor loadings, accurate floor settlement predictions are not possible. Where little or no additional loading will be placed on the existing site soils, we estimate that settlement of "floating" slabs should be small. Differential settlement of the "t1oating" t100r slab may also occur. As previously discussed, this can be reduced by the addition of rebar in the slab. The slab ca·n also be leveled by the addition/replacement of concrete if settlement does occur. 14.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS All exterior grade beams and conventional spread footings should be provided with a footing drain. Drains should consist of rigid. perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set down approximately 2 inches below the bottom of the grade beam or footing at all exterior locations and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the foundation drain system but should be handled by a separate. rigid tightline drain. Both roof and foundation drains should discharge to a suitable point. Directed. point source storm water flows should be kept off of the slopes. In planning. exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage. Interceptor drains may be needed to cut off near surface ground April 23. 2003 JDClb ~ KfOJI7.1Hl -/'roj((I.f.:IXJJ!7JlKDWI' -\~::K ASSOCIATED tARTII SCIENCES. INC Page 20 • • • Ironwood King County, Washington Subsuiface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Design Recommendations water. The need for and design of these drains may best be determined in the field during construction. 15.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Undocumented fill materials underlie some of the site. These materials exhibited varymg densities and were observed to be relatively loose. As such, some remedial measures will be necessary for support of pavement in fill areas. We recommend that new pavement sections (including gravel base and top courses) in existing fill areas be underlain by at least 2 feet of structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. A pavement section consisting of 21/2 inches of Class B asphalt underlain by 3 inches of asphalt treated base (ATB) and 2 inches of ItA-inch crushed surfacing base course is the recommended minimum over the new structural fill or dense to very dense natural soils. This pavement section is typical for light residential traffic areas that do not receive heavy truck traffic. We recommend that an engineering stabilization fabric (AMOCO 2002 or equivalent) be placed over the stripped subgrade prior to placeinent of structural fill in existing fill areas. The fabric would provide separation of the new structural fill from the underlying silty fill, preserving the favorable characteristics of the more granular structural fill. 16.0 INFILTRATION POTENTIAL The site's infiltration potential is considered to be low due the presence of a shallow ground water table and rather wide spread underlying relatively impermeable lodgement till soils. There are small deposits of highly permeable recessional outwash and advance outwash on the site but these deposits often contained considerable ground water and were limited in extent. 17.0 DETENTION PONDS Two detention ponds are planned for the site. One is planned for the northeast site corner and one is planned west of the wetland near the north central portion to the site. The pond in the northeast site corner will be located primarily in advance outwash sand based on the soils encountered in exploration pit EP-22. No ground water was encountered in this deposit. Water stored in the pond. without any form of liner. would most likely migrate through the soil into the wetlands west of the pond location. A soil liner, meeting the below- mentioned fill embankment specifications, or a geosynthetic liner is recommended to reduce the amount of water migration through the underlying advance outwash sand if infiltration is not desired. At this location. advance outwash exposed in excavations may be prone to raveling and as such the inner pond sidewalls should be graded to no steeper than 3H: I V. April 23. 2003 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. JOG:lb _ AEOJJ7J81 -Pruj/,,c/sI:0031 7JlrJJ WI' -IeA' Page 21 • • • IroIHvood King County, Wasilingroll Subsurface £rplorarion, Geologic Hazard, and Geolechnica/ Engineering RepOrl Design Recommendations Exterior sides of the pond embankments may be graded no steeper than 2H: I V. Fill used in the pond embankments should contain at least 20 percent fines or soil particles smaller than the U.S. No. 200 sieve. The fill should also contain a maximum of 60 percent sand. The embankment fill should be placed at a moisture content approximately 2 to 3 percent over it's optimum moisture content and be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557 to reduce in-place permeability and the potential for wetting-induced soil collapse. The advance outwash does not appear to have sufficient fines for pond embankment fill, however, site till soils may be suitable for pond embankments. Samples of the soils, slated for use as pond embankment fill, should be tested by AESI to determine if they have sufficient fines prior to construction. The pond located west of the wetland will be founded in weathered lodgement till over unweathered lodgement till based on the soils encountered in exploration pits EP-5 and EP-S. The till was generally over it's optimum moisture content for compaction and ground water was encountered 3 to 5 feet below existing grades. The till soils are anticipated to have low permeability rates and no pond liners are anticipated. Due to presence of shallow ground water the interior pond sidewalls should be sloped no steeper than 3H: I V. Exterior sides of the pond embankments may be graded as steep as 2H: I V. Fill used in the pond embankments should contain at least 20 percent fines or soil particles smaller than the U.S. No. 200 sieve. The fill should also contain a maximum of 60 percent sand. The embankment fill should be placed at a moisture content approximately 2 to 3 percent over it's optimum moisture content and be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557 to reduce in-place permeability and the potential for wetting-induced soil collapse. The site till soils may be suitable for pond embankments. Samples of the soils, slated for use as pond embankment fill, should be tested by AESI to determine if they have sufficient fines prior to construction. All ponds should be constructed in accordance with the 1998 King COllllTy Surface Water Design Manllal. IS.O EXISTING WATER WELL As noted previously, a domestic well is located on the property. I I' the well will not be used in the future, it should be properly abandoned. Specific standards for abandonment of wells depend on the type of well in question. The State of Washington Department of Ecology presents this information in a publication entitled MinilllulIl Swndards for Construction (fnd Mailllenance of Water Wells. The water well most likely will need to be legally abandoned by a Washington State Licensed Water Well Driller. Local health district and King County regulations may also apply. 19.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING We are available to provide geotechnical consultation as the project design develops. We recommend that AES[ perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way. our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly April 23, 2003 .. lSS0ClATED EARTH SClE,vC[S. INC. JUC.lb -,,'U))17.!!I/· !'rrljr('/S'~(j()jI73'KE',\\'!) -\~::K Page 22 • • • lromvood King County. WaslzinglOl/ SubsUiface Exploration. Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Design Recommendations interpreted and implemented in the design. This review is not included in our current scope of work and budget. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a proposal. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. John D. Coleman, P.E.G. Project Geologist ion N. Sondergaard I Jon N. Sondcrgaard. P.G .. P.E.G. Associate Geologist Matthew A. Miller. P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: figure I: Figure 2: Appendix: Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Exploration Logs April 23. 2IX)] ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. JDC Ib ~ KUUI.~.iIJJ -!'r".I"CIS :'1.-l./li}IKtJWP -\~K Page 23 " ~ B f ~ ~ " ~ __ • .1 .J----t .. ' '1:" c.~='. "'(U::"\' I' '. ;:,,:./ t """''''y ·:;~:~·.·~:;.n cjJ·I"r. ::~~~~y:",·p",':~\~;:·.~~:j:;::;) ;.:/., , .' co, I.rgek· ....... , --'; . :::t~:'-~-.-\ \\ _, 1 ", ,f".,k -'-:' •.. "'~-i1!~ .. :', ._ ~ . ~ i. '~~~j3;~:·.,2' , ,. ! ~ .1"-l· " '," -":i' .. ~,,-"--.. -:-'~'.--.,\ ,~:::;_:.\-,:C~_': ., .,""'J ... .• -!'j' ~-N~ __ r ,;1 --::i __ --SwMHt ~ '. ~ . I " •. t.enn V,l1kI I'''· . ,! , ~.' . ", ",,\:;,J; ;;' c;j,-,j.);,' "', .. ?~ ;~~;\ .' i-:,.j.·~·'-Lr .'.'.¢.~~~.'(:'\':\c, . :L .. : :, u1 :~~-: J . .: 't"T-1....Lf""9": ~Lt ~\'J:~{--i:~L .}.: ... . '. TN'r II '-l(~:a"~'>' ,:'I:' .; .... ~ <' J l 'S"'_ .. . , /. -... ,. J: . '. I '" .l' ra -.'.... I : I I'i,!':. \ ~O~l'li"'ITO ~ JI:'<;'l' _~I ~-~~"" R n 'j [oj ':1 ";"'l 1N1~RC,fi~ GE ~ 1.1 ./~y-\ '.~ , /_ II.." # .' , I' ". '1 ..... 1 '."'" ,. "1' \ • ,I·. .1. 'J -'. .. \ '. : TT .• \\~ )'., r -' < • • .. I . \ \ '.~ .' :,i / .. ,,-:--::';~":1;:,( [. 1; -I' --'{ -:~. =-Al. _ -: I--L.. ~.,: i :.' 1\ '.\'.' \·C .~ ... { t' f.r J--l'! !~l .. ", i,. ,--~{ K~p;oir' ~ ,-\,\ ~. ·"i-r:+-r~ • , .~, ". L":.l : ', •. {',:\ \ ,j! r~~~L-'-' 1·"-),,1'~;~j"P" l( C[t:<.bfi?cmOn,: ","gyq~"y) .J.. tb ~ \ "rf-~, j ,~ af 'iI~' _ rJ , ,~ \ L _/ J: \!" + \ \\ "-,I, I 'iJ ~ '.". .i • . i ~~' '-' •• "J 4-' ~' I .---~-(;'\ I -J ) ~'\ ~.-~... ," J' r-,~. , -. I , .•.. , .~. . ~~, .. "I ----"-.~" 0' ,), ,,' I .... J~.'1 " I /-,." " "', ,. -"<.,);· ... 7 '} /'. \:'" -. 00\ ~-\r' -' f', L!.'J;I I .•. __ .:I )<~':'!:\I .'-._ ....... c·P·i~~ :t;i':&h!4. t:., '? ~'L .L:.· :,,' ., ..L'~':" ji\-7/" " ~F '" . :W;= 07 ,., -, ' 'T--. "T .'. To -'-"--7. . .,. "'. I, [r\ -fl' .11'/' \ '.1 ('" ,~J fl, ... .G","woo~--l·· .'·f:· .... II' \ ...... :. tJ!I-. I<..~ 1": \_, ~.!!!:I I . ,i . Ceoo' 1------/'".. \ ····~·1· . , ~' .:/' -" r, • 1 \ \ '.1: 1"-1.' , ,h, I -eWT~! (""" I I , J " \ ''''''j' \ ·1· . T·wlN', ( . J--'i? \' ' .. '" '11"]'. ,~; ,: ... '\. ,; ' .. lj / I _. -£ ,...-" .', -( \ \ ',--1.-"1' 0 ' I' .. :' .. :-./.:~. '--J.. .. ~'" il) }\,!'.' .. ' ," r_1 I 1 0" '~-t.l...,. [;(->1,-\ '. ".'. "'j \ ,-J_. .,. . _=_ III __ .:::IM'( L=::::d"DrHI ~ ~.. ==30<.0 ... Pru.l.d r,_,,, TorD' "l"'~ W.Ui\:.,,~, p,ootO.:u:>r", ("'W"f '''PO ,en.) 'llVf~~,r;~ , . , \, \. \ " '\.. .. :..... .. ~,-," .~ "'-. '. \,'. '- :-."'''-.. i' / . :' ".1 ' ")- 1> , ~'. . '-:-- I. "~' ;\. -\ \.~ \" "-\ , ........ . '. \ 'I '" '_ i ,\ . '\ ~~,~~<.: .~(.. ~;.. . ' > l <-'~~~, __ j r " , , \. .' ....... i '- , "·M.vV~ "'-,," ." :..:.: 1 ,. ;!' . ;,'~"""';f;~'i? " ':'CQ'allicldj" ~ .]\ I \ : Park'I' .' \., l;':' ",,-,. ''''','\-j ':' \. '; .• ~ '\ \.,l .. ,\{ 'L" '."'.\ ..... \ if; . ; .. Iii \:i:', \ . .hll· :~ .: : . -:; ""\ .:-DC -'-,-. .... '. I;;;·: .... ·, . '. I' ;, i" ·i!~.\ :!. ,".' .1" ". \ --.. !. '!'\'\it /~~:~ ":====================================================================================================================~~~~~==:: 1 g F'GURE 1 J A"oci.ted E.n" Sdence,. Inc. VI~I~~:~~tP DATE 04103 ~ ~ ~ 1m I!J ~ KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PROJ. NO KE03173A 8 • APPENDIX • ., 'f -~ ~---------------------._-----------------------, ~ > • • iii 0 0 N 0 Z 0 0 " • 0 .. OJ a:: .... 0 '" 0 ~ :: e 0 :;; !t- '0 U) " • 0 'iii cj ~ ~ ~ 0 U • • > • iii 0 0 N 0 Z ~ • ~ ~ ~ n. • i5 :;; _i5 .... c '" !t-'0 <f) " • C .~ cj ~ C c: " 15 .:::> ':;-C G c ""0 ... "1 C = o 0 ~ '3 ;n~ .§' Well-gradec: gravel and ,,, .. ,,..... with sand. littte to Poorly-graded gravel and gravel with sand. little to no fines gravel and gravel with sand sand and Poorly-graded sane SP and sand with gravel, little to no fines . CL Silty sand and silty sand with Grave! Clayey sand and clayey sand with gravel S;U. sandy silt. gravelly silt. silt 'Nith sane or gravel Clay or [ow:o mec:iLJm plastic:ty siity. santy, cr g~avell'/ clay. lean c!ay Cr£2nic clay or sill of lew I I ~/ I erms uescflDmg Kelatlve uenslty ana ~onslstency Density SPT"lblows/foot Coarse-Very Loose 0104 Grained Soils Loose 4 to 10 Medium Dense 10 10 30 Test Symbols Dense 30 to 50 Very Dense >50 G = Grain Size M = .'v1clsture COnlen! Consistenci SPT I21blows/foot A = Atierberg limits Fine-Very So~ o t02 C = Chemical Grained Soils So~ 2104 DO = Dry Density Medium 5uft 4 to 8 K = Permeabliity Stiff 8 to 15 Very Stiff 15 to 30 Hard >30 Descriptive Term Boulders Component Definitions Size Range and Sieve Number Larger ttlan 12w Cobbles 3' to 12' Gravel Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel 3' to No, 4 (4.75 mm) 3' to 3/4' 3/4' to NO.4 (4.7S mm) Sand Coarse Sand MeeiumSand Fine Sand No. <1 (4.75 mm) to No. 200 (D.OiS mm) NO.4 (4.75 mm) 10 No. 10 (2.00 mmj No. 10 {2.00 mm} (0 No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. JO (0.425 mm) to No. 200 (0075 mml Silt and Clay Smaller than No. 200 (0.075 mm) Estimated Percentage Moisture Content Cry -Absence of rr:OIS(~fe. dusty, crj to ;he [CUC:1 SiiGhtly MClst -PerceC(icle mOIsture Trace Few Lmle With Sam~ler T'/pe 20·00 Scllt·Scccn Samcier Percentage by Weight <5 5 to 10 151025 • Ncn·pnmary coarse constituents: > 15% -Fines centent be!'Neen 5% arid 15% MOtst -Damp blJ no 'lIs,tie water Very MOis! -Water "Jlsicie but ne! free crain:ng Wet -ViSible ~ree watEr. usually frcm ce!cw '",ater tac!e Symbols Blews;6' c.:r I=Grllcn or 5- I , Samoier Tvee Oesc~pticn j.j.Iw,Ir--~"----------1ls?r, , cr :--.Ign plas::c:r;. 3.0" CO S(:III-Scecn Sam~ler J.2~' CD S~hl-SCCGn Ring Samcler I BUlk sample or grave!ly c!ay. at ','lIth sane cr gr3vel aLLu._..L __________ -j Grab Sample ," ,',' 3.0' 00 Th;n·Wat! Tuee Sam~ler \lnc:t.;CII'G Sr:e:ty tLCe) :'.; ,'; Cr,;ar.lc c:a'l cr Silt 'Jt iT;ec::~1To :0 r,u;n I ~c.-' ~'C'~ ~rc _ ..... ~r :-w..:;,. ".", " :,.,. '-." .t;;. PT ---'" '-r---IC <-,,< I' .11;:. '-'= .... ,. -I,.. w I Per'icn nc: re<.:cvereC! \ Percentat;e oy crt · .... e:~r.: 2: (SFT) SlanCard ?eretra:;cn i-2~; 'J (ASiM D-15S6j In Ger,eral ,.1.cccrcar;ce WI:~, S!anCarC PraC:lce ~cr Cesc::::I:cn arc: icentltiCJllcn ct Sc;ls (A.S7M C·2.teE) :~) Ce~::-.'-::I ;rc:...rc,'.a,er .f. :.:-:::> = :'\ :;r-e::t cnU;rt;; :z. SiJt;c ,\',]ter ·€'.e! :CJiel '.~I C.::rr:lr;ec :"';SCS s·.m'.ccls usee 'cr ~ires ::e:-.veer: : ..... ~ JrC: t5~G C:.asslroCJlJons.:f 5C,,5 ."1 ':-.:5 'e=c~ Jre :ased '.:n ,'S;';.)i :~eld Jrc.:cr 'acerate!)' ctlservauons, .... nle!"! .nC:uc.e cenSlfylccnslstency. mo.sture c::r,dl\;cn. ;r.l;n $I.l:e. lr:d pl.lst;c:ry es::rr.ate<; Jr<: ~.~c~:C ·cl::e ::r.<;1f\.1e<l :0 .rr::ly r:elo :r ·accratery :e~tlng unless presented 1".efeln Visual-manual ander ~aCCr.ltcry CassJ.CJt.en metnecs ·:;.1 ~S:-.'.\ :<~c~ Jrc :'-:.123 ... ere use-o as an cer.:J.c.JtlOn ~ulde fer ~e Unlfied Sell C:asslfiC:ltlcn Sys:em, ~ .~================================= Asscciatec Ea~h Sciences. Inc. ~ i Exploration Log Key FIGURE A-1 "----------------------------------------------------- • • I I , I ! , LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-3 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the lime of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change al this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a slmplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION 1 I Forest Duff and Topsoil I Weathered Till I Medium dense, moist to wet, light olive-brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to 2 I coarse, subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) 3 J I ---------------------------------,T~iI"I--------------------------------- ! Dense to very dense, moist to wet, light olive-brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few 5 J fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) 4 6 I 7 -' I 8 1 9 - 10 -~--------------------------------------------------------- Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet Na caving. Moderate (2 to 3 gpm) seepage of at approximately 3'. I 11 "1 I 12 13 -; 14 -; 15 i , 16 I , 17 -j 18 19 l --20 .. ~-----------------------------Ir-o-n-w--o-o-d---------------------------- ~ King County, WA § ~ Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~ Logged by JOC ~ ~ [JIIiij ~ ~ :.: Approved by: ~ ~ ~ rn u ~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 • I i , • I I • 8 N .,; " < ~ ~ ~ , ~ 0 ~ ~ " ~ LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-4 € This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, (AESI) for the named waieet and should be £; read together with that report for comR,ete interpretation. This summary agPlies only to the loea ion of this trench at the a. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are Q 0 a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff and Topsoil Weathered Till 1 - 2 -Medium dense, moist, light olive-brown, nonsiratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, 3 - subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) Till 4 -Dense, moist, light olive-gray, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, 5 subrounded gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. 6 - 7 I 8 - 9 1 10 -[------------------------ ~ Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet 11 I No caving. No seepage. 12 -I I 1 13 -I I 14 I -1 15 I ! 16 J I 17 -. I 18 I 19 --28 Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Logged by: JOC Project No. KE03173B April 2003 Approved by: I I I I ! I I , I ! i • i I I I • M a • 2 ~ a < "' ~ ~ ;; a " " u " LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-5 g I This log is part of the report Jrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ftrOject and should be .c read together with that repo for comR,ete interpretation. ThIs summary agPlies only to the IDea ion of this trench at the a. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are m ·0 a simplficatian of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff and Topsoil Weathered Till 1 -I Medium dense, moist to wet, light olive-brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) 2 - 3 Till 4 -Dense, wet, light olive-gray, nonstralified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, little gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. 5 l 6 1 7 _l I 8 -1 9 l 10 -r--- 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I 1 I , -i i 1 I l 1 I J J I -1 I r Bottom of exploration pit al depth 10 feet No caving. Very slight « 1 gpm) seepage below 3'. Ironwood King County, WA I Logged by: JOG Approved by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE031738 April 2003 -e I I I I I I • I I I I • g N ~ a. < " ~ • ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ u ~ LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-6 S This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. (AESI) for the named ~roject and should be .c read together with that report for com~lele interpretation. This summary agplies only to the loea ion of this trench at the . a. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are ~ 0 a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff and Topsoil 1 - f--Weathered Till I 2 l 3 1 4 5 J I J 6 , 7 1 l 8 -I 9 .J I i 10 I 11 -1 I I 12 I 13 ~ 14 J , I 15 I i 16 I 17i 18 -' 19 28 Medium dense. moist to saturated, light olive-brown. non stratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few organics as roots, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel. (SM) Till Dense, saturated. light olive-gray, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt. few fine to coarse. subrounded gravel. trace subrounded cobbles. Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet Moderate caving. Very heavy (5 to 10 gpm) seepage below 3', Ironwood King County, WA I I Logged by: JOC Approved by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc . ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 , I -e is £; 0- ~ 0 I I 1 - 2 1 3 i 4 5 -, 6 I 7 8 • 9 ! 10 11 ~ 12 - 13 -[ 14 I I 15 I 1 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-7 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named RrOject and should be read together with that report for comR,ete interpretation. This summary agplies only to the IDea ion of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are a simplflcation of actual conditions encountered, DESCRIPTION Forest Duff and Topsoil Weathered Till Medium dense, moist to wet, light olive-brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) Till Dense, wet, light olive-gray, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, trace ~ubrounded cobbles. - Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feel No caving. Very slight «1 gpm) seepage below 4', Ironwood King County, WA I I I I I I I , Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE03173B April 2003 I I I I ! , I ! I , I I i I ! I I -. , I I , i -• I I LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-8 g This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named RrOiect and should be ,; read together with that report for com~'ete interpretation. This summary agPlies only to the loea ion of this trench at the a. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are ~ 0 a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff and Topsoil 1 - 2 -Weathered Till Medium dense, moist to wet, light olive-brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few organics 3 - as roots, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel. (SM) I J 4 5 Till .. -6 I O~"". wo'. ",", "wo ''',. oo","",od. '00 " 000"0 SAND. ,,"" "". 'ow 'mo " "'''0. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 J subrounded gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. 1 -I J Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet I No caving. Slight (-1 gpm) seepage below S', J I i ! -I i I I I 18 -, 19 --20 I I , I I ., I ! It 3------------------------------I-r-o-n-W-o-o--d----------------------------- J King County, WA ~ ~ Logged by: JOe Approved by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 • • g .5 a. ~ a I I I 1 1 2 - 3 - 4 ~ i 5 - 6 - I , 7 --, I I 8 .J I i 9 l LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-9 - This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ftrOject and should be read together with that report for comRlete interpretation. This summary agPJies only to the loea ion of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff and Topsoil Weathered Till Medium dense, moist to wet, light olive-brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) Till Dense, wet, light olive-gray, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. 10 -I-:otlom of exploralion pil al deplh 10 feet 11 1 No caving. Very slighl « 1 gpm) seepage below 4'. 12 ., 13 -\ I , , 14 "I 15 -I 16 i 17 J 18 19 -' I I I I I i I i , I I ---2e~------------------------------·----------------------------- .. ~-----------------------------I-rO--nw--o-o-d---------------------------- ~ King County, WA ~ ~ Logged by: JOe Approved by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~[!jj~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 -e • M e 0 " '" ~ < ;: " LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. Ep·11 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with thai report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench al the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change al this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplflcation of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION '22P and Topsoil -l 2 ~ 3 - 4 I 1 5 ~ ! 6 -1 7 -, 8 9 J I 10 ~ i , 11 --l I 12 Fill Loose, wet to saturated, olive-gray, dark brown, and dark gray, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded to subangular gravel, few scattered concrete rubble and boulders to 30" in diameter, few organics. (SM) Weathered Till Medium dense, saturated to wet, mottled, light olive-brown, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few subrounded, fine to coarse gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. (SM) 13 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 12 feet -t Heavy caving throughout moderate (-2 to 3 gpm) seepage below 3'. 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---20 i I -j J I , -j I J Ironwood King County, WA r Logged by: JDC Approved by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~[!j~ Project No. KE031738 April 2003 • • 0 0 • 0 ~ ~ ,. < ~ " ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ G " LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. Ep·12 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplficallon of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION ~~S~o~d~a~n~d~T~o~p~so~i~I ____________________ ~~ ________________________________ ~r Fill 1 - 2 - 3 1 4 I 5 l 6 -\ 7 .J I i 8 I -I Loose, wet to saturated, olive-gray, dark brown, and dark gray, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded to subangular gravel, few scattered concrete rubble and boulders to 30" in diameter, few organics. (SM) 9 +--10 Recessional Outwash 11 ~ Medium dense, wet, tan, weakly slratified, fine to medium SAND, trace silt. (SP) 12 I I J Bottom of exploration pit at depth 12 feel 13 Moderate caving throughout. Very slight (-1gpm) seepage below 6', ! 14 l 15 -[ 16 17 -I 18 19 -' --20 Ironwood King County, WA I , I I I I I I I , , I Logged by: JOe Approved by' Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~l!j~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 I I I I I I I I I I I I • • £; a. 8 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-13 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION "\,~S",o",d-,a"-,n",d-,T-,o",p"so",i,l ___________ --=::::-__________________ ----'r -Fill 4 Loose, wet to saturated, olive-gray, dark brown, and dark gray, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded to subangular gravel, few scattered concrete rubble and boulders to 30" in diameter, few organics. (SM) Recessional Outwash Medium dense, wet, tan, weakly stratified, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse, subrounded to 5 -I rounded gravel, trace silt. (SW) : J 8 -I 9j , __________________________ __ 10 1 Bottom of exploration Pit at depth 10 feet 11 -i Minor caving throughout. Slight (1 to 2 gpm) seepage below 1', 12 - 13 I 14 -t I 15 J 16 - I 17 l 18 19 -t ---20--------------------------------------------------------------8------------------------------------------------------------------e N .n ~ Logged by: JOe Approved by: Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 • I • LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. Ep·14 "'-This log is part of the report Jrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ~rOject and should be £; read together with that repo for com~lete interpretation. This summary a~Plies only to the loea ion of this trench at the <> time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location Wit the passage of time. The data presented are • 0 a simplficalion of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil 1 Recessional Outwash 1 Medium dense, moist, tan, weakly stratified, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded to 2 rounded gravel, trace roots in the upper 4'. (SW) j 3 4 J 5 I 6 1 7 I I 8 ~ 9 I 1 10 ~I------------------------------------------ 11 J I 12 -I 13 ] 14 I 15 1 I 16 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet Minor caving throughout. Slight ( 1 to 2 gpm) seepage at 10', Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Logged by: JOe Approved by: ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 I I i • • ~ 0 • ~ " a < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 M " U , LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-15 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION I Sod and Topsoil 2 Recessional Outwash Loose to medium dense, wet, tan, weakly stratified, sandy, fine to coarse, subrounded to rounded gravel, trace silt. (GW) 3 -~I~~~~~~~~~~--~~~--~A~d~v~a~n~c~e~O~u~tw~a~s~h----~----~~----~~--~~~--~ 4 J Medium dense to dense, wet, mottled tan, stratified, silty, fine to medium SAND grading to hard, tan, sandy SILT. 5 " 6 " 7 "I 8 -' , I 10 +---------------------------''---.... -----.~~ 11 J 12 I l 13 1 I 14 i ..., I 15 J J 16 , 17 I ! , 18 "l ! i 19 I --------20 Bottom of exploration Pit at depth 10 feet Moderate caving throughout. Heavy (5 to 10 gpm) seepage at 3' to 5', Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Logged by: JOC ~~~(!j~ Approved by: Project No. KE03173B April 2003 • • • I I ! I I I I I i I LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-16 -This log is part of the report Jrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named WOject and should be :; read together with that repo for comR,ete interpretation. This summary a~Plies only to the IDea ion of this trench at the a. tIme of excavatIOn. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are $ a a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil -_. 1 - 2 - 3 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 9 - 10 - 11 ..... I I 12 , -, I I 13 ] 14 -I 15 I 16 -} I 17 -t , 18 _. 19 ~ i Weathered Till Dense to very dense, moisl, light olive-brown, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, trace roots, trace subrounded cobbles. (SM) Till Very dense, moist, light olive-gray, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. (SM) .- Bottom of exploration pit at depth 8 feet No caving. No seepage. I I I ----20 § " "' ~ 2 0 ~ M , ~ o M ~ Logged by JOG Approved by: Ironwood King County, WA A~sociated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 i , ! i , I I , I I , I I I ~----------------~==========================================================::::::::::~-- ,------------------------------------- LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-17 • -- I is This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES1) for the named Rroject and should be .c read together with that report for com~lete interpretation. This summary a~Plies only to the loea ion of this trench at the a time of excavation. Subsuriace condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are ~ 0 a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil .J Fill I 1 . Loose, wet, olive-gray, dark brown, and dark gray, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded to subangular gravel, few scattered concrete rubble and boulders to 30" in 2 . diameter, few organics. (SM) 3 -I , I i 4 Advance Outwash 5 . Dense to very dense, wet, weakly stratified, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse, subrounded to rounded gravel, few silt. (SM) I 6 . I • I ! 7 ! I I I 8 - I I 9 i I . I i I 10 i I 1 , Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet , , I 11 -Minor caving in the upper 5', Heavy (5 gpm) seepage below 4', i , I I I I I 12 I i 13 i j 14 i :: ~ 17 ! 18 ., 19 -i ! -2Er--------_._-------It ~------------------------------I-ro--n-w-o-o-d------~--------------------- J King County, WA ~ ~ Logged by: JDe Approved by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE031738 April 2003 • , I I I • LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-18 .- € This log is part of the reportJrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named Rroject and should be " read together with that repo for comftlete interpretation. This summary aRplies only to the loea ion of this trench at the 0. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are ~ 0 a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. . DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil Fill 1 1 Loose, wet, olive-gray, dark brown, and dark gray, non stratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine 2 -to coarse, subrounded to subangular gravel, few scattered concrete rubble and boulders to 30" in I\diameter, few organics. (SM) Weathered Till 3 1 Dense to very dense, moist, light olive-brown, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, trace roots, trace subrounded cobbles. (SM) 4 l 5 Till -_. 6 Very dense, moist, light olive-gray, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded 1 gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. (SM) 7 l Advance Outwash 8 1 Very dense, moist, light olive-gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND, trace silt. 9 I I , 10 rl ----------------- 11 I "1 13 - 14 ~ 15 - 16 ..J 17 -; 18 , J 19 - Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet No caving. No seepage. (SW) r I i I ~&8---------------------------------------------- ~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • ~ Ironwood ! King County, WA E; o ~ ~ " logged by: JOC Approved by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 ~------------------------~~~~~==~~~~==============================================~--- • • • 8 N ~ 5. < " ~ " 8 ." a ~ ~ u • £ a. " o LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-19 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES1) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil Advance Outwash Dense to very dense, moist, weakly stratified, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse, subrounded 2 I to rounded gravel, few sitt. (SM) 3 -[ : ~ : l 9 1 I 10 _jl B~ttom Of exploration pit at depth 10 feet 11 No caving. No seepage. 12 -, 13 ' ! I 14 --; 1 I 15 I i 16 ~ i 17 18 J 19 J I i ~e-- Logged by: JOe Approved by: Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 •• • LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP·20 IT This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ~rOject and should be read together with that report for com~lete interpretation. This summary agPlies only to the loea ion of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered . I I i i I I I I . '''' DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil 1 Advance Outwash 2 , Dense 10 very dense, wet, weakly stratified, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse, subrounded 10 3 ~ rounded gravel, few sill. (SM) 4 ~ 5 6 -1 7 l 8 1 9 1 10 11 J 13 ~ 14 ~ J 15 - 16 J I 17 J Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feel Moderate caving. Heavy seepage below -5', Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 I I I • • " 0 • ~ " , < ~ ~ ~ " 0 " " " " LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-21 S This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES1) for the named ~roject and should be '" read together with that report for comRlete interpretation. This summary agplies only to the loea ion of this trench at the a. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are v 0 a slmplficalion of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION -Sod and Topsoil 1 Weathered Till 2 Medium dense, moist to wet, light olive·brown, nonstratified, silty, fine to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse, subrounded gravel, few organics as roots. (SM) 3 - 4 - 5 Till Very dense, moist, light olive-gray, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse, subrounded 6 -gravel, trace subrounded cobbles. (SM) ! 7 -j I I 8 r Bottom of exploralion pil al deplh 8 feel 9 -I No caving. No seepage. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 28 -r , I I , 1 -1 I , , -; I 1 -; I , ! -r J _. Ironwood King County, WA I 1 I I I I i , Logged by: Joe Approved by' Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE03173B April 2003 I i I I I , , • • • LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-22 il This log is part of the report rrrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ftTOject and should be read together with that repa for comR,ete interpretation. This summary agPlies only to the loea ion of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit . the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. I I I I I I I I I i ! I I M ~ ," " 6 I 1 1 2 3 - 4 ! ] 5 I 6 -t I 7 I 1 8 l 9 1 10 J 11 12 ~ 13 i 14 i 15 ! -j 16 I -, ! 17 18 , 19 ! -, I , --20 DESCRIPTION Sod and Topsoil Advance Outwash Dense to very dense, moist, light-olive brown, weakly stratified, sandy, fine to coarse, subrounded GRAVEL, grades to light olive-gray, fine to COarse SAND, few subrounded to rounded gravel, trace. silt. (SW/SW) Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet No caving. No seepage. Ironwood King County, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. I I I I I I I ! I I I I , I i \ I . ! I I I , I Logged by: JDC Approved by: ~~~(!j~ Project No. KE031738 April 2003 <I' 0"-""50 Ifij . -\ ~ ,,-'" ~ !" ," I .~" £:::I0 (""C"" ~; ~ \- "u •• _' ~/~;-6;'fi~j ~ \ . .' \... . ,. \ ~ "'""-.. '. ~S .... _ .... '<AlS"'£"'" ..... " ~ ,.><\_. /1 Ce''', ~~ / '" , ~ ,<\ I ( t·· \ .. ., II'" /: I \ ~ 1 . ~. / ~ "".1 .,..(. ......" -, j .... " :: + ::X-GARAGE ~.~. /\ ~ . ",' -........ .... f... ....~ :: ~ -'to ....,~ I ; j I .__ ~~:~ ... , .• 1 ~ •. ~ ... /' ., I''''-''''~' J_ I: :~.:.I:":.I ,,:~] .• "".' } /.-d ".I' l \. \ II III~\ ,_,. I "I " \..,... ' \ (":"'''~I\I; 'l ~ '-' ... ,.. "';',,?, .. ~J":''' ~ -= I .... :. ~-~...: .... -.. 111' '~ .. Y' ~ __ .-,.,. • .,..., ;. ~ ~ , <: '" I. , .• ' '''' .tlEP. I, y, (--+.EP "". . " 1 I I .. ~. o. ,{/.. • II \ ',. ".' -,._-.,' ~ \ i ,~; .. ~: ' If, ~.... ... • :.... ,.~ l J ! _, . __ ,,_ ._ ',~" 'I (.' i' -.-.. "U7--;J r?J, I! ; •• ' I '''', I 1 ,_, co,' /.~.l;,' ~~~.,p.u\,/ " \ .' ' 1 '1 ." '" I • "," . " // ',0 ' -•. ~,...' r ' j , .. ... " " '"' I .. ", " ,., \ ' , I I \\~ \ -'0[j, -'" -'--/'...." ../ " /7'" Jj " 'I "., , , '-"j --. 1"--.LJ . ,,_c;\..,~ 1 / ~~.~, /~ -.... • ~ / ' ! ',~.,:: '~: :,-'o"cJJ J6 ' I"" \ 1 I ."' "'. , ..... , .... /. / ..... ~ "'/ ... :i !" . ~_,,, , 'Li, '··r IU<-<..Jj (II \) I\~\ ." I )-.... .~ ...... -::y., . ,",. , (/ '~c-// ~I.. iii / , I , ._, ~ , \. /'fjJ),(' /l--... ...~, ,0'" ".,,:..y ir - / w! . ; ,., .. ,'. JO-n "'Il / "04.' "-2"-.../! ~~,/ / ... ,-' ~.!, 5 ~ 11 12' i~':',~'1i ~,7? .. I: [1'1 t' ._ . (; '.;A; ~ ;. \ ''', ...... -~.~:::::.:-, . /-! J'/ r /' ~t I ~;i ; "f •• , • ~~. __ " ,--'-/ (,":t;1 , '-~ "';' . ., . ~' I / '\ -~,! <,Ii I .EP~ _ ,. 'c.l, • ,. I' .• "z. __ . . .... __ .' " ~ -/ , I,: ~'" =.,-'-~. ". ' .-=--~~ _..:. ..... ~. , !'_ ..:' _" ';''''-. i;:.:..... . ... -' ..--'" ....... __ J: ~; I .. , .. 'I'll ,,/. >,._' i "" •• " . 'I' 1,\ "I'~I' ,! ' : I· -'-1' .. ,-,~ I~" /'-- __ .... ~ _____ ' __ .'__ ,f ." .. I { . ._,', ;. '., / I\~·' ,/ I,."." " \'\" :of ~,~'r"" :: . .' , .. :·!..,I ;'"!..'-":";"""", 1 J9 I I _-=-.:.:=:::::: //Z -·'i-----l-"'/ \\~1~81.t1''f' 11:r:·::·:.;::··;' .. ..::··:l~"'~~::,~;;;;:~·::I:~:· ~o ~,; J,: 2~~;::t~~: 1 .",<-•.. 1 ,_, I" I ; . 1'_,' 'I'"'' , .. .. /. . ,." .. , d 1./-.", ,'~"i ';" .. ,,'7,'1, I !.:t~;~~t'-~,_::"".,~ L .) ., ..... '''',.. r./ _.'~/ '../! ' \-'I:.~t\:'~~ ,j. -~:-~ _"J '----:;;-" '-.--i:":" .. ~ -,.' -~~'~ ,-: '~~(~'21;.~ :'~~.=!=-I __ -,-,~I ·"7.{:"'~~·-'" I\\~" \)h://'/~' , -----.-,-.. -~,~-.:::;-:..::-~j I;--"~~! .! :~, , '! ',~~~:::",~~, ""\.:~:~~\, ~'E;,; \~-~ i~l~-=~'I-"-I~ '~1 : ,.~~ '~~ ~': . .: .. :i;c, ... q;-~TP,iJ-j~ ". \ '1" ~~ .---\ '-", '., ,"'; ) /--J I ; I;' :1 ., /,11, : J" . ~",-+·-t.~'1 ~i I i' _ '-: I I'.' 3'. ,. ' ./ '-''', (.": {" ,;.'; : : ' . i '" ~ .' ''h l,;tl ... ·1:, " 1 -, 'j.~/ifJI LI -'I'" ",? ... '.""c' 's . ( j !I~"" I i' I, ,e,,' ,'" \ I._,/'/ r.p· /< -.. : /"y.:."/ ".' . I·· "~"':"':':l~ .},-:-"~,,,~,), : , ... _ .'_._._. \ , .. _.-.... - . .c~.' _. ·,,/h· : ... , ' .. O'~'_ I' I \ LEGEND""~'''·-j "/-,,;-*-~~,~~~.~. ~-::..'-~.'~:~i,:i-i! ':: EP·15 • Approximate location of exploration pit Reference: Core Design, Inc, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN IRONWOOD N A ~-.-~'. = FIGURE :< OATE IJ4IO.3 ~m~~~ KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON PROJECT NO. I<:E03173.A • • • ~< " \-- '. ~",,,, .. ,, /{J"'CDUSC ~ l77l"'"0"<£ "\ ... O·«L" 8~ ~ ~'G' -'\ , /\ ~:::i,,,,,,,,, •. ~ \ •. " __ _ ~ "'-->\ > /-i~:i;N;' "'''' -\~\" \ \ i : ~~ -"',;,;~-' /~ .~"' -' I ---..,) I I::' • " \. ... ~ ..-..,-0 L ~.:. ~ " I.· / '.. ",'" ,,' /'... ..,/ J'--: \ " .. ,<," I"'~ ""_:?' " j .' .~ ,,",, •. ~ • ~; :::.c~ •. ~.' .... \ ~" ; ~ ,_ ~c~ _ • ,,,e:"" -"'l\~!i --. "~~I""')--....::"·'" ;::s:;:; ___ ~T '--._.{ '/ .ll_' ~~~-.. 2 'I . '11 ~~ .• ' ,.;. \ --"''N~40-..... ~... ... ... , I ,. 17 'r ( , , ,,, ,">3" '. .' •. ' \...,.' ",' ., "<". : .. " .. J" . . )'.' .,~ ... ,.~ .• "",7. ,.Ep·7I -" ... \ft.... ; . ~~-... ,~l,. \ 'J -;:;.. I,!---.'· ,~.. "'" ,,\), "~,. A~' -"-~ :.. yl' 1 " , ' I ~--__ -I •. _1 ~ ,~O:,"'«~. ~/ )1 ~ ~(/ (~~~II NO." :.".'--., 2~f~ \\>,1 I ,=0:.' " ,~(-";";" ii 1\ i /1 1 \~:~~ ~.. " ~,:' .,.", ," //':~' ";;<'l" //£~/:~r~'~T: -',---'~-''''. \_ ",' ' Q.~~P .... ,' I -~ -~', // ••• " "";, ,/ / '-. I "~-'-, "." . \ ',00 ' , -------• / ~ I-! 7 :. I AV' '.i 3'" \ \ ~ -", :JH.'_~ / .... -, z::=:.......--" _ .-'--' I" s i~ ,)i '0'".:1 t .;r':LJ ,£.. ':~71;".\ 1 / •. ,,""'" / .. "~ ~;;-,.:;:~, --(o' ~:.. ~/ ~·t iP""~Fi '-',," .' \, . I '\ \ ' I )"oll~ ,0/ ".' '\ "cL,::-,, __ / 'r -/"1 '. ,-I' ~-,;=, ,:." ""I,J "I , f-I" ,;l., '\; ! 1 I 42)'> 'if/I! .", ,_. _/ ----~ .s / / /1 " ' If ""' I •• .. 1 LU.-t'. "," +--'/ X II'----.. ~y-'-"'" . I / -" :t·~ 1::::-: .\ ' I II" I}I \ \-""! 1/ jll:/' 1.\,.:;' ........... '-"_ ~ .•• ~_~--------_--;r./ .-.!. I I •• "'~'!" t I! ' (\~,. I ~.~ , 1"-____ C!..f__ (71) ,-', j" '.--1. 'rtl 12 , .... '-,,, .. :; II ...,------,,;..-~ • '..-7( ..... ,." \'. ( .. , (1" I . /~" ..:l.!1 ~~,'-"f ._,,.,,, i~_ I Ij:.;c.~;., .... _---." ,'" " . ;-l' i·III.~-:>.~r,.,' .. /. ;';:'25"1. ,:~ , . I !lli~! ! 'i '. . : ,,~ . I 1 !~ :' I (r-- , c i 1 " ) i!i ii' / ;~!! l I :" , .. ! ' 1<,; : 1;: ,: i :~;\L/'--'. I ' r;--,l..jl 30 ' ( ,'\ \ ".". ....... -----_ • .., '~:'....--: ~---... ~~:::, ", ".'''','', )":, ", .. \. ~-~ ..... 'I:' ..... ----' '. ~ 1Ii'."~.. '. -.--.-,.,-. _"'-ji" ;' .EP-3 I_ '-'.---1. ~ " I "'. "/-i ",f 14 :i 15 ,.16'-,17 :-:;;1a t :I)_:.,~:o c_ .-~. ]--. 24, ' •· .• 1 -,-' " I 29,' /( .... ;,-.. l'\'.:~t( 1 '\\-l" , •••. '1,.c::"'-·"';··~-'·"'""':·["·';'::1~:·~:O:·':/l ~:.,f.. ,e.'! ''''''': ·r:":"--------~" ~ ~"I':' :' ".;;:" // J '."'.---: __ •• , \. ''X'' '11/ i :',' : I.~ ..:~,! / ,"'~ ~;: , : I'---:=--LP21 1 ------~~. o"j, '," I --\ i~-" '\(' '\ ,"" (r .---:.:r-~ ~--.. -. ~ .. -I.-~ --' :.....---::...=--~ =--~--:: :;-~-r-=---::;7 ~_-..!.: .. ,,,. 1; i /J9 26! '. "":"\,.../\ \"-'~,,, \\~\ ,..-f;..--Y 1 'I, ~ I '_-' -, --,-~'--;:-:: 'I I . i"_ .c /-'" " ~ " r.·) ./' .... , ", . l' '" " " ... , ----. -'., I \ ': . '';(7)/'' '" I , , ~ ,. k" " '. ~,l !! , .-.,..... ,~;;.;:.~~:_::,. ,~.~ ... 1.-_-'.1---:1 -o::;.~,~,~ ... ;.: I \_ ... \1·"-/-__ --!!..L~f4-,--L.-----~-'~_ ._~ ._::" t· 40' ,' .. ~ /{ ",,~, '~O;"-"", ) \ I~!": I,' I ( './ ' 'I -:;::2 " ~'=---: I" 27 ''''" ;;;,\C ~ \ 11. (t I I --1; 'I ~ 11 .~, """'j""\ ~". " . SE:t~:':) /-,..,' ,'1---, /1 I J ",.,."~ I '=",===~';I I ~ .-, \ .. , '" , .. ," ./ "t.~/: \/il ;,,'-'.::, .. :' .. ' -1,,, : J:' '.' ~, : ,,',f,':,' ''''J ,!.\' ,.' I" ~=o '::,::. 'lbl<~' ~:'~-'I :. __ ... \\ /C:~ /2;:~JJ ::f_./ ~--'S~~ ;:; _;; ~ ", .. ~ ~" .•• ~~ ~~~.~t -' C~·: -. . ! r~' i1. '1' i: N -2 ::~ - LEGEND A EP-12. Approximate location of exploration pit C J Approximate location of fill soils • = ,. Reference: Core Design, Inc. (107 Approximate depth of fill in feet FIGl:RE : Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN IRONWOOD DATE 04'03 ~mn~~ KING COUN1Y', WASHINGTON PQCJECT NO, KE0311J11 • • • • II ,. ".. ";".~ Preliminary . WETLAND DETERMINATION FOR EAST RENTON PROPERTY King County Washington Prepared for: Ms. Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th PI. Suite #100 • Kirkland, Washington 98034 -<ocr 425-825-1955 Prepared by: C. Gary Schulz We~landiForest Ecologist 7700 S. Lakeridge Dr. Seattle, Washington 98178 206-772-6514 April 3, 2001 K.C. D.D.E.S. MAiN FilE COpy • Introduction Project/Site Description Purpose Methodology Wetland Determination Soils Hydrology Wetland Description Wildlife Habitat Red-Tail Hawk Nest Appendix A Data Plot Fonns * • TABLE OF CONTENTS * Wetland data plots will be submitted at the time of formal application. ., • • INTRODUCTION Project/Site Description The East Renton Property is comprised of 2 parcels with a total size of approximately 19.6 acres situated east of Renton in unincorporated King County. The property is located on the west side of 148th Avenue S.E. near S.E. 120th Street, King County (Section 10, Township 23 N., Range 5 E., WM). The subject property is situated in an area that is zoned for single-family development. The southern parcel (Schinnan property) has been developed for a single-family residence and includes a house and garage/shed. The north parcel (Intlekofer property) has been used for pasture land but includes no improvements except a small shed. The preliminary project site design includes a total of 68 single-family lots clustered on the eastern, upland portion of the property. The project roadway is proposed as a circular access that fronts all of the lots. Surface water runoff from new development would be conveyed to a detention and water quality facility to be located west of the development. Please refer to Conceptual Site Plan map (3/15/01 Triad Associates, Inc.) The upper, eastern half of the site is proposed for new, single-family development. This area has flat to gentle sloping topography. Slopes steepen as the site falls to a basin area on the west half of the site. A natural drainage system is present within this basin. The drainage originates off-site from the south and flows through the property to the north boundary where it continues as a natural drainage feature. The majority of the eastern, upland portion of both parcels is.pasture land that has not been recently maintained or used. The area includes old apple trees and few, scattered individuals of native bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), D!:mglas fIr (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) trees. There is extensive shrub cover of clumps of Himalayan blackberry . (Rubus discolor) including one area dominated by Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius). Waste areas include small trees -crabapple (Malus sp.) and Douglas' hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii). The groundcover is dominated by common pasture grasses and includes areas of bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). Much of the lower portion on the west side of the property is influenced by, runoff and groundwater seepage. This is a basin area of mostly deciduous forest with native vegetation in wetland and buffer areas. A more detailed description is found in the Wetland Detennination section. r----- • • Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide the applicant a preliminary wetland determination study to .submit for County comment, verification, and regulatory compliance. This study is considered complete and accurate but may need to be revised prior to a formal project application. Professional observations are included to assist with determining natural resource classifications and functions. Wildlife observations, related to red-tail hawk use, are included in this study. A preliminary, residential site design is submitted for the subdivision permit process. Site plan layout has avoided significant impacts in order to preserve existing wetland areas and the associated functions. Methodology Typically defined, wetlands are ... "those areas that are inundaied or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas". Through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the Growth Management Act (GMA), the County reviews proposals which may potentially impact wetland and other sensitive areas. Because of observed site conditions, combined with jurisdictional wetland regulations, wetland presence and extent must be determined for the permitting process. The methodology used for wetland determination was based on the presence of dominant hydrophytic vegetation' (i.e .. plant species adapted to, or tolerant of, growing in saturated soil conditions), hydric soils, and observed wetland hydrology as described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Dept. of Ecology Pub. #96-94, 1997) was used, for consistent regional wetland determinations. The State manual was developed to address regional conditions and is consistent with the 1987 Corps Manual methodology. The three technical criteria for vegetation, soils, and hydrology are mandatory under normal conditions and must all be met for an area to be identified as wetland. Because the site has relatively distinct wetland plant communities, the Routine On-site Determination Method was used in this investigation. Wetland data plots (9), approximately 0.01 acres in size, were installed within wetland and upland areas as a relative sampling of the property's existing conditions. The associated data plot forms are included in Appendix A. King County's Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990) was used to review local area wetlands and streams. The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) (USDA 1973), King County Area Soil Survey, was used to reference soil mapping and classification. • • Determination of wetland area was based on observed plant species, topographic relief, soil profiles, and hydrology. Orange plastic flagging was used to mark the site's wetland boundaries and data' plot locations. This delineation of wetland areas updates previous wetland flagging by others. Much of the old wetland flagging (pink) was still present on the site. The current wetland boundaries were professionally land surveyed by Triad Associates, Inc. and mapped onto a base topographic map (CamWest East Renton, 3/9/01) . • • WETLAND DETERMINATION Wetland investigations were conducted during nliddle to late February of 2001 to delineate the portions of wetland areas existing on the East Renton Property (Attached Map). Three wetlands (A, B, & C) are identified on the west side of the property and are within the natural drainage corridor that runs from south to north through the property. Old wetland flagging was encountered during the field work but it is not known if this delineation was subnlitted to the County. The current wetland study generally found the old wetland boundaries to be closely correlated with this updated determination and survey. To supplement this study, nine wetland data plots were installed and this information is found in Appendix A. Soils The SCS (USDA 1973) Soil Survey -King County Area has mapped two soil series on the subject property. The soil map units are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam -0 to 6 percent slopes (AgB) and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam - 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC). The Alderwood series is comprised of moderately, well-drained soils associated with a glacial till at depths of 20 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands but have inclusions of other soils that are not large enough to map. Some included soils are Norma, Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila, and Shalcar series. Investigation of portions of the site's upland area confirmed soil that closely resembles the Alderwood series. The soil inclusions mentioned above are poorly drained and found in depression areas and drainage ways on till and outwash plains. These1!oil map units are listed in the Hydric Soils of Washington (1985). Hydric soils are generally associated with wetland habitats. Hydric mineral soils observed in soil pits excavated within the wetland areas appeared to be the Norma series. Organic soils present in ponded areas could be the Seattle, Tukwila, or Shalcar series. Hydrology King County's Map Folio includes one wetland on the East Renton Property. This wetland is identified as May Creek #24b. The letter "b" indicates the wetland was mapped in the US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory but is not included in the King County Wetlands Inventory (1983). This wetland drains to an off-site "Unclassified" stream identified northwest of the subject property at a distance of more than one mile. This 'stream appears to be Honey Creek, a tributary to May Creek. . ". • • Observed hydrology on the site appears directly influenced by local, shallow groundwater that is moving through the area from south to north. There is strong near-surface hydrology within this lowland basin and much of the water may originate on the site. However, contiguous wetland area appears to be present on both south and north sides. Old farm roads, crossing the wetland drainage basin, have caused blockage. As a result, a small and shallow pond has formed on the southwest side of the site. Two narrow, stream-like channels are present within the wetlands (Wetlands A & B). The concentrated, surface water flowing in these channels leaves the subject property in culverts under a farm road along the north boundary. Field observation of the channels and flows indicate they are likely to be seasonal. The channels are narrow and lack significant erosion features. Wetland Description Wetlands A. B. and C Wetlands A. B. and C are described together as part of a headwaters wetland system due to their close proximity and similar habitats. On-site wetland drainages have been crossed and separated by fill from old farm roads built on the south and north portions. They are no longer connected by hydric soils but are supported by the same groundwater hydrology through culverts and groundwater seepage. Wetland B is not directly connected to Wetlands A and Con the site; however, surface flows from A and B join just north of the site boundary. The wetland system is within a distinct basin and also receives surface runoff from adjacent slopes. Overall, the wetland areas are characterized as forested habitat dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) trees. Several small groves of western red cedar are present along the wetland edge. Big leaf maple and black cottonwood dominate the forest cover in uplands surrounding the wetland drainages. Douglas fir and western hemlock individuals are scattered throughout the basin area. The southern most portion of wetland (Schirman property) has standing red alder trees throughout; however, the majority are dead and dying and do not constitute significant cover for a forested wetland classification. The shrub cover in the wetland is dominated by salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and Himalayan blackberry. Past land clearing activities have caused Himalayan blackberry to thrive and dominate in the southern portion of the wetland drainages. Most of Wetland C is affected by blackberry cover. Vine maple (Acer circinatum), red elderberry(Sambucus racemosa), Douglas' spirea (Spiraea douglasii), and prickly currant (Ribes lacustre) shrubs were also observed in wetland areas. The adjacent upland has dominant shrub cover ofIndian plum (Oemieria cerasiformis), vine maple, and western hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) shrubs. Associated upland groundcover is dominated by sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus). • •• The wetland has diverse emergent vegetation dominated by skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum), lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina), and piggy-back plant (Tolmeia menziesii). Significant cover of speedwell (Veronica sp.), and hedgenettJe (Stachys sp.) were observed emerging in the small wetland drainage channels. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub/shrub, persistent and non-persistent emergent, and is influenced by seasonally and semi-permanently flooded conditions. Although there are trees rooted in the wetland, the criteria of 30 percent cover may not be present on the subject site. With or without the presence of a forested wetland class, the wetlands would likely be rated as Class 2 for the following reasons. The wetland system probably exceeds one acre in size when offsite area is considered and these wetlands have present raptor nesting trees (KCC 21A.06.141S). The standard buffer setback distance for Class 2 wetlands is 50 feet. This area is considered a "headwaters" wetland system mostly supported by groundwater discharge. ," . ----------- • • WILDLIFE HABITAT The project site has four distinct plant communities that could be important to wildlife for providing food and cover. These are grassland, shrub, wetland emergent, and forest. Because this study is preliminary, the forest habitat is addressed as it relates to red-tail hawk use. Red-Tail Hawk Nest The basin portion of the site has several, large black cottonwood trees. The diameters of these trees at breast height (DBH) range from approximately 30 inches to 50 inches +. Tree heights are more than 80 feet for some of these trees. The site does not contain conifers that are as large as ·the cottonwood trees or of a mature size. There are also a few mature bigleaf maple trees. However, it appears· that the greatest potential for red-tail hawk (RTH) nests would be located in black cottonwood trees. The preliminary site investigations located two RTH nests. These have been surveyed and noted on the Conceptual Site Plan map. As part of this study, hawk observations have been conducted during March and April, 2001 to determine if the RTH pair is utilizing one of the two nests. The nests are referred to as the "central" nest and "north" nest. During the wetland field delineation in February, a pair of RTH were observed using the site and one was perched in the central nest tree. The central nest is in the largest black cottonwood tree on the project site and was assumed to be the active nest. Playing and diving antics were observed of the pair on 2/24/01. On 3/30101 and 3/31101 the RTH pair were observed on the north portion of the site and one flew away from being perched in the north nest tree. No defensive behavior was exhibited. On 4/5101 one of the RTH was observed in the north nest tree using the nest. Upon approach to the tree, at a distance of about 200 feet, it appeared the RTH was incubating eggs. This hawk did not leave the nest and the mate was not in the area. Once again on 4/7101, the RTH pair was in the vicinity and one exited the north nest. At this time the observation was concluded and it is assumed the RTH are using the north nest. , In general, literature research indicates that RTH initiate mating and nesting from mid-February to early March. The incubation period can begin in mid-to late-March and lasts for about a month. Therefore, hatChing can begin in late April and it is reported that RTH fledge from mid-May to July. However, RTH fledglings can leave the nest by early June. It is recommended that the only other hawk observations for this site be conducted in June to determine if the RTH fledge has occurred. More detailed information related to the research literature and RTH management will be submitted at the time of formal application. • • • REFERENCES Cow ardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of tbe United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, United states Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79-31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, c.L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and lW. Thompson. 1977. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. University Press, Seattle, Washington. King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. King County. 2000. King County Code -Chapter 21A.24 Environmentally Sensitive Areas. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. King County Area Soil Survey, Washington. Prepared in cooperation witb tbe Soil Conservation Service, King County, and the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. United States Department of Interior, Flsh, and Wildlife Service. 1988. National Wetland Inventory. Prepared for the Office of Biological Services. Washington State, Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #96-94. -------------- . ,. • • APPENDIX A DATA PLOTS (To be submitted at the. time of fonnal application) _ _ __________________________ --l ...-. ,----------------~-~--.--\ ----~ --~ ~~---~ ), • .• • TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR EAST RENTON ~ January 16, 2002 CamWest Real Estate Development 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 MAIN FILE COpy King County Hearing Examiner r ..:T.:..r::;affiY..'::;c..:i..:m:!:p-=a.::.ct:..:A.:..,..::Ja..:i)""S:.::iS=--_-C •• l-_______________ e ________ E=as::.::1 Renton TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ......... , ................................................................................................................................ 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................... , ..................................................................... 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS : ..................................................... , ..................................................................... 1 Roadways .................................................................................................................................................... 1 148'h Avenue SE ..................................................................................................................................... 1 SR-900 .................................................................................................................................................... 4 TransitINon-Motorized Facilities ........... , ................... : ................................................................................ 4 Transit ......................................... : ....................................................... ; ................................................... 4 Non-Motorized Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 4 Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... , ............................... 4 Level of Service .......................................................................................... , ............................................... 6 Accidents ............................................................................................................. : .............. , .. , .................... 7 Planned and Programmed Improvements ................................................................................................... 8 FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT .......................................................................................... 8 Background Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................................................... 8 Pipeline Projects ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Level of Service ........................................ , ................................................................................................. 9 FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT ................................................................................................ 11 Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................ 11 Project.Trip Generation ............................ , ...................................... : .................................................... 11 ' T~ip DistributionfTraffic Assignment ....................................................................................................... 12 Level of Service ............ ~ ............................................................................................................................ 12 Sight Distance Analysis ..... : ..... : ........... ~: .................................................................................................. 15 Turn Lane Warrant Analysis .......... , .......................................................................................................... 16 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 16 TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION ............................................................................................................. \7 Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. , Traffic Impact Analysis • • East Renton INTRODUCTION The following report was prepared to address King County's traffic impact analysis requirements for the Preliminary Plat of East Renton located at 12013 148 th Avenue SE in the Renton area of unincorporated King County. A vicinity map is presented in Figure 1. As specified in the King County Integrated Transportation Program (ITP); intersections impacted by 30 or more peak hour project trips and at least 20 percent of the total peak hour project traffic were selected for evaluation. Based on the transportation concurrency model distribution for this site, it was determined that the proposed project would impact two intersections -SR-9001148 th Avenue SE and SE 116 th Streetll48th Avenue SE. This report summarizes the process,. findings, conclusions and recommendations of the traffic analysis. PROJECT DESCRIPTION East Renton is a preliminary plat consisting of 68 single-family lots. King County zoned the subject parcel R-4, which allows 4 dwelling units per acre. Currently, there is a single-family residence on the property, which will be removed as part of the proposed development. The plat is expected to be fully occupied by 2005, which for the purposes of this analysis is assumed to be the horizon year. East Renton will offer a single point of access to l48 th Avenue SE. The internal road system will be built to King County standards. In addition to providing access to the proposed lots, the internal road system will provide road stubs to adjacent properties to the north and south. A preliminary site plan is presented in Figure 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS The Existing Conditions analysis provides a statement of the traffic-related conditions within the study area at the time of the writing o(this repOli. The statement includes a discussion of the existing roadway, transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities serving the site; identification of existing peak hour traffic volumes and accident history at the analysis intersections; and identification of proposed transportation improvements in the area. Roadways The roadways impacted by the proposed development include 148 th Avenue SE and SR-900. These roadways are discussed in the following sections. <. 148t " Avenue SE 148 th Avenue SE is a two-lane collector arterial that runs north-south. The paved roadway width is approximately 28 feet and includes two II-foot travel lanes, a 5-foot shoulder on the west side of the road and a 2-foot shoulder on the east side.' Traffic control includes stop signs at the SR- 900 and SE 128 th Street intersections. The posted speed limit on 148 th Avenue SE is 35 miles . per hour (mph). . Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 1 \ , ~GARRY STRUTHERS ~SOCIATES. INC. • 31~Rl<:noo",*Rr»cI.9ultIol00 ~A s:;C:~~ ~ • F...: (~25) !l10-c300 , 1i_", .. II: g 011* 1""-"",,, . hU;I:I_.~-.. VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 PARK & RlDt EAST RENTON l--~-.-,._--"--'._---.--_ .. __ .. _-.-._--,---.--_ .. --.-.----.. --,--.----.----.--.-.----.--.--.. ---.. -·----1 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 ! I I I 1 1 -----I I I ! -------\-------------------------------- I(C R-4 o LOT' .. ----'-1--'----"'r e.--___ oj I I I I -I f(C R-4 1 1 I I _______ ~I------------------------------~-------------------------------L----L-,--L----i ! , L _________ . ___ .. _ 1 o KC I 1'--..1 .. _ .. -., I • 1 I _. 1------------- I I I SITE PLAN EAST RENTON FIGURE 2 East Renton SR-900 SR-900 is a two-to five-lane principal arterial that runs east-west. In the vicinity of 148'h Avenue SE, the pavement width is approximately 32 feet with two II-foot travel lanes and 5-foot shoulders. Traffic control includes signals at 138'h Avenue SE and 164'h Avenue SE and stop signs on the side streets. The posted speed limit is 35 mph west of 148'h Avenue SE and 40 mph east of 148'h Avenue SE. TransitINon-Motorized Facilities Transit King County Metro provides transit service in the vicinity of the site. Route 114 provides weekday service between the Renton Highlands and downtown Seattle via SE 138 th Street and Coal Creek Parkway SE. Weekday service for Route 114 operates with approximate 30-minute head ways during the commuting peak hours. Route 240 provides weekday and weekend service between downtown Renton and Bellevue via 138'h Avenue SE and Coal Creek Parkway SE. This route operates with 30-to 60-minute headways during the weekdays and 60-minute headways on the weekend. Transit service is also available at the Renton Highlands Park & Ride located approximately three miles from the project site which serves Metro Routes 105, Ill, and 909. Routes 105 and 909 provide weekday and weekend service to the Renton Transit Center and Route III provides weekday service to downtown Seattle. Non-Motorized Facilities There are no sidewalks or pedestrian facilities along'either side of 148'h Avenue SE in the vicinity of the proposed site. According to staff at Apollo Elementary, 15025 SE I 17th Street; all students are bused to the school since there are no facilities whi~h provide safe pedestrian access. Maywood Middle School, 14490 168th Avenue SE, buses all students except those who live within a mile radius. Bus transportation is also provided for Hazen High School located at 1101 Hoquiam NE. . Traffic Volumes Existing PM peak hour traffic volumes at the analysis intersections were determined from September 2001 turning movement count. The. existing PM peak hour volumes are presented in Figure 3. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 4 '" '" '" ~ CO ~ ~ p '" ~ e '" '" '" ~ " Ii; ~ NOT TO SCALE "'<" :'<1)- i-~(<). 1'0 "', .. L'2 "'w _ _ 509 JIL ,4 35 ~ iIi 393- 64 1 ~_<o ,.,,.,'" Sf: '" '" L,o '" "'<0 ~ w __ _ 0 JIL ,13 " Ii; ~ iIi ;!: 5 1 SE 116TH ST 2 1 -<0 W~_ S 117TH Sf SITE S 120TH ST SE 128TH Sf EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 3 '" '" '" ~ ~ :e xx -PM PEAK EAST RENTON East Renton Level of Service Level of service (LOS) is used to qualify the degree of traffic congestion and driver comfort on streets or at intersections. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) describes the methodologies for calculating LOS on street segments and at signalized and unsignalized inter~ections. According to the HCM (TRB Special Report #209), there are six levels of service, which describe the operational performance of the roadway system. The levels range from LOS A, which indicates a relatively free-flowing condition, to LOS F which indicates operational breakdown. The level of service for a two-way stop controlled (TWSC) intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. Level of service is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Average control delay less than or equal to 10 seconds per vehicle is defined as LOS A. For LOS F, the average control delay is greater than SO seconds per vehicle. The LOS for signalized intersections is defined in tenns of average control delay per vehicle for the entire intersection. The criterion for LOS A is an average control delay of less than or equal to 10 seconds per vehicle. The criterion for LOS F is an average control delay of greater than 80 seconds. King County has adopted level of service E as the county road standard. According to the King County Integrated Transportation Program (ITP), any development that impacts an intersection with 20 percent of the peak hour project generated trips and 30 project generated peak hour trips must insure LOS E with full development of the project. Level of ser~ice for the analysis intersections was calculated using Synchro™ 5.0 and HCS™_ 2000, computer software programs based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. As stated previously, the intersections meeting the impact criteria are SR-9001148 th Avenue SE . and SE j"16 th Streetll48 th Avenue SE. The results of the existing condition level of service analysis are shown in Table 1. -- Table 1 2001 Level of Service Intersection SR-9001l4S'h Ave SE NBLT' SE 116,h Stll4S'h Ave SE ·EBLT' (xx) -seconds of delay per velucle Traffic Control Two-Way Stop Two-Way Stop 2000 Existing LOS Standard F (69.4) E B (10.2) E 1 -level of service for the two-way stop controlled intersection represents the movement with the highest delay, The remaining movements operate at an acceptable level of service. As shown in Table 1, the SR-9001148 th Avenue SE intersection currently operates at LOS F and the SE I 16 th Streetll4S th Avenue SE intersection operates at LOS B. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 6 Traffic Impact Analysis •• • East Renton Accidents The most current accident data for the analysis intersections was obtained from WSDOT. for the three-year period from January 1998 to,December 2000. In addition to the analysis intersections, accident data for the SR-9001164 th Avenue SE intersection is included since it is considered a high accident location (HAL). According to WSDOT, accident data for 1999 and 2000 have been entered into the system, however, some data fields are still missing. Although some of the data fields are missing, the total number of accidents has been recorded. However, only 64 percent of the 1998 data has been entered. The available three-year accident history is summarized in Table 2. Table 2 Three-Year Accident History Rear-end Enter at angle Front end (not head-on) Intersection Total Enter at angle Front end (not head-on) Pedest~'ian . Head-on Object Intersection Total -Injury accidents 2 2) -Property damage only accidents No. of Reported Accidents 1998 1999 2000 2 I I' 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 3) -Accident rate per million entering vehicles 4) -Average accident f<He state-wide for this type of intersection per WSDOT 2 2 3 1 6 5 1 1 21 1.30 5) -Listed as a "enter at angle", however, it is coded as a front end (not "head-on), with one of the vehicles crossing over the centerline or through median. As shown in Table 2, a total of 8 accidents have occurred during the latest three-year period at the SR-9001148 th Avenue SE intersection. Of the 8, there were 6 enter at angle, 1 rear-end and 1 front end. The accident rate at the SR-900/148 th Aven'ue SE intersection, however, is well below the statewide average for similar intersections. At the SE 116 th Streetl148 th Avenue SE intersection, one bicycle collision occurred during the latest three-year period. As shown in Table 8, there were a total of 21 collisions at the SR-9001164th Avenue SE intersection between 1998 and 2000. Of the 21, there 8 were rear-ends; 5 enter at angles; 5 front ends; I pedestrian; 1 head-on; and 1 fixed object. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 7 Traffic Impact Analysis • • East Renton It is assumed the accident rate for each of the intersections will remain the same in the future. As such, with increased traffic, it is likely there will be a corresponding increase in accidents. However, it does not appear that the relatively small increase in traffic would create an identifiable safety hazard. Planned and Programmed Improvements A review of King Comity's Planned and Programmed Transportation Improvements indicate the following transportation improvement projects planned in the study area. King County's 1999 Transportation Needs Report (TNR) • SE May Valley Road (Coal Creek Parkway to SR-900), NC-42. This project includes widening travel lanes and paving shoulders. In addition, this project would also include the constmction of equestrian facilities. Both King County and the City of Newcastle would fund this low priority project. • Coal Creek Parkway at SE May Valley Road, NC-I01. This project includes widening the north and south legs of this intersection to provide additional channelization. King County would fund this high priority project. King County's Pipeline Project(s) Improvements • A traffic signal is to be installed at the 148 th Avenue SE/SE 128 th Street intersection as part of the mitigation requirements for the Maplewood development located south of SE 128th Street between 148th Avenue SE and 152nd Avenue SE. In addition, left-tum lanes for the east and west approaches will be constmcted at the intersection. The south approach will be constmcted with an exclusive right tum lane and a shared left/through lane. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUJ PROJECT The Future Conditions Without Project analysis provides a discussion of the traffic-related conditions in the horizon year without the proposed project. This section includes a discussion of background traffic volumes and level of service at the analysis intersections. East Renton is expected to be fully occupied by 2005, market permitting. Therefore, 2005 for the purposes'of this analysis is considered to be the horizon year. Background TraffiC Volumes Background traffic volumes for the 2005 without project condition include the 2001 existing PM peak hour traffic volumes, plus known pipeline projects in the vicinity of the site, plus area-wide traffic growth. A growth factor of 2.57 percent per year was used based on the area-wide historical growth in traffic provided by WSDOT. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 8 " . Traffic Impact Analysis • East Renton Pipeline Projects A pipeline project is defined as a proposed development which submitted a complete application in advance of East Renton, and is expected to be fully developed and impact the transportation system within the horizon year of East Renton. According to King County, there are several pipeline projects in the general vicinity of East Renton. Trip generation for the proposed projects is presented in Table 3. Table 3 Pipeline Projects 142nd Ave.SE between 11400 & 11600 SR-900!148'" Ave SE 14429SE 116 th St 13715 SE 116'" St 11813 148'" Ave SE 128 th St & 146 th 1 SE 1 Street N. & S. side of SE 128 th St 14606 SE 136" St 5715 SE 128 th St 5710 SE 128'" St 5800 SE 128'" St S. of SE 128" St, btwn 148'" Ave & 152nd Ave 618 .6 sfdu's 4 mfdu's 2 sfdu's 37 sfdu's 20 sfdu's 3 sfdu's. 60 sfdu's 45 sfdu's 21 sfdu's 7 sfdu's 7 sfdu's 8 sfdu's 218 sfdu's 6 2 2 37 20 3 61 45 21 7 7 8 218 PM Peak Hour Trips In 24 13 2 39 ;'i 29 13 4 4 5 140 2 1 13 7 22 51 3 16 8 3 3 3 78 As shown in Table 3, there are eight pipeline projects identified by King County and eight identified by the City of Renton in the vicinity of the project site. Trip distribution/traffic assignments for the pipeline projects were determined based upon the Transportation Concurrency run for East Renton provided by King County. Level of Service The results of the 2005 background without project PM peak hour level of service analysis are shown in Table 4. The existing level of service is shown for comparison purposes. Garry Struthers Associates, {nco Page 9 • w '" w i:: ;:0- '" ~ e w '" w " ~ ::; NOT TO SCALE JIL 58 ...J 435- 98 "1 <n" L'5 _ 56J ," iii " --L" jlL _0 ," ...J iii 6 1 '" 2 "1 -" ,,-- SITE w '" ~ l: ~ S 117TH ST 10TH ST ~GARRY STRUTHERS-AsS. OCIATES, INC. ~• 3'SO~A.o.d,Su"'OO A a::;(:~)~ • F..,(<I%!I)!!lo-o:3OC1 1'!-mII11: \I_~r>O.<X>m ntl;I:JJwww.\I~com PROJ VOLUMES 005 WITHOUT TRAFFIC SE 116TH ST SE 128TH ST FIGURE 4 w '" w " ~ :!' xx -PM PEAK EAST RENTON ~T_'n~tn~,~c~il~l~~a~c~t~A~na~I~)'s~is~·_· ______ ... ~ ____________________________ ~~ .. ~---------E~a~s~t~R~en~t~on~ Table 4 2005 Without Project Level of Service Intersection 2001 Existing 2005 Without Project LOS Standard SR-900/14S'" Ave SE NBLT F (69.4)' F (578.3) E SBLT F (160.1) 2 E SE 116'" Stl14S'" Ave SE EBLT' 8 (10.2)1 B (11.2)1 E (xx) seconds of delay per vehicle 1 -level of service for the two~way stop controlled intersection represents the movement with the highest delay. The remaining movements operate at an acceptable level. 2 -movement will also operate below an acceptable leveL As shown in Table 4, the SR-900/148 1h Avenue SE intersection will operate below the levelof service standard in 2005 without project. The SE 116 1h Streetll48'h Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS B) in 2005 without the project. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT The Future Condition With Project analysis provides a statement of what traffic related conditions will be like in the horizon year with the project. The analysis simply adds anticipated project impacts to the horizon year background conditions. The analysis defines anticipated project trip generation and evaluates impact through a level of service analysis at the analysis intersections. Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes for 2005 with project condition include 2005 without project PM peak hour volumes discussed above plus expected PM peak hour traffic to be generated by East Renton .. Project Trip Generation Trip generation for East Renton was calculated using the trip generation rates for Single-Family Dwelling Units, Land Use Code 210 presented in the Sixth Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Report, 1997. A summary of the anticipated trip' generation for East Renton is presented in Table 5. Table 5 Trip· Generation Land Use Proposed East Renton 68 sfdu's Existing Residence I sfdu AWDT 651 Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Total 51 AM Peak In 13 Out 38 Total 69 PM Peak In 44 Out 25 Page 11 Traffic Impact Analysis • • East Renton As shown in Table 5, East Renton is estimated to generate 651 daily, 51 AM peak hour and 69 PM peak hour trips in the 2005 horizon year. The net traffic impact of the project was determined by deducting the existing site trip generation from trip generation expected with the proposed development. The net traffic impact is 641 daily vehicle trips, SO AM peak and 68 PM peak hour trips. Trip DistributionlTraffic Assignment Trip distribution percentages for East Renton were based on the traffic assignment provided by King County Transportation Planning as part of the Transportation Concurrency Analysis for the proposed Aster Park development located at the SR-9001148 th Avenue SE intersection. Trip distribution percentages for the pipeline projects were derived from the percentages determined for the East Renton analysis. The results of the trip distribution/traffic assignment process for project-generated trips are presented in Figure 5. A summary of the 2005 with project PM peak hour volumes are presented in Figure 6. Level of Service, The 2005 with project PM peak hour level of service at the analysis and site access intersections are provided in Table 6. The existing condition and 2005 without project PM peak hour level of service are provided for comparison. Table 6 2005 With Project Level of Service Intersection 14S'h Ave SE/Site Access EBLTI S'R-900114Sw Ave SE NBLT SBLT With Signal 3 SE 116'h StlI4S'h Ave SE EBLTI (xx) -seconds of delay per vehicle 2000 Existing F (69.4)1 -. B (10.2) 2005 Without Project F (578.3) F (160. I)' B (11.2) 2005 With Project A (S.5) F (1902.0) F (220.1)2 A (8.2) B (11.6) LOS Standard E E E 1 -level of service for the two-way stop controlled intersection represents the movement with the highest delay. The remaining movements operate at an acceptable level. 2 -movement will also operate below an acceptable level 3 -signal currently under design by pipeline development As shown in Table 6, the site accessl148 th Avenue SE intersection will operate at an acceptable level of service in 2005 with the project. The SR-9001148 th Avenue SE intersection will operate below the level of service standard in 2005 with the project. The SE 116 1h Streetll48 1h Avenue SE intersection will continue to operate at a LOS B in 2005 with the project. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 12 ~ a. '" w w '" U .J "' 0 u w V> ~ ~ ~ S' ~ e w V> w " ~ ~ (36%) NOT TO SCALE + J'~ Y,.;. '" :': ~(~ ,3 (30%) 1'" iIi 9, 141 I 8 "'roN (8%) SR-9D (21 %) -9 w V> ~ ~ :': 261 115 SE 116TH ST w V> w '" " N j ~ ~ 15 -..J i SITE 10 , ~ 9 15 2 SE 128TH ST -1 (5%) xx -PM PEAK PROJECT -GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES EAST RENTON FIGURE 5 w "' w ., ~ ::' '£i ~ ~ g 2- w "' w '" '" '" ::' NOT TO SCALE 1Il::1XI L'5 "'--_563 jlL f" 58 -.-J l!( 435- '07 1 -"''' '""'" SR-9D w " Lll "' 0" W "N_ jlL _0 '" f14 ~ 6 -.-J l!( ;': 1 '" SE 116TH ST 2 1 r--~~ SE 117TH ST SITE OT 5T SE 128TH ST 2005 TRAFFIC WITH PROJECT VOLUMES FIGURE 6 w "' w '" ~ ~ xx -PM PEAK' EAST RENTON e. Traffic Impact Analysis • • East Renton A signal warrant analysis was conducted for the SR-900/i48 th Avenue SE. Results of the analysis indicate that a signal is not warranted at this intersection in 2005 with the project. However, the King County Examiner required a signal and other improvements at this location as mitigation of the traffic impacts generated by the plat of Stone Ridge. Stone Ridge is approximately located on the west side of 148 th Avenue SE, approximately between Northeast 16 th Street and Northeast 18 th Court. Stone Ridge is required to provide the following traffic- related improvements for final approval: • • • Construct eastbound and westbound left tum lanes on SR-900, at the SR 9001148 th Avenue SE intersection. Modify the east leg of the SR-9001148 th Avenue intersection as necessary, to meet WSDOT stopping sight distance requirements. (Note that per the. applicant's engineer, this can be achieved by the clearing of vegetation along SR-900.) In addition, the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR-900, east of 148 th Avenue, to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. Construct a traffic signalat the SR-9001148 th Avenue SE intersection. This work shall be completed either individually, or in conjunction with other developments in the area. If Stone Ridge provides a new traffic signal at the SR-9001148th Avenue SE intersection as required for final approval, the existing and horizon year level of service deficiency will be mitigated. In 2005 with East Renton, the level of service would improve to an acceptable level (LOS A) with the proposed signal. Therefore, no additional level of service mitigation would be required for East Renton. The required improvements are currently under design by Stone Ridge. Sight Distance Analysis A field study of stopping and entering sight distance was conducted on April 18, 200 I. The proposed access to the plat at that time was approximately 120 feet south of the north property line. The stopping sight distance (SSD) at the site access intersection with 148 th Avenue SE was observed to be 318 feet for southboimd.vehicles and 425+ feet for northbound vehicles. The posted speed limit on 148 th A venue SE is 35 mph. The King County Road Standards (KCRS) does not stipulate the design speed used to calculate SSD. King County has administratively chosen to use the posted speed plus 10 mph for design speed. Based upon a 45 mph design speed (posted speed of 35 + 10 mph), SSD of 425 feet would be required for northbound vehicles and 400 feet for southbound vehicles under the KCRS. (The increase of 25 feet in the SSD fqr the northbound direction is the result of a correction for downgrade specified in KCRS 2.12. The KCRS does not identify an adjustment to reduce SSD for the upgrade condition. 1 Adding 10 mph to the posted speed to calculate design speed increases the required SSD by 150 feet over what would be required for a 35 mph design speed. If a 35 mph design speed is used t According to the American. Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book (1984), page 143, "Design Speed is used in calculating downgrade corrections, average running speed' in calculating upgrade corrections." . Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page IS East Renton then the required SSD per the KCRS is 250 feet in the southbound direction and 265 feet in the northbound direCtion. It should also be noted the KCRS adopted the highest value stopping distance (400 feet) for a 45 mph design speed, established by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). AASHTO is the agency that establishes national standards, including SSD, upon which the KCRS is based. According to ASHTO, the assumed speed for a 45 mph design speed ranges between 40 and 45 mph, with a calculated SSD ranging from 325 feet to 400 feet. Based on a recent speed study on 148 th Avenue SE in the vicinity of the proposed plat, the 85- percentile speed is 40 mph.2 th . King County requested Cam West Development, Inc. reconstruct 148 Avenue SE along the plat frontage and to the north of the proposed plat, or obtain a variance to meet KCRS for stopping sight distance. This issue was first raised in 1999 with Harbor Homes, the previous project applicant for the property, and was raised again in a meeting between the CamWest Development Design Team and King County staff on Thursday April 19,2001. A response to the deficient stopping sight distance is provided in a memorandum to King County DDES from Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. dated August 8, 2001 (Technical Appendix). Based on the infonnation provided in the memorandum, CamWest requested King County determine the proposed development should not be required to reconstruct 148 th Avenue SE along the project frontage and off-site to correct a pre-existing SSD condition, and that a variance is not needed to meet the King County Road Standards. An analysis of the entering sight distance (ESD) at the initially proposed access indicated the project would not meet the KCRS required entering sight distance (ESD) for vehicles approaching from the north (the critical ESD movement). In the field study of sight distance discussed above, 390 feet of ESD was observed at the proposed site access compared to the KCRS requirement of 620 feet. To provide the 620 feet of ESD, CamWest relocated the site access intersection with 14Sth Avenue SE to the south property line. At this location, acceptable ESD can be achieved. SSD is also acceptable at this location using a 45 mph design speed. Turn Lane Warrant Analysis -- A left-tum lane warrant analysis ~t the site access on 148 th Avenue SE was conducted. The results of the analysis indicate a left-tum lane is not warranted. CONCLUSIONS The plat of East Renton will not create any significant adverse conditions on the surrounding transportation network. The plat will generate approximately 641 daily vehicle trips, 50 AM peak and 68 PM peak hour trips to the transportation network. As determined from the analysis, project impact is limited to the SR-9001I48 th Avenue SE and the SE 116 th Streetl148 th Avenue SE intersections. The SR-9001I4S th Avenue SE intersection 2 The speed study was taken from 12:00 AlY! Tuesday May 7 to 12:00 AM Wednesday May 8, 2001. The counters were stationed 50 to 75 feet north of the north property line. GarJ)1 Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 16 East Renton was detennined to operate at an unacceptable level of service in the 2001 existing condition and in 2005 with and without the project. With the installation of a signal constructed by pipeline development, the level of service will improve to LOS A in 2005 with the project. The SE 116 th Streetl14S th Avenue SE intersection was estimated to operate at an acceptable level of service for the existing, 2005 with and without project conditions. It should be noted that the addition of the project traffic will not change the qualitative level of service at either analysis intersection. Based on the preliminary response from King County, the proposed development is not required to reconstruct 148 th A venue SE along the project frontage and off-site to correct a pre-existing SSD condition, and that a variance is not needed to meet the King County Road Standards. It is anticipated that the proposed project would not impact Metro's transit operations in the surrounding area. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION East Renton is required to pay a Mitigation Payment System (MPS) fee of $198,084 based on $2,913 per unit (68 units) for concurrency zone 442 .. If the proposed plat of Stone Ridge provides a new traffic signal at the SR-9001148th Avenue SE intersection (required for final approval), the existing and horizon year level of service deficiency will be mitigated. In 2005 with East Renton, the level of service would improve to an acceptable level (LOS A) with the proposed signal. Therefore, no additional level of service mitigation would be required for East Renton. -, Can), Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 17 \ " .:.T:.cra'l.!.rffi.::iC..:.'m::.lpr.::a:.:.ct~A:::Il:::::al:1:.);S:::iS~_!II. ______________ -.!I •• _____ ---.:::E=ast Renton , TECHNICAL APPENDIX for EAST RENTON -- Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. East Renton SE 116th Street/14Bth Avenue SE PM PEAK HOUR Collected Sept. 26, 2001 '" ro w a. ~ a. 0 a N EBlT 5 EST 1 EBRT 2 WBlT 13 WBT 0 WBRT 10 NBlT 6 NBT 71 NBRT 15 SBlT 15 SBT 122 SBRT 6 266 10/12/012:53 PM .c ~ e l') "0 C ~ e 0> '" 0 ro rn 1 0 0 1 O. 1 1 8 2 2 13 1 30 • ~ 13 '" i'l 0 "e-o. w '" 'e-o. w c .S; ill "-ii: ~ "-ii: c 0 e '" 0 a: 0 '0 0> 2-C G 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 34 0 60 • ~ 13 '" 'e-o. '5 0 ~ "' a a N c 0 e '" a: ;;; ro w 13 w 'e-o. .c ~ "' a a N ~ ro LL " ~ 0 I '" ro w a. '" ~ ~ l!i '" 0 2 l-e w ~ w a. 0 6 0 6 0 1 0 1 0.47 0 0 2 0 2 0 14 0 14 0.77 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 11 0 7 0 7 13 118 15 133 0.86 0 0 17 0 17 0 17 0 17 12 181 26 207 0.86 0.0 0 7 0 7 25 381 41 422 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- East Renton 148th Avenue SElSR-900 PM PEAK HOUR Coliected Sept. 26, 2001 , '" m w "-:;; "- 0 0 '" EBLT 35 EBT 393 EBRT 64 WBLT 4 WBT 509 WBRT 12 NBLT 38 NBT 31 NBRT 25 SBLT 14 SBT 63 SBRT 27 1215 10/12/012:53 PM •• w 13 w 13 "e- "- .c "3 e .'l!. e "-w .5 w .S ""iil 0. il: CD "0 C 0 e en '" u '" <Il ""iil 0. il: ,; u en c "2 c .9 c w a: "0 C G 4 19 42 0 7 21 0 5 54 0 1 2 4 10 3 11 3 4 1 3 7 23 3 8 129 106 • w 13 w "e- "- "5 a :; ~ "' 0 0 '" c ~ w a: 1;; m W 13 w 'e- "- ~ "' 0 0 '" 9 u '" u. ~ 0 I '" m w "- w w 0 @ w '" u 2 f- C w e w "- 0 58 0 58 0 435 0 435 0.96 0.6 6 98 9 107 2 11 3 14 0.87 0 563 0 563 0.8 0 15 0 15 4 56 5 61 6 51 8 59 0.84 0 3 35 2 37 0 18 0 18 4 97 14 111 0.78 1.0 0 38 0 38 25 1475 41 1516 ~-------------------.~------- East Renton SIte Access/148th Avenue SE PM PEAK HOUR Collected Sept. 26, 2001 ~ ro w a. :2 a. 0 0 N EBLT EBT EBRT WBLT WBT WBRT NBLT NBT 92 NBRT SBLT SBT 137 SBRT 229 10/12/012:53 PM " ~ e CO "C C " e '" ~ 0 ro '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 15 0 25 • u w u 'e-o. w 'e-o. m .s m oS W a. a: W a. c 9 a: c w 0 a: 0 '0 '" c c ;Z (3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 34 0 60 -- • "' 13 w e-o. '5 0 f; 3 "' 0 0 N c 1:1 w a: ;; ro LU 13 w ·e a. f; 3 "' 0 0 N {l OJ "- 5 0 I '" OJ w a. m "' ~ CD ;;; ~ 0 2 f- C " <! " fL 0 0 15 15 0 o· 0 0 0.47 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0.77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·0 0 17 . 17 13 141 o • 141 0.86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 198 0 198 0.86 0.0 0 0 26 26 25 339 68 407 n~ __ 1~.c1 ~AYSTOPCONTROLSUM General IIlIulinatlQn 80. "i5ai8Pei ;(J ~ 'es : Street: --sR-9OO ~~ "VOilIiTles a;:;(j"Adiu IMaior street HOillIVROwRa.te.HFR . • Heavv i TvP8 !FIT I 1 L 38 o lonM 0 COrlficIU ration LTR Uo &na.I , street 7 L IVolume 38 :;-;;:-=;pHF 0.80 IHourlv~ 47 ~nt Grade (%) I Approach Storage ,. IRTC ''',ed ,an( Level of I-Ipproacr IItli Il ILaneCo; IvTvPhl "'Ic ~Delay ILOS ,,~~ruaCri LOS HCS2000™ --~-... _. ----'--.--------·----r EB 1" LTR 38 0.04 0.12 8.7 A -- md 2 T 436 -- 1 o 8 T 31 '"OliO und "38. o o N o 1 LTR WB "4 LTR 4 0.00 0.01 8:4 A -- ISite Information )/148TH A VE SE i IKING COUNTY Year 12001 EXISTING , ID . lEAST N I UN INOrthTSouth Street: 148TH A VE 3E IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 64 0.90 71 -- o o 9 R 25 0Jjfj :31 o o Unu,' . 162 0.72 4.32 F fi9.4 F . 4 L 4 0.90 4 o o LTR 10 L 14 0.80 17 o o VVI 5 T 509 0.90 565 -- 1 o SOL 11 T 63 0.80 78 o a N o 1 LTR 6 R 12 0.90 13 -- o o 12 R 27 0.80 33 a o o Southbound 10 101 12 LTR 128 209 0.61 3.52 E 46,2 E Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 \.:Oeneral InJorrrlatlo-i"I Vlnaivst VlaencvlCD. Date P Time Period 11=, 'es~ ---~~ ---~~ ------------- ~AY STOP CONTROL <::11 •••• "'. JMS GSA 10-01-01 PMPEAK Site Information lintel SR-900/148TH AVE SE i KING COUNTY O/-;<b-U r) FYear 2005 WI I HOUT DO" °r:T ~-EASTHcN IN ;outh Street: 148TH AVE SE IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25 , [nt8I ~ " Ie \1OI"Umes ar:iCIAdTustinents [Malor street Eastbound IVolume ' urF~ RT Ch I = ~- ~Sianal ~ [P'ercent Grade (%) [Flared Appruacn ~ized [Lanes F::-;;-on . 1 2 l T 64 483 a -- a LTR 7' L 56 0.80 -69 a -. 51 cf8i5 63 . --0 a N 1 LT"R , an< LeVelot ILane cOnfiQ :::;: 64 0.07 195% queue length . 0.22 ICO nrol"DeIaY A -- f-Ipproacn LOS WB 4' LTR 12 0.01 0.04 8.1 A -- -- 3 R 9a -0-:-9C 108 --.. 0 a 9 R 35 -6~i30 43 0 o NOrihbound -8 LTR 175 ,36 4.86 , 20.57 F 4 L 11 0.90 12 0 0 LTR 10 L 18 0.80 22 0 o 9 HCS2000™ Copyright if) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved ----... _. --_._-.------'---.1,"" 5 T 563 0.90 625 -- 1 j o Southbound 11 T 97 0.80 121 o o N o 1 LTR 6 R 15 0.90 16 -- o a 12 R 38 0.80 47 o a a . Southbound 10 1.1 12 LTR 190 139 1.37 12.21 264.3 F 264.3 F Version 4.1 [) ___ l_.I,;l -;:w&"AY STOP CONTROL SUMMARW" ljene~ dCo. Ifniei i IJMS IGSA rtO-Ql-01 1PMPE.1J( IJehf",e Volumes and AdiUStiiients ~ 'Volume 58- . Factor. PHF 0.90 IRT'" i , 'nnO a a:t:iOn LTR Sianal . street IVolume ~PHF -~IU~ I Grade (%) 1m Cilannelized i L 61 0.80 '. Lanes -() IconficiUration ~ :i=~~of:,erv EB . IIVlovemem --:--1 Iv (vph) 64 I· .953 ~/c 195% queu~le";gth IContro~ 9.0 ILOS , Delay -- I LOS -- [Site Information . :tion 'sR-90uII4IJ I HAVE SE ~Uli KING COUNTY . "-"b-U I) i 'i'8ar 2005 WITH-,CT 2 T 435 0.90 483 -- 1 a 8 T 59 0.80 73 a a N a LTR- LTA 15 986 0.05 8.7 A -- md IPrOl8CtTD EAST HtN roN ISouth Street: 148TH AVE SE IStudy Period (hrs)' 0.25 . 3 4 R l 107 14 0.90 0.90 118 15 --a Uc .. o a a g- . R 37 0.80 46 a a IWru,uuUf,u 8 LTR 195 F LTR 10 L 18 0.80 . 22 a a . 9 5 T 563 0.90 625 -- 1 a 11 T 111 0.80 138 a a N a md 6 R 15 0.90 16 . -- a a 12 R 38 0.80 47 a a 1 a LTR . Southbound 10 11, LTR 207 130 1.59 14.85 359.9 F 359.9 F 12 HCS2000™ , Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings • , 3: SR-900 & 148th Ave SE (2005 WITH PROJECT) , :/ ~ -( --+ Baseline Garrysbell-st51 • ""-'\ t ".. PM PEAK· 10/12/2001 '-.. + ../ Synchro 5 Report Page 1 ,------------------------------------------------------- Lanes, Volumes, Timiilgs • • 3: SR-900 & 148th Ave SE (2005 WITH PROJECT) PM PEAK 10/12/2001 Intersection Summary Baseline Garrysbell-st51 -. Synchro 5 Report Page 2 HCM Unsignalized lritersecti.apacity Analysis 3: SR-900 & 148th Ave SE (2005 WITHOUT PROJECT) -• t PM PEAK. 1/2/2002 MQyft'ffi'@i\li~~~e_Ej3§jll'llllJ;llilfi!W:\~I?J,tfit@lilmWIil!ilil'Jl~I3.!dfNI!liIitlrilI?Ji!.$J2.11f.i:l11;r,,"'!ilill.B~ Lane Configurations 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ §!gjj'i6;~ii~DIr~~?1!_~'l!fv,@.e"l;;.£_B~~~_i[SiQ~}1i1 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ~J!;11;\'lj!~).iI;eRm"'2.~.'[!lIl6?J[Jj\~~§II~1mt4fk1!'1j9,~i§_1,9;ti_~ Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 iHf;)Th"rlt~]flow&Menlti)D~~~B.1iiil.M!0i',i;1'~IIF[t2]:rJii!6"2'm.l6M6~'i!':!55l!;!'~;illl20Il),:f":05;~1,1 ~i<h'",""'"",,,i;:~ ...... 1o:.>0i ~l=.:.t, ~,..... ~"''\~Il ~'-"'" Jill.:i;.m,w"", . . u-L'1 .. ,~"J.!lAli;i. ~ .......... Pedestrians , .li\ cM capacity (vell/h) 'llJi~i:!'1\ti0il\«I!'1tQ'e~'~''''''''EB~!!'IIiViJBIi!j'''''t,1\l1iffii;w.""sEldi1i)jj~\l';;,I·W'~''''1lmIi!k''Ml'-il.' ,W."""''''1.lt.\ i'~!"'i·M .. "tif;'" t-~-",._,._. __ L't,1.!,:"_Il_:.t~_~iir,$,~L~ __ :..<'!_:..w.L". ' ..... ~!~_ !l.t/;"H ~_IIHJ:~f;~:~'''IJ; ... ~;;:·~f': ...,"'f,'£~';:.r~':~t!;..:.~.~~,_:..." . .n' ~.-k..'!itl"L JkIlc.:~,r:,,",,~.:J:i Volume Total 642 640 154 166 if' ~ !~~. WYI Baseline Garrysbell-st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 HeM Unsignalized Inters~cti.apacity Analysis 6: SE 116th St & 148th Ave SE (2001 EXISTING) <I--• PM PEAK 10/12/2001 M~lt~~l~p!~\~t~~·~L2i'~i_tiJ~~~~~!fit:j·!: ?4~H)m~lb~;,;':;.;tP:, ,.:1t,~.:~'l:!i;(.I~r!\4~~,:I7R~~::Wt~y,~r;;~~1;m Median storage veh) /Z@J,jt.0~WIJ!ili'@jg1?1g.L!i~I.~~g'('.QIbIlifJj!:J;:~~~!~'zt:!~II;;'!!.lJi: .iiE'l1t:3lg~~~;;~~\~ vC1 1 coni vol 'H~i . Baseline Garrysbeli-st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Iniersecti.apacity Analysis e: SE 116th 8t & 148th Ave 8E (2005 WITHOUT PROJECT) -• t PM PEAK 10/12/2001 M@~)n~J5l""4_'§!1!._l;fJjfd~.F.lii\~t~_u;,'1WJ3jl"!I!WJ~ffililfl'l];!~lf~I2_J2§I1.!_t;!!!!II'!i.I$..eITd$]:lffl Lane Configurations 4> 4> 4> 4> ~jgru~:RBtr§!@\;'tt;B1~*j!i;t~~~i~~!i:~!£i.J~:%JIfo;~~~~W1F,t~i\1 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ro~~Ji?~.eBii1[rm2Wim1,~i¥~~?,0Itll~a1~1[8~lllil'i1r7j)\~~~ Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 M!Y;,fl~W~~WJ)'l@)B~~'I:ili'~WJ~lliIf!l£B~11i~,jj]ilj~'G~~mlili'!]§i_~,lb8,~~t~~E Pedestrians [illl,ilw,iaJ'l!ltl~~t~j~11·F,l,i;l¥i"\I~J¥&~:JI,lk&J.I~i:'t~IIl!t:tt;i~iSi~jt:il!IiId~iiAr,;;;;*3fii!hl Walking Speed (ft/s) l?,~i£effitlBloa~a'gj~\t'ii;?~\\5}i!!ti\iii&~ail!!iiiIJiiil':,t;:·.;;i' ;M, t;'~:l':i~,';] .~il¥i4j';4\~~ :1' ,'~l:;r,;fu!1~ ,'Ij;~;.i: ;,', ,!,:~ Right turn flare (yeh) N1~~8~~W:et:r.;W~i:H~il!~~IIiII!'~~i>lwrn~Il!JJ~Wm:\.1IB;:lf!il1lB{!!@1_~~1U Median storage yeh) ~l[5piIililffiY(l]L·"'lqi""·,,""~1""~~""1!$""~""O""2j li111&;gj_~~iiJII!i~l\!'!lilll~?,~.~aJ]iglllmlli@tt~~}~i~liil~ yC1 1 conf yol Baseline Garrysbell'st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersectiaapacity Analysis 6: SE 116th St & 148th Ave SE (2005 WITH PROJECT) - Baseline Garrysbell-st51 • t PM PEAK 10/12/2001 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 , 1. I-lCM Unsignalized Intersectiaapacity Analysis 9: Site Access & 148th Ave SE (2005 WITH PROJECT) t • PM PEAK. 10/12/2001 fYiP1&m.gil!~~EJ3.~eF,l.!!lS@_J2IrIil!!lliil~ __ ~ •• r~.!.11IjWf~Df.'i'I Lane Configurations V 4' r. ~l§i'iL~~~_!?m~~"'to"'.pm"""'SNt'!!k~p;"._""""""".""~,,,,, """". """';""'·""'Wli",,~ .... """"',."". ""."".~"""""""""""c"".·"""" .. """', ,!iii Volume (veh/h) 15 10 17 141 198 . 26 .!il§!ki8~IDllJ.ii$ilt~_1iI.W9~211~m:?mlliJ192 • .&2~~~~ Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 16 11 18 153 215 28 iruf.~'f1i!@m~ltttflIl1lt1.jll!IlI'I[:illj;\1i1I!!1rll@~I.§e.il\~~'Il.,illlif.!!Iil~ Volume Total 27 172 243 , ~: Baseline Garrysbell-st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 " !, • • GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: To: August 8,2001 Bruce Whittaker King County DDES From: Gary A, Norris, PB- Subject: Road Improvements Cam West Plat 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, W A 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Project Name: East RentonlIntelkofer- Shinnan Property Project No,:_' __ P: ___ T: __ _ CamWest is proposing the development of a 68 unit single-family plat on 19,57 acres located at 12013 148th Avenue SE The plat will have approximately 650 feet of frontage on 148 1h Avenue SE 148'h Avenue SE is a two-lane arterial with a 6-8 foot shoulder on the west side and a 3-5 foot shoulder on the east side, The roadway maintains a continually increasing downgrade from the south property line of the proposed plat to the north property line, The percent grade at the south property line is 2.4% whereas at the north property line it is 4,6 %, North of the north property line, the percent grade increases dramatically to 9 percent with a grade break 50 to 75 feet north of the site, This change in grade creates a potential substandard stopping sight distance (SSD) condition according to the King County Road Standards (KCRS, 1993) for southbound vehicles on 148'" Avenue SE approaching the site, Need for Road Improvements 01' Variance for Stopping Sight Distance This memorandum responds to King County's preliminary request for CamWest Development to reconstruct 148'h Avenue SE along tlie plat frontage and to the north of the proposed plat, or obtain a variance to meet KCRS for stopping sight distance, This issue was first raised in 1999 with Harbour Homes, the previous project applicant for the property, and was raised again in a meeting between the CamWest Development Design Team and King County staff on Thursday April 19, 2001. • CamWest believes there is a question of whether there is an actual sight distance problem under' , the King County Road Standards, A substandard SSD condition arises under the KCRS because of an administrative decision to use a design speed of 10 miles per hour (mph) over the posted limit, although this definition of design speed is not specified by the KCRS.' Utilizing a 40 mph design speed (the 85-percentile speed on 148'h Avenue SE based upon a recent speed study) results in an acceptable SSD, Assuming it, is appropriate to use a 45 mph design speed, the substandard SSD condition is preexisting and unrelated to the impacts of the proposed plat. Reconstructing 14Slh Avenue SE to meet SSD would be extremely burdensome and cost prohibitive, The KCRS provide that the extent of frontage and off-site improvements must be tied to the impacts of the proposed development, as required by Washington law, The proposed plat did not create and will not exacerbate the SSD condition on its frontage road. Additionally, there are no known safety issues associated with the present grade, Therefore, any requirement to regrade this roadway to improve the SSD would not be consistent with the KCRS and Washington law. e:\2001 projects\01·002.04 east renton\camwesteast renton tinal g. norris memO.doc 10/15/01 (j) ,. " Memorandum October 15, 2001 Page 2 • • Because requiring these improvements would exceed the County's authority, a variance is unnecessary. Existing Stopping and Entering Sight Distance Conditions Garry Struthers Associates (GSA) performed a field study of stopping and entering sight distance . on April 18,2001. The proposed access to the plat at that time was approximately 120 feet south of the north property line. The SSD at that access point and its intersection with 148'h Avenue SE was observed to be 318 feet for southbound vehicles and 425+ feet for northbound vehicles. The posted speed limit on 148'h Avenue SE is 35 mph. The KCRS does not stipulate the design speed to be used to calculate SSD. King County has administratively chosen to use posted speed plus 10 mph for design speed. Based upon a 45 mph design speed, SSD of 425 feet would be required for northbound vehicles and 400 feet for southbound vehicles under the KCRS. (The increase of 25 feet in the SSD for the northbound direction is the result of a correction for downgrade specified in KCRS 2.12. The KCRS does not identify an adjustment to reduce SSD for the upgrade condition.l Adding 10 mph to the posted speed to calculate design speed increases the required SSD by ISO feet over what would·be required for a 35mph design speed. If a 35 mph design speed is used then the required SSD per the KCRS is 250 feet in the southbound direction and 265 feet in the northbound direction. It should also be noted that the KCRS adopted the highest value stopping distance for a 45 mph design speed of 400 feet, established by AASHTO. AASHTO is the agency that establishes national standards, including SSD, upon which the KCRS is based. According to AASHTO, the assumed speed for a 45 mph design speed ranges between 40 and 45 mph, with a calculated SSD ranging from 325 feet to 400 feet. Based on a recent speed study on 148'h Avenue SE in the vicinity of the proposed plat, the 85- percentile speed is 40 mph.2 .The computed SSD for 40 mph is 318.7 feet and 325 feet when rounded for design. This suggests that a SSD of325 feet wouldbe·adequate in this section of 148'h Avenue SE. There is currently 318 feet of SSD available 100 feet south of the north property line that increases heading south as the percent grade decreases. Additionally, the KCRS, unlike AASHTO, does not adjust the required SSD to reflect the reduced stopping distance required for the upgrade condition (southbound approach to the plat). Since the SSD deficiency on 148 th Avenue is a result of the vertical curve to the north of the site with a downgrade to the north of approximately 10 percent the average running speed should be used in the SSD calculation for southbound vehicles. According to the recent speed study, the average ' running speed is 33.7 mph. This results in a SSD of212 feet. Therefore, applying the upgrade correction per AASHTO analysis procedures to this situation results in more than sufficient SSD at the originally proposed site access intersection and across the. remainder of the plat to the south. Adequate SSD may also exist to the north property line but has not been validated by field observation. . 1 According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book (1984), page 143, "Design Speed is used in calculating downgrade corrections, average running speed in calculating upgrade corrections." 2 The speed study was taken from 12:00 AM Tuesday May 7 to 12:00 AM Wednesday May 8, 2001. The counters were stationed 50 to 75 feet north of the north property line. e:\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwesteast renton final g. norris memo. doc 10/15/01 m '" ! " " Memorandum October 15, 2001 Page 3 • • An analysis of the entering sight distance (ESD) at the initially proposed access indicated that the project would not meet the KCRS required entering sight distance (ESD) for vehicles approaching from the north (the critical ESD movement), In the field study of sight distance discussed above, 390 feet of ESD was observed at the proposed site access compared to the KCRS requirement of 620 feet To provide the 620 feet ofESD, CamWest will relocate the site access intersection with 148 th Avenue SE to the south property line, ,At this location, acceptable ESD can be achieved. SSD is also acceptable at this location using a 45 mph design speed. Scope of Imp~ovements Needed to Achieve SSD Based upon 4Smph Design Speed Changing the grade of SE 148,h Avenue SE to provide 425 feet of stopping sight distance along the entire frontage of the proposed plat would require lowering the profile of 148,h Avenue SE for at least 700 feet and possibly much more, This improvement would necessarily extend beyond the plat frontage. Cuts of 2 \/, to nearly 4 feet would be necessary for over 300 feet Several hundred feet of a 12-inch water main would need to be dug up and lowered. At least two power poles would need to be relocated, water meters, dry utilities, ditches and culverts along this road reconstructed and several driveway approaches to 148,h Avenue SE rebuilt The areas where the cuts would be greatest would probably need low retaining walls or rockeries at the edge of the right-of-way in order to accommodate the drainage ditch on the side of the street opposite the proposed project Some of this work would require easements from the abutting property owners, These improvements would be extremely costly and burdensome for the proposed plat Furthermore, although limited survey data is currently available to make a definitive assessment, it appears that it may be necessary to reconstruct the SE 116,h Place!148 th Avenue SE intersection to meet the reconstructed 148,h Avenue SE centerline profile. ' King Couuty Road Standards Governing Frontage and Off-site Improvements The 1993 King County Road Standards addressing frontage and off-site road improvements require these improvements to be based upon the impacts of the proposed development To the extent improvements are necessitated by the development impacts, they must be done in conformance with the KCRS. These standards are set out in Section 1.03 Responsibility to Provide Roadway Improvements: A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve 'such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards, The extent of off-site improvements to serVing roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of , the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency , B. Any land development abutting a'"d impacting existing roads shall improve the frontage of those roads in accordance with these Standards. The extent of improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency. (Emphasis added.) CamWest's attorney has advised them that the balded language set out in these two provisions' reflect Washington law regarding governmental authority to require roadway improvements as a condition of approving development proposals. Washington law limits the. extent of required improvements to those that are directly related to the impact of proposed development. Even if the impact test is met, any required improvements must be proportional to the impacts of the development. (See Benchmark Land Company v. City of Battle Ground, 94 Wash. App. 537 (1999).) e:\2001 projects\01-002.04 east renton\camwesteast renton final g. norris memO.doc 10/15/01 U) , , , .. • Memorandum October IS, 2001 Page 4 • • It order to detennine whether Cam West can be required to provide SSD improvements across the entire plat frontage and beyond, the impacts of the proposed plat and the costs of such improvements must be assessed. (It should be noted that CamWest, as part of the plat development process, would provide frontage improvements on 148'h Avenue SE to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks.) The SSD issues associated with this area of 148'h Avenue SE are preexisting and completely unrelated to the impacts of the proposed CamWest plat. There is no data that suggests the SSD condition on 148'h Avenue SE has created a safety problem or has significantly affected operational conditions 3 _ As discussed previously, road improvements to improve the existing SSD would be extremely costly and burdensome. Requiring the plat to fix the existing SSD condition when it did not create the condition, and when there is no safety issue associated with the condition would violate Washington law. Therefore, there is no legal basis to require frontage and off-site improvements on 148'h Avenue SE to improve SSD. Need for Variance A variance is unnecessary since Staff does not have the legal authority to require frontage and off- site improvements of the magnitude discussed in this memo. A variance would be needed only if the County had the authority to require the improvements for which a variance is sought. Conclusion .Based on the foregoing information, we respectfully request you determine that the proposed development should not be required to reconstruct the 148'h Avenue SE along the project frontage and off-site to correcta pre-existing SSD condition, and that a variance is not needed to meet the King County Road Standards. 3 The most pertinent factor applicable to the SSD standard wonld be imp,act on safety. To address this issue, the latest available three-year accident history was obtained from King County Department of Transportation which included the period between January I, 1996 and December 31, 1999, According to the data provided, three accidents have occurred in the vicinity of the plat between 1996 and 1999, South of the proposed plat, at the SE 124th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection, there was one accident in 1996 and one in 1997: both involving a vehicle striking a fixed object off the roadway. North of the plat. at the SE 116th Streetl148th Avenue SE intersection, one accident occurred in 1999 involving a vehicle colliding with a bicyclist. None of the accidents were related to sight distance conditions across the plat frontage,) 9:\2001 projects\01-D02.04 east renton\camwesteast fenton final g. norris memo.doc 10/15/01 U) ~ ' . . , • KEY: Below curve, [35 storage not needed for capacity, >iJ Above curve, further analysis recommended, I I II. ) L 7Y ) II V \Y/ \-111'1-1 ~~) /y ~ ~ V \Y~ ~ V~ / ~ / ~ '...--- 25 20 15 10 5$ % Total DHV Turning Left (single turning movement) ('I) DHV is total volurne from both directions. (2) Speeds are posted speeds, ' Left-Turn Storage Guidelines (Two-Lane, Unsignalizedl Figure 910-98 Intersections At Grade Page 910-18 English Version 1200 1100 1000 900 800 ~ > I 0 ro -0 f- 700 600 -d- 500 :f II '" N. <:S::l lfJ 400 CD -......... N (Yj,r:: :;g 1\ Ii '> h:: 300\..\) =t: V) (:::\ ::J 0 ~ -= ~ <t:" ~ T t:i -<: ~ \() .Design Manual May 2001 -, ~ -< W C>l <t: ;; ~I sa ~ <: ...J 2 S>l. ~ t w .J •• • • WASHINGTON K.C. D.D.E.S. T R 0 U T K.C. DOES. October 15, 2004 On June 14,2004 Washington Trout performed a watertype/stream classification survey in Renton, W A on King County parcels # I 023059004 and # I 023059390 (designated Parcel A and Parcel B, respectively). These parcels, hereafter referred to collectively as the Survey Area, were surveyed for Northward Construction, Bellevue, W A. The Survey Area is located near the headwaters of Honey Creek, a tributary to May Creek, in Township 23N, Range 05E, Section \0 (Maps I, 2). Honey Creek enters the Survey Area through a culvert at a fence line and old access road at the southern boundary of Parcel B. The stream flows northerly through a large wetland before exiting Parcel A through a 2 ft diameter corrugated round metal culvert under SE 116 1h St. (Map 2). Downstream of the Survey Area, Honey Creek continues in a northerly direction before making a sweeping curve to the southwest, and then to the northwest under NE Sunset Blvd. Honey Creek continues on to its confluence with May Creek (approximately 12,800 feet downstream of the Survey Area), which is classified by the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) as a Type-2 stream with documented, significant fish use. Lower Honey Creek near its confluence with May Creek is classified Type 5 (WAC 222-16-031) (Map I). Washington Trout's formal survey was limited to an approximately 1400-foot stream reach from the culvert at SE 116 1h St. (Map 2: WPTOO I) to the southern fence line (WPT006). The Washington Trout field crew was accompanied by Mr. Garet Munger, representing Northward Construction. Executive Summary No fish were observed in the Survey Area during the course of this survey. Consequently, the stream within the Survey Area meets the criteria for a King County Class 2 without salmonids. However, in an effort to present a rigorous and objective scientific assessment of salmonid presence, Washington Trout recommends that the following factors be considered when finalizing the classification of the Survey Area: I) The number and passability of culverts on Honey Creek downstream from the Survey Area are unknown. Based upon surveys conducted in similar suburban watersheds, however, it is likely that anthropogenic barriers to fish passage currently inhibit the migration of fish between the Survey Area and the known fish-bearing waters of May Creek. Classification of the Survey Area, therefore, should take into account the potential for future repair or removal of such blocking culverts. MAIN fBlE COpy Exhibit No. ~l.....: I(:::!..l)::.-_-._ Item No. W62.€~m Received 3 . 'Z.g • t>'T- King County Hearing Examiner • • 2) The USDAINOAA Drought Monitor (http://www.drought.unl.eduldm/monitor.html) for the period during the survey and for the five weeks prior to the date of the survey identifies Western Washington as presenting "abnormally dry" conditions (weeks of May II, May 18, June I, June 8) or "moderate drought" conditions (week of May 25th). Given this fact, and that the survey area is within the headwaters of a small watershed, it is possible that the observed absence of fish was the result of abnormal hydrologic patterns. 3) The hydrology, riparian condition, and channel morphology observed during the survey supported the assumption of perennial flow during normal (non-drought) water years. This assumption can be confirmed or refuted by revisiting the site seasonally during a normal water year. Fish Presence Washington Trout evaluated salmonid presence/absence per the WDNR protocol described in Section 13 of the Forest Practice Board Manual. This assessment was conducted using a Smith Root Model12A Backpack Electofishing Unit set at 400V, G-7. Electrofishing was performed in stream habitats likely to hold salmonids (i.e. areas of open water). At II :00 am the Washington Trout crew began surveying upstream from the inlet of the culvert at SE I 16 th St. The water temperature was 14.5 degrees Celsius. One crew member electrofished walking upstream while the second walked slightly downstream of the electrofisher to net any affected fish. No fish of any species was observed. This finding, however, must be interpreted in the light of official drought conditions declared for Western Washington during May and June 2004 (USDAINOAA Drought Monitor). Since fish distribution is directly impacted by low flow conditions, the results of this survey cannot definitively support a claim for fish absence within the Survey Area. Physical Characteristics The Washington Trout crew observed very low flow conditions and poor channel development within the Survey Area. The surveying therefore consisted primarily of locating areas of open water within the large wetland complex for electro fishing. The Survey Area included large areas of saturated, hydric soils and large areas of open water varying in depth from 0.1 ft to 1.5 ft. Channel formation was associated with the culvert on the southern boundary of Parcel B where there was a 2.5 ft channel for a distance of approximately 145 feet before widening and entering the wetland (Figure I). There also appeared to be a channel at the outlet of the culvert at SE 116 th St. where the stream exits Parcel A. The wetland width varied between 60 and 240 feet; wetted width varied between 0 and 80 feet. These wetland areas were scattered throughout the Survey Area, but were larger at the northern end of Parcel A near SE I 16 th St. A large area of open water 1.0-1.5 ft. in depth was observed at WPT002 (Figure 2), and a putative perennial pool was observed just upstream of WPTOO I (Figure 3). Gradients were measured using a clinometer. Average gradient of the stream/wetland across the Survey Area was 0.75%. Vegetation and riparian cover consisted of dense willow, red ozier dogwood, rushes and sedges, skunk cabbage and other typical wetland plants. 2 • • Stream Classification Currently, WDNR classifies Honey Creek (identified as 'Honeydew Creek' on Forest Practice Base Maps) as Type 9 (unclassified). With the proviso about prevailing drought conditions mentioned above, Washington Trout classifies Honey Creek within Parcels A and B, at the time of the survey, as a Class 2 stream without salmonid use (50-foot buffer) as per King County Rules and Regulations (DOES Chapter 21 A.24.360). On maps provided to Washington Trout by Mr. Munger, the area surveyed includes regions of King County "Wetland Type 2", also referred to in King County Code as "Wetland Class 2", which requires a 50-foot buffer (DOES Chapter 2IA.24.320). It is important to note that the Survey Area also appears to meet WDNR criteria for a Type A Wetland (WAC 222-16-035) requiring a protective Wetland Management Zone up to 100 ft. in width (WAC 222-30-020 (7)(a)). Specifically, the wetland complex is (i) greater than 0.5 acre in size, including acreage of open water where the water is completely surrounded by the wetland; and (ii) is associated with at least 0.5 acre of ponded or standing open water present for at least 7 consecutive days between April I and October I. Washington Trout believes that the surveyed wetland is the perennial water source for Honey Creek and that all waters downstream of this perennial source should be classified as WDNR Type-4 water. The newly suggested Type-4 classification is indicated in Maps I and 2. Eliot Drucker Washington Trout Director of Science and Research (Physiology) 3 • • Figure 1. Channel entering wetland complex on Parcel B. View downstream from WPT005 (Map 2). Figure 2. Large wetland area with water depth 1.0-1 .5 ft. below surface vegetation (WPT002 , Parcel A). 4 ------------ • • Figure 3. Typical wetland vegetation and putative perennial pool (at left). View upstream from WPTOOI on Parcel A. 5 • Map 1 • Honey Creek and Confluence with May Creek S05 Lake Washington S S 07 S 08 Legend ""'--May Creek ""-Honey Creek T-9 WDNR Stream Type ""-Honey Creek T-5 WDNR Stream Type Honey Creek?<l WDNR Stream Type ""'-Wetland D Section Boundary King County Parcel .vv---King County Stream o WDNR Hydrology S 09 S 16 S 03 t\o{\e~ Oee'f... S10 S26 S35 S02 ( <t -.;j- ~ S 11 S14 _IC:=--=::J' Feet 1,500 3,000 o N A DJprojectsiStreamtype_Renton_zoomout.mxd, July 2, 2004 • Map2 • T23N R05E S10 Legend Honey Creek 'ii'c41 WDNR Stream Type __ Honey Creek T-9 WDNR Stream Type --Wetland D Section Boundary Gl King County Parcel ~ King County Stream o WDNR Hydrology o GPS Point _=_=, Feet o 500 1,000 N A D:/projectsiStreamtype_Renton.mxd. July 2, 2004