HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscI •
... p.s-autLT
LA\'\clsc.111v~ f '""
-
LANU~._;At-'t: NU t t::S:
LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION DOClJMENTSCONSliiT of' PLANTING AND IRRIGATION PLANS. DETAILS AND SPECIFIC-AT IONS
2 THE $COPE OF WORK INCLUDED IN THESE DOCUMENTS CONSIS':S Of
LANDSCAPE SITE PREPARATIONS. FiNISHGRAOl"JG. PLANTING, AND MULCHING
IRRIGAliON CONSISTS OF SLEEVING. TRENCHING ESTP.BLISHING /. PCINT OF CONNECTION ANO INST ALLING A COMPLFTE AND 100'};
OPERATIONA~ AUTOMATIC IRRiGA,TION WHICtl PROVIDES 100;; COVERAGE OF ALL NEWF'LANTINGAREAS
RELEVANT DRA'MNGS.
SEE ARCHITECT URAL QRAWNGS REGARDING BVILDING. SllE. AND CODE COMPLIANCE
SEE CIV1L DRl<WINGS RELATED TO HAROSCAPC SIT[ FEATURES. GR",DING ANO DRAINAGE
SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS l 1 0 AND L-2 0 RELATED TO PLANTING. LAYOUT DETAILS. AND PLANT UST
SEE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION L 3 0. 4 0 4 1 RELATED TO IRRIGATION LAYOUT. DETAILS AND SCHEDULES
THf lANDSCAPE~RRIGAT;ON CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EXAMiNATIOf< OF £X1STING AND
NEW CONSTRUCTION AND VERIFICATION THAT THESE CONDITIONS ARE IN CONFORMANCE 1/lllH
APPROVED DESIGN SUFFICIENTLY Er..OUG>-1 TO PROCEED INITIATiON OF WORK SIGNIFIES
ACCEPl ANCE: OF EXISTING CONSITIONS
~ THE LJ\NDSCAPEIIRRIG/..TION CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR NOTIFICATION OF THE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REQUIRED SITE INSPECTION AND PROCEEDING WITH EACH
SUBSEQUENT PHASE OF WORK ONLY AFTER REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF WORK COMPLETED TO
DATE
;::, SITE CONTEXT MAP ALL PROPOSED U..NDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION SHALL MEET OR EXCESO THE CITY OF RENTON REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPING ANO
SHALL BE IN AC(;SRDANCE 1/',/lTH APl"ROVED CUPAND Bf' PERMIT DESIGN AC_~~..: X P ''-..__/ SCALE. NIT, 1-T-
----__ ffiQPJ;BrrJ30UNDARY
I/• ~ ::===::::::===:.=======:::::===
:;,,._,N'>tr PACIFIC MAP\.E ·... ,
1
.
RHODODENDRON SPP 9'-_.---~",
o~, •• .?~...:_ ------_•·:___---==-----._.::.=---------------~~-
HYBRID~HO~N._DRO~· , . , , ----:·-y-!!_r~1 1t
::::4---~~-/; I
, ___ ----,
,./
_ .. r---1-
c,, ><
CARPI NUS CAAOLINIANP.
AMERICAN HORNBEAM
<e,V(j J--------._.......__ ::;1::Mt'l::KVIH:l::N'> 'ii: (,.-,;;. /' ...:,,~~-~~"·~~
Q'<"" ·(
CERCIS CANADEN\,IS "ALM"
WHITE REDBUD \.
EUONYM_US FORTU)',IEl\:.CQ..ORA TUS' _
Vl'INTERCREEPER -~
TAXUSMEDIA ' IRISH YEW ...___,_ --1-----"'--,---._, _fQRNUS S 'KELSEYII" ---:"
~ARF REDTWIG DOG\NOOD ....___ __ _
HEl:,l{:TOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS
BLUE'o.l\ T GRASS
' ENTAl.lS "EMERALD GREEN'
PLAY AREA
CORNUS NUTTALLII VENUS"
PACIFIC DOGWOOD
RHODODENDRON SPP
HYBRID RHODODENDRON
·-,
"\
' I
'
0 i
\
~---.
.)le_
#~
----,/
DRIVE AISLE
~.-/ '\ . ; , .. ,, I
II Ti,.~
\. / ·, __ _,., PARKING
0
DRIVE AISLE
Ca/
.,,--,.
( it, \
....... ~.--
.------.
~~~ii.
-------
VACCINllJM CORYMBOSUM "SUNSHINE E!LUE"
HIGHBUSH BLUEBERR'i"
STEWART IA MONADELPHA
TALL STEWARTIA
HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS
BLUE OA1 <.,1-1,v;;:,
,,~ \~--
. _ ... _,L' PARKING ' :'
' ~'/!, , -"' 'I ..llL_a___ 'L1) .
; EiC
ffi.,_
~-,-r'f;l;_.,·1r .o; "w '" Cw 'Zj
t:~'1 j
'. 0 STORAGE -~-, I/
T BUILDING ~
/'.r-L pmcii/>
"LJN'>MINt r,uJt ''"s, '--. , .'.,_ ,,, ', .-. ~-. ,'•,/ HIGHBUSH BLUEBERRY -¢'>-_ -.. 1 ' ~ ; , / 1
HELICTOTRICHON '\ / _ __)., ,,,-•. ,;"' I fi,~--=-1 ~11 , I \.1
' I I ' I •',1 I '\ ll ·""• I'
"t. _/ N 1·· :1 1, 1 -·_ ·. __ ,_·· I ;_._·_· I' '·1 ..... ,_/ I
I I)<· 1"f·,
·1 "1·~.l ''I I . . "'-
CORNUS S "KELSEYII .h'
DWARF REDTVIIIG DOGWOOD .fl
TAXUSBACCl',TAREPANOE.NS /
SPREADING ENGLISH YEW
BERBERIS THUNBERGII
"ORANGE ROCKET'
ORANGE ROCKET BARBERRY
'I-_-,--~7"--jC-a-/F, -----. -,. -~l,!_~U.~. T_RICO_L_O_!i
' '-. HYDROSEED HYDR_OSEED LAWN '· ..., SEEPLANTLiST ____ . ,-....
~ I ' --'--'. y __ "~_" __ .•. s,~~SO<CDi,G } c==:::::::____ .; , ENTRY
' Ji ~ ' ' '· ' -~ , ~ -~' "' 'DREN'S 1N'smu~~"''"'
··~
"'~·"'-.:.
I l-:..---
', ',, ---1--+----',
CORNUS NUTTALUI VENUS'
PACIFIC DOGWOOD
'"
/
EUONYMUS FORTUNE! "COLORATUS" I
//
/
..... ffi:).Offf,
LA',""
.. ~
RUBU~T:~~i~E GHIL BUILDING ::;;,CROPHYLLUS
CREEPIN YEW PINE LEUCOTHOE AXILLARIS
~ coASTLEIJCofHOE
/ / LONICERAPILEATA.
/ . / PRIVlT HONEYSUCKLE ___ _ _ CORNUS SERI CEA. "KELSEYI'
// / -----DWARF RED-TWIG DOG'NOOO
4 _ _.---ACER PALMATUM ATROPURPUREUM 'f' ~', , R~n.l~<LF L.O.<
[
PARTHENOCISSUS TRICUSPIOATA
---) ,// BOSTON IVY 3' 0.C @WALL
GIi.REX PENDULA
\' ,.-/ '"''""""' """"'""
., __ ·-·· •... ANESEMAPl.E
~-:---------,, -----------------LL~=--:_ lJR1114Nf1,y -
QI· =-~" ·---::::-:::-------. ----e..
• ------d ----------
------
WINTER,;;a&a-ER
' -• -,...>~MATISMONTANA
/ EVERGR~EN jrLEMATIS
, /I---
_, ';'---
.,.. ----l
------=~/------
-------DRIVE AISLE
tct•IJCE.RAPILEATA
,·,.::::.::_
•
EUONYMUS FORTUNE! "COLORATUS'
WINTERCREEPER
CERCIS C.ANADENSIS 'ALW.'
Vl'l11TE REDBUD
----------
--JI ---.
r ------BoNsoNRo.L
___ PRIVIT1iSNE;YSUCKLE
~. :----~;~~~~~~~~~~r: LONICERAPILEATA
PRIVIT HONEYSUCKLE
~cf"
lh"""''
::':...~"":c:c...._~ /
J u---~;:;:---Ji
I
;sou,,_,
I
I
(-~--..) LANDSCAPE PLAN
\ __ j SCALE: k, -= 1·-a··
---ic
f!i fij
ic"' CJ f!:
O CO co
---
LEUCOTHOE AXILLARI.S
PARKING COAST LEUCOTHOE ADEN SIS "ALBA ,f""
--~'"'" .,-~, '.-. _-. ---··, ~._,. DBUD •C --.. --· -h; ," ', ., •• ,~
~
,,~------___ RU8U~G
1
:~~L~ _ ~-· •• :_,,·:.r. I·--~,._-~_ -----------< -_ c>eeei,, ' , , , , ___ _
'· --~ ----L -·------------------. .. --------------. --\c::::::,,;-:._::_:: -~-,;------. -----/-I -. -----------..,_..,,:\___ ------------, ~" ·=--==---I
----:·----~ ----------------"'"'"'G_,.__ I I -----. ----~------'""' ------------,_ ----. .-;;;:;,_ . -,.. _____ '<-''°"''% --.•• .,._.._ ---=~ SPRe,o'" r::: :--,r-:, .::)
LONICERA PILEATA
PRIVIT HONEYSUCKLE
BERBERIS THUNBERGII
"CRIMSON PYGMY
CRIMSON PYGMY BARBERRY
LAVANDULAAN§U_§TIFOLIA
ENGLISH LAVENDER
l.-1 0
L-20
l-1.0
L-4 0
LANDSCAPE PLAN.--~-·
LANDSCAPE DETAILS AND PLANT LIST
IRRIGATION PLAN
IRRIGATION DETAiLS
L-4 1 IRRIGATION DETAILS
" i
"
integra:ed site design
PROJECT
ClilLDREN'S INSl ITIJTf:
2640 BENSON ROAD SO.JT~
RENTON, WAS>-iit,JGTON
CLIENT.
CHILOREN"S INSTITUTE
2640 BENSON ROAO SOUTr-
RENTON. WASHINGTON
/;;,[ ,::.--.. 1:'~.Jl~_o\\
\~~1]'f~) ..... _ ~-:·:,/
~-
REVIS!ONS
COO!SfhkiriO>. x, "'iJG.--Y
()..':>C:JME"TS
A.S-81J,lT 2e:,,..m.rn
0".)CUMf.S:15
LANDSCAPE PLAN -
SITE AND ENTRIES
L-1.0
:::.:.r:~.i. ~;..,;;,:~:.:,; ···"
4f -
•
,, -. _ ..
,
,,
)
0J + , CONTINUOUS OUTER ROW AT "JC" f[CT ON
• 0) ij, , CENTER l-, "JC" FEET SEIB/I.CK FROM EDGE OF
(
, .;, E, , 6 ;r, . , PI..ANTlt;G BED wm-l TRIANGULAR SPACING
f;!;};,/?f'.};J!,f'.0!' ',. INSIDE BED TY!'
I e~;W/!-fU{\f/.1/f '-~ EDGEOFPLANllNG!ICDORPAVEMENT
I ~::):: ;;;~2S/~}~~-~-'.B '·"·-------~ X ~RECOMMENDED ' ,,,:.:~,$,'-'-"a:.-+-. ~::__E/,/;_.;/ /,)'.;;$ 1) ,_.$ ,:i, ,\ SPACING(SEE L.MIDSCAPC.
'\\/\/\• ·. /\/\/.///,5\;/:·/P,'//,,{,· 'i DETAiLONDRAWING)
\_+-+-+~-e-4-4 r,, ,;, r,, e '=' El! ~ACl\.l.wf'l#IT lOCATlONS
-LI\?:"-:,,.---
/
GROUNOCOVER
INSTALL T DEPTH MULCH, llGHTLY
COMPACT ANO LfVEL PRIOR TO PLANTING
9·// ~~ri~~~~~:6~~HM~~~~:~~~~
GREEN SCREEN~ FENCE OR CABLE TRELLIS
i I SIAKE" ATTACHf.0 IOWALL Ok ~i:Jri~
FOR TENDRIL TYPE VINES
i , VINE
1-r,! __ .-----IN§TAU 2" DEPTH MULCH. LIGHTLY
L, ------COMPACT AND LEVEL PRIOR TD PLANTING
"'n : 1' ,if'v '
7,J,C I
I '·
PLANT" FLUSH TO FINISH GRADE WITH NO
FOLIAGE COVERED BY MULCH AND WITH
ROOT BALL COVERED WITH MULCH
t=Jlll=iill§lllli
I 1111'=1 ·x· jjjj
U,"X" 1111~:
_,
f>"MIN
a ~-J·
0
ROOT8A.LL COVERED WITH MULCH.
' .,ov~~? , \ . . ,_:-,~3 ,<ff BACKFILL
l \ I IHbROUGRl.Y llllTOPSOlLINl'O
T 1,_) j -----r----ITT1!
-V . ~
111~1111§i:1111-1111=1111g111ru . TOP 8" OF EXISTING SOIL. COMPACT
AND LEVE:._ PRIOR TO PLANTING
SOIL
'°"""'"'
,.
SOIL BACKFlLL
GRAOE PLANTING) OR LIGHT WEIGHT SOIL
(PLANTERS)
4"MIN.
2x·x··~
(~1-\ GROUNDCOVER PLANTING
\ ! Saa!ec 1" = 1'-0 ,j
(2
'~-./
VINE PLANTING
Scale. 1• = 1'-0
(:3'\ SHRUB PLANTING
'-.-/ 1.r~-
y jHTO>S<AK>
/ ;_-; "y"
2 , '"x' ~,,~ .. ----
"!('I
NOTE
ALL SPECIMEN TREES TO BE
SECURED WITH GUY WIRES ANO
SOIL ANCHORS
"Y" ~ TREE HT. ADV GRADE
-X" ~ Dw.tETER Of ROOTBALL
CONIFEROUS TREE
STAi<E
;AR $ I AKE EMBEDDED
S' !N UNOISTIJRBEO SOIL WITH#~
"CHAlNLOCK" TREE TIE ATTACHED TO
""""
ROOT BALL
'EMOVE CONTAINER OR BURLAP
PRIOR TO PLANTING
PLANT TOP OF ROOT SALL FLUSH
TO FINISHED GRAOE ANO COVER
WITH 2" DEPTH OF MULCH
PLAN VIEW
\ ¥'-, ', l >,'.
(()
.l_
""''-4 i
ROOT EIAIUl!ER \ d)
I 2• ilh<w• fini,h grade
O'-Y-----
1 §1111§1111
1111§
1111
NORM 2" 1111§
I!!!
I
!!!I
ti', , 11' ?fr \J \.d \~t, ,, ... J
c:.:r--1·/ , ,.
.1 r---..:,.,d.;',
I I I • r:tx ~L:;J')! • ' 1>
_fi:;.
~1TTI§
son,
Amended \
) \._/ l~llii TOP SOIL
1111 = ROOT BARRIER I@ Thick wa11e<n11ack pvc
rifpt barrier t'Xlflt. en:,und bamboo
WJ l..ep !198m 6" 8Hch a.de end -t
./<~ BELOW FL~
IPllCTFl"l I'll Fr.ID OF ~~-. . . . ) OJlADE .
,oesrnc ::' \ -' I 1111=1111::1111=1111=1111 =I 1!1111 lspel:$Ci.Jmlybolhsldea
~i,..("
Con1ractor to w,nfy looafon end configuration of
root bamer on site prior to inatel1811on
(5) ;:_~N,!".~!' PLANTING-SECTION (6' ~AMBOO PLANTING-SE_gT~l~O~N~-----
·~ , ___ /
-----sHRUB
ROOTBALL
~R•E•M•O"V"E"B"V"R"CAP=AN-'"D'C'PLANT
TOP OF ROOTBALL FLUSH TO
FINISH GRADE. COVER WITH
2" DEPTH MULCH
-,.--~ SCAffOLD TREE BRANCH
HEIGHT A.BOVE GRADE
·,· • '"""" oe Roora,c_, )~!, Ji: ""~,·
1.:~ J. Hf 0~ S<:AHOLO
BRANCIU;S
-, TOPOFSTAKf,
DECIDUOUS TREE
TREE STAi<ING
(2) P.T. NOM. 2" DIAMETER
STAi<ES EMBEDDED 3" IN
EXISTING SO!L WITH 11:J
"CHAINLOCK" TREE TIES
A lT ACHED TO STAKES
ROOTBALL
REMOVE CONTAINER OR
Bl.lRLAP PRIOi'l: TO PLANTING
PLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL
FLUSH TO FINISH GRADE AND BACKFILL
SCARIFY PLANT PIT AND
BACKFILL WITH TOPSOIL
SO!L
"Y"
2.1] ''Y"
'l')i COVER WITH 2" DEPTH OF I MULCH
I,'. BACKFILL I; 11 _/-SCARIFYPLANTPIT
EXISTING :111-lii)li!'.!!I J ANO BACKFILL WITH
SOIL BLEND
COMPACTED BLENDED
TOPSOIL AND EXISTING SOIL
·x·
2,rx· -----{ __ _
IZ"'
NOlE·
All. Sf>ECIMEN TREES TO BE
SECURED wt TH GU'I' WIRES AND
SOIL ANCHORS n· A
({:) r:0E1~-~~NTING
PLANT UST
Code .2!! Scientif1<: Nam<> Common Name
DetldUOU!i T~n
-"P Ar.e-p,okB!u•r ~·mr.uip~;;,:;;;; --R~U-l<'al Jap,mes~ ~,aµ!~
"' Ace hUncatum > pl~ta~oic),;s 'V1arrenre<.i' Pact'ic Sur,~..i ma;,I,, ,. ,,:;
" " '
Carp,nns ca,o!,n,ana Ac:wncan tio,nbe~c,
CcA
CnV
Sm
Ce't 1$ t~l\adf"!'1s,:, 'Al!X! W:,,le redl>LJ<i
C,,c,,i1~ n.J!.tal!., """"~ Pad.:. Dcg'l-<xd
Stev.art,a rncoa<l<>loh~
EW_1]_11t•n Tree
Fma.: PoUocareus m«cr"l''•Yllus
Ewrgreen Hedge
Tt; 6~ Ta.u~ weo:;a1a 'fh,paqJ,m, ,m l Ta,u~, mec',a
" SS T1>,1a <>CC-<len1,L1,s '[,,-,era kl c"l""'"
S~rub
-fl()-2!> Be~r,s toun,,.,rg, o,~nge Roc<~t
C(,\. 104 \.-0'!":WS ~:o1c,,m.-s 'KeH,,yi
La 71 i.euco'.ooe,.,,11a,-;s
Lp OC :.""""'" p,fE~ta
Tali slewa~,a
Ja;x,riese Yr:w Fi,,e
C~n,mon 1""
Yew
A,ix,r.ila ..
Orasge ,-xk~1 baob~cry
Dwa~ A~cH'M!j l1'>T·"""1
CO$\ 1euc0Hue
Pr.,·1 hcn"'YS<IC~ e
21 Rhode<leridrcn sp;:, Hii,r,J ,hOd<>domcmn
Ve':! 57 Vaccn,~m c<>rsm/X",W"'\ Sunshine s,ue· H,g1",~"'~ t,1tJeMny
Ornamental Gl"lllll/Gr.n•hk~
s,ze
TOPSOIL
'°" EXISTING
¥)1L~~t_,I_Q
COMPACTED BLEND OF
TOPSOIL AND EXISTING
SOIL
Sp-11G1na Nol_~_
0· sprea~ 011! A$ sr,;:,w:, Net,, li3
f," spreM. JN As Si><'W/1 Ncit~ 1'3
C $~rew. 2'tit ~ ~r,ow,, Note#}
€is;,rsa.1 l'hl A,a ~,.,,....,, N:,te it;)
~; spr~;><1, 2'til 3b o ~ Not" ~3
,r sr1eatl n,t 1r, o ~ Note a<J
s· 111
2·G~'
6 hl
/)' hl
2-G~
r;a:
2-Ga
2-G~i
c,.c:;~·
'Ga'
A~~'""""
3",:, C
3'<,"
;·.H
~0C
?oc
s~e z,,
&~c
~G-C
Cp . JS Ca,;,, p~e.du!a Ha~i•,g ~<".lg.
s,~e cat gr~M
-----~ 2:i'cc
C'~ 4111 '1e·;;tctr,~hoo sern,-,,,r,,,en,
Vine&
Gm -1Z ·c1~iYlat,,; rnOr.1;;;,;;-
P1 t3 Pa<:,..,nv<:,s~u$ tn-cusp1d,i:a
Ground Cover
EY,!-gr;.-.,:;·,;i.;m;ii,S
Bc~ICf1 i,v
'-G~: 2'o.c
2 G~; i!Vi'iC-
4· po!; 3",> C
Eli-·· ·· · ··i,· ... 6an,.:,ns ;c,"~b!!,g;· ·Cr,ni,,M j,~gm/ Cur,'K.~ f'vg,,;,-b,ict,er,} c;a 18" "-' --·
Er.:: S5' Euc~yn,"s fuiun~ ·cobat"~ 'Nnler~reeFe' '-Ga' :;· n c
Lv 1G ur,andula ac,gus\1lo!·a Eql,sl\ L~vE'C.1~· <-GJI 18" o c
Rt 226 isut,~~ !r1<:<1I<>• r"'""P'~~ b'amb-~ 1.sn, 3' a; c
Ti• 274 ln)"•~~, !'"""COO> Cr,ffipi~g lhtmB 4'' 001', ft r,,
L,w~
law,, 17l!P. ,J H,c,"~"""d r-.w Mi<··-
PLANT LIST NOTES.
1 ·-, -PLANT QUANTITIES SHO\NN ARE BASED ON cllRRENt SURVEY INFORMATION. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
ACTUAL PLANTING AREAS AND PROVIDE QUANTITIES OF PLMTS TO MEET SPACING REQUIREMENTS
PLANTS SHALL CONFORM TO ANSI STANDARDS. BE FULL SYMMETRICAL. AND WELL ROOTED
TREES -SINGLE TRUNI\, 2" CAL MINIMUM, HEIGHT AND SPREAD PER PLANT UST. SCAFFOLD BRANCHES
TO START AT ~-5' ABOVE TOP OF ROOT BAU ALL TREES TO BE. STAKED PER U\NDSCAPE DETA!LS
g
~
.E
SHEET INDEX ,
L-1.0 LANDSCAPE-P(AN I
L-2.0 LANDSCAPE DETAILS AND PLANT UST I
L-3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN I
PROJECT
CH1LDREN'S INSTITUTE
2640 BENSON ROA0 SOUTr
RENTON, WASHING'TO"l
CLIENT
CH1LDREN'S INSTITUTE
2640 BENSON ROAD SOUTr
RENTON, WASHINGTON
.-----:=-:::::>\ /~,rJ'"' ' . .., 11 8'01011
1\1~11re;;;
~::_J~:>
~ ..
RE\/IS10r-.~
CON;,TfllJ8TIO"-, :?(!"4.0(,.2/
00<::JMEE<TS
AS-DI.J,IT '.'(l'.5 02-1~
cl-.JCclME,;T~
LANDSCAPE PLAN -
SITE AND ENTRIES
L-2.0
L-4.D IRRIGATION DETAILS I •. ,, ,,·e, q"''''-''-~·\1'·' L-4. 1 IRRIGATION DETAILS e,s,,,. ;s ,-,0e ""' ~t-1<-'
t/) ,· \:
--_,.J -
.. (), .. --·---.. :. . .: .. :· }(
..... :/;'::_. :r :1:1 ···: ,;: : :r: r :. :, {',.
: :. ;;°':r) ·1··: 'j :. : :
:·,:: :: :: :: :: ·i: ':::::
:: .. :.:.ex:: .. · /t·~·: <!·i:•::,1 1 :_11_·~·-··:·1_·,:z:. ·_11;1. 1Q1·.~:-·:·:····//1 /1: r»·•.·. .... ''' . ' <' .: .. ,... J.l .. L~l:J·. 0 '· "frJ;1"' ··9· ·,· ... v".Ij;,/f .... '• ._ .. _ ..... ,,., .•. '-,, . ""'~/"-\ . ' ... ~·-'"'· ·t;·, ~ "",·,1-.,./ -A,,, .. ·Y,····7 .. 1 .... •f , .. ·7· .. ··;····I-·"""'' ·
2-;1: :·::·.::::.::·._:·.::~.::_:.::;: ·.::·:::·.-::-i·._::·. :f .. ,·-. -'·:::-.:: .::·.:::c:·.:.·.::··::··:.·:·-.: :·.· ... : .... /1 ... I 711/1 ·.·, / ··. !1 .. z .. /. 1///;(, ·····. :o ::. . ·. ··········· .. ······· ..
~~ -~~~1Ni~7JP r ·· -. ·· .. -.. r-_,)_-_:s~. ::
;.;;c,J, .. ·. . . , , \ . @ ' : .[· ... , ..... ;:-°'--::d--'.-c(I, , 7', . ":·": ... ::·::.·: ·:: :· :: ,, ·. :: '. .: ':.. : :: :: :: :: :· :. ::::· ... ,cc1 ....... .
.;:.;; .. --~-1,.,1 ,,
·o·-·
'.:'.__L:.. : : : : :' :'j'f.:. ~..:: ~/c:'f~ . . . .--,-c--1v1 2--:":-":'-~ : . . . . .
--~~Ff:-: ~ ··--·-ffc .. ·· .~1·J••o -----~~-:;:t~~~;~,c~ .... : ' : ::,;_, '. _:-~~•-: r:\\ .
--...f_,____~"-' ·I . '#f!Q~#tlf:JA" . . . i;, .
~~Till:
. Jt~J ............ , .. ~
:-.-.-.-.
-~--:.-~~-~~-c-~ic · · · h :' ~iii:S~.:-:< . · · . :/ C':-~ ~" -
?:=c~::·cf,l,~t··· .... ,:: ~:'~~~~~;ti==:::~~·-· -__ -···· ······ ·-,.•-•.···']-~~-· .. . .~~~~ . ~:C.~f~~=-~ -""'i,,;~~,,ij~Ct~~ . . . ..... .
j-.. , ... ·/·!"'
~---... _,_ ... , ,.-. f ·-t,-··r:lI_t~::::/'
I I
-, __ _
Luminaire Schedule
Symbol Qtv Label ArraQgement Total Lamo Lumens LLF Descrintion
.--..-,-,--.-
;-: ... ; ' •. l ..•.. ··Tl-/. \_ ,,"11:.'
~,..-,---:-;-,
.----,·
.. i:r:.'
-:-1: '.: :::
· jj · :: t:· ...
'. : i:
.. :. :I . : ••• \ •.. : 1 · \ ·. ·· · I
t:}: :: I
1::
LLD
·1· .
..\
LDD BF
-E] 7 ECF-4-1 OOLA-6453-NW SINGLE N.A. 0.850 ECF-4-1 OOLA-6453-NW I.ODO I.ODO I.ODO
D 3 121-4-SOLA-CW SINGLE N.A. 0.780 l 21-4-50LA-CW
Calculation Summary
Label CalcT)'JJ.e Units Av Max Min Av /Min Max/Min
ob·ect Planar llluminance Fe 0.31 6.0 0.0 N.A. N.A.
-------1.000 1.000 1.000
---,,..J.Ereilli\.J:@l]l ®
Planning Division
~lP>lJ~~~![D)
~~t~
1#1m~
lij
I
I I j, fil,
I
z: 4..,
~LU
u..= u..-, o:
511
2
.2
~ .s
~ -c
8:J u
:.c u
0
0 () ..c -U O
VJ u
~2 z u5
L_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -. . 140199
l. f' I I LD SCHoOL l..U. ~ I Y-000203 , _ __J
r--------------
i L_ ---------·-------------._ ------
LANDSCAPE PLAN-PROPOSED
SCALE, 1" -50'
PLANT LEGEND • PROPOSED PLANTING
SCIENTIFIC NAME -COMMON NAME SIZE SPACING
laROAOlEAF TREE
ACER RUBRUM 'OCT06ER GLORY' • RED MAPLE rn, AS SHOWN
CERCIS CAW.DEt.SIS 'Al.SA' • WHITE REDBUD 2'CAl AS SHOWN
CORNUS NVTTAll~ '\IEl<US" • PACIFIC OOOWOOD 2"CAl. 36"0.C
STEW:O.RTIA MO~OELl'HA ,TAU &TEWARTIA 2"CAl. 15'0.C.
\HEDGE
01 THUJA OCCIDENT ALIS· ARBORVITAE rn J'O.C
! SHRUB & GROUNDCOVER MIX
VIIICI, lallNOR ·DWARF PERl'MNKLE 1-0Al. :ro.c.
RHAPrlOLEPIS !NOICA • Rl'APHIOlEF'IS _, 3"0.C.
RKCIOOOENOR0'-1 SP?. • RHOOOOENORON =· 8'0.C,
GROUND COVER
ARCTOST....,HYLOS WA l/RSI -l(ININNICK 1-0Al. 2'0.C.
HYDROSEED
lfl'DROSEEDUIMI AT SLOPE CUT
I
ASPHALT DRIVE
PLANTING AREA
452 SF
~---
/ ..... ~ ~ ~ PLANTING AREA (NEW ROCK~
I~ ~F ~~,'~
e~NT,NGA~ ~~~~~<fJ
~ '--J
PLANTING AREA
R,j --· SF
1: ir·~ ... ~~~
'
' 1
r'
u, >
Ii
>-' "" NJ
le ii :::, .
Oo u,.
PL.jA.NTLN(l AREA
---
'• --------
0
1-C
"' ~
<D
"' iE
&
PLANTING AREA
2313 sF --.. _ ~ --~"-·
50 100
SCALE IN FEET
-----
150
~
-----.
PLANTINO AREA
660 SF
NE'lfM~ 1 STY.
8' 11. C1-WN WIK rol~ FlR. El.EV; ~ \.J
[M:f .... ~1t/·
·~~
I ~ =i}2 ~D4NC ' ----x \ -·-_l
SIDEWALK
BENSON ROAD S '-cuRs
(80' RIGHT-OF"-WAY) .
GENERAL LAND~r.A_PE_NOTES:
1, ftti -'-""""-'""" ""'"'~"c' ~,. ............. ""'· "''"'"'°· , .. , ... TIC~. -MUCOH '"" ""'"c" .l!C .. Oi '""'"' O>R....,..,., MIMIOP"'-=>E RECU"™"""
'"''""""'O''-"'Til"""' .... "'""''"'-,,.,cmOF"'"""'"""'""'""'"""TEroTOm,,""-.. "'""''"""''"ITI"N'
]. "'' "'""""'""'i.wo,,:,.1'""" '" ™' ............ ....,... c, """""™' -~· '""0"'""""°""''"''"'"'""' "" """""'"'-= ~'""""'"'~"-LO"l-:z:.~:..~·=,:~':"= .. ·;·::t·i~::z.~,~.~;"~0:.:'!1~'"·''"',P! ... O!o<IICVO•!O\JlTH<
•. '"'" """ """'"""''""I"' ""'"''" 1-1 "'""''ONE''"""'°'"""'"'''"'"' .. .wa,wm•• '"' ,01 "'"'""
........... TlH0'""1MIJI.AATEOF°'E"«l»l"""""{"UOF'-'N~ .. , .. UPTCf~lY,'11C>H'il"""C'iHRU8'-•0EO<C"°'OUS
c. """'"" "°"'" ""'1L .. F1ANnD1t<>Uff<Cl'"'CUJo1ol1T1" '°""""""'"' UA5' "'"'"'""'"' I""'! cav,...,, a, '"' "'°"'"c .,,. Wl'HH(>) ....... OF"'5T-'J.I.Al!C"
D '""''""'Li"'N<l""'"""""'"".iw,ON-"llACe-, .. RCNCilCfU."""'-"' ... ""-
1-~W-.k
lllol:ISDlil'[!j[
V.Tll.E,U,Nl!S ,~
_, .• " QII UOIN9DINI-H.CCII
W:• Wf'"CICn.f I CHILDRENS INSTITUTE ... '&~e..w-. ......... c 2540 Benson Rood S.
~tt':,d',Ollw:'wi'::.':0t1 "LE 98034 b~>'e"'eleoo""aWaA~-------1 ;:7'-: ::t::t~?; PROl"OSED LAtlDSCAPE PLAN
..
!~ECE!V
--,~,.,,,,,1,:-1'".'"."'""
•• -FEB I 7 2011c
Cl,,.\, .... : ,·,c;.,ToN· '~ U1 l•.Ll;i,
PLANN;NG O!'./IS!ON
,. 2'. Nl4
·~311
Ll.O
STAFF
BREAK RM.
r----
TAFFIISTAF
OFC. WORK
COPY /c = =
UPPLY
COMPUTER
LAB
19-7 X 11-0
-J['}
CLASSRM.
25-5 X 27-11
CORRIDOR
CLASSRM.
25-9 X 31-9
'HIGH' \-VINDOWS--~---------~
CHILD SCHOOL
EXISTING BUILDING
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR
SCALE, 3/16" = 1'-0"
AREA, 9,405 SQ. FT.
DN.1
SENSORY
ROOM
7-8 X 15-7
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 28-5
,_,::;,
I NEW 'HIGH' I WINDOWS ~----~
VIDEO
ROOM
13-1 X 16-1
--SLIDING I L I if. PARTI1JON I -1 f..-... I
-~,
TLT 1
STUDENT
ENTRY
~
7' W. CORRIDOR
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 2B-5
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 28-5
NEW 'HIGH' Vv'INDOWS --~-------"----'----------_/
n u
·~1~~.
WINDOWS """'-
CLASSRM. ',.
23-7 X 21-2
CLASSRM.
23-7 X 21-2
~'HIGH'
--.~~/
C!J'J ,·-,:: ·. ·,! '()Ai I , \,~. , , , • ·le, l',I
Pt 1\r>J1•.J:1\JC r:w..11.s 10:\
I
!
;
~z
3:5 .,; g~
~ .. ~a i.. ,le' QJ~s~ ; ii 6f:
o~~
~~ ij ~~:l f
J ~~:.. ';;;
zllil1=J.J,
63~,Si~ ~ c,:;i.:!:;s ij ..
t.!!8;l~ jg.f!::
F-<~"'1--"-
-~·
" ~
" 'ii
A2.0 -
UP
STORAGE RM.
33-2 X 10-0
CONF. RM.
17-5 X 13-11
"f SHWR/.ILD~~w_J ' ,,
" L
O.T. ROOM 3
19-5 X 13-1 CONF.
ROOM
12-8 X 17-1
I
NEW SPRINLER
RISERS
FD-+
Q.T. ROOM 2
19-5 X 26-6
MECH.
OFFICE 11 OFFICE
12-8 X 17-2 12-8 X 16-9
CHILD SCHOOL
EXISTING BUILDING
PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR
SCALE: 3/16" ~ 1'-0"
AREA: 9,064 SQ. FT.
TOTAL OF BOTH FLOORS: 18,469 SQ. FT.
MECH.
ST-:;
STOR.·
STOR.·
STOR.
~
SLIDING ·1
PARTITIOO ----¢-
'
'
i
i
!
' i
i
Q.T. ROOM I
27-5 X 16-1
MULTI-PURfOSE ROOM
71-3 i 38-0
DF
'HIGH' WINDOWS --'-------'----i_~c___ ____ L_ ___ _L_ _____ _;
MENTAL HEALTH ,
23-4 X 13-6
SPEECH &
LANGUAGE
23-4 X 9-4
EARLY
CHILDHOOD
23-4 X 18-6
FEB 1 7 201
-'
Cf.; .~:,_~·:-·J"fON
"'' ,,. •u Di VJ.Sf ON
I
;
;
;;: ~"' "'~ "' :J§ ~! ~~ ~I•~§ ;} if~; a ... -~~
;~~
O!:!,! '° r-
:J.,§~ ~ ~~fl~
ll";:5 ..... r:i::l~8:i\ ..
t!:10-i:iS:
!~Ji~
',,.
-~l!!
A2.1
0 I
"() ..,,I 5: --t
"< 0
z rnl z [", CD
WANGERIN Cllll)SCHOOl
.-..saoe, ... n;:.,, 1..1..c 26401lensoo~S.
12.«18 106th Ploce NE Renllln,WA
~::.."!~~~i~-~ ~~E"'X~l~ST~l~NG,',B~U"ll'D"IN'G-----l
ra. : 425-672-7182 EXISTING FIRST FLOffi PLAN
,-,
L"'J
..
W CHllDSCHOOl ... M~!lWsi. '-'-C: 2840BensonRoldS.
~=.lo: ... ~;~NE gao~4 b,..,.;-~~WA~==~-------l
ro1op1,one: 425-672-8719 EXISTING BUILDING
Fa, , 425-81:2-1,a:2 EXIST[t(i BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN
"' e,
()
I
[]
17'-11 112·
14'-0' 10'-9 1/2' 10'-9 1/2' 9'-10' 12'-5 ... 9'-10'
1 :/-0"' C,'-0' 9' -10'
SLOPE UP JN 12 LANDING JvEST.
\._
(JJ
I CONF. RM. OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE RECEPTION/ OFFICE OFFICE
WAITING -( ( ( ( ( I' . m ~( TLT.f=,
I
!\Cf C') OF \._ \_ \_ 0. \_ l) . m l) \_ I OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE~ WORK RM. OFFICE -I
i--. TLT. TLT.
" ' !J, CJ ~ "71: ),.J._,
9'-11 1/2' 9'-10' 9'-10' 9'-10' 6'-7' 6'-1 ... 10'-0 112· 15'-10 112· .
78'-0'
CHILD SCHOOL ~ MODULAR
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
FLOOR PLAN
SCALEc 1/4" ~ 1'-o"
"' I
"J
. v-
I
0
.
st 0
I I
"' "-
(U
.
st
I
0 -
REC>E:,
l='l='R 1 ~ · .
Cl,.,~.
I i \...).:
PLANN.'i\JC ·
!
I
;
;
.I
~
i ~
ilil
!;!J!i! •~ :a!! .I ~~ ON
I
I
;i. N
"''" u ... "''l' i::.
~!.F~~ ~ -·. "i i~~ E:Ls .... st "'! ! .. c.,o-.,;
1~!;!1
•~· ,om,
A3.0 -a
(J) n
)>
' rr,
0
0
(Jl
0
----------..
~ CHILD SCHOOL
SITE PLAN-PROPOSED
SCALE: 1" ""' 30'
q ~o 69_ ~o 120
SCALE IN FEET
SITE AODRESSl
ib~~,=s.
EXISTING:
F°ClffMER--CHURa-1 BUll.DINC:
1 STCflY PlUS B~ENT
TOTAL AREA! 1~4fl9 SCI. n. ~~Jh~3 r,p[sav~·
CELLULAR BUILOINO: I STORY
TOTAL AREk J:ZO SQ. FT,
CONSTRUCTION TYPE V-B
ilW-'~o'lll,~··•
LOT co'WRAGE·
AREA Of LOT:175,111 SF
11,907/175,111 •
PROPOSED:
MOOUVJI 8U1L01NO: 1 STOR'r'
TOTAL ARtA: 2,239 SQ. n.
CONSTRUC'OON TYPE V-B
FOOTPRINT JHQJIDING
AAMP; 2.240 SQ. n.
AEMCIDEL rt'RMER Qf.JRCH
BULDING FOR USE AS A
PRIVATE SCMOOt. (E OCQJPANCY)
~
~---' ""' """""' i PER 1Q ST1JOEHff:; "'!!!~' _., 18,li"l!W : -.!
f.1/t $PAC£$ • J
amall:. __ _
"ORNAL am 4:1
CCW'ACT SZE: 14 ~ .... ~ .....
&i?F'
COiFACTl ~-a"'x 111" ·~.u & '°""'
UTILITY U:GENP·
WATER LINE
STORM DRAIN
SANITARY SE'11£R
Ov£RHEAD POWER LINE
O'o'ERHEAD CABLE
UNotRGROUNO GAS
SANITARY MANHOLE
UTILITY TRANSFORMER
--~
m---
. •·
~ ----•--
--0--SMH
ISi UT
EXISTING TREE LEGEND
CONIFEROUS fflEE )\<
DEODUOUS TREE 0
~
1
)
i
·.~. i
·+1 1\ .,,/;J!b '_;l>·~-;<~/·,/ ,~
.~ ---··· . ;;:;.::':(·'.-;>'• y
, .. ~ . .. -· -··· -I _.,..-/'
.. ,( .... ---, ..... · .. .__... ..•. i-
1, 11£ IDflUC11II !IW.l DE-.: K OOiCf L«AtlON fl NJ. DIS!III; IJ1U1ES IEFW t'CMININI
ml[, Mil /alEE!l 111 a: FIA.LY IOl'Clla,.E rt1t ltf1 ... ,'lL O,IIMID ltQ 11111'1' E Gll:aCIEI
IT 1HE IXIORM:ltll'I FM!IRE 111 !XM:llY LOCA1E MIi P1EDW IIIY .1111 IU IJIIXIIGIIOUICI IJ1UlU
JtL ux:AQ: EMU RllD E ODml:l&l PMII 111 IIIY OCIIS1llllC1II: (II smanct
m,u'NIIOl'I, eAlL I-G-4114-MIS.
t. fE.D UMf. set. -:IIIJ. l. Ul(J(UI N1EIIYN. .. 1 FOOi',
4. 11111 S. !IHIIIU I. r, 'Ill: 1111.1 IIEPOIIT AD'illNl 'ID M EMDIUff Ft111 WID IIMC. IIECIRllt:I MO.
llllm.. ID E.\!111811" IIO UflCEI MnCn K SIMCt ""'8ITl' ~ JI£ PSDDT II
IIIJlll'MO Q H SWIii JD fflT CF 11£ IE 11• CF H 1111/4 CF 98:*91 21. .. IS H SM1E
lO l'ID' DUPl!D Cl.IT rtlt M»I0 11 'fl£ 181,lL lla1IPIIOII CF H ~ l'IIQPUffl',
.S. JlDI I. 1DBW: B r, H 1111..E IIPCaf a-1tl Ill 1lJIIS -Cllll1ICNS CF 111t "QFrla.lQI
CF OW. II. IIIIUtll. Mii lNll:IICIITS, lllXIIINIIIII. 41.Dll!!I. 1IIS DCO.IDTIS All
MllUNDl'T lllAT EMOIXTS aAN1m TO l'IICIE't' DIil PGID .t UGHT 971" ' 1m MIi .U.. 12,
ltMe, 10 C110SS MIi N \IIIIEJI ll£ O£SQml l'IIQPUffl' HIEII. (H U£1' fm'ER1Y
811111 PMT CF 11£ DDClml PllflOn1, IS .._,.MID N ~ IIIOI[ IS WM 1HAT llGt!f
ilCQ.11 ctl 111: l.8CT 1'111:1'£11TT.
t. nD1 7. !OElllU I r, H lffll _,. IIRINC 1tl U108fT Ft111 IUPl Mii lllUIWlt 11£ &CR
WIJEfl" IEl:GIIDNI Ill 2CIOIDl211m1U H 'ElllltM'I' CCIISIIICIDI EASDEMT IS IIOt SQII
llDUilE 1111: l'AIDIJIT D1ltCMHD I IIClffll!I #lEII IT 'M1 GMIIEII.
7. l1EN I. SQGU I CF 11€ n£ IVlllf !Uma«I TD H f'IIM!lllll5 IDITIIID II "111,9 l'mN.
OWIZ P.11' BIOlalG IIO. ZWll~ 11:fQ 'IO A CCIKtJQI awa: L1'll'l'EII .IGMI H
OIHRS CF Hinlll.M f'fllDU NQJIIIC 'IME S&ECT Pl'ICRJITT MIi l:Mlll1f E U'l'UI.
~ ~
.! = ~~ f I ~j.
ii f It
j
l,•1 ii~
I
I. "81 t. S0UW: Ir, H 1IU IIN!I' fllD'l!IINll:I TO H llA!t 10 'aEffllEMI PCS I a#.
lltaac MCI. llllmSl•to. 11£ lltlltllPIIL1l II K WSE CIU S,,'11 • PGll1ICIN CF 11£
FtU0111C ~ l'IIClll(ltTf. SIi AffACIID Dl9T •1,-, H11E EIIIIT A IDJa: 111: B1.E
CF111:!l&ECTPl!lftlffl'll.ll'IIDT'lf:PGll1ICIN1UIE~~ t. nnl 111. Em.U I CF H 1111..E IIO'llRI' 111EEF11c: TO 'llll WSl
20'llUUUO!ffl JHE ~ CF 11( lfCN.. DDCM'1ICIN 1111G
111EQl.rl:l'l'IICF£Rll'OIIIJtlilDal!;IIW..IIIR;JIIAQFtlll ...... _DI Al.1 I ,_ .
' 1 7 2014
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING f)I\/ISION
(E&F) ELEV. 402.5'
CONCRETE
RETAINING WALL
WEST ELEVATION
(FROM BENSON ROAD SOUTH)
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
CONCRETE RAMP -SLOPE: 1 IN 12 COL.OR: T-1
EAST ~~EY()IJPN ...,,..,,., r-_ ~ 1 4-= I -v r -·
COMP, SHINGLE ROOF
COLOR: DARK GRAY
BRICK WAINSCOT
COLOR: MEDIUM RED
8&'.'<llf T-2 r<:----
(E) ELEV. 406.J'
HARDIE SIDING
COLOR: F-1
~D~AtmiNOOW,
COLOR: T-2
E) El.EV. 403.5'
(F) ELEV. 402.5'
TOP OF ROOF: ELEV. 416.9'
FlRST FLOOR: ELEV. 404.6'
{E&Fl ELEY, 1:02-5'
HARDIE SIDING
COLOR: F-1
I
I
I ,,
.. ~I
111,1;
iii ;~
I
(F) ELEV. 4-0J.J' ( , l I 1 Ii r· llll!F ~ I : T'f !111'.!!IIF"'!' jl1'!~~ _ E&F)ELEV. 402.5 _ _ _ _ I _ {E&f)ELEV. 402 5' ~
NORTH ~LE¥ATION r------------~ . i5lf
scALE, ,74 _ 1 --0· I EXISTING AVERAGE GRADE ELEVATION, 403.,a· I souTH ~LEVA r10N ~~Ir·
t-----------. •• .--,---'=·=====~~~;=T====-· ___:s:c::A'.:'.LE:'..: ~1~/4~=~1~·-;o~· --,----------~;,a~ l -=<-~ !
FIELD COLOR F-1 TRIM COLOR T -1 TRIM COLOR T-2 RECE!\1 • ' A3.1
----...
CITY 0,,-. .~.--,.
'f , , ; • . ~--' 4\t
PLANN:i\lC .-. '-1:,1t. .:~
I
(E) TOP OF ROOF ELEV. 421.9'
DOORS
COLOR: T-2
(E&F) ELEV. +10.5'
COMP. SHINQ.E ROOF°
CCl.OR: DARI< GRAY
m:iw1Jom11t11]
WEST ELEVATION
(FROM BENSON ROAD SOUTH)
SCALE: 1 / 4-" = 1'-0'
-~---------·----........... ~ ...... ~----------:~im:~~f:;m~I~~iHt~iWfi:{~~{Hffiillr!~~~irnH~f~!~~~1itrn~~~1mrnH~l
::i "": • :~:ni :::·: :.: :::~·:·,:,:~:·: :: ::: .. ::.::~~~·~~:::~::::::::t~~: ::::::::::::~::::::::·:ti ::;f : :m:: :! ~ :r::1::: :~. ~ :. ~ ::i~ ~ ~; ~~·: ~ ~ ~:::~~: m::: : :::::, :. :~;,:ti::::~~~,:=~~~ mi
'~:' ! ::·=~.: ~~ :::~~~:: :~:: ~ ~ ::~~ ~:: ~: :: ~ 1~ ::,:.~: ~~;::!: :;::::~ ~: ~ ~·:; ~= :1~~!.'1.:1:::: ~: !1 .,,~,~•n• ''"""'~"'"""''"""' "" "'""'""""'"'"""""'o•• ~•• ,,.,,~,~u••~~"'~"',."""'' ~::~!!~1,;;:~:~~~::~1.·;~~;::i~::~~:m~~~rnt:::::.:~t:~.::::~m:~~:~~u::El
WOOD lRIM
COLOR: T-1
(E&F) ELEV. 409.5' (E&F) ELEV. 410.5'
SOUTH ~LEVATION
SCALE: 1/4-= 1'-o"
I
I
~
(E&F) ELEV. 408.5' (E&F) ELEV. +o9.5' (E&F) ELEV. 409.5' (E&F) ELEV. 408.5'
.. I§
sJ.li~ ;~1,1
FIELD COLOR F-1
I i,lji
I li/ll
I ~iiJl
'"'°""'.llr"". A 14 .. = 1-U
EAST l;~EY()IIPN ,--. ....
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0'
TRIM COLOR T -1 TRIM COLOR T-2
RECE/\.1:
FEB 1 7 .""
CITY or:
PLA/\1/\JU\JC ':-.
A3.2
'
(N) CEDAR TRIM.
COLOR: T-1
01sr. GRAD~ fl.EV. +94.5'
HO CHANGE
{E) CEDAR SIDING.
COL~: F-1
ALL EXT. OOORS
COLOR: T-2
(E) BUILT-UP ROOFING
COLOR: DARK GRAY
(E) ... CK
CCU>R: MEDIUM R£lJ
WEST ELEVATION
-;. (FROM BEN~nN ROAD S.) NOTE: NO ROOF-TOP EQUIPMENT ON THIS BUILDING.
SCALE: ve" -1·-0·
FIELD COLOR: F-1 •
(£) BIOCK
(E) METAL ROOF FLASHING
COLOR: T-1
ca...oR: MEDIUM RED
~SJ-~~ A-EV +lJ 9'. ,NO CHA QE
TRIM COLOR: T-1
EAST ~, •• e:veiu9N
e,,,r,AI r,,.. • ,5-• l -v 10 • ,.,,
{E) CE>AR SIDING.
ca.OR: F-1
TRIM COLOR: T-2
(E) BRICK
\.....,----i 00..0R: MEDIUM RED
TOP OF RQW; El.EV. 436.5'
(HO CMAN<E)
FIRST FLOOR: El£V. 413.&"
(HO aiMGE)
EXIST, GRADE Elfj. 406 .5' fNO Ojg.)
~\"!'!!k"""" El£\/ 403.§'
1UP Of RO(F: n.EV. 436.!!'
(HO CMAN<E)
OBST O-QOR: El.EV-41.l.Q'
~sr. GR~ El£\\ +JJ,Q' NO CHANCE
RECEIVE
FEB 1 7 ?'·A
!i"',..~l",'-"'
f>/ ,tl,,{\/f\liNC:. f ,:· __ ih_
I
• •
t 11 ~ =~
11 f ;1
ii J
~
I ..•
iii .... ....
A4.0
•
(E) ORICK
COLOR: MEOIVM RED
(E) CEDAR SIDING,
COLOR: F'-1
BASEMENT B-OOR· EL.EV 40.l..6'
(NO CHANGE)
{E) CEDAR StDING.
COLOR: F-1
SOUTH ELE~AJJON SCALE: 1 /8' -. -0
FIELD COLOR: F-1 • TRIM COLOR: T-1 •
TRIM COLOR: T-2 •
TOP OF ROOF: EL.EV, 436.5'
(NO CHANCE)
(E) METAL ROOF' Fl.ASHING
COLOR: T-1
FIRST FLOOR• El.EV. +13 6'
(NO CHANGE)
(E) 8"1CK
COLOR: UEDIUM AW
NORTH ELEX:AIJON
SCALE"1/8" -,:_:O
(E) METAL ROOF" f'l.A51-IING
COLOR: T-1
Y<f' OC ROOF· 0 fV +;58 :r
(NO CHANGE)
(E) CEDAR SIDING.
COI..OR: F'-1
FIRST FLOOR: ELEY, 413,6'
(NO CHANGE)
(N) 26' HIGt STEEL POLE UQtT
IN PARKIN<. LOT
ca..oR: FLAT Bl.ACI(
POLE LIGHT (26' HIGH}
NOT TO SCALE
\l"ls!!':!'.~Jl,906; ELEV. m,e'
_.Ill_
NORlli & SOUlli ELEYATJON
CATE: 12' WIDE=---
EAST ELEVATION
(H) e' MIGH OWN-1.M FENCE
'11TH Wffl. a.Als.
CQUlA: OMK GREEN
k war ~1 , r
WEST ELEYATJON
(FROM BENSON ROAD S.)
IBASH ENCLOSljRE
$CAL[: 111e,· • 1·-0
(N) 6' HIQ-1 GALVANIZED 5TEEl.
CHAIN-UNI< FENCE
ca.OR: LIGHT GRAY
WEST El,EYATION
(FROM BENSON ROAD S.)
~N S1¥,j EE!119,1.NG CALE: 1 1e• • 1 -
(N) Sll'IJT-f'AC[ ~CRm.'.
ffi,'l!ll,l.m'
SOUlli ELEYATION
Pl AX 9,~Pll!jD WAI I
SCALE: 1 16 • 1-o'
;
FEB 1 7 2014
CliY OF R::NTON
I
I
j
i ,;
Ii j Ii
ii J
~
I.•;
iii
"'"' .. ~,
A4.1
•
STAFF
BREAK RM.
r----
ISTAFFIISTAF
OFC. WORK
COPY /c =:
UPPLY
COMPUTER
LAB
19-7 X 11-0
CLASSRM.
25-5 X 27-11
7' W. CORRIDOR
CLASSRM.
25-9 X 31-9
'HIGH' WINDOWS--~---------~
CHILD SCHOOL
EXISTING BUILDING
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR
SCALE: 3/16" -1'-0"
AREA: 9,405 SQ. FT.
STAFF ENTRY
DN.1
SENSORY
ROOM
7-8 X 15-7
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 28-5
,_c;1
I
NEW 'HIGH'
'NINDOWS ~----~
VIDEO
ROOM
13-1 X 16-1
·--SLIDING I ) L, I rt PARTITION I _ -f"i.-..:. I
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 28-5
7' W. CORRIDOR
STUDENT
ENTRY
~
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 28-5
NEW 'HIGH' WINDOWS--~-------~-~---------~
ON.I
NEW
'HIGH'
"MNDOWS "'I
CLASSRM. "-
23-7 X 21-2
CLASSRM.
23-7 X 21-2
'
)
CITY Of RENTON
P/.ANN!i\/G Di\JISIOl"'J
!
!
~z z~
~i .. -] ~e;
!Ji!~~ ~ifs~
I· ij ow ~/:::
j z ' ' ,. " ~~lo ...
zifE~ I ;;1,J·~ lil1~8 ;,; .. "'-·J '•' i!~~;! &
~-11114
~"
A2.0
i
m:rr,~. $~!:. 2®, ¥. 2:111::;ir~[[Wb.M.
8:1 ~ -------
t'.) ASPHAI ' DRIV[
I
J
--
-,cu.·,..,'""'"
t,IMIIS!Ollt"W<IIO,IO
C,101 ~ CCO.l!OTS ("·~-··
--------------
-·-:::-......
NEW 5' HIGH ~
Ctl. LINK FENC[ ~ ~,
AREA ~
'
-=
-~EXISTING J' ~l~~U~ENT ----.. ---.. ·--------. ...._
-----------
---..
---'"1·----.. --. -....
~ --·-·-.
•l
~ .. ~n.Jl
,.
~
0
' ' I
I]
I'
\1
I' 1'--N[W 6' H
·.1 CHMN LINK I rfN(E ~
I, -,
i I
] I
1: .. /I
,c 4{ I
" I -L.
,4
-N[.,. 6" J io CAT[ "
<I r; I
/ /j u.J <O \ t
·-r",fF . ~ I I ~; t"l ?-I -;. .. i ~1,'
L !;i ~1101SW-1G I I ~ ~)~ 1~0~f~~~~ I)
, a '
U'.'l '((' I ~ir h . .._l.... I
~;' o"l-~ , cS, IRETA'NIN::; ]'. l I
NEW MODULAR ; s1Y:-,.._ I . Wto.LL \ .,, ./
AD~IN. BUILDING '-. J '· /' "? <> -j .....-\ __.I, .J./@_)tlEV. 404.6' ----~, "' l-2,W/""J ·-., l.. L,, . . z· . ~-~~/_\ A v · ....... _
----~ ----------1--~1%rm I
---_N~W 6 H. CHAIN uNKITNC( ·------------··r· --J-, ---, I ---------------0tn s.:TBM'.\1Nf .
-J
---.. I ---------........ ......... _..-· .
, .. --..
I I ( I
-.... -.... --GRADING PLAN @D/NC Pl AN NOJFS
lfllPO/rtA/1£1.·•/1',l/fST
.....-MU 1mJIIIJT am VJ CY(-Uf llfS} (If! BE'. IIW!lll !J'·ll'i:!" F DWoU' COIRC/llfl. O!l,PllllZ"
D>l:'FU'"''"""llll"<l«<J1lf"•'~""""m1111~/1f!ICRf1J/NJ
l'I.L· '" cr{m TIIS/V-(}N-91CWl~JPIAtSI !U...i: -/IIP<llr .. •,m,i
,..iu:,_-:.=~~~=~,1':;,f"'i::f=~ia,
lllray1 ..
Engineering
C1tnsuHants
·-MV,IUIOI
,.0. ... 111,
-111,'-!J
·~-Jll·l<~ -·-
I CAU. EEFgE mu oo
, 1-B00-424-5555
""1flEU>U>C.l,.,..Of~lTTIUTIES
si;:.ll[: 1'•20'
~ w ~. ·-
---------
zEB
-.
~ 0,.TE \ N'PR
--
l"-:ro'
I .:::. I .:.:-.::.
~~-orn1CA T\ON /
------CONSffiUCTION NOTES:
;,.-; -·------.......... LO<m. J&C ~1151: IMlllMI Cl/JI£
lOIIJII llllOD[ ll!CUG IUJIHl CIRO W 404.00 W:.
PIIU/IICvMOC~lnlUIFIDIG
"-'I
ORAPli!C .SC.I.LE ~-
1111~)
1 -~ -"' ft.
®
IIIXJ([Jt • ..,,..u,,,-.......
IL1"1t-lUI0<111U•/AAttJlt~M'OJ.""51< CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
CHILD s~OOol
N
FEB I 7 ZD14
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING DIVISION
r
' ,,
~
°"' ..
"' ,,i
~
0
_\
'"' ~ ____ J_
' y
OM
,FJ2
,' )z
, ' ,
:
' , , ,
' ' :
' ' '
llll -SS-ddd
< r
~ <
,,,,---
_ ___/,,.. I
' :
//'
,
', i
" /' / '
I
I :
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
' ,
I
' ' I
I
' ,
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
(
. ;
~ ~
I
'
l
j
I I . ' '
\
' ' I
\
I
I
' \
\
I
PPP-SS-TITI
I
' '
I
' ' I
' ' ' '
' /
--·---<y-
/i
-·--: '
'·*"~~<:>
0
"'
C
C
C
"'
0
-----1
, I , ,
I ' f; 0
f-w w
"-
w
~ m
~
~ ~
0 e-z w >
" w w
~ e-
~
0
~
" '.,
e-w w
w~ rw Ow Z 00
I
I
I='"' i" ~ Fe ~&
~ ~; i5. ~mg
~~<: G~&
z
<(
_J
o_
>-
0:::
0
I-z w > z
w w
0:::
I-
I
• ~ • > ~ • ~ • ~
0
"' II
~
<( u
V)
G)
t-.....
m w w..
I
,i ,,
!
!
g I ! rl-+--+'+--H-+-+-+-H
I
j
ii! rl-+-+-+-+-H-++-+--+-++-H-+-+-+-H-++-+-H-+-++-H-+-+-+-H-++-+-H !~
I
I
,,I,, 1S.,css sss I~ . u s "
I I
Io __ ' ,_ ~ -~ :... I-\,o -
ii
G s u " I
I
s
,.,
'
~·
:!: ~ ~ ~ ~ '.::' ~ ;_, ::; :::; ti t; :::; t;
ii! rl-+-++-H-+-+-+-H-+-++-H-+-+-+-H-+-+-+-+-H-++-+--+-+-+-+-H-+-+-+--1
i I
r
I ~ I I ! • ~ ! • ~ ~ • •
-"
f--1-~ -• 1-------+-t---+-+--+--+-+-t---+----t--+--+-t-tc-t----t----t--+--t---+-t---+---t---+--+-+-t---+----t--+--+-t-i---+----j
t-;.· . -+--+-+-t---+-+--+--+-t-t---+----t--+--+-t-tc-t----t----t---+---t---+-t---+---t---+--+-+-t---+-+--+--+-t-t---+----t----t---t-1
i i i ~ ~ a ~ ~ ! ~ • Q " • • ' • " '
I
I
I'! vi "'1l F' 0 !2~
~ ~< ~ [n3'
~~c
9~2 :i:<.e>i
UN~
•
" • ~
& g
~
' ~
~
William Popp Associates Transportation Engineen/Planners
(425)401-1030
FAX (425) 401-2125
e-mail: info@wmpoppassoc.com
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
for
CHILD School Renton
Prepared for:
Wangerin Associates, UC
12408 JO</" Place NE
Kirkland, WA 98034
Prepared by:
William Popp Associates
14--400 Building, Suite 206
14400 Bel-Red Rd
Bellevue, WA 98007
February 4, 2014
14-400 Building• Suite 206 • 14400 Bel-Red Road. Bellevue, WA 98007
RECEIVED
FEB 1 7 ;r,'.i • I", r
CITY Of Rf.:!\l'i'ON
PLANN!NG UiVISIOl\i
Traffll· impact Analysis CHIWSchoo/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ·-····················· .. ················-··························-··················· .............................. -............ 1
A. EXISTING CONDmONS ·········--······················-············-······-.................................... --............... 2
I . SITE SERVICES INVENTORY ................................................................................................................ 2
Table I Three Year Accident History a........ . .......................................... 4
2. TRAfFIC VOWMES ............................................................................................................................ 4
3. LEVEL-OF-SERVICE ............................................................................................................................ 5
Table 2 Intersection Level-of-Service Criteria .......................................................................................... 6
Table 3 Existing Intersection Level-of-Setvice (Year 2014) ................................................................... 6
4. PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................................. 7
B. FUTURE CONDmONS .......... -................. -....................................................................................... 7
1. BACKGROUNDTRAFF!CVOLUMES ..................................................................................................... 7
2. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ............................................................................................................... 8
Table 4 CHILD Site Trip Cieneration a ..................................................................................................... 9
Table 5 Existing Site Trip Generation .................................................................................. . ....... 9
3. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRAFFIC AsSIGNMENT ............................................................................... l 0
4. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................................................. 10
5. LEVEL-OF-SERVICE (2016 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT) ................................................................ 11
Table 6 2016 Future Intersection Level-of-Service (AM and PM Peak Hour)' ..................................... 11
6. QUEUES (2016 WID1 PROJECT) ........................................................................................................ 12
Table 7 Queues (2016 AM and PM Peak Hours with Project)' ............................................................. 12
Benson Rd SIS 26'' St/Site Access ......................................................................................................... 12
7. SITE ACCESS -SCHOOL BUSING ...................................................................................................... 13
C. CONCLUSIONS .......................................................... -..................................................................... 13
1. PROJECT DETAILS ............................................................................................................................ 13
2. ACCIDENTS ...................................................................................................................................... 14
3. PROJECT VEillCULAR IMPACT .......................................................................................................... 14
4. LEVEL OF SERVICE ........................................................................................................................... 14
5. SITE ACCESS .................................................................................................................................... 14
D. MITIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ._ ....... -..... -... -.......... --.. ,-............... -.................... 15
Page i
Traffic impact Analysis (2/4/14) Cf/1/JJ School
INTRODUCTION
The following report was prepared in order to address the traffic related impacts of the
proposed new CHILD school located in the city of Renton. This study evaluates the
project's AM and PM peak hour impacts at Benson Rd SIS 26th St/Site Access
intersection. The analysis includes an operations analysis for both street peak and school
peak conditions as well as a safety.
The study addresses the typical City of Renton traffic impact analysis guidelines of
project impacts at year of estimated full occupancy.
Project ltkntificatwn
CHILD is an approved Non Public Agency by the Washington State Office of the
Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPD to provide contracted therapeutic sertices to
students from public school districts whose resources cannot adequately serve the
complex needs of struggling children. Their mission is to provide innovative school
programs and therapies that promote social, emotional and academic development for
children with special needs.
The school is both an accredited day school for children ages 5-17 and a developmental
therapy clinic serving children 3-18. They educate children with a range of conditions
that interfere with learning. The school provides innovative academic programs with
integrated developmental therapy services that promote social, emotional and academic
growth for children with special needs. They have a small class size with a very high
teacher to student ratio that ensures focused instruction for the greatest success of the
student.
CHILD offers a full-time program with year-round, open enrollment and a six week
summer program. They serve students placed by parents or in partnership with school
districts. Most students are, able to successfully return to their home school district within
1-3 years.
The school operating out of a building located at 4030 -86th Ave SE in Mercer Island
that has 7 classrooms. The school is proposing to relocate to the property at 2640 Benson
Rd S in the City of Renton. The location of the site is shown in Figure I.
The site is currently occupied with a church. The church building is one story plus
basement with a total floor area of 18,469 gsf. The project is proposing to remodel the
church for school use and add a modular building that will be 2,239 gsf. There will be 7
classrooms for the new school, the same as the existing site.
The site currently has 80 parking stalls for the church use. The proposed use, new
modular building, and revised lot circulation pattern will result in a total of 65 stalls for
William Popp Associates Page 1
St
509
\
t-4tGHLIN£
"' I'
I
' '' !·
S~11t"llu S!
\ ·~
of,,,
~.\ \. 1\ .Duwamish. i \, \Y
1 ·.!. ''\\ ,l 99
2
Boulevard Park
ii
''
'; '
,/
Buri°ifn-
: 1
Notth
:ieata,
Park
,Riverton
Heights
lntemahonai
" " s1aeths1 SeaT~c
AmJII ,<'./ 'i , c.,
iii lol:e,/~
S 200tt> St -.j
~
E
! s ·-
.. /f
0
'.d
~fflier JI.
'tos
\ Bryn Mawr
"Q, "'~ .. .r
1 , Skyway !J
May Creek
Kennydal,e
,i
Newcastle
V,
'" . s, Nl 4th ~I "",id
S lnd St ~
"' S 196th St t <
.r.
~
. '' L',c· I • /
'Cl
"' ,._ " ' -' ~
" i { ·,
I< ,,
'
i1
! .
I
S lllth \I O Brien J
'%val~ Renton ,,...,_
w
V,
~ ..
.c
;§
ns;
SE 192nd St
1.i.;;tl
Gt,-,~~
w
"' " > <
~
WJUlAM ffJPI!_ ASSOCIA~ --
CHILD School VICINITY MAP
"""-WA
42HOl.l030 -.~ ........ Figure 1
2640 Benson Rd S, Renton, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis /2/4//4) CH/W School
the school use. The upper parking lot (east end of site) is designed for a counter-
clockwise circulation pattern such that the school bus drop off and pick up design has the
bus door facing the school entry/exit point, such that it minimizes the walking distance
for the students and also prevents the students from walking through the parking lot.
Access to the site will be from an existing eastside approach to the Benson Rd SIS 26th St
intersection. There is also an access to S 27th St on the east end of the property, however,
this access is gated and is presumed to be for emergency purposes only.
The site plan is presented in Figure 2.
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
I. Site Services Inventory
Roadways
Key roadways serving the site are discussed below.
Benson Rd S is a two-way north/south Minor Arterial that connects between SW Grady
Way to the north and Benson Dr (SR 515) to the south. The roadway just north of the site
access is a 5-lane roadway with two-lanes each direction and a center two-way left tum
lane, along with curb, gutter, and sidewalks on both sides. On-street parking is
prohibited. Traffic control includes signals at all major intersection, and the site access
intersection (S 26th St). The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
S 26th St is a two-way east/west residential street that provides access and connection
between Benson Dr S (SR 515) and Benson Rd S. The roadway is approximately 36 feet
wide with curb, gutter, and sidewalks on both sides. Parallel on-street parking is
permitted. There is no roa4way channelization except at both ends. The posted speed
limit is 25 mph.
Intersection Geometrics and Signal Operations
The Benson Rd SIS 26th St intersection is signalized. The roadway channelization is:
• Northbound approach -single lane with thru and right turns permitted. Left turns
are not allowed.
• Southbound approach -three lane approach including a center two-way left tum
lane that is used as a left tum lane at the signal, one thru lane, and a right tum
lane.
William Popp Associates Page2
.,
Ill;•-~["T 1"1:j< ,,· . -'
<"-i
,,
..,j ~.
'~l ·.:.11;: ,r"
,-;
;
~•~IL N(,J ztl.lt->-91 l;!
' --.. ..
. -
_\
. -r~·-a-~'~· -~. . -.
~ii.I..'(" _-. --. ·~!. t.,_ -· ... :n·.
~-SITE ~LAI\-P,OPCSED
SCA.LE: 1--~c·
~1E A:JUHE:i'S,
:ll:o.0.0 8E',.5CN l<'OA£1 S
ftENTCN, W" 11110'~ ~
~
FOs!\tEst CHIJRCH cn.lLOIN:;
! ~I PLU~ BA:'ir;UCNT
niTAL Al<!A: 11\,"-6!'1 !-iC J'"T.
~O'ISTRUCllO'\ TYF[ 1'-8
CEl..LUL.AP BI..IIU'J~:;. · 1 ST:H ~
rnTAL AREA ~70 ':>O. FT
CONS"fi.uCTlOI'* TY\'E V-j
pJ:;]•,r:.. TRK LEC£NO
;;cNIFER<:ru:i "TREE
OE:::C .. 0'.)'; ll<E[
W1LUAMPQPfAS§QClATES·---
TI-~all<v>'°*""""&E~
Bc:lcvuc,, WA
42~.401. L030
\1-WW.wmpoppassoc.oom
~ROP:JSED·
li'OOL-LA't 81Jll.DINC 1 STCl'(T'
Tl:.1TAL .1:.i£A: 2,239 SO FT
CONST~\JCTION TYPE V-3
'l:EWXEL F'f:RME~ :':Hll~:':H
~~~.
1¥{ [~~t6cCL•PANcr;
l'~_!iklNG:
NGtUIM. ~ii!::;
"ffi~tqJr:
Ti'JTAL;
,.,
' ~PACE'S
•
0
_,
•-._ w.o•~r r-II(: RE: "° · ,a:>::12·-..,
· i --:_--·--:--:~~·.1~~;=,,. _ _ ~ ----.,,,..,.... "",,
C -•-;;::;:;"~ -~· ,., -~""'"' ,,.,-· i -. l fl,j "'I: ~~• , ~oll<"IN~: • ~I "'f'ol!ZS '\. '\,-J ..... ;'Q.f " ___ ;--'I' _ _,.; ,_.._, ,.,.~ . ,) . -"""E""' . ~,#--
'" -\)' -"', . /.,. /· .· .··y;-\~~---il'·,P· . '"''" 0 · · ·• ,._., .. \ I ' .e: ~ . . . . . ,/;N . ' ' -\' o , .. u r !fW, ..:::,,,,. o . --
---,.___,...__, ' ,cw-~ ~~ts \ LW"" 5,..., ~s-~·-1 ~ ;
'+,"'-• . -0 ' · . .-.\~---··--.. t. ' '~"""" , .. ____ \_ I. ..-:a:
I" ../:"""""t' .,. -.......... , .. J..:' " ~ /''--.. , L ,. ~-.-~·:;
!! ~·-~,,... 1 · :i. 'lltSlfl-" ELJ'• ""'"' ;._ f" '1"'1'. f\~ r..E, •n• •
' I , --,,---1_,,o i :i'I=~·
T -k·
aa,
~--,;.""
.o.s~r ~Mi.
":Jt~)}rt,-., .).,
~--
I
I
d
~ -·-J ,,;-y-7~ : I
'f," ., ).\ -u
~
c:>,_"" . ---'::-"'1'L-,~--,l.t
\_ ' I ~~\ 1---_.. JIMII l ~'TT 1: •• "i:'lu
1
{; t·, r': I ..
~
O;
< -~ "• ,,_. -
"' ,.,.,
• :'! ..
I
r.:ifr-~..._ __ r •11: .tt
~t '-------... ';';_:,~~
I
/ I II~' \toe ~""~..O~C ', ' • ~ ' • • • ,, .', 1 f\i lil.i\' •(..l,O. __ J" ,-il.f''·-n:.,, -·---·--·-t-=-=--~-~-'
·t·,
1 'IH 1Ir I ITfl.,
w.111!7( U'lf:
STOfN DRAIN
SANIT.l.~Y ~,fo'IUI'
o~~AC PO"lf[R u,-,e
CVERHEAP CA0-1..f
t~:;Rc:<.JV:: ,:-,A:,;
'---. ·k
I
/
-oil-Ao-
!"Ml<~ =, I --~~~~=-:::z .. ,a:J31 lw, -· I ,....,...,...,., 42$--112-811'11
1"1• : ui ... 11-11~, ~-slTE"L.~~
SITE PLAN
. -.·11-U<*l"uocl-' ·-~ ~,:,'l:.~1~·""
·
1
r~z
-t;o.·•?.2.~.~ ,~· _;;. : -::.,._ ~"
,~ l::lfNSO'-, J.fC/1.'.)
(&i:· ~IGl-tr-,y_"""Y)
~:.~~~~l':l s .
C 2c 1Q·)
S!.'ALE I~ FEET
.!...~~
--
Of"" ...
l ~.J
.!."''
-,.!,'.
Al.l
CHILD School
---·--
2640 Benson Rd S, Renton, WA
Figure 2
Traffic Impact Analysis (2/4/14) CHIID School
• Eastbound approach -a two-lane approach including a shared left/thru lane and a
right tum pocket.
• Westbound approach -this is a two lane approach with a short left tum pocket.
The approach is signed and striped for left tum and right tum only movements; a
thru movement is not permitted.
• The signal operates as an actuated signal. The northbound and southbound
approaches run congruent and the southbound left tum is a permitted phase
movement. The eastbound and westbound approaches a split phase, which means
they always run separately. There are crosswalks with pedestrian phasing on all
legs except the north leg.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the site include sidewalks the adjacent roadways.
As noted above, at the signalized Benson Rd S/S 26th St intersection, there are crosswalks
with pedestrian phasing on the east, west, and south legs. Pedestrian crossing of the north
leg is not permitted.
The intersection is well lit with street lights on all signal poles.
Transit Service
Transit service in the region is provided by the King County Department of
Transportation (Metro Transit). There is, however, no transit service in the immediate
vicinity of the site along Benson Rd S. The nearest transit service is Route 201 and 148
north at the Benson Rd S/S Puget Dr intersection, which is approximately 1,800 fl north
of the site. Also, there is Route 161, 169, and 906 south at the Benson Dr SISE 176'h St
intersection, which is about 0.9 miles away.
Accident Data, last 3 (available) calendar years.
A summary of the three-year accident data at the analysis intersections was obtained from
WSDOT Headquarters Olympia. Data for the subject intersection was for the period of
January !, 2011 through November 30, 2013 for the subject intersection. A summary of
available accident data is presented in Table 1.
William Popp Associates Page]
Fra(lic Impact Analysis (214/14) Cll/LD School
Table 1
Three Year Accident History •
Number of Accidents by Year Accident
Intersection
Intersection
Control 2011 2012 2013' Total Rate 1:t
Benson Rd SIS 261h SI/ Site Access signal 0 2 0 2 0.15
a Data period is 1/1/11 through 11/30/13.
b Accidents per million entering vehicles (acc/mev).
As shown in Table I, the number of accidents occurring at the Benson Rd S / S 26'h St
intersection is 2 over the period of almost 3 years. The accident rate is 0.15 for that
period which suggests adequate safe operation at this intersection. The typical standard
threshold is 1.0 accidents per million entering vehicles (acdmev). The average number
of accidents over that period is 0.69 per year.
Both of the accidents appear to be rear-end accidents. One was identified as following to
closely (February, 6:11pm, dark/wet) from the north to the south. The second was
identified as inattention (July, 11 :30am, daylight/dry) with one vehicle stopped heading
north and the second moving south to north. There were a few other accidents in the
vicinity however none of these were identified as intersection related.
2. Traffic Volumes
Existing AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were collected at the Benson
Rd S / S 26th St intersection January 15, 2014. A brief summary of the counts are:
a. The AM peak hour volume occurs between 7:00 and 8:00 AM.
b. The AM peak hour volume is 1,255 vehicles per hour (vph) on Benson Rd S
with 82% northbound. The west leg (S 26th St) volume is 50 vph, with 40
eastbound approaching the intersection.
c. The PM peak hdur volume occurs between 4:45 and 5:45 PM.
d. The PM peak hour volume is 1,365 vph on Benson Rd S with 79%
southbound. The west leg (S 26th St) volume is 117 vph, with 96 eastbound
approaching the intersection.
e. For School bus activity, during the AM peak hour, there were 6 school buses
on Benson Rd S. There were more busses past 8am. During the PM street
peak hour, there were 3 buses on Benson Rd S.
f. The pedestrian count was IO for the AM street peak and none for the PM
street peak.
g. The heavy vehicle composition in these counts was I truck in the AM peak
hour, and essentially zero.
William Popp Associates Page4
Traffic Impact Analysis (2/4114) CHJWSchoo/
A summary of the existing 2014 AM and PM peak hour volumes at the analysis
intersections are presented in Figure 3.
An average weekday daily count on Benson Rd S south of Puget Dr S was provided by
the City. The count was done in 2008 and was adjusted to 2014 based on the recent
turning movement counts conducted at the Benson Rd S/S 26th St intersection. The daily
volume when adjusted to 2014 is 14,850 vph. Per historical AWDT City records, the
volume on Benson Rd S south of Puget Dr S has bounced around 1,5000 vph between
2004 and 20 I 0. However, it should be noted that the primary use of the City's count was
to identify the hourly volume fluctuation percentages based on the peak hour volume.
The proposed school in general will have traffic volumes that generally coincide with the
AM street peak hour volume, however, for the PM peak the school lets out between 2:30
and 3:30 for all days except Wednesdays, where it lets out between 12:30 and I :30. The
daily counts indicated that for the non-Wednesday departure, the northbound approach is
91 % of peak and the southbound approach is 66% of peak. For Wednesday departure, the
northbound approach is 97% of peak and the southbound approach is 39% of peak. The
PM peak hour turning movement count was adjusted based on these percent-of-peak
values to the off-peak school departure times.
These volumes are also shown in Figure 3.
3. Level-of -Service
Level-of-service (LOS) is a term defined by transportation and traffic engineers as a
qualitative and quantitative measure of operational conditions within a traffic stream and
the perception of these conditions by motorists and/or passengers. There are several
quantitative indices utilized depending on the type of intersection control present. There
are six levels-of-service that are given letter designations from "A" to "F", with "A" being
the best, or minimum delay conditions, and "F" being the worst, with maximum delay or
jammed conditions. LOS "C" or "D" is generally considered acceptable for planning and
design purposes, while LOS "E" represents operating conditions at or near capacity with
freedom to maneuver being extremely difficult.
Level-of-service for the existing condition was caiculated using Trafficware's Synchro
software. This software replicates the analytical procedures specified in the Highway
Capacity Manual. The level of service criteria are shown in Table 2. Level-of-service for
signalized and non-signalized intersections is quantified in terms of vehicular delay.
Delay, measured in terms of time (seconds), also represents driver discomfort, frustration,
excess fuel consumption and lost travel time.
William Popp Associates Page5
N
School PM Peak (Non-Wednesday)
-1-
10 __ I
0
56--,
,~-~ 1
-I -
! I i
School PM Peak (Wednesday)
10
0
34
WIWAM POPP ASSOCIATES ---
1
-1
1
-I -
xm-,_
N
AM Street Peak Hour
a,
0 a, N D
-I
18
0
21
SITE
0
1
1
I -
S 27th S1
PM Street Peak Hour
11
0
86
1
1
1 --1
-I -
SE 168th St
SE Petrovitsky Rd
-...w,
425.401.1030
www.~.a,rn
EXISTING VOLUMES (2014) CHILD School
Figure 3
2640 Benson Ad S, Renton, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis (214114) CJJ/LD School
Table 2
Intersection Level-of-Service Criteria
Level of
Service
A
B
C
D
E
F
Definition
Little or no delay
Shon traffic delays
Average traffic delays
Long traffic delays
Very long traffic delays
Extreme delay
Delay; seconds per vehicle
Stopped Delay Per Vehicle
signalized non-signalized
Less than IO.O sec
IO. I to 20 sec
20.1 to 35 sec
35.1 to 55 sec
55.1 to 80 sec
Greater than 80 sec
Less than 10.0 sec
IO. I to 15 sec
15.1 to 25 sec
25.1 to 35 sec
35.1 to 50 sec
Greater than 50 sec
Note that for signalized intersections, the delay presented represents the overall operation
of the intersection, whereas the delay presented for unsignalized intersections represents
the delay for the critical approach or movement. The results are presented in this manner
since the overall intersection delay at a non-signalized intersection is generally quite good
because the major through street maneuvers are not impeded and for the most part carry
the majority of the traffic. It is also important to note that the level of service results from
the Synchro output do not fully take into consideration the queue spill back from
upstream or downstream signalized intersections and the additional congestion that may
occur.
The existing level of service at the analysis intersections is presented in Table 3.
Table3
Existing Intersection Level-of-Service (Year 2014)
Traffic
Intersection Control LOS Oelay' Comments
AM PEAK HOUR•
Benson Rd SIS 261h St/Site Access Signal A JO. just under 10 sec overall delay
PM PEAK HOUR'
Benson Rd SIS 26th St/Site Access Signal A JO. just under 10 sec overall delay
a delay va1ues represented in seconds per vehicle
b street peak houc AM 7c()().8c00am, PM 4c45-5c45pm
As shown in Table 3, this intersection is estimated to operate at LOS A for both the AM
and PM street peak hours.
William Popp Associates Page6
Traffic Impact Analysis (2141/4) CIIIW School
4. Planned and Programmed Improvements
According to the city of Renton's 20014-2019 Transportation Improvement Program,
there are two roadway project improvement projects in the vicinity of the project.
TIP 9 -I 16th Ave SE Improvements (Benson Community Planning Area) includes
widening the roadway to provide a 3-lane roadway with bike lanes along I 16th Ave SE
and Edmonds Ave SE, new pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, traffic signals,
storm drainage, channelization and landscaping from Puget Drive SE To south City
limits. Improvements will enhance vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian safety along this
north-south transportation conidor.
TIP IO -Carr Road Improvements (Benson-Talbot Community Planning Areas) derives
from a conidor design report prepared by King County in 2003 that identified the need
for roadway improvements from Benson Dr SE (108th Ave SE) to Talbot Rd S. Potential
improvements vary from roadway realignment/widening at several locations to address
geometric deficiencies, widening to a new 5-lane roadway including bicycle lanes on new
alignment.
8. FUTURE CONDITIONS
1. Background Traffic Volumes
Background traffic volumes are estimated by factoring the existing traffic volumes by
historical traffic growth rate(s) to the project's horizon year and adding in known pipeline
development proposals. The project's estimated horizon year was assumed to be 2 years
out from today, thus 2016.
Historical average annual daily traffic counts in the area of the project were obtained from
City sources for the years 2()04, 2006, 2008, and 2010. The count locations include
Talbot Rd north of Puget Dr, Benson Rd north and south of Puget Dr, Benson Rd north
and south of S 31st St, Puget Dr west of Benson Rd, and Benson Dr north of Benson Rd.
A summary total for all roadway segments noted above indicate that the historical annual
growth rates trending between 1.7% and 1.8% per year. WSDOT daily count records for
SR 515 (Benson Dr S, between milepost 5.14 and 5.29) from 2005 to 2012 indicate an
average annual growth rate of approximately 2.8%. Given the information noted above,
for estimating horizon year background traffic, a background growth rate of 3% was used
to forecast future volumes on Benson Rd S and 2% per year was used to forecast future
volumes on S 26th St.
No pipeline projects were identified by the City that would have a significant impact on
Benson Rd S in the vicinity of the site.
William Popp Associates Page 7
Traffic Impact Analysis (214//4) Cll/LD School
Year 2016 AM and PM background volumes are presented in Figure 4.
2. Project Trip Generation
The CHILD school currently operates in a leased building on Mercer Island. The gross
building area of that building is approximately 17,000 gsf with 7 classrooms and ancillary
uses. A few of the classroom uses shift to occupational therapy type uses in the later parts
of the day. The relocation of the CHILD school to the proposed site will result in a slight
increase in gross building area, however all uses will be the same. There will be 7
classrooms plus more area for ancillary uses. In addition, there the occupational therapy
uses will shift to exclusive rooms (no longer in classrooms). The proposed site building
area will utilize the existing church building at 18,469 gsf plus there will be a modular
building at 2,239 gsf constructed in the southwest corner of the site.
In preliminary discussions with City staff, and the pre-application meeting December 19,
2013, it was proposed by the project team and accepted by City staff that the trip
generation analysis for the proposed school include driveway counts at the existing site
for three different average weekday days. The counts were summarized every 15 minutes
and ran between 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The counts were conducted Tuesday January 7,
2014 through Thursday Jan 9, 2014. Counts were recorded for both entering and exiting
movements, and were stratified by passenger vehicles, school buses, and cabs. It was
concluded that there is insignificant vehicular activity for an average weekday before 6:00
AM and after 6:00 PM.
Table 4 summarizes the trip generation counts for the existing school, which would be
transferred to the new site, with same school operations.
William Popp Associates Page8
N
-I
1=!.
C, s.
:D a.
(J)
School PM Peak (Non-Wednesday)
"' "' a, I ..--<D.-1
-I -
10
0 --
59
~1
-1
-I -
I
School PM Peak (Wednesday)
-I -I
-1
1
1
11
0
35
WIUJAM POPP ~J'ES .=
-I -
AM Street Peak Hour
-' -
19
0
22
0
1
1
-I -
PM Street Peak Hour
SITE
S 27th St
-i -
11
0
89
1
1
I -1
-I -
SE 168th St
SE Petrovitsky Rd
""-WA
425.401.1030
-·~-com
BACKGROUND VOLUMES (2016) CHILD School
Figure 4 2640 Benson Rd S, Renton, WA
lra{fic lmpac, Analysis (2/4//4) CH/ID School
Table 4
CHILD Site Trip Generation a
Passenger School Buses All
Cars s and Cabs" Vehicles
Period Time In Out In Out In Out All
AM Peak Hour ' 7:30-8:30 AM 37 4 13 10 50 14 64
PM Street Peak Hour ' 3:45-4:45 PM 2 36 l I 3 37 40
PM School Peak I ' 2:30-3:30 PM JO 13 18 18 28 30 58
PM School Peak2 ' 12:30-l:30PM JO 13 18 18 28 31 59
Daily (weekday) r 24 hour 70 70 37 37 107 107 214
a Based on 3--day driveway counts at the existing site. All volumes presented in Table 6 reflect a 3-day average.
b The AM peak hoor for the site. These trips are assumed 10 coincide with the AM: street peak for conservative purposes.
c The PM peak hour for the site that generally coincides with the street PM peak hour.
d The PM peak hour for the school for Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday.
e The PM peak hour for tbe site for Wednesday (similar volumes expected as Peakl however at earlier time of day).
f The estimated daily volume for the site.
g Passenger cars typically reprsent staff and visitor activity.
f All students typically arrive via school bus (large and small) or via school district provided cab.
As shown in Table 4 above, based on a 3-day average of driveway counts at the current
CHILD school, the school generates around 60 vehicles (in & out) during school peak
arrival and departure times. During the street's PM peak hour period, the commute peak
when most staff leave, the school generates around 40 vehicles per hour. The 3-day daily
volume estimate is 214 vehicles per day.
The trip generation estimates for the existing site are presented in Table 5.
!TE
Code
CHURCH
Land Use
Size
LUC 560 18.469 ks/
a per ffE rates for Chun:::h
Rate
Vol
Table S
Existing Site Trip Generation
AWT
9.11
168
AM Peak
Total In Out
0.720 0.540 0.460
13 7 6
PM Peak
Total In Out
0.660 0.520 0.480
12 6 6
As shown in Table 5, the existing site is estimated to generate 168 average weekday daily
trips, 13 AM, and 12 PM peak hour trips.
William Popp Associates Page 9
Tra{(ic Impact Analysis (2/4114) CHILD School
In terms of net new trips generated at to/from the site, it is estimated that for the AM and
PM street peaks, the net new trips to the surrounding street system would be 51 and 28
trips respectively. The net new daily trip estimate is 46 trips.
It should be noted that in the future operations analysis summarized later herein, no trip
adjustment credit was taken for the existing church trips at the site access intersection.
3. Trip Distribution and Traffic Assignment
A specialized analysis was conducted for the project's trip distribution and assignment.
There are two major trip types arriving and departing the site. There are staff, and there
are students. The staff are presumed to arrive for the most part by passenger vehicle
(versus public transit, bike, or walk). CHILD school provided zip code information for
all staff. The passenger car trip component as noted in Table 6 is assumed to primarily
reflect staff trips, thus the staff zip code information was used to develop trip distribution
patterns and assign trips for staff, as well as a few visitors and/or parents. The zip code
information indicated there were 31 different zip codes for staff residence, with 59 staff.
Approximately 90% of these staff would be to and from the north on Benson Rd S, thus
10% would be south.
The trip distribution and assignment of students via small school bus and cab were
obtained from CHILD for the various school districts that provide bussing and/or cab
transportation for student's to/from the school districts to CHILD. Based on this
information, it was determined that there are currently 17 different school districts
providing students and transportation to CHILD. There are 13 buses and 7 cabs estimated
to be currently used for student transit. Based on the zip code information for each school
district, it was estimated that approximately 75% of the buses/cabs would be to and from
the north on Benson Rd S. Thus the remainder 25% would be to and from the south on
Benson Rd S.
The AM street-school peak, the PM school peak, and the PM street peak hour trip
distribution and assignment for the project is presented in Figure 5. The trip assignment
stratifies both the passenger car and bus/cab trip types.
4. Background Traffic Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Year 2016 PM peak hour with-project traffic volumes were developed by adding project
trips to the year 2016 background traffic volumes.
The AM peak hour background total volume entering the Benson Rd S/S 26th St
intersection is estimated to be 1,360 vph. The CHILD school is estimated to add 41
passenger cars and 23 bus/cab vehicles to the total. The total volume with the project is
estimated to be 1,424 vph. The total volume added to the intersection with the school is
64 trips, which would equate to a 4% increase in total entering traffic.
William Popp Associates Page JO
AM Street Peak Hour
N 0
'" O Oe,
-' -
3 (7)
0
1 (3)
0
0
-I -
90% (75%)
-----"
"\ cP
\
\
'"--~------
School PM Peak (Non-Wednesday
and Wednesday)
LEGEND
00 0,
-I -
0
0--
0
12 (14)
0
1 (4) ,_
>< 0~
xx --Passenger Cars (StaffNisitor)
(xx) --bus/cab for students
xx% --Passenger Cars (Staff/Visitor) Distribution Percentage
(xx%) --bus/cab for students Distribution Percentage
. -··-·.i
0
S 27th S1
llel.le"1le.WA
42HOl.l030
WWW.WIIIIJIOPPIWOC.COlll
PROJECT DISTRIBUTION &
ASSIGNMENT; AM & PM
::::, 1 32 (1 I OON
---o -I -4 (0)
0 -I --
0
0 X 0§:
0
·-Streel AM Peak Hour
--Street PM Peak Hour
SE 168th St
---10% (25%)
SE Petrovitsky Rd
CHILD School
Figure 5
2640 Benson Rd S, Renton, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis (214114) CHIWSchoo/
The PM peak hour background total volume entering the Benson Rd SIS 26th St
intersection is estimated to be 1,481 vph. The CHILD school is estimated to add 38
passenger cars and 2 bus/cab vehicles to the total. The total volume with the project is
estimated to be 1,521 vph. The total volume added to the intersection with the school is
40 trips, which would equate to a 3% increase in total entering traffic.
The school peaks during the afternoon period are estimated to be significantly fewer trips
total entering. The school's impact however is slightly higher.
The Year 2016 AM and PM peak hour with project volumes are shown in Figure 6. The
volumes in greater detail are included in the appendix.
5. Level-of-Service (2016 with and without Project)
Level-of-service for the 2016 with-and without-project conditions were calculated for the
subject analysis intersection. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 6. For
comparison purposes, level-of-service values for 2014 are also presented. All of the
future level of service calculations assume existing geometric and signal operations
conditions.
Table 6
2016 Future lnter5eetion Level-of-Service (AM and PM Peak Hour)'
Intersection
AM PEAK HOUR b
Benson Rd SIS 2611, St/Sile Access
PM PEAK HOUR"
Benson Rd SIS 26th St/Site Access
2014
Existing
A 10-
A 10-
20\6 C
Background
A 10-
B 10+
2016
w/Project
B II
B 13
Comments
school and street peaks
assumed to coincide
street peak
A 10-Non-Wed school peak
A 8 Wed school peak
a WS and Delay; delay represented in seconds per vehicle. LOS and delay represent overaJI intersection approach delay.
b Existing oounts conducted January 15, 2014.
c The background traffic forecast includes 3%/yr growth for Benson Rd S and 2%/yr for S 261h St.
As shown in Table 6, the level of service conditions both AM and the school and street
PM peak periods are LOS A or B. The school's impact in terms of overall delay varies
between 1 and 3 seconds per vehicle.
William Popp Associates Page ll
'
N
AM Street Peak Hour
-' -
19
0
22
SITE
S 27th St
10
1
-5
-I -
XC,N
a,
0
PM Street Peak Hour
-I -'
34
1
5
11
0
89
-I -
School PM Peak (Non-Wednesday)
N
"' '" " ..... r.o C\I --27
1
I -,-6
10 -
0
59
-' -
School PM Peak (Wednesday)
-I -
11 --l
0
35
WIUIAJ.f POPP ASSOCIATES==----r;:. ...... _-11o., ~a Er.--
"""""' -425.401.1030
--~"""'
27
1
6
-I -
BACKGROUND PLUS
PROJECT VOLUMES (2016)
SE 168th St
SE Petrovitsky Rd
CHILD School
Figure 6
2640 Benson Rd S, Renton, WA
Tm[fic Impact Analysis (2/41141 CHILD School
6. Queues (2016 with Project)
A traffic simulation run was conducted for the various peak hour scenarios with the
project (utilizing SimTraffic) in order to identify queue conditions, in particular the
southbound left tum as well as queues exiting the site.
The queue results are shown in Table 7.
Table7
Queues (2016 AM and PM Peak Hours with Project) '
Benson Rd SIS 26"' St/Site Access
Intersection
Average
Queue (ft)
95 %'He
Queue (ft)
AM PEAK HOUR (school and street peaks assumed to coincide)
Soulhbouod Left 40 81
Westbound Left 9 37
Westbound Right 11 39
PM PEAK HOUR (street peak)
Soulhbouod Left 3 18
Westbound Left 12 40
Westbound Right 31 56
PM PEAK HOUR (Non-Wed school peak)
Southbound Left 10 35
Westbound Left 6 27
Weslbound Right 32 59
PM PEAK HOUR (Wed school peak)
Southbound Left 14 35
Westbound Left 7 27
Westbound R.;ght 30 58
A 10-
Max'
Queue (ft)
llO
54
40
Comments
approximate 400' storage d
28 approximate 400' storage d
52
40
50 approximate 400' storage d
31
53
28 approx.imate 400' storage d
31
53
a Queue result<;. based on traffic simulation (Synchro SimTraffic).
b 95m percentile queue is a calculated queue based on the average queue. Design parameters typically are derived from this
finding.
c The maximum queue is the maximum queue observed through simulation.
d The left turn lane storage is noted as 400 feet as this is the distance of the center two-way left-tum lane between the site access
and the nearest driveway to the nortJi. which is on the east side.
As shown in Table 7, the queuing should not be a significant concern. The focus is
generally on the 95lh percentile queue. The southbound left tum 95th percentile queue is
the highest during the AM peak hour, estimated at 81 feet. The storage of that tum lane is
approximately 400 feet to the north.
The queue results for the left and right tum out movements for the 95th percentile estimate
are generally around 30 to 40 ft for the left turn and 50 to 60 ft for the right tum. The
approach is striped for two lanes, however the distance is of the left tum pocket is only
about 40 feet. The site access approach is also skewed such that large vehicles will likely
use both lanes for right turns out. It should be noted that the signal phasing is split phase
William Popp Associates Page 12
Traffic Impact Analysis (2/4//4) CHIU) Schon/
for the side street approaches which means that both the left and right turn movements
out from the site would move together, thus there would not be any queue blockage for
movements during green time. Larger vehicles may be blocked from turning right on red
from the site with any vehicle queue in the exiting left turn pocket.
7. Site Access -School Busing
Given the one-way counter-clockwise ingress and egress for the site, a vehicle turn path
evaluation was conducted for access at the Benson Rd SIS 26th St/Site Access
intersection. The site access width at the intersection (including crosswalk distance)
curb-to-curb is approximately 48 feet. The inside radius on the northeast corner
(applicable to vehicles exiting the site to the north) is approximately 15 feet. The same is
generally true for the southeast corner. Both corners are compound curves.
A typical large size school bus (36 to 40 feet in length) requires approximately a 25-foot
inside turning radius. A turning evaluation using CAD Autoturn indicates that this type
of school bus will have difficulty (in particular right turn exiting the site) without
significant encroachment into the southbound left turn pocket. A van type bus (20 feet in
length) would be able to enter and exit with no encroachments. In a discussion with the
Bellevue School District's Transportation Department, they operate a smaller bus to
CHILD (26 ft to 32 ft in length). The overall dimension of the larger bus, which they are
gravitating towards, is 32'Lx9'Wxl 1 'H. The minimum U-turn dimension for this type of
school bus is 46 feet across. A bus of this size is estimated to be able to adequately enter
or exit the site without significant encroachment into oncoming lanes. Selected bus and
van diagrams are attached in the appendix.
1. Project Details
' The proposed project will be used for the CHILD school that is proposing to relocate
from a site in Mercer Island to the proposed site at 2640 Benson Rd S in the City of
Renton. The site is currently occupied with a church building with a gross floor area of
15,802 gsf. The school will use the church building for it's own uses, and it will also add
a modular building to the southwest of 2,141 gsf.
The site currently has 80 parking stalls for the church use. The proposed use, new
modular building, and revised lot circulation pattern will result in a total of 65 stalls for
the school use.
William Popp Associates Page 13
Traffic Impact Analysis (214/14) CHILD School
2. Accidents
Based on accident records obtained from WSDOT, the subject intersection Benson Rd S I
S 26'h St has experienced only 2 accidents over the past 3 years (from 11/30/13). The
accident rate for the 3-year period is 0.15 accidents per million vehicles entering. The
typical standard threshold is 1.0 acc/mev. The accident occurrence and rate suggests no
unusual unsafe conditions.
3. Project Vehicular Impact
The CHILD school was counted at the existing Mercer Island site. The building area's of
the exiting site is slightly larger than the new site, thus it was assumed that the driveway
counts at the existing site would be those at the new site. Based on an average of 3-days
of counts, the site is estimated to generate 214 average weekday daily trips, 64 AM
(street/school peak), and 40 PM street peak hour vehicle trips to the surrounding street
system. During school departure periods in early afternoon, the school is estimated to
generate 59 trips.
The project's vehicular percentage impact at the Benson Rd S / S 26th St/ Site Access
intersection is 3% to 4% for the street peaks and about 5% to 7% for afternoon school
peaks.
4. Level of Service
The results of the level of service analysis indicate that the Benson Rd S / S 26th St/ Site
access intersection will operate at LOS A or B conditions with the project. In general, the
delay increase overall with the project traffic is between I and 3 second per vehicle.
5. Site Access
The property's access is a circular counter-clockwise path through the site. Both the
ingress and egress to and fri>m Benson Rd S are skewed one-way roadways. The upper
parking lot is designed also in a counter-clockwise route such that bus load/unload occurs
adjacent to the school's front entry thereby allowing safe access for students to and from
the bus, without walking in front of parked buses or into parking drive aisles.
Vehicles such as cab, van, or small school bus (32' in length or less) that are used to
transport students are anticipated to make safe movements at the site ingress/egress at
Benson Rd S. Larger school buses are expected to encroach onto opposing lanes when
turning into the site right tum in (from the south) or exiting the site right turn out (to the
north). It was noted by CHILD staff that at most one large bus enter/exits the current site
each day.
William Popp Associates Page 14
Traffic lmpal'I Analysis /214114) CHILD School
D. MITIGATION and RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the foregoing traffic impact analysis for the CHILD project, the draft mitigation
recommendations are suggested:
I. The site circulation pattern as proposed is designed to allow school bus access ( drop
off and pick up) directly to the main door of the school. This concept would result in
maximizing the safety of the students by preventing student from walking through the
parking lot and in front of buses. The design counter-clockwise path through the
upper parking lot.
2. In addition, it is recommended that the one-way ingress and egress roadways to/from
the upper lot and Benson Rd S be designed for a counter-clockwise pattern as well.
This design would prevent any crossover type movements on the access immediately
east of Benson Rd S, which would occur if the path were clockwise.
3. Due to the site access limitations, CHILD should coordinate with the all school
districts providing student transportation that any vehicle used for student
transportation be no larger than 32 feet in length. Any buses larger than this that are
anticipated to arrive to the site should arrive from the north (left tum in) and exit to
the south (left tum out) to avoid anticipated significant encroachment onto opposing
lanes of traffic.
4. It is recommended that the site access at Benson Rd be designed and paved to the
maximum extent possible to accommodate school bus movements entering and
exiting.
5. With respect to frontage improvements, there are curb, gutter and sidewalks along the
project frontage. The project will be required to dedicate additional right of way for
future widening of Benson Rd S.
6. The site has a secured gated access to S 27th St. This access shall remain gated except
for emergency purposes.
William Popp Associates Page 15
William Popp Associates Transportation Engineers/Planners
(425) 401-1030
FAX (425)401-2125
e-mail: info@wmpoppassoc.com
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
for
CIDLDSchool
February 4, 2014
CONTENTS:
BENSON RD 24HR COUNT (2008)
CHILD SCHOOL MERCER ISLAND DRIVEWAY COUNTS
STAFF AND STUDENT ZIP CODE DATA
AM AND PEAK HOUR TURNING VOLUMES (Street Peaks and School
Afternoon Peaks)
AM AND PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES AND QUEUE
AASHTO SCHOOL BUS TEMPLATES (36' AND 40')
CITY OF RENTON ROAD IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
14-400 Building • Suite 206 • 14400 Bel-Red Road • Bellevue, WA 98007
--------------
BENSON RD S s/o S Puget Dr
Source: City of Renton, July 2008
1400 -.---~----~----~-------~---~----
.. ::,
0
1200
1000
::C 800+----
i
:!l
.!:! 600
~
400 + --
200 + --
0
-------1--
----1--
__ _J __ _
1 :00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:0 11 :0 12:0 1 :00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:0 11 :O
AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM 0 0 0 PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM 0 0
AM -'Wid i'Mie (Hourly) PM PM
,--
-~Northbound ~Southbound -6-Bothways.
I. ··----·--·· ---· ·--·-·------
-· ---·---------
DATE: Jan 7 2014
START TIME 6:00 AM
HOUR
END Passeng91
TIME Vehicle
6:30AM -
6:45AM
7:00AM 2
7:15AM 3
7:30AM 9
7:45AM 30
8:00 AM 48 ---------------------
8:15AM 49
8:30AM 46
8:45AM 27
9:00AM 10
9:15AM 10
9:30AM 9
9:45AM 8 ....
10:00 AM 9
10:15 AM 10
10:30AM 9
10:45 AM 7
11:00 AM 3 -----
11:15 AM 2
11:30AM 1
11:45AM 1
12:00 PM 0
12:15_PM 0
12:30 PM 0
12:45 PM 0
1 :00 PM 0
1 :15 PM 0
1:30 PM 0
1:45 PM 0
~:OOPM 0
2:15 PM 0
2:30 PM 0
2:45 PM 3
3:00 PM 6
3:15 PM 9
3:30 PM 10
3:45 PM 8 -----
4:00PM 5
-4:15 PM 3
4:30PM 2
' 1
CHILD SCHOOL MERCER ISLAND
EXISTING SITE DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC COUNT
IN
Bus
OUT
Bus
Small Larae T Cab
Passenge1
Vehicle Small Lame I Cab
----
-~--
--
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -------0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -----
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 ------
4 2 2 6 0 0 2 ------------
7 4 7 11 4 2 6 ---8 4 7 12 7 4 7
8 4 7 11 7 4 7 ------
5 2 5 6 8 4 5
2 0 0 1 5 2 1 --------
1 0 0 0 2 0 0
1 0 0 1 2 0 0 -
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 --0 0 0 2 0 0 0 ·----------·--
0 0 0 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0 0 --1 0 0 4 1 0 0 -1 0 0 2 1 0 0
1 0 _____ o ___ ,__ 2 1 0 o_ ---
1 0 0 2 1 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0 0 --0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -------------0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -----
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---------------
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 -__ _Q__ -------
4 3 5 1 1 0 0 -------------------
5 5 7 6 5 5 7
5 5 7 6 5 5 7
5 5 ' 7 10 --
5 5 7
1 2 2 19 4 5 7
0 0 0 36 0 0 0 -0 0 0 46 0 0 0 ---0 0 0 48 0 0 0 --------0 0 0 39 0 0 0 , 4:-41,_ PM ----------· -----
5:00 PM 1 0 0 0 18 0 0 0
5:15 PM 1 0 0 -----___ Q_ 8 0 0 0 --------
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 --
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 --. -. -6:00 PM 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0
IN OUT TOTAL
ALL ALL ALL
--
-·-----
2 0 2
3 0 3
9 0 __9__
30 0 30
48 0 48 ----
49 1 50
54 8 62 ~-----.,.-
I----~ 23 68 ----
29 30 59 --------·
29 29 58 ----
21 23 44 ------· ---·-
10 9 19 -----
10 2 12
11 3 14 -
9 2 11
7 2 9
3 5 8
2 4 6 f-------------------
2 5 7 ------
2 3 5
1 3 4 --
1 3 4
0 4 4
0 4 4
0 1 1
0 1 1
0 0 0
0 0 0 --
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
15 2 17
1-.. 23 __ 23 46 -
26 23 49 ----------
27 27 54
13 35 48 --------5 36 41
3 46 49
2 48 50 --·-·--1 39 40
1 18 19 -
1 8 9 ----
0 4 4
0 1 1
1 6 7
CHILD SCHOOL MERCER ISLAND
EXISTING SITE DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC COUNT
DATE: Jan 8 2014Wednesday is early dismissal
START TIME 6:00 AM
HOUR IN OUT
END Passeng'1 Bus 1 Passenge1 Bus
TIME Vehicle Small Larne Other Vehicle Small
---------------------------
--------------. ---·--· __ ._. ----
7:00AM 2 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 3 0 0 0 0 0 --
7:30 AM 10 0 0 0 0 0
7:45AM 27 0 0 ------O _ ____ J) __ 0
8:00AM 38 0 0 0 0 0 -8:15AM 37 0 0 0 0 0
8:30AM 35 6 4 4 5 4 --------
8:45AM 21 6 4 6 7 6
9:00AM 7 7 4 6 7 6 -----
9:15AM 7 8 4 6 7 7 ------
9:30AM 2 3 0 2 2 4
9:45AM 0 3 0 0 0 2
10:00 AM 1 2 0 0 0 2 ----~----
10:15AM ' -1 _______ 1 0 0 0 1 -----
10:30AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 -10:45AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------
11:00AM 2 0 0 0 ___ o __ --0
11:15AM 2 0 0 0 0 0
11:30AM 2 0 0 0 0 0
11:45AM 4 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 PM 2 0 0 0 1 0
12:15 PM 2 0 0 0 1 0 --------12:30 PM 2 0 0 0 1 0
12:45 PM 4 8 2 3 2 0
1:00 PM 8 9 3 5 7 9
1:15PM 10 9 3 6 11 9
1:30 PM 10 9 3 6 13 9 -----
1:45 PM 6 1 1 3 13 9
2:00 PM 2 0 0 1 7 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 -------------
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 ----
3:00 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0
3:15 PM 1 0 0 ' 0 2 0 -
Larae I Other
--
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 4
4 6
4 6 ---·-
4 6 --------
1 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 --
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 -------------
0 0
0 0
3 4
3 6
3 6
3 6
0 2
--·-
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 -----
3:30 PM 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 --
3:45 PM 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 ---. -----··---4:00 PM 3 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 ------------
4:15 PM 3 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 ------------
4:30 PM 2 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 -----
4:45PM 0 0 36 0 0 2 0 ~--0 ------·-
L_ 5:00 PM ' 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 -------
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 ---
5:30 PM 0 0 0 o __ ,____?__ ___ -0 0 0 ----------
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0
IN OUT BOTHWAY
ALL ALL ALL
---
-----
2 0 2
--------------------
3 0 3
10 0 10
27 0 27
38 0 38 -----------------
37 0 37
49 16 65
37 23 60
24 23 47
25 24 49
7 9 16
3 2 5 -----------
~ 3 2 5 -------
2 1 3 ----
1 0 1
1 0 1
2 0 2
~--2 0 2 -----------
2 0 2
4 0 4
2 1 3
2 1 3 -------------· ----
c______? 1 3
17 2 19
25 23 48
28 29 57
28 31 59
11 31 42 ----· -
3 9 12 ---
0 3 3 -----
0 2 2
.__o _____ 1 1
1 1 2
1 2 3
2 2 4
2 2 4
3 17 20 ---
3 28 31 ----
2 32 34
2 36 38
0 21 21
0 12 12
0 7 7
,___ 0 3 3
0 7 7
CHILD SCHOOL MERCER ISLAND
EXISTING SITE DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC COUNT
DATE: Jan 9 2014
START TIME 6:00 AM
HOUR
END
IN
Bus
TIME
Passenge1
Vehicle Small Lame I Other
------
----~--------------
7:00AM 1 0 0 0 -------
7:15 AM 1 0 0 0
7:30AM 5 0 0 0 -----
7:45AM 15 0 0 0
8:00AM 21 0 0 2 -----
8:15 AM 26 0 0 4
8:30AM 31 6 5 6 --------
8:45AM 23 7 5 6
9:00AM 16 7 5 4
9:15AM 12 7 5 2
9:30AM 2 1 0 0 ------
9:45AM 1 0 0 0 -------
10:00AM 1 0 0 0
10:15AM 2 0 0 0 -----
10:3oA~ 2 0 0 0
10:45AM 3 0 0 0 ·------
11:00AM 3 0 0 0
11:15AM 1 0 0 0
11:30AM 1 0 0 0
11:45AM 0 0 0 0
12:00 PM 1 0 0 0
12:15 PM 1 0 0 0 ------
12:30 PM 1 0 0 0 ------
12:45 PM 1 0 0 0
1:00 PM 0 0 0 0
1 :15 PM 0 0 0 0 f---
1 :30 PM 0 0 0 0
1:45 PM 0 0 0 0 ------
2:00PM 0 0 0 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0
2:30PM 0 0 0 0
2:45 PM 4 4 2 3
3:00 PM 6 7 5 6 -----
3:15 PM 8 7 5 6
3:30PM 10 7 5 -,--fl
-
3:45PM 7 3 3 3 ---------
4:00 PM 5 0 0 0 ---·
4:15 PM 3 1 0 0
4:30 PM 3 1 0 0
4:45PM 2 1 0 0
5:00 PM 3 1 0 0
5:15 PM 3 0 0 0 ~-
5:30 PM 1 0 0 0
1------------------
5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 ------
6:00 PM 1 0 0 0
OUT
Passenge1 Bus I Vehicle Small Larae Other
. ------------
-----------
0 0 0 0 -------------
0 0 0 0 -----0 0 0 0 --0 0 0 0 --
0 0 0 0 -------
0 0 0 0 -2 6 5 6 -------
3 6 5 6 -4 6 5 6 -
4 6 5 6 --
2 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 ------------
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 ----"-----------
0 0 0 0 --
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 ----
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 -----0-
-----------------
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0 ---
0 0 0 0 -----------·------
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 --
0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0
9 5 5 5
12 7 5 6 ----
15 7 5 6
19 7 5 6 --.. ---
21 2 0 1 -··------
29 1 0 0 ---
28 1 0 0
24 1 0 0 -
19 1 0 0
8 0 0 0 ------
7 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 -----
4 0 0 0
IN OUT TOTAL
ALL ALL ALL
--
---------------
-----
1 0 1 ---------·-·---
1 0 1 -----
5 0 5 --f---15 0 15 --
23 0 23 r---------
30 0 30 ---
48 19 67
41 20 61
32 21 53
26 21 47 ~-
3 2 5 ------
1 1 2 ~--------
1 0 1
2 0 2
2 0 2
3 0 3 --
3 0 3 -,.-
1 0 1
1 0 1
0 0 0
1 0 1
1 0 1
1 0 1
1 0 1
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 ----
0 0 0
0 0 0 --------
0 0 0
13 1 14
24 24 48 --
26 30 56 -----
28 33 61
16 37 53 ------------------
5 24 29 ---
4 30 34
4 29 33
3 25 28
4 20 24
3 8 11
1 7 8
1 6 7 -
1 4 5
START
TIME
6:00 AM
END
TIME
7:00AM
7:15AM
7:30AM
7:45AM
7:00 AM 8:00 AM
8:15AM
8:30 AM
8:45 AM
8:00 AM 9:00 AM
9:15 AM
9:30 AM
9:45 AM
9:00 AM 1 O:OO AM
10:15 AM
10:30 AM
10:45 AM
10:00 AM 11 :00 AM
11:15AM
11:30 AM
11:45AM
11 :00 AM 12:00 PM
12:15 PM
12:30 PM
12:45 PM
12:00 PM 1 :00 PM
1 :15 PM
1:30 PM
1:45 PM
1 :OO PM 2:00 PM
2:15 PM
2:30 PM
2:45 PM
2:00 PM 3:00 PM
3:15 PM
3:30 PM
3:45 PM
3:00 PM 4:00 PM
4:15 PM
4:30 PM
4:45 PM
4:00 PM 5:00 PM
5:15 PM
5:30 PM
5:45 PM
5:00 PM 6:00 PM
PASSENGER CARS (STAFF TRANSPORTATION)
Early
Tue Wed Thur
in out in out in out
2 0 2 0 1 0
3 0 3 0 1 0
9 0 10 o 5 o
30 o 27 o 15 0
48 0 38 0 21 o
49 1 37 o 26 0
46 6 35 5 31 2
27 11 21 7 23 3
10 12 7 7 16 4
10 11 7 7 12 4
9 6 2 2 2 2
8 1 0 0 1 1
9 o 1 0 1 0
10 1 1 0 2 0
9 1 1 o 2 0
7 2 1 0 3 o
3 5 2 o 3 0
2 4 2 0 1 0
1 4 2 0 1 o
1 2 4 o 0 0
0 2 2 1 1 0
o 2 2 1 1 0
0 4 2 1 1 0
0 4 4 2 1 0
o 1 8 7 0 0
0 1 10 11 0 o
0 o 10 13 0 0
o o 6 13 0 0
0 0 2 7 0 o
0 0 o 3 0 0
0 o o 2 0 0
3 1 0 1 4 1
6 6 1 1 6 9
9 6 1 2 8 12
10 10 2 2 10 15
8 19 2 2 7 19
5 36 3 17 5 21
3 46 3 28 3 29
2 48 2 32 3 28
1 39 2 36 2 24
1 18 0 21 3 19
1 8 0 12 3 8
0 4 0 7 1 7
o 1 0 3 1 6
1 6 0 7 1 4
343 329 265 260 228 218
Dismiss
l-day Av1Tue Thur Wed
in out in oul in out
2 0
2 0
8 0
24 0
36 0
37 0
37 4
24 7
11 8
10 7
4 3
3 1
4 0 ..
4 o
4 0
4 1
3 2
2 1
1 1
2 1
1 1
1 1 2 1
1 2 2 1
1 2 4 2
0 1 8 7
0 1 10 11
0 0 10 13
0 0 6 13
0 0 2 7
0 0 0 3
0 0 0 2
4 1 0 1
6 8 1 1
9 9 1 2
10 13 2 2
8 19 2 2
5 29 3 17
3 38 3 28
3 38 2 32
2 32 2 36
2 19 0 21
2 8 0 12
1 6 0 7
1 4 0 3
1 5 0 7
BUSES AND CABS (STUDENT TRANSPORTATION)
Early
Tue Wed Thur
in out in out in out
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 o 2 0
0 0 0 o 4 0
8 2 14 11 17 17
18 12 16 16 18 17
19 18 17 16 16 17
19 18 18 17 14 17
12 17 5 7 1 0
2 8 3 2 0 0
1 2 2 2 0 0
1 2 1 1 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 13 0 0 0
0 0 17 16 0 0
0 0 18 18 0 0
0 0 18 18 0 0
0 0 5 18 0 0
0 0 1 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
12 1 0 o 9 0
17 17 0 0 18 15
17 17 o 0 18 18
17 17 o o 18 18
5 16 o o 9 18
0 0 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
152 152 148 144 148 144
Dismiss
l-day Av1Tue Thur Wed
in out in out in out
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
1 0
13 10
17 15
17 17
17 17
6 8
2 3
1 1
1 1
0 0
o o
0 0
0 o
o 0
0 0
0 0
1 , 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 13 0
0 0 17 16
0 0 18 18
0 0 18 18
0 0 5 18
0 o 1 2
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
11 1 0 0
18 16 0 0
18 18 0 0
18 18 0 0
7 17 0 0
0 2 0 o
1 1 0 0
1 1 0 0
1 1 0 0
1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
50 14 AM STREET PEAK WINDOW
28 31 WED SCHOOL PEAK
28 30 TYPICAL SCHOOL PEAK
15 36
3 37 PM STREET PEAK WINDOW
CHILD SCHOOL
STUDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION LOCATIONS
Student Transporation
Zip School District # of Buses # of cabs
98002 Auburn School District s
98003 Federal Way School District 1 s
98005 Bellevue School District 1 N
98021 Northshore School District 1 N
98030 Kent School District 1 s
98038 Tahoma School District 1 s
98040 Mercer Island School District 1 N
98055 Renton School District IZ
98109 Seattle School District 6 N
98110 Bainbridge School District 1 N
98203 Everett School District 1 N
98204 Mukilteo School District 1 N
98272 Monroe School District N
98292 Stanwood Camano School District 1 N
98371 Puyallup School District s
98466 University Place School District 1 s
98501 Olympia School District 1 s
98036 Edmonds School District 1 N
98148 Highline School District w
13 7
17 school districts
Zip
98004
98005
98010
98012
98024
98033
98034
98038
98040
98042
98052
98055
98059
98074
98102
98103
98106
98107
98112
98115
98117
98118
98119
98125
98133
98136
98144
98146
98166
98168
98371
31
locations
CHILD SCHOOL
STAFF ZIP CODE LOCATIONS
# of Staff / zip City Subarea
1 Bellevue
1 Bellevue
1 Black Diamond
1 Bothell
1 Fall City
2 Kirkland
2 Kirkland
1 Maple Valley
5 Mercer Island
1 Kent
1 Redmond
1 Renton
1 Renton Newcastle
2 Sammamish
1 Seattle East Lake
6 Seattle Green Lake
2 Seattle Riverview/Delridge
3 Seattle Fremont
3 Seattle Capital Hill
2 Seattle Bryant
3 Seattle Ballard
3 Seattle Seward Park/Rainier
1 Seattle Queen Anne
2 Seattle Lake City
1 Shoreline
4 Seattle Seaview/W est Seattle
3 Seattle Mt Baker/Central
1 Burien
1 Burien
1 Seattle Highline
1 Puyallup
59
3 or 4 staff via Metro Trans it
N
N
E
N
N
N
N
E
N
s
N
IZ
N
N
N
N
NW
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NW
NW
NW
s
1
EBLT
EBT
EBRT
WBLT
WBT
WBRT
NBLT
NBT
NBRT
SBLT
SBT
SBRT
2
EBLT
EBT
EBRT
WBLT
WBT
WBRT
NBLT
NBT
NBRT
SBLT
SBT
SBRT
CHILD SCHOOL -RENTON
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Benson Rd s / S 26th St
Existing* 2016 Background* Project Trips
2014 Future 2016 Staff etc Students
AMPKHR Growth AM PKIIR Passenger Car Busffaxi
18 I 19 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 r--------
21 I 22 0 0 ~----
I 0 I I 3
I 0 I 0 0
0 0 0 3 7
0 0 0 0 0
-
1021 62 1083 0 0
~
2 0 2 4 3
0 0 0 33 IO
~---
209 13 222 0 0
9 0 9 0 0
1283 77 1360 41 23
* note: ~-~~r __ of in~tion (dictated by NB/S_~ __ v'!_l~) ., __ _
-----------------
Benson Rd S / S 26th St
Existing"' 2016 Background Project Trips
2014 Future 2016 Staff etc Students
PMPKIIR Growth PMPKIIR Passenger Car Bus/Taxi
11 0 11 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
-----
86 3 89 0 0 ----·----
1 0 1 4 0
1 0 1 0 0
' 1 0 1 32 1
0 0 0 0 0 f---~
287 17 305 0 0
1 0 1 0 0
1 0 1 2 1
990 60 1050 0 0
19 1 20 0 0
1398 83 1481 38 2
"'note: peak hour of intersection (dictated by NB/SB volumes)
Street Peak
AM PK HR
Hori1.0n Yr*
2016
AMPKHR
19
0 ----·-----
22
~------
5
1
IO
0 --------
1083
9
43
222
9
1424
Street Peak
PM PKHR
Horizon Yr
2016
PMPKIIR
11
0
89
5
1
34
0
305
1
4
1050
20
1521
child coums renton.xls, TURNS-Street Peak
Existing • 2014 AM PK HR
218 1039
10 2
40 2
231 1023
Background' 2016 AM PK HR
231 1102
IO 2
41 2
245 1085
Horizon v,· 2016 AM PK HR
274 1112
10 16
41 52
249 1092
Existing• 2014 PM PK HR
1010 299
20 3
96 2
1077 288
BackQround 2016 PM PK HR
1071 317
21 3
100 2
1141 3-06
Horizon Yr 2016 PM PK HR
1074 350
21 40
100 5
1145 3-06
<Ji'
(,(,'',
!)]'i
(ih'--,
66'.:,
yy,;
_i()',r
()71,
'')',
-~()< I
CHILD SCHOOL --RENTON
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS (SCHOOL AFTERNOON PEAK OPTIONS)
1 Benson Rd S / S 26th St
Existing 2016 Background
2014 Future 2016
School Peak. Growth School Peak
EBLT 10 0 10 -·--
EBT 0 0 0 L__ ___ --
EBRT 56 2 59
--
WBLT l 0 I
WBT I 0 l
WBRT l 0 l
NBLT 0 0 0 ------
NBT --· _ ?_62 16 278
NBRT I 0 I -----
SBLT l 0 I
SBT 652 40 692
SBRT 13 l 13
999 59 1058
2 Benson Rd S / S 26th St
Existing 2016 Background
2014 Future 2016
School Peak Growth School Peak
EBLT 10 0 11
EBT 0 0 0
EBRT 34 1 35
WBLT l 0 l
WBT l 0 i
WBRT l 0 l
NBLT 0 0 0 --
NBT __ _}_24!__ 17 296
NBRT l 0 l ~ ------
SBLT I 0 I
SBT 391 24 414
SBRT 8 0 8
727 43 770
child counts rentoo.:w:ls, TURNS -School Pll
Project Trips
Staff etc StudenL'i
Passenger Car Bustraxi
0 0
0 0
0 0
l 4
0 0
12 14
0 0
0 0
I 4
9 14
0 0
0 0
23 36
Project Trips
Staff etc Students
Passenger Car Bus/Taxi
0 0
0 0
0 0
l 4
0 0
12 14
0 0
0 0
~
l 4
9 14
0 0
0 0
23 36
M,Tu.Th.F
School Peak
Hori7.0n Yr
2016
School Peak
10
-
0 --
59 ---
6
l
27
0
278
6
24
692
13
1117
Woo
School Peak
Horizon Yr
2016
School Peak
11
0
35
6
l
27
0
------
296
6
24 --
414
--
8
829
Existing 2014 School Peak
666 273
14 3
66 2
710 263
Backaround 2016 School Peal<
706 290
14 3
69 2
752 279
Horizon Yr 2016 School Peak
729 316
14 34
69 30
757 284
Existing 2014 School Peak
399 290
9 3
44 2
426 280
Background 2016 School Peak
424 308
9 3
46 2
451 297
Horizon Yr 2016 School Peak
447 334
9 34
46 30
456 302
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 112312014
.,> -""t ., -' ..... t I" \. + ~
Movement EBL EBT EBA WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBA SBL SBT SBA
Lane Configurations .f ., .f '(' l> 11 t .,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time ( s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (prot) 1612 1615 1854 1880 1881 1509
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (~rm) 1612 1615 1854 1880 1881 1509
Volume (vph) 19 0 22 1 1 0 0 1062 2 0 217 9
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.61 1.00 0.45 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.94 0.50 0.50 0.89 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 31 0 49 2 2 0 0 1130 4 0 244 9
ATOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 31 3 0 4 0 0 1134 0 0 244 7
Heavy Vehicles (%) 12% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Oo/o 1% 0% 0% 1°/o 7%
Tum Type Splrt Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.7 6.7 1.4 82.1 82.1 82.1
Effective Green, g (s) 6.7 6.7 1.4 82.1 82.1 82.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.80 0.80 0.80
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 106 106 25 1510 1511 1212
vis Ratio Prot 0.02 co.oo c0.60 0.13
vis Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01
vie Ratio 0.29 0.03 0.16 0.75 0.16 0.01
Un~orm Delay, d1 45.5 44.7 49.8 5.0 2.3 2.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 0.1 3.0 3.5 0.2 0.0
Delay (s) 47.0 44.8 52.8 8.5 2.5 2.0
Level of Service D D D A A A
Approach Delay (s) 45.7 52.8 8.5 2.5
Approach LOS D D A A
Intersection Summ!!!l #
HCM Average Control Delay 9.6 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 102.2 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.4% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
AM 2014 EXISTING STREET PEAK CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 1/23i2014
.,> -~ 'f -' .... t /" '. + ..,,
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4' 7' 4' ., l, 1i t 7'
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1612 1615 1869 1881 1881 1509
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (!!!!rm) 1612 1615 1869 1881 1881 1509
Volume (vph) 19 0 22 1 1 0 0 1083 2 0 222 9
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.61 1.00 0.45 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.94 0.75 0.75 0.89 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 31 0 49 1 2 0 0 1152 3 0 249 9
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 31 3 0 3 0 0 1155 0 0 249 7
Hea~ Vehicles (%) 12% 0% 0% 0% ()",I, 0% 0% 1% O"/o 0% 1% 70;(1
Turn Type Split Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.7 6.7 1.4 82.2 82.2 82.2
Effective Green, g (s) 6.7 6.7 1.4 82.2 82.2 82.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 O.Q1 0.80 0.80 0.80
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 106 106 26 1511 1511 1213
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 co.oo c0.61 0. 13
vis Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01
vie Ratio 0.29 0.03 0.12 0.76 0.16 0.01
Unnorm Delay, d1 45.5 44.8 49.8 5.1 2.3 2.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 0.1 2.0 3.7 0.2 0.0
Delay (s) 47.1 44.9 51.8 8.9 2.5 2.0
Level of Service D D D A A A
Approach Delay ( s) 45.7 51.8 8.9 2.5
Approach LOS D D A A
lnlenleclion Summ!!)'. ,
HCM Average Control Delay 9.8 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 102.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
AM 2016 BACKGROUND STREET PEAK CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 1 /2312014
.,> -,. • -~ ..., t ~ \. + ./
Movement EBL EBT EBA WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBA SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ,f .,, ,f ., f. "'i + .,,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1612 1615 1805 1615 1879 1805 1881 1509
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.14 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow !!!!!rm) 1612 1615 1805 1615 1879 270 1881 1509
Volume (vph) 19 0 22 5 0 10 0 1083 9 43 222 9
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.61 1.00 0.45 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.94 0.75 0.75 0.89 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 31 0 49 7 0 13 0 1152 12 57 249 9
ATOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 2
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 31 3 0 7 0 0 1164 0 57 249 7
Hea~ Vehicles (%) 12% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1o/o 0% 0% 1o/o 7%
Tum Type Spilt Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.7 6.7 2.9 2.9 79.2 79.2 79.2 79.2
Effective Green, g (s) 6.7 6.7 2.9 2.9 79.2 79.2 79.2 79.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension !s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 107 107 52 46 1476 212 1478 1186
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.00 c0.62 0.13
vis Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 0.21 0.01
vie Ratio 0.29 0.03 0.13 0.01 0.79 0.27 0.17 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 44.8 44.0 47.7 47.6 6.1 2.9 2.7 2.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 0.1 1.2 0.1 4.3 3.1 0.2 0.0
Delay (s) 46.3 44.1 48.9 47.6 10.4 6.0 2.9 2.3
Level of Service D D D D B A A A
Approach Delay (s) 45.0 48.1 10.4 3.5
Approach LOS D D B A
Intersection Summ!!!l'. .,
HCM Average Control Delay 11.3 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
AM 2016 WITH PROJECT STREET PEAK CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 1i23i2014
.,} -l' f -...... "' t I" \. + ~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations .f .,, .f .,, l> 11 t .,,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 40
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (pro!) 1805 1615 1854 1615 1880 1805 1900 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.55 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (E!!!rm) 1805 1615 1854 1615 1880 1053 1900 1583
Volume (vph) 11 0 86 1 1 1 0 287 1 1 990 19
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.50 1.00 0.77 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.86 0.50 0.50 0.92 0.60
Adj. Flow (vph) 22 0 112 2 2 2 0 334 2 2 1076 32
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 104 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 7
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 22 8 0 4 0 0 336 0 2 1076 25
Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% O"k O"k O"/o 0% 1% O"/o 0% O"/o 2%
Turn Type Spilt Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 6.5 1.3 1.3 72.6 72.6 72.6 72.6
Effective Green, g (s) 6.5 6.5 1.3 1.3 72.6 72.6 72.6 72.6
Actuated giC Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
lane Grp Cap (vph) 127 114 26 23 1477 827 1493 1244
vis Ratio Prot 0.01 co.oo 0.18 c0.57
vis Ratio Perm 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.02
vic Ratio 0.17 0.07 0.15 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.72 0.02
Unttorm Delay, d1 40.4 40.1 45.0 44.9 2.6 2.1 4.9 2.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 2.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.0
Delay (s) 41.1 40.4 47.8 44.9 2.9 2.1 7.9 2.2
Level of Service D D D D A A A A
Approach Delay ( s) 40.5 46.8 2.9 7.8
Approach LOS D D A A
lnlels8cllon Summ!!!}'. #
HCM Average Control Delay 9.6 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 92.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
PM 2014 EXISTING STREET PEAK CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 1/23/2014
.,> -"t ,(' -'-"" t I" ~ + ~
Movement EBL EBT EBA WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBA SBL SBT SBA
Lane Configurations 4' 7' 4' 7' 'f. 'i + 7'
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time ( s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (pro!) 1805 1615 1869 1615 1880 1805 1900 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1869 1615 1880 1028 1900 1583
Volume (vph) 11 0 89 1 1 1 0 305 1 1 1050 20
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.50 1.00 0.77 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.86 0.50 0.75 0.92 0.60
Adj. Flow (vph) 22 0 116 1 2 1 0 355 2 1 1141 33
ATOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 108 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 22 8 0 3 0 0 357 0 1 1141 26
Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2°/o
Tum Type Split Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 6.5 1.3 1.3 72.3 72.3 72.3 72.3
Effective Green, g (s) 6.5 6.5 1.3 1.3 72.3 72.3 72.3 72.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Gap (vph) 127 114 26 23 1476 807 1492 1243
vis Ratio Pro! 0.01 c0.00 0.19 c0.60
vis Ratio Perm 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.17 0.07 0.12 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.76 0.02
Uniform Delay, d1 40.3 40.0 44.8 44.8 2.6 2.1 5.3 2.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 2.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 3.8 0.0
Delay (s) 40.9 40.3 46.8 44.8 3.0 2.1 9.1 2.2
Level of Service D D D D A A A A
Approach Delay (s) 40.4 46.3 3.0 8.9
Approach LOS D D A A
Intersection Summ~ ff
HCM Average Control Delay 10.3 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 92.1 Sum of lost time ( s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
PM 2016 BACKGROUND STREET PEAK CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 1/23/2014
.,,;. -~ f -'-' t r "' + ./
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4' .,, 4' .,, f+ 11 t .,,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 40 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (pro!) 1805 1615 1805 1615 1880 1805 1900 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (e!:rm) 1805 1615 1805 1615 1880 1017 1900 1583
Volume (vph) 11 0 89 5 0 34 0 305 1 4 1050 20
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.50 1.00 0.77 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.86 0.50 0.75 0.92 0.60
Adj. Flow (vph) 22 0 116 7 0 45 0 355 2 5 1141 33
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 108 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 8
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 22 8 0 7 2 0 357 0 5 1141 25
Hea~ Vehicles !%) 0% O"k Oo/o O"/o 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2°/o
Tum Type Spin Perm Spin Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 6.5 3.9 3.9 69.2 69.2 69.2 69.2
Effective Green, g (s) 6.5 6.5 3.9 3.9 69.2 69.2 69.2 69.2
Actuated glC Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 128 115 77 69 1420 768 1435 1196
vis Ratio Prot 0.01 0.00 0.19 c0.60
vis Ratio Perm 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.02
vie Ratio 0.17 0.07 0.09 0.03 0.25 0.01 0.80 0.02
UnHorm Delay, d1 40.0 39.7 42.1 42.0 3.4 2.8 6.9 2.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.0 4.6 0.0
Delay (s) 40.7 40.0 42.7 42.2 3.8 2.8 11.5 2.8
Level of Service D D D D A A B A
Approach Delay ( s) 40.1 42.3 3.8 11.2
Approach LOS D D A B
Intersection Summ!!)'. •
HCM Average Control Delay 12.9 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capactty ratio 0.81
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 91.6 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capactty Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
PM 2016 WITH PROJECT STREET PEAK CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Ad S 1/23/2014
.,} -~ f -' ~ t !' ...... + ~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 ., 4 ., T+ 'I + .,,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1 .00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1827 1615 1873 1805 1900 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.55 1.00 1.00
Said. Flow (e!!rm) 1805 1615 1827 1615 1873 1045 1900 1583
Volume (vph) 10 0 59 6 1 27 0 278 6 24 692 13
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.50 1.00 0.77 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.86 0.50 0.75 0.92 0.60
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 0 77 8 2 36 0 323 12 32 752 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 71 0 0 34 0 1 0 0 0 7
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 20 6 0 10 2 0 334 0 32 752 15
Hea~ Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0°/o 1% 0% 0% 0% 2o/o
Turn Type Spltt Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.7 5.7 3.2 3.2 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3
Effective Green, g (s) 5.7 5.7 3.2 3.2 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Gap (vph) 147 131 83 74 1315 734 1334 1112
vis Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 0.18 c0.40
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.14 0.05 0.12 0.02 0.25 0.04 0.56 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 30.0 29.7 32.1 32.0 3.8 3.2 5.2 3.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.1 1.7 0.0
Delay (s) 30.4 29.9 32.8 32.1 4.3 3.3 6.9 3.2
Level of Service C C C C A A A A
Approach Delay (s) 30.0 32.3 4.3 6.6
Approach LOS C C A A
Intersection Summ!!!:}'. #'
HCM Average Control Delay 8.7 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.2 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
PM 2016 WITH PROJECT SCHOOL PEAK NON WED CHILD SCHOOL
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Site Access & Benson Rd S 1i2312014
.,} -~ f -..._ ~ t I" '-. + ~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4' .,, 4' .,, l> 11 t .,,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1827 1615 1873 1805 1900 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (~rm) 1805 1615 1827 1615 1873 1018 1900 1583
Volume (vph) 11 0 35 6 1 27 0 296 6 24 414 8
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.50 1.00 0.77 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.86 0.50 0.75 0.92 0.60
Adj. Flow (vph) 22 0 45 8 2 36 0 344 12 32 450 13
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 42 0 0 34 0 1 0 0 0 4
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 22 3 0 10 2 0 355 0 32 450 9
Hea~ Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2%
Tum Type Spltt Perm Split Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.7 4.7 4.1 4.1 50.4 50.4 50.4 50.4
Effective Green, g (s) 4.7 4.7 4.1 4.1 50.4 50.4 50.4 50.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 119 107 105 93 1326 721 1345 1121
vis Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 0.19 c0.24
vis Ratio Perm 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01
vie Ratio 0.18 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.27 0.04 0.33 0.01
Unttorm Delay, d1 31.4 31.1 31.8 31.7 3.7 3.1 4.0 3.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.0
Delay (s) 32.2 31.2 32.2 31.8 4.2 3.3 4.7 3.1
Level of Service C C C C A A A A
Approach Delay ( s) 31.5 31.8 4.2 4.5
Approach LOS C C A A
lntersettion SI.Imm!!!}'. ,.
HCM Average Control Delay 7.6 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.2 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
PM 2016 WITH PROJECT SCHOOL PEAK WED CHILD SCHOOL
2016 AM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY
Performance
1/23/2014
Intersection: 1: Site Access & Benson Rd S
Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB SB
Directions Served LT R LT R TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 47 22 54 40 410 110 63
Average Queue (ft) 19 19 9 11 183 40 11
95th Queue (ft) 51 28 37 39 395 81 43
Link Distance (ft) 456 150 1072 1150
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 30 400
Storage Blk Time (%) 0.06 0.02
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
SimTraffic Report
2016 PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY -STREET PEAK Performance
1/23/2014
Intersection: 3: Site Access & Benson Rd S
Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served LT R LT R TR L T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 26 83 52 40 105 28 301 22
Average Queue (ft) 11 45 12 31 33 3 165 3
95th Queue (ft) 31 81 40 56 75 18 285 15
Link Distance (ft) 1420 658 1434 1813 1813
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 30 400
Storage Blk Time (%) 0.11 0.05
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 0
Sim Traffic Report
Performance
2016 PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY -M,Tu,Th,F SCHOOL PEAK 1/23/2014
Intersection: 3: Site Access & Benson Rd S
Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served LT R LT R TR L T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 48 46 31 53 87 50 310 16
Average Queue (ft) 12 28 6 32 28 10 115 2
95th Queue (ft) 37 45 27 59 71 35 253 11
Link Distance (ft) 1420 658 1434 1813 1813
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 30 400
Storage Blk Time (%) 0.02 0.04
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
SimTraffic Report
2016 PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY -WED SCHOOL PEAK Periormance
1/23/2014
Intersection: 3: Site Access & Benson Rd S
Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served LT R LT R TR L T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 26 45 31 53 66 28 153 22
Average Queue (ft) 13 20 7 30 39 14 49 1
95th Queue (ft) 33 37 27 58 72 35 117 10
Link Distance (ft) 1420 658 1434 1813 1813
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 30 400
Storage Blk Time(%) 0.02 0.05
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
SimTraffic Report
-
~SHTO-Geome!rfc Design of llighways and Streets
RE3RE388R
Pathof left
lrontwheel
-
3.66m
(12 ft]
4·i\11j
[8 fl]
@
i . ..
10.91 m
[35.6 l!J
(Vtsta style)
0 5ft 101!
IVS'
O 2,5m
6.49m
(21.3 ft]
scale Path of · ht
rear wheel
r---.
r:::--. ~·
-.
-
• Assumed steering angle is 37 .2 °
• Cffi= Centerline turning
ladillll aHmnt axle
• 65 pa$Sellfl8T bus
0.76m
[2.5 fl]
0 5ft 10ft
IV','
0 1 m 2.5m
scale
Exhibit 2-8. Minimum Turning Path for Conventional School Bus (S-BUS-11 [S-BUS-36])
Design Vehicle
26
..
Design Controls and cn·1erin
Path of left
fro
l: 3.96m [13 ft]
6.10m
12 .. 21lm (20 fl]
[40 ft]
, , ,
2~
[8 ft]
, , ,
{Transit style)
-~----~---,, ,,' ~~~~--
0 5 ft 10 ft
~m
scale Path of right
rear
• Assumed steering angle is 34.2
• CTR = Cenlelfine turning
radius at front axle
• 84 passenger bus
0
0 5ft 10ft 1•··•1 j . + I
O 1 m 2.5m
scale
I
' ' I ,
I
I
I
I
' ' I
I
I
'
Exhibit 2-9. Minimum Turning Path for Large S£hoo1 Bus (S-BUS-12 [S-BUS-40])
Design Vehicle
Z7
..
Current Fee
Fire $488.00
Parks $530.76
Transportation $750.00
Total $1,768.76
Current Fee
Fire $388.00
Parks $354.51
Transportation $498 75
Total $1,241.26
Current Fee
Fire $0.52
Parks
Transportation $0.83
Total $1.35
Current Fee
Fire $0.52
Parks
Transportation $2.09
Total $2.61
City of Renton
Proposed Impact Fees
Rates and Phasing Schedule
Proposed Fee
$479.28
$1,827.58
$2,856.89
$5,163.75
Proposed Fee
$479.28
$1,239.92
$1,862.37
$3,581.57
Proposed Fee
$0.14
'
$4.94
$5.08
Proposed Fee
$0.59
$3.22
$3.80
Single Family -per Dwelling
(also see comparison charts)
01/01/2012 01/01/2013 Fee
Fee (1st Year of (2nd Year of
Phase-in) Phase-in)
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
01/01/2014 Fee
(3rd Year of
Phase-in)
$479.28
$963.03
$1,452.30
$2,894.61
Multi Family-per Dwelling Unit
(also see comparison charts)
01/01/2012 01/01/2013 Fee
Fee (1st Year of (2nd Year of
Phase-In) Phase-in)
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
Office -per Square Foot
(also see comparison charts)
01/01/20U 01/01/2013 Fee
Fee (1st Year of (2nd Year of
Phase-in) Phase-in)
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
Retail -per Square Foot
(also see comparison charts)
01/01/2012 01/01/2013 Fee
Fee (1st Year of (2nd Year of
Phase-in) Phase-in)
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
no change no change
01/01/2014 Fee
(3rd Year of
Phase-In)
$418.43
$649.65
$953.29
$2,021.36
01/01/2014 Fee
(3rd Year of
Phase-In)
$0.14
$2.20
$2.34
01/01/2014 Fee
(3rd Year of
Phase-in)
$0.54
-
$2.47
$3.01
01/01/2015 01/01/2016
Fee (4th Year of Fee 15th Year
Phase-in) of Phase-in)
$479.28 $479.28
$1,395.31 $1,827.58
$2,154.59 $2,856.89
$4,029.18 $5,163.75
01/01/2015 01/01/2016
Fee (4th Year of Fee (5th Year
Phase-in) of Phase-in)
$448.85 $479.28
$944.78 $1,239.92
$1,407.83 $1,862.37
$2,801.47 $3,581.57
01/01/2015 01/01/2016
Fee (4th Year of Fee (5th Year
Phase-in) of Phase-in)
$0.14 $0.14
--
$3.57 $4.94
$3.71 $5.08
01/01/2015 01/01/2016
Fee (4th Year of Fee (5th Year
Phase-in) of Phase-in)
$0.56 $0.59
-
$2.84 $3.22
$3.41 $3.80
-.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
CHILD SCHOOL (REVISED SITE PLAN)
2640 BENSON ROADS.
RENTON,VVASHINGTON
G-3591
Prepared for
Mr. Lee Wangerin
Wangerin Associates, LLC
12408 106,. Place NE
Kirkland, WA 98034
January 29, 2014
By
GEO GROUP NORTH\VEST, INC.
13240 NE 2Qlli Street, Suite IO
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Phone: (425) 649-8757 RF(~EIVED
FEB 1 7 2014
CITY Of REN·ro
PLAN ' -' N N,NG D!V/SiON -
January 29, 2014
Mr. Lee Wangerin
Wangerin Associates, U£
12408 106'" Place NE
Kirkland, WA 98034
Subject: GEOTECIINICAL ENGINEERING STuoY
Child School (Revised Site Plan)
2640 Benson Road S.
Renton. Washington
Dear Mr. Wangerin:
GGNW Project No. G-3442
At your request, GEO Group Northwest, Inc., conducted a geotechnical engineering study to
evaluate the site conditions and provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed child
school located at 2640 Benson Road South in Renton, as illustrated on the Vicinity Map, Plate I.
The site is currently occupied by the Living Faith Presbyterian Church. This report addresses the
revised site plan. Our scope of work included a visual site reconnaissance, review of the area
geologic map, a soils investigation, evaluation of the subsurface conditions, engineering analysis
and preparation of this report with our findings and recommendations.
PROPOSED IlEvELoPMENT
The proposed child school will consist of remodeling the existing two-story building, the
addition of a new modular administration building at the southwest comer of the property and the
construction of a play area with two 6 foot high block walls, as illustrated on the Site Plan, Plate
2. The administration building will have a supported floor.
SURFACE CoNDmONS
The site is located on the east side of Benson Road South at the intersection of South 26'" Street.
Topographically, the area slopes down to the west and north. The site generally slopes down to
the northwest. The existing building is located in the southern portion of the property. The
13240 NE 20th Street. Suite 10 • Bellevue. Washington 98005
Phone 425/649-8757 • Fax 425/649-8758
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
G-3591
Page2
upper southeastern portion of the site is a flat paved parking lot. A circular asphalt driveway
extends from Benson Road around the west side of the building to the south end of the upper
parking lot, then from the north end of the upper parking lot back down to Benson Road, A steep
slope embankment is located in the central portion of the site on the north site of the existing
building. The slope extends along the northwest side of the upper parking lot. The height of the
steep sloped portion of the embankment varies from about 8 feet to 25 feet tall with a gradient of
50 percent to 70 percent. The slope is vegetated with trees, brush, blackberries and grass.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Geology
According to area geologic map1
, the site is mapped as glacial till (Qvt), consisting of a very
compact mixture of sand, silt, clay and gravel deposited under glacial ice during the Fraser
glaciation period that ended some 12,000 years ago.
Subsurface Findings
The subsurface conditions were investigated with four hand auger borings. The borings ranged
in depth from approximately 2 feet to 3.5 feet at which point gravel refusal was encountered or
dense glacial till was encountered. Soils below these depths were evaluated by probing with an
extendable Y2 -inch diameter probing rod. The approximate boring locations are illustrated on the
Site Plan, Plate 2.
Borings HA-1 and HA-2 were located in the area of the existing storage building on the north
side of the existing building. The soils encountered in HA-1, consisted of a dark brown, loose
silty sand with a few gravel to a depth of 15 inches, underlain by mediwn dense to dense brown
silty sand with a few gravel. Soils at 2 feet could be probed 3 to 4 inches with a Y:z-inch steel
rod. Soils encountered in HA-2, consisted ofloose dark brown and brown silty sand (fill) to a
depth of 3.5 feet. Dense soil conditions were encountered at a depth of 7.5 feet based on
probing.
Mullineaux, D.R.., 1965, ''The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County,
Washington", U. S. Geological Survey Map GQ-405, Scale I :24,000.
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
G-3591
Page 3
Boring HA-3 was located in the proposed play area, where the 6 foot tall retaining wall is
proposed. Soils in TP-3, consisted of dark gray medium dense gravelly sand to about 15 inches
underlain by medium dense to dense brown gravelly sand.
Boring HA-4 was located in the area where the new modular administration building is being
proposed to be constructed. Dense glacial till soil was encountered at a depth of 3.5 feet,
overlain by loose silty sand.
No groundwater was encountered in the borings. Please refer to the boring logs in Appendix A
for a more complete description of the subsurface conditions encountered.
SEISMICITY & SLOPE ST ABILITY
The site is underlain by dense glacial till soil, based on the soils encountered in boring HA-4, the
geologic map, and based on probing. Based on the presence of dense glacial till soils, the site is
seismically classified as Site Class C, in accordance with the International Building Code (IBC)
and ASCE Chapter 20. The potential for liquefaction and/or lateral spreading is negligible. The
site is located about 0.25 miles north of the Sunbeam fault, an east-northeast trending fault.
Surface ruptures due to fault movements have not been identified in the immediate project site
area. It is our opinion that the risk of surface rupture at the project site is low as a result of a
large magnitude seismic event. No geotechnical seismic mitigation measures are recommended.
The location of the proposed new administration building is relatively flat with no slope stability
concerns or setback requirements. Based on our site reconnaissance, we did not observe signs of
recent slumps, slides, scarps, or tension cracks on, or above, the steeply sloped embankment
located north of the main building. No water seepage was observed on or at the base of the
slope. It is our professional opinion the slope is stable with respect to deep seated sliding,
however there is a potential for shallow sloughing to occur on the face of the slope due to the
loose condition of the fill.
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
REVIEW OF AREA COAL MINES
G-3591
Page4
The site is not located in an area of previous coal mining, based on a review of the "Geology and
Coal Resources of the Cumberland, Hobart, and Maple Valley Quadrangles, King County,
Washington," 1969, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior, Geological Survey
Professional Paper 624, by Vine J. D. The project site is located at T23N, R5E, Sect 29, NWl/4.
The closest coal mines were identified as:
Mine or l'ro§pect
• New Black Diamond mine
• NewLakeYoungrnine
• Red Devil (Cavanaugh) mine
Locytion of Portal
T23N, R5E, Sect 25, NEl/4
T23N, R5E, Sect 36, SWl/4
T23N, R5E, Sect 26, NEl/4
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Distance From Site
3.8 miles east
4 miles east-southeast
2.8 miles east
The following recommendations along with the design criteria are discussed in more detail in the
following sections. The proposed new modular administration building may be supported on a
spread footing foundation. Footings should be supported directly on the dense underlying soil or
on compacted structural fill that extends 2 feet below the bottom of the footings.
The proposed walls in the play area should be supported on a prepared dense subgrade base. We
understand the walls will be privacy walls and will not be comtructed as retaining walls. As
such, no geogrid lateral reinforoement is required. The base of the walls will be stepped with the
ground elevation change.
GENERAL EARTHWOU llEcOMMENDATIONS
Erosion Control & Site Preparation
The site soil could be susceptible to moderate erosion during moderate to heavy precipitation
events and during extended periods of wet weather. For temporary erosion control we
recommend ihe insiiilfatfon of peninetei siTt fencing oown~grad[eni oftlie work· aiea<s>: During
wet weather, exposed soil should be covered with straw mulch or plastic sheeting. Permanent
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
erosion control should consist of landscape vegetation and mulching of exposed soil upon
completion of the site work.
Excavations
G-3591
Page 5
Temporary excavation of up to 4 feet is anticipated for the administration building foundation.
Temporary excavations over 4 feet in height should be sloped at an inclination of lH: 1 V
(Horizontal:Vertical). It is the responsibility of the contractor to provide a safe work
environment, including stable temporary open cuts. Pennanent cut and fill slopes should be
inclined no steeper than 2H: 1 V and up to 3H: 1 V if the slope is to be mowed or maintained.
Structural Fill
Fill material used to achieve design elevations below foundations, floor slabs, and sidewalks
should meet compaction specifications for structural fill. Structural fill should be placed at or
near its optimum moisture content and be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding ten inches
in loose thickness. The optimum moisture content is the water content in soil that enables it to
be compacted to the highest dry density for a given compaction effort. Each lift should be
compacted to 95 percent of the material's maximum dry density based on ASTM D-1557
(Modified Proctor). Placement and compaction of structural fill should be observed and tested
by the geotechnical engineer for quality control.
The onsite soil may not be reusable as structural fill due to the silt content of the sand, depending
on its moisture content and time of year that construction takes place. During dry weather, any
non-organic granular soil free of organic and other deleterious substances and having a
maximum rock size of 3-inches,may be used as structural fill, provided the material is near its
optimum moisture content and can achieve the compaction specification. During wet weather,
imported soil to be used as structural fill should be a granular free-draining material, containing
no more than five (5) percent fines -silt and clay-size particles passing the No. 200 mesh sieve.
FOUNDATIONS
Spread Footing Foundations
After grubbing the building pad area, the foundation subgrade should be improved by over-
excavating to dense soil and replacing loose soils with structural fill. The foundation may be
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
G-3591
Page 6
supported directly on the underlying dense soil or on structural fill that extends down to the
dense soil. Structural fill placed below footings should create a prism that extends out and
below the footing at IH: IV. We recommend the geotechnical engineer evaluate the foundation
subgrade soil at the time of construction.
Foundations may consist of conventional spread footing foundation, consisting of strip and/or
colwnn footings. The following design criteria is applicable to spread footings supported on
dense soil or on structural fill:
• Allowable bearing pressure, including all dead and live loads:
• Minimum depth to bottom of perimeter footing below adjacent
final exterior grade:
• Minimum depth to bottom of interior footings below top of
floor slab:
• Minimum width of strip footings:
• Minimum lateral dimension of column footings:
• Estimated post-construction settlement:
• Across building width:
= 2,000psf
= 18 inches
= 12 inches
= 16 inches
= 24 inches
= 1/4 inch
= 1/4 inch
A one-third increase in the above allowable bearing pressures can be used when considering
short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Lateral loads can also be resisted by friction
between the foundation and the supporting compacted fill subgrade or by passive earth pressure
acting on the buried portions of the foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured
"neat" against compacted soil. Our recommended parameters are as follows:
• Passive Pressure (Lateral Resistance)
• Coefficient of Friction (Friction Factor)
= 350 pcf equivalent fluid weight
= 0.35
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
DRAINAGE
G-3591
Page 7
The glacial till site soils are not suitable for infiltration. We recommend collected roof and
footing drain water be conveyed to the city storm drain, if available. Water should not be
discharged on or directly above the embankment slope. If a storm drain system is not available,
we recommend dispersal of the water.
Footing drains are recommend around the perimeter of the structures. The footing drain should
consist of a four (4) inch minimum diameter, perforated, rigid PVC drain pipe laid at the base of
the footing. The drain should be bedded in clean drain rock and the rock protected with
geotextile filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N, or equivalent, as shown on the Footing Drain Detail,
Plate 3. The footing drain should tightline to an appropriate discharge point.
Roof drains, yard drains, and other drain lines should not be connected to the footing drain
system. The footing drains should be tight-lined separately to the discharge point. Installation of
clean-outs is recommended to allow periodic maintenance of the drain systems.
PLAY AREA RETAINING WALL
Two 6-foot high segmented block (CMU) privacy walls are proposed to be constructed at the
northeast and southwest sides of the proposed play area.
The wall foundation soils should be prepared to create a stable, non-yielding subgrade base. We
recommend organic soils be removed and the footing subgrade soil compacted. A "cinder-block"
wall should be placed on a concrete footing. We recommend the wall be reinforced with steel
bar and the blocks filled with cement.
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
LIMITATIONS
G-3591
Page 8
This report has been prepared for the specific application to this project. The findings and
recommendations stated herein are based on our field observations, the subsmface conditions
encountered, our experience, and engineering judgement. The recommendations are our
professional opinion derived in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this
area and within the budget constraint. No warranty is expressed or implied. In the event that the
soil conditions vary during site work from those described herein, GEO Group Northwest, Inc.,
should be notified and the recommendations herein re-evaluated, and where necessary, be
revised. GEO Group Northwest, Inc. should be retained to review the final site development
plans to confirm the validity of the recommendations contained in this report if the final plans
significantly differ from those contained herein.
CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
GEO Group Northwest, Inc. should be retained to provide geotechnical monitoring services
during construction. This will allow us to confirm that the subsmface conditions are consistent
with those described in this report and allow design changes in the event subsmface conditions
differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. It will also allow us to evaluate
whether the geotechnical aspects of the construction activities conform to the plans,
specifications and the recommendations herein.
GEO Group Northwest, Inc.
January 29, 2014
Geotechnical Report
Proposed Child School (Revised Site Plan)
Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this report.
Sincerely,
GEO GROUP NORTHWEST, INC.
Wade J. Lassey
Engineering Geologist
William Chang, P.E.
Principal
Anachments:
Plate 1:
Plate 2:
Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Plate 3: Footing Drain Detail
Appendix A: Soil Classification Legend & Doting Logs
GEO Group Northwest. Joe.
G-3591
Page 9
APPENDIX A
SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND
&
BORING LOGS
Adapted from "The Thomas Guide.' 2007.
SCALI! A,, Shown DA11! 1/15/2014 MADE WJL
0
j'
I
1000' 2000'
Approximate Scale: I inch = l 000 feet
20
Iii
t; 1'!
._,
'
,./. ..... SE_ ~ 16111 t; pt
ii5il a"t~ :;' CT. •
VICINITY MAP
CHILD SCHOOL
2640 BENSON ROAD SOUTH
RENTON,WASIDNGTON
CHKD WC JOB NO. G-3591 Pl.AD!
....,.
V,
~
LEGEND -r Had Auter lorint: Nuriff • ~ Approlilllllk' t.ix.inn
HA-I
SITE PLAN-PROPOSED
SCALE, f -so·
SIT£ ADDRESS:
2640 BENSON ROAD S.
RENTON, WA 98055
EXISTING:
FORMER CHURCH BUILDING:
f STORY F'l.US BASEMENT
TOTAL AREA: 15,802 SQ, n.
CONSTRUCTION Tl'f'E V-B
STOR ACE BUILDING: 1 STORY
TOT AL AREA, 320 SQ. FT.
CONSTRUCTION TYPE V-8
PROPOSED:
t.lOOULAR BUILDING: 1 STORY
TOTAL AREA, 2,239 SQ. FT.
CONSTRUCTION Tl'f'E V-B
REMODEL FORMER CHURCH
BUILDING FOR USE AS A
PRIVA1£ SCHOOL (E OCCUPANCY)
yn,rry L£Q(HQ·
.......... UNI: ---
STORM OftMN --......,..., SE>D -·--
Olo£RHEAO POWER LK -
O',f;RH[.&.D CASLE ---UNOOIGROUNO a.-.s -,--
'·
~= !NOi 1Qffll ,...,. IC
=:'~-r ,. : ......,..71. ..................
i
-l ' " •. t
.!,~\ ' ' ~t ~ -,
~
"'
'" ~
N
-+·· ''"""'Y ::,,( / /_..L-/-
Q 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
iiiiil' -
150
!!
·--
AU
PU.TE: 2
111~111=1111
6" to 12" Relati.,,.
/mpenMab/eCap
0
GEO'TEX17LE
FILTER FADRTC
(Mirq/i U()N, or
equivalenl/
F0017NG DRAIN:
4-inch dianwter petforated rigid PVC pipe
with positive gradient to disclulrge
Slope to drain
0 • 0
COMPACTf.:D
F/1.L
• •
0
a
0
0
• 0
0
a
D
a
0
C>
FOUNDA170N
WAU
0 •
0
•
fOOTING
Slob •
SVll6RAJ>e AS;_{; <?-'.:
IN Gl!o/B~ijfvi,CALx :, -: .
«s«s'\5<· "><-' .i;;;.-; ' •
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
Footing drajn: Do not replace rigid PVC pipe with flexible cormgated plastic pipe.
Perforated PVC should be tight jointed and laid with perforations down. with
positive gradient to discharge. Do not connect roof downspout or other drains into
the footing drain lines.
FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL
SCALE NONE DATE 1/15/14 MADE Wll.
CIULD SCHOOL
2640 BENSON ROAD SOUTH
RENTON,WASHINGTON
cmm WC JOB NO, G-3591 PLATE 3
'
APPENDIX A
SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND
&
BORING LOGS
LEGEND OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND PENETRATION TEST
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)
MAJOII OIVISION i .: I TY~ OESCIIM'OON . LABORATORY ~TION CRITERIA
' ' 1 -------1·--:-LEAN ··;--~---1 WEUGRAOEOGRA~;,-~FUVB.-.5A;;;---~-----! Cu=(~;~~~g,....-~~------
! I GRAV9..S : I MIXTURE, UTTlE OR NO ANES : OETERlilNE j Cc a. (030') I (010 • 080} between 1 and 3
-----------------t-. -. ! PERCENTAGES OF /--· -----------------
GRAVELS I tbllle«no I GP I POCIRLYGAACIEDGRAYRS,ANOGAAVEl-SN<J1GRAVB.ANOSAN)f' NOTa.E£TlNGASOVER.EOU4REMENTS I (Mare Than Hall' ....., I I MIXTIJREs LITTLE OR NO FINES I FROM GRAIN saE ~siu:;-n.n~,r:::~['e------1-:-------------------i ~ I "TTERBERGL.MTSeeiaw
) Sifta) ORTY GM l SI.TYGAAVB.S,GRAVB.-SANO-,SLTJialCI\JRE. s I I I -. "A"LWE
I GRAIIB.S I CONTENT ~ "L LESS THAN.
I 1-I ~YEYGRAVB.S GRAVS.~;-1 lt~?AI ATIER8ERGUMfTS.1tBO\o'E -i some I GC MDCTVREs i COARSE~ "A"LINE ' I -1· : -~: SOl.SARE I Of ~-1.~THAN ~-r I Cl •s &AS
I
i SANDS ,: CLEAN ~ i WEl..l. GRADED SANOS. GRAVEU.Y SNrC>S. FOU.°""5: Cu= (Dl!IQI 010, ~ttlar. 8
SAIIC>S I _ UTn..E OR NO FIES I Cc= (D3'r} I (010 • oeo, batWNfl 1 and 'l
(Mm n.n Half ~
MnllwlHalfbrl CatMGNIM ('im.otno SP j POORl.,Y~~:SVEUYSANDS, i ~~:,~:· NOTMEETINGABOVEREOUREMEHTS
Waight Lqe, · Smallllr Tiwt No. Ma)
ThanNo.200 i csi...i 1----1---..+----------------il --ATTeRSERGLMTSBEUMI' .,_ I DIRTI' SN SI.TY SANDS, SNilJ.SI.TIIO:TURES I> 13 FIN GlaiMd: .,,,. LINE
SANDS , GM, GC. SM, SC cc:-OF 1----'--"-'·-=LESS=:_™_;_;_AN"--4'---1
-
r---/ 51D12'1oFIM EXCEEDS12" ATT'ERBERGLMTSABOVE
ii --i .SC Cl.AYEYSANDS,SNO.a..A.Vl&lm.JRES I ~dual 4 A·UNE
l1nelJ i ..,.._ I with P.I. MORE rnAN 7 -----·-+-----+-----+---~.----------------+-~---~----+----------'
i SI.TS w.,idUrnit I INORGAHICSI.TS, ROCKR.OUR, SNIO'fSI.TS ! 1--... <.... 1 ..._ OF SUGHTPlASTICrlY I
FWE.GRAJNEO ! ~Oat. l ... lill'lit II ... I INORGANICSI..TS,MICACE()li,OR I
SOILS I OtpnicJ > 50lt OIATOMACEOUS, FINE SAHDf OR SL TY SOIL I
. ~~~Cl -----1--INOAGAJ«:a.AVSOFLOWPLASTICrTY,
1 Q.AVS ""'!1114 'mit. I r.J GRAYB..LY, SANOV, ORSI..TYCLAVS, Q..EAN j ~ A-line~ CLAYS
~ a •fr::. -1-,--.-.... -.._-+--C><--+-.,_,----CI.A-YS-~-':'--PI.ASTlCfTY----. ,-.-,--!
--""" ---+-----+-----jf-----------------
Weigflt L..., ~ Limit Ol. ORGANC SLTS AND 0RGN«: SI. TY ClAVS OF
Thai No 200 ORGANIC SI.. TS & < ~ LCNI PU.STICITY ..... I CLAYS
--... 1 I' Pl-.:ily OIM) Liquid Lnit
I '""" ~----~----+---+---------------!
OH ORGANIC a.A YS OF l-t9GH Pl.ASTICITY
HIGHL V ORGANC SOLS PEAT AND OTHER 14GH...Y ORGANC SOILS
o 10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ 100110
LJQUD I.MT ('IS)
SOIi. PMTICU! SIZI!! Ql!jNIIW. GIIDUICeOf' SOL ENGlf UNG .__-----,, ___ U_.S._ST ____ --------<I -.tlllOl,,_ST_PBETRATIONTl!STISPT)
l'MCTION ~ "-'"I -SANOYIIOILS SILTY & CLAVEY SOU..S ----I ! I -: ,_) ,_, --,.-. -_, __
-""""' °"""" -' --.,_..
$1l.TICUY #200 0.075 • .. ··-I • -t---q, .. ' i I -------~ -I ·-· 0-15 I I v...,c-., i <02S I . ..,, ""' -I -042$ I """' 0.075 4-10 15-36 ' 28,,0 ' ,,_ ,_, ! 0.25-0.50 ' ""'
I
I I I I
I -otO I 200
.., 042$ 10-30 I
..... I
,._,. -""-·-· 05(1-1.00 --""" COAASe i .. • " I IJ10 200 J0,50 ..... ! ,._., I ""'-3-15 I 1.00-2.00 ...
------
I I ' I I GRAIIB. I > 50 ' 86-100 I ,._ .. ,.,., """" i5-30 u,o -4.00 --! I I I I ! I -I I 19 ! .. I '·'" > ,0 I >40'.I -i ! ' "°""5E I _L ,. i "
• Gro~!~.~~~=~'
----
COl!OI.ES I Temmlolmmm
Inc.
BOULDERS I ,. 20:Jrrim I -· ----""19mm
EnYll'Onm•t. SCientlaui -I 13240 NE 20lh .sn..t, &a 12 Bellr!NII, WA !MOOS -
"""" i >O 78 Cubie .,...., itt WJlwne ~ (425} IIMIM757 F• (425} "49-8758 PLATE Al
, HAND AUGER BORING NO. HA-1
LOGGED BY WJL EXCAVATION DATE ln/14 GROUND ELEV. 4W feet (±J .
DEPTH
It. uses SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENlS
SM Silty SAND, dark brown, loose, few gravels (Hll.)
1 -.... ~--------------------
2 SM Silty SAND, brown. medium dense, fine-grained, . r, damp r · At 2 feet: Probed J"to 4"
3 . Total Depth = 2 feet (Gravel Refusal)
No Groudwater Seepage
Boring Location: Near SW corner of existing storage
4 -building.
5 -
HAND AUGER BORING NO. HA-2
LOGGED BY WJL EXCAVATION DATE i/15/14 GROUND ELEV. 407 feet(±)
Dl!P11I
IL uses SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
SM Silty SAND, dark brown, occasional gravel, loose moist
1 (Fll.L) .
.... ._ __ ------------------
2 -
SM Silty SAND, brown, fine-grained, few gravel. loose, damp
(FILL)
3 -
-Probe at 3.5 feet: Dense soil
4 encountered at 7.5feet +/-below -Total Depth= 3.5 feet (Gravel Refusal) the ground surface .
No Groundwater Seepage (Dense at Elev. 399.5' +/-)
Boring Location: NW corner of proposed administration
5 building -
HAND AUGER BORING LOG
•Gr~up·~=~: Inc. CHILD SCHOOL
2640 BENSON ROADS.
RENTON, WASIDNGTON E, Mio •••Ital Scltnlilel
JOB NO. G-3591 I DATE 1/15/14 I PLATE A2
HAND AUGER BORING NO. HA-3
LOGGED BY WJL EXCAVATION DATE -·-·-·----ln/14
.. GROUND ELEV. 380 feet(±)
DEPni
ft. uses SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
SM GraveUy SAND, dark gray, medium dense
1 -.... ,_ __ ------------------
-n SM Gravelly SAND, brown, medium dense to dense, r • Probed O"at 22" below 2 damp
ground surface
3 -Total Depth = 22 Inches (Gravel Refusal)
No Groudwater Seepage
4
Boring Location: Proposed play area
-
5 .
HAND AUGER BORING NO. HA-4
LOGGED BY WJL EXCAVATION DATE
~
1/15/14 GROUND ELEV. 404 feet(±l
DEP111
ft. uses SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
• Probed to 3.3 feet below
SM
1
Silty SAND, dark brown, loose, moist ground surface at 6 inches
.
~ 1---I!P!ut"£.O!i!lt1i.~~·t~~~-------
2 -SM SDty SAND, brown, loose, fine-grained, moist ... __ -----~----------, 3 ...
Silty SAND, lighter brown, mottled, loose, fu,e-graioed; -. SM
very moist
R ---------------------• Probed l"at 3.5' below
4 ML Sandy SILT, mottled brown & gray, dense, very moist r ground surface -
Total Depth = 3. 7 feet (Glacial Till)
5 -No Groudwater Seepage
Boring Location: Relocated Storage Building
HAND AUGER BORING LOG
Group Northwest, Inc. L'HILD SCHOOL
2640 BENSON ROADS. a....dw.ica EnQlnNnl.6-ogictll, & RENTON, WASHINGTON '""'"···--
JOB NO. G-3591 DATE 1/15/14 I PLATE A2
Loilil ...... --..
Taylor
Engineering
Consultants
TEC Project #: 603-WA
PRELIMINARY
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
for the
CHILD School
Parcel# 292305-9102
Site Location:
2640 Benson Road South
Renton, Washington
RFCEIVED
FEB I 7 2014
CITY OF RENTON ,-----...
Prepared by: Lorna M. Taylor, P.E.
Date: February 12, 2014
485 Rainier Blvd N, Suite #201, P.O. Box 1787 • Issaquah, Washington 98027 • (425) 391-1415
Preliminary Technical Information Report
CHILD School
Section
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Appendices
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description
Project Overview ......................................... .
Conditions and Requirements Summary .......... .
Off-Site Analysis ......................................... .
Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis
and Design .................................... .
Conveyance System Analysis and Design ....... .
Special Reports and Studies ......................... .
Other Permits ............................................. .
ESC Analysis and Design ............................. .
Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and
Declaration of Covenant. .............................. .
Operations and Maintenance Manual. ............. .
Figures (10 pages)
1. TIR Worksheet (5 pages)
2. Site Location Map (1 page)
Page Number
1
1
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3. Drainage Basins, Subbasins & Site Characteristics (1 page)
4. NRCS Soils Map (3 pages)
Offsite Analysis (2 pages)
Area Take-offs and Calculations -pending
Bond Quantities Worksheet -pending
Under separate cover
Declaration of Covenant for Inspection and Maintenance of
Stormwater Facilities and BMPs -pending
TEC
Preliminary Technical Information Report
CHILD School
SECTION 1
PROJECT OVERVIEW
This Technical Information Report (TIR) is submitted to the City of Renton in accordance with
the City-adopted King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of
Renton Amendments thereto (Renton Amendment). The 4.02-acre project site is located at
2640 Benson Road South. The project proposes to remodel a former church building for use
as a private school. It will place a 2,140 square foot modular building on a currently-paved
portion of the parking lot, add a new play area and new pedestrian walkways, as well as parking
and pavement revisions to the existing parking areas and drive lanes.
Appendix A contains a TIR worksheet for the project (Figure 1), as well as a Site Location Map
(Figure 2), a Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics figure (Figure 3), and a Soils
map (Figure 4).
SECTION 2
CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY
The project is required to undergo Full Drainage Review in accordance with Figure 1.1.2.A of
the KCSWDM & Renton Amendment:
• It is not a single family residential project,
• It 1§ a redevelopment project that will result in ~2.000 sf of new and/or replaced
impervious surface,
• It will not result in ~50 acres of new impervious surface.
The following summary describes how this new project will meet the "Core Requirements" and
"Special Requirements" that apply according to Table 1.1.2.A in the Renton Amendment:
Core Requirements
1. Discharge at the Natural Location: The already-developed site drains ultimately to the
drainage system along the east side of Benson Road South. The proposed
development will drain in the same direction.
2. Off-Site Analysis: A Level 1 offsite analysis will be conducted for this project as
detailed in Section 3.
3. Flow Control: Flow control will be accomplished using a Native Growth Retention
Credit BMP as required by the City and described in Section 4.
4. Conveyance System: No major conveyance is proposed, and standard storm drain
pipes will be sufficient to convey runoff on the sloping site. See Section 6.
5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control: Temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC)
measures will be provided as described in Appendix D of the KCSWDM. The TESC
facilities will only be removed once all exposed site surfaces have been stabilized.
6. Maintenance and Operations: The City's Declaration of Covenant for Inspection and
Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities and BMPS form will be submitted, including
pertinent excerpts from the KCSWDM Maintenance Requirements for Privately
Maintained Drainage Facilities.
7. Financial Guarantees and Liability: The project Bond Quantities Worksheet will be
included in Appendix C.
8. Water Quality: Not applicable. Water quality treatment will not be required because the
project will not add more than 5.000 square feet of new PGIS surface.
Page 1 TEC
Preliminary Technical Information Report
CHILD School
Special Requirements
1. Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements: According to City mapping, the property
includes a coal mine hazard area, and contains steep slopes in excess of 40%.
However, the topographic survey for the site shows the slopes in excess of 40% are
manmade embankments. No other sensitive areas are mapped on the site, but there
are erosion hazards mapped along the downstream drainage path. The entire property
is located in the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions) area.
2. Floodplain/Floodway Delineation: Not applicable.
3. Flood Protection Facilities: Not Applicable.
4. Source Controls: Source controls are required for this commercial project, in
accordance with the King County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual.
5. Oil Control: Not Applicable.
6. Aquifer Protection Area: Not Applicable.
SECTION 3
OFF-SITE ANALYSIS
Task 1. Study Area Definition and Maps
The Offsite Drainage System Maps in Appendix B show the extent of the study area. Figure 3
in Appendix A also shows the surrounding local topography, and the civil plan drawings show
even more detailed topographic information on the project site.
Task 2. Resource Review
Agency (King County and City of Renton) mapping was reviewed. The City's mapping shows
that the property includes a coal mine hazard area, and contains steep slopes in excess of
40%. No other sensitive areas are mapped on the site, but there are erosion hazards mapped
along the downstream drainage path. The entire property is located in the Flow Control
Duration Standard (Forested Conditions) area. The USDA, NSRC soils map identifies site soils
in the proposed development area as Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 -15 % slopes, as
shown on Figure 4 in Appendix A.
Task 3. Field Inspection
pending.
Task 4. Drainage System Descriptions and Problem Descriptions
The site is already developed with buildings and pavement, and was most recently used as a
church.
Downstream: Runoff from the site flows overland west into the ditch and culvert/pipe system on
the east side of Benson Road S. According to the project survey, city GIS, and county
topographic mapping, this runoff is conveyed in a pipe under Benson Road, just south of S. 26th
Street, then north under S 26 1" Street, to a channelized drainage flowing northwest to a
detention pond facility located just northeast of the bend in S. 23rd Street. This open channel
drainage system continues north, and slightly west, eventually crossing Talbot Road
approximately 3,950 feet from the project site.
Upstream: Upstream is a school campus, with an area totaling about 9 acres draining toward
the site, consisting mostly of athletic fields, with some driveway and parking area. This area is
sketched on the Upstream Tributary Area map in Appendix B.
Page 2 TEC
Preliminary Technical Information Report
CHILD School
SECTION 4
FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
The proposed project will add 5,855 square feet of new and replaced impervious surface area,
even after credit is taken for the 1,185 square feet of impervious surface that will be restored to
pervious.
The project must meet the requirements stipulated in Section 5.2.1.2 Large Lot Low Impervious
BMP Requirements:
1. Full dispersion all target surfaces is not practical because the site is already developed
and does not lend itself to retrofitting for dispersion.
2. Full infiltration of roof runoff is not practical because the soils are not conducive to
infiltration, and because the site is already developed.
To meet the BMP requirement, the project proposes to set aside the north portion of the
property as a Native Growth Retention Area.
Frontage improvements are not anticipated.
Existing Site Hydrology (Part A)
Not necessary.
Developed Site Hydrology (Part 8)
Not necessary.
Performance Standards (Part C)
Detention: If required, detention must meet the Conservation Flow Control Standards
established in the KCSWDM, which in this case means Level 2 flow control assuming historic
forested site conditions for peak flow and duration matching. However, flow control
requirements are being met using BMPs for this project.
Treatment: If required, runoff treatment facilities must meet Basic Water Quality Treatment
parameters established in the KCSWDM and Renton Amendment. However, treatment is not
required for this project because the project will add less than 5,000 square feet of new PGIS.
BMPs: BMP's are required to be applied to the entire target surface area, which is the new plus
replaced impervious surface area, which totals 5,855 square feet.
Conveyance: Conveyance features must be able to convey the predicted 25-year flows without
flooding.
Flow Control System (Part D)
Flow control will be provided via the required BMPs. The Native Growth Retention Credit BMP
requires that at least 3.5 square feet of native vegetated surface be preserved for every square
foot of impervious surface being mitigated. Therefore, to mitigate 5,855 square feet of new and
replaced impervious surface, at least 20,492 square feet of native vegetated surface must be
preserved. The native growth area may not be steeper than 15%. The area north of the
driveway is proposed to be set aside as a Native Growth Retention Area, and while portions of it
are too steep, it contains more than 20,492 square feet that is 15% slope or less.
Page 3 TEC
Preliminary Technical Information Report
CHILD School
Water Quality (Part E)
Water quality treatment is not required because the project will add less than 5,000 square feet
of new PGIS.
SECTION 5
CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
pending.
SECTION 6
SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES
A geotechnical report was produced for this project by Geo Group Northwest, dated January
14, 2014.
SECTION 7
OTHER PERMITS
No other permits beyond those required by the City of Renton are anticipated to be required for
this project.
SECTION 8
ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
pending.
SECTION 9
BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT
pending.
SECTION 10
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
The drainage facilities should be maintained as described in the Declaration of Covenant for
Inspection and Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities and BMPs.
Page4 TEC
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
1. TIR Worksheet (5 pages)
2. Site Location Map (1 page)
3. Drainage Basins, Subbasins & Site Char. (1 page)
4. NRCS Soil Map (3 pages)
Kl:-JG COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
h (( (,.(,i'f;. j_
Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND
PROJECT ENGINEER
ProJect Owner (l[,\JJ ,I Sc);\o,J l
Phone-----------~
Address JIAo H,atoc ij2ci S.
Project Engineer lq, ,w:-r~;, ,-; { :_'). /
J
Company :TE,:i' , I"' r
I Phone 2. -3"i i -l'i 1
: Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION . .
0 Landuse Services
Subdivison / Short Subd. I UPD
~ Buildinn Services
M/F f Commerical\/ SFR
0 Clearing and Grading
0 Right-of-Way Use
0 Other
Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION
Technical Information Report
Type of Drainage Review Qi Targeted
(circle) Large Site
Date (include revision
dates)
Date of Final:
Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS
'
•
I
Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND
DESCRIPTION
Project Name t\u..i cl S: ,J.w o I
DOES Permit# ----------
Location Township _7...__3,__ __ _
Range 6 ~
Section _.,,t,....,11.,,Ai'-"2.'-'j __ _
Site Address 2c1,,~· ~li~o_·~B~, "-~5~D~f·~'~<~d~'.>~, ---
Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS
0 DFWHPA 0 Shoreline
0 COE 404 Management
0 DOE Dam Safety 0 Structural
RockeryNaulV __ 0 FEMA Floodplain 0 ESA Section 7 0 COE Wetlands
0 Other
..
Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans)
Type (circle one), <@1 Modified
Small Site
I
Date (include revision
dates):
Date of Final:
Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication I Experimental I Blanket
Description (include conditions in TIR Section 2)
Date of Annroval:
2009 Surface Water Design Manual I 19/2009
.
.
KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monitoring Required: Yes/~ Describe:-------------
Start Date:
Completion Date:
Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN
Community Plan "Soo:;;;. Cc-<,; lL
Special District Overlays -----------------------
Drainage Basin :J?,\c...ck (2,·ve.r
Stormwater Requirements:
I Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS
; 0 River/Stream ________ _ IE Steep Slope ________ _
· 0 Lake 0 Erosion Hazard _______ _
0 Wetlands __________ _ D Landslide Hazard-------
0 Closed Depression _______ _ ~ Coal Mine Hazard ______ _
D Floodplain-----------D Seismic Hazard _______ _
0 Other ___________ _ 0 Habitat Protection ______ _
0 -----------
~
Part 10 SOILS
.. . .
Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential
Ar;/ .-"I fe. -I~ 'l
D High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) D Sole Source Aquifer
D Other D Seeps/Springs
D Additional Sheets Attached
2009 Surface Water Design Manual
2
1/9/2009
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
~---------·-····----------------------------,
Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS
REFERENCE
0 Core 2 -Offsite Analysis
D Sensitive/Critical Areas
D SEPA
D Other
LIMITATION/ SITE CONSTRAINT
D __________ _
D Additional Sheets Attached
_ ....
Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summarv Sheet per Threshold Discharoe Area)
Threshold Discharge Area:
(name or description)
Core Requirements (all 8 apply)
Discharoe at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharae Locations: I
Offsite Analysis Level: (9 2 I 3 dated:
Flow Control Level· 1 / 2 I 3 or Exemption Number
(incl facility summary sheet) Small Site BMPs ... \ l ·, ... C-ru..,J.\--\a\ w~J-er.i{~\"\I\
Conveyance System Spill containment located at:
Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor:
Contact Phone:
After Hours Phone:
Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: Private I Public
If Private, Maintenance Loa Reauired: Yes I No
Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes / No
Liability
Water Quality Type: Basic I Sens. Lake I Enhanced Basicm / Bog
(include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. I
Landscape Manaqement Plan: Yes I No
Soecial Reauirements (as aoolicable)
Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MOP /BP/ LMP / Shared Fae. / None
Reauirements Name:
Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor / Exemption I None
100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range):
Datum:
Flood Protection Facilities Describe:
----
Source Control Describe landuse:
(comm./industrial landuse) Describe any structural controls:
--
2009 Surface Water Design Manual l/9/2009
3
.
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, St:RFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
Oil Control High-use Site: Yes I No
Treatment BMP:
Maintenance Agreement: Yes I No
wrth whom?
Other Drainaae Structures
Describe:
Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS
DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION
0 Clearing Limits ~ Stabilize Exposed Surfaces
0 Cover Measures I CZJ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities
1:.31 Perimeter Protection I IXJ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris, Ensure
Iii Traffic Area Stabilization
1 Operation of Permanent Facilities
0 Sediment Retention i O Flag Limits of SAO and open space
0 Surface Water Collection
1 preservation areas
0 Other 0 Dewatering Control
0 Dust Control
0 Flow Control
Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS/Note: Include Facilitv Summarv and Sketch)
Flow Control T"ne/Descrintion Water Qualitv Tvoe/Descriotion
0 Detention 0 Biofiltration
0 Infiltration 0 Wetpool
0 Regional Facility 0 Media Filtration
0 Shared Facility 0 Oil Control
0 Flow Control 0 Spill Control
BMPs 0 Flow Control BMPs
0 Other 0 Other
2009 Surface Water Design Manual
4
119/2009
''
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURF ACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
D Drainage Easement D Cast in Place Vault
D Covenant D Retaining Wall
3J Native Growth Protection Covenant I D Rockery> 4' High
D Tract D Structural on Steep Slope
D Other D Other
Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were
incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my
knowledge the information provided ~· accurate.
,L.---,e-11-I'/
Si ned!Date
2009 Surface Water Design Manual l/9/2009
5
-
Site Location Map -Figure 2
(
/
:?.15Til ST
.S 1rTIH ST
s 1.m,.sr ~-
(',
i..t.::·
di' i.,,_i-~
,-,,
c,
s rsr s-r
52rl.D.:',T
S:2SE1 -ST
.S2.l"""TII CT
$2GT'!ST
:flf1r.,,t,i.
S:!11ST Si
SJaTHCT
{C) :2®!11tmg Coun1Y
.S:l1ST CT
:/J
"' ~
~ -;,
Th.It inF1,mm1tlon included .on U1i,,-,1Tl~j'.(~_as,bl;l13:i:i•compl1!3'(.l by ~ng_. Ot.Jnty slaff fTOIJ'.u1. varil:lre of s·9. •
smHs1
~-~
if.
§
~1r~,J:L f: n~ff~:~1:~~ ~ew~r::~}~~ci~~~~pl~~~~;f~~ 1f!ililf_te~~9eMr_a_
damages lncludin9, bul 0ot li_Jnited.to, lost revenuw. or Jo:i.t p[o«IG tesultin!} fii:im,me-usa or-tnJsuse_cr !he
lhl?:map~r.mfor!l\ation on this rrnwii; proh1bilei:f. !IXC9pt,by wPiltlln p~fmissiq~ ~ _l(il)9 Courjty. . . . i .: ; .'.
OJ1~i 2i4,1~14 Sour.ca: Kiaj .Co~~ iMAP:_. P;op~_ rty.1nlcir~li~O~hi1Pf1~.~etrOk'd-~1G1$JfMA~~f} '. . ' . . . ' . . . . ' .
-PROJECT SITE
st )tl3T1! ~ ...
SE: 11ITT:tl ST
'" 942ft
-Si;2_1SLST
S:ite Characteristics -Figure 3
nm .nfrim·.;,t,.~n ·1:· .11r•d on lt1i:; :n,,p c<;ci:; le, rn r,i: rnp ["l 1) K ,~ C , :;ul;Jl;cl lo c1·«mgu w1lll,,ut ;1-:,lict. i-(ic1~
C.o_.anty 11,,,,:e,s ri 1 , ,_ "'~',I ',,w o ~ 1r·nn11f'~ expra ~--o 1rr p11ei.l "' IJ <"(,..u11:acy ,..,n , 2te, ):,:;, J,\BI .~cs~. ~r r;g'ils lo Ibo u:;u of 5uc!• ;nform,,t,0,1
;11~~.~r\~~;::r!}~:~i:i:;,:~~~-~i!:,!~2;:r ~~t~f~~\~;{fi;·,;i~.!·.:;~11~:;~EEfZ}tf~~:;l~~i~f:s~~t ~r~~~~~{~J~~U~,-,~~~:n;~<Cg;~·1;'1')\· ~~~o~:;~~!~ ;! ~ King County
,r
St:il rJ,ap-'-<i-ig C::Lmly Area W2s'1111gt::iri
(Child School)
Fiq•.m: 4
"'q; S:ot: l·C.,!JG:.' r.'r;r-,'.-:v: en 1< k1>l'~-,iw '.11" ~ 8.'i'; si1c:\a'..
" 0 SU l"}cJ
n 2,)J
--
)UI
sec
--:·-,Met.e·s
·c:x;
ltcs-·1
1/C() A ·,13p pn)_io':-::-10r,: \NdJ i<c:i;ito; CJJrr,(• wo,-,Ji"-ctss: v\'GS&i ':dqe tJC.c:: :J:1'1 Lo:1e lCL\ 'NGSEL.
l•SD\ Natural ResoL!ICCS
,,-JEi;;i Conservation Service
vVeb Soil Survey
Nati::inal Coo~era!ive Soil Sc::Vey
a ,
,
" " fJ
~
~
~
~
~
~
§
~
~
~
112312014
Page1of3
47" FJ~"N
.-ir Ul.!'111
Soil Map-King County Area, Wash:ngton
(Child School)
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOII
Soils
~'-"
Iii
Area or Interest (AOI)
Soil Map Urnt Polygons
Soil Map Unit lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
w
rgi
ff<
-:,,
V "~"
(~
/t.
,!.fa,
";;..~
12)
€)
+
§
(J
t,
ffe/
USDA Natural Resources
:liiiiii Conservation Service
Blowout
Barrow Pit
Clay Spot
Clost:d Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly $pol
landfill
lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide ar Slip
Sadie Spot
~
,,
('.<
-·
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
01her
Special line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
++> Rails .... ln:erstate Highways
US Routes
MaJor Roads
Local Roads
Background • Aerial Photography
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Sur,;ey
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000
--------------
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line
placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting
softs that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.
Please rely on 1he bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Sur,;ey URL: http:l/websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape bu1 distorts
distance and area. A projection lhat preseives area. such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate
calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certif:ed data as of
the version date(s) listed below .
Soil Survey Area·
Survey Area Data.
King County Area, Washington
Version 8, Dec 10, 2013
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scares 1 :50,000
or larger.
Dale(s) aerial images were photographed· Jul 9, 2010-Aug 20,
2011
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
1/23/2014
Page 2 of 3
Soil Map-King County Area, Washington Child School
Map Unit Legend
.
King County Area, Washi_ngton (WA633)
------------~-----------~---'----------~-----------! I Map Unit Name I Acres. in AOI j Map Unit Symbol ~--------~----~----+----
AgC
AgO
Totals for Are~ of Interest
lSDA Natural Resources
"'ffi Conservation Service
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, :
6 !o 1 5 percent slopes
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,
15 to 30 percent slopes
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
Percent of AO!
87.3
17 .1
104.4
83.6%
16.4%
100.0%
1123/2014
Page 3 of 3
•
APPENDIX B
OFF-SITE ANALYSIS
(2 pages)
•
•
U pstream:]rib:utary Area
• • • , • • • • I ' '
Public Hearing Exhibits, April 15, 2014 -CHILD School, LUA14-000203
Exhibit 1: Staff Report dated April 8, 2014
Exhibit 2: Neighborhood Detail Map
Exhibit 3: Site Plan
Exhibit 4: Landscape Conceptual Plan
Exhibit 5: Tree Cutting/Land Clearing {Tree Inventory) Plan
Exhibit 6: Utility and Paving Plan
Exhibit 7: Main Building Exterior Elevations
Exhibit 8: Main Building Floor Plans
Exhibit 9: Modular Building Elevations
Exhibit 10: Modular Building Floor Plans
Exhibit 11: Public Comment
Exhibit 12: Plan Review and Fire Department Comments
Exhibit 13: Environmental "5EPA" Determination
Exhibit 14: Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated Mitigation
Measures and Advisory Notes
Exhibit 15: Proof of Notice of Application Mailing
Exhibit 16: Street Modification Approval, dated April 8, 2014
Exhibit 17: Geotechnical Report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest,
Incorporated, dated January 29, 2014
Exhibit 18: Preliminary Technical Information Report, prepared by TEC
Taylor Engineering Consultants, dated February 12, 2014
Exhibit 19: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by William Poop
Associates, dated February 4, 2014
Exhibit 20: Conditional Use Permit Justification
~~---..
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
-_-< · • ·r:itv oL If::.'.~
; 1 J lJi EXHIBIT 1
REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST
REPORT DATE:
Project Name:
Owner:
Applicant:
Contact:
File Number:
Project Manager:
Project Summary:
Project Location:
Site Area:
April 8, 2014
CHILD School (Childrens Institute for Learning Differences)
Presebytery of Seattle; 1S44 S. Snoqualmie St; Seattle, WA 98108
CHILD (Childrens Institute for Learning Differences); 4030 86th Ave SE;
Mercer Island, WA 98040
Carrie Fannin, Executive Director; 4030 86th Ave SE; Mercer Island, WA
98040
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner
The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Site Plan Review,
Conditional Use Permit, and a street modification for a private school called
Childrens Institute for Learning Differences (CHILD) that will remodel a
former church and add a modular one-story 2,239 square foot building. For
the primary building of 18,469 square feet, the applicant is proposing
remodels to the first floor and basement for school classrooms, kitchen,
and staff and student support areas including occupation, speech, and
language therapy rooms. Exterior work for the primary structure will
consist of paint, trim, and in-fill of some windows. An existing cellular
building and tower will remain on site. Other improvements include a play
area, parking spaces, landscaping, and street improvements. The existing
facility would be brought up to current Building and Fire codes. Drainage,
Geotechnical, and Traffic Impact studies are provided. The site is located in
the Residential-8 single family zone and is 175,111 square feet in size (4.02
acres). Approximately 2,083 square feet of steep slopes are located on-site.
Over 150 trees are to remain. Vehicular access would be gai"ned off Benson
Road South at the intersection with S 26th Street and an emergency fire
access would be kept from S 27th Street. A modification is requested from
street improvements along S 27th Street_
2640 Benson Rd S; Renton, WA 98055
175,111 sf
Project Location Map
HEX Report 14-000203_Fina/
Ci'ty of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL (CH/WRENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES}
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 2 of 18
[ B. EXHIBITS:
Exhibit 1: Staff Report dated April 8, 2014
Exhibit 2: Neighborhood Detail Map
Exhibit 3: Site Plan
Exhibit 4: Landscape Conceptual Plan
Exhibit 5: Tree Cutting/Land Clearing {Tree Inventory) Plan
Exhibit 6: Utility and Paving Plan
Exhibit 7: Main Building Exterior Elevations
Exhibit 8: Main Building Floor Plans
Exhibit 9: Modular Building Elevations
Exhibit 10: Modular Building Floor Plans
Exhibit 11: Public Comment
Exhibit 12: Plan Review and Fire Department Comments
Exhibit 13: Environmental "SEPA" Determination
Exhibit 14: Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated Mitigation Measures and Advisory
Notes
Exhibit 15: Proof of Notice of Application Mailing
Exhibit 16: Street Modification Approval, dated April 8, 2014
Exhibit 17: Geotechnical Report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest, Incorporated, dated
January 29, 2014
Exhibit 18: Preliminary Technical Information Report, prepared by TEC Taylor Engineering
Consultants, dated February 12, 2014
Exhibit 19: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by William Poop Associates, dated February 4,
2014
Exhibit 20: Conditional Use Permit Justification I C. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Presebytery of Seattle; 1544 S. Snoqualmie St;
1. Owner(s) of Record: Seattle, WA 98108
2. Zoning Designation: Residential 8 (R-8)
3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Single Family
4. Existing Site Use: Religious Institution -Church
5. Neighborhood Characteristics:
a. North:
b. East:
c. South:
d. West:
HEX Report 14-000203_Finol
Multi-Family Residences (RM-F zone)
Renton School District; Fred Nelson Middle School and Spring Glen
Elementary Schoof (R-8 zone)
Single Family Residential {R-8 zone)
Single Family Residential and Multi Family {R-8 zone and RM-F zone)
J
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
~CH.;;l;;.LD:__;:SC;::H~O:~O;;;LC.!{.:CCH;,;.l;;;L;;.DR;,;.E;;;f.;;JS.;;l;;;N:_ST;,;.l;;;TU;;;T;;;E;;;F.;;;0,;;Fl,,;;LccEA.;;R,;,;N,;,;l;;;N,;;;;G.;;D.;;15;.cA.;;B.;;IL;crr:;,;.IE;;;S;:a/----~L=-UA'-'1:_4:_··=000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 3 of 18
6. Site Area: 175,111 sf
D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND:
Action
Comprehensive Plan
Zoning
Annexation
Hearing Examiner
Conditional Use -
Cell tower
R PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. Existing Utilities
Land Use File No.
N/A
N/A
N/A
LUAOS-105
Ordinance No.
5099
5100
1909
N/A
a. Water: This project is served by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District.
b. Sewer: This project is served by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District.
Date
11/1/2004
11/1/2004
09/20/1951
08/25/2005
c. Surface/Storm Water: There are storm drainage facilities in Benson Road South.
2. Streets: There are street frontage improvements along Benson Road South and South 27th
Street. South 27th Street only has a pedestrian connection, walkway, to Benson Road South
where it dead ends at the south end of the subject property.
3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department
F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE:
1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts
a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
b. Section 4-2-050: Zoning Use Table
c. Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards
2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts
a. Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations
3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards
a. Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations
b. Section 4:4-070: Landscaping
c. Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations
d. Section 4-4-090: Refuse and Recyclables Standards
e. Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations
4. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria
a. Section 4-9-030: Conditional Use Permit
5. Chapter 11 Definitions
HEX Report 14-000203_Finol
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL(CHILDRENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING 0/SABIL/TIES}
-
Report of April 8, 2014
G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
1. Land Use Element
2. Human Services Element
I H. FINDINGS OF FACT:
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Page 4 of 18
1. The applicant, CHILD School (Childrens Institute for Learning Differences), is requesting a
Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit approval for the remodeling and addition of a new
modular building at an existing church building to allow for a school.
2. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review
on February 17, 2014 and determined complete on February 26, 2014. The project complies
with the 120-day review period.
3. The subject site is located at 2640 Benson Road South. The site is surrounded by multi-and
single family residences and public school district properties with existing schools (Exhibit 2).
4. The property is located within the Residential Single Family Comprehensive Plan land use
designation and the Residential 8 (R-8) zoning classification (Exhibit 2).
5. The site currently contains a church building and cellular tower building. The one-story church
structure with a basement is approximately 18,469 square feet of area and the cell building is
approximately 320 square feet. The existing facility has 80 parking stalls for church use.
6. The applicant is proposing to add a new one-story modular building at the southeastern area
of the subject site for administration of the school at approximately 2,239 square feet of area
with no expansion of the existing church building or cellular building (Exhibit 3).
7. The applicant is proposing a childrens play area north of the school building of approximately
500 square feet surrounded by fence and block walls with a proposed sidewalk connecting
back to the school building (Exhibit 3).
8. The applicant is requesting a street modification of the street frontage improvements along
Benson Rd South to allow the existing street frontage improvements to remain, but dedicate
right-of-way for future build-out of frontage improvements to current City standards.
9. Vehicular access to the site is through the intersection at Benson Rd S and S 26th Street and
there is a blocked off vehicular access point at the westerly dead end of S 27th St available for
emergency access (Exhibit 3).
10. The interior and exterior improvements for the primary building are remodels to the first floor
and basement to create six school classrooms, a kitchen, and staff and student support areas
including occupation, speech, and language therapy rooms and exterior work will consist of
paint, trim, and in-fill of some windows (Exhibit 8).
11. The kitchen remodel will be submitted to King County Department of Health.
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {Cl-I/LORENS JNSTITUffFOR LEARNING DISABILITIES}
Report of April 8, 2014
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
WA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOO
Page 5 of 18
lZ. The site is located within the Moderate Coalmine Hazard area, has approximately 2,083 square
feet of Geological Hazard protected slopes, and high landslide hazards. No other critical areas
are on site.
13. The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest,
Incorporated, dated January 29, 2014. The report indicated the soils are not suitable for
infiltration and that water should be conveyed to the city storm drain, not discharged on or
directly above the embankment steep slope area, and dispersal of the water if storm drain is
not available (Exhibit 17).
14. The applicant submitted a Technical Information Report, prepared by prepared by TEC Taylor
Engineering Consultants, dated February 12, 2014. The report indicated the existing runoff
flows west into the ditch and culvert system on the east side of Benson Rd South (Exhibit 18).
15. The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by William Poop Associates, dated
February 4, 2014. The report indicated the existing traffic volumes on Benson Rd S in the AM
peak hour, from 7 AM to 8 AM, are 1,255 vehicles per hour, and peak hour PM traffic volumes
from 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM are 1,365 vehicles per hour. Traffic volumes for S 26th St in the AM
peak hour is SO vehicles per hour and for the PM peak hour, 117 vehicles per hour (Exhibit 19).
16. The subject project is not exempt from SEPA Environmental Review, WAC 197-11-800, and
went through SEPA review by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee on March
24, 2014, with a determination that the proposed action does not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment with a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M)
with 3 mitigation measures related to geotechnical and traffic elements. An appeal period
began on March 28, 2014 and ended on April 11, 2014. No appeals have been filed (Exhibit 13
& 14).
The subject project has 3 mitigation measures as determined by the Environmental Review
Committee's decision March 24, 2014, where the applicant shall comply with the
recommendations of the Geotechnical Report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest,
Incorporated, dated January 29, 2014, with comply with the recommendations of the
geotechnical report, prepared by prepared by TEC Taylor Engineering Cons.ultants, dated
February 12, 2014, and with the applicant to comply with the recommendations of the Traffic
Impact Analysis, prepared by William Poop Associates, dated February 4, 2014.
17. No agency comments were received.
18. One public comment was received; inquiring about the storm water drainage. These
comments are included in Exhibit 11.
19. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to
identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are
contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the
appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this
report.
ZO. The proposal requires a Conditional Use Permit. The following table contains project elements
intended to comply with multiple decision criteria; for Conditional Use Permit decision criteria,
HEX Report 14-000203_Finaf
City of Renton Deportment of Community & Econ~mic Development
CHILD SCHOOL (CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES)
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 6 of 18
as outlined in RMC 4-9-030.D.; for Street Modification decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-
250.D.; and for Site Plan Review decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-200.B.
21. The proposal includes a Street Modification request for the Benson Rd S frontage
improvements that was approved (Exhibit 16) but the applicant is providing required right-of-
way dedication. For S 27th St, there are required frontage improvement requirements. The
following table contains project elements intended to comply with multiple decision criteria;
for Conditional Use Permit decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-030.D.; for Street
Modification decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-250.D.; and for Site Plan Review decision
criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-200.B.
22. The proposal requests Site Plan Review approval. The following. table contains project
elements intended to comply with multiple decision criteria; for Conditional Use Permit
decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-030.D.; for Street Modification decision criteria, as
outlined in RMC 4-9-250.D.; and for Site Plan Review decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-
200.B.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA:
A. CONSISTENCY WITH PLANS AND REGULATIONS:
a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES COMPLIANCE AND CONSISTENCY:
The site is designated Residential Single Family (RSF) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
Policy LU-107. Safe pedestrian access to schools should be promoted (e.g. through
" pedestrian linkages, safety features) through the design of new subdivisions and roadway
improvements.
" Policy LU-108. Vehicular access to middle schools, senior high schools and other large-scale
facilities (e.g. bus maintenance shops, sports facilities) should be from arterial streets.
Objective HS-A: Enable individuals to meet their basic physical, economic, and social needs
" by promoting an effective human services delivery system and enhancing their quality of
life.
" Objective HS-B. Make human services more accessible to the Renton community.
" Objective HS-C. Create a caring community that nurtures and supports individuals, children,
and their families.
"
Policy HS-7. Support the development and operation of facilities for human services, and
where appropriate, seek opportunities to achieve efficiencies through agency collocation
and coordination.
" Policy HS-11. Collaborate and partner with non-profits, churches, employers, bus_inesses,
and schools.
b. ZONING COMPLIANCE AND CONSISTENCY:
The subject site is classified Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) on the City of Renton Zoning
Map. RMC 4-2-llOA provides development standards for development within the R-8 zoning
classification. Exterior changes are proposed as part of the project. The proposed private school would
be located within an existing one-story building with a basement and a proposed new modular building.
Density: The maximum density permitted in the R-8 zone is 8.0 dwelling units per net acre.
N/A Net density is calculated after the deduction of critical areas, areas intended for public right-
of-way, and private access easements.
Staff_ Comment: Not Applicable.
HEX Report 14-000203_Fina!
City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development
CHILD_SCHOOL /CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILIT/ESL
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, fVIOD
Repo,-t of April 8, 2014 Page 7 of 18
N/A
Lot Dimensions: The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 zoning designation is 5,000
square feet for parcels an acre or less and 4,500 square feet for parcels greater than an acre_
A minimum lot width of 50 feet is required for interior lots and 60 feet for corner lots. Lot
depth is required to be a minimum of 65 feet.
Staff Comment: Not Applicable.
Setbacks: The required setbacks in the R-8 zone are as follows: front yard is 15 feet for the
primary structure; interior side yard is 5 feet; side yard along a street is 15 feet for the
primary structure; and the rear yard is 20 feet.
Staff Comment: The existing structures and proposed new modular structure are located on
the subject property where all the required setbacks would be met. The structures comply
with the zone setback standards (Exhibit 3).
Building Standards: Building height is restricted to 30 feet. Detached accessory structures
must remain below a height of 15 feet and one-story. The allowed building lot coverage for
lots over 5,000 SF in size in the R-8 zone is 35 percent or 2,500 SF, whichever is greater. The
allowed impervious surface coverage is 75 percent.
Staff Comment:
Height: The existing church building meets the standards (30 foot difference between
existing grade elevation and top of roof elevation) and the proposed modular administration
building has a height of just over 14 feet in height. The structures, existing and as proposed
comply with the zone standards.
Building Coverage: Lot area is 175,111 sf and the multiple buildings' coverage totals 11,907
square feet with a building coverage of roughly 7 percent.
Landscaping: Existing landscaping on site and proposed new landscaping would meet the
minimum requirements for landscaping along all public street frontages, along common
property lines with residential development, and for parking areas. Landscaping is broken
into these separate areas:
Along Streets: Ten feet of on-site landscaping is required along all public street frontages,
with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways and those zones with
building setbacks less than ten feet (10'). In those cases, ten feet (10') of landscaping shall
be required where buildings are not located per RMC 4-4-070.
Visual Buffer between residential and non-residential development: A fifteen-foot (15')
wide partially sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier, orten-foot (10') wide fully sight-
obscuring landscaped visual barrier, is required along common property lines when a
nonresidential development is located in a residential zone.
Perimeter Parking Lot: Parking areas shall have a minimum of 10 feet in width of
landscaping as measured from the street right-of-way.
Interior Parking Lot: Surface parking lots with more than 14 stalls shall be landscaped where
this proposal with 65 total spaces would need 25 square feet of landscaping per space, or
1,625 square feet.
Staff Comment: A conceptual landscape plan, Exhibit 4, was submitted with the project
application. Much of the site has mature or existing, maintained, landscaping and the
conceptual landscape plan shows additional landscaping including trees, shrubs, and
groundcover to be added around the site and parking area. Also, the proposal includes a P-
Patch (gardening area) outside the south end of the main building, and a new playground
bordered by new trees and landscaping around the southern edge of the play area.
Along Streets: For the ten feet of required landscaping along public street frontages, with
the existing mature landscaping and proposed additional landscaping, the proposal complies
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD S(_HOOL {CH/LORENS INSTI_TUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES}
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 8 of 18
Not
Compliant
with the on-site landscaping requirement for a 10-foot wide landscape area per RMC 4-4-
070.
Visual Buffer between residential and non-residential development: If the subject site
abuts a less intensive use rather than a school, a sight-obscuring landscaped visual buffer
would be required per RMC 4-4-070. There is an existing fully sight-obscuring landscaped
visual buffer between the northern mu/ti-family residences and the subject site, where a
forested area exists. The property abutting the subject site ta the east is a school and of
similar use intensity, so no sight-obscuring landscaping is required although the proposal
includes existing mature landscaping and new rockery along much of the southeastern
property border (Exhibit 4 & 5 ).
Perimeter Parking Lot: Along Benson Rd S where a new property line will be moved east per
the right-of-way dedication requirement, there is still a minimum 10 feet of existing
landscaping between the street and parking area. Along S. 2th St, there is the required 10
feet of landscaping between the parking area and the street except for the vehicle turning
area from the southerly street curb cut for emergency access.
Interior Parking Lot: 1,625 square feet of parking lot interior landscaping is required. The
conceptual landscape plan as proposed has over a/mast 3,000 of interior parking landscaping
proposed and complies with the requirement per RMC 4-4-070.
Staff Comment: In addition to the total required area of interior parking lot landscaping the
following standards apply:
a. Landscaped areas shall be a minimum of 5 feet in width,
All landscape areas are proposed to be at least 5 feet in width.
b. Trees shall be two inches /2") in diameter at breast height (dbh) and planted at
one tree for every six {6} parking spaces within the lot interior,
Based on 93 parking stalls 16 trees are required to be planted. The provided
landscape plan identified 13, 2" diameter trees to be planted in the interior of the
parking lot. As such, an additional 3 trees are required to be planted in the
parking lot interior.
c. Shrubs shall be planted at the minimum rate of one per twenty {20} square feet of
landscaped area, up ta fifty percent {50%} of the shrubs may be deciduous.
d. Ground cover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least ninety
percent {90%} coverage of the landscaped area within three /3} years of
installation, and
Ground cover appears ta be sufficient ta meet the above standards.
e. There shall be no more than fifty feet /50'} between parking stalls and an interior
parking lot landscape area.
As identified above, portions of the proposed interior parking lot landscaping complies with
the minimum standards and portions do not. As such, staff recommends as a condition of
approval that the applicant be required to submit a final landscape plan, identifying
compliance with the interior parking lot landscape standards and other landscaping
requirements for review and approval prior by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
construction permit issuance.
Lighting: A lighting plan was not provided with the application; therefore staff recommends
a condition of approval that lighting plan be provided that complies RMC 4-4-075 lighting
standards.
Refuse and Recyclables Standards (RMC 4-4-090): Outdoor deposit areas and collection
points shall not be located in any required setback or landscape areas. Such areas shall not
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES}
Report of April 8, 2014
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Page 9 of 18
located within 50 feet of properties zoned residential, except by approval through the site
development plan review process. Collection areas must be fenced or screened with
minimum 6' wall or fence. For educational developments, the minimum size of a collection
,,' area is minimum 2 sf per every 1,000 sf of building gross floor area shall be provided for
recyclables deposit areas and a minimum of 4 sf per every 1,000 of building gross floor area
shall be provided for refuse areas with a minimum of 100 sf for the combined deposit area.
Staff Comment:
As proposed, the collection area is next to parking stalls generally between the main building
and play area where there are 6 compact vehicle stalls. The proposed collection area is
approximately 160 sf which meets the minimum size requirement far bath the main building
and new administrative building {20,201 sf I 1,000 is 20.2 multiplied by 2 and 4 with totals of
40.4 sf far recyclables and 80.8 sf far refuse). The proposal does not indicate the height of
the collection area screening, whether a fence or a wall ar the height and dimensions.
Additionally, the site is in a residential zoned property as are the surrounding properties,
where the minimum 50 feet from residential zoned properties requirement. Although this 50
feet can be reduced if approved through site plan review. The proposed collection area is in a
central location an the subject site, not near the surrounding properties.
Staff recommends approval of the location and proposed size of the refuse and recyclables
collection area, although as a condition of approval, would require a profile of the screening
fence or wall ta make sure the minimum height requirement is met.
Critical Areas: The site contains geatechnica/ hazards including moderate coal mine hazards,
moderate landslide hazards and sensitive and protected slopes; there are no other critical
areas on site. The site topographically slopes down to the west and north. The site generally
slopes down to the northwest. The upper southeastern portion of the site is flat paved
parking lot next ta the main building. A steep slope embankment is located in the central
portion of the site north of the existing building. The slope extends along the northwest side
of the upper parking lot. The height of the steep slope portion of the embankment varies
from about 8 to 25 feet in height with a gradient between 50 and 70 percent.
According to the Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest,
Incorporated, dated January 29, 2014 (Exhibit 17), the soils encountered during field
exploration consist of gravel refusal or dense glacial till. The report identifies that the sails
,,' will not support infiltration. The site is underlain by dense glacial till soils and seismically
classified where liquefaction and/or lateral spreading is negligible.
The study also specifically reviewed coal mines far the site, as the City of Renton mapping
software identified the site as having "Moderate" level coal mine hazard on-site. The study
determines that there was no previous coal mining at the location based on a review of the
"Geology and Coal Resources of the Cumberland, Hobart, and Maple Valley Quadrangles,
King County, Washington," 1969, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior,
Geological Survey Professional Paper 624, by Vine J.D. The nearest mines or prospects were
between 2.8 miles and 4 miles from the site (New Black Diamond mine -3.8 miles east; New
Lake Young mine -4 miles east-southeast; Red Devil [Cavanaugh] mine -2.8 miles east). No
conditions or recommendations are made, through the report analysis, as there was no coal
mine activity on or near the site. According to Renton Municipal Code subsection 4-3-050.J
Geological Hazards, the site would not be classified as a cool mine hazard according to the
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES}
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 10 of 18
definitions of low, medium, and high coal mine hazards and not require a special study.
The application narrative states approximately 450 cubic yards of fill soil will be removed
and exported from the site and some excavation work will be required for the foundation of
the new modular building. The geotechnical report makes recommendations for the
excavation, cut and fill slopes, and types of structural fill for the new modular building
location, in addition to other recommendations for the whole site. The applicant will be
required to design a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TE5CP} pursuant ta
the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual -Erosion and Sediment Control
Requirements.
Parking: The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of off-street
parking stalls be provided for both vehicles and bicycles as well as minimum vehicle parking
stall and drive aisle dimensions.
The following parking ratios would be applicable to the site for vehicles:
Use Ratio Reguired
S11aces
Schools; Min & Max: 1 per employee. In addition, if buses Min & Max:
Elementary for the transportation of students are kept at the so
and Junior High
school, 1 off-street space be provided for each
bus of a size sufficient to park each bus.
Schools; Senior Min & Max: 1 per employee plus 1 space for Min & Max:
high schools:
every 10 students enrolled. In addition, if buses
public, for the transportation of students are kept at the 55
parochial and school, 1 off-street space -be provided for each
private bus of a size sufficient to park each bus.
Offices, Min: 2 per 1,000 sf of net floor area Min: 3
Not general: for Max: 4.5 per 1,000 sf of net floor area Max: 8
Compliant 1,732 sf net
The following ratios would be applicable to the site for bicycles.
Use Ratio Reguired
S11aces
Schools 10% of required off-street vehicle parking spaces. Min: 5
Staff_ Comments:
Otf_street parking stalls: Based on these use requirements a minimum of 53 and maximum of
63 vehicle parking spaces would be required, where there are no buses kept an site for the
transportation of students. Three ADA stalls is the requirement for the proposal. For bicycle
parking a minimum of 5 spaces would be required. The site had existing parking areas from
the previous use. The applicant is proposing a total of 65 vehicle spaces and O bicycle spaces.
The 65 vehicle spaces would be made up of 45 normal size stalls, 14 compact size stalls, and
6 ADA stalls (and as proposed, a normal size stall size is 9 ft by 20 ft; a compact stall is 8 ft 6
inch by 16 ft; and an ADA stalls is 8 ft by 20 ft). Due to there being an additional 2 parking
stalls beyond the maximum allowed, the Administrator must grant a modification:
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {C:HILDRENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING D/SABILff/ES}
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000ZD3, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 11 of 18
Not
Compliant
Section 4-4-080.F.10.d allows the Administrator to grant modifications from the parking
standards for individual cases, provided the modification meets the following criteria
(pursuant to RMC4-9-250.D.2):
a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental
protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based
upon sound engineering judgment; and
b. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; and
c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and
d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended;
and
e. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity.
Modification to increase number of stalls: The existing site provides more vehicle parking
stalls than maximum allowed in the area where the new modular Administrative building will
be located. The proposal brings the maximum vehicle stalls allowed by using some of the
parking area for the modular building location and reducing the amount of parking stalls at
the site.
Staff recommends approval of the additional 2 parking stalls as the Conditional Use for the
site is a private school that serves nan-traditional students that need more ADA parking than
the minimum requirement by the municipal code and additionally the proposal is reducing
the amount of parking area to bring the site closer to the maximum allowed number of stalls
by reducing the amount of parking area. The additional parking would meet the objectives
intended by the Code, not be injurious to other properties nearby nor create adverse impacts
to properties in the vicinity as the parking stalls.
Drive aisle dimensions: The proposed parking setup are with 60 degree head-in parking
stalls, where the minimum for one row and two rows using a one way circulation
pattern, the minimum width of the aisle shall be 17 feet.
Drive aisle width: The proposal has a range of parking aisle widths. There are two parking
areas. One is at the west of the main building near the proposed administrative building
with a single row of head in parking and 20 ft of drive aisle. The main parking area is along
the south eastern portion of the site, where drive aisle widths vary between 17 ft and 1-inch
and 20 ft. The proposed drive aisles meet satisfy the minimum requirements.
Streets Standards {RMC 4-6-060): The subject site has two street frontages. Along the west
side of the subject site is Benson Rd Sand along the southern side of the subject site is S 27th
St.
Benson Rd S: Existing right-of-way width in Benson Road South fronting the site is 60
feet. Benson Road is classified as a Minor Arterial. To meet the City's complete street
standards, street improvements including a pavement width of 22 feet (south of S. 26th
Street) and up to 29 feet from centerline (north of S. 26th Street), curb and gutter, an 8-
foot planter strip, 8-foot sidewalk, and storm drainage improvements are required to be
constructed in the right of way fronting the site per City code 4-6-060. To build these
street sections, approximately 8 to 12 feet of right-of-way will be required to be
dedicated to the City along the project side in Benson Road.
S 27'h St: Existing right-of-way width in 5. 27th Street fronting the site is 60 feet. S. 27th
Street is classified as a residential access street. Frontage improvements including a 5-
HEX Report 14-000203_Finaf
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL (CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES)
Report of April 8, 2014
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, £CF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Page 12 of 18
foot sidewalk and 8-foot planting will be required.
Staff Comment: For Benson Rd S, the applicant provides the dedication of right-of-way as
shown on the site plan running the whole western length of the site although requests a
street modification from installing the improvements. The modification request has received
Administrative approval {Exhibit 16} and analysis is provided in subsection "I. Street
Modification." For improvements along S 21• St, the improvements would be required to the
easterly curb cut into the site, where beyond that point there is no vehicular access but
rather a pedestrian access path west to Benson Rd S due to topographical slope. The
required frontage improvements are not shown on the proposed site-plan and would be a
condition of approval.
B. DESIGN REGULATION COMPLIANCE AND CONISTENCY: The proposal is not located within a Design
District.
C. OFF SITE IMPACTS: Based on the existing site use as a church facility that has, or has had, weekday
and weekend activities and the abutting twa schools, it is not anticipated to result in a substantial or
undue adverse effect on adjacent property. Additionally, the existing northern forested area of the
property will have minimum impact where, of the 159 trees an site over 6 inches in diameter, 153 willbe
retained. The landscaping proposal also adds over 25 new trees and additional graundcover and shrubs
which would provide updated aesthetic quality to the existing facility and neighborhood above what
exists today.
Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular
portion of the site.
There are no changes proposed ta the bulk of the main building on s'ite. However, there will be a new
modular administrative building located at the southwest portion of the site at one-story in height.
There will be a new playground area in the central area of the site. As such, the new building and
playground would have little to no new visual impact. The main building on site is one-story with o
basement ond the new modular one-story will be consistent with the height of the building already
on-site. The improvements proposed would not result in an over concentration of development on a
particular portion of the site.
Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and
adjacent properties.
The current circulation system for both pedestrians and vehicles would remain similar to what exists
today, with some minor improvements. The subject proposal would require the installation of street
frontage improvements along Benson Rd Sand 5 21• St. Internal pedestrian circulation improvements
circulation will be improved with a new added walkway from the main building north to the new
playground area. The parking drive aisles will be regarded in some areas to create an improved
driving slope for small and large vehicles such as b.uses and cars. There are existing street
improvements along Benson Rd S that the applicant has requested a modification from installing the
new city code frontage requirements. Along S 21• St, the applicant does not show the required
frontage improvements but would be required as a condition of approval. The proposed site
improvements would result in improved pedestrian and vehicle linkages between school buildings and
the public street and adjacent properties.
Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop
equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties.
No new loading and/or storage areas are proposed.
Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive
natural features.
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISAB/UT/ES}
Report of April 8, 2014
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Page 13 of 18
There are na large attractive natural features on or near the site for which to maintain visual
accessibility. The upgraded buildings and site improvements would enhance the look of the building.
Territorial views are not impacted by the proposed improvements or new modular building.
Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and surrounding
properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the
project.
See Landscaping discussion under subsection "A.b Landscaping".
Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness
or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
See Lighting discussion under subsection "A.b Lighting".
D. ON-SITE IMPACTS:
Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and
.orientation.
There are no changes proposed for the main buildings on the project site with the exception new
fa,ade treatments and interior improvements. A new play area will be added at the center of the site,
south of the northern forested area that sits between the multi-family residences to the north and the
main school building. A new modular building will be added between the main building and Benson
Rd S away from the multi-family development at the north and near Benson Rd S, topographically
sitting below the homes along S 2"/h St.
Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural
characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle
needs.
There are na changes proposed in the scale of the structures on site but a new one-s-tory modular
building will be added. The proposed site improvements for pedestrians and vehicles would improve
the existing sites arrangement and usability by providing two distinct areas for the two separate
programs planned to use the site.
The proposed building improvement, new modular building, and play area are designed appropriately
to allow adequate light and air circulation to the buildings and the site. The design of the structures
would not result in excessive shading of the property. In addition, there is ample area surrounding the
buildings to provide normal airflow.
Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using
topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces.
The applicant provided a tree retention plan with the application, where where there are 159 trees
on-site with 6 inch diameter or greater. Only 6 trees are proposed to be taken down, for a retention of
153 trees required to stay or be replaced, and this is a significantly greater retention than the zoning
required 30 percent retention. The on-site existing circulation system will be kept where a circular
pattern is provided, with vehicles turning into the site from the intersection at Benson Rd S, traveling
on-site southward and up to the upper level of the site where the majority of parking is located and
main entrance to the school building. Impervious surface coverage is limited from the existing
condition, where the new modular building will be located where there was previously some parking
stalls. Existing vegetation on-site will be kept and added to with new plantings of trees, shrubs and
groundcover.
Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance .of parking areas, to provide shade and
privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & fconomic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING 0/SABILITIES)
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 14 of 18
of the project. Landscaping a_lso includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are
less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements.
See sub.section "A.b. Landscaping" above for analysis.
Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas.
There are no separate loading and delivery areas for the proposal other than loading and unloading
of students from small and large buses and vehicles nearest the main building entry.
Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access.
For bicycle parking analysis, see comments above in subsection "A.b. Parking."
The subject site is not served by public transit. Students will be dropped off and picked up from the
school.
Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings,
public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
See comments above under "C. Off Site Impacts, Circulation."
E. OPEN SPACE: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide
adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site.
The subject site is a developed church site. The existing site contains no sports or play areas and the
proposal includes a new play area at the center portion of the site. There is also a large [arrested area at
the northern portion of the site. The combination of the existing open spaces and the proposed play area
the overall project would provide adequate area for both passive and active recreation by the occupants
and users of the site.
F. VIEWS AND PUBLIC ACCESS: When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier,
and incorporating public access to shorelines.
The proposed structure would not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier. The public access
requirement is not applicable as the site is not adjacent to a shoreline.
G. NATURAL SYSTEMS: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable.
There are no natural systems located on site.
H. SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE:
Police and Fire: Fire and Police Department staff has indicated that existing facilities are adequate to
accommodate the subject proposal. Based on the proposed location of the new buildings, new fire
hydrants would be required. A minimum af two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is
required within 150-feet of the proposed buildings and one hydrant within 300-feet. At least one new
hydrant will be required on the site with corresponding water main extensions. Existing hydrants can
be counted toward the requirements as Jong as they meet current code; all existing hydrants need 5-
inch storz fittings ..
Water and Sewer: Water service will be provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A water
availability certificate will be required to be submitted to the City. It was not included with the site
plan submittal. A copy of the approved water plan shall be provided to city for review prior to
issuance of the construction permit.
The proposed project does not impact existing sewer services at the subject site. The new modular
building would contain plumbing fixtures (i.e. sinks, toilets etc.) as part of the project. Sewer system
development fees will be owed if the project adds a new water meter or increases the size of the
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL (CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING 0/SABIL/TIES}
Report of April 8, 2014
existing domestic water.
Hearing Examiner Reco0mendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Page 15 of 18
Drainage: A preliminary drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan
application as "Preliminary Technical Information Report for the CHILD School", prepared by TEC
Taylor Engineering Consultants, dated February 12, 2014 /Exhibit 18}. The report addresses
compliance with the City-adopted 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of
Renton Amendments to the KCSWM. All core and any special requirements were discussed in the
report. The already-developed site drains ultimately to the drainage system along the east side of
Benson Rd Sand the proposed development will drain the same direction. No major conveyance is
proposed and standard storm drain pipes will be sufficient to convey runoff on the sloping site. Flow
control will be accomplished using a Native Growth Retention Credit BMP /Best Management
Practice) in the northern, undeveloped-forested area of the site. Water quality is not required because
the project will not add more than 5,000 square feet of new PGIS surface. For public comments, one
person living near the subject site communicated a general concern about storm water drainage
(Exhibit 11).
Flow contra/ through the Native Growth Retention Credit BMP requires that at least 3.5 square feet of
native vegetated surface be preserved for every square foot of impervious surface being mitigated.
Therefore, to mitigate 5,855 square feet of new and replaced impervious surface, at least 20,492
square feet of native vegetated surface must be preserved. The native growth area may not be
steeper than 15%. The area north of the driveway is proposed to be set aside as a Native Growth
Retention Area, and while portions of it are too steep, it contains more than 20,492 square feet that is
15% slope or less.
Transportation: The site has two public street frontages, Benson Rd 5. /Minor Arterial} to the west
and 5. 21' Street to the south. No new curb cuts will be made where access to the site would continue
from Benson Rd. Sat the intersection with 5. 26'' Street. The 5. 21' St access at the south end is
chained off and would not be a point of access for vehicles, but be retained for emergency access.
Vehicles such as cob, van, small school bus and larger school buses are expected to access the site. A
Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by William Poop Associates, dated February 4, 2014 {Exhibit 19)
considers the site circulation system for drop-off of students, safety of students, coordination with
nearby public school districts, on-site drive aisle paving for bus use, and bus turning movements onto
the site from the Benson Rd. 5 intersection. For Level of Service, the intersection will operate at Level
of Service A or B condition. Around the site, there are pedestrian connections and sidewalks into the
surrounding neighborhoods and to nearby schools. Based on the site design and provided traffic
analysis and mitigation measures required to be met as part of the DNS-M {Exhibit 14}, staff believes
the site design would result in safe movements for vehicles and pedestrians.
Schools: N/ A
J. PHASING: The applicant intends to commence construction in spring of 2014 with completion
anticipated for the opening of the 2014-2015 school year in the fall. The applicant is not requesting any
phasing.
K. APPROPRIATE LOCATION: The applicant provided a conditional use permit justification narrative with
the application (Exhibit 20). Within the provided narrative the applicant has described their intended
functions at the subject site as a private school for grades Kindergarten through 12'h Grade. CHILD is an
approved Non Public Agency by the Washington State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction
(OSPI) to provide contracted therapeutic services to students from public school districts whose
resources cannot adequately serve the complex needs of struggling children. Their mission is to provide
innovative school programs and therapies that promote social, emotional, and academic development
for children with special needs. The school is both an accredited day school for children ages 5-17 and a
HEX Report 14-000203_Finol
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL (CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES}
Report of April 8, 2014
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOO
Page 16 of 18
developmental therapy clinic serving children 3-18. They educate children with a range of conditions that
interfere with learning. The school provides academic programs with integrated developmental therapy
services that promote social, emotional and academic growth for children with special needs. With small
class sizes and high teacher to student ratios. CHILD offers a full-time program with year-round, open
enrollment and a six week summer program. They serve students placed by parents or in partnership
with school districts. Most students are able to successfully return to their home school district within 1-
3 years.
This site is appropriate for the subject use as it is located near two school locations, near both 1-405 and
Highway 167. The site is located next to Fred Nelson Middle School and Spring Glen Elementary School.
The surrounding community is residential; both single family and multi-family, and contains existing
sidewalks for safe pedestrian connections to surrounding residential neighborhoods. The proposed
school is a regional facility and would not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use
within the City. The proposed location is suited for the proposed use.
L. EFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES: See "Off-Site Impacts" above .
.
M. COMPATIBILTY: See "Effect on Adjacent Properties" discussion and subsection "b" above. Overall the
proposed use and added modular building would be compatible with the scale and character of the
neighborhood. The existing main building will have minimal changes where no structural changes such as
new projections that add square footage or new height to the building are proposed. The new modular
building is proposed at one story in height.
N. PARKING: The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, do specify ratios for vehicular and bicycle parking
stall numbers as well as minimum dimensions of stalls and drive aisle widths. See the previous report
subsection, "A.b Parking" where the analysis of requirements and compliance is discussed.
0. TRAFFIC: See subsection "H. Services and Infrastructure -Transportation" above.
P. NOISE, LIGHT, AND GLARE: It is anticipated that the most significant noise impacts would occur during
the construction phase of the project. The applicant has submitted a Construction Mitigation Plan that
provides measures to reduce construction impacts such as noise, control of dust, traffic controls, etc. In
addition, the project would be required to comply with the City's noise ordinance regarding construction
hours.
Exterior onsite lighting, including security and parking lot lighting, would be regulated by code.
Compliance with this code (RMC4-4-075) ensures that all building lights are directed onto the building or
the ground and cannot trespass beyond the property lines.
Q. LANDSCAPING: See subsection "A.b. Landscaping" above for analysis.
R. STREET MODIFICATION:
The applicant requests modification from the required street improvements along Benson Rd S, where
decision criteria for a modification, per RMC 4-9-250.D, states:
Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Title, the
Department Administrator may grant modification·s for individual cases provided he/she shall first find
that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical, that the intent and purpose of the
governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan is met and that the modification is in
conformity with the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such modification:
a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {CH/WRENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES)
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
LUA14-000203, £CF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Report of April 8, 2014 Page 17 of 18
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed
modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives;
b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and
maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment;
c. Will not be injurious to other property(.ies) in the vicinity;
d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code;
e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and
f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity.
Staff Comment: The applicant requests the modification from street frontage improvements and proposes
right-of-way dedication to the City to provide the required street right-of-way os required by City code.
The applicant requests the modification from frontage improvements as there are already existing curb,
gutter, and sidewalk along Benson Rd. S for the whole length of the subject property. The existing
improvements provided pedestrian connections to the surrounding residential areas and to the adjacent
schools and other neighborhoods. The intent of the City code is to provide access for vehicles and
pedestrians and all users of the public-right-of way, where the existing improvements comply with this
intent and not create injurious or adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity. The applicant is
providing the needed right-of-way as part of the proposal for a future expansion of the frontage along
Benson Rd S when those improvements may occur. Staff recommends approval of the street modification
request for Benson Rd 5. Approval of the staff recommendation is shown in Exhibit 16.
i 5. CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposal complies with the Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria if all conditions of
approval are met.
2. The proposal is compliant and consistent with the plans, policies, zone, regulations and
approvals.
3. Staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties and uses as long as
the conditions of approval are complied with.
4. The proposed Private School use, Kindergarten through 12'h Grade, is anticipated to be
compatible with existing and future surrounding uses as permitted in the R-8 zoning
classification.
5. The scale, height and bulk ofthe proposed buildings are appropriate for the site.
6. Safe and efficient access and circulation has been provided for all users.
7. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
HEX Report 14-000203_Fina/
City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development
CHILD SCHOOL {CH/LORENS INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES)
Report of April 8, 2014
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
WA14-000203, ECF, SA-A, CU-H, MOD
Page 18 of 18
8. A street modification has been approved for the existing street improvements on Benson Rd S
to remain with no additional improvements. The proposal will provide a dedication of right-of-
way for future construction of improvements along the arterial along Benson Rd S. For S 27'h
St, frontage improvements are required from the east to the curb cut for emergency access
9. The proposed location would not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular
use within the City or within the immediate area of the proposed use. The proposed location
is suited for the proposed use.
10. The existing use would not result in a substantial or undue adverse effect on adjacent
properties. The addition of the modular building, exterior improvements to the existing
building, added play area, parking lot improvements, and added landscaping would result in an
overall improvement of the visual environment.
11. Adequate parking for the proposed use has been provided.
12. The proposed site plan ensures safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and has mitigated
potential effects on the surrounding area.
13. The proposed development would not generate any long term harmful or unhealthy
conditions. Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use have been
evaluated and mitigated if all conditions of approval are complied with.
14. Landscaping has been provided in all areas not occupied by buildings or paving. Existing
mature landscaping has been preserved where feasible.
T. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the CHILD School improvements and addition of modular building, as
depicted in Exhibit 3, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant is subject to the mitigation. measures as determined by the Environmental
Review Committee's decision March 24, 2014, where the applicant shall comply with the
recommendations of the Geotechnical Report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest,
Incorporated, dated January 29, 2014, with comply with the recommendations of the
geotechnical report, prepared by prepared by TEC Taylor Engineering Consultants, dated
February 12, 2014, and with the applicant to comply with the recommendations of the Traffic
Impact Analysis, prepared by William Poop Associates, dated February 4, 2014.
2. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant be required to submit a final landscape
plan, identifying compliance with the interior parking lot landscape standards and other landscaping
requirements for review and approval prior by the Project Manager prior to construction permit
issuance.
3. Staff recommends a condition of approval that lighting plan be provided that complies RMC 4-4-075
lighting standards.
4. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the street frontage improvements along S 27"' St to
the curb cut into the subject site be installed and shown on an updated Site Plan that will need to be
approved by the Project Manager.
HEX Report 14-000203_Final
~
w
w
"' 0::
z
"' N
I-
0
"' w
"' ::r::
R-8 ---H
S 21ST ST
-,-
····----
R-1
R--8--
co ·----~ ·-,
, ,\R-8 .... ---~-.,
ZONING MAP BOOK
PLANNING -TECHNICAL SERVICES
PRIMTED DATE: 10/0312013
This dDCL1men\ is a 1,n1phicrepresent.alion, riot
guarari\eed to survey awxacy, aid is bawd
on t!le bes! information available as af the date
Slown. This map is irrterded fer City display
pUl'l)l)SesonR'.
Community & Economic. Development
t:.!;."'Ol<Jl"llllocmt A~~
~ G",.z.n,rii..i
~I~~~~It~is1·F'.::-:~
--------R-14 ;---
G4W 20 T23N R5E
RM-F
. R--8
-~R,8.
14W 32 T23N R5E W 112
EXHIBIT 2
'",~~:"· .. ·
.,,
CA
CA·
0 420
·-...::
,,-·,
R-14
<(
0
MO
~ ' --Feel --1:9,620
RM-F
CX) -... " rr. -R--8
R--8
R-14
~
3
ti
"
--·-
H4W
29 T23N R5E W 112
Page 52.ol 80
City limits D (CV} CenterVilh,ge D (R-Bl Residentl.31 Sdu/ae
C'J RENTON D {iH) \ndtistr\al Heavy D (RC) Resourtf! Com.el'\lalion
Zaning DeslgMtion O (IL) lndusb1al Lgh\ D (RM--F) Residential Multl-Fami'ry
D (CA) CommercialArt.,.ial D (lM] lnduslria\ twetium D (Rf.\. 1) Resi. Multi-Family Tradi'ional
D (GD) Center Downtiwn D {R-1) Resi:leritial 1dulac (:] (RM-U) Resl. 1,},Jlli-f.mi!y Urblll'I Cenhf
D (CN) Commercial Nei;hbortmad CJ (R-10) Residential 10du/a:: D {RW-1) Resichmtial Manulac:tured Homes
CJ (CO) Commercial Office D {R-14) Rttsideniial 14dular:: D (UC--N1) Urban Center Nmh t
c:J (COR) CommerdaL'Qlf,ca/Residen5al D [R-4) Residen6al 4dulac CJ (UC-N2) Urb;,n Center Ncrlh 2
I ,.
rn
t;s
-<
tl z
~ rn
rn
N
t
,1
"··-~-!-
· -:..::::,__, ~ Q --I oo --·-, I~·. , ' . ' "'"'' w-, ---• • -·---,_ ------,0 .... -\ ~~ ,__ · · '·rt:.,1 '/t\, ~'·<·-··-·. ---. , , ,, . . ,< I ,
"',1 . • • . ' ' --
. ' ' . . . . . ' --, " ' ' '~-j . , \ ~I'~•.;~;:~~ ··~·,. ,iif;; ~>'-c ,~~-,-~\.., ,··.,,,, i ,
1~--~~~-_,. • / Ff I. '. . ,; -' · _
,~ -' ' ---" ' -J-J --, .. '' '• ----,• ., --' ~ ----~ ' 11,-"~,1'--~-) I ~/ -j I/ -~~.-<.· .. ·'(, ..... " .. · ·.:·-,, .. ',(:, •·'-. ,'}~0-c-. .+ , ,. -',,'-; •·-~~-··--a.;.,, . .. -.~ -.. -'" --~' --'" .,,, __ '" •• -C\ ~--' -, --' ' "' • --' ~c. ' ·"' C >,--._ -c,. . • -\ -.mm , ,
1
i[''""· ; ~~ •. ' ' -~-. '\ '-,;_ :·. ' ~----. ' -m','.llll, ' . ,'
h -,, ' ' -' ' ', ' ' ' " -•• , ' ----~ '· ,~--~'·,,._, --~-<Ji~-~------.----·----, ..... --o ' "", ~ u I I ,-,.., "
• -"' . ',' . . ,,,, ' ---\ ,• " ' Y,_ •• Jfc··-,.,, ' "-----~-----•... , ....... ,ic:;,_~~\'.;_.,,_~---+,f\. ' ... ~Q ·-., · '•', ,"-· , I,·,. ~
,Ii ' ~I :··,• -· C:,c.":;;;,t,e~wS'; ., ,-lli-%: ·c·:-/-;. __ · · ,;, ,;,,t , , ' _ '-c ,
-~ , ,--~---, -s-•-c __ ,_ --,,,, 1li' , "· --, -c, ,,. ',,_ --. --.._~,
---ck-' --·-.r.c-, .. = :.. . ,-' "'• '' ~ --~, "-'' __ .,.' .. ' ...
,, ' ' ~~-\ -~~--~,S~~-.,, --~ 1·--,,~i:,.,;.,. "\·-···-······ccll;_,••,..,, ___ '
-dc_,;,o,, ·",E+--. , _ ~ 1 \ /' , , ., ''"""-· ':' _ ._ ~ · -'-~ _ -
--.--'!£/.,-• ""':CC;--, .. -~---6. ' '1 ( ' '~ ":"-...:~;-..,; "S .. .._.,.,, . l""';--:_ -:--::.·::\'Ji'!~,, --· ., ,._,,.."-.·, , , ; . · -. ,. . , •a~,,...,,, / · · l '-----
-,., , I / •··!,c· I, , , (..-•"<1--.";',-... .,_ _'"""""""""--•-'-·· ' . ,,. '1-+f' • ' . --,, ---· --
' ,,,_ ',J.I< .,. ;, . '·'" ----==-~""'--,=
L '", /' .• ---. ,. •-•• •--· •• -
CHILD s~H
0
gsoeosrn .. !,
1
. '-. .i:;(' ;"=:,.:;,,_---·
sm; et , · ~-, -·-.. _ ••• ,._,
. ' -" ' ' ·--..,,.,. --·.:.--..... i, SC~ ' ,w ,_[ ~ '""'-••••--••••••=--" . -' ·-·---.•... -··-··· o ,o I . '-·,:::-·-·=··-:.:.-., ... =• ~, e '"'"'!':.:=;;:.-,=,:=<\'.:"=
Silt AODR!:SS:
~ttt~~~eC8lf s.
EXISTING:
FORt.lER CHURCH BVltD!NOi
1 SM'l' PLUS BASEMENT
TQTAL ,a,REA: 18,469 SQ. FT,
FOOlPRIIHI 9,JJ6 SQ. FT.
CCf>ISlRUCllctl T'i"PE V-B
cn.LULAR BUILDIHG: 1 STORY
TOT.Al .ioREA: J:2.0 SO. FT.
CONS1RUCT10H TJ'PE V-0
~"i! l?ful'·"" T f!ove:RAGE·
AREA OF LOT:175,111 SF'
1!,907/175,111 ..
PROPOSED:
MODULAR BUILOINOI 1-STORY
TOTAL AREA: 2,2JQ SQ. FT.
C0NSTRUC110N TYPE V-B
FOOTPRINT INCWOING
RAMP1 2,:Z-4U SQ. FT.
REMOOEI.. FORMER CHURCH
Bl/lLDINO FOA USE. AS A
PRIVATE SCHOOL \t OCCUPANCY) =· --1 PEIi EMPLoYtt
1 PER 10 S1U0ENT5:
~~~s .. -&0
TOT,'.!. IIE<l'O. • -d
H/C SPACES • J
-NORMAL Siu:;--~ -,t,C'.:1'51ZEI 14 COl,lf. ___ -
Wf ..... SP=s,-d
szr PE ,;i:,.1.g;~ NOll!,IAl.!Yx
CQMPACT: a•-t, X 10·
"¢1<!~'..ti' ~[, """'"
um.1n:: 1 mwo.·
WATER LINE
STORM DRAIN
SANITARY SEWER
OVERHEAD POWER UNE
OVERHEAD CABLE
UNDERGROUND GAS
SANITARY MANHOl£
t UTILITY TRANSF"ORME'R
·--~I0------1-------__ , __
--O--SMH
llil UT
EXISTING TREE LEGENO
CONIFEROUS TREE *
DECIDUOUS TREE 0
r, IXl,lL, 111AT WEEf1S tll1IJI 'IMI'. DCSCMIDl MED Ill CASC HIii:
""""'""' "" "" -. '"" ,. ... ::::.~M,<r~i,. m""""'""'""=--:'.,,,-OOCUl.tNlHE IVCl!TAETEll':l«lltlf'(IIAlll'~
"""'." "".:'-....... ~ """""' "".:-...... """-,. ""'' ........ ~ -· """""""' ~-"""'...:
"""',. """"";.,"""' """""""' m ' """":, """• "" -' ",. ... ,., .. ~-.. ""'""""' -"' . ""' ,, "" ';,... "' '='l..., "':. m,. = m "-' •• • '::,,,. .., """'"',M,,,.,., ... ,:, ...... ,,.._~WFD ""' ' = ... ""'''"'~ '" '"""" ~ """' " ~ IDl!IEl ~T MOT 'M .... ~ ll£ \EASE 11«1
nt: !J8.E'.CT REPORT ~ · • : sam,u 1 II T,£ ~ IT ll£ Lmll fftAIAIIGN ~ A
'·""':·:~..,,.......... 1 7 2014 .......
CiTY OF RENTON
PLANNJNG Dl\/1.SIQN
m >< :c
1-4
Cl:!
1-1
-I
w
;..-y t m•
lll13!1 .....
Al.1
I
-= .. ----=
·-
----· ····. : i" ,; ... -.,.:~~~,a~~·G1~;: · ~ i:.:1i.i~11,~~l .
.' .. ,/ ; // \;,ee,c,oa,"' i r,"'•"; 1"'""'-t / \ ·'·:·.·"'--•\\ \ •;.,,,\.
i Lil! •• i~r~i:tz~f }{[7/:,;~11•1
:1 ,-: J'"· . . \ V !0~-
--,;y·
/f~t --
~'~;t\~
' ' ]· --I -r. --·,;-\·
)}\~-~----
"{;;~:-
:;::\(~--
,;., j~}f
·--. ' .:··)!'..::·· .
...,.,_~)l_:_--.
:r r ...
\~.----
-.·,-:-.;·. tt-t\\
,. -~ ' .: •• "<> .... _./,
LANDSCAPE PLAN-PROPOSED
SCALE: 1" = 50'
PLANT LEGEND· PROPOSED PLANTING
SCIEtHIFIC NAME· COMMON NAME I SIZE I SPACING
BFIOADLEAF TREE
ACEII 11\JanuM 'OCTOOEII OLOAY' •IIEO IMPLE 2"CAL !le$~·
CEIICl9 CAHAO£NSl9 '"L8A' -\'MITE REIIPUD 7'CAL "88HOYYN
COIINIJ5 NUTIALLll 'VENU&' • PAClflc:. OOOWOOD ']"CAL. 3&'0.C.
&Tal'AIITIAMONODELl'HA • TALL &TE~IITIA .~, 15'00
lHEOQE
<> I TMUJA OOCIOENTALI~. i1,,APOAV1TA~ ,-HT. I J'O.O.
•'.)l6HRUB &.13ROUNDCOVER MlX
VINl:A MINOR· OWAAf PEFIIWINIQ.E 1..QIIL 1 xo.c.
RW.rfflOI.EFIS l~)W,-AH,1,PH!OlEFl9 l-<lAL [ 'lfo.c.
"HOD00EN0R0tl 5PP .• Rl!OOCIO~l'll)ROH S.OAl. ·1 tfO.O.
;!GROUND COVER
AACT0STAPHYL0& IJVA UR51 -KIHINHICK I ,-, I 2'0.C.
HYDROSEED
1-NOROSEEO LAWN ~T 5~0PE CUT
>-'
l/1~;
ie ~
"''
~ '>---.. Jw.:@,ii .. o,,, , •,: ;,;''•"·
f,.PliOPQSEl) "' ~,--:·'. .
~~ " . Ob "',,,
'C,;.
\
·.:~ ..
::·I
1·
0
-IINil!lfll,IUl!fT(DUl(lN,INC.
ll'IU211TH•>£1((
'!' 5E.lm.E.'1Alll15
J'l1t11.~ltCIII
"~--·-~ 114 UOlltlSlllll-$-0,o:II
.::~1·
·-· .>'--. -I ,--
. .;! .. __ ,}/~:,,J,
,;
\' .·
I
I
50
t· '.l.i.T:i'.. . .i._f._; : ~ l( ;
.JA 1 '-r~ . I",(_
·::r,J\1,1 ilRI'.
1\l-.:l lt.h"'( ':,. ''~"/-:
. •vrc<?Hf. ,,1) .,(,·1:t,r
·1,·cr,:111:i,,;, t :~,
· 11'1;_:,u~r:1):'1-'-''· r ·'.;
100
SCALE IN FEET
. : ... :;-.
150
~
'-PATCH -PL NT1N&-l'lttt:>"1.
£XIS11!-IO BU~DIHO
HOM.Ja' HT.
~:J{ ';1&, 'trtt !1l.:&
\ \10:i.3!8F
-~~ ,1?DJ:P . • .. ~~~Lr~~~OH' _, .. -~: ,-\l~-~·.·
"""""'s~t~ ~-',' '·-<.:. ----...
. .. ••. • " . SIOEWALK -.
. .. 8~~-SP.N ~OAp S. ... \.~uRa
(80 RIGHT-or"-WAv)
g:ENEI\Al lANOSCAPE NOTES_;_
I-T>lf-•<OW.,"10F,m ... 11•M'IION,"-'""""·'"'""IIOH.ON11Ml,\t>O_T.....,o•u<,n,lMHJTT 0'"""""'""""°"'"'°"°''""" .. .....,,.,·
1 Tl<E ,..,,o..,, ........ n,.., ...... "'_ .... "'' "" ''"'"""" ............... ..,. '""'""''" n,LSIU. """'" ••• "'"""""''
,. "'".,,,. .,.,..,.,. ,.,,..,c ......... .,,.,, .. ,.,....., ,. ... , •• naun lMI c,n oro,"n><1"""'1CM'""'-"'™"'" "" .......,.ill<OOI.
._...,.,., .. , .. _,., ...... "'"_ -·~n"""""'...,"""""""""""'!l,11w.111•""""'""°'"""""!>'l"'"""n,.u,.,,imon.,oo,..,.,,.,.., ·-""'''"'•iro111<1""'"_,.. ... , ,..,..,_,...~-·""""-·''"'""""
A.Tlll'IIIWJ.H1W1>•-'•ltit1o•••mU.lt*<l•'""'TO<<E'"'''""•n01(0I ..... Ul61'.ll<t!WITIOflT1',tO'l'"fr"°"
........ , ., ""_.,. .... , • .,, ...... ,ai ....... , "" "'""'-· ..... 1# "'"'" .. '"'"' "°"' "''"""" ""'' •t """"'"
c.0"""""<0¥1111WJ.l(P\AN1101<...,,.,..~l<l\l"'llll!lfO!OCl'l'IO<Alu .. , ... ...,,uc,HlilO!lj<.,.,,OMIO! .... WIOOCM,0AJ ~1,1 ...... "'.,,, ...... ,.,..
O,llllMIIIMLlll!O-ll<AHIO'll'!WllNADll,Cllll,.U ..... lDT\Nllll[J,flWM..
.,. Wj,/j,Gl<~!/i I CHILDRENS INSTITVlf
'"' 0 ' "'· 1.Lc 2640 Ben9on Rood S.
12~08 10&1~ 1'1a.,. NE I Renton WA I
Klrkl~<>d, wa,hlnglar> 9B034 ~=••~"""""'-"'--------1
T,l,ph<>n11 US-812-8719 PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PV.N
frn< I 42!1-672-7182
RE(..::EIV
""·I"'" ~ ...... ~
FEB 1 'I 2014
CITY OF RENTON
PlA,11,ING DIVISION
m >< :::c
1-1 c:,
1-1
-I
+:a
TREE INVENTORY LEGEND
..J.,, ,Ma TREE TO BE REMOVED
~TREE#11/98 .
#1~27 TREE TO BE RETAINED
AREA TO BE CLEARED
FUTURE BUILDING SITE
NOTE:
SEE SHEET L 1.2 FOR TREE INVENTORY TABLE
E) y
0
~,~E,.l~~~NTORY PLAN
if .,
I -~"'"""" fU43 IO!A'lf.ll
SU.TU, tit Nit.I
Pl toaJOJ.tO!t
:!!.~~.•-El( Ulll!OISQljQ-$-D.ca.1
UJII ITY I fGfND·
WATER LINE
STORM DRAIN
SANITARY SEW£R
OVERHEAD POWER LINE
OVERHEAD CABLE
UNOERGROVND GAS
--•--
-01<-ro-
--,--
1Jl
11
~~/!J..~UJ LLo CHJLORENS INSTITUTE
12401!. 10111h p10(:1 NE -2640 Benson Rood S.
IClrlclond, W<llhln,;itoh 116034 ,._.,...,R,enet,ooe._oWsA~ _____ _j
T1l1phon11 42~672-8719 I' ra• 4.25-872-7182 TREE INVENTORY PlAN
o 50
11\fl':!'l~it;;::'I\
I>
r ' l C-C
100
N1
I O s <ic
Oo
"' "
SCALE IN FEET
!1-11-1~ OIIHU CIIII.
FEB 1 7 2014
CITY OF RENTON
PlANNING DIVISION
-~
,.IJ,:io!I
·201)11
Ll.l
m >< :::c
1-1
C:J
1-1
-I
l/1
:
I
~
~
'::; I
r ~
I~ ~,i ! lb•;~•
! e.
H-+-+-++-H-+--+-+--+-++--+-++-H-+--+-+-H-+-++-H-+-+-H-+--+-+-H~
I
~ :€: ~ ~
t; t; t; t; t;
~
~ f-++-f-+--4----l--l-+-+-+-1-+--4----l--l-+-+-+-f-++-l-++-f-++-l-f-+-++-+-++-l--l-+-+~
~
-~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~ ~
I • • • • • • • • a a • • • a a • • • G a a a a • a a a a • • • G a a a a a a • a
! ~ ~ ~ § g E ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ i ~ § § § § ~ ~ § § § ~ § si ~ ~ ~ ; ;.
' b; ~
~ ~ ~ ; ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b b ~ ~ ~
"',.,· 1 6
~ H-+--+-+-H-+--+-+-f-+-++-f-+-++-H-+--+-+-H-++-H-+--+-+-H-++-H-+--+-+---1
•
,I I I
!
' i
I
t
I
I
\.I'.)
'"-'S '. ts-
II! '~. $~IC. 2~. 'If. 2311!., l'I. 5 [, @.Iii.
' I= : ----------22i ~ '~-~ __ ----------------N1'43~ rh -:=-i--------
"I ' :::~·.
I I I " I \ I ,,..-
1 I I ,
I 1 I ,, ~ --:-----------------~---------i---~,,~~---___ J_
0.. .. -~
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \,,/
.,
=~==~:.,4, .. ;;:,,riii::..;;;,::1i ' ----
r) ASPHALT DRIVE
0
~ / \\\
J ',:~:~~:. __
'-.. :.,,
/,,,,,,---"
-----------------------------------r----------
·--------------
•
Ta~or
EnglnoerinfJ
Conaultanls --..... ~~·"'' ,.11.1,,1191 ffl..l!ll·"I! -·-1 '"""-
----------
!lC,l,U, 1·-~·
$ "' .
CALL fFQBE rPIJ PfQ
1-800-424-5555
FOIi fl(lO LOC,,.TIDM Of" UNDL11GROUG1 ill>..fJE<
' ', (i
/g~-~~~i<'
,\ASPHALT DRIVE
(\
EXISTING
MONUMENT
SIGN
' ' ' '
------
~-·-
' ' ' '
CD IOIJ1'1' l'llilQ.!(N:(P'fli 'IOIUMIK 0 ltnWTt lllffllll SIHl/,l"I $lllJI SDIIIIJ: MCUI> ID ~ I' I -(llAJ(:11 DKN) !"Ill SNIW:l'
EOIDIIIClPRA1_nfll_SUF£
0 6" OM lAllfMV !DD EM:[ 1'1"[111!0 UJN)
Al1U10n/llllfl!LCI'(
--,,.
\
' ' ,
,;,,-\ EXISTING BUILOll<IG 1tl!1SI F_LR. ELEV. 413 6'
~~I I-LR f{E'V '403.6" ' ,
!
_,._
~~
"'"Ulllll<l,r,o
f'll[Hmll,lffASS!IB.T
FlllllV' ... llll>fl-.. [-fl!Slll
mm BY lR. mTRII lfftl(lfll -
!"•W' -.
~ i _i-::. I "i" l'(l~T[IAPPR
m >< :::c
1-1
D:I
=I
O'\
0~-=•mn•FEB I 7 ll11t, "'" ltX1Ffll -.W OOIMI! ... • .. Bl ..
@mom IE•IM.lU Pl'C( IODl$1R ~-__.___;.... j
CITY OF REN'tON
PLAr<JSOOfO~PERMlT
CHIL05chool
; ,,
,.//
\--
~
ill
r~:--.
~
t:;
ca ..... :c
~
, .. , CEDAR TRIM,
COLOR: T-1
&cST GRAOr El.EV NO CHANGE NO a
(E) CEDAR SIDING.
COLOR: F-1
ALL EXT, DOORS
CCl.OR: T-2
(E) BUILT-UP ROOFING
COLOR: DARK GRAV
,WEST El.EYAJIQ~ ,. (FROM BENS~N R0,'-0 S.) NOTE: NO ROOF-TOP EQUIPMENT ON THIS BUILDING.
SCALE: 1/B' -1 -o•
FIELD COLOR: F-1 • TRIM COLOR: T-1 • TRIM COLOR: T-2
(E) METAL ROOF FLASH!NO
COLOR; T-1
(E) BRICK
COLOR: MEO!VM R£0
~ISJ. (i~AOE ELEY 413.0'
.NO CHA OE)
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/8~ = ~ ·,/-:;;;. -~· -··
(E) CEDAR SIDING.
COL.00: F"-1
(E) BRICK
COL.OR: MEDIUM RED
•
TOP OF ROOf': ELEV, •36.5'
(NO a-!ANGE)
FIRST FLOOR: El.EV. 413.6'
(NO CHANGE)
EXIST GRADE EJ..EV. -,06.!5' (NO CHG,)
?iASEMEN~OCfl: ELEY W B'
,NO OIAN
TOP Of ROOF": aEV, '4-36.0'
(NO CHAN~
~
'""' c:,
~
~
I
= ;
l ~~
f i1
g , I• ~ I
1:!! ~n~ FJRSI FLOOR· ELEY, 41-5,6'
'tmST. GR~ ElEYe 41J,Q'
O a<ANGE ~ I . RECEIVECT~~ ....
FEB 1 7 20:4 A4,0
l!I-=-"!-
PLAI\INING [)1-..1:,;::1._,,1,,
{E) BRICK
COLOR: MEDIUM RED
(E) CEDAR SIOING.
COLOR: f'-1
BASEMENT FLOOR: ELEY, :tOJ,6'
(NO CHANGE)
(E) CE:OAR SIDINO.
COLOR: F-1
souru ~LEYfiJJON
SCALE: 1/8 -I -0
FIELD COLOR: F-1 • TRIM COLOR: T-1 •
TRIM COLOR: T-2 •
TOP OF ROQ='1 EL£V, 4.36.5'
(NO CHANCE)
(E) METAL ROOf' FLASHING
Oct.OR; T-1
f1BST fJ QOB; EL,EY
(NO CHANGE)
(E) BRICK
COLOR: MEDIUM RED
NORTH ELEVAJION
SCALE: 1/a" -,·-o
{E) METAL ROOF Fl.ASHING
cct.OR: T-1
TQP OF ROCE' fl EY '-lfl §'
(NO CHANGE)
(E) CEDAR SIOING.
COLOR: F-1
flBST FLOOA; ELEV. 413.6'
(NO CHANGE)
~r~ ~II ,·
(N) 26' H!OH STEEL POLE LIGHT
IN PARKING LOT
COLOR: Fl.AT BL.ACK
POLE LIGHT (26' HIGH)
NOT TO SCALE
8"5EMENT FLQORj Et.cy1 1:93,6'
(NO CHANG€)
• NORD:1 & SQUD:1 ELEVATION
GATE: 12' V.,OE=--
EASJ ELE\/ATION
{N} ~· HIGtt CHIIRH.ffl FENca:
~~~~-
V "'"'' V1 / }
WEST ELEVATION
(FROM BENSON ROAD S.)
TRASH ~NcLgsuRE
SCALE: 1 ti" "" 1 -o•
{N) 6' HIGH GM.VANIZED SlEEl...
CHAIN-LINK FENCE
Ca.OR: LICHT GRAY
WEST ELEVATION
(FROM BENSON ROAD S.)
ON $1Jfi EE~QlNG SCALE: 1 e" • 1 -o
(HJ SPUT-f'Aa OONCR£1!. ~.·:11,,l.l'l'
SOUTH ELEYA]ON
PLAY 7iW2U~D WAI I
SCALE: 1 16 • 1 -01
FEB l 7 2014
cnv r1r ~r.:-i.,, ............
!
!
i
! ~!
!J ! ii
; I J 11
~
ii =t
1
ff !hi
""" "'"' -A4,1
=~=
:s.::1
><I STAFF
BREAK RM.
r----
STAFFIISTAF
OFC. WORK
COPY;:-:~
UPPLY
COMPUTER
LAB
19-7 X 11-0
CLASSRM.
25-5 X 27-11
7' W. CORRIDOR
CLASSRM.
25-9 X 31-9
'HIGH' WINDOWS-~~---------~
CHILD SCHOOL
EXISTING BUILDING
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR
SCALE: 3/16" -1'-0"
AREA: 9,4-05 SO. FT.
STAFF ENTRY
DN.
SENSORY
ROOM
7-8 X 15-7
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 28-5
,_c;,
NEW 'HIGH'
WINDOWS -----~
VIDEO
ROOM
1.3-1 X 16-1
CLASSRM.
2J-4 X 28-5
7' W. CORRIDOR
CLASSRM.
23-4 X 2B-5
NEW 'HIGH' WINDOWS __ L_ _______ .L _ __,_ _________ .J
D N ·111: I :f -:'.LJI Al<:::;::.
·~1i~,
WINDOWS".
CLASSRM. '\_
23-7 X 21-2
CLASSRM.
23-7 X 21-2
[
\_____,H
r~ECEi
~
:I:
1-1
0:,
~
00
CITY Of R
PLANNING DIVISION
!
'
!f:3 5~ "' -~ ~ i,io ~ S D o"" l:::l__J o .. zu..
5~;!i:c-J! -,;.,).;.,; !i 8cc'
~-. o~"'1~
:J 11!!~ ~
• 0 ·e 1 1<!11:: ., !(I
~:6 s +
~~~~ .. 3.,,
8 :.,-i" ~!:!t~ !
~I STORAGE RM.
33-2 X 10-0
CONF. RM.
17-5 X 13-11
0.T. ROOM 3
19-5 X 13-1
0.T. ROOM 2
19-5 X 26-6
CONF.
ROOM
12-B X 17-1
OFFICE
12-8 X 17-2
CHILD SCHOOL
EXISTING BUILDING
M,STAff
TLTS.
I
'NEW sPRINLER
R!SERS
FD-"'
MECH.
OFFICE
12-8 X 16-9
PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
AREA: 9,064 SQ. FT.
TOTAL OF BOTI-1 FLOORS: 18,469 SQ. FT.
,_c:;,
O.T. ROOM 1
MECH.
27-5 X 16-1 . ... ~
DF
SLIDING
PARTITION-
I I
__J •
MUL TI-PUR,OSE ROOM
71-3 38-0
STOR,·
STOR.
'HIGH' WlNDOWS --~----J...---~~-----~---J...-----~
I I 1
I ' 0
MENTAL HEAL TH
0 0
23-4 X 1.3-6
SPEECH &
LANGUAGE
23-4 X 9-4
EARLY
CHILDHOOD
23-4 X 1B-6
FEB J 7 201
cnv OF RENTON
PLA1'1NING DIVISION
I
'I·.· i'
~~
"' ~e1
11 ill~
!i ~r, .!l;; a.!,i
i<lid§~I
1~ ~
()"' ... ,::::
:Jz !~ 5
15'' -~ ~ ,.i.• .. ~<-si ij" •• <>j-,, .s:~U I p,-(-!'2t=-IL
4. 20H
~011!__!
A2.1
~
~"-·
~ ...,
X ~
(E&F} ELEV. 40V5'
CONCRETE
RETAINING WAU
WEST ELEVATION
(FROM BENSON ROAO SOUT!-1)
SCALE: t/4" = 1'-o"
CONCRETE RAMP -SLOPE: 1 IN 12
COLOR: T-1
EAST Ei,,.EY~ T1.(2~
"CALE:174" = , -v r -
COMP. SHINGLE ROOF
COLOR: DARK GRAY
BRICK WAINSCOT
COLOR: MEDIUM RED
8&'.'.\W T-2 ~
HARDIE SIDING
COLOR: F-1
' =-I WOOD F ACIA. \\1NDOW, AND DOOR TRIM
COLOR: T-2
E) ELE_V, 40J.5'
(F) ELEV, 402.5'
INCRETE
RETAINING WALL
TOP OF ROOF: ELEV. 416.~'
FIRST FLOOR: ELEV. 'I
(E&Fl ru:y, 102.5'
HARDIE SIOING
COLOR; F-1
m >< :c
t-1 c:,
~
I.O
(E) ELEV. 406.J'
(F) ELEY. 40J.J' (E&F)ELEV, 402,5' I I I C: I I {c.ocr)c.u:.v, "l"V-'-:;;
~,9nr~,,~~E;{~JION EXISTING AVERAGE GRADE ELEVATION: 403.78' SOUTH ELE;iATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1-0" .
FIELD COLOR F-1 • TRIM COLOR T-1 TRIM COLOR T-2 RECE!VFL>
C
CITY 0 ,,: ::· .'~;)'\i ~ " .• '" . •. ,. 1 ..
PLANNINC :)J\l(i10t·
I
I
-,~
I
.. ~~~ a} ~
I J.i Ii ~ ,i: "' j,... ~
;. ij
~i
1! s ;di~: ~s; ·! .. ~.!~&
!I!
A3.1
i!'!!!!L....__ ...
~~,
..,.,,,
.,,..
Uj
.
~I
14'-0' 10'-9 1/2' 10'-9 1/2' 9'-10' 12'-5'
~ le'-0' .5'-0" 9'-10'
I SLOPE UP: 11N 12. (~AND!NG _);EST
11 CONF. RMriLJl OFFICErl OFFIC~
\_
RECEPTION/
WAITING
17'-11 1/2'
9'-10'
OFFICE OFFICE
!Ill
b] il,~P1~rn;J ~mcrd ~,Jl I' I' I' " ~11~,~I , '""'"' .. () I r::, 11 c'.:'J CIP--_J I I :1
DF
I-
OFFICE
9'-11 1/2' 9'-lW 9'-lW _2'-10' 6'-7'
~ CHILD SCHOOL
MODULAR
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" -1'-0"
78'-0"
6'-1' ~ 10':-_Q_ 1/2' I,_ 15'~10 1/2'
;.
-'
II S
• "" -' 0 -
~ _,
lf1
.
0
I
" cu
~
11=4 I ,I ::c
1-1
~
:i ....
0
RECE/\::: •
fffi_J_ry,.,
~ ' " .
Cny Of K. -
PLANNING [), · .:: .. ·
n
'I' ·-1·1:
1,111111 I'
3
"' ~ ~i g 11~ ,~
i'i~i ~~I
i!
~· ., -~" i~,H .,,h~~ .,i •••• ,, ~~:g;I\, ..
l!iH~r
._ .. ~014
1'lill!.
A3,0
1-., I,
Kris Sorensen
From:
Sent
To:
Subject
Hi Richard,
Kris Sorensen
Friday, March 14, 2014 8:39 AM
'Richard'
RE: CHILD school development
EXHIBIT 11 -
I will include you as a Party of Record given your comments and provided address. You can come to city hall to read
drainage report and any other submitted studies for the project. They are available on the 6'h floor of city hall. Thank
you for your interest.
Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593
From: Richard [mailto:richardmor@aol.com1
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 4:10 PM
To: Kris Sorensen
Subject: CHILD school development
Hi Kris;
I left you a voice mail and thought it best to follow up with an email.
Would you put me on the notification list for any future communications regarding the planned
development of the Presbyterian Church located at the corner of S 26th St and Benson Road S. (2640
Benson Rd S, I think)?
I live directly across the street at 2614 Cedar Ave. S. I have a concern about the Storm Water
Drainage. I'm not sure this concerns requires me to submit anything -at this point, I'.m interested to
read the Drainage Report and Geotechnical Reports when completed.
Thank you,
Richard Morris
2614 Cedar Ave. S.
Renton, WA 98055
TEL: 425-255-5520
Cell: 425-417-5556
Email.: RichardMor@AOL.com
1
PLA~ REVIEW COMMENTS (LUA 14-000203) EXHIBIT 12
PlAN ADDRESS:
DESCRIPTION:
Engineering Review
March 19, 2014
2640 BENSON S RD
RENTON, WA 98055-5192
APPUCA TION DA TE: 02/18/2014
The applicant is requesting_ a Conditional Use Permit for a private sd"lool called Childrans lnstiMe for Lea!"fling Differences (CHILD) to
remodel a former church and add a modular Dne-story building at 2640 Benson Road South. The applicant proposes a 2,239 square foot
modular building be added to the west side of the lot in the existing parking area wi1h the erlerior matching the primary building exterior.
for the primary former church bu~ding of 18,469 square feet, the applicant is proposing remodels to the first floor and basement for
school classrooms, kitchen, and staff and student support areas including occupation, speedl, and language therapy rooffiS. Exterior
work for the primary struc:ture wm consist of paint, trim, and in-fill of some winda.vs. An existing cellular building and tc:,v,/ef will remain on
site. Other improvements include a children's play area, added parking spaces, landscaping, rockery, and street improvements. The
existing facility would be brnughl up to current Building and Fire codes. Dralnage, Geotechnical, and Traffic Impact studiei. are provided.
The site is located in the ResidentiahS single family zone and is 175, 1 'I 1 square feet in size (4.02 acres). Approximately 2,083 square feet
of steep slopes are on-site. Over 150 trees are to remain. The application'includes Environmental and Site Plan reviews. Vehicular
a~ would be gained off Benson Road South at the intersection with S 26th St and an emergency fire access would be kepi: from S
27th Street A modification is requested from street improvements along S 27th Street
Jan Illian Ph: 425--430-7216 email: jillian@rentonwa.gov
Recommendatbns: l have reviev.ied the application for the CHILD School located at 2640 -Benson Road South and have the
follcrwing comments:
EXISTING COND!TIONS
WATER water service will be provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District.. A y,rater availability certificate will be
required to be submitted to the City with the site plan application.
SEVVER ·SewerseMce will be provided by the City of Renton. There is an 6-indl sewer main in Benson Road. There is en
existing side SeNer serving the building.
STORM Thei:e is no drainage conveyance system in Benson Road South.
STREETS There are sb'eel frontage improvements in Benson Road fronting the site.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
WATER
1.Water service will be provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District.. A water availability certificate wil! be raequired to be
submitted to the City. It was not included with the site plan submittal. A copy of the approved water plan shall be provided to.city
for ra,view prior tc issuance of the construction permit
SEWER
1.Sewer system development fees will be a,.ved if the prtjed: adds a new water meter or increases the size of the existing
domestic water.
SURFACE WATER
1.The project is required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Re~ton Amendments
to the KCSVv'M, Chapter 1 and 2. Based on the City's flow control map, this si1e falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard,
Forested Conditions. A drainage plan and full drainage report dated February 12, 2014 was submitted by Taylor Consulting
Engineers. Curreritly runoff from the site flows to the west into a ditch along the east side Benson Road. The project will result in
5,885 square feet of new imperviou:> surface and replaced impervious surface therefore the' site is subject lo Full Drainage
Review. Fla.v contol will be accomplished by using a Native Growth Retention Credit BMP. To meet the BMP requirement the
project, two areas have been designated at the north end of the site. The project is exempt from water quality because the
project will not create more than 5,000 square feet of new pollution generating surface.
2-A. geotechnical rep::irt, dated April 9, 2013, was submitted by Geo Group Northwest, Inc. The report identifies the soils as
glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Recommendation is that roof drains and yard drains should not be connected 10
the footing drain system.
3.A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and dearing of the site
exceeds one acre.
4.Surfac:e Water System DM\opmentfees of $0.491 per square foot of new impervious surface will apply. This.is payable prior
to issuance of the construction permit
TRANSPORTATION/STREET
1. Existing right-0f..way width in Benson Road SDuth fronting the site is 60 feel Benson Road is dassified as a Minor Arterial.
To meet the City's complete street standards, street improvements induding a pavement width of 22 feet (south of S. 26'1h
Street) and up \o 29 feet from centerline {north of S. 261h Street), curb and gutter, an S--foot planter strip, 8-foot sidewalk, and
storm drainage improvements are required to be c:onstruded in the right of way fronting the site per City oode 4-8--060. To build
these street sections, approximately B to 12 feet of light-of-way will be required to be dedicated to the City along the project. side
in Benson Road. The dedication is shown on the plans.
Existing right-of-way width in S. 27th Street fronting the site is 60 feel S. 27th Street is classified as a residential aCE;eSS
street Frontage improvements including a 5-foot sidewalk and &-foot planting will be required.
2.Applicant has submitted a letter to Jennifer Henning, dated February 4th, 2014 requesting a modification of the street frontage
improvements ~uired along Benson Road as outlined in City code 4-9-25DC5d. The applicant is asking to allow the existing
street frontage improvement to remain.
3.Street lighting is not required tor the following smaller project sizes: two (2) to four (4) units for residential; zero (O) to five
~~
~
Page 1 of2
Technical Services
Reviewer Comments
thousand (5,000) squarE= commercial; or zero (D) to ten thousand (10,000) square feet .. :dustriaL
4.A traffic impact. analysis dated February 4, 2014, was submitted by William Popp and Associates. The projed expects to
generate 46 new daily net trips. No traffic impacts or additional offsite improvements are expected as a result of this new
devebprnent
5.Additional transportation i_mpact fees may be c:wec:I for this new use. Credit will be given for the use of the existing building.
The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation
impact fee is due at the time of Issuance of the building permit
GENERAL COMMENTS
1.Separate permits and fees for side sewer connectbn, water meter and storm connection will be required.
2.A!l construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements wll! require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall
C011form to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans.
a.Rockeries or retaining wans greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate bu~ding permit Strudura! calculations and
plans shall be submitted for revie,.v by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required.
4.A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal.
Bob MacOnie Ph: 425-430-7369 email: bmaconie@rentonwa.gov
Recommendations: The Roadway Slope and Drainage easement under recording number 20010129001B14 on the site plan
does not show the 55 foot deep area for traffic control and Other roadway purposes-at the inter.;edion of Benson Rd S and S
26th St
Leslie Betiach Ph: 425-430-6619 ernaik LBetladl@rentonwa.gov
Community Services Re-view Created On: Oll06/2014
Fire Review -Buildin.g
Police Review
March 19, 2014
A Environmental !mpaci Comments: There are no impacts to Parks
B. Policy-Related Comments: None
C. Code-Related Comments: Must remove high-risk, dead cottorrwoods at teh NE Comer of BensDrl Road S and S 26th street
Corey Thomas Ph: 425-430-7024 email: cthomas@rentonv.ra..gov
Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments:
1. The fire impacifeeS are applicable at the rate of $0.14 per square foot of commercial modular office area Fees are paid at
time of builOmg permit issuance.
Code Related Comments.:
1. The preliminary fire fluw requirement is 2,000 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered buHding including all existing areas. A
minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150--feet of the proposed building$ and one
hydrant within 300-feet At least one new )lydrant will be required on the site with corresponding water main extensions.
Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code; all existing hydrants need 5-inch
storz fittings.· site is served by both the City of Renton and Soos Creek Water District. A water availabllity ~rtificate is required
from Soos Creek Water District.
2. An approved fire alarm and fire sprinkler system are required throughout the building due to change of use. Separate plans
and permits are required to be submitted to the ~enton Fire Department for review and pennitting. A direci outside door is
required to tt-ie fire sprinkler riser control room.
3. Existing fire department apparah.Js access roads are adequate. Fire lane signage will be required on existing roadways
used for access purposes.
Cyndie'Parks Ph: 425-430-7521 ernail: c:parks@rentonwa.gov
Recommendations: N~ one-story modular building reviewed a;; new construction.
Minimal impact on police services.
No addi'tional comments.
P-age2 of2
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
EXHIBIT 13 -
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNSM)
MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000203 ·
APPLICANT: Carrie Fannin
PROJECT NAME: CHILD School
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: . The applicant is requesting SEPA, Site Plan and Hearing
Examiner Conditional Use Permit Childrens Institute for Learning Differences (CHILD) to be
relocated to 2640 Benson Rd. S. The project would remodel a former church and add a 2,239 SF
modular one-story building to accommodate the new school. The former 18,469 SF church
building would be remodeled for school classrooms, kitchen, and staff and student support
areas including occupation, speech, and language therapy rooms. Other improvements include
a children's play area, added parking spaces, landscaping, rockery, and street improvements.
Drainage, Geotechnical, and Traffic Impact studies are provided. The site is located in the R-8
zone and is 175,111 SF in size. Steep slopes are located on-site. Over 150 trees are to remain.
Vehicular access would be off Benson Rd S and an emergency fire access would be kept from S
27th St. A modification is requested from street improvements along S 27th Street.
PROJECT LOCATION:
LEAD AG EN CY:
MITIGATION MEASURES:
2640 Benson Road S.
The City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
Planning Division
1. All earthwork performed, implemented by the applicant, be consistent with the
recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared by GEO Group Northwest,
Incorporated, dated January 29, 2014.
2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared
by prepared by TEC Taylor Engineering Consultants, dated February 12, 2014.
3. The applicant to comply with the recommendations of the Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared
by William Poop Associates, dated February 4, 2014.
ADIVISORY NOTES:
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the
administrative land use action. Because these notes .ore provided as information only, they are
not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions.
x:.·
; .
Planning:
1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:_30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless
otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. The Development Services Division reserves the
right to rescind the approved extended haul hours at any time if complaints are received.
2. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate
ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further
construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic
covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by
the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The
Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the
permit.
3. Commercial, multi-family, new single-family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be
restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through
Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock
(8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays.
· 4: All landscaping shall be irrigated by an approved irrigation system prior to final occupancy permits
Exhibit 11 of the report provides additional Advisory Notes to the applicant for water. sewer. surface water.
trans·portation, and fire.
'(RQ~ EKk, 11 (~O\l\·tt,llo~\V'5
a5 Mv1::,o<1 NP·i-€r'-
ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of2
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS (LUA14-000203) EXHIBIT13
PLAN ADDRESS;
DESCRIPTION:
Engineering Review
March 19, 2014
2640 BENSON S RD.
RENTON, WA 98055--5192
APPLICA. TION DATE: 02/18/2014
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a private school called C~ildrens Institute for Leaming Differences (CHILD) to
remodel a former church and add a modular one-story building at 2640 Benson Road South. The applicant proposes a 2,239 squar.e foot
modular building be added to the west side Of the lot in the existing parking area with the exterior matching the primary building exterior.
For the primary former church building of 18,469 square feet, the applicant is proposing remodels to the first floor and basement for
school classrooms, kitchen, and staff and student support areas including occupation, speech, and language therapy rooms. Exterior
work for the primary structure will consist of paint, trim, and in-fill of some windows. An existing cellular building and tov.ler will remain on
site. Other improvements indude a children's play area, added parking spaces, landscaping, rockery, and street improvements. The
· existing facility would be brought up to current Building and Fire codes. Drainage, Geotechnical, and Traffic Impact studies are provid_ed.
The site is located in the Residential-8 single family zone and is 175,111 square feet in size (4.02 acres). Approximately 2,083 square feet
of steep slopes are on-site. Over 150 trees are to remain. The application·includes Environmental and Site Plan reviews. Vehicular
acc:ess would be gained off Benson Road South at the intersection with S 26th St and an emergency fire access would be kept from S
27th Street A modification is requested from street improvements along S 27th Street
Jan Illian Ph: 425-430-7216 email: jillian@rentonwa.gov
Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for the CHlLD School located at 2640-Benson Road South and have the
following comments:
EXJSTI NG CONDITIONS
WATER Water service will be prnvided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A water availability certificate will be
required to be submitted to the City with the site plan application.
SEWER Sewer service will be provided by the City of Renton. There is an 6-indl sewer main in Benson Road. There is an
existing side sewer serving the buikfing.
STORM Ther:9 is no drainage conveyance system in Benson Road South.
STREETS There are street frontage improvements in Benson Road fronting the site.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
WATER
1.Water service will be provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A water availability certificate will be required to be
submitted to the City. lt was not included with the site plan submittal. A copy of the apprDYed water plan shall be provided to·cify
for review prior to issuance of the construction permit
SEWER
1.S8'Wer system development fees will be owed if the project adds a new water meter or increases the size of the existing
domestic water.
SURFACE WATER
1. The project is required to oompi'J with the 2009 King County Surface water Manual and the 2009 City of R~ton Amendments
to the KCSW!vt, Chapter 1 and 2. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard,
Forested Conditions. A drainage plan and full drainage report dated February 12, 2014 was submitted by Taylor Consulting
Engineers. Curreritty runoff from the site flows to the west into a ditch along tre east side Benson Road. The project will result in
5,885 square feet of new imperviou~ surface and replaced impervious surtace therefore the. site is subject to Full Drainage
Review. Flow control will be accomplished by using a Native Growth Retention Credit BMP. To meet the BMP requirement the
project, two areas have been designated at the north end of the site. The project is exempt from water quality because the
project will not create more than 5,000 square feet of new pollution generating surface.
2.A geotechnical report. dated April 9, 2013, was submitted b'; Geo Group Northwest, Inc. The report identifies the soils as
glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Recommendation is that roof drains and yard drains should not be connected to
the footing drain system.
3.A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and dearing of the site
exceeds one acre.
4.Surface Water System Dev8!oprnent fees of $0.491 per square foot of nB'N impervious surface will appty. This is payable prior
to issuance of the construction permit
TRANSPORTATION/STREET
1. Existing right-Of.way width in Benson Road South fronting the site is 60 feel Benson Road is dassified as a Minor Arterial.
To meet the City's complete street standards, street: improvements induding a pavement width of 22 feet (south of S. 26th
Street) and up to 29 feet from centerline (north of S. 26th Street), curb and gutter. an 8-foot planter strip, &.foot sidewalk, and
storm drainage improvements are required to be construded in the right of way fronting the site per City code 4-6-060. To build
these street sections, approximately 8 to 12 feet of right-af.-way will be required to be dedicated to the City along the project side
in Benson Roaci. The dedication is shown on the plans.
Existing right-ef-way width in S. 27th Street ·fronting the site is 60 feet. S. 27th Street is classified as a residential access
street Frontage improvements including a 5-foot sidewalk and 8-foot planting will be required.
2.Applicant has submitted a letter to Jennifer Henning, dated February 4th, 2014 requesting a modification of the street frontage
improvements ~uired along Benson Road as outlined in City rode 4-9-25DC5d. The applicant is asking to allow the existing
street frontage improvement to remain.
3,Street lighting is not required for the following smaller projed sizes: two (2) to four (4) units for residential; zero (0) to five
Page 1 of2
Tei::hnical Services
Reviewer Comments
thousand (5,000) square, commercial; or zero {O) to ten thousand (10,000) square feet .. ~ustria!.
4.A traffic impact analysis dated February 4, 2014, was submitted by William Popp and Associates. The projed: expects to
generate 46 new dalr)' net trips. No traffic impacts or additional offsite improvements are expected as a result of this new
development
5.Additional transportation impad fees may be owed for this new use. Credit will be given for the use of the existing building.
The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation
impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit
GENERAL COMMENTS
1.Separate permits and fees for side sewer connection, water meter and storm connection will be required.
2.All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall
conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. i licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans.
3.Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit Struciural calculations and
plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required.
4.A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a landscape plan shall be inciuded with the civll plan submittal.
Bob MacOnie Ph: 425-430-7369 email: bmaconie@rentom.va.gov
Recommendations: The Roadway Slope and Drainage easement under recording number 20010129001 B 14 on the site plan
does not shbW the 55 foot deep area for traffic control and other roadway purposes at the intersection of Benson Rd S and S
26th St
Leslie Betlach Ph: 425-430-6619 email: LBetlach@rentonwa.gov
Community Services Review Created On: 03106/2014
Fire Review -Building
Police Review
March 19, 2014
A. Environmental Impact Comments: There are no impacts to Parks
B. Policy-Related Comments: None
C. Code-Related Comments: Must remove high-risk, dead rottonwoods at teh NE Comer of Benson Read S and S 26th street
Corey Thomas Ph: 425-430-7024 email: cthomas@rentonwa.gov
Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments:
1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $0.14 per square foot of commercial modular office area. Fees are paid at
time of building permit issuance.
Code Related Comments:
1. The preliminary fire flow requirement is 2,000 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building including all existing areas.. A
minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150-feet of the proposed building$ and one
hydrant within 300-feet At least one new hydrant will be required on the site with corresponding water main exten_sions.
Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code; all existing hydrants need 5-inch
slorz fittings. site is served by both the City of Renton and Soos Creek Water District. A water availability certificate is required
from Soos Creek Water District.
2. An approved fire alann and fire sprinkler system are required throughout the building due to change of use. Separate plans
and permits are required to be submitted to the f3enton Fire Department for review and pennitting. A direct outside door is
required to the fire sprinkler riser control room.
3. Existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. Fire lane signage will be required on existing roadways
used for access purposes.
Cyndie'Parks Ph: 425-430-7521 email: cparks@rentonwa.gov
Recommendations: N~ one-story modular building reviewed as new construction.
Minimal impact on police services.
No additional comments.
Page 2 of2
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
EXHIBIT 14
ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M)
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000203
APPLICANT: Carrie Fannin
PROJECT NAME: CHILD School
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval an Administrative Variance from
RMC 4 2 110A regulating front yard setbacks for primary and attached accessory structures in the Residential 4
dwelling units per acre (R 4) zone. The applicant is proposing a 20 foot front yard setback where a 30 foot front
yard setback is required to accommodate a future house to be constructed on the site. A Category 2 Wetland is
located on the project site. A portion of the proposed house would encroach into the wetland buffer. Wetland
buffer averaging for a portion of the site is proposed with a 2:1 buffer enhancement ratio. The applicant is also
requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review.
PROJECT LOCATION:
LEAD AGENCY:
2640 Benson Road S.
City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee
Department of Community & Economic Development
The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant
adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental. Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW
43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under
their authority of Section 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental
impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the
lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 11, 2014.
Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South
Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be
obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
PUBLICATION DATE:
DATE OF DECISION:
SIGNATURES:
Gregg'Zi rm · , Administrator
Public Works Department
March 28, 2014
March 24, 2014
3/ 2.'i ,/1 'I ~'--f'---c},.L---,r+------
Date
Date
e-_'Z-.u '---~ 3f
C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrat!Dr
Department of Community &
Economic Development
Jj/;;4
~
Date
:oenis Law -1·. ~---·..1M:a:yo:·.r---~-.. ---·P'i1 il
EXHIBIT 15
• February 2q, 2014 .•
Department qfCornmunily a~p E.conomi<: o;velopment.
Carrie Fannin
·. Exe1:utive Dire~tor, CHiLD
4b3o 86th A~e SE ... · .. ·
. Mercer islat1d,.WA 98040
. . . . . . C.E.''Chip"Virn;entiAdministrator .
. N~tjEe of Complete Applicati~n
· CHILD School; LLJA14:000203 · •
. /.'
Dear Ms. Fannin: ·
~··
.. The Planning-Division -of the City_ofl,e.rita'.n has determin_ed that the subject a·pplication ..
. is.·c-omplete a~cording t6:s_ubmittal requirements and; therefore, is ·accepteiHor review .•
. . . -~. ' . . ' . ·, '.-. . .· . . .
. It is tentati~ely-scheduled for con;ideratiQn hy the Environmental Review Committee on ·
M~rch 24, 201:4. Prib'r to that revie,;.:,, you wilf oe n£Jtified fr any additional i-oforipatlon is
' . req.ufrep to' continue j)iocessing your app Ii cation.
In additi~n: thLSniatter isteritatively;cheduled_fr,r aP~bHc 'Hearjng on IYlay l3, 2pi4 at
' 10:QOam, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Rentori City Hall, 1055 South Grady wa;;.
_Renton. The applii:~rii: or representatiile(s)bfthe applfc;antare required to be p~esent at
the public hearing,A copy ohhe staff report will be maile'dto yoLi'p~io(to tl:ie scheduled ' hearing:' . . . -•, ' ', . . '.' ·., . ' ·• ·. . . '' ' .
. Ph!ase_confact rne at\42$) <1-30·6$39 if you ha~f, any questions: •
Sincerely; . ·rcv/4 ~ ...... ~-·-
.• Kris Soren_sen
Associate Planngr
Cc: Presb~ery of Seaui~ / Owner
R.enton Crty HaB • 1 CiSS Sb~ Grady Way·: Renton.'wast,i~gton 98057 • re~tonwa.gov •
. -! • --.
Kris Sorensen
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Jennifer T. Henning
Tuesday, April 08, 2014 10:20 AM
Kris Sorensen
Vanessa Dolbee
EXHIBIT 16
Subject: RE: Street Mod Request attached; FW: CHILD school LUA 14-000203
Kris,
I support your recommendation and you should recommend this in the staff report to the HEX.
Jennifer
From: Kris Sorensen
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 8:11 AM
To: Jennifer T. Henning
Cc: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Street Mod Request attached; FW: CHILD school LUA 14-000203
Hi Jennifer -.1 have attached the request, and sorry for not providing it much sooner. The HEX report goes out end of day
and we could recognize that it has been applied for ifwe don't have a decision to put into the report.
Vanessa and I both recommend approval. The frontage improvements are already there, although not to current city
code with planting strip between curb/gutter and the sidewalk although the applicant will dedicate the needed ROW to
provide that amount of space for future installation.
Thank you, Kris
From: Kris Sorensen
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 7:50 AM
To: Jennifer T. Henning
Subject: CHILD school; street modification request
Hi Jennifer -I am looking for a decision on the street modification request for CHILD school to incorporate into the HEX
report. The request was dated Feb 4'h. Let me know what you think, thank you. ·
Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Pla.nning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593
1
EXHIBIT 17
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
Cml.D SCHOOL (REvisED SITE PLAN)
2640 BENSON ROAD S.
RENTON,\VASHINGTON
G-3591
Prepared for
Mr. Lee Wangerin
Wangerin Associates, U...C
12408 106"' Place NE
Kirkland, WA 98034
January 29, 2014
By
GEO GROUP NORTHWEST, INC.
13240 NE 20"' Street, Suite 10
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Phone: (425) 649-8757 RECEIVED
FEB 1· 7 2014
CITYo;: RENT
PLANNING D1v1s1o~N
-
TEC Project#: 603-WA
Taylor
Engineering
Consultants
EXHIBIT 18
PRELIMINARY
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
for the
CHILD School
Parcel# 292305-9102
Site Location:
2640 Benson Road South
Renton, Washington
RFCEIVED
FEB I 7 2014
·--'._..._.._., CITY OF RENTON
Prepared by: Loma M. Taylor, P.E.
Date: February 12, 2014
485 Rainier Blvd N, Surte #201, P.O. Box 1767 • Issaquah, Washington 98027 • (425) 391-1415
William Popp Associates
EXHIBIT 19
Transportation Engineers/Planners
(425) 401-1030
FAX (425) 401-2125
e-mail: info@wmpoppassoc.com
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
for
CHILD School Renton
Prepared for_·
Wangerin Associates, LLC
124(}8 106"' Place NE
Kirkland, WA 98034
Prepared by:
William Popp Associates
14-400 Building, Suite 206
14400 Bel-Red Rd
Bellevue, WA 98007
February 4, 2014
14-400 Building• Suite 206 • 14400 Bel-Red Road• Bellevue, WA 98007
RECEIVED
FEB 1 7 7G'4
CITY OF RENiON
PtANNING DIVISION
CHILD School
Conditional Use Permit Justification
Consistency of Plans
EXHIBIT 20
The proposed use of this property, a private school for grades K through 12, is compatible with
the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the comprehensive plan and the zoning
(RS) of this property. Toe comprehensive plan calls for continued residential use and uses that
are compatible with residential use. Schools naturally fall into this category as they support
families with school-age children. An existing school, Nelsen Middle School, borders this .
property on the east. Toe RS zone allows schools for grades K through 12.
Appropriate Location
This location, on Benson Road South, is very appropriate. It will have no traffic impact on
nearby residential streets and is near Nelsen Middle School to the east. Toe site is large, 4.02
acres, has adequate on-site parking, and can easily accommodate a school of this size.
No Adverse Effect on Adjacent Properties
The siting of the existing building and parking areas will not adversely affect neighboring
properties. The only residences nearby are on the south side of South 27fu Street. There is a row
of mature trees on the north of the street which provide a buffer between these homes and the
proposed site.
Compatibility
The proposed use is compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. Toe existing
church building, one story with a daylight basement, has been in this residential neighborhood
since 1960. With its brick and wood exterior, it blends well with the existing surrounding
homes. Toe proposed small administrative building, one story, will have similar exterior
materials. '
Parking
The existing parking, 80 spaces total, on the upper and lower parking lots, is more than adequate
as the real parking need is about 60 spaces. (See traffic study enclosed with these documents.)
The proposed plan includes 65 spaces which include 6 handicap spaces.
Traffic
The proposed school will have no traffic impact on nearby residential streets as the primary
access will be from Benson Road South. There is an existing traffic light on Benson Road at the
RECEIVED
1 FEB 1 7 2014
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING DIVISION
entrance to the site which will allow traffic to safely enter and exit the site. The existing
sidewalk and pedestrian crossings at this intersection will remain.
Noise, Light and Glare
Noise: There will be minimal noise generated from the school -primarily from school busses
coming and going. The small playground would be on the opposite side of the school from the
only nearby houses on South 27th Street.
Light and glare: There are some exterior lights illuminating the parking lot on the east side of
the building, however these are directed downward and are not directly visible from the houses
on South 27 111 Street. A new pole light is proposed in the east parking island. This light will
shine downward onto the parking area There are also some building-mounted lights
illuminating the west parking lot. This lighting is also directed downward so that it does not
create glare for traffic on Benson Road South.
Landscaping
Currently, all areas of the site that are not covered by buildings or paving are already landscaped.
Proposed landscaping changes are shown on the enclosed Landscape plan. A buffer of tall trees
currently exists between the buildings and the homes on South 27th Street. These trees will
rernam.
2