The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMisc - 2 of 4ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** 0 THE ENC EXHIBIT 2 �n R � 9 � O Or ��- I..,..ia CAM I --- afe�beF� L4 -- 00 6 D14 � Gl�gr�dLv THE ENCLAV EXHIBIT 3 -r poj Lam _..! Ij 1 f.;� f..`i"�,{'9 1 jl. . 1^! I.1 T•'w�T I s� I -0� - -- � __ i � _ � I � I • nth Z m - w �F1V -- - z- pyD I S gRR .1 11111 Till did Its! �R � au vIrpl `a-0 8y ry - A 'Hmnn all to p C gu eke I � $" � 4 N N � 6 8 Z m - w �F1V -- �'r°moi pyD I S w -- �'r°moi �� Tt M 1. CT u 11 EXHIBIT 4 THE ENCLAVE AT m :> n m AnF.' __ e vim Ln 0 n �� dle Tt M 1. CT u 11 EXHIBIT 4 THE ENCLAVE AT .30 XXXX-XXX 30CIIH 3101H8 iV 3AVION3 3Hi 3M =f THE ENCLA) EXHIBIT 5 EXHIBIT 6 T7,77-1, virl i O _ � �- � iJ31R� neiwu f a� t, ° � s% ➢ rI i� Z PI "3 m Q s13a INC n3 F � s ri FNW HOHANG5 LLC •o f �Y 1�A o RF)NS _ TNS FNaM A ffIM pinGFJV,a9v 4tl��i rKr I� I T7,77-1, virl i O _ � �- � iJ31R� neiwu f a� t, ° � s% ➢ rI i� Z PI "3 m Q s13a INC n3 F � s ri FNW HOHANG5 LLC •o f �Y 1�A o RF)NS _ TNS FNaM A ffIM pinGFJV,a9v 4tl��i rKr T- ...,.,.�_ �_ - . �� .�_. .: r_._- - �c ...... ,�.:.�. ��,, � �� \ �^ , 3w. _�. .... � _ — _ ..... �Nl7� .� �� i 9 56Th: ti VE -r � I lop 14 N 7 7 yY ra FNW NOL iI NCA5, LLC REVISIONS , y NCLAV€. prlt)I�I� Fi%lr .... . ..... THE ENCI Awniia• 'I EXHIBIT 7 a� g �p1 <m A aIM 11 I .a u4 � v Fw ° a L � � 3a 4p I Hit I �o� r e_ Paz •p MiHI��UF P1 U3 F 7EI i3 3a 8Q 4'F H � illit d3�g g) ° 11 q v4 a l O��IMM sez . a � � ' rya rn� xa 4F �ccc„ her y & q R� R �E1 �o 3 -��3Mp N y3 r%bj�a l R H w h wb l 4 ya F °`x TOWN, z. �p1 <m A aIM 11 I .a u4 � v Fw ° a L � � 3a 4p I Hit I �o� r e_ Paz •p MiHI��UF P1 U3 F 7EI i3 3a 8Q 4'F H � illit d3�g g) ° 11 q v4 a l O��IMM sez . a � � ' rya rn� xa 4F �ccc„ her y & q R� R �E1 �o 3 -��3Mp N y3 r%bj�a l R H w h wb 4 z9F °`x TOWN, �p1 <m A aIM 11 I .a u4 � v Fw ° a L � � -�(n 4p I Hit I �o� 86 e_ Paz •p MiHI��UF P1 U3 F F R i3 3a 8Q 4'F H � illit d3�g g) ° 11 q v4 a l O��IMM sez . a � � ' rya rn� xa 4F �ccc„ & q R� R �E1 Fra 3 -��3Mp N �p1 <m A aIM 11 I .a u4 � v Fw ° a L � � -�(n Hit I �o� e_ Paz •p MiHI��UF P1 U3 F F R i3 3a 8Q 4'F H � illit d3�g g) ° 11 q v4 a l O��IMM sez . a � � ' rya rn� xa 4F �ccc„ & q R� R 3 N y3 R H 4 z9F z. I Fw ° a L � � -�(n Hit Paz •p MiHI��UF P1 U3 jolly! F R i3 3a 8Q 4'F H � illit d3�g g) ° 11 q v4 a l O��IMM sez . a � � ' rya rn� xa 4F O c Hit •p MiHI��UF P1 U3 jolly! i3 3a 8Q a '1 J p illit d3�g g) ° 11 q v4 a l O��IMM ; ism ESIR {;°g 2 'sgoa Egg xa 4F THE ENC' I EXHIBIT S n b 4 D R � a THE ENC' I EXHIBIT S THE E EXHIBIT 9 THF EN( EXHIBIT 10 gm p z mm 5 4 �q-bj j iSRf { W J f > A I 7 m % E 5 P E,7 —E THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE xxx—Xxxx EKY ca NAME I 1 153THAVE SE TILE ENCLA EXHIBIT 11 1� Tq lit _.. EXHIBIT 12 THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36"' St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by QR 7RHWE-ST TRA.FFIC EXPEwTS 11410 NE 124th St., ##590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 R CF/\/.V- D 2 7 1014 dig . NTON EXHIBIT 13 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT for THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Preliminary Plat 14038 156'" Avenue SE Renton, Washington DRS Project No. 13117 Renton File No. Owner/Applicant PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Report Prepared by D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 6207 th Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Report issue Date February 19, 2014 92014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. FEE 2 '� 014 CITY OF �'�NNh'V� GlviBiGN 1 PREPARED FOR AMERICAN CLASSIC HOMES February 5, 2014 IL �- I IV - t'Ai-I �� ,. Sie en H. Avrl S Geologist OP67 �-'[ONAL � 2l <1 oA Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal EXHIBIT 14 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14038 - 156th AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON C RECEIVED ES -3220 FEB 2 7 2014 CITY OF RFNTON Earth Solutions NW, LLC PLANvV IG DiVISfON 1805-136 th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 Toll Free: 866-336-8710 Greenforest IncorporatE 2/18/2014 EXHIBIT 15 Justin Lagers, Director of Land Acquisition & Development FES 2 7 2014 PNW holdings, LLC CITY:t.i_ `'ON 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 t;i,I'; i ' F Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Tree Inspection, 14038 156th Ave SE, Renton WA 98059 Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and evaluate the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. (Tax Parcel Numbers 142305-9023, 9057, & 9112). 1 received a TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING PLAN from D R Strong Consulting Engineers showing the location and numbers of the surveyed trees. I visited the site last week and inspected the trees indicated on the sheet, which are the subject of this report. TREE INSPECTION My initial inspection was limited to visual observation from the subject parcels. Trees off site were included in the inspection but are not included in this report. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline extension and recorded visible defects. At the east property boundary (Near tree 6185) is an infection center for a root rot disease. This is evidenced by a tree -free circular area (actually, semi circular as bisected by the parcel boundary) with standing dead trees, recently or previously failed trees, and trees with thinning and/or chlorotic canopies at the edge of the infection area. After my initial inspection I returned to the site and performed rootcrown excavations on the conifers bordering this infection area. I found both signs and symptoms of armillaria root rot fungus, as evidenced by the presence of mycelial fans and fungal rhizomorphs, oozing resin flow, and varying stages of root decay in approximately a dozen trees on the north and south sides of this infection area. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 S'e11LAi!2 EXHTBTT 1 F February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 RECEIVED Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton FER 2 7 LU4 SWC Job413-187 CITY 0- 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed `'The Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (4 1423059023 & 9122), located on the east side of 156th Avenue SE, in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). vicinity IVap DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY EXHIBIT 17 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP APPLICANT: Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings, LLC PROJECT NAME: The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street_ The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet_ Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 156" Ave SE LEAD AGENCY: 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 18, 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: April 4, 2014 DATE OF DECISION: March 31, 2014 SIGNATURES: ff;v Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Mark Peterson, Administrator Public Works Department Date Fire & Emergency Services Date CA - Terry Higashiyama, Administrator C.E. "Chip" Vincent, dministrator Community Services Department Date Department of Comm nity & Date Economic Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY EXHIBIT 18 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP APPLICANT: Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings, LLC PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057, All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038156 th Ave SE LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.02 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock {8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plants 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. Fire: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 2. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to 3,600 square feet (including garage and basements). If the dwelling exceeds 3,600 square feet, a minimum of 1,500 gpm fire flow would be required. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 300 -feet of the proposed buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,5D0 gpm. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 - inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 - feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Water: 1. Water service will be provided Water District 90. 2. A water availability certificate from Water District #90 will he required. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 4. Approved water plans shall be submitted to the City. Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156" Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144t6 Street and ext6ending the sewer main into the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave 5E up to the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156"' Ave 5E will require overlay pavement restoration of at least half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 1561h Ave SE up to the north property line. 2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main in the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 -foot sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer main in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the end of the sewer stub. 3. System development fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. Fee per lot based on %-inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. Estimated fee for sewer is $63,023.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 4. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District- Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per new lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. S. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope_ Surface water. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 4 1. A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 26, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre -developed rates for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. 2. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geotech recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. 3. Surface water system development fee is $1,228.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit_ Estimated storm fee is $36,540.00. 4. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Tra asportation: 1. The current transportation impact fee rate is $1,430.72 per new lot. 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. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest, The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SE/5E 142 Place was done to determine what, if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS P with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date_ 3. A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a 53 -foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street_ One side of the road will be marked No Parking. As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. 4_ To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156' Ave SE shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 foot wide curb, an 8 -foot ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory (Votes Page 3 of 4 planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6-060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required. It is shown on the plans. 5. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 6. Street lighting is required for this plat. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. General Comments: 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. Z. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A 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_ Structural 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 separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 4 of 4 City of` } i IFjp^ 14�' OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED DNS -M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME Enclave @ Ill Ridge Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUA144W24I, ECF, PP LOCATION: 14038158x' Ave SE DESC97➢TION: Proposed subdivision of an 8.6 acre project site locatad within the R-4 (Residentlal 4 dwelling units per acre) toning deslgnatlon. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts Tracts A and Bi and a new public street. The propased lots would range In sire from 8,050 square feet to 12,555 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provlded via a new public street off of 1,5ath Avenue 5E. A lot line adjustment %UA14-000250) Is proposed between tax parcels 1423054057 and 1423059122 which will result In 30,175 square feet of pamal 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An exlstlng residence is proposed to remaln on parte! 14 2 3 05 905 7. All other st-ctr+res are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. an April 16, 2014, 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 City of RMC 4-9-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City CTerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EYAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON APRIL 22, 2014 AT 10:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE 'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SHORT PLAT, ETC,. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 15 APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTAT (425)430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDETHE PROJECT NUMBER WHENCALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION, 4e�g � EXHIBIT 19 6,Jl C,il'-qy,�hereby certify that _ _ copies of the above document were pasted in --3— conspicuous places or nearby the descr� property on Date: 'Z.� `l q Signed: .��. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ] SS COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that , �� l�I a� tn-m signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/herr/th- e r free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated:` Notary z Notary (Print) ointment expires c in and for the State of Washington On the 3rd day of April, 2014, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing SEPA determination documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached See attached Owner, Applicant, Contact, Party of Record (Signature of Suoder): STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING PO I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Lisa M. McElrea `�.•�'�"5"'M signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Ap, f_ 3 _ 2otq Notary (Print): My appointment expires: lic in and for the State of I1VaS in r; N je The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge e LUA14-000241 template - affidavit of service by mailing AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 — 172od Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * _ Duwamish Tribal Office * _ Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Sox 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers *** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 5outficenter Blvd, 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *Note; If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gou ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa,gov template - affidavit of service by mailing m� Applicant PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th St, 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 588-1147 Justin@pnwholdings.com Owner Sally Nipert 14004 156th Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 Party of Record b j Roger Paulson 6617 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 (425) 228-1589 -...� Enclave at Bridle Ride. LUA14-000241 PARTIES OF RECORD Engineer aoz _ Maher Joudi D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers 10604 NE 38th PI, 232 Kirkland, WA 98033 Party of Record M.A. Humu 6608 5E 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 (425) 226-6594 Jason Paulson 31 Mazama Pines Ln Mazama, WA 98333 Richard Ouimet 2923 Maltby Rd Bothell, WA 98012 Par#y of Record, _ � DAVID MICHALSKI 6525 SE 5TH PI RENTON, WA 98059 (425) 271-7837 Page 1 of 1 David M EXHIBIT 20 6525 se _ r_ Renton, Wa 98059 March 21, 2014 Jill Ding, Senior Planner Planning Division 1055 So Grady Way Renton, Wa 98057 This memo is regarding my concerns over the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241/ECF/PD. I live off of SE5th pi and my residence buts up to this planned subdivision. My concern is regarding the traffic going North and South on 156th Ave Se. Since the building of the bridge across Cedar River traffic on 1560 ave se is unbearable. Coming out of any of the side streets off 156th ave se is sometimes impossible with waits as much as 15 minutes. At the 3 way stop south of me vehicles do a quick stop and accelerate up the hill leaving no time between cars to allow access going both North and South. Frequently when large trucks traveling up the hill slow traffic down, there is a huge backlog of vehicles and this causes terrible traffic congestion. I see signs for additional development in the future on the West side of 156th. I feel that an immediate traffic study be implemented. I am really surprised there isn't more accidents than I see. Has anyone thought about additional access off of Maple Valley Highway for folks to get unto Cemetary Road? Sincerely, _D Oryx David Michalski Email: dcrnichalPrnsn_com Ph# 425-271-7837 March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay a* Jdingaxentonwa.gov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, EXHIBIT 21 Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project 4LUA 14-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22°d. 1 also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. 1 would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5t11 Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156'h Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142 intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156" and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142'd, and then only 1F the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156th between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow health, safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156`from SE 5"' Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156th/ 142°d intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156th during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156th/142 d intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156th/ 142nd intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24`h deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22" d public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA detennination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22nd, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at RogerAPaulsen ,�cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Eleetronieally Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application Jill Qin EXHIBIT 22 From: Jill Ding Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 6:38 AM To: 'DAVID C MICHALSKI' Cc: Rohini Nair Subject: RE: concerns_ the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/Lua14-000241/ECF/PP Dear Mr. Michalski, Thank you for your comments on this project. I apologize for the delay in responding. Your comments have been included in the official land use file and will be considered by the decision maker. In addition we have forwarded your comments to the City's transportation department for review. The City is aware of the delay at the 1561" Avenue SE and SE 142nd Place intersection. Unfortunately, the delay at that intersection is anticipated to increase with or without the approval of the proposed project. According to the applicant's traffic study, upon completion the project as proposed is anticipated to add 2.3 seconds to the delay at the intersection. With regards to your question regarding additional access off of Maple Valley Highway to Cemetary Road, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes it infeasible to provide additional access. Widening 1-405 (which the State is pursuing ) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 155 th SE to access Cemetery Road. The City will also be requiring the applicant to pay a traffic impact fee to help offset the impacts of the proposed development to the City of Renton street system. A public hearing on the project is scheduled for 10 am on April 22, which will include an opportunity for additional public comment, If you have further comments or concerns, I encourage you to attend the hearing. Thank you again for your comments, Jill Ding Senior Planner From: DAVID C MICHALSKI [mailto:dcmichal@msn.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:00 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: concerns: the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/ Lua 14-00024 1/ECF/ PP 1 EXHIBIT 23 Ange[ea Wickstrom From: Jill Ding Sent: Monday, April 14, 2024 6:46 AM To: 'Roger Paulsen' Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Mr. Paulsen, Thank you for your comments. They have been included in the file for official consideration by the decision maker. Below I have attempted to respond to the concerns raised in your letter. In your letter you cite the proposed development's impacts on transportation. Per the submitted traffic study the current delay at the southbound approach to SE 142"1 PI and 156th Ave SE is 94.8 seconds. The future delay without the project is anticipated to be 133.2 seconds and the future delay with the project is anticipated at 137.1 seconds. Therefore, it is anticipated that the traffic generated by the proposed project would result in an additional delay of 2.3 seconds. I also understand that you have concerns regarding the traffic heading northbound through the SE 142nd PI and 156`h Ave SE intersection as it makes a right turn from SE 5th PI difficult. According to the submitted traffic study the northbound traffic at the SE 142"d PI and 156th Ave SE intersection is currently operating at a Level of Service (LOS) B and is anticipated to continue operating at a LOS B with the construction of the proposed project. The City's transportation department has reviewed the proposal and has concluded that the payment of a traffic mitigation fee by the project proponent would sufficiently mitigate the additional trips generated by the proposed project on the City's street system. You also indicated in your letter that you would like the opportunity to connect to the sewer being constructed with the proposed project. It is my understanding that the City cannot require the applicant to provide sewer to abutting properties. In order to gain access to the sewer being constructed, you would need to contact the developer (Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings Inc. 253-405-5587), The City would then review any plans for additional connections. 3. You also noted that additional wildlife, not identified on the SEPA checklist is present on the project site. Thank you for this information. 4. You expressed concern that adequate public comment has not been provided for the project and that the City's notice of application is misleading. The posted notice of application is in compliance with RMC 4-8-090B. The notice advertised the 14 day public comment period on the project and also advertised the date of the public hearing. Any comments on the project not made during the public comment period can be made at the hearing, currently scheduled for April 22"d at 10:00 am. If you have any additional comments or concerns, I would encourage you to attend the public hearing on April 22 at 10:00 am in the Council Chambers as an opportunity for public comment will be provided at the hearing. Thank you again for your comments. Jill Ding Senior Planner From: Roger Paulsen [maiito:rogerapaulsen@cs.com] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 7:46 AM To: Jill Ding Cc: Vanessa Dolbee; Lisa Marie McElrea; Rohini Nair; jasonmpaulsen@gmail.com Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Please find attached an electronic copy of my comment letter for the proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge development. I'm sending this via e-mail while traveling in order to meet the March 24" comment period deadline. I'll be entering an area of the country (southern Utah) where Internet access is unreliable. I'm copying my son, Jason Paulsen, on this is so he can address any questions or issues you may have if I'm unable to respond. Jason can be reached at lasonmpaulsen@gmaiLcom. Please acknowledge receipt of this communication via e-mail to both Jason and me. Thanks!! Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDinq(d�Rentonwa.goy> To: Roger Paulsen <rogerapaulsen(a).cs.com> Cc: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(d,Rentonwa.gov>; <RNair(@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 6:38 am Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, Lisa Marie McElrea <LMcElrea Rentonwa. ov>; Rohini Nair Thank you for your email. Could you send us your mailing address so that we can add you as a Party of Record? The plan reviewer assigned to review the Enclave at Bridle Ridge for utility compliance is Rohini Nair. I have copied her on this email. I do not have her direct line, but she can be reached by contacting the front desk at 425-430-7200. I primarily work remotely. I do go into the office once a week on Thursdays from 10am-2pm. I will also be happy to answer any questions you have on this project via email. I will let Vanessa respond to your request for public records, as I am not sure if we grant them electronically. Thank you, Jill From: Roger Paulsen [rogerapaulsen cs.com] Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2014 10:41 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Fwd: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Jill, I'm forwarding an e-mail I had copied you on -- but had your address incorrect. Hopefully this one works!! Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Roger Paulsen <ra era aulsen cs.com> To: VDolbee <VDolbee(@Rentonwa._gov> Cc: jding <0ding(5)renton.wa.gov>; jasonmpaulsen <jasonmpaulsen(c�gmail.com> 2 Sent: Sun, Mar 16, 2014 10:37 pm Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, This is a follow-up to my earlier correspondence regarding the project named "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", file number: LUA14-400241, ECF, PP (see below). Now that the project has officially been posted, I request to become a party of record. Attached is an electronic copy of the required form, with my contact information. As I mentioned in my earlier e-mail, I am traveling out of the area, and won't return until after the end of the comment period on March 24th. I am an adjacent property owner (parcel 9425200080), and this project is of vital interest. I had arranged for my son (Jason Paulsen) to watch for official notice of the proposed development, and have been copied on Jason's correspondence with Jill Ding, of your department. Apparently Ms. Doing is out of the office on vacation until March 20th, and was unable to assist Jason in obtaining an electronic copy of information on the project. I'm writing you in the hope that you can help. If possible, I'd like to receive an electronic copy of application materials and supporting studies pertinent to the SEPA decision so that I can comment prior to March 24th closing date. I am especially interested in reviewing the traffic study. I am quite willing to pay the reasonable cost of providing this information. Let me know the best way to provide payment. Now that the project application has been officially accepted by the City, I'd like to pursue my question regarding sewer service. Can you tell me who I can/should contact to determine whether this project will provide an opportunity for adjacent properties to connect to the Renton Sewer system?? Thanks for any help you can provident Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(a,)Rentonwa.gov_> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogeraoaulsen@cs.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 13, 2014 6:28 am Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, Yes you are correct, as long as you are the property owner. The City uses the King Co. assessors data to mail out to the 300 ft. surrounding neighbors, so whatever address the assessor have for tax purposes is where the City will mail the notice. Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Roger Paulsen fmailto:rogerapaulsen(aD-cs.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:33 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, Thanks for the update!! My wife and I will be away from home for the next 6 weeks, so I won't be able to watch for the pink notice posters. Based on my conversation with Chris on Monday, I understand that we'll also receive a letter in the mail because we are within 300 feet of the development. is that correct?? Our property actually abuts the development. We're having our mail forwarded, so I should receive the notice in time to become a party of record, and submit comments on the project. I'm assuming my question about access to the Renton Sewer system will need to wait until the City has actually accepted the application. Please let me know if my understanding is not correct. Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(�Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsenCq�cs.com> Sent: Wed, Feb 12, 2014 12:25 pm Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, The name of the project based on your photos is "156"' Ave, SE Assemblage" This project did go through the City's pre -application process but has not been submitted to the City as an official application. The developer is required to install these public notices signs prior to application to the City. At this point in time we do not have an official application to add you to as a party of record. Please keep an eye on the big white sign, once you see a bright pink "notice" poster stapled to the front of the sign, the application has been submitted to the City for review. At this time please contact the identified person at the City that is noted on the pink "notice" sign requesting to be added to the party of records list. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Roger Paulsen mailto:ro era aulsen cs.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 8:15 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, Thanks for getting back to me!!! Attached is a zip file with photos taken of the "Proposed Land Use" sign recently posted on the property. The address is 14038 156th Ave. SE. I believe the project number is 13117. Does that help?? Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(aDRentonwa.goy_> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rooerapaulsen(Qcs.com> Sent: Tue, Feb 11, 2014 5:23 pm Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, have searched the City's permit system for a project with the title "Enclave at Bridle Ridge" or a variation of this title. We do not have any records of a project with this name in our system. Can you please provide me a site address or tax parcel number so I can identify what project you are inquiring about. If you would like to become a party of record for any project, the City has to have an application to assign "you" to. In order to do this I need to identify what application you would like to become a party of record for. Thank you for the additional information. Thank you, Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1655 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerapaulsen a,cs.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 2:09 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, By way of introduction, my wife and I live on the East Renton Plateau, adjacent to the NE corner of proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge development. I had some questions about the development, and met yesterday with Chris in your department. He suggested that 1 forward one of my questions to you. Our property has a 50 -year old septic system. It's currently functioning correctly, but I anticipate it's life is limited. I wonder if the new development will provide us an opportunity to connect to the Renton sewer system?? If you're not the right person to address this question to, please direct me to someone who can. Although we haven't yet been formally notified of the development, I would like to become a party of record. Can I do that via this e-mail?? If so, the following is my contact information: Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Pt_ Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 RogerAPaulsen@cs.com " ThanksM Roger EXHIBIT 24 city of Department of Community and Economic Development Development Services Division ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY/CODE INTERPRETATION MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS: RMC 4-6-030 Drainage (Surface Water) Standards REFERENCE: N/A SUBJECT: Landscaping, fencing, pond slopes, and other standards for stormwater tracts and easements and ownership and maintenance responsibility for stormwater facilities. BACKGROUND: The current drainage code (RMC 4-6-030) references the current King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) for compliance with stormwater standards. Requirements for landscaping in stormwater facility tracts are included in Section 5.3.1.1 of the 2009 KCSWDM as amended by the City of Renton. Section 5.3.1.1 of the KCSWDM restricts planting in berms that impound water or within 10 feet of any structure. Requirements for pond geometry and side slopes are listed in Section 5.3.1.1 of the 2009 KCSWDM, as amended by the City of Renton. Adopted standards allow for the side slopes of an open detention or water quality treatment facilities (pond, wetpond, stormwater wetland, etc) to be steeper than 3:1 if a fence is provided along the wall and/or around the emergency overflow water surface elevation. This standard is resulting in facilities that are difficult to maintain, expensive in labor and materials for maintenance, and create a safety hazard to the maintenance crews. Fencing requirements are also standardized in section 5.3.1.1 of the 2009 KCSWDM, as amended by the City of Renton. A fence is required to discourage access to the stormwater pond, prevent litter, allow efficient maintenance, and in consideration of worker and public safety. JUSTIFICATION: Recognizing that requirements for landscaping and tree planting contribute to the aesthetics and value of new surface water installations while needing to ensure proper functionality and maintenance of facilities, both the Department of Public Works and the Department of Community and Economic Development desire to clarify standards H:\CED\Planning\Title lV\Docket\Administrative Policy Code Interpretation\CI-38\Code Interpretation.doc EXHIBIT 25 U re, 156th Ava SE C E co (fl cil 7 a m c o 3 c V U re, 156th Ava SE C E co (fl _EA�_)J ZC Jill Din From: Roger Paulsen <rogerapaulsen@cs.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 3:34 PM To: Jill Ding Cc: olbrechtslaw@gmail,com; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Traffic Study Comments Attachments: Traffic Study Comment Response.pdf Jill, Because I believe the record will show that I have until Wednesday, July 2nd to submit my response to comments from the City and Developer, I am forwarding the attached letter to the Hearing Examiner. It is in response to the June 27th e- mail from Mr. Carson. If the City provides comments before the end of today (Tuesday, July 1), 1 reserve the right to respond to those comments before the end of day tomorrow. Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Roger Paulsen <rogerapaulsen@cs.com> To: JDing <JDing@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: olbrechtslaw <olbrechtslaw@gmail. corn >; VDolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Tue, Jul 1, 2014 2:49 pm Subject: Re: Traffic Study Comments W My understanding, from the Hearing Examiner's comments at the hearing, is that I had until Friday, June 27th to submit comments on the two "eleventh hour" Traffic Study documents. Both the City and applicant then had until today (Tuesday, July 1) to respond to my comments. I than have until tomorrow (Wednesday, July 2) to respond to the City's and Applicant's comments. Please let me know if that is not true, and on what basis your finding is being made Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing (@,Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <ro era aulsen cs.com> Cc: olbrechtslaw <olbrechtslaw(a?gmail. com>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(CDRentonwa, ov> Sent: Tue, Jul 1, 2014 1:33 pm Subject: RE: Traffic Study Comments Roger, The record was closed on June 27th, as such the City will not be providing a response to your June 26th comment letter. Jill From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerapaulsenCcDcs.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 7:42 AM To: Jill Ding Cc: olbrechtslawAa Lmail.com Subject: Re: Traffic Study Comments Jill, Will the City be submitting a response to my June 26th comment letter?? Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDin Rentonwa. ov> To: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw(a)gmail.com>; 'Justin Lagers'<tustin@americanclassichomes.com>; Garmon Newsom 11 <GNewsom Rentonwa. ov> Cc: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsena_cs.com>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(a)Rentonwa.gov>; Rohini Nair <RNair Rentonwa. ov> Sent: Fri, Jun 27, 2014 8:29 am Subject: FW: Traffic Study Comments Phil, Please find attached a copy of Mr. Paulsen's comments regarding the traffic studies (Exhibits 4 and 5) which were submitted by the applicant and the City at the June 24th Hearing for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge_ Thank you, Jill From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerapaulsen@cs.com] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 9:19 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: Traffic Study Comments Jill, Please find my comment letter, attached. Because of the time sensitivity of my response, I request that you provide confirmation of receipt. Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <J�inq(cDRentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <ro�Lerapaulsen(@s.com> Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 12:32 pm Subject: RE: Traffic Study Comments Roger, The hearing examiner has indicated that any comments/questions you have should be emailed to me. I will forward your questions to the applicant and hearing examiner. Thanks, Jill From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerapaulsen(cDcs.com Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 9:01 AM To: Jill Ding Cc: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Traffic Study Comments Jill, realize should have been more specific with my question. At yesterday's Appeal Hearing, the Hearing Examiner provided me an opportunity to submit comments about the two "eleventh hour' Traffic Studies by 5:00 PM Friday, June 27th, but he didn't say how those comments should be submitted. - Can my comments be submitted via e-mail, or should they be in the form of a hard copy letter? - To whom should the comments be addressed? - Is it necessary to copy others parties when the comments are submitted?? If so, what addresses should I use?? I assume I should continue to use you as my City of Renton contact person for all questions related to the Enclave at Bridle Ridge development. If that is not correct, please let me know. Thanks for any guidance you can provide!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing (d)Rento,nwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsen(aDcs.com> Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 6:45 am Subject: RE: Enclave Hearing Exhibit 1 Rohini would be your contact for traffic related questions. Jill From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerapaulsen(a)cs.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 12:07 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: Enclave Hearing Exhibit 1 Jill, To whom should I address my comments on the traffic studies??? ThanksM Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing(dRentonwa.gou> To: Phil Olbrechts <oIbrechtslawCa7gmail. com>; 'Justin Lagers' <Tustin(aDamericanclassichomes.com>; 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapauIse nCa7cs.com>; Garmon Newsom II <GNewsom (oD-Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Tue, Jun 24, 2014 12:04 pm Subject: Enclave Hearing Exhibit 1 1 am going to be sending all the exhibits in separate emails as the files are so large. Jill Ding Senior Planner Community and Economic Develoment City of Renton jdinq[a�rentonwa.pov July 1, 2014 Dear Mr, Examiner, The following is my response to Mr. Carson's June 27th comments. a) Neither the City nor the applicant has demonstrated that an additional traffic study was not required to support the City's May 19th Environmental Determination. b) Neither the City nor the applicant has demonstrated that the City supported their May 19`h Environmental Determination with a traffic study which analyzed the impact of the proposed new traffic signal. c) When I filed my Request for Reconsideration and appeal on June 5th, there was no such traffic study in the public record to support the City's May 19th Environmental Determination. d) If I hadn't appealed, there most likely wouldn't be a traffic study in the public record today to support the City's May 19th Environmental Determination. e) If the City had accepted my June 5th Request for Reconsideration, and completed the traffic study it requested, an appeal wouldn't have been necessary. The record shows that Request was denied — without proper justification, in my opinion. f) As a direct result of the City's denial of my Request for Reconsideration my appeal was filed. At that time, all of the following was true: The first reason for this appeal is simply that the record locks any analysis of the impact of the proposed traffic signal upon the level of service at the two proposed streets associated with this plat, and the adjacent intersections of concern, including the intersection at 156th Ave. SE/SE 5th A, and the intersection of 154h Ave. SE /SE 142 d PL.. The City was aware of the plan to install the neer traffic signal, but failed to consider its impact on the proposed development when it issued its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated on May 19th. g) Acceptance of my Request for Reconsideration would have allowed the City to obtain a traffic study to support their decision, and would have allowed all parties of record a 14 - day appeal period to examine the new information. h) Thanks to my willingness to pay the $250 appeal fee, the City did obtain the requested Traffic Study. However, with the exception of the City and the applicant, the appeal process allowed only one party of record (myself) 3 % days to review the new information — and then only due to the generosity of the Hearing Examiner. I understand that the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) allows jurisdictions a certain amount of discretion, but SEPA exists to inform the public's understanding of the likely impacts of a proposed action, and that was not done when the City issued its May 19th Determination, I ask that my appeal be upheld, and that the City be directed to re -issue their Environmental Determination, including the supporting traffic studies, and that all parties of record be given a 14 day appeal period to review that new information. Thank you for your consideration of my response. Sincerely, Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5`h PL Renton, WA 98059 Jill Ding From: Jill Ding Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 4:13 PM To: Phil Olbrechts; 'Justin Lagers'; 'Roger Paulsen'; Garmon Newsom H, 'brc@vnf.com' Cc: Rohini Nair; Steve Lee; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: City Clarification of Outstanding Questions for Enclave at Bridle Ridge FYI, see below. A couple of projects I had identified as having preliminary approval, have approved utility construction permits. Thank you, Jill From: Rohini Nair Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:52 PM To: Jill Ding Cc: Steve Lee Subject: RE: City Clarification of Outstanding Questions for Enclave at Bridle Ridge Ni Jill, Both Liberty Gardens and Maplewood park East have approved utility construction permits —just wanted to let you know. Sincerely Rohini From: Jill Ding Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:40 PM To: Phil Olbrechts; 'Justin Lagers'; Garmon Newsom II; 'brc@vnf.com' Cc: 'Roger Paulsen'; Rohini Nair; Vanessa Dolbee; Steve Lee Subject: FW: City Clarification of Outstanding Questions for Enclave at Bridle Ridge Phil, I received some additional information on the projects listed under #5 below. Liberty Gardens is only 36 lots, not 46 lots. The 29 lot project identified on Exhibit 14 has had a pre -application meeting with the City, the project name is Alpine Gardens, PRE14-000293 with 29-31 lots. The property is located within King County, a formal land use application cannot be submitted to the City until the area is annexed. Thank you, Jill From: Jill Ding Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 8:59 AM To: Phil Olbrechts; 'Justin Lagers'; Garmon Newsom II Cc: 'Roger Paulsen'; Rohini Nair; Vanessa Dolbee; Steve Lee Subject: City Clarification of Outstanding Questions for Enclave at Bridle Ridge I Phil, Below are the responses to the outstanding questions for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge: 1 -Clarification for the question regarding the 2% annual traffic growth for this project - The Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Developments mention that the forecasted volumes include the projected growth rate and volumes anticipated by pending and approved developments adjacent to the proposed development_ For this project, when I discussed with Transportation, 2% annual traffic growth rate was recommended for this area (this was based on historical data on this area). Until 2010 we were using 3% annual traffic growth rate, but due to the recession, the rate recommended for this area after 2010 was 2%. The applicant engineer used 3% annual traffic growth rate, which was okay with us because the engineer was analyzing a scenario that included more background trips. 2.Clarification for the question if we have ado ted the ITE Trip Generation Handbook by code or if we use it by polig— It is by policy. The Rate study for the Transportation Impact fee that was adopted by the City uses the data reported in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, latest edition (8th edition at that time). 3. 20 trips to trigger a traffic study, is this code or policy - Policy. 4.The am and pm peak our times, is this code or policy -Policy. The ITE Trip Generation Handbook also mentions the 7 to 9 am as the AM peak hour of the adjacent street traffic for single family detached housing. 5. Exhibit 14 submitted at the hearing was a map that included 10 new projects with the corresponding number of new lots anticipated. I have identified the names and file number of the projects located within the City of Renton and have been able to confirm the status of these projects. Two of the projects were located within King County's jurisdiction and I was unable to verify those projects. For your convenience I have identified the projects by the number that was identified on Exhibit 14: 1. 17 - Saddlebrook I & II (LUA12-077 and LUA13-000626) total 17 lots, status: recorded 2. 2 - Mair SP LUA14-000708 totals 2 lots, status: preliminary review 3. 8 - Mindy's Place LUA14-00093 totals 8 lots, status: preliminary review 4. 36 - Liberty Gardens LUA08-093 totals 46 lots, status: preliminary approval 5. 14 (north of NE 2" Street, not the 14 located on the west side of 156th Ave SE across from Enclave)- Maplewood Park East LUA12-018 totals 14 lots, status: preliminary approval 6. 7 - Renton 7 S.P. LUA13-001214 totals 7 lots, status: preliminary approval 7. 46 + - Copperwood LUA14-000550 totals 47 lots, status: preliminary review and Dewitt short plat LUA12-085 totals 4 lots, status: preliminary approval. 8. She had identified two projects within the County, one with 14 lots and the other with 29 lots. I could not find these projects on the County's website at the locations identified on her map. Please let me know if additional information and/or clarification is needed. Thank you, Jill Ding Senior Planner Community and Economic Develoment City of Renton iding@rentonwa.gov Jill Ding From: Brent Carson <brc@vnf.com> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 11:51 AM To: 'olbrechtslaw@gmail.com' Cc: Garmon Newsom II; Jill Ding; 'rogerapaulsen@cs.com; 'Justin Lagers (Justin@americanclassichomes.com)' Subject: Response to Appellant's June 26, 2014 Letter Mr. Olbrechts, At the close of consolidated hearing on Tuesday, June 25th regarding the Enclave at Bridle Ridge, you gave Appellant Paulsen until Friday June 27th to review and comment on the traffic studies submitted into the Record as Exhibits 4 and 5. Mr. Paulsen submitted his comments in a June 26, 2014 letter. On behalf of the Applicant, here is the Applicant's response to Mr. Paulsen's June 26th letter. On the issue of traffic impacts, Mr. Paulsen's SEPA appeal (Exhibit 1) raised one issue. He alleged "that the record lacks any analysis of the impacts of the proposed traffic signal upon the level of service ...." Mr. Paulsen's appeal then assumed, without any analysis, that the signalized intersection would cause longer queues and a worse level of service. Exhibits 4 and 5 provide the analysis that Mr. Paulsen's appeal indicated was lacking. These studies demonstrate that a traffic signal will improve level of service and reduce queue length. Mr. Paulsen's June 26th letter admits these results and provides no counter to these facts. Instead, Mr. Paulsen continues to argue, without merit, that these studies are not relevant to his appeal because they were not available at the time of the Environmental Determination. As the Hearing Examiner noted during the hearing, the purpose of an open record hearing on a SEPA Appeal is to allow the parties to present evidence to address the issues raised on appeal. Exhibits 4 and 5 directly respond to the traffic issue raised in Mr. Paulson's appeal. As a result of these studies, Mr. Paulsen's appeal should be denied. Brent Carson I Partner VanNess Feldman us 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, Washington 98104-1728 (206) 623-9372 1 brc vnf.com I vnf.com This communication may contain information and/or metodato that is legally privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure. Cf you are not the intended recipient, please do not read or review the content and/or metadata and do not disseminate, distribute or Copy this communication. Anyone who receives this message in errorshould notify the sender immediately by telephone (206-613-9372) or by return e-mail and delete it from his or her computer. Jill Din From: Brent Carson <brc@vnf.com> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 12:15 PM To: Iolbrechtslaw@gmail.com' Cc: Garmon Newsom II; Jill Ding; 'vince@nwtraffex.com'; 'Justin Lagers (Justin@americanclassichomes.com)' Subject: Enclave at Bridal Ridge - Response to Public Testimony Exhibits Attachments: 6-27-14 Response to Exhibit 14 Pipeline Projects.PDF; 6-27-14 Response to CARE Traffex comments.PDF Mr. Olbrechts, At the conclusion of Tuesday's public hearing on the subject preliminary plat, you allowed the Applicant to submit, by Friday, June 27, 2014, responses to the exhibits that were submitted into the record by members of the public. Attached please find two letters from the Applicant's traffic consultant, Mr. Vincent J. Geglia of TraffEx. One letter responds to the traffic related comments in Exhibit 13 presented by CARE. Mr. Geglia's letter further supports the record established at the hearing that this preliminary plat meets all applicable city road standards (including intersection spacing and sight distance) and will not cause public health or safety concerns. The letter also addresses the background for using a 3% annual growth. Mr. Geglia's other letter responds to Exhibit 14 and the testimony by Ms. Hydh regarding additional houses expected to use these roadways. Mr. Geglia's letter demonstrates that his 6% growth assumption over the next two years more than adequately considered traffic from projects that have submitted applications or have been approved. Brent Carson I Partner Van Ness Feldman LLP 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, Washington 98104-1728 (206) 623-9372 1 brc@vnf.com I vnf.com This communication may contain Information and/ar metadato that is legally privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure. if you are not the intended recipient please donor read or review the content and/or metadato and do not disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. Anyone who receives this message in error should notify the sender immediately by telephone (206-613-9371) or by return e-mail and delete it from his or her computer. rraffza, June 27, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 NCRTHWr&r TRAFFIC E'xPERTA 1141 ONE 120 St, #590 Kidland WA 98034 Phone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 49.522.4311 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Review of Exhibit 14 and Analysis of Pipeline Projects Dear Mr. Lagers: Purpose: We were asked to review the attached Exhibit 14 and the number of alleged new pipeline project housing units identified and determine whether the trips we had estimated from an annual 3% background growth adequately addressed the anticipated development. Short Answer: Yes Background : Our TIA estimated a growth rate of 3% per year over a 2 year period for total growth rate of 6% which added 68 PM peak hour trips to the SE 142nd PI./156th Ave SE intersection. The basic distribution of trips for residential projects in the area is 70% to the north and 30% to the south. One lot roughly generates one PM peak hour trip per ITE Trip Generation. Pipeline Projects: We have reviewed the pipeline projects in Exhibit 14. We included 7 projects that were either approved or have submitted applications. We did not include 2 projects in the re -app stage, namely the 29 lot Alpine Estates or the 14 lot plat on the west side of 1561 Ave SE. Trips generated by the 7 valid pipeline projects that pass through the SE 142nd PI./156th Ave SE intersection were estimated as follows: 47 lots of Copperwood plat - the 70% north oriented trips will go up Jericho and not 156th, 20% of the south oriented trips turn right from SE 142nd St. to SE 142nd PI. and do not pass thru the SE 142nd Pl/156th Ave SE intersection . Therefore only an estimated 10% go actually thru the intersection = 5 trips 17 lots of Saddlebrook - only the 30% south oriented trips go thru the intersection = 5 trips Page 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge rralffay 14 lofts of Maplewood Court East - 30% south oriented trips = 4 trips 9 lot short plat - 30% south oriented trips = 3 trips 2 lot short plat - 30% south oriented trips = 1 trip 8 lot short plat - 30% south oriented trips = 2 trips 36 lots of Liberty Gardens - north oriented trips go up 160th Ave, therefore only the 30% south oriented trips go through the SE 142"d P1/156th Ave SE intersection = 11 trips The total trips the generated by the 133 lots of the pipeline projects passing through the SE 142"" P1/156th Ave SE intersection = 31 trips Conclusion: The 68 PM peak hour trips background growth trips estimated in the TIA more than adequately addresses the estimated 31 trips generated by the pipeline projects plus other general background growth passing through the SE 142nd PI/156th Ave SE intersection. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mailm at vce ,nwtra ex.com or arty .nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 2 N +'•1r 4]691 Di ks I.I Nr., � N 4 � 0 V t it cx �� 1�7N41•rl I 4} 3ht --q iucoi L a o' 3N ]n,r-aux,a ss Y3�3 N Xc# owuaJ rA—V * 3& - jAv 4",1 itm or: ;Sq —,III _ :Oi Libert Gardens -zxg,Lf4;�1 Z Akpamp Estates F�rti�'� � • �� r.Copperwood' 47 v TJ t T� H rt is � ' Avt 5.•1' .. Of[ ski Enclave ,4 lSaAiebrook € Id 414 E 3y 7ntr U19Si :iosr• q.r rm Maplewood Ct � � � s; � , ,,.. P .East j-, r yF � .]S&1 ill i1 �' � ' ' �•_ � � � ' � � � • � � � s iisel Di ks I.I Nr., � N 4 � 0 V t it cx �� 1�7N41•rl I 4} 3ht --q iucoi a o' 3N ]n,r-aux,a ss Y3�3 N Xc# owuaJ rA—V * 3& - jAv 4",1 4 ;Sq —,III :Oi Z F�rti�'� � • �� r.Copperwood' 47 v TJ T� H Di ks I.I Nr., � N 4 � 0 V t it cx �� rraftmy June 27, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36tH St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 NamrH Arwr 7)rAFF/C ExRERT$ 11410 NE 12401 St. #590 WA 98034 Rwe:425.522.4118 Fax: 4 .522.4311 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Review of Exhibit 14 and Analysis of Pipeline Projects Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to provide the following response to comments from the CARE letter dated June 24, 2014. Comment: -ice"' Ave SE is straWght and #at at the access stnsts trrith excellent sight distance in hath directions-' This is a true statement, but it is insuffident to fully describe the situation. St 141" HL is not straight at trtis location and has terrible sight distance. When there is any vehicle waiting at the southbound stop sign on 156°' Ave SE, any vehicle waiting to tum either right or left from SE 142 PL onto 158'4 AVE SE will not be able to see. This will be particularly dangerous when vehicles is entering or leaving the proposed southern access for the project. The driver will be obstructed by the telephone pole in front of the stop sign and the southbound car, and will not be able to see any exiting vetride on the access street. In a scenario with a southbound vehicle turning left into the project, the driver will be further obstructed by a solid fence and v%ptation. If the tractor trailer truck that fives at parcel# 533$700015 Is parked where is usually is — the driver will we that truck and very little else Please we the accompanying SightUneittustration.pdf. Response: The posted speed limit on 156th Ave SE just north of SE 142nd St. is 25 mph. The required stopping sight distance for a design speed of 25 mph is 155 feet. The distance from the center of the SE142nd P1/156th Ave SE intersection to the center of the 156th Ave SE/Enclave south site access street is 247 feet, therefore stopping sight distance requirements are met. Furthermore, northbound vehicles departing the intersection are from a stopped position (since the intersection is an all way stop) and will be in the process of accelerating from 0 to 25 mph thus increasing the elapsed time to reach the Enclave south site access street. Additionally, the City noted in their May 5, 2014 memorandum that the historical accident data since 2009 for the SE 142nd PI/156th Ave SE intersection does not meet warrants for crash experience. There were a total of 5 accidents on 156th Ave SE. There was only one accident recorded at the intersection. The other 4 accidents were at least two blocks away. The low accident rate is an indication of adequate sight distance and comparatively safe operations. Page 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge rralffa Comment: A A per year annual hackgmwod growth rate was added for each year of the two year thne period (for a total of 6%) from the 2013 traffic count to the 2015 horizon year of the proposat. The 3% per year growth rete should result in a conservative analysis since the growth in traffic volumes has remained relaVvely flat the last several years.' Response: The City requires a 2% per year growth rate to be added to existing traffic volumes. The 2% rate included traffic from pipeline projects. The Traffex TIA used a 6% background growth rate (3% per year for a two year period from now to the horizon year of the project) to insure a conservative analysis. It is our experience that traffic volumes have remained float over the last several years since the recession and therefore we believe the 6% increase in background traffic is in all probability greater than what will actually occur. Comment: The southbound stop sign and crosswalk for this intersection is located about at the center point of parcel# 5336700015 which is approximat* 70 feet north of the southern boundary of the Enclave site. f=igure 2 of the TIA shows that the stormwater tract is proposed to be 85.24 feet wide and Lot 19 is proposed to be 94,59 feet, This yields a measure of 189.86 feet north of the southem boundary of the Enclave site as the proposed location for the south access to 15e Ave SE. 166.6&70 yields a measure of 119.86 feet which fails to meet the intersection distance standard of 125 feet. Please see the accompanying 1 56thAveSEin tersection Location. pdf Therefore, we request that the street access as proposed be rejected. Response: The distance between intersections is measured from the center of the intersections. The distance from the center of the SE 142nd St1156lh Ave SE intersection to the center of the 156th Ave SE/Enclave south site access street intersection is 247 feet and therefore the 125 ft. intersection spacing requirement is met. Comment: The original Trafflo Impact Analysis (Exhibit B - TraRie_Impact_Analysis.pdf) states (bottom of page 2) that 156th Ave. $B is a "minor arterial". Based on the traffic volumes Renton reported as a result of the citizen recommendation to investigate the need for signaiization eadler this year (and which Roger Paulsen graphed) the road segment including this intersection should be classified as at least a minor arterial (12K Average Daily Trips) Response: 156th Ave SE is classified as a minor arterial by the City. Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride TI''ff If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince@nwtraffex.com or larry(d,)nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 3 C��/Iltbif /6� Jill Din From: Roger Paulsen <rogerapaulsen@cs.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 9:19 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: Traffic Study Comments Attachments: Traffic Study Comment Letter.pdf Jill, Please find my comment letter, attached. Because of the time sensitivity of my response, I request that you provide confirmation of receipt. Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing(d0Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsen(c,)cs.com> Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 92;32 pm Subject: RE: Traffic Study Comments Roger, The hearing examiner has indicated that any comments/questions you have should be emailed to me. I will forward your questions to the applicant and hearing examiner. Thanks, Jill From: Roger Paulsenmailto:ro era aulsen cs.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2094 9:01 AM To: Jill Ding Cc: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Traffic Study Comments Jill, I realize should have been more specific with my question. At yesterday's Appeal Hearing, the Hearing Examiner provided me an opportunity to submit comments about the two "eleventh hour" Traffic Studies by 5:00 PM Friday, June 27th, but he didn't say how those comments should be submitted. - Can my comments be submitted via e-mail, or should they be in the form of a hard copy letter? - To whom should the comments be addressed? - Is it necessary to copy others parties when the comments are submitted?? If so, what addresses should I use?? I assume I should continue to use you as my City of Renton contact person for all questions related to the Enclave at Bridle Ridge development. If that is not correct, please let me know. Thanks for any guidance you can provide!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDinq a_Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsen(a)cs.com> Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 6:45 am Subject: RE: Enclave Hearing Exhibit 1 Rohini would be your contact for traffic related questions Jill From: Roger Paulsen fmailto:rogerapaulsen&cs.comt Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 12:07 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: Enclave Hearing Exhibit 1 Jill, To whom should I address my comments on the traffic studies??? Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing(aD_Rentonwa.gov> To: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslawCo)gmail.com>; 'Justin Lagers' <justin americanclassichomes.com>; 'Roger Paulsen' <ro era aulsen cs.com>; Garmon Newsom II <GNewsom@Rentonwaagov> Sent: Tue, Jun 24, 2014 12:04 pm Subject: Enclave Hearing Exhibit 1 1 am going to be sending all the exhibits in separate emaiis as the files are so large. Jill Ding Senior Planner Community and Economic Develoment City of Renton 'ding c@rentonwa.gov June 26, 2014 Dear Mr. Examiner, Thank you for allowing me additional time to review the traffic studies performed by the City and the applicant for the Enclave At Bridle Ridge proposed plat. The studies appear to confirm that, if this signal is constructed and operational by the study horizon year (2015), the intersection at 15e Ave. SE and SE 142nd PL. will improve In level of service from a failing level to a functional level. This is important information relative to the City's approval of the plat itself, as it is clear that appropriate provision for streets cannot be made for this plat, pursuant to RCW 58.17, absent an installed and functioning traffic signal at this location. Neither of these studies oonfirm nor guarantee that the signal's oonshKton is certain, lot *Kone likely. to fact, teased on the City's current prior�n of the signal in V*W 2014-2019 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program, the signal won't be installed for approxir mtely 18 years. Therefore these studies confirm this plat cannot be constructed as proposed, without contributing traffic to the failing intersection for which the City has identified the need for project specific mitigation. To approve the proposed plat based on the record is clearly not in the public interest. With respect to the applicability of these new traffic studies to my appeal of the Environmental Determination, I have confirmed that both were completed AFTER the date that the City issued k's most recent Environmental Determination for this project (May 1 e). My appeal is of that Environmental Determination, and the information that was part of the record as of that date. For this reason, these traffic studies are not relevant with respect to my appeal of the Environmental Determination and I ask that you take this fact into consideration as you consider my appeal based upon the record. Sincerely, R a 6617 SE St' PL Renton, WA 48059 From: Roger Paulsen <rogerapaulsen@cs.com> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 10:40 AM To: Jill Ding Cc: Bonnie Walton; Chip Vincent; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Request for Reconsideration Explanation Jill, Thanks forgetting back to mel l 1 do disagree with the City's interpretation because I believe it deprives the pubic of their rights under the law. I will pursue this with City Administration and the City Council once the Bridle Ridge plat approval process has been completed. Thanks again!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing @Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsen@cs.com> Cc: Bonnie Walton <Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov>; Chip Vincent <CVincent@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Fri, Jun 27, 2014 8:15 am Subject: FW: Request for Reconsideration Explanation Roger, I have been asked to provide a response to your request for an explanation regarding why your second request for reconsideration was denied. Requests for reconsideration are governed under RMC 4-8-11017.2: 2. Optional Request for Reconsideration: a. When a reconsideration request has been submitted, the matter shall be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the reconsideration. A new fourteen (14) calendar day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. b. In order to request reconsideration, the person or entity must have been made a party of record, or submitted written comments to City staff prior to the issuance of the determination for which the reconsideration is being requested. Under subsection a. above, it states that "A new fourteen (14) calendar day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration." We have interpreted this sentence to mean that once a decision on the reconsideration has been issued, the next step is an appeal and no further reconsiderations are considered. I hope this answers your question Thank you, Jill From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:11 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: FW: Request for Reconsideration Explanation IM Can you please respond to Mr. Paulsen. Thank you, Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Chip Vincent Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 10:52 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: Request for Reconsideration Explanation Vanessa, could you please handle the following. Thanks, Chip From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 8:20 PM To: Chip Vincent; Jennifer T. Henning Cc: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: Request for Reconsideration Explanation Chip, Can you or one of your staff please respond to Mr. Paulsen on this issue? Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk From: Roger Paulsen maiito:ro era aulsen cs.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 5:36 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: Request for Reconsideration Explanation Ms_ Walton, At your suggestion, I requested from Mr. Vincent an explanation for the denial of my June 5th Request for Reconsideration. It has been over a week since I made that request (see below), and I haven't received a reply. That seems a reasonable amount of time. Please advise on the best way to proceed to get the requested information. I'd prefer not to escalate my request, but will if necessary. Thanks?II Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Roger Paulsen <rogerapaulsen(c),cs.com> To: cvincent <cvincent(a.rentonwa.gov> Cc: bwalton <bwalton(-rentonwa.gov> Sent: Tue, Jun 17, 2014 7:01 am Subject: Re: Appeal Mr. Vincent, Please see my question below to Ms. Walton, and her reply, suggesting that I forward my question to you for clarification. The only reference to a Request for Reconsideration that I am aware of is in code section 4-8-110, which is titled "Appeals". Therefore, I assume a Request for Reconsideration is a form of appeal. Is that a correct interpretation?? If so, it appears my June 5th Request for Reconsideration met the requirements of the ERC letter dated May19th, which leads to my original question: What is it that disqualified my Request for Reconsideration? Thanks for any clarification you can provide. Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Bonnie Walton <Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsen(a)_cs.com> Sent: Mon, Jun 16, 2014 2:01 pm Subject: RE: Appeal Mr. Paulsen, I see that the response to the request for reconsideration issued by Gregg Zimmerman did not state the option for filing of a second request for reconsideration, but it did allow for an appeal process. So that is why the appeal is being processed next. I am not an expert on state law or land use, but it seems to me that doing this fairly preserved your right to be heard and your viewpoints to be considered, but it also preserved the rights of the applicant to receive timely processing of the land use application submittal. The better person to contact for this clarification really would be Chip Vincent, CED Administrator, however. His phone number is 425-430-6588, and his email is cvincent rentonwa. ov. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 From: Roger Paulsen jmailto:rogerapaulsen(cDcs.comj Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 6:31 AM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: Re: Appeal Bonnie, Welcome backll I also was away much of the week, but did have a chance to review the copy of code section 4-8-10 that came in the mail. I'm curious what in that code section disqualified my Request for Reconsideration?? From my perspective, the ERC modified their determination, and it was that modification that created a nexus to the proposed installation of a problematic stop light. That appears to qualify as "any administrative decision made", Thanks for any clarification you can providell Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Bonnie Walton <Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov> To: Roger Paulsen (rogerapaulsenCc_cs.com) <roger@paulsen65Dcs.com> Cc: Jill Ding <JDin9(QRentonwa.goov> Sent: Sun, Jun 8, 2014 5:16 pm Subject: Appeal Mr. Paulsen: I'm going to be out this week, but you can look for the attached to come in your mailbox. As you can see, no Request for Reconsideration process is available at this point. Instead, we will be proceeding with the appeal process. The appeal hearing notice will be coming to you by separate letter this week from my office. The appeal hearing will be held on June 24;h which is when the plat hearing also will be heard by the Hearing Examiner. I'll be out of the office this week, but if you have questions, feel free to contact Jill Ding or my main office number and someone will be able to help. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425430-8510