The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport 1~ ~1"=100' , 168 ~ -~~ STORM POND \ NEIGHBORH M0L,\$SES~ CON0°0MIN1utJ1S .,,... y t"~""' I SITE :~._i> ..... <, ... ~ ."ft" t. \ i f:c.._ /' ... N., .... 6' 18215 72NDAVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND Pl.ANNING, SURVEYING, l.ANQSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SOU~CE' KlHG coumv ASSES~ W.PS MARCH 2:1. 201, 3215 n~c MU,UE s,:LJIH SENT, WA )SO).' ("'''""'"""""'""'°"'-'"=•c.,...-.,,.,_<!PV>C>S c-,~..:L.:h:! CEDAR AVER UJHTFOOT, LLC AIO LeH:IN NVEST\ENTS, NC:. - I / I // ! I CO'IERstEET OF BLLIOTT FARMS 15734 2 L ' J L_ ---------------------JI"'--_ ---- -, _, i -f ....:.-..1_ J ' -0 ra215 72SD •vErauE SC'IJI~ SlN', ~/. 9~C.l? (~25)201-61:'1 1•20.12i1-Pe2 r•, / CML (HClNCfFI""' C...C ,.,_,._.,_ -~.[>f>-"'<SIJl'«.IO.O.-',l.J.11.!:; ,> ' ' , ( CB)AR FIVER LIGHlFOOT, LLC All) L...eN:lN tlYES'l'I.ENTS, NC. •f'J'''' - t ! i , ,,ii I• I CS' IU,UOTT FARMS ., ;t (.:j ""D J i _ _7_ i 5'.'I', '2ND AVENUE c;ou1H K(NT, WA ;aocc (<15)25' -6212 1i2o1::,---a7a: '"' ' ' ' ' ' ,r-- CEDAR RIVER uc»fJFOOT. LLC ""' LeN:>N M'ESTIENTS. NC. , ~-,,.,. ., ~ ' .,,,_,, ., ~ ~-,,,,, . ., ~ ' ' i i/' ! ' I I '"""' .... ,~ ,.-.,; "'"' "'"' """''""""-"""''""' --- OF EU/OTT FMIJIS -.. ----, ..L .---, ~i '• ' •I' I ~; :ij:; !1 ,, I -,~-· m .. 9 I· <) ;, ) \' • • • i-"' ,,-,,- I '" ,,, l! ,. , i! I, '" --=-' I i i "' ,,. )-... '" -'""""" *.le.,~~--, i ~-----;trr,-·-)t;;," • • • • '--'" . "' !~/15 ,:~O •VE>,J£ SO·"'l-< >-C~T. ~• ~~U3i (4!5)C51 -0222 (•1~J151-a782 rM • C""-(>a<£.<"""'~"""- SU..,...,,..,_l.........,.....TAL,E""1C(5"''•= -01, .. I • • • , ... \.~1,,,:,.,1 .... .......,.,,.,,,._,,._ ,., •. ~ ...... .-,,,,o,,,_,. .. '""''·-· ...-..c-s ,.., ---- • • • • I !I / ra r I' ' 1--'-"'_' ,J11;•' ' ' ' ' , ' II • '" ' , , I • -;~,:nr , I --~a- I • ; ~ -~ '! CEDAR RIVER LJGiTFOQT, LLC NO LetK:lN NVESTI.ENTS, NC. ,.--- I• / -!~-~--,,r- ~~t I ~u ' . • • ~ ,. -,// 11 !! l!l \ I ' I· '" • • ll I • ii',({-'-·· !.~ ,/ "'""""'"'"-... " L_; .,;:------/ ,; !I / w,, .. .., ... ,. ...... ,, ~ ' ,,..,,,.._, I ,! '' !· '· ' I • • • I -PFEI..J,9Wff ON STE AOAO PLAN AN> f'ROFLE OF EU.IOTT FARMS I,--' i ;~· I .. I 1-·"- I • • • • i • ' • - • a a 11--·----, II 't -----.. ...,. :; II If------- II ii CEDAR RIVER L.ICl-fTFOOT, LLC ,..., Le.tlON tNESThENTS, NC. no, f'f£LIANARY SFl-169 ROAD PLAN OF BLUOTT l'ARMS ~t! [0 ' ; ' ' ; I I"' J; " -~ --1 i !; ' r I ;,,ii I_ / ' ' I l I I I • • • 1321~ -2,D •,E,.u( sour~ k.£~'-w~ 'J6,:,J2 i•25J~C I -0.'~:C (~:'5}?Cl-a7B7 rA, :..,, ,,,.,,,cu·..__ '-"lll """""". SUl",lcYM; (--"'"'-'lF,IC,S -dli.'.1> • ' • • ' i I• CB)AR Fl'w'ER L...IGHTFOOT, L.l..C AllD Le.NON M'ESTMENTS. NC. / I I - H.· .1· ; ~ "'--ii\-z . .JI '" ·; OF EILIOTT FARMS i I ' • I i I c',/ i I l ' ' , I . ' i / • • • ' • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' • -'.:.-.....£ • • ' • • • • • I l, /. I I I I ! ! / ' ----/' ·-. __ / I I I~ 'h '~~ , ~= !l~li!~~I~~~,1t!~~~i~!!t:~~~!~I~~:~J!i~!ii~!~!!~~;!(liilii!~liifi!ff!!~!!€ !~!!~~~~i!~~~!!~~~!!~~!!II~liiil!~~i~! 11 ~~~~ r ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ~~!;~~~;;.;.;;;;~:!;~!;;~~;~~;;;;;~~~~~ i ffl 11 ii::i:::11:!/!!;l!!!l!!l;/ll!!;!!l!!!l!!!!!!:!!!!!!l!!!!!l!ll!!!!!!!!I!!!! i!!iiiill!!!:!!!!!j!!!l!!!!!!!I!!!!!! i I i! " c1 8~ ~~5~a~a~~~5~a!s~a~~~G~~aa~5;aaa~1!~~a11~!~aa~~~~a~aaa;a~aa~~~!!as~a!!a!!as ~aaaa!~~eaaa~oaaa~~~a11~aaaa~~~!a~~aa ~ ! ,1,i~i;i~J~JCJ~. fiiii;~;~iilfii'il•Jeii~~,i~Jiiii;,ii,,if;'Jl'ii§l•j~. ~1~:l!'. ! ii~~'§J~l~~i;;••i·i~J.'i§~~~§l~~jjit~~I ! • I l I ,, 1j1l, ,,., ,.11.11 j • • ' ;•,1,1;·!· 11, ,, •11 ·111 ,.,1,,11,,,, :: l!1' ' ! i r '' n H!! I' ·111 , 1 :m·· 1, 11 : In 1m1m11 :l m! l •! ' 11 l !. ! z ~ .. "J. ~~ 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 l!lll!l!llllllll!l!!!ll!llll!ll!lllll CEDAR RIVER UCl-f'TFOOT. LLC AJO LeN:lN tNESTMENTS, NC. OF ELLIOTT FARMS _J_ ' 1~~--"" ' ' ' ' 18:il5 71ND A\l!';NU( SOUTH 1-~ ~ENT. Vf~ 990J2 ,._ --- (42S)251-6222 (4:i~)251 -8782 F.1,.j -......._ -O,,.~l.WJf'I..W,lt,C, ..,. Su!M'!'H'l,°""'"'""[l(]J,LSOMe(';-~ ' ' ' ' : "' ~ ./ I ERXTON HO.ES, LLC 14410 BELL-FED ROAD, SUTE 200 BB..LEVlE, WA 98007 CCNTACT: KRIS'TEN LI.NXJUST ii? "' > c ! f "' 1m I § ~ ~ "' " 1 "' l 11 ~ ~i i = ~ I ~ ! r,j 8 l" I ~ ' I I ' ,' I EUJOTT FARMS D~D I fill a l•e O o~;_; i . C . . . 00 A f 11 I lll!!lj 111111 · 1un; iH!U I 11; r1!111 ip n1 ' ;u ir I 't §~ ~ 'h~ ! I Ii ~r I i Hp,i i I !!: I h! i ' ffl t O i l!,!lli hd 11 11h1 hl,11 d~ dl1i!l iU· 1H ; Iii ; ; I , 11u 111 11111 lilU U UI ~11 1'u~ 1 u i 111 !u 11 1 i I ,1,1 I 11 n i e I i 11 < ! ; 111 • ! I ! . I I ffl 111 ~ i i I I r ! ; i I i I I • < • iHiHi iUiii ~i ~i ;U ~-i ___ .. 'i-. r ' • m ~::; a:!i :!; 1nq ~ ' I I " I ' HR!!~ ! UEU nun EU E HU H•i• EU • -. H -!iHliii ii!iiliii ... ' !!e, IH .l tll I ;I '""'' ' 1n11 HUI! !I! i ···· UUi IHUH ii ,,,,, HH!e '"' ' ii!! ,., ~ hi 11 I~ • I ~~!H UUH ~H ! cldda ui i • I ~ 1 • ;g~;g ~ J uu .. e i~~~~~ i ffl ~gi,:~~ g!::i=: l - > 1s21~ 12ND .o:.'!:mJf saum _ _..._ ..,.. KEtlf. VIA 98032 ,._ __,._ --' EflXTON HOMES. LLC (~2S)2Si -6222 I 1~20)2~1-8182 f.O.:,: ,,,_---"'-IIS ----0\0.-.L.INI)......,.,..,;, "'' """°""'· tfm""'""<Nt1<. s£JW<:[<; -.ulu:J i 144IO 88..l.-FED ROAD, SUTE 200 EEl...l.EVUE, WA 98007 CONTACT• KRISTEN LUtfJQUST -f'LANTWG SClfillll OF ELUOTT FARMS l ! £l£VATI()N NOTES r_-- -'PC-.».• i' 1 \ -, .••• ~'''c:'!t, ·-· I _,,,.. / I :1~ L!\ ;>,* e ".".·~, C. ~ CC--··::_ ~ 1 .-: ~~~i~fJk ... 1;:·:~:;;;i.;~-1~ 1 ' •• ________ "::----, , I_ -, _, . ._._. ~~-·,_·.;,,co ·s_:;_, ;~~;-::~~~~R~ ~ ,,~·-c:~"""'''~"" ""'~ ~"'''"~~-ll DU[j'EL!l\f{)!'Tl) _, il -, -·~";....... "" -· .,, -·=·=· --'""":s_. --, ' ----I AA# ' 'i'°:~--:;; c;;.,,, ' --~' ' ~ ' ' -cc ---Ql:U.=--e/.&, ' ~;-"'' ~'''""'~"" rc,~:::E::::,,,,,""' I -·--~ :i'o;rtAJ10N - ·----...... ·-· .""'"" llf!!i.li!L, ., -. ~--... ···~. --'"' ~ ..... "' '6' '··" ./. --~ 1 ~';;~'"'-, .. ---~ ,r , +~ y :~fii: ~'F~ -. ·c,----.... I 11 c,,,~tt;?:i~ I -'--~J ;.< ' / ,' ' ---1---,--~-~-~-=--=fi,, BUil.DiNG A ROOF~Ol'T 2) .~ -- UNITTYPF r., =:t ~- 1--· I ~ I I, . J· .,._,.~ /?' ·f" ~ ~~ '. ~ ';~~---~~~-,,~-&-"-+--' • ,J,:~' ~ - -~·-·~-- ·-' --_:; t(:i; ~· t:~ir nn-1, ~-- / :· "· Q/>.~ i ll~'ITwr,1, ~!1/,S,,C ~ ! -ti 12)-~ff~A~0_v, . .L£C£NP ______ _ r?", 8()/f[)JNC 11' {/£VAl10N OP/ 2 ROO[ P/AN \.:!,_J ~--(_,:ff 3/.JL ' [' --,~ 8{140/NC ;.i' SfCCWD OM 8/JI/DJNC PJAN a01s Jg 42) Ifs" 8/JILOINC '.4 'RR'i! izOOR Bl/Ito/NC P(AN a ors Jg 42} \V 'X4/F· !/8 -! {}' \;::) SOff ,.11' · !' 0 VN!TTYPl'.!o LOT>'I -~~~ Ell'.ILDlNG A~ EAST ELEVATION OPT. 1 JSf~¥.~1~6~~-,1}~fA~Tliw OPTION-/ (!_Or -,iii-4zJ ,. ~ ~· l.'°"ITTYl'Elo t.OT•O filll!PING A-WESTELEVATrON OPT. 2 -8f!!Udttc.. A-, n(vATION f2E.l10N ZfliJ..!S.....,Jj &: 40) ' ---------. --·-_---------------.!i,-~IJ .. J,".,;.~-------------------- ffi-_ I ~-~! ' .. 1.;. j . i:: IDi!T TYPF.1, IJNITTYPF. I, lJNIT ITPfi I• LOT4l LOT 41 LOT 41 BUILOrNG A -SOUTH ELEVATIONS OPT. I BUILDING A -WEST ELEVATIONS OrT. ---·---~~~-----~~-~~----~--- -j----_:_:_.._ -----------~===-------------c:i --________ ..,·-~~., ... .,,..,~ "" IJ'<ITTYPr.r.. lJNITn"PE I.I LITT40 LOT .1' BU[LOING A -SOUTif ELEVATIQ_!:'{S OPT. 2 J ___ ---- .!f_~~-::..,1...:. : : I, ~"· '"" -'~~,ti ca-;:-,;-. ~;: ~ '4"'~ ~. llNITnl'i"I• ~~7'1f/:l-1TTYl'Ela ~.c--UNITITP~I• -~~~-1:_, Ll>l .l~ ,/' l,ITT l~ lOT-IO ~ .. ,·;;--..,_-o>< D'< BUILDlNG A. EAST ELEVATIONS OPT. 2 BUIWING A · ALLEY NORTH ELEVATIONS OPT 2 ~, ~;----=--~~{]~"~--:::J II , .. ,,..,,p,,e,>lk '"··· ~i.,,., W...hin.,Loo "80lt! <>0&<<.L<4'!-Fn&<<.111:1, .,,-,.~ ... u,.._,....., '"""''"'-·-·-· ~:Y~~ 0 u,\ 11\.i' ::ens :--1' i:i:::" ,) :;,~ <[ 2 'r.i!5 ~~t§~i 0~ -,;l!:,-1/< 3 ~ ~11;~~ ~ t&:j~Q-1!:~1~~ i ·I li ;; .. -.. " C. C:,. -2 I- m ~ > C .!' 2 w ., • C .... ;, a: Z OI -c C,- .J :51 5·5 a, a, .... ~:.'."':!_ ~---~ ····---==-------- ® ,~-,i ';;;;:,~:;';,' • .• ,. • ·c~ ~c-., i•-• 1 ~·~"'''"'" ,a.,,_,,.,. ""'"""~'· --~~ ;,c·~- '"'"'c":")~';.~.,;; ;'.;:..'-~~~ ~ •• )l'C~~~ '"-'"'!'' S'C>'u -::.x:,:£z.~· :": .. '"~"'°'·"'-OOC '""''-"-'° •c~ ,.,, ···~_.,.,, ..... e-_c,; """·"'=·c"' ;;;',: -:;;o;,.~-1~-;;-,: l'C~ ~~~M~'"~ ,,.,,,o_ ,c -' 0 .,u=-.,..,, "°~ ,,,, ·::.:·~·;:;:;;: ;!~-,~~~ ... T-':•i:~,;a..;~~~~--!_; ;,:e, .,, ___ .,....,.-~ s-,,.c. 'C'<•'' =-"" ~"aLCE~ "'"'" "' '"~ ..,,.. ~q..:p ·~ iCT?f, :~~, fi~i1;f:c• -, .. _, .. ...:,,.~• "'""" ,,~ ,,,,. ~-. """'"'""'-•• .,, , o,o ><0~1.<C>,OAL ..,.,~ ~' 0 ,.~,.......,. ""'"""'''Y,0, •:JD~~-:~'~~,-:;:~, '"'''"' "'"-"<>• ~ ... ,,.A.,'-' "./,,E .:,;~ •; 'E: .;~;:;1 .,..,;,,.,.,.,,.,.....,,,.,__ I _--_=----:::J i I ' \: ·-r-----' . ' ' ' ''"'-· ') . -~~'# I 1f i I, ± lr=:;;-;t " ... ~_..,._;,.,,.-,,..~,. -_jl c,-~~:,aa_..:~iv~--;:~------1 11 ~ ~ -----------j ; _J_ I ROOF Pl.Al" (ELEV OPT I) ,.,~. '°""""°"'"'-,... \V ~Yc•c<~Yc'c'_-_'~'--------- ~\. filJ;;},' rB;J~~c-i;• ELFVAO(W ll"T 2 R@:P!AN E'..:.i_.·~~~-:: ~;';'(..~";:-'~··· ' --L':. "~* ,,,~ '=~"'""'F=='==' ' ~-.' ·;, '9•·-~· ., _1&~·-~1 ,. ::~i~~~~~it·. •;_(·--= ---'~1'./ , ,:-tr:·:";;~::;:::.,~:-I /"' f 1 "'" ~n -1 _ 1J;;,) 1.,11 t-Y''"" ~~ ~?~iff~~t·· /' / --~~~•~n:0}4:1:::; ~-t-=11 _..;,. ,,t,../' .,: ... v ~-: l ...~--:..·~. H "',;~: .,~;::_'.,;:;,: .. ~. . ~~ ~ -~~[~~~~!!:[Cf~~--------1c~~/~~:~j/~ff:1~ OPT 2 RoiP/AN--~--10~~~,~~,i::x~~0'D __ ~~C PLAN 001S: 1:.1) I l ~@_~l({?f/~~11 ~· ~11!{.T oom BU1t.D1NC 8'.AN a ors 1-11 UNITITl'l:10 ---·-----LOT1 ---------• -----umr~:f?[b ----l ---,.,,,1r~~n, --------------UNIT!..()~)· --------- BUlLDlNG 8-EAST ELEVATfON OP'T. I BUILDING B-NORTH ELEVATIONS OPT. l BUILDING 8-WEST ELEVATIONS OPT. ?, sai_O;_!j( ~'8-; ~iiOiiOPrioii i (i.015 -iJ(?7 .=J ,.,·.,,c •.8 ____ ' ·• ___ .... --------- ·3 ----- . . . -·-;;=-~1 , r i~f~~~~FJJ9L 'J". ,,H ~-,.._-_ ,i" I ---/ °"'' ""'" ... ' ,.----con I · · o!'!".--,..-_ .... ~ ,..,. ·I -~f::~i.'. ·. .. ;§~I~.l!Nson,j~--~ -. ---__ li~~~P, -~ ~L -~c~;,,.~fc~~-.-~~:::__---: ~~ -~~~F-~-~-=~--~---_' __ BUJLDING B -NORTH ELEVATIONS OPT. 2 ~_!,JILDING ~ -WEST ELEVATIONS .9..!''.L_2_ l'1''JTWPil~ ---------L<J1• -------- BUILDING 8-EAST ELEVATION OPT, 2 j)_ f!F{(_f!f~{ ti' iJ ~VAfldi(QPiiiii?if Q[5_j_ 4-.i) II ,.,..,..,._, ....... !ll,.1 -,,w.,,i,,.1onaaci011 <:l:,.~41L«l-1ulMUll!I """'11< ... ,., .. _ .......... ,. ....... -. »:: .. '')'~::':'."' ----- D C '1': en\ s f,;i'! ;,, ::i: ~ 2 :~~ ~~ i !?~~ ""' '7c :;; ,~ & t -~.J e-< -,, .... ,,. "i1·-§~~I<!~~ rJ~ s, il~;~g ~ G si I' i t :;; .. -.. " C. C >, ,2 ,--a:I :!:: > C ~; {II .. "ii: z O> Q.5 -'" 5~ ~_JQ_ ··~_··ce.1 .,.,...=:.__ ~, @ Ei..EYATIOfl NOTES l•'.,J'. :,;;t:.',;:":':,'."::'i't:_":~· (.---------~•.:A.•-.C-'"D"' .. -. '"~"E-'C~OO.,,..~• -~-• !s:>S •· ~-~·~ ..<0<.'0 ·~a, • S·-• !~:¥:Ji£;~~:i_J/' : ~f,7.~i~~~ -c"'c, •·-,,,;;; "''..,'""""' ._..,. ,.-, .,_,,. ·;~eCG"'.-'-" ,• ~-~"""' :,.,ec<..e' ,,, .. eo,,_, ' ,,-_.-);z:~g{tt11;:E~• rs:e~~;;1~1;Jf.~" :,R,/.CO "-~~~ .c:i_T~ •J -'~, 4~ r ij¥1Iit_ ·--! '·"" '•A==-~c,· ~·vf!Le:0 O,~,>,;> --3 "'""'"'"""' ""~ •• ,~ '1\t,: '1>~~--:~~·~~~.~- -~-:";'.,,:'.:;;~~c .,';;~-~.~ "'"'-· "'-" -,,. 5"'CC0>. """""' ~,;,-.,-.. ,.. ,,._,.~, .. '~ i':'.. ~-~~_..,., .• c,,, ~~"'" -- ,,-• '°"· P' ~·~ •CsT ~ .. a• JOO'• '~.:;~:::"'C-CC ••C~~• ~-.,. .,.., ,.. ,~..-.,=, cc •• -,..··"""""'"' '"" ::<.•,cc cAe<c • ,~ "' ''"""' _,, .. _-~,c~ """ e>-«" .. • ~, .,,. PC,,' C, ,, l>C ,,:,. ccc~"!" "-"""'.><O PF<ON C"C -~ :c:t ..;."".!,"~ ;.':',\."~""" """ ~~ 'ti?f =~:: :~. ,,,~--''"""''a-..• 0.~D ,c C"A e C'>'::~ • -·~--.co~· ~-- · ~1~1~;~~E71~!f· ~-,_""f, ~-·,~-"'"'""' .. -~,., '"'-"'~ ,,~_, ~·~ ,C["vC>,<•O I" ~- I -__ , UCB:_·"·····:, j ~,n=" '_ii LCJl'4! If ,, J ·· ~-lO ~_:_ __ . --~- UNrTTYP~l!I, ,m• . ----------r 4 I : ' i~J 'i ~ : i l'NITTYP£!o j LO"Hl .-.~ ---~:~--~1: 6 1_FL["il~ Tl{)/t/__(ECENO } ,,,,u ' ' .-,._., -----__ ;0·1k{f!~q;.~· ;iffGWO fZC<JR Bf.llLO/NC PIAN aor> 4.1 # «: 45) ----- UNIT TYPE!, =" BU11DING C -WEST ELEVATION ...... _ ,._,,. • "' .,.,,, __ -,-J -• , 'o..;_ t; •• -/i'.'-=;l •, -::-( -~ ',fi ~ ..... L. ••• t' ~ $~ i' ~T~.T j'1 ::&.el ~ , :;1:b_ , -.--___ --~-, ~-r if:'h. ·,, .""":: en ----·--" , I -'I , J , , -' , : '-' I -. 12, I I l I I / I I ·"'1 ~-1,_, .. •. "' :-~~l~,-" j J 'ill;,,;,=____:._ ~l<IITYPCII ,m• ':'1- ' : 9 l;NIT TYl'E lo ,,,-r ·__:_:____] _ ~§ 1.ar,1 6 .,..... ··~· ,-•o, ' ' (E)~f~~e \' f/~l-1=__,~_ BU!(O/Nc))T;iii/1._o_is_4.1_-_-_,_,-__ "_"_I __________ • IINITTYPF.I, l<JT,< I I l 'N!T TYPF. Ill, UJT-1< BUILDING C-SOUTI( ELEVATIONS UNrTTY'-1,1, WT!l "5'f}f'fjj ) ~,,,,c 1 ------------------------,-------------------------------~~"-':,P~~ ---;:=------f--=--------::::::- a "' • ---= \,j -,:_f------:r-:tj-m -· -! I --· -I ,, 1-<l ' '':{'~ I "1 :;--lJ---+,-j .::..:_~ Cl --I, \_:::.-::_ t ! 1: Bl/!LD!NG C }::_-±~~ ROOFPLAN 4] 8.VP!!N(?' ~-'.fl/VA 1/_{)N__f?flilf. f_'fA(y' \ ' ----+-f," I rl ,k· , I l I l.-= =-·=-=--=-i !JNITTYPF.I, Ll>HC BUJLDING C -EAST ELEVATIONS ar111o;N1 f'ffiv.411& aorz "I ii& 45; o~A.i '//!' I-.~ ~ " = " / "'!= cv-~ ~\:~ ~-II -...... ----··---.... . .ai 11il ... .. .... ii -~ll 1 Jl-:cll ·-.! ·-~ '. -t ..... m ·~ I BU(LDING C · ALLEY NORTH ELEVATIONS t?,.~.-~. ~/~,S~1 =~-~ ~~~-------, II LIOli:lelbP"""H!Sl,.I E.ii.rt,W .. bia11oo- -•.1m-1 .. 1M.lll!1 .. ,~."' .... ,.._ """""""*"''""·"'-· -·-.:."1:: .. ··.:>:.!'::"..:.7:' 0 Cl.I~ ';£ i ;", :?i E--~ £ .... ' . o:i:.,- :3L~ ...:l Cl< ~·'? .. ., ~ C: Q. 0:,, " ... ~ :!:: ~ C: w3 -.. 0 C: ... 'o ill .. '.11·1ii :::; ~ I ~;e-~ I C l•I ' "'11 :ii; ,I '_ !11·:, ,:,:; R1 2-p <!) a: ~ g, C ·--. =' ::2 .!! ::::, 'Si =:. mm.!! ..::<'•:""~ ,. __ "':'.'<-__ _ ,,.,,,.,. @ iEt!::VAflON A_ ~ i~~---,_,-~}'~~-- -. -' -----,-"-' ,--_· ~- ~ ~1,-:~ ----~"'-~--// _J _/>-~-- i ______ ~'.;:..._ ... --. . ,.. ·._ ,, '~ -""j'~c,--=os,,c_c,cc~-,.,•': --/;' _---, - 1 'iii i 1===~ 1 I'· · Ii , ~1 r 1===~1 r r==a· · ·· 11~///I'-·'· -----------I i ---------I ______ :/,~I ~ ''-,---, __ ,,,,_,-_,,_----_-ccc, -----,- 11 ----~--------,·-=cc,-·---=---,----,,, ... __ ~1i: l -1 __ ,·•--1i6~1 1 ;.,-i_!_I~ !-·i s~R~ s~~ , !_! ---, ~-~~ -~~~ -: --1 Ji __ -,--il ~--1 !!_,----.. 1-_1 i I ; I! I ii . !i ll : :j - I -" I ,, ; -'I ' -, _ __ ! I : IL' :: ] · 1, :1 ,' :I I I_! i LJi I 1 1 il L i -1.J 1__;11_ --·-i ,-,, I -----~!Jt/\::;':: . ! lj \ \S\ --0 ~ -~o iBody I: 5W 5049 Monterey fan Bod4 I: 5W 5042 Woodland ' -----~-~---OJ\ f3ody 2: 5W 5059 fobacco Body 2: 5W 6172 Hardware t: -----"' '1-" I ., ..scl; ' 1 j-ta I ~ ~ ~ i H' 1 l1lH s J ! fi "I ~ f i ~ HHl HHl -.... -! j ": ~ ~ .t ~ -,I ,-n ~j 1 ij ~ 1 ill l ! ~cc cl:~ " ! ! : l' I '' ! 1 , J, l ! n,iJ t ~-u ~ -l --' nH'j n1ii I ~1 j I < -~ 1 ~ "--' "' t: "' "---lfr1tr1 5W 6149 Relaxed Khaki frim 5W 6149 Rela~ed Khaki __ ~ ~ 1 Accent: 5W 1069 Iron Ore cent: 5W 2724 _Black Cherry fl:' ~ ~ ~ '€ ~ ·- "--' ---·-----~-------------------------·-- !flXVAflON A-OP110N 2 -------~ Body I : 5W 6102 P ort:abello Body I : 5W 6105 fea Chest ------ Bodq 2: 5W 606B BrevtOj Brown ody ?J.W 2821 ColCllial Revival 5lon.e lfrim 5W 2B29 Classical White rim 5W 2B29 Cla55ical White ii ,jA:cent: 5W 10SS fndurinci Brmze Vlccent: 5W 6069 French Roast -· \S\ ti \;'::' ' ~o "' ____ 11~ ~ ''S -,:,_ '-'--' ~ ' ' ' ' .J~.! i ? !li I 11, , I ~ i H.1 ~ [ J -• l ,''l' ' '1 p-11, I • 1-~ "i i11 H lJ!~l -f ".i j ! di'' i .,,, ,i,P qi~ 1 ! ! i' .11.! !:/1~ ' ' ',, l H"] j'jil ! ,,i, ... i ~ ~ ~ I 1 l ; 1 -t J I dil i 1 ;-11 11~· '' l' ,q j N z G 'I== "-G ' < Es ~ -"" '-'--' "' E ~Ii ~~ < - ,:,_ '-'--' EllVAflON B I I I \S\ .. 0 ~ 's' "' 0 ,;~li ~ ... (1 ?J~l ! !1 H ~ ~ h;·~ ~-~~~~ 1-i1,1 t "--ll 1 ' ~ l ,, ~ ~ ] I-,. 41 1~ f,q ,1,H ~ i~-}. Pi.,~ HHl 11] i ! t1~~1--i11. "' ' ', ' i I!.' ql !I t -1 ' ;t{1 l ~ i; 1,.' ~ J ~ ~ {-.;_ ·'i .tn. fr i j .!"1b Ii'> 11 ~ j !Body I: 5W 6089 Cirrunded ody I: 5W 5025 flai5@e I ~ "' "' Body 2: 5W 1052 Warm 5Ul'le Bady 2: 5W 7032 Urban Putty t t -----' I\) {'i5 f rll'll 5W 7 Q~QJ?lack f_r,K~ frim: 5W 7 020 Black f OK I~ ~ l:E ~ i 1 t _cent: 5W 60t\B ferra Brun Accent: 5W 1062 Rock BoUan __ _ : s,: ~ ~ ~ ----~~· --·---------- ~--·------- rlrVA-nON D-OPflON 2 i : )l~ ~ 1 ~ J: 1 ~ ~-d "' 0 ~ - 2§ 0 'l' l j l : l 1 t [t: lil{J lf~ji H 1 f] lp~l 1,1H . '"" ,: ";: .< j ~ t t ~ _., j 'i ~ i ( 1 j,d ! .,.i H'j ;,, i • . "'] l !1111 Lpq h¥]j rq;a ·dil 1 1 ~ :t1 J! ~l~ i .q ] N z C) s;:: 6 ' (0. ts ---1 ~ IDady I: SW 6175 Cocoon Dody I: SW7009 fik1 Hut I ~ I . --. 1 "' 1Body 2: SW 2070 Dackpack fan Dody 2: SW 7040 SmokehOJse , ~ ~ ! ·---(\S ~ llrim: SW 7041 Van tlyke l3rcwn 'rim: SW 7041 Var tlyke Drcwn ~ '; ± '; < is \--c is Accent: SW :2_167 Canyon Wall Accent: SW 2858 Poli5ned Mahociary _3:' ~ ;';:: ~ I . rL.[VA110N C i . . \I\ 0 ~ . 2§ 0 ;i1~ ~Ht f ";H Hur i an·; tq1 ~ t~1!1 i~l d 111n ! ,~H ·1;H !n,' .,-1' i, L ! .,.;!iH_i: h'J ii, l 1 C' 1 t d1 ~ ~ sl,dj r~rt~ ltn; . ~-,,_"" ·~t?! uH Jj tt '-.) . E i 1Bod4 I: SW 1027 River Pebble 1Bod4 I: SW 5007 Lodcie Br<Nln IBod4 I: SW 1061 Citqscape ' "' ~ i CaJ4 2 SW 5027 CJ,bw BoJ4 2 SW 7754 O,ecbmls boo, 2 0W 2848 "''"f\ PMu :_J' . ~ ~: 'jfrim 5W 7051 Canvas fan lrim 5W 7051 Canvas fan frim: 5W 7051 Canvas fan ,,:.: ':; ,:S:: ':; 1Accent: SW 16 50 Raisin Accent 5W 6006 Black Bean Accent SW 2121 Cardamom ~ ~ ~ ~ . ---------------· -~---~--- 16734 f---..-.. • .. ., ,--. L:=-= -J_' -~---·-~-\--:::'"~-fi~~--~- BAIXTON HOMES L C/0 LC 1-4410 Cil.EN MAURER BEL-RED--RO!W RRL!;V~ • SUITE 200 -= -· ··-WA A8007 ii ' OJ 0 C z C )> ::c -< po -j 0 "ti 0 G) ::c )> "ti :c (') (J) C ::c < m -< ... -.. 0.,. .... . BOUNDARY & y --1.14:":r:: NW1t4,o;o::~HIC SURVEY rw!1"' 8W114, OF THE ::: CE SEC. 22 , crn o, fll!Nf~ 23 N., ABE 5 EAST l/fl OF aEC. 22 Kitt COIMTY , W. M • 8TATi OF WA8lllll'GTOH ---~~\ IS215 72ND ~'IO<UE SOUTH ---1573,4 ~Etlf. WA gaoJ2 -~ (~2S)251-6222 ,•.,or -(~i5)?51-~7B? FAX --\..,, .,/ CM. D«aHWO..-., cH<O "<NWl',G --- ? ? ......... ~ ... ~~ SIJIM'l'INC,,-!MS(a,,ci; -- ·~ SRIXTON HOMES ll.C C/0 GLEN MAURER 14410 BEL-REDo.FIOAD, SUITE 200 BELLEVUE. WA AB007 I I t 1 --. -. -- ) Tltlit: BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CD 0 C z Cl )> :Il -< QO --t 0 "ti 0 Ci) :Il )> "ti :::c C) en C :Il < m -< -- i PTN OF THE NW1i'4, OF '1HE 8E1/4 OF SEC. 22, i AND PTN Of THE IW114, OF THE NEt/R OF &EC. 22, I TWP. 23 N., RGE 6 EAST, W. M . CITY Of' RENTON Ql8 OOUIITY HATE OF W.t.SHIN8TOH I CIVIL [NGIN[CRING. LAND "I ,-\Nr~IN8 SURVEYl\.8 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: Clark Close City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Elliott Farms Quantihl Date 1 copy PMT Reductions -all sheets 4 copies 06117116 Updated Landscape Plans 1 copy 06117/16 Updated Color Landscape Plan For your use. CITY OF RENTON Ri=r'c,, ,r::n JU~! i 2 >~16 DATE: SENT VIA: PHONE NO.: OUR JOB: Descriotion Signed: June 22, 2016 Courier Delivery 15734 Ivana Halvorsen Senior Planner 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA 157341.0Q 3 _doc www.barghausen.com ~ ' 1":100' '60 ·"~ STORM POND \\ MOL.tSSES CRE CONDt,MINlU,JVIS NEIGHBORH MoL,~,SSEs Cl'/'fot;'( co"'Do SITE (lol<A.1, .,.<t-~· •1- ~( I'." ~ \ f . •. <~, .................... . 18215 72NDAVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING. LAND PLANNING SURVEYlm. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SOURCE: l(ING COUNTY ASSESSOR MAPS M.-.RCM 25. 2015 '"' '::J;j ~ni !i!! ~?~~ ;'!C15 :'2t<C Av(f.~~ $(:IJTH KENT. WA 980)'. l.•251:~1-b~:''. \4:~li51-87ai rA, ~u$ ~1:;' ' l CMI.E=-,cmoo-._.-; Sc,OV[Yt.0,E"'""""""1J.cSE"""(S,_~ 111~ vu ! ' ! .•. l ! 'I ! TJ §i~~ ~-~fS "ni ;,;~ '''! ¥i~l ~fi ,!: ~,Ji i--i -~~, I l ., ij l , .. ' ' ' !!""' !,l!p! • : l ! l!'· i· I · l i ' ~: ~ ~ ~ i-i; ' ~ ~ ,~~~~~ _J, !~t ,~ --~ ,, ,.~ ' "'j'I'"!'' 1;, ldli 11 ,q,,,•n•'; ~i-.~~§~~f~~~ ~{;j]J~i;~! "r . . . ' . ~i I .11 ~ s ~ t ~ ? § :: 5~i ~=ll~~~:~! i:·· "'·1 ,u l ! . ' l ! ''"""'.., ' '""''.., ~+::·,: -CEOAA RIVER U3HTFOOT, L.LC AIO L..eH:IN tNES'TMENTS, NC. .. ;~ "00 ; • I r • I ~ OF ELUOTT FARMS 'y / 'l I I > ---------------------_ _/.........____ ---~ ~J I----- ' '• • . , I ------L--~--~--~-~-= 02'5 ,;N) >V[>,U[ S•JijTh ,-,...,----"'-- Sl"NT, WA l!IOJ;' o.------"'. (<251~~·-sc:; (<:s125·-e,~2 r>x CMl'""'""~.u,,0"1,,_; \lJll'~t<; -"'"-'ll~.-:,~ "'"'~ I I I I , / J ' i CEDAR FIVEA UOiTFOOT, LLC Afl) l£NoK)N MESThENTS, NC. I I I. I , /. / f------ 1 - : ,. ~ ,1-, ' .. s j i,4 I // '/' i• ,/ / OF ELUOTT FARMS I , LlD / )F,,\ ' J I I ' ' 1-----, ' ' ) I ' I I I I ! i' ,/ j I .,;-,-,c-· ',j,··.;,-t',--·-·-· I ' / //1 /' i I I /, ceDAR FIVER LDiTFOOT, LLC ANO L..eN:lN NVEBTIJENTS, NC. I ! ! I / / I I ! --' I ~ :; ~--{~-z ~ -~ '" ' OF BU/OTT FARMS ~; 41f. _J ,, i! 1,-, --: ' ., 1: I i ' 1' :.'/ I ,,, --·-wz-· ' "'' 8 I '"' ' i • • • ( ~I !, ,, !· ' i ' j • • • s I <W<~C• P-1 ,.., w:,. ,,, """'''"""'"""'' ,1--,-« .. «····" s • I • • '. ~ ~ ' N "----**--! 1, :';- "' ,--=- I 2 • ,a,,, :i~o A>'E~u£ $,JUTH _,_, ....... r.f~I. w• 9mJ2 (4,~1:51 -b~~, ,.42~11s1-e,a1 FAX °'"'-'~"'-"'"'~-;u~"'"·'-"""'""'" "-.uuL'.> i ~I~ l' I ., : 'I I I, :_ ' ( • • • • • ( ( ( ' ' '"'""'"'"'·"'-:[iW{;~~-___ ' ' } ' I • § • I • s • CEDAR FIVER LD-fTFOOT, U.C AIO L.8IHON NVESTI.ENTS, NC. 0r1; ~~~ fl~;, ' - • ; ~ ,,,! !I \. l• c: ' • ----- -.r-- I ' / • e~ '! \ • • "' cc~l,'\.__z / '/ ,; /' •I; / "" > i ,/! ! J ,/ " ' ' ' ~ ti.I I~§ I 2 ~ : Fl~ ' 1!1 ~~ I '/• !• I I 1\;"m;"-'i;ac ,II . 'I !, ~,-"'"'"'""" ·-....ru,-. '!!a"" -~- B • • a OF ELLIOTT FARMS ~ ~ ! fl.i ! 8 l" "' ~ I I I "' ,1 ., I, I I ,,_ ' I • • • I !B II ! ; I • • • • 8 ,_ -, I ;~ I el :1 i, j ' • e "" -' CBJAR flYEA LIGHTFOOT, LLC ""' L...efi:'.lN tNES'T\ENTS, NC. I I; Wiiii•{._z ij ..... ;,· "' ' j '"~"'' ~ M M """""'""--""-l(t)''/>0 ' >,;>1•> ~ M M ....... , .. ,or,_t,1tfl!.''/'' ,;,-.,,,,.. .... __,.,,,......,,. - OF ELUOTT FARMS I! 1 j aoz:ic: oo ( !'' /I I / / • • • ){ ·:: liii i'-, 1r-----!l----=jf/l ---,- ' ' ' ' ' ,! / i~F'\ '2NJ .l>'[S1J[ S·1'JT~ • [NT, VI~ '100~2 (•2,:20 1 -~"'' (•P,;20'-81~2 F~< '"""-~,.;v,.o,v,,,..; SUM~NL , __ ,,,.. '~"'<:[S o.,, .U.U,:,.0 • • • • .. , ......... . !j ~; • iJ' ' ' • • ! • ' ~ .... Ii!,. ! 'U~~ :· / M:,:~~ij ' / :z, o I / "'"'~ / ' /1t. CB)AA Mm L...1Gi1'FOOT, L.l..C AIO LEtfllON NYES1\ENTS, NC. I /, I . I, // 1.· !.' i : l' . g I I l OJ•!J,< ... H H "'""""'""~""[Ol,1('' ~ :,~::. E+J+i+~'""' ~, ='-' -~ ,,,. --------1 -f'Fl3..MNAFIY UTUTES PLAN CS' ELLIOTT l'ARMS ' I I ' • I i I i i j / ' / • • • • ' ; ' ' ' ' . ' • • • ' • • • • ! / ii, a' EUIOTT FARMS ! i '~ 'c " g z 0 > BUILDING 'A' Elevations & Building Plans (Unit Type la) r ----------------- I ' ' ' I ' i~ " !'? 'c\ ! ~ ! .. ' ~ Cc • ' " ,, ' ' '! T I I, I l :r·l,il ~ 1 ' ,-JI;# ··~· t---~~-'--.~-+-~~--+ '\";o,. '$":? o-~, F,f ~~ ELLIOTT FARMS """"'"""'"""""""'""' .,.,,,,,.!"Li!!.,,._ _ _.~,... , -~'U,!ON, W~5H!NGrr.,."1 1 1 ··cutNT.-BR,··,rC,N-HOl!E:i L~-,.-- ·..u;;, en.•"EC> """" "'-tT'f 1""' -..~--"'~'""''°"""' -u~AnoN 11on.s '.lXJ~,,.._AL,~"'""",._.""'-<& ~~',:;-',..;,~';~• 'm''""""""'""'....,'"'."',_.., ,,....,,ee;,:,_.,,,_ --.,.,.... • ...,& •·w10• • ._ca,_.,, .... c ~~Si~;~~2~:·: ~!~~ "!·•'""""''''"''"''"°'"'~"""'"' _.,,.,. :,_, 1 ~:'i~;~,t ~l!) ·--,.., ....... ., ......... ~':l;:;~~I:~. ~·g~:a~I~Jr:~ .. ~."'""''""'~~ ,---- '"""°EP--,ti,IELCT~;;; C----- '""''" ,.,,. ... ~ ... .-:-& :=.. :::::::.;~ I ,..., .. ~' ,,.,.,.,. __ .....,...,__: -""'" P-• .o.ii; Lc10,0,_,_• __ .c·-· --; ~-' l:ICIL011'!.<U! '"''""'<=I.""'"""'""'""' t,,ot '-~'.<':·;:~1~~i;~:'"-11 ='• ::::::.~. J_ ____ J_ J.~J. ,L_j ___ _JI R(}()fPLA"i';_@_F,_V__,_Ol'T I) ,1 I ,1 11 ,r.,··,cct1.:,-~--&lD""' ..,..,., -~ii~Er:., r·~ •'IT'!':':!'i:~~-~ '"""' -·o ·-·, ,,,.._ ~' 6,6 "'""' --~ '" ~-· ·-. e><l•<l ._,,,,,. , •• :,-' e.>91''"''"' '8--~~--~_, ~-e~"',.,;,.'=·~~~- \li-~_)>'' .,. ""'"" .;, ,,. ""'"'"C' 0W+,-,.,..,..,OE1·~ ~,.:!.~;.:Jtr::~c:-= ,1a·,..,-. ~ ... "'.~~ :=~~ ..... :~~ii~~~,;:_ ~:;;",r.,.'$,~a,~~-·· (~) ~~ffir~YE::· (If . ...-.,~·-·~·--...... Dll'"A" cn;,1~:,'!::-...;;.:-·,,.,, ... :;;;;,i';":,"' (-":, Bl_ «;(hW(' /9 E! [i,A li'.Q\t ,)Pf ? .RCff Pi 1N .,H...-. '"'"""""""-.,.: '.._~! V41£-] 'J2" !'-0" ~ J / ' " , ,J-= :··:( Rl'lllllNGJl RfOF PT7iR7f["fv.on_l! ... ,._,_ -~ -'T-''""'' \'1-.JTTVf'fJb H"[m,,:~. 1 ~ i 1 -lj I ·., +. ! '~ ....... 1,;_o, '\;v, l ' ' ,;/i ~:·· ... ,·--.. 1=i ~:~·' -.~.--"="'"L.--·-·•"•~-+1 ~ 'IO-i-~"·· -----I f •·-~· T,,.., ,., .,~ -· ti - --- " . I • L' >•'l'>>cco')., L :__;_,-,_~'11:,' _ _J i:~nn-nro -i ' - , • :1 ,,t ... ,.;·~,;, L !•~~·-"":"' <t'-IIT TYPe II, -; \/! ~ - .,.v .,.,, ~ .. ~-· ,• ,, (D ftif!~~-J}'fff)_;1li'O'V OPT 'liticr Ff4N (,)BU/!./J/NC ti' 5'P'~WO FLOOR O!JliD,W( PIAN (U)TS f .;! ---SCALE-V_8· ~ r -cJ ·-------(~) BU!ihWC ?J' Fll?Sl Fi('O.R 8(.!!!.[WVv' P!.A!I (l(!TS !-4) _. ___ .;_.,. SCA;£ 1,8' ~ _,_,_· ___ _ =~;,,..-,--1,kll l\lii\.ih f \.'N!IHPFI~ ':Y,OP',,.::_•:t llUJLDING B -EAST ELEVATION OPT. 1 BUILDING D . NORTH ELEVATIONS OPT. 1 BUILDING B . WEST ELEVA T10Ns oPT.1--·---.,l BU1LD1N~ Au.F.v'S;;"TflEuv A"~~'r.s OPT 0 ..... 0 """ , !!~ -',\,~_.-_p· ilfKl?Pv (Fi7Cl'I i 'iOTS I &-2-' b. -_ . --1 -t--- l'MI IVl•l·IS '"" ---------\Nll lHl·lb -----'"'' ---~·---Ulll ·------------- c4,L '/,='' -!' {) • --- l'~lf lYl'l·IO BUILDING B · EAST ELEVATION OPT. 2 ,:i, ? EiOhhW ·"Pl'(!/1/ ,, 1U~lS Jct-./! '4:f ' ' -----LOT~ --~::c±;C,~ ~~\(~~~:'~,-.--'°~ ±, ---~ -~ --~ ''"'[,~;~-·~ --------- RLJ[LDJNG B · NORTH ELEVATIONS OPT. 2 filJ_!LDl_t,19 B -WEST ELEVATIONS OPT. 2 "'"T·~,.;;;, i\PFI~ 1-·c --iTN1T%rii: 'T;,;;--" --,L~'h'ALL,,rnTuv,~UNsoPfrj __ _ ' fl. it•• !'*1o , .... i. si..1 ,.11, .... , .. i1oo11on-•-•-11d-h., .... 1•1 ....,, ... _,_ --·-·--;:.-:.i«~~-=· D' IT~: i I ' lu,~ 1:-:J ~ '-<"_l··.81, '"""') 2 l,_JN 10::"' (,I ;:t' :< ~ ~i ii_ij i::..~ ~I t~i E-.. o::i >--il,1 E-J , ;..-"" ;II . (i: '" 8 11 t rn_\~ ::I!~ ,•1 ~h~ ~h I 12 :;; .. - " .. Q. 6 >, ;:: t- ~ i ~~ ID '" ;, CL ~1 0 '--- 11 BLNLDING •c• Elevations & ! Buijding Plans !Unit Type la,llla) I '~ I j;:S.i J 'A ~c, -~ -~ ' ~ ' [" I ~, ' ' I I : ,=~id<\ ~ i ~ '' IELEVAflON A Body I: 5W 5049 Monterey fan ------------------------- Bod~ 2 5W 5059 fobacco frim SW 6149 RelaKed Khaki ------------------------------ !Accent 5W 7069 Iron Qre IBody I: 5W 5042 Woodland IBody 2: 5W 6172 Hardware lrim: SW 6149 RelaKed Khaki Accent: 5W 2724 Black Cherry ·--- "' ~o i§;o I , : I s,:: 5 j ~ "--' I "' "' E E' ti\ ti\ I IL IL I~~~ ~I i SL "--' SL "--' I -· . " ,, ______________ _ flrVAflON A-OPilON 2 '"' 0 ~ -<T DO e N z C) ~ ' < ~ j bod4 I 5W 6102 Portabello bod4 I 5W 610:? fea Chest ~ bod4 2 5'N 6068 Brevil4 Brcwn Bod4 2 5W 2821 Colonial Revival 5raie ~ ~ -·· ... -----------(\J (\J lrit11'_?\lv]829Qa5sical White frim: 5W 2829 Clas5ical White ~ ~ ~ ~ !Accent 5W 10'7'7 E:ndurinci Bronze Accent 5W 6069 French Roast ~ ~ .. ~ ~ lrL.rVAflON B l:'ody I: 5W 6069 Llrwnded Body I 5W 5025 flacisW1e \I\ 8 () i3; 0 i:G 1s 1 "-' !Bo~2: 2V\l 1052 Warm 5W'!e Body 2: 5W 1052 Urban P~bj ~ ~ frim: 5W 1020 Black foK frim: 5W 1020 Black foK , -':; ± ':; -~~\---~ Accent 5W 6046 forra Brun /\ccent: 5W 1062 Rock bottom ,s:: ~ ~ ~ ----- EL.rVA1lON B-OP110N 2 il?od4 I : SW 6175 CacoCl1 -------- Bod~_ 2: SW 2070 Backpack fan frirn_: _ _51N 7041 Van l74ke Brown Accent: SW 2167 Can4C11 Wall Bad4 I: SW 1S09 liki Hut Bodq 2: 5W 7040 Smokehruse lrim 5W 7041 Van t?yke Brown _ cent: 5W 2B5B Pol15hed Mahociany -~~------- \I\ I . 0 \;:' . ,<CT I:", 0 "' E (lj "- ;'i '€ ----' -- ' SL ill N z Cl I== es ' (<:', ti 1 ill "' E ~ (lj "- ¢ '€ <C -- SL ill rLrVAflON C B_cid4 I: 5W 1027 River Pebble Bodq 2: 5W 5020 C_a_ri_bcu __ _ lrim: 5W 7051 Canvas fan .. ----· . ---------- Accent: 5W 1650 Raisin II\ 0 ~ -< 'T GQ \._) § 1 Bod4 I: 5W 5007 Lod14<"~rc>l/n Bod4 I: 5W 1061 Ci~scape ~ Bodq 2: 5W 7054 Outerbanks Bod4 2: 5W 2848 Ro4crofl Pewter ~ ~ . --. ~ ~ frim: 5W 7051 Canvas fan frim 5W 7051 Canvas fan , --':; ± ':; -~ ~ \-, ~ A::cent: 5W 6006 Black l:iean A::cent: 5W 2121 Cardamom IS::' ~ ~ ~ ! / ' \I ' ' i / ,/1 r-=~~-~-----------~-~--,----- 1115734 ~-(1.otlA<,,s,~ ~:~:5 ]t!c"/t"·0 >.J1.m· -. ---""-I For. BRIXTON HOt.ES LLC ~ i i :~~~(;~:=~;;; r.x ,_ ... --""-,._,, ! C/0 GLEN MALAER I \ ~.; '•""-,,.,..,,..., ,. .. o ..,,.__ ----14410 BEL-RED-ROAD. SIATE 200 ! 1 _ 2 ................. "-"""""G. ~"'"-"~"',:;. """ .l&il.. BELLEVUE, WA 98007 " :q m 0 C z C )> JJ -< SlO --i 0 '1 0 G) JJ )> '1 :I: 0 (JJ C JJ < m -< Tlk BOUNDARY l TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY P1N OF THE NW1/4, OF TltE 8E1/4 OF SEC. 22. MID PTM OF THE 8W114, Of THE NE1/R OF SEC. 22, TWP. 23 N., RGE 8 EAST, W. II. CITY OF IIENTOII ICING COI.IIT'I' STATE OF WAIHlfGTON ·e2,, ,,~o ~vi:"~' >CVIH KENf WA JllU!.' (l:'~):051-6:'C'. 1i2s::'i1-87~2 ra, C""-f.....a:-,""°F'i-So"""'""'·'"'"""""'"T"-1<""fS i I I I --~----~ c,._,.,_,&o. ---"""•.ru.!.1... BRIXTON HOMES LLC C/0 QI.EN MAURER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUITE 200 BELLEVUE. WA 98007 .. ~~~-z ~ DJ 0 C z C )> :II -< "" -t 0 "ll 0 G) :II )> "ll :::c (') (/) C :II < m -< 1; ;~J:D 1 A~~ -~--~OPOORAP~ -SURVEY - PTll OF THE NW11,4, OF Tl-IE SE1/-4 OF SEC. 22. ANO ,TM OF TitE IWt/-4, OF THE NE1/R OF IEC. 22, TWP. 28 N., RGE Ii EAIT, W. Iii. CITY OF IIENTON ICING COUNTY ITA11 OI W,,_6TON STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of ,general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months xior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on July 15, 2016. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is lhe sum of $140.63. ;:$[~: A, .. :J;t(Jf //(fl ( -Linda Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter ~ s ~•o=<h;, 15'h®yofJoly,2016. ' ! . I . 'i -,1. ".1, . 1/ ", ';..:i\. .. : '. ;.:,,?." _)", }:'i\J C ... .,,..-:.. :~Lt~ Gale Gwin, Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing1n Puyallup, Washington .: ·-... ·,, . >cc':; I; ,1 1-.~~,· ,, ! T • ' • ,.-•' \ ... ·IIPd',d\\\ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND PUBLIC HEARING RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Detenni- nation of Non-Significance Miti- gated (DNS-M) for the following project under the authority of the Renton municipal code. Elliott Farms LUAIS-000242 Location: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy. 14207 Maple Valley Hv.,y LOT, Renton, WA 98058 (APN 2223059004). The appli- cant has requested Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdi- vision. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR·169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE in the R·14 zone. The 45 residential lots and 8 tracts would result in a density of 9.7 dufac with lots ranging in size from 2.217 sf to 3,939 sf Primary access to the develop. ment would be via a managed public road access from SR·169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condomin· iums. The site contains moder· ate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and wetland buffer are pro· posed to be retained. Apptals of the DNS.M must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 29, 2016. Ap- peals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner c/o City Clerk, City of Renton, I 055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Appeals to the Hearing Examiner are governed by RMC 4·8· 110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, 425-430-6510. A Public Hearing will be held by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers, City Hall, on August 09, 2016 at 11:00 am to consider the submitted applica· tion. If the DNS·M is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing. Published in the Renton Reporter July 15, 2016. #1654132 .. Agencies Ivana Halvorson, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Patrick Lennon Todd Leavitt Cedar River Lightfoot Inc. Parties of Record (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) \'._J ) ss ) Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD template • affidavit of service by mailing See Attached Contact Applicant Applicant Owner See Attached Dept. of Ecology •• Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region • Attn: Ramin Pazookl King Area Dev. Seiv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers • Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers *** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Jalaine Madura, Attn: SEPA Responsible Offlclal 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILIN.:i (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** Attn: Misty Blair PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Duwamish Tribal Office• 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division • Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 WDFW -Larry Fisher• 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 City of Newcastle Attn: Tim McHarg Director of Community Development 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 Newcastle, WA 98056 Puget Sound Energy Wendy Weiker, Community Svcs. Mgr. 355 110" Ave NE Mailstop EST 11W Bellevue, WA 98004 Puget Sound Energy Doug Corbin, Municipal liaison Mgr. 6905 South 228" St Kent, WA 98032 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.•• Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015-172"d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program** Attn: Laura Murphy 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program** Attn: Erin Slaten 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Charlene Anderson, AICP, ECD 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City ofTukwila Jack Pace, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 •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.gov •• Karen Walter, Laura Murphy and Erin Slaten with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. are emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email addresses: KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us / Laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us L erin.slaten@muckleshoot.nsn.us •••oepartment 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 Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton. WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, 6104 Renton, WA 98058 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton. WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton. WA 98058 Leland Gregory :11111tt E !Jill JJT[i~,, ., &mllll!i11l!m1ill!ll!111!11rll!ii Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton. WA 98058 Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 Emily O'Meara Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall Citv. 98024 _____ ,,,,_,,_,,,Re ri to Il OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Elllott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD LOCATION: SR 169 EAST OF 140"' WAY SE (APN 222305-9004) Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two- and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district {APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet {SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway {SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums {MCC). Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easementthrough MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO- foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE {ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION HAS PROBABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED THROUGH MITIGATION MEASURES. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 29, 2016, 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 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. I ---------Rell toll A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON AUGUST 9, 2016 AT 11:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, SITE PLAN & MODIFICATION. 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 DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. I -----Kenton@ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE • MmGATEO (t)NS-MI POSTED TO NOTIFY IN1ERE51EO PERSONS Of AN E/MRONMENT/ll ACTION PRCU!CTNIIME.I 'ED!attfim1>l'rlnllri .. rfPlrt PROliCFNUMBEII: LUAl.S.ilOOUl, ECF, PP, !A-H, MOO LOCATIOH: 5R16'BU'l'Of UO"'W,U5.(,UIN ll231)5.!P004) Oesaip~oo: Th• oppllcant Is roquenln1 PrtllmlNll'I' Plot, Heorin:i1 E.oaminer Sill! Plan, SEPA En~n:inml!lltal ~evlew appnm,I ond a Strut Modiffcatlcn for i 4S-lol ,ubdlvbl"" furtha luture conttN<tlon d attad!ecl two- and \llru._un~ buildlnp. Tho 6.07-acre site ls localm along SR-16!1 bor.v.1n L40th War SE uld 145th Ave SE wlihln the R .. ldentl•l-14 ,cnln1 district (APN 2223059004). On h.n• 16, 2016, the applicant 5Ubmittod rovl,K pin plan thttwauld dMd1 tho parail into 45 rtsl!Mndal lots and 8 tnc:t:s thai would ,esult In a net density ot 9.7 dwernns units per ,era. Tho ti.cts lnduda 47,911 squar1 le<!t(SF) Dfcri!lal arU!l,60,731SF ol O!IM spa ca ,nd 4,915 SF for allOV!I. The pnopo .. d fee 51mple lors would ranp in si•• lrom 2,217 Sf to 3,939 'if ~th an •••ra1• 101 ~It ol 2.586 5~. Primary""""'" totha d .. elopmentwculd be~• • mana1.d publlt rcad access from M•pl• V•llay Hl1hwaY l'iR 169) that run, lhruu1h tho d1•elC1JmOnl and ccnn!d:I le "" ,xbthill privata lana at Moln,111 CrHk Condominium• (MCC], Soe<>ndory aa:ass to the lots 11,'<lUld be ava,lablo lhrcu1h the .. 1,dnll pmoat• read du<1 tothe t,<i5llng private ••......,•nt thrcu1h MCC. Tlwt !COIi• olthe prcje<;t 1, lo mlmo< the adjacent condomonlum da,elapml!nt a, comemi>'-1.d by tho PNI-Annaxatio<1 Agreement and Aq,.,o 8Arn AAnaxatlon in was. Tho ,ite ,s curi•nily und..,.lopl!d and contain• moduata landslide hatards and a ~1•10!'\I II watland ~th a 50· fDat buffer. The Site Is In the Ced1r ~Iver dri1ina1• basin and outsl,1t 1he JOO.you floodpbiln limits. Stormwater w,11 bo ccnwyed to 1he e1fsljn11 water quality pond that WH constructed a, part oftl,a Plot of Ellion Farms and MCC, l<>C.ltod west of 140th Way SE. Soils amsistof Newburg Slit Lculm (N1) with a small arN of Alderwcod and Klt:Dp lAkf). Apprc<lma1ely 9,000 cubic yards o1' cut would ,p.-d on tli• finished k,t, and/or ••por1ed off-oltt! and apprc,clmauiy 20,000 cubk: ~uds of nu matelial would ho lmponod far the prcjoct. The slle contain• ll4 slgnlfl"""tu-. The project will remo..... U •iabla .....,rg,un ond ci&ciduaus trea within the d°'olopment ar1!11. All 74 •IKmficant trots In tht wall and and buHerwlll remain. The prnjKtwill replant 97 trees on,111. The applicant hao ,ubmlttad a Crlth:al Area Ropart, Tnhnlcal Jnf<>rmation Rllpon, Traffic lmpactAs$t$Smem, Arborin A~pcn, Wotl1nd Dellneatlon, Lenor ofUnderstandln,i of GKll<>clc: ill,k, ,..,d • Gaota<hnical E!1ain ... nns Studyw,th theappllcatlon. TI-lE OT'I' OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CDMMITTEE IERCI HAS DETE~MINED TI-lAT TiiE PIIOP051:ll ACTION HA5 PROBA8LE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN SE MmGATEO THROUGH MmGATION MEASURES. Appall DI the erwlronrnoMal dete'"'"""tlan mmt bo filed in writll'III ooi or before 5:00 p,0t. on July 29, %0111, topthar will, Iha rtqUlnd fH with: lfll!llins Enmlnor, City cl Rentan, 1055 5DUlh Grady Way', Renton, WA g111n. App,ub to the Eir•mln.r ire _.,,od by City DI RMC4-S-110 1rod In~ rec,,,dl,. tho appal P"'""" may bor abtab,ed from tlte Reman City Clark'• 0111a,, (4251 ~510. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PtEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTONlEPAATMENT OF DO Noi° 0~~~r lH~ii~ti Wtiit~&~~~~~~~~J:ZAnoN PtEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CAW NG FOR PROPER Fll.E IDENTIFICATION. ----Renton® A ?UBUC HEARING WILL BE HELtl BY THE RENTDN HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEEl1NG IN TI-lE COUNCIL D-!AMBERS ON THE 7™ FLOOR OF CITY HAU, 1055 SOUTH GI\AtlY WAY. RElfTON. WA5HINGTtlN, ON AUGUST ~. 11116 AT 11:00 AM TO CO'l'SIOE~ rne PRELIMINARY PLAT, SITE PLAN S.. MOD1ACAT1t1N. IF THE E:NVIHONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALEO, -rnE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD A5 PART OF T111'i PI.JSLIC HEARING. PUASE INaUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CAWNG FOR PROPER Fll.E 1DENT1f1CATION. CERTIFICATION I, C /.A1ltL I+• U 0 S!;" hereby certify that '3 copies of the above document were posted in _7_ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date:_-z-'-+-/ '-'I ~c.../-'1'-'-r.,, ____ _ Signed:_.._{J_...'2M.=,._._f/.c..:·c.....J..C""'»>---====----- STATE OF WASHINGTON 55 COUNTY OF KING Denis Law Mayor October 26, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Decision upon Reconsideration Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Decision upon Reconsideration dated October 25, 2016. This document is immediately available: • Electronically on line at the City of Renton website (www.rentonwa.gov); • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the project number LUA-15-000242; and • For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the Hearing Examiner's Decision is $.90, plus a handling and postage cost (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110{E)(14) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov / If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, g[£ City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (10) Denis Law Mayor October 26, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Decision upon Reconsideration Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-lS-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Decision upon Reconsideration dated October 25, 2016. This document is immediately available: • Electronically on line at the City of Renton website (www.rentonwa.gov); • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the project number LUA-15-000242; and • For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the Hearing Examiner's Decision is $.90, plus a handling and postage cost (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (10) October 26, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Denis Law Mayor City Clerk· Jason A. Seth, CMC JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 26th day of October, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the Hearing Examiner's Decision upon Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA- 15-000242) to the attached parties of record. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 26th day of October, 2016. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov r l. Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton, WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem, OR 97302 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 .-',----r\ I ,__., DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton. WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, 8104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 Emily O'Meara '>... ••. , Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton. WA 98058 Leland Gregory ---__ _- /~ ,-,~-~i/\\'.'"'iiJ;iJ!lf;ffl~,~/W-'·*:i:~~~~{.~~'k-,:,f~,1,.:r'."~.A~~ Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON ) RE: Elliott Farms ) ) DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION Preliminary Plat j LUA 15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD) ) ) SUMMARY Leland and Joanne Gregory have requested reconsideration of the approval of the above-captioned preliminary plat, issued on August 25, 2016. The Gregorys contest the location of the Elliot Farms access point to SR 169, which is located 90-100 feet from their driveway. The reconsideration request is denied and the Final Decision of the above-captioned matter is left unmodified except for the additional findings and conclusions added by this Decision Upon Reconsideration. Reconsideration is denied because the Gregorys largely or arguably entirely base their request upon assertions of error in a deviation request separately approved by City staff. The staffs deviation decision approved a reduction in minimum separation between adjoining access points on SR 169 from Code required 330 feet to the 90-100 foot separation authorized in the Elliot Farms preliminary plat approval. Since that deviation request was not timely appealed, the examiner has no jurisdiction to review it. Even if the examiner does have jurisdiction to consider some or all of the issues raised by the Gregorys, it is determined in this Decision Upon Reconsideration that the deviation for the 90-100 foot separation was properly granted by the City and that the separation satisfies general subdivision standards requiring "adequate" streets. EXHIBITS The following exhibits are admitted and added to the administrative record as a result of the Gregory PRELIMINARY PLAT-I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 l l 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 request for reconsideration: Ex. 49 -September 12, 2016 Jami Balint objection to Gregory Reconsideration Request Ex. 50 -First Order on Request for Reconsideration, dated September 13, 2016 Ex. 51 -September 19, 2016 Gregory Request for Reconsideration Ex. 52 -September 26, 2016 City response to reconsideration request Ex. 53 -September 30, 2016 Applicant response Ex. 54 -October 9, 2016 Gregory Reply (received by examiner 10/11/16) Ex. 55 -October 12, 2016 Applicant objection to Gregory Reply FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Reconsideration Request Chronology. Leland and Joanne Gregory Submitted a request for reconsideration dated August 25, 2016 and received by the City on September 7, 2016. The applicant, through their attorney Jami Balint, submitted an objection dated September 12, 2016. The hearing examiner issued an order addressing the reconsideration request on September 13, 2016. The order sustained the objection in part, determining that the reconsideration request was inadmissible because it contained new evidence. The order authorized the Gregorys to resubmit their reconsideration request without new evidence by September 19, 2016. The Gregorys submitted a revised reconsideration request on September 19, 2016. The City submitted a response on September 26, 2016, the Applicant submitted a response on September 30, 2016 and the Gregorys submitted a reply on October 9, 2016 t. 2. Basis of Reconsideration Request. The basis of the Gregorys' reconsideration request was that the Elliot Farms SR 169 access point was too close to their driveway. There is conflicting information in the record as to the width of the separation, but the Elliot Farms access point is most likely 90 to 100 feet from the Gregorys' driveway. The Gregory and Elliot Farms access points adjoin each other on the south side of SR 169. The Gregorys' reconsideration request is primarily directed at a City decision in Ex. 24 that authorizes a reduction in the minimum separation of 330 feet between the Gregory and Elliot Farms access points required by WAC 468-52-040(3)(b )(ii)(B). The Gregorys assert that the access point should be moved to one of two alleys located in Elliot Farms, which would roughly double or triple the separation between their driveway and the Elliot Farms SR 169 access point. 1 The October 9, 2016 letter objected to a reference to a conversation between the Gregorys and the applicant. That 26 objection is sustained and the information was not considered in this reconsideration decision. PRELIMINARY PLAT-2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The Gregorys assert two impacts from the location of the Elliot Farms access point. They note that they currently use the south shoulder of SR 169 as a deceleration lane to enter their driveway from travelling west on SR 169 and that the approved access point eliminates this use of the shoulder. The Gregorys also assert that a new SR 169 left turn lane to be added to serve the Elliot Farrns access point will restrict access to their driveway to right in/right out access. 3. Impacts of Proximate Elliot Farms Access Point. For the reasons outlined below, the approved project access point to SR l 69 provides for optimal access to SR 169 from a traffic circulation and safety standpoint. The primary reason for greater separation from the Gregorys' driveway would be to avoid the right in/right out turning restrictions on the Gregory driveway, but the circulation/safety benefits of keeping the access point in its approved location outweigh the problems caused by these turning restrictions. The Gregorys do not assert any safety impact associated with the proximity of the Elliot Farrns access point and none is apparent from the record. Their primary issue is centered on the loss of shoulder use and the loss of ability to turn left due to the required installation of a left turn lane. As to the loss of shoulder use, the Gregorys do not contest the Applicant's plausible assertion in Ex. 53 that the frontage improvements required for the project would narrow the shoulder to five feet and render it unusable as a deceleration lane no matter where the Elliot Farrns SR 169 access point would be located. As a result, it is determined that the approved location of the Elliot Farms SR 169 access point is not responsible for the loss of shoulder use for deceleration. As to the impacts of the left turn lane, the Gregorys will be subjected to the same right in/right out turning restrictions onto SR 169 as the future residents of the Elliot Farms project. This is certainly an inconvenience, but the safety and/or circulation factors that were the basis for the Elliot Farms turning restrictions likely apply as well to turning movements from the Gregorys' property, at least to a partial degree. Of course, the state would only have adopted the WAC 468-52-040(3)(b)(ii)(B) 330 foot separation requirement because of safety and/or circulation problems caused by intersections that are spaced closer together. However, the City had to balance reducing the 330 foot spacing requirement against the 2,640 foot spacing requirement between the Elliot Farrns SR 169 access point and 140'h Way SE, also set by WAC 468-52-040(3). The approved Elliot Farms SR 169 access point is only 2,093 feet from 140 Way SE, which is the maximum separation possible between the two access points. Due to several factors identified in Ex. 52, City staff deterrnined that on-balance maximizing the possible separation from 140'h Way SE provided for safer and more code compliant traffic circulation and improvements than adhering to the 330 foot separation required from the Gregorys' driveway. Even eliminating grade separation issues with the adjoining Gregory property raised in the Ex. 24 deviation approval, the considerations by staff are sufficiently compelling to conclude that safety and circulation impacts are minimized by the approved location of the Elliot Farms SR 169 access point. The approved access point maximizes separation from another public road intersection ( 140 Way SE) and avoids the need for a cul-de-sac (which would have to be installed if the Elliot Farms SR PRELIMINARY PLAT -3 I 2 3 4 5 6 169 access point were moved to one of the project's alleys as suggested by the Gregorys). As outlined in Ex. 24 and Ex. 52, a City traffic engineer found these factors sufficient to justify a reduction to the 330 foot requirement. From a traffic circulation and safety standpoint, these factors outweigh the inconvenience of the right in/right out limitations to the Gregorys. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Authority of Examiner. The examiner has no jurisdiction to hear the validity of the City's approval of the deviation request to WAC 468-52-040(3)(b)(ii)(B), Ex. 24, and likely has no 7 jurisdiction to collaterally attack the approval under general road adequacy standards applicable to subdivision review. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 RMC 4-6-060(F)(9)(b) adopts WAC 468-51 and 468-52 (which includes the 330 foot separation requirement) by reference. RMC 4-6-060(Q)(l) provides that waivers from WAC 486-52 are subject to the criteria of RMC 4-9-250. Ex. 24 does not clearly identify the approved deviation as processed pursuant to RMC 4-9-250, but in the absence of any evidence to the contrary City staff are presumed to use review procedures authorized by City code. RMC 4-8-080(G) provides that deviation/modification decisions are subject to appeal to the hearing examiner. RMC 4-8-l lO(C)(3) requires appeals to be filed with the examiner within 14 days of issuance of the decision appeal. No timely appeal was filed of the Ex. 24 deviation approval. In the absence of a timely appeal, a permit decision, even if noncompliant with permitting criteria, can no longer be challenged. See Nykreim Chelan County v. Nykreim, 146 Wn.2d 904 (2002). Further, case law is clear that cities cannot collaterally revisit permitting decisions in subsequent permit applications. See Habitat Watch v. Skagit County, 155 Wn.2d 397 (2005). The courts are equally clear that a permit decision cannot be revisited even though no notice of the decision is provided to the public. Durland v. San Juan County, 182 Wn.2d 55 (2015)(fact that neighbor did not receive notice of building permit did not relieve neighbor of requirement to file an administrative appeal within time limits set by County code). Given these parameters, it is clear that the Ex. 24 deviation approval cannot be revisited in the Gregorys' reconsideration request. It is also likely that applying general subdivision criteria to address the adequacy of the separation (specifically, the criterion requiring "adequate" roads, RMC 4-7-080(B)(4)) would be considered a collateral attack on the Ex. 24 deviation approval. 19 Nonetheless, in case on appeal the examiner is determined to have jurisdiction, applicable deviation 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 and subdivision standards will be addressed in this decision. 2. Approved Gregory/Elliot Farms Separation Complies with Applicable City Standards. The approved 90-1 00 separation between the Gregory driveway and Elliot Farms SR 169 access point both satisfies the criteria for a deviation and the adequacy standard of RMC 4-7- 080(B)(4). The access point provides for "adequate" streets as required by RMC 4-7-080(B)(4) because the approved access point is an optimal location in terms of safety and circulation efficiency for the reasons outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3. The Ex. 24 deviation request is governed by the standards of RMC 4-9-250(0)(2) and is consistent with all of them. As required by RMC 4-9-250(0)(2), strict adherence to the separation requirements of WAC 468-52-040(3)(b)(ii)(B) is impractical, given that two access points are PRELIMINARY PLAT-4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 l l necessary for the project and further separation from the Gregory driveway would require closer proximity to 140'h Way SE, which is prohibited by the code, while at the same time necessitating a cul-de-sac, which is strongly discouraged by the code. Given the balancing of factors outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the separation deviation is the minimum deviation necessary to implement the safety and circulation objectives of the comprehensive plan as required by RMC 4-9-250(D)(2)(a). Further, for the reasons outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the deviation meets the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment as required by RMC 4-9-250(D)(2)(b ). As further determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the proposal would not be injurious to other properties as required by RMC 4-9-250(D)(2)(c), as the primary impact on the Gregorys will be right in/right out tum restrictions, which may actually serve to enhance their safety. Since the proposed access points optimize safety and circulation efficiency, the approved access point is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code as required by RMC 4-9-250(D)(2)(d). Finally, for the reasons identified in making strict compliance with separation requirements impractical, the deviation is shown to be justified for the use and situation intended as required by RMC 4-9-250(D)(2)(e). DECISION Reconsideration is denied for the reasons outlined in this decision. The August 25, 2016 Final l 2 Decision of the above captioned matter is to remain unchanged, except that the findings and conclusions of this Decision Upon Reconsideration should be considered as supplemental to the 13 Final Decision. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DATED this 25 1h day of October, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner APPEAL RIGHTS AND VALUATION NOTICES RMC 4-8-080(G) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(l4) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall-7th floor, (425) 430-6510. PRELIMINARY PLAT-5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Affected property owners may request a change m valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PRELIMINARY PLAT -6 October 11, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Gregory's Final Response Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242} Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Gregory's final response to the City's & the Applicant's Traffic Engineers Responses in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, ~,;;d) ason A. Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov LELAND W. un.cGORY October 9, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 14235 Maple Valley Highway Renton. WA 98058 PHONE 206-713-8920 Subject: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat-LUA 15-000242 Mr. Olbrechts: This Jetter in in response to the City of Renton letter of 9-26-16 submitted by Ann Fowler and the 9-30-16 letter submitted by Chris Bicket of Transportation Engineering Northwest regarding the above Reconsideration Request. We have no further comments on the Chris Bicket letter. Regarding the City of Renton Jetter we have the following comments and additional questions. Paragraph 1.1.2 states that using Alley 2 as the through access would create a dead end road greater than 500 feet ( paragraph 1.1.1 says this distance is 475 feet) and would require a cul-de-sac. The second sentence is paragraph 1. 1.4 states "Since an alternative to creating dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs is feasible to the site, the need for such a request would not be approved." We are curious why if this is feasible, it is simply being denied without any further explanation? The information provided in paragraph 1.2 seems to support the theory that the location of any entrance to the Plat would have minimal impact to the existing traffic flows and accident history. However, based on this, it was determined that the entrance should be placed as far from the intersection as possible, which puts it in the present location. If Alley 2 was the designated entrance, the same logic used to support the conclusion reached would also apply. Paragraph 2 allows an alternative access if there is less than Yz mile of spacing. Regarding paragraph 3, the City did not review any alternate to the West of the present proposed access. They looked at the existing elevation of the road into our property and found that with the proposed elevations of Elliott Farms "would not allow a safe acoess connection between the two properties.' Using this criteria, they waived the 330' rule. If they had looked to the West, they would find that the access available at Alley 2 would be more than 330' from both Molasses Creek and our acoess. This seems like a reasonable compromise. • Page 2 October 9, 2016 In recent discussions with the Elliott Farms owners, they have stated that the proposed elevations on the property have been reduced by 3 feet. They have also determined that in order to provide replacement water and sewer services to our property, that will be destroyed when constructon begins, the road elevation may have to be raised. This would probably eliminate the elevation differences referred to in paragraph 3. We believe that using the criteria of the City in choosing the presently proposed access and applying it to Alley 2 as an access is a reasonable attemative for the Plat. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Respectfully, Leland Gregory / / 'Joanne Gregory LELAND W. GREGORY October 9, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 14235 Maple Valley Highway Renton, WA 98058 PHONE 206-713-8920 Subject: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat-LUA 15-000242 Mr. Olbrechts: This letter in in response to the City of Renton letter of 9--26-16 submitted by Ann Fowler and the 9--30-16 letter submitted by Chris Bicket of Transportation Engineering Northwest regarding the above Reconsideration Request. We have no further comments on the Chris Bicket letter. Regarding the City of Renton letter we have the folloWing comments and additional questions. Paragraph 1, 1.2 states that using Alley 2 as the through access would create a dead end road greater than 500 feet ( paragraph 1. 1. 1 says this distance is 475 feet) and would require a cul-de-sac. The second sentence is paragraph 1. 1.4 states "Since an alternative to creating dea<Hlnd streets and cul-de-sacs is feasible to the site, the need for such a request would not be approved." We are curious why if this is feasible, it is simply being denied Without any further explanation? The information provided in paragraph 1.2 seems to support the theory that the location of any entrance to the Plat would have minimal impact to the existing traffic flows and accident history. However, based on this, it was determined that the entrance should be placed as far from the intersection as possible, which puts it in the present location. If Alley 2 was the designated entrance, the same logic used to support the conclusion reached would also apply. Paragraph 2 allows an alternative access if there is less than Y, mile of spacing, Regarding paragraph 3, the City did not review any alternate to the West of the present proposed access. They looked at the existing elevation of the road into our property and found that With the proposed elevations of Elliott Farms "would not allow a safe access connection between the two properties." Using this criteria, they waived the 330' rule. If they had looked to the West, they would find that the access available at Alley 2 would be more than 330' from both Molasses Creek and our access. This seems like a reasonable compromise. • Page2 October 9, 2016 In recent discussions with the Elliott Farms owners, they have stated that the proposed elevations on the property have been reduced by 3 feet. They have also determined that in order to provide replacement water and sewer services to our property, that will be destroyed when construction begins, the road elevation may have to be raised. This would probably eliminate the elevation differences referred to in paragraph 3. We believe that using the criteria of the City in choosing the presently proposed access and applying it to Alley 2 as an access is a reasonable alternative for the Plat. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Respectfully, (/ Leland Gregory <Joanne Gregory October 3, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Applicant's Response to Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Applicant's Traffic Engineer's Response to the Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, Jaso,A'~ City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov September 30, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton I 055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest Subiect: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat -LUA 15-000242 Mr. Olbrechts: This letter supports the findings of the September 26, 2016 letter from the City of Renton regarding the appropriateness of the proposed site access location of the Elliott Farms Plat The City letter was written in response to the request for reconsideration of the HEX final decision submitted by Leland and Joanne Gregory. Specifically, the request for reconsideration focused on the proximity of the Elliott Forms access in relation to the existing single-family driveway approximately I 00 feet east of the proiect access. Among other arguments, the request for reconsideration cited that the new access location precludes further use of the existing 8 to 9-foot shoulder as o defocto right-turn deceleration lane into the adiacent property. This suggests that adiustment of the driveway further west may allow continued use of the shoulder for this purpose. The Elliott Farms proiecl is required to construct "urban" improvements along the entire proiect frontage, including vertical-curb, gutter, sidewalk, and o (narrower) 5-foot shoulder. The eastern terminus of the frontage improvements is the Gregory property line. These frontage improvements will effectively eliminate the existing use of the shoulder for deceleration purposes, by virtue of the reduced shoulder width and vertical curb/ sidewalk, regardless of the new site access location. Further, use of the shoulder for deceleration is discouraged given the potential safety conflicts with non-motorized users. The proposed site access location and improvements were closely coordinated and vetted through WSDOT and City of Renton review and approval process, and have been deemed appropriate based on all factors. We appreciate your consideration of this letter. Please contact me with any questions at (425) 250-5002 or ::_:,0 -·!',·2· · _: :- Sincerely, Transportation Engineering NorthWest Chris T. Bicket, P.E Design Manager 11400 SE 8• St, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 I Office (425) 250-5002 Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #MlOS Renton. WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem, OR 97302 lll&--~-·~1ffi~'jif. JC'£'..~~~M:~..1,t'~'if'~~JoxrH.?J:>j;,,E, Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, B104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton. WA 98058 Emily O'Meara Joanne Gregorv 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Leland Gregory Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 October 3, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Applicant's Response to Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Applicant's Traffic Engineer's Response to the Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, Jasoo..'M City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov September 30, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton I 055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 ~TENW Transportation Engineering Northwest Subject Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plot -LUA 15-000242 Mr. Olbrechts: This letter supports the findings of the September 26, 2016 letter from the City of Renton regarding the appropriateness of the proposed site access location of the Elliott Farms Plot. The City letter was written in response to the request for reconsideration of the HEX final decision submitted by Leland and Joanne Gregory. Specifically, the request for reconsideration focused on the proximity of the Elliott Forms access in relation to the existing single-family driveway approximately I 00 feet east of the project access. Among other arguments, the request for reconsideration cited that the new access location precludes further use of the existing 8 to 9-fool shoulder as a defocto right-tum deceleration lane into the adjacent property. This suggests that adjustment of the driveway further west may allow continued use of the shoulder for this purpose. The Elliott Forms project is required lo construct "urban" improvements along the entire project frontage, including vertical-curb, gutter, sidewalk, and a (narrower) 5-foot shoulder The eastern terminus of the frontage improvements is the Gregory property line. These frontage improvements will effectively eliminate the existing use of the shoulder for deceleration purposes, by virtue of the reduced shoulder width and vertical curb/sidewalk, regardless of the new site access location. Further, use of the shoulder for deceleration is discouraged given the potential safety conflicts with non-motorized users. The proposed site access location and improvements were closely coordinated and vetted through WSDOT and City of Renton review and approval process, and have been deemed appropriate based on all factors We appreciate your consideration of this letter Please contact me with any questions al (425) 250-5002 or y Sincerely, Transportation Engineering NorthWest Chris T. Bicket, P E Design Manager 11400 SE 8'" St, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 ) Office (425) 250-5002 ,• t Denis Law Mayor September 26, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: City's Response to Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-lS-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the City's Response to the Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above- referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. son A. Seth, CMC ity Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record {12) 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov ,• Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator September 26, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA15-000242 Dear Mr. Olbrechts, CITY OF RENTON tJ- SEP 2i2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE I have reviewed the re-submitted request for reconsideration of HEX Final Decision submitted by Leland and Joanne Gregory for the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (APNs 2223059004) and provide the following comments which expand upon the State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination, written on May 12, 2016, included in the official public record, and describes in detail all of the criteria used to evaluate the development and the creation of new roads as it relates to City of Renton Code and State requirements. Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) is classified by the City of Renton as a Principal Arterial Road. Site access to/from a principal arterial road is determined on a case-by-case basis. The added complexity of it being a state highway provides additional requirements which were considered when evaluating the proposed site access. The City and State requirements below, listed in order of priority, were reviewed when approving the location of the new access point to the proposed Elliott Farms development. 1. Life Safety 1.1. Fire and Emergency vehicle access to the development is required. Per RMC 4-6-060H.5, secondary access is required when a development of three (3) or more buildings is located more than two hundred feet (200') from a public street. Two access points are provided through the development. One access point provides a direct connection to SR-169 while the second access point proposed is available through the existing private lane through the Molasses Creek Condominiums to the west. 1.1.1. If the through access point to SR-169 were to be located at Alley 3 or Alley 2, the remaining length of Road A (approximately 650 feet and 475 feet, respectively, to the furthest end of Lot 18) would then have been considered a dead-end road. 1.1.2. Per RMC 4-6-060H, cul-de-sac and dead end streets are limited in application and may only be permitted where, due to demonstrable physical constraints, no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 1.1.3. If allowed, the maximum length of dead-end streets is 700 feet and over 300 feet requires a cul-de- sac. Locating the through access at Alley 3 would have created a dead-end road greater than 700 feet and would not be approved. Locating the through access at Alley 2 would create a dead-end road greater than 500 feet and would require a cul-de-sac, if it was to be approved. 1.1.4. The proposed through access point to SR-169 is located so as to create the longest length of a through public street and to minimize the length of dead-end alleys servicing the homes. Since an 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat-LUAlS-0( Page2of2 alternative to creating dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs is feasible to the site, the need for such a request would not be approved. 1.2. Accident history of the impacted intersection is reviewed and considered when approving new intersections and/or access points on a roadway. It was determined that the new peak hour trips into and out of the proposed development via SR-169 would not cause a decrease in the level of service with the conditioned right-in/right-out turning movements and the proposed location of the new access point to be acceptable. In this case the three-year collision rate (1/1/2012 -12/31/2014) for the entrance to the Molasses Creek Condominiums revealed that the added entrance to the highway did not result in any reported accidents over the three-year study period. Therefore, the added incoming and outgoing trips from the proposed Elliott Farms development are expected to have minimal impact to the existing traffic flows and accident history. Additionally, the three-year collision rate for the intersection at SR-169 and 140th Way SE to the west of the development was 24 total collisions (8 annual average). Therefore, it was determined that the entrance should be placed as far from the intersection as possible. 2. State Requirement -Intersection spacing of less than 14-mile may be allowed, but only when no reasonable alternative access exists (WAC 468-52-040 (3)). 2.1. The required minimum spacing from the intersection of 140th Way SE and SR-169 is Y, mile or 2,640 feet. The intent is to provide maximum spacing from the major intersection while providing adequate distance between neighboring driveways. 2.1.1. The proposed distance from the 140'" Way SE and SR-169 to the proposed access point to the Elliott Farms Road B intersection is approximately 2,093 feet, roughly 547 feet short of meeting the minimum required spacing. 2.1.2. Based on proposed elevations at the neighboring property lines it could not be located any further to the east. 3. State Requirement· The minimum distance to another (public or private) access point is 330 feet on the same side of the highway. 3.1. Based on the requirements of Items #1 and #2 (above), the distance between the proposed access and the private driveway to the east (approximately 90 feet as shown on the approved WSDOT Channelization Plan) was reviewed. The proposed elevation grades on the Elliott Farms project were reviewed to determine if a shared access point could be made with the neighboring property to the east. The grade difference between the two properties at the east property line would not allow a safe access connection between the two properties. Therefore, the access spacing was found to be an acceptable distance based on the minimal number of trips which would be generated from the single family residence and the proposed Elliott Farms development. It was determined through the review that the intersection to SR-169 from the Elliott Farms development could not be located at any other location while still providing reasonable and safe access to public and private properties, maintaining a maximum distance from the major intersection, and meeting the development and design standards for the site. Ann Fowler Civil Engineer II, EIT City of Renton, Plan Reviewer cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Cynthia Moya, Records Management Specialist Clark Close, Senior Planner Fi!e LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Denis Law Mayor September 26, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: City's Response to Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the City's Response to the Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above- referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. son A. Seth, CMC ity Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516, rentonwa.gov Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #MlOS Renton. WA 98058 t~~'.~~~~ltf~-~--~~}til~~j\~:Jffei}i Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave 5 Kent. WA 98032 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058-5819 ~~~~--,~~lftj J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 "'' -:~r.1tll ~~~ John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem, OR 97302 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 Jami Balint Murray Franklyn 14410 Bel-Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, B104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 Emily O'Meara ~~i?¥.fj~~!{ilf~~,~ Joanne Greg-orv 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton. WA 98058 IP"5:trt-EH3FI CW Leland Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator September 26, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA15-000242 Dear Mr. Olbrechts, CITY o= REolT()N ~ :iEP 2i201b RECEIVED Cl ry C'.YRK'<' ~,.-,_1C"' -· , ,) ·,_n-:. - I have reviewed the re-submitted request for reconsideration of HEX Final Decision submitted by Leland and Joanne Gregory for the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (APNs 2223059004) and provide the following comments which expand upon the State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination, written on May 12, 2016, included in the official public record, and describes in detail all of the criteria used to evaluate the development and the creation of new roads as it relates to City of Renton Code and State requirements. Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) is classified by the City of Renton as a Principal Arterial Road. Site access to/from a principal arterial road is determined on a case-by-case basis. The added complexity of it being a state highway provides additional requirements which were considered when evaluating the proposed site access. The City and State requirements below, listed in order of priority, were reviewed when approving the location of the new access point to the proposed Elliott Farms development. 1. Life Safety 1.1. Fire and Emergency vehicle access to the development is required. Per RMC 4-6-060H.5, secondary access is required when a development of three (3) or more buildings is located more than two hundred feet (200') from a public street. Two access points are provided through the development. One access point provides a direct connection to SR-169 while the second access point proposed is available through the existing private lane through the Molasses Creek Condominiums to the west. 1.1.1. If the through access point to SR-169 were to be located at Alley 3 or Alley 2, the remaining length of Road A (approximately 650 feet and 475 feet, respectively, to the furthest end of Lot 18) would then have been considered a dead-end road. 1.1.2. Per RMC 4-6-060H, cul-de-sac and dead end streets are limited in application and may only be permitted where, due to demonstrable physical constraints, no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 1.1.3. If allowed, the maximum length of dead-end streets is 700 feet and over 300 feet requires a cul-de- sac. Locating the through access at Alley 3 would have created a dead-end road greater than 700 feet and would not be approved. Locating the through access at Alley 2 would create a dead-end road greater than 500 feet and would require a cul-de-sac, if it was to be approved. 1.1.4. The proposed through access point to SR-169 is located so as to create the longest length of a through public street and to minimize the length of dead-end alleys servicing the homes. Since an 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat-LUA15-2 Page2of2 alternative to creating dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs is feasible to the site, the need for such a request would not be approved. 1.2. Accident history of the impacted intersection is reviewed and considered when approving new intersections and/or access points on a roadway. It was determined that the new peak hour trips into and out of the proposed development via SR-169 would not cause a decrease in the level of service with the conditioned right-in/right-out turning movements and the proposed location of the new access point to be acceptable. In this case the three-year collision rate (1/1/2012 -12/31/2014) for the entrance to the Molasses Creek Condominiums revealed that the added entrance to the highway did not result in any reported accidents over the three-year study period. Therefore, the added incoming and outgoing trips from the proposed Elliott Farms development are expected to have minimal impact to the existing traffic flows and accident history. Additionally, the three-year collision rate for the intersection at SR-169 and 140th Way SE to the west of the development was 24 total collisions (8 annual average). Therefore, it was determined that the entrance should be placed as far from the intersection as possible. Z. State Requirement -Intersection spacing of less than Y.-mile may be allowed, but only when no reasonable alternative access exists (WAC 468-52-040 (3)). 2.1. The required minimum spacing from the intersection of 140'h Way SE and SR-169 is ls mile or 2,640 feet. The intent is to provide maximum spacing from the major intersection while providing adequate distance between neighboring driveways. 2.1.1. The proposed distance from the 140'h Way SE and SR-169 to the proposed access point to the Elliott Farms Road B intersection is approximately 2,093 feet, roughly 547 feet short of meeting the minimum required spacing. 2.1.2. Based on proposed elevations at the neighboring property lines it could not be located any further to the east. 3. State Requirement -The minimum distance to another (public or private) access point is 330 feet on the same side of the highway. 3.1. Based on the requirements of Items #1 and #2 (above), the distance between the proposed access and the private driveway to the east (approximately 90 feet as shown on the approved WSDOT Channelization Plan) was reviewed. The proposed elevation grades on the Elliott Farms project were reviewed to determine if a shared access point could be made with the neighboring property to the east. The grade difference between the two properties at the east property line would not allow a safe access connection between the two properties. Therefore, the access spacing was found to be an acceptable distance based on the minimal number of trips which would be generated from the single family residence and the proposed Elliott Farms development. It was determined through the review that the intersection to SR-169 from the Elliott Farms development could not be located at any other location while still providing reasonable and safe access to public and private properties, maintaining a maximum distance from the major intersection, and meeting the development and design standards for the site. ~rely ' ···-,,. :,jQ:,_-=~ -,~ Ann Fowler '"<\_ Civil Engineer II, EIT ,, City of Renton. Plan Reviewer cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Cynthia Moya, Records Management Specialist Clark Close, Senior Planner File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Denis Law Mayor September 19, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Re-Submitted Request for Reconsideration of HEX Final Decision filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, . / r-,f} asonA.~~C City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 O / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton. WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem. OR 97302 t&l?:fBffli'i'N!i'ti~~hJiW!!!'~?1t";t~ Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 Jami Balint Murray Franklyn 14410 Bel-Red Ra Bellevue, WA 98007 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058·5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3·344 Renton. WA 98058 U;~:~~~~iti~;"t~tt~!~~,;::r:~'.~2-~~~i~::-~ Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, 8104 Renton. WA 98058 ~-j!lg~~~~-t~(f;?;:{~;j Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton. WA 98058 Emily O'Meara Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton. WA 98058 f;ii~t1~!~ff~~~~j,,~-:~~~-~~~~; 11};!" Leland Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER FINAL DECISION, Dated 8-25-16 and FIRST ORDER ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RESPONSE Dated September 13, 2016 RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA15-000242, ECF,PP,SA-H,MOD Leland and Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 CITY OF RENTON ~ \f.4'1 SEP 192016 ~ RECEIVED CfTY CL!:RK'S OFFICE We own the single family residence directly south of the Elliott Farms Plat on the Southeast corner of the plat. Access to our property is a private road over property owned by the Pioneer Homes HOA on which we there are recorded easements for our use. Our request is based on the following item. 1. SR -169 ENTRANCE TO ELLIOTT FARMS We have attached Exhibit 24 from the original hearing documents which is a letter from the City of Renton regarding the Spacing Deviation Determination for the access to WA -169 with areas highlighted by us. We have also attached the Final Approved Channelization Plan which is Exhibit 38 from the documents. The City states that the spacing does not meet minimum standards of 330 feet of spacing between other connections and apparently approves the plan because there is no feasible alternative because of proposed elevation grades. In looking at the Preliminary On Site Grading and Drainage Plan dated 2-11-15, which is Exhibit 6 from the documents, the elevations at the approved location are no different that the elevations shown at Alley 2 or Alley 3, so our question are: 1. How can this be used as the basis for accepting the design when there are no differences in the elevations all along the property line adjacent to SR-169? 2. Why can't the access to 169 be placed at Alley 2 or Alley 3 so that the 330 foot spacing minimum standard is adhered to? 3. What does the collision rate at the Molasses Creek access have to do with the approval of the design? The acceptance of this new plan forces us to exit only to the right from our existing road on to 169, and go down and turn around somewhere down the road if we wish to travel west on SR -169. The new left turn only lane into Elliott Farm when approaching from the east will not allow us to cross to 169. The new entrance is only 90 feet from our driveway, not the 133 ft. noted in Exhibit 24. When we approach from the West to turn into our property now, we usually turn into the shoulder approximately 120 ft. before our entrance to avoid the traffic that usually is travelling at SOMPH. This may not be legal but it seems to make sense to get out of the traffic rather than slow the traffic down at this point. This shoulder will now be reduced to 5 ft. wide with the new construction. We are now going to have to put on our blinker after passing the proposed Elliott Farm entrance, slow down in the 90 ft. space, check to make sure no one is exiting in the right turn only lane only from Elliott Farms and turn into our driveway. There is no longer a shoulder available to exit into. We think that this has the potential of creating a real cluster in a short distance on this stretch of 169. We hope that this area will have an accident rate of .0 in a 3 year period. Moving the entrance to the West may not be preferable to the Elliott Farm owners but we feel this should be reexamined, because the only criteria for the original placement of this was because of an elevation issue which simply does not exist. The proposed exit road should be reduced in width so that Alley 2 or Alley 3 can be increased to meet the City Road design criteria. Thank you. Leland Gregory Date . Denis Law Mayor May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72°d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 r c City of t . r <· ~, r. r1 r_ r y r. : 1 -~.J -. ..,,,..ij, ._, Community & Economic Development Department CE."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated design deviation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6.07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). AH new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7-080B.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized residential access connection to SR-169, which is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access. The spacing. of new public street connection and the existing single family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor can any feasible alternative as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January l, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0.00 collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) and million vehicle miles of travel (MWM). Staff has completed a review of the subject request and finds the proposed access spacing deviation request is approved, subject to the following conditions: Exhibit 24 Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject to WSDOT approval. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Enclosure: Elliott Farms (SR-169) Draft Channelization Plan (CHl) cc: Ramin Pazookl, Local Agency & Development SeNices Manager WSOOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ owners Patrick o. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudl, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(les) of Record File LUAlS--000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD t-"'Txii7w-- T.23N.R.5E.W.M. SECTION 22 oww-ow~ 1 q_ ""cz ,::;:;z: dj:!o '.;' i,::J 111 :::l' ""za: g~~ :~ :~: -1.&1:S Q ~v ~ -~~ ;1t:t: v,Si: w o:i er, 3: :oi-"' -_, tx [OP, TYP. ; 3; ffii ~ 1 EX EOOE UHE, TYP, "\ ----------·--0111:;!" ol:!:w ow(i oo::3r; om:;!" ::ii,~ :h~ i~t; ~!li1 ~!,~ itt~ :;!l;w .!:u>C .!:11-< .!:B~ o .u o <>~ o l:;w o .1 o -~ ,cJi;;;: -<Id <Cz::c -c!E ·•1.:ti:: liio~ lii..=-Ing~ tiio t;o :ol!!; Ill: zm:s moi-;oi- ~R/W- --0 "" • .. -EX EOP, TYP. J ~ --~,;-_____ ~;_ -~-_: ___________ . ----- 15flli ST~ 30+00,00 = SR 169:f.t, 9HS5.41 - SR 1H M.P. 22..51 -Q "' 11· SR 1 69 MP 22.56 EX 20" SHOULDER Ex11·- £X 11·--- ~i:·-EXB'SHLDR ---·-·--------~--.. -~-------•. ~ .. -~---=-=~~~-~.=-----·---·---------·----------··--·-·----£X8'SHLDR _l_j ___ ....a.EGIN PROJECT _____ ---------·-------- ;!'"' "',,. -SR 169 (SERENTON MAPLE VALLEYROAO) -----51< 169 97+47.00 ---- v,~ 103 S7IS"391~t•E 1iff -. . . 1(11 II )( i' ----.~~----.,--------~----·--··-----~--------,.--··--------~------95 --D1.-i' ~~ EX 11· -~• .. -SR 169-LINE ----·---7x7DGEUNE~-,;~~-----------------------~---------------------------·-_};JL~: 5 ~ EX 11' &roe. TYf', .WHITE EDGE UNi:fYP. -··· --4 -----~ EOP, TYP. :J -----~::·~---------l -· ----------·· 11'-- i ·------__ . __ L __ --------. --------~-==------------~ EX 12.' £X JI -------------------·--,. A ' r----..... w :__.!!..R/W --------__ --__ ---__ --_ _ EX R/W ____ -,J ~ DESIGN DATA 11 - DESIGN CRITERIA I SR t&SI I PLAT ~ESS \ I ~ ' TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION A-A " ' ' ,tj EX ·~· j EX 103' \---J ""1 R/W I R/W 1 F'UNCTIONAL CLASS I UR&AN-PRINCIPAL AlrrERIAL I (1) I'! j 0'1 NEW 6 O.!i CURS I ' ~ PLANTER HEW 5' I ::J HEW ~-1 !ASPHALT ' EX 15771 ' 8 SIDEWALK SHOULDEJI 1 161 ..., os·--t [X 11' EX 11' lc-x ,;•lc-x IS' EX 11' c-x 11' EX B' 1-s, L,,j $ • ! THRU LANE THRU LANE TWLTl I TWl.Tl THRU LANE THRU LAN£ ASPHAL:1 ' 1 e!: 1 ISHOULDEI I lj ~ , I •. I , ~· l i,: I , I " l fi NOT TO SCALE 1.&1 NHS STATlJS .l NHS ~ ACCESS CONTROL 8 DE5'GN VEHICLE .., POSTtD SP£ED «SIGN SP[(D TElUWN MANAGEOi CUSS 3 ws-e1 50 MPH 55 WPH LEVEL TRUCK PERCENTAGE I 5.0X (1) NOT Af'PUCA8!.E; CITY Of RENTON ROADWAY. PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES NON NHS l-11 SU-30 25 MPH 2!i MPH lEVEL <1.0" ~ ---------------------------------------------------------------tx R/w (D WHITE HHNCH STOP LINE PER WSDOT STD. Pi.AN M-24.IS0-04. END PROJECT ... '-' ' z ' I « I @ DOUBLE YEU..OW CENTER (DYC) UNE PER WSDOT STD. PUN M-2.0.10-02.. @ WHITE e-FT TRAFnC LrTIERS (•ONL'Y") PER WSDOT STD, PLANS W-80.10-01 ANO M-80.30-00. @ WHITE EDGE LINE PER WSDOT STD. Pl.AN M-20.10-02. @ WHITE TY1'E 2SR TRAf'nC ARROW PER WSDOT STD. Pl.ANS M-2,i.,4Q-02 AND M-80.10-01. CENTER IN UN[ 4T STATION EX £Of>, TYP. J EX 8' SHLOR I Ci VI I I I-~ I I ~U I I ~~ I SHOWN. _EX EDGE LINE, TYP.~ ________ ·\·, -----_ j \, ~ @ YELLOW PRECAST CONCRETE DUAL FACE SLOPED WOUNU,Bl.E __l_ -------------·--·-·----------------EX S~ + CURB PER WSOOT STO, PLAN F-10.IU-03. ---------·-·---------------·-· --·-----· --~-"l t:: ® YELLOW PREC,\ST SLOPE MOUNTABLE CURB PER WSDOT STD. SR 169 MP 22.72 SR 169 105+93.64 EX 11' 0 PLAN f-10,62-02. -MAPLE-VALLEY R0Ao) -·-·r----··----EX 1--;:-: ~ ® WHITE CROSSWALK LINES PEA WSDOT STD. PLAN M-15.10-01. 107 s75•3a·~1·t ~ -105 1°" ~M •• t;; ~ @) WHITE 2,· HEICHT POST DEUNEATOR (,3• OtAM.) WITH 2 ROWS ~ = v tX , 0 OF WHITE REFLECTIV!. TAPE. --- SR 169 (SE RENTON --···---~---- EX 11' --- SR 16" . ···-:J~LiNE°-----------WHITt&DGE LINE, TYP'.1 -~ ~ ~ @ YELLOW 4-INCH LIME, 10" O.C. EX l1' . . . --. -_-----. ~-,x ll' FOC,,..IYP.\ ------f'.i' --;-...J ~ (ill WHITE TYPE 2L TRAFFIC ARROW PER WSDOT STO, PlAM ___. -------------·-----------~---~-----~ . ---·-_ \ \;!( EX 11 :X: ~ M-2-4,20-02.. CENTER JN I.AN£ AT STATION SHOWN. EXl!l'SHLOR ;J t R 1 (,.) R --- ·---------· -.. .,., .. -J------·------------------------.. , &'P•••R 6 P'"TR 1-~WHITEWIDELANEUNEPERWSDOTSTD.PLNM-2.0.10-02.. EX EDGE UN[, TYP. ---------.. ----·-~-"'"' ""' ct'. [X EOP, TYP. -EX JI 'II :i; GENERAL NOTES -EXJl~i--------------------------T-- ' ' \ i/ 1, ALL SIDEWAU< RAMPS SHALL MEtT CURRENT ADA RE;QUIAEMENTS ~ TO lHE MAXIMUW [XT[NT F'EASIBU:. 2. CHANNELIZATION TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS ANO SPEClnCATIONS, CURRENT E:OITION. I ' DESIGN VARIANCES .&. VARIANCE: ACCESS SPACING. DM 540.03(3XB)2., NOVEMBER 2.01, & JUSTlrlCATION: CURB ON HIGH SPEED rACIUTY. OM 12l0.05, NOVEMBER 201~. FILE NAME TIME DESIGNED BY: ROLETTO ENTERED BY: DUBREUIL/ROLETTO CHECKED BY: BICKET PROJ. ENGR.: BICKET I~ ~~ ~ -~ 'GI w !Q ~.,:t::i'.j ;~:'io -c C?oi- 0::1-mz,c Ill VI""' 1.&J::IE -"'· Rm n ~ + m _.n>-'• ~e;.Ja -""'c:!:o ~~• ~~w 10 WASH -~ """"' "'· Exhibit 38 ~TENW Transportation Engheering NorthWest Transportation Plaming I Desigl I Traffic Impact & Operations 11,400 SE 8th Street Suite 200. Belle\/Ve, WA 98004 Office [425) 889-6747 SR 169 Pl STA SE 1i+17-32 ~ 0 CURVE DATA BOX I 12,. I R !TANGENT I l l12•39•2o·l 100.oo· I 22.0,· I u.oe· lO \ \ l SCM..[ IN fEE'T 90 T,c SUPER ,. CROWN WSOOT NORTHWEST REGION APPROVED CHANNELIZATION PLAN TRAFFIC ~~rJtAREA OPERATIONS Signed ~~~=[,>'-'- Prlnt Hdrc S...,.... ENGINEERl~~E" Slgn•d U- Print W )/..,..,}I Date 1',r,,~,c DQte# M.P. 22.56 TO 22.72f----, ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT SR 169 CHANNELIZATION PLAN CH1 SHEET 1 OF 2 REGIONAL ADM. REVISION DATE BY PrOjeet Contact: Glen DuBreuil PhOne:42~250-0582 RENTON/KING COUNTY JULY 2016 SHEETS Drawer 236 Sequence 08 • 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON ) RE: Elliott Farms ) ) Preliminary Plat j LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD) ) ) _______________ ) FIRST ORDER ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WHEREAS, Leland and Joanne Gregory submitted a request for reconsideration dated August 25, 2016 and received by the City on September 7, 2016, and WHEREAS, Jami Balint, applicant's attorney, submitted an objection to the request for reconsideration dated September 12, 2016, NOW, THEREFORE, Findings: 1. The Gregory Request for reconsideration is based upon several assertions of fact that do not appear to be contained within the administrative record. These factual assertions include comments that address drainage onto the Gregory property, a photograph not admitted into evidence, the location of the Gregory's septic drain field, and a city approved channelization plan. Conclusions: 1. All requests for reconsideration must be limited to evidence that was admitted into the administrative record. New evidence cannot be considered except under very limited circumstances. RCW 36. 70B.050(2) provides that city and county land use permit review procedures can only authorize one open record hearing per project permit application or consolidated project permit application. The purpose of this requirement is to provide for a more efficient permitting system by preventing RECONSIERA TION -1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 decision makers from holding one new hearing after another ad infinitum as new factual issues occur and also to prevent public confusion about when to participate in an on-going series of public hearings. See RCW 36.70B.OIO. For these reasons, once a hearing is closed, any new evidence would be considered a prohibited second hearing. RMC 4-8-100(0)(9) recognizes this limitation by noting that reconsideration may be based upon "the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing". There is nothing to suggest that any of the new evidence included in the Gregory request for reconsideration was not reasonably available to them at the time of the hearing. The new evidence included in the Gregory request for reconsideration was not timely provided prior to the close of the hearing and cannot be considered at this time. 2. Jami Balint argues in the September 12, 2016 objection that the Gregory's don't have standing to file for reconsideration because they did not provide verbal or written comment on the application prior to the close of the hearing. RMC 4-8-100(0)(9) authorizes "[a]ny interested person" to file for reconsideration. This is in stark contrast to provisions such as RMC 4-8-l lO(E)(3) that expressly limit standing in various types of land use actions to parties who have participated in a prior land use proceeding. Given the broad and plain meaning of "[a]ny interested person", it is concluded that the Gregory's can file a motion for reconsideration even though they may not have provided written or verbal comment prior to the close of the hearing. 3. Although the Gregory's request for reconsideration is largely based upon new evidence, it is recognized that the City's regulations do not clearly restrict new evidence in a motion for reconsideration. Some allowances must be made for the fact that local land use hearings need to be accessible to the general public and that the general public cannot be reasonably expected to have a detailed understanding of Chapter 36.70B in order to effectively participate. In this regard the Gregory's will be given another opportunity to revise their request for reconsideration to limit it to evidence admitted into the record. It is recognized that this is likely not possible for their stormwater and septic system arguments, but they may be able to appropriately express their traffic concerns based upon the maps and traffic analysis contained in the record. Based upon the findings and conclusions above, it is NOW ORDERED as follows: I. The Gregory's may submit a revised request for reconsideration by 5:00 pm, September 19, 2016. The revised request must be received by the Renton City Clerk's office by that deadline. The request may be sent by email to CMovaiiRentonwa.~ov. If the Gregory's choose to not submit a revised request for reconsideration that conforms to this order, their currently filed request shall be denied forthwith by a second written order of the examiner. RECONSIERA TION -2 • • 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2. Any evidence used in the Gregory's motion for reconsideration must be based upon evidence admitted into the administrative record. All exhibits used must be clearly identified by page and exhibit number. Any testimony relied upon must be clearly attributed to the speaker. No evidence will be considered by the examiner unless its source is clearly identified as required by this paragraph. 3. Upon receipt of a timely filed revised request for reconsideration that conforms to the terms of this order, the examiner shall forward the request to the City and Applicant for response and give the Gregory's an opportunity for reply. DA TED this 13<h day of September, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner RECONSIERA TION -3 , Denis Law Mayor September 13, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Request for Reconsideration Objection & HEX's First Order on Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-lS-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: I have attached the following: 1) Request for Reconsideration Objection filed by Jami Balint of Murray Franklyn, dated September 12, 2016; and 2) Hearing Examiner's First Order on Request for Reconsideration, dated September 13, 2016. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. ['Q·~~ ([\ Megl, Gregor, CMC 'v1 ~ Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516, rentonwa.gov ' 14410 Sel~Red Road BellevlJe Washington 98007 425.644.2323 September 12, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 MURRAYFRANKLYN --------------- A Family of Compan/e.t Re: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott F anns Preliminary Plat LUA-15 -000242 Dear Mr. Olbrechts, I am in receipt of the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland and Joanne Gregory in the above- referenced matter. On behalf of the Applicant, I'm writing to object to the Request for Reconsideration as an improper attempt to re-open the record. Though present at the hearing, the Leland's did not testify, nor did they provide written comment, and they are now attempting to improperly use the process for reconsideration to do what they failed to do when the record was open. The Leland's request contains information and arguments that are not part of the record, and there is no reason to believe such information was not available to the Lelands had they desired to submit it prior to the close of the record. A request for reconsideration cannot be used to submit new evidence; rather, a party requesting reconsideration has only limited grounds for making such request as set forth in Renton Municipal Code section 4-8-100.G.9, namely that the Hearing Examiner's decision is based on an erroneous procedure, errors oflaw or fact, error in judgment, or the disco,·ery of new evidence which could not be reasonabl) a,ailable at the prior hearing. The Leland's request for reconsideration does not fit into any of the categories set forth in Ri\1C 4-8-100.G.9, and as such should be denied. Allowing the Lelands to submit new information and arguments after the close of the record violates the procedures established by the City of Renton for preliminary plat applications, and will substantially prejudice the applicant. ~~ectfully, \ ('1 !~\;~ J alint General Counsel cc: r,,, '"-'"H7S Clark Close, Settior Planner Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager flep:1/www.murra~ranklyn.com , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON ) RE: Elliott Farms ) ) Preliminary Plat ~ LUA! 5-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD) ) ) FIRST ORDER ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WHEREAS, Leland and Joanne Gregory submitted a request for reconsideration dated August 25, 2016 and received by the City on September 7, 2016, and WHEREAS, Jami Balint, applicant's attorney, submitted an objection to the request for reconsideration dated September 12, 2016, NOW, THEREFORE, Findings: 1. The Gregory Request for reconsideration is based upon several assertions of fact that do not appear to be contained within the administrative record. These factual assertions include comments that address drainage onto the Gregory property, a photograph not admitted into evidence, the location of the Gregory's septic drain field, and a city approved channelization plan. Conclusions: I. All requests for reconsideration must be limited to evidence that was admitted into the administrative record. New evidence cannot be considered except under very limited circumstances. RCW 36. 70B.050(2) provides that city and county land use permit review procedures can only authorize one open record hearing per project permit application or consolidated project permit application. The purpose of this requirement is to provide for a more efficient permitting system by preventing RECONSIERATION -I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 decision makers from holding one new hearing after another ad infinitum as new factual issues occur and also to prevent public confusion about when to participate in an on-going series of public hearings. See RCW 36.70B.010. For these reasons, once a hearing is closed, any new evidence would be considered a prohibited second hearing. RMC 4-8-IOO(G)(9) recognizes this limitation by noting that reconsideration may be based upon "the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing". There is nothing to suggest that any of the new evidence included in the Gregory request for reconsideration was not reasonably available to them at the time of the hearing. The new evidence included in the Gregory request for reconsideration was not timely provided prior to the close of the hearing and cannot be considered at this time. 2. Jami Balint argues in the September 12, 2016 objection that the Gregory's don't have standing to file for reconsideration because they did not provide verbal or written comment on the application prior to the close of the hearing. RMC 4-8-IOO(G)(9) authorizes "[a]ny interested person" to file for reconsideration. This is in stark contrast to provisions such as RMC 4-8-11 O(E)(3) that expressly limit standing in various types of land use actions to parties who have participated in a prior land use proceeding. Given the broad and plain meaning of "[a]ny interested person", it is concluded that the Gregory's can file a motion for reconsideration even though they may not have provided written or verbal comment prior to the close of the hearing. 3. Although the Gregory's request for reconsideration is largely based upon new evidence, it is recognized that the City's regulations do not clearly restrict new evidence in a motion for reconsideration. Some allowances must be made for the fact that local land use hearings need to be accessible to the general public and that the general public cannot be reasonably expected to have a detailed understanding of Chapter 36.70B in order to effectively participate. In this regard the Gregory's will be given another opportunity to revise their request for reconsideration to limit it to evidence admitted into the record. It is recognized that this is likely not possible for their storrnwater and septic system arguments, but they may be able to appropriately express their traffic concerns based upon the maps and traffic analysis contained in the record. Based upon the findings and conclusions above, it is NOW ORDERED as follows: I. The Gregory's may submit a revised request for reconsideration by 5:00 pm, September 19, 2016. The revised request must be received by the Renton City Clerk's office by that deadline. The request may be sent by email to CMova'iiRentonv.a.,wv. If the Gregory's choose to not submit a revised request for reconsideration that conforms to this order, their currently filed request shall be denied forthwith by a second written order of the examiner. RECONSIERATION -2 ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2. Any evidence used in the Gregory's motion for reconsideration must be based upon evidence admitted into the administrative record. All exhibits used must be clearly identified by page and exhibit number. Any testimony relied upon must be clearly attributed to the speaker. No evidence will be considered by the examiner unless its source is clearly identified as required by this paragraph. 3. Upon receipt of a timely filed revised request for reconsideration that conforms to the terms of this order, the examiner shall forward the request to the City and Applicant for response and give the Gregory's an opportunity for reply. DA TED this 13 1h day of September, 2016. Phi A.OI City of Renton Hearing Examiner RECONSIERA TION -3 Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #Ml05 Renton, WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem, OR 97302 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 Jami Balint Murray Franklyn 14410 Bel-Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 .- DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 980S8-S819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, B104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 -,---------------- Emily O'Meara (__,~ Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Leland Gregory Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 14410 Bellevue Wash1ngto11 98007 425.644.2323 fax 425 643.3475 September 12, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 MU RRAYF RAN KLYN A Family of Companies Re: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA-15 -000242 Dear ~fr. Olbrecht::;, ;:;,~CC.ii/ED ·:!l Y C,_f.-::RK'S ,:;i=FiU I am in receipt of the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland and Joanne Gregory in the above- referenced matter. On behalf of the Applicant, I'm writing to object to the Request for Reconsideration as an improper attempt to re-open the record. Though present at the hearing, the Leland's did not testify, nor did they provide written comment, and they are now attempting to improperly use the process for reconsideration to do what they failed to do when the record was open. The Leland's request contains information and arguments that are not part of the record, and there is no reason to believe such information was not available to the Lelands had they desired to submit it prior to the close of the record. A request for reconsideration cannot be used to submit new evidence; rather, a party requesting reconsideration has only limited grounds for making such request as set forth in Renton Municipal Code section 4-8-100.G.9, namely that the Hearing Examiner's decision is based on an erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing. The Leland's request for reconsideration does not fit into any of the categories set forth in RMC 4-8-100.G.9, and as such should be denied. Allowing the Lelands to submit new information and arguments after the close of the record violates the procedures established by the City of Renton for preliminary plat applications, and will substantially prejudice the applicant. R;i· ectfully, I, 1, i\1 "',-"' Jam alint General Counsel cc: Clark Close, Senior Planner Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager http·//www.murTayfranklyn.com Denis Law Mayor September 13, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Request for Reconsideration Objection & HEX's First Order on Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: I have attached the following: 1) Request for Reconsideration Objection filed by Jami Balint of Murray Franklyn, dated September 12, 2016; and 2) Hearing Examiner's First Order on Request for Reconsideration, dated September 13, 2016. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. ~,·p·~~ ( 1\ Megl, Gregor, CMC ~ -Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (12) l 055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-<i510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 14-4 I 0 Sel-Red Ro.i.d Bellevue. Wasf\ington September 12, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 -- MURRAYFRANKLYN --------------------- A Famrfy of C,:,mpan/es Re: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA -15 -000242 Dear Mr. Olbrechts, I am in receipt of the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland and Joanne Gregory in the above- referenced matter. On behalf of the Applicant, I'm writing to object to the Request for Reconsideration as an improper attempt to re-open the record. Though present at the hearing, the Leland's did not testify, nor did they provide written comment, and they are now attempting to improperly use the process for reconsideration to do what they failed to do when the record was open. The Leland's request contains information and arguments that are not part of the record, and there is no reason to believe such information was not available to the Lelands had they desired to submit it prior to the close of the record. A request for reconsideration cannot be used to submit new evidence; rather, a party requesting reconsideration has only limited grounds for making such request as set forth in Renton Municipal Code section 4-8-100.G.9, namely that the Hearing Examiner's decision is based on an erroneous procedure, errors oflaw or fact, error in judgment, or the disco,·ery of new evidence which could not be reasonabl> a,ailable at the prior hearing. The Leland's request for reconsideration does not fit into any of the categories set forth in Ri\1C 4-8-100.G.9, and as such should be denied. Allowing the Lelands to submit new information and arguments after the close of the record violates the procedures established by the City of Renton for preliminary plat applications, and will substantially prejudice the applicant. ,aoc, General Counsel 425.644.2323 cc: "'' '25JHH7' Clark Close, Senior Planner Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager h~:/i'www.mumiyfn.nlc:lyn.com 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON ) RE: Elliott Farms ) ) Preliminary Plat ~ LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD) ) ) _________________ ) FIRST ORDER ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WHEREAS, Leland and Joanne Gregory submitted a request for reconsideration dated August 25, 2016 and received by the City on September 7, 2016, and WHEREAS, Jami Balint, applicant's attorney, submitted an objection to the request for reconsideration dated September 12, 2016, NOW, THEREFORE, Findings: I. The Gregory Request for reconsideration is based upon several assertions of fact that do not appear to be contained within the administrative record. These factual assertions include comments that address drainage onto the Gregory property, a photograph not admitted into evidence, the location of the Gregory's septic drain field, and a city approved channelization plan. Conclusions: I. All requests for reconsideration must be limited to evidence that was admitted into the administrative record. New evidence cannot be considered except under very limited circumstances. RCW 36. 708.050(2) provides that city and county land use permit review procedures can only authorize one open record hearing per project permit application or consolidated project permit application. The purpose of this requirement is to provide for a more efficient permitting system by preventing RECONSIERATION -I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 decision makers from holding one new hearing after another ad irifinitum as new factual issues occur and also to prevent public confusion about when to participate in an on-going series of public hearings. See RCW 36.70B.OIO. For these reasons, once a hearing is closed, any new evidence would be considered a prohibited second hearing. RMC 4-8-100(0)(9) recognizes this limitation by noting that reconsideration may be based upon "the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing". There is nothing to suggest that any of the new evidence included in the Gregory request for reconsideration was not reasonably available to them at the time of the hearing. The new evidence included in the Gregory request for reconsideration was not timely provided prior to the close of the hearing and cannot be considered at this time. 2. Jami Balint argues in the September 12, 2016 objection that the Gregory's don't have standing to file for reconsideration because they did not provide verbal or written comment on the application prior to the close of the hearing. RMC 4-8-100(0)(9) authorizes "[a]ny interested person" to file for reconsideration. This is in stark contrast to provisions such as RMC 4-8-11 O(E)(3) that expressly limit standing in various types of land use actions to parties who have participated in a prior land use proceeding. Given the broad and plain meaning of "[a]ny interested person", it is concluded that the Gregory's can file a motion for reconsideration even though they may not have provided written or verbal comment prior to the close of the hearing. 3. Although the Gregory's request for reconsideration is largely based upon new evidence, it is recognized that the City's regulations do not clearly restrict new evidence in a motion for reconsideration. Some allowances must be made for the fact that local land use hearings need to be accessible to the general public and that the general public cannot be reasonably expected to have a detailed understanding of Chapter 36.70B in order to effectively participate. In this regard the Gregory's will be given another opportunity to revise their request for reconsideration to limit it to evidence admitted into the record. It is recognized that this is likely not possible for their stormwater and septic system arguments, but they may be able to appropriately express their traffic concerns based upon the maps and traffic analysis contained in the record. Based upon the findings and conclusions above, it is NOW ORDERED as follows: 1. The Gregory's may submit a revised request for reconsideration by 5:00 pm, September 19, 2016. The revised request must be received by the Renton City Clerk's office by that deadline. The request may be sent by email to CMo\adRcntonwa.gov. If the Gregory's choose to not submit a revised request for reconsideration that conforms to this order, their currently filed request shall be denied forthwith by a second written order of the examiner. RECONSIERATION -2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2. Any evidence used in the Gregory's motion for reconsideration must be based upon evidence admitted into the administrative record. All exhibits used must be clearly identified by page and exhibit number. Any testimony relied upon must be clearly attributed to the speaker. No evidence will be considered by the examiner unless its source is clearly identified as required by this paragraph. 3. Upon receipt of a timely filed revised request for reconsideration that conforms to the terms of this order, the examiner shall forward the request to the City and Applicant for response and give the Gregory's an opportunity for reply. DATED this 13th day of September, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner RECONSIERATION -3 Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #MlOS Renton, WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 ~,ti~~J;;tt~~,~~l;,1E~f~~~ John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem, OR 97302 Patrick Lennon ' . Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 tf-~~2£trf.i!~!l!l1~ Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, 8104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 Emilv O'Meara Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 ~-~\l\ii<"""~~·""""""7'""'j;"'-"r"' ·~4: _,, ~ ...... ~.,;.;~.,-;;;;>t-:'!iit';&'.~"t!iHt! Leland Gregory ~ Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Attachments: Cynthia Moya Wednesday, September 07, 2016 9:53 AM Phil Olbrechts Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Clark Close; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren; Sabrina Mirante; Vanessa Dolbee; Megan Gregor Elliott Farms Reconsideration.pd/ We have received this Request for Reconsideration in the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat matter at 8:30 am today (9/7/2016) from Leland & Joanne Gregory. I will be mailing out a letter along with a copy of this reconsideration to all parties of record later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 --~ ___.....J@roD~ 1 Denis Law Mayor September 7, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72"d Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242} Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, Megan Gregor, CMC Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (11) 1055 South Grady Way• Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor September 7, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72"d Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-lS-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, Megan Gregor, CMC Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (11) 1055 South Grady Way• Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 O / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor September 7, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72"d Av S Kent, WA 98032 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Request for Reconsideration for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-lS-000242) Dear Ms. Halversen: Attached is your copy of the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory in the above-referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me or Clark Close, Senior Planner at (425) 430-7289. Sincerely, I Megan Gregor, CMC Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (11) 1055 South Grady Way• Renton.Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 O /Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER FINAL DECISION, Dated 8-25-16 RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA15-000242, ECF,PP,SA-H,MOD Leland and Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Ci1Y OF RENTON SEP O 7 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE We own the single family residence directly south of the Elliott Farms Plat on the Southeast corner of the plat. Access to our property is a private road over property owned by the Pioneer Homes HOA on which we there are recorded easements for our use. Our request is based on 3 items that are detailed below. 1. OFF SITE DRAINAGE ISSUES Attached are 6 pages from the Preliminary Technical Information Report for the Plat, dated April 10, 2015, of the Off Site Analysis. The areas highlighted in Orange discuss the drainage as it relates to our property. There are several pertinent items missing from this report. Under Task 3 of the Upstream Drainage Area, it does not state that the drainage collected in the ditch and conveyed to an 18" culvert crossing WA-169 is first collected on the east side of the road into our property and then runs through a culvert under the road to reach the ditch, but this is noted in the System Table under Location 1A. The storm water from our property drains down into the Plat property along the south boundary between the 2 properties, on to the road with some collected in the area east of the road and some running directly into the ditch. The main item that is missing from this report is that the overflow from the retention pond for Pioneer Place Homes also drains into this area. Once the main part of the pond fills, the overflow area fills and then the water starts flowing into the area east of our road. Once this occurs, the area east of the road fills, the culvert under our road to the ditch is unable to handle all of the water and flooding occurs in this area with the excess water running cross the road into the ditch. A picture taken on December 9, 2015, shows what the area looks like when this happens. The area east of our road always contains water during the entire rainy season but when the retention pond overflow discharges to this extent, you can see the result. The Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan for Elliott Farms shows filling the area directly in front of our property approximately 5' higher that the existing grade of our road from the southeast corner of their property to the northeast corner where it tapers to a height of approximately 3' higher than the road. They show a 4' modular block wall along the entire north boundary of our property and continuing % of the way along their east boundary. They are covering the existing drainage ditch referred to above and replacing it with a storm drain that will flow into the existing 18" drain that goes under WA -169. The Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan shows a catch basin on the south part of this system that shows something extending into the road part way but no further details. We presume this represents the culvert under the road. Our concern is during periods of heavy rain, that the modular wall will act as a dam and allow storm water naturally draining from our property that now goes into the Plat property and also that drains off the road into the existing ditch, will now be blocked from draining and will collect and pool up against the wall. This same situation will occur on the road where the wall and fill will act as a dam. When the existing Pioneer Place pond overflows again, the water will flood our road, being held from draining by the modular wall. We wish to request that a condition of approval be included in your report, that the developers include off site details for the construction of a system to remove the storm water that collects both from the upstream drainage and from the overflow from the Pioneer Place retention pond once the existing ditch is covered. This should include some method of preventing the accumulation and pooling of water that will occur because of the erection of the modular wall along our property line and existing road. 2. SEPTIC SYSTEM AND DRAIN FIELD, WATER LINE. In the summer of 2015, we reviewed with Rick Lennon and Todd Levitt along with their engineer Mark Sumrok, that our current line was running through the Plat property and that our septic drain field was possibly on their property also. They agreed to review this and assured us that if this was the case, they would hook us up to the sewer and run the water line as necessary. We contacted them prior to the August 9, 2016 hearing to see if they had determined anything regarding these items. They responded after the meeting that they would again look into these matter and get back to us. The Preliminary Utility Plan indicates that the water to our property will need to be rerouted as needed but nothing is specifically shown as to where this will be routed. There is no reference on this plan to our drain field. We do not have any records regarding the drain field location and have checked the county records and did not find anything. The septic tank is approximately 8' from our property line with Elliott Farms Plat. We wish to request that a condition of approval be included your report, that the area of the septic drain field be located and the necessary actions required, if any, to provide sewer to our property be addressed. The impact of placing the fill over or near our drain field and the water pooling caused by the building of the modular block wall near the drain field location also needs to be considered. The Final Utility Plan should include the plans for rerouting the water line as well as the action required for the sewer. 3. SR -169 ENTRANCE TO ELLIOTI FARMS We have attached Exhibit 24 from the original hearing documents which is a letter from the City of Renton regarding the Spacing Deviation Determination for the access to WA -169 with areas highlighted by us. We have also attached the Final Approved Channelization Plan received from the City of Renton Planning Department dated 7-22- 16, which we did not find in the documents from the August 9th hearing. The City states that the spacing does not meet minimum standards of 330 feet of spacing between other connections and apparently approves the plan because there is no feasible alternative because of proposed elevation grades. In looking at the Preliminary On Site Grading and Drainage Plan dated 2-11-15, the elevations at the approved location are no different that the elevations shown at Alley 2 or Alley 3, so our question are: 1. How can this be used as the basis for accepting the design when there are no differences in the elevations? 2. Why can't the access to 169 be placed at Alley 2 or Alley 3 so that the 330 foot spacing minimum is adhered to? 3. What does the collision rate at the Molasses Creek access have to do with the creation of an entirely different designed exiUentrance to this Plat? The acceptance of this new plan allows us to exit only to the right from our road on to 169, and go down and turn around somewhere down the road. The new left turn only lane into Elliott Farm when approaching from the east will not allow us to cross to 169. The new entrance is only 90 feet from our driveway, not the 133 ft. noted in Exhibit 24. When we approach from the West to turn into our property now, we usually turn into the shoulder approximately 120 ft. before our entrance to avoid the traffic that usually is travelling at 50MPH. This may not be legal but it seems to make sense to get out of the traffic rather than slow the traffic down at this point. This shoulder will now be reduced to 5 ft. wide with the new construction. We are now going to have to put on our blinker after passing the Elliott Farm entrance and slow down in the 90 ft. space, check to make sure no one is exiting in the right turn only lane only from Elliott Farms and turn into our driveway. There is no longer a shoulder available to exit into. We are probably complaining a little here, but think that this has the potential of creating a real cluster in a short distance on this stretch of 169. We hope that this area will have an accident rate of .0 in a 3 year period. Moving the entrance to the West may not be preferable to the Elliott Farm owners but we feel this should be reexamined, if the criteria for the original placement of this was because of an elevation issue which does not exist. The proposed exit road could possibly be reduced in width so that Alley 2 of Alley 3 could be increased to meet the City Road design criteria. Thank you. Leland Gregory Date t'.:fuanne Gregory CJ Date I I I I I I • • I I I I I I I I I ' 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS The proposed Plat of Elliott Farm is an attached single-family residential project consisting of 45 lots zoned R-14. The tax parcel number is 2223059004 and is 6.07 acres in size. The site is located on the south side and adjacent to Maple Valley Hwy (WA-169) at the eastern terminus of 140" Way SE (Private Road), in a portion of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton. Please refer to the vicinity map in the section. The site is rectangular in shape with 691.70' of frontage along Maple Valley Hwy (WA-169). A condominium site, known as Molasses Creek Phase 1, is located on the west side of the project. A single family residential development, known as Pioneer Place, is located to the east and a single family residence is located south. Ground cover mainly consists of weeds, grass and brush; however, the southwest corner of the site contains a mixed variety of trees. A wetland exists at the southwest corner of the site with a 50' buffer. This site is currently undeveloped, but contains remnants from an existing farm, including partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. Existing on-site utilities were constructed along the northern portion of the site for this development. On-site soils are mapped as Newberg (till soils) . The on-site topography is generally flat. The southwest corner of the project (approximately 1.85 acres) gently slopes toward the wetland. The wetland is approximately 4-6 feet lower than the edge of the 50' buffer and drains westerly through more wetlands located behind Molasses Creek before entering into a 24-inch culvert under 140'" Ave Se. The remaining portion of the site drains into the roadside ditch along WA-169. There is an ~~isling drainage ditch along the east side of the project that conveys off-site upstream flows from the southeast. The elevations on the site range from 87 to 107. TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW • Adopted Basin Plans: The site is located within Mainstem Reach 2 of Lower Cedar River Basin. Refer to Appendix A for the portions of the basin that applies to this project. • Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable. • Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: This site is located in the Mainstem Reach 2 in Lower Cedar River Basin, which is covered by the Lower Cedar River Basin ancl Nonpoint Pollution Action Plan dated July 1997 (included in Appendix A). • Critical Drainage Area Maps: This project will not discharge drainage to any critical areas or wetlands as it will be discharging developed run-off to existing conveyance system that is conveyed to an existing water quality facility prior to discharging into the Cedar River. Therefore, no critical areas are to be affected. • Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: Please see the attached FEMA Map (Section 1.0) utilized for this analysis. As indicated on the map, the site is located in Zone X and is outside of the 500-year floodplain. • Other Off-Site Analysis Reports: A site investigation was conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis. The United States Department of Agriculture Soils Conservation Service Map is also provi0ed. See Figure 4 -Soils Map in Section 1.0. • Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on review of the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folios located in this section and special reports prepared by consultants included in section 6.0 of the TIR, the site contains a wetland and buffer at the southwest corner of the site. The site is also located within an erosion, landslide, and seismic hazard area. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc I I I I I t. • Road Drainage Problems: The project researched drainage complaints from King County and the city of Renton. The city had no records of any downstream drainage complaints within the drainage investigation areas. King County had a listing of the drainage complaints within a mile of the site; however, none of the complaints were within the downstream drainage area and were not applicable. • United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: Based on the Soils Map (Figure 4 -Soils Map, Section 1.0) for this area. the site contains Newburg (Ng) silt loam with a small portion of Alderwood and Kitsap {AkF). very Steep, located near the south boundary line. The soils were modeled as till soils for drainage computations. • Wetland Inventory Map: From the Wetland Assessment Report by Radakke Associates located in section 6.0 of this TIR, there is a wetland in the southwest corner of the site. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable. TASK3 City of Renton Aquifer Protection Zones: Per the City of Renton's GIS Map. the project site is not located within an Aquifer Recharge Area. FIELD INSPECTION The field inspection for this Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis was conducted on April 3, 2015 for the purpose of analyzing the proposed project site and its upstream and downstream corridors. The weather was cloudy with occasional rain showers. The off-site drainage system was inspected from the project limits to the edge of the outfall at the Cedar River. The boundary and topographic survey and LIDAR map were also used to identify the drainage patterns associated with the property. Upstream Drainage Area The project contains two off-site upstream drainage areas that drain onto the project. See Exhibit A showing the upstream drainage areas. The more southwesterly upstream drainage basin (Basin OS1) area contains 3.3 acres of upstream drainage area. The majority of the area is steep slopes. The upstream drainage area drains to the existing wetland at the southwest corner of the site where flows are then conveyed westerly to a larger wetland. The south easterly upstream drainage area (Basin OS2) contains approximately 17 .2 acres. The drainage from this upstream drainage basin is collected in a ditch along the projects easterly boundary line and conveyed to an existing 18-inch culvert crossing WA-16g. Onsite Drainage In the pre-developed condition approximately 1.85 acres of the site drains toward the wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The remaining 4.22 acres drains toward the north into the existing ditch along WA-169. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Jc;onveyance system !')Uisance problems are minor but not chronic flooding or erosion problems that result from the overfow of a constructed conveyance system that is substandard or has become too small as a result of upstream development. Such problems warrant additional attention because of their chronic nature and because they result from the failure of a conveyance system to provide a minimum acceptable level of protection. ;fhere were no ®rweyance system nuisance. problems observed · during the Site. lilsit.. Furthermore, based' On a· review of the drainage complaints received from King County and the City of Renton, there is no evidence of past conveyance system nuisance problems occurring in the direct downstream drainage course, as there are no records that have been submitted. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc I 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the concentration of runoff into erosion-sensitive open drainage features. Severe erosion problems warrant additional attention because they pose a significant threat either to health and safety or to public or private property. Based on our site visit, there was no evidence of, or potential for, erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard downstream within the limits of the study. All runoff sheet flows to existing conveyance channels, where flows are then conveyed off site. Stormwater runoff from the proposed roads and rooftops from the developed project will be collected in catch basins and conveyed through pipes to an existing water quality facility where it will then be discharged directly to the Cedar River. As a result no future erosion problems should occur downstream because of this development. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depr3Ssions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: • Flooding of the finished area of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings. Flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or seve,ely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." Based on a review of the FEMA Map (Section 1.0) the proposed site is outside of the 500-year floodplain, and there is no evidence of severe flooding problems encountered during our visit. TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: The downstream drainage course does not exhibit any major concerns and appears to contain plenty of capacity to convey the additional developed flows from Elliott Farm. Please refer to Exhibit A for the Upstream/Downstream Drainage Area Map Exhibit B for the Off-site Analysis Drainage System Table. Drainage complaints were requested from the city of Renton and King County Water and Land Resources as required, however, there were no applicable complaints within the downstream drainage course within the last 10 years. In the developed condition, stormwater generated from the new impervious surfaces, including road and rooftops, will discharge in two locations. The westerly portion of the site will discharge into the conveyance system constructed by Molasses Creek and be conveyed to the existing water quality facility (wetpond) before discharging into the Cedar River. The drainage from the north easterly portion of the project will be conveyed to a proposed 24-inch conveyance system that will replace the existing ditch along the WA-169 frontage. From here the drainage will be directed through a series of ditches and culverts before entering into the existing wetpond. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc TASKS MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS The only mitigation required, based on the analysis performed on the downstream drainage course is to upsize the existing 12;inch storm pipe to an 18-inch where the project will be connecting to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek. Please refer to the 1 OD year Conveyance Capacity Analysis in section 5.0 showing that the existing convyance system in Molasses Creek contains enough capacity to convey the future developed flows from Elliott Farm. The project is required to provide frontage improvements along WA-169. This will include installing curb, gutter and sidewalk. The existing ditches will be replaced ·.vith a 24-inch piped conveyance system along the frontage and will discharge to the existing ditch. The existing conveyance system appears to contain plenty of capacity to convey the future developed flows from the developed project to the Cedar River. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc Basin: Lower Cedar River Location ID Sec Map -A IB IC 2A 2B 2C 20 2E Drainage Component. Type,.Name, and 0Size Type: sheet flow, swalc, slrcam, d11mm::I, pipe, pond; size, Uiamctcr, surface area 18" CULVERT Channel 18" CULVERT Channel 18" culvert Channel 18" Culvert Channel OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasin Name: Mainstem Reach 2 ;Draiµage. Component · Description Drainage busin, vt..-gctation, cover, t..lcpth, type of sensitive area. volume Drains across ex gravel road, 17.2 acre up-stream basin 6"-1' wide x 1.5 to 2' deep with gentle side slopes. Covered in blackberry bushes Crosses under WA-169 Channel draining cast to west along south side ofWA-169, l.5'-2' deep with 4:1 side slopes Drains under existing access Drains West along W A-169, 1.5' to 2' deep with 4: I side slopes Drains under access Drains West along WA-169, 1.5-2' deep with 4:1 side Slope % 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% I 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% Distance. . fromSite.. Discllarge . .Exlstlngc .... · Problems l!o~aL · ProbleDIS Fl. Constriction~ under capacity, ponding, uvcrtopping, Oooding, habitat or organism dc.struction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion Discharges I Outlet should onto site be maintained Along I None seen. site's west boundary line Discharge I None seen from Ditch at NE corner of site North I None noted boundary of site 0 None noted 0 None noted NW corner I None noted of site 0-220' I None noted Subbasin Number: ---- ,:,QbJiP1\V,lltlQ~,~-,] ~-.. ·~,~.;~:):_{. . ·c'<<•···:rRelident,>:·.,; ; Tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts Culvert conveying flows to existing ditch Flows observed in channel, heavy blackberry bushes Flows observed during site visit. Receives flows from pond on Pioneer place and 17 .2 acre upstream basin Grass lined channel with very little slope. No restrictions, outlets to channel Grass lined channel with very Ii ttle slope No restrictions, outlets to channel Grass lined ditch outletting to 24" D. I. Culvert. Flows 15734-0IT-Sitc Analysis Dn1inagc System Table.doc IBl >oZ IO C ~ !E. 3 , o· CT ~. :::, m ' CJ) ~ J Ill ~ CJ) 3 . -· CT c. a CD -a CJ) 3i 5· ) CD C. c. o· · a Ill ;! CD I i5 §- . -=E . Q.:::, -CJ) :~ ~ -· CD :::, Ill <O 3 = C. o~ =I: !:!!. ~-:::, -Ill <D <O <D ""' 41~~Gtl~u,s,~ i .~ ; " 'O"': ~>'olto HGV,.t,,t,,~ 14 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUlH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 2~1-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX CML [NGINEfRING, LANO PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONM£NTAI. SERVIC['::i Duign•J~ Dr<>"A _l,!!;i. Chc~ked _l_ill:i._ Aj>pfo,.o....!!Ya.. D<it, ...iLU.!.i.. 1 ;;{ig,s: ·elimi!1Ury\f>reluni1>or1 Tlff\15734 ·L..!ur<lWiJ 0..,\a/font:V6/2015 t-o~ PM Scllie.\ ~ I ,,. Horiz<>nluJ ,· .. ~oo· Ve<heo! ,;, lilSIJl,IROI( -~,tt- • for, •. // Ll.lJ ~ l•,:1 I ,, • I,-, ,; ' \ \ C i ( l 1, I \ , 1 , \ , •. f \ • l ' ~ ' ' .• \ ~ ' '\ \ ' I I', (_ I \' \1 1· ~ ,' . " . ,. I , ,1, '•· i• _,, I ,,'\\} ,,·,1 (\Ji ' .-.~, .1 \~·-' \ ·:': j ( (i' "\ ' \. ~ { J r· 'I (_, 1 -\ "::'._>\ ("'.\ /,I),, ! \ ) _j -•.. ')\) ·'/l / > ,, . \1 ' ,z , \ 1 . ' a C \ ' • (,'' :,u.' ~11 ··-a"'-\, \ \ '\ \ I , .... 1 ~ 0 \ °' o . \11 1 ( / ,,. I • f I (' ·'~ ~~ / / ,r-• 1>1\ r/0 • ~ ~ I/ r· ·1 1.v;li " (,',.." .,.""I S> ·r, r-· ,.\.• /· l)· _(; / ' t::i l/' ' I , ~<-i', \ ·.,( ' I ·' \ I •·,. '·,'-,. '-• • . .J\ '1 ~ I \ ·,, --.,'-t<. .. :,: (" \ f" \ ... ' \ . \\· i, I, • " ' I •, ··\ • I r-, • <\' I t' I ' \ (\),, ,P.J, ',/ ·1\\/1 l 1 • \ I· •/ \}\-('~·. ,,,,, . f-1~ ': ,-' ,I ! ~'? ::i ' • : 1 i \ t,., ' ' /· .·'/· , i\·' r' .. < \ : .. I --." ,· : 0 ( i ~ 8 k-/-,, I". / .,., ~ n~ Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE AREA MAP ~ Rev,s,c,,i • De nis Law Mayor May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Community & Econom ic Devel opment Department C.E. "Ch ip"Vi ncent, Admini strator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated des i gn devi ation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6.07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Av e SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). All new residenti al subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7 -0808.2}; therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channel ized residential access connection to SR-169 , w hich is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approx imately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Mapl e Va ll ey Hwy, and appro ximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the w eekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring d uring the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access . The spacing of new public stre et connection and the existing si ngle family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor ca n any feasible alternati v e as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0 .00 collisions per million entering vehicles (M EV) and million vehicle m i les of trave l (MWM ). Staff has completed a revi ew of the subject request and finds t he proposed access spacing deviation request i s approved, subject to the following conditions: E xhi bit 24 Ren t on City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way • Renton , Was hing ton 98057 , rentonwa.gov 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject to WSDOT approval. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~--;.--- Ann Fowler ~ Civil Engineer II Enclosure: Elliott Farms (SR-169) Draft Channelization Plan (CHl) cc: Ramin Pazooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSOOT Jennifer Henning 1 Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrtson, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD I-Txii7w-------------~--------------~-o.., ,tCIZ ,::i;i:: ~~:; ,:i O o"" GI 0 oz~ "'~ :s.: :o t;m: "'5 jiff T.23N.R.5E.W.M. :;E SECTION 22 ~ C :ci= ::~ ; ..: :!IP ~o ~' - 1 ~3 WeO mz= +.= uC a~~ .,, C?= mo =' ~· --- EX 8' SHLDR j!U mzw ~e• C 111:l t; • g~ -o ~ ci 011: ·w 01.o!C., ...... ~ ,..,,.... OK~ 2~ffi is~ ie~ ~~B :;':u :~~ A::i: :!!i:E till:~ :!::zu en < c;,ao:: ~ 8~ 0 ~i!e g ci" [X EOP, TYP-\ g m2 ~ 0 -_ J -ti 0,: ~ ---~ ~ ~ m --•- ci"R;W - 1S;4TH $TA 30+00.00 - SR 169 STA 94+65.<I-I z SR 169 M.P. 22.51 ~,_ •• :-.~:.~~~--::.::.::.!_XEllGE_:::·· TY·~~_:__::..--_::_::.::._::= __ -_::-----_::_::---~----_~ =----=r_::_:-_::.::.=--=-+-BE_GINPROJECT -------·--.. ------ ~ i3 EX,,-.------ ~ ~ EX ,,. -SR 169 (SE-RE_NTON _~IPLE VALLEY ROAD)_ -----n . ----------.. -.,-_ --e---~--, ---_ ,-,-, -, Vl :> 1 101 II SR 1 69 MP 22.56 SR 169 97+47.00 ~ -- 0 X 6 7 ~, •. 'ii!! 1 EX 20' SHOULDER EX 11·----- EX 11·---- w...J .-~ -----------·-----_______ _,,_ ----.. ~-=-------~·--~~~ ------------~--·-----~ ~ -SR 169-UNE EX EDGE LINE. TYP-~ 510"07'3 D( 11·----1 __ ::r ~ ~ &Foe, TYP. WHITE EDG£ LINE, TYP. --" · ·roe, ___ ----~ EOP,~--------·-----_ ----=--l ---_ U tn tx 8' SHI.OR ________ \ ---"').,~ EX 12' EX 11'--- ~ -· ..,,---------·-----,. --------... ------------------=--:=i~---------------, <...;. R35' "'~"~' ::_/, -~---.--~,(. A '·-./·,, >' -• I < / ...J ' ----........ . I EX A/W EX R/W I ' ·., I '~---------DESIGN DATA --------------', I :,: "/ . 4: \ t-! ti,,{.? TYPICAL ROADWAY,_ SECTION A-A DESIGN CRITE.... SR"' PLAT ,cc,ss I \ ! ~ Ex ,45' I Ex ,o3' H FUNeTIOHAL cv.ss uRSAN-PAINC1PAL ARTERIAL (1) t ~ C_:,(1:· c : ·t I 111::, R/W I R/W , i..i w NHS: STATUS NHS NON NHS 0'1 NEW 6'-;-0.5 CURS I ·1 ~ ~ ~ ACC£SS CONTROL MANAGED: cuss 3 (I) PLANTER NEW 5' ::J w DESIGN V[HICLE WB-67 SU-30 NEW 5~1 !ASPHALT 1 1 EX 671' ' ~ g POST£O SPEED 50 MPH 25 MPH SIDEWALK SHOULDER , ~ ~ l;;,l o "' ,_j 0: 11' EX 11' rx e· rx 6' rx 11' EX 11· EX a· • j t:: ::J ~ ,.... 1,,1 DESIGN SPEED 55 WPH 25 MPH o.5 , THRU LANE THRU LANE TW\.TL I TWLn THRu LANE THRU LANE ASPHALT y , ~ ~ w o: nRRAIH LEVEL LEVEL 1 SHOULD[~ 1 o o . ~ . ~ TRUC:.IC PERCEHTMlE 5.0% <1.0,C .I I ,zmc•-<:J '1 + 8 +~ + o (1) HOT APPUCASLE; CITY Of flDfTON ROADWAY. :: : --~~: .... : ..... \t u.11 I I lili <t.i:i:!~1-li::J. -· I ~~~ta:~~ i O (.I 1/)sf'J;;j -. ll}N HOT TO SCALE PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES ~ ---------------------------------------------------------~ __ Rf'# G) WHITE 18-INCH STOP LINE PER WSDOT STD, PLAN M-l-4,60-04. @ DOUBLE YEUOW CENTtR {DYC) LIME PER WSOOT STD. PLAN M-2.0.10-02. . ~X .. E:P:.~_._ J EX B' SHLOR ----~~--··-·----------, ------------ EX 11•-- E:ND PROJECT SR 169 MP 22.72 SR 169 105+93.64 ~.-E_DgE~l,!_N~ _!'r_!'.:~--=-__ . ___ ---·---------~-- "' (.) z < Zv, "'"' ~ ... z<> 'iu ,. .. @ WHITE 6-n TRAF'fiC LETTERS {"ONLY-} PER WSl)OT STO. Pl.A.MS M-80.10-01 AND w-eo . .30-00. @ WHITt (OCE UH[ PER WSDOT SlD. Pl.AH w-20.10-01. @ ~[J."°~6i 1~ J~b~i-~~o~NfiR .:Sf.fJr 5If' sr"lfi~~ SHOWN. 5=; @ YELLOW PRECAST CONCRETE DUAL fACE SLOPED MOUNTABLE EX 8;-;HLDR + CURB PER WSOOT STD. pt.M,t f-10.6.(-03. -------···---I")~ ® YELLOW PRtCAST SLOP[ MOUNTA8LE CUAB PER W5DOT STD. EX 11• ~ b PLAN r-10.s2.-02. Ex 11· --SR 169 (SE RENTON ~APLE VALLEY R-0-Ao) --·· ··---__ .. -----c(-'@ WHITE cRosswAU< uHts PER wsooT sro. PLAN M-15.10-01. iti'l(X15-,~~--------·--10f""" ------___.,,,,.=·-107------g75•.3 • t'"E 1 -·· -------~--=~-------· 105 • ii!l ___ --ti~ @ WHITE 24'" lt£1GHT POST DEUNEATOR (.3• DIAM.) WITH 2 ROWS O: 5' ="' V O OF WHITE REfLECTM: TAPE, -·-··--=~--------------~---------------------------='"""•--------.. ---' ~~-liJ[O EX11'~ -·· --· SR_169-UNE _ _ ___ WHITE~O:!c..~!;_TYP. ---· --------~ct@YEUQW4-1NCHUHE,IO'o.c. EX 11' [X , /icJ l ---....J W (!) WHITE TYPE 2L TRA.FAC ARROW PER WSOOT STO. PLAN ---_ _ _ . 11 :C I.a.I M-24..20-02. CENTER IN LAH[ AT STATION SHOWN. · ----·· --f ----·_ :~-E~E~N[, r,p_J--~ -----O' POOR 6 PLNTR ~ "1 @ WHITE WIDE LANE LINE PER WSDOT STD. PLN W-20. 10-02. EX B' SHl.!.IR [)( [OP. TYP. _J [X II :::E GENERAL NOTES t. ALL SIDtwALK RA.WPS SHA.L.L Wl:ET CURRENT ADA REQUIR[1imus EX fl/W, --------------------------------~-- i \ ~ FILE NAME TIME i I PESIGN VARIANCES f .& VARIANC[: ACCESS SPACING. DM 54D,03(5)(B)2 .. NOVEMBER 201S J& JUSTIACATION; CURB ON HiCN SPEED f,\CIUTY. Ct.I 12.30.0S, NOVEMBER 2015. DESIGNED BY: ROLEITO ENTERED BY: DUBREUIL/ROLffiO CHECKED BY: BICKET ~ ~ ; !~ ~iB ~=~ U: IDZ-C VI VIN l.ol::IE ~ .,_ -~!~ -= ~ !:i:, :~~ ·~· ~~- 10 WASH =~ ~"'- ~TENW Wansportation Engineering Northwest Tronsportation Planning I Desigl I Traffic Impact & 0p8fattons 11400 SE 8th Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 Office (-4251889-6!-47 TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE. 2. CHAHNEUZA.TIOH TO B£ IHSTALLlD PER CITY OF' lt[NTON STANDARDS AND SPEClnCATIONS, CURRENT ED!TION. SR 169 CURVE DATA BOX i Pl STA l::,. R TANGENT L ,c SUPER: st 19+17-32 1z-59•20• 100.00· 22.04' 22.osi· I clJ"wN j \ \ ~· 60 j 0 30 ,o SCALE IH f'tET WSOOT NORTHWEST REGION APPROVED CHANNELIZATION PLAN TRAFFIC l'fl.E~A.REA OPERATIONS Slgn•d · t; Print H,fq $well!$ Dale , ,O·" ENGINEER!~ ~!.• /,L Signed D1;1te ~ """' ~ 1/rl'f,'/f M.P. 22.56 TO 22. 721----, ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT SR 169 CHANNELIZATION PLAN CH1 SHEET ' OF ~"""" RENTON/KING COUNTY Project Contact: Glen Dv8reuil Phone: -425-250-0582 PROJ_ ENGR.: BICKET JULY 2016 SHEETS BY REVISION DATE REGIONAL ADM. Drawer 236 Sequence 08 ' > September 7, 2016 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ) § ) MEGAN GREGOR, Deputy City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 7th day of September, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the Request for Reconsideration filed by Leland & Joanne Gregory for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-lS-000242) to the attached parties of record. Megan Gregor, CMC, Deputy City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 7th day of September, 2016. Cynthia . M ya ·. .. \. Notary Public in an~ for the State of Washington Residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 • Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton, WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent. WA 98032 ~i~~i~1JPj~efj:tf~f#\~4i~t'.l John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem. OR 97302 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton. WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 tfi~~~l~~~?~!t;tsrit~Yi~:~~a~~tfif;if Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, B104 Renton. WA 98058 Emily O'Meara Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton. WA 98058 t1i1fl~~~liif'J~R:trit!:mt~:tlr~!t.~t,1 Leland Gre~ory a1 ·r m: TT?F-SIII~ II! J TtT!IBl !lllflt!J1t1Rrlf(~ Stan Harrison Todd Levitt 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. Renton. WA 98058 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER FINAL DECISION, Dated 8-25-16 RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA15-000242, ECF,PP,SA-H,MOD Leland and Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 CITY OF RENTON SEP O 7 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE We own the single family residence directly south of the Elliott Farms Plat on the Southeast corner of the plat. Access to our property is a private road over property owned by the Pioneer Homes HOA on which we there are recorded easements for our use. Our request is based on 3 items that are detailed below. 1. OFF SITE DRAINAGE ISSUES Attached are 6 pages from the Preliminary Technical Information Report for the Plat, dated April 10, 2015, of the Off Site Analysis. The areas highlighted in Orange discuss the drainage as it relates to our property. There are several pertinent items missing from this report. Under Task 3 of the Upstream Drainage Area, it does not state that the drainage collected in the ditch and conveyed to an 18" culvert crossing WA-169 is first collected on the east side of the road into our property and then runs through a culvert under the road to reach the ditch, but this is noted in the System Table under Location 1A. The storm water from our property drains down into the Plat property along the south boundary between the 2 properties, on to the road with some collected in the area east of the road and some running directly into the ditch. The main item that is missing from this report is that the overflow from the retention pond for Pioneer Place Homes also drains into this area. Once the main part of the pond fills, the overflow area fills and then the water starts flowing into the area east of our road. Once this occurs, the area east of the road fills, the culvert under our road to the ditch is unable to handle all of the water and flooding occurs in this area with the excess water running cross the road into the ditch. A picture taken on December 9, 2015, shows what the area looks like when this happens. The area east of our road always contains water during the entire rainy season but when the retention pond overflow discharges to this extent, you can see the result. The Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan for Elliott Farms shows filling the area directly in front of our property approximately 5' higher that the existing grade of our road from the southeast corner of their property to the northeast corner where it tapers to a height of approximately 3' higher than the road. They show a 4' modular block wall along the entire north boundary of our property and continuing % of the way along their east boundary. They are covering the existing drainage ditch referred to above and replacing it with a storm drain that will flow into the existing 18" drain that goes underWA-169. The Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan shows a catch basin on the south part of this system that shows something extending into the road part way but no further details. We presume this represents the culvert under the road. Our concern is during periods of heavy rain, that the modular wall will act as a dam and allow storm water naturally draining from our property that now goes into the Plat property and also that drains off the road into the existing ditch, will now be blocked from draining and will collect and pool up against the wall. This same situation will occur on the road where the wall and fill will act as a dam. When the existing Pioneer Place pond overflows again, the water will flood our road, being held from draining by the modular wall. We wish to request that a condition of approval be included in your report, that the developers include off site details for the construction of a system to remove the storm water that collects both from the upstream drainage and from the overflow from the Pioneer Place retention pond once the existing ditch is covered. This should include some method of preventing the accumulation and pooling of water that will occur because of the erection of the modular wall along our property line and existing road. 2. SEPTIC SYSTEM AND DRAIN FIELD, WATER LINE. In the summer of 2015, we reviewed with Rick Lennon and Todd Levitt along with their engineer Mark Sumrok, that our current line was running through the Plat property and that our septic drain field was possibly on their property also. They agreed to review this and assured us that if this was the case, they would hook us up to the sewer and run the water line as necessary. We contacted them prior to the August 9, 2016 hearing to see if they had determined anything regarding these items. They responded after the meeting that they would again look into these matter and get back to us. The Preliminary Utility Plan indicates that the water to our property will need to be rerouted as needed but nothing is specifically shown as to where this will be routed. There is no reference on this plan to our drain field. We do not have any records regarding the drain field location and have checked the county records and did not find anything. The septic tank is approximately 8' from our property line with Elliott Farms Plat. We wish to request that a condition of approval be included your report, that the area of the septic drain field be located and the necessary actions required, if any, to provide sewer to our property be addressed. The impact of placing the fill over or near our drain field and the water pooling caused by the building of the modular block wall near the drain field location also needs to be considered. The Final Utility Plan should include the plans for rerouting the water line as well as the action required for the sewer. 3. SR-169 ENTRANCE TO ELLIOTT FARMS We have attached Exhibit 24 from the original hearing documents which is a letter from the City of Renton regarding the Spacing Deviation Determination for the access to WA -169 with areas highlighted by us. We have also attached the Final Approved Channelization Plan received from the City of Renton Planning Department dated 7-22- 16, which we did not find in the documents from the August 9th hearing. The City states that the spacing does not meet minimum standards of 330 feet of spacing between other connections and apparently approves the plan because there is no feasible alternative because of proposed elevation grades. In looking at the Preliminary On Site Grading and Drainage Plan dated 2-11-15, the elevations at the approved location are no different that the elevations shown at Alley 2 or Alley 3, so our question are: 1. How can this be used as the basis for accepting the design when there are no differences in the elevations? 2. Why can't the access to 169 be placed at Alley 2 or Alley 3 so that the 330 foot spacing minimum is adhered to? 3. What does the collision rate at the Molasses Creek access have to do with the creation of an entirely different designed exit/entrance to this Plat? The acceptance of this new plan allows us to exit only to the right from our road on to 169, and go down and turn around somewhere down the road. The new left turn only lane into Elliott Farm when approaching from the east will not allow us to cross to 169. The new entrance is only 90 feet from our driveway, not the 133 ft. noted in Exhibit 24. When we approach from the West to turn into our property now, we usually turn into the shoulder approximately 120 ft. before our entrance to avoid the traffic that usually is travelling at 50MPH. This may not be legal but it seems to make sense to get out of the traffic rather than slow the traffic down at this point. This shoulder will now be reduced to 5 ft. wide with the new construction. We are now going to have to put on our blinker after passing the Elliott Farm entrance and slow down in the 90 ft. space, check to make sure no one is exiting in the right turn only lane only from Elliott Farms and turn into our driveway. There is no longer a shoulder available to exit into. We are probably complaining a little here, but think that this has the potential of creating a real cluster in a short distance on this stretch of 169. We hope that this area will have an accident rate of .0 in a 3 year period. Moving the entrance to the West may not be preferable to the Elliott Farm owners but we feel this should be reexamined, if the criteria for the original placement of this was because of an elevation issue which does not exist. The proposed exit road could possibly be reduced in width so that Alley 2 of Alley 3 could be increased to meet the City Road design criteria. Thank you. Leland Gregory Date t:foanne Gregory (} Date I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I I 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS The proposed Plat of Elliott Farm is an attached single-family residential project consisting of 45 lots zoned R-14. The tax parcel number is 2223059004 and is 6.07 acres in size. The site is located on the south side and adjacent to Maple Valley Hwy (WA-169) at the eastern terminus of 1401 h Way SE (Private Road), in a portion of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton. Please refer to the vicinity map in the section. The site is rectangular in shape with 691 .70' of frontage along Maple Valley Hwy (WA-169). A condominium site, known as Molasses Creek Phase 1, is located on the west side of the project. A single family residential development, known as Pioneer Place, is located to the east and a single family residence is located south. Ground cover mainly consists of weeds, grass and brush; however, the southwest corner of the site contains a mixed variety of trees. A wetland exists at the southwest corner of the site with a 50' buffer. This site is currently undeveloped, but contains remnants from an existing farm, including partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. Existing on-site utilities were constructed along the northern portion of the site for this development. On-site soils are mapped as Newberg (till soils). The on-site topography is generally flat. The southwest corner of the project (approximately 1.85 acres) gently slopes toward the wetland. The wetland is approximately 4-6 feet lower than the edge of the 50' buffer and drains westerly through more wetlands located behind Molasses Creek before entering into a 24-inch culvert under 1401h Ave Se. The remaining portion of the site drains into the roadside ditch along WA-169. There is an existing drainage ditch along the east side of the project that conveys off-site upstream flows from the southeast. The elevations on the site range from 87 to 107. TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW Adopted Basin Plans: The site is located within Mainstem Reach 2 of Lower Cedar River Basin. Refer to Appendix A for the portions of the basin that applies to this project. • Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable. • Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: This site is located in the Mainstem Reach 2 in Lower Cedar River Basin, which is covered by the Lower Cedar River Basin anct Nonpoint Pollution Action Plan dated July 1997 (included in Appendix A). • Critical Drainage Area Maps: This project will not discharge drainage to any critical areas or wetlands as it will be discharging developed run-off to existing conveyance system that is conveyed to an existing water quality facility prior to discharging into the Cedar River. Therefore, no critical areas are to be affected. • Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: Please see the attached FEMA Map (Section 1.0) utilized for this analysis. As indicated on the map, the site is located in Zone X and is outside of the 500-year floodplain. • Other Off-Site Analysis Reports: A site investigation was conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis. The United States Department of Agriculture Soils Conservation Service Map is also proviGed. See Figure 4 -Soils Map in Section 1.0. • Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on review of the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folios located in this section and special reports prepared by consultants included in section 6.0 of the TIR, the site contains a wetland and buffer at the southwest corner of the site. The site is also located within an erosion, landslide, and seismic hazard area. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc I l I • Road Drainage Problems: The project researched drainage complaints from King County and the city of Renton. The city had no records of any downstream drainage complaints within the drainage investigation areas. King County had a listing of the drainage complaints within a mile of the site; however, none of the complaints were within the downstream drainage area and were not applicable. • United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: Based on the Soils Map (Figure 4 -Soils Map, Section 1.0) for this area, the site contains Newburg (Ng) silt loam with a small portion of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF), very Steep, located near the south boundary line. The soils were modeled as till soils for drainage computations. • Wetland Inventory Map: From the Wetland Assessment Report by Radakke Associates located in section 6.0 of this TIR, there is a wetland in the southwest corner of the site. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable. • City of Renton Aquifer Protection Zanes: Per the City of Renton's GIS Map, the project site is not located within an Aquifer Recharge Area. TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION The field inspection for this Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis was conducted on April 3, 2015 for the purpose of analyzing the proposed project site and its upstream and downstream corridors. The weather was cloudy with occasional rain showers. The off-site drainage system was inspected from the project limits to the edge of the outfall at the Cedar River. The boundary and topographic survey and LIDAR map were also used to identify the drainage patterns associated with the property. Upstream Drainage Area The project contains two off-site upstream drainage areas that drain onto the project. See Exhibit A showing the upstream drainage areas. The more southwesterly upstream drainage basin (Basin OS1) area contains 3.3 acres of upstream drainage area. The majority of the area is steep slopes. The upstream drainage area drains to the existing wetland at the southwest corner of the site where flows are then conveyed westerly to a larger wetland. The south easterly upstream drainage area (Basin OS2) contains approximately 17 .2 acres. The drainage from this upstream drainage basin is collected in a ditch along the projects easterly boundary line and conveyed to an existing 18-inch culvert crossing WA-169. Onsite Drainage In the pre-developed condition approximately 1.85 acres of the site drains toward the wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The remaining 4.22 acres drains toward the north into the existing ditch along WA-169. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) 'Conveyance swtem nuisance problei:ns are minor but not chronic flooding or erosion problems that result from the overflow of a constructed conveyance system that is substandard or has become too small as a result of upstream development. Such problems warrant additional attention because of their chronic nature and because they result from the failure of a conveyance system to provide a minimum acceptable level of protection. r~re were · no conveyance s;ystem . ·nuisance· problems obseived during the · sit11 visit. • Furthermore, based on a review of the drainage complaints received from King County and the City of Renton, there is no evidence of past conveyance system nuisance problems occurring in the direct downstream drainage course, as there are no records that have been submitted. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc I 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the concentration of runoff into erosion-sensitive open drainage features. Severe erosion problems warrant additional attention because they pose a significant threat either to health and safety or to public or private property. Based on our site visit, there was no evidence of, or potential for, erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard downstream within the limits of the study. All runoff sheet flows to existing conveyance channels, where flows are then conveyed off site. Stormwater runoff from the proposed roads and rooftops from the developed project will be collected in catch basins and conveyed through pipes to an existing water quality facility where it will then be discharged directly to the Cedar River. As a result no future erosion problems should occur downstream because of this development. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depr-,ssions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: • Flooding of the finished area of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings. Flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe buHding flooding problems." • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or seve•ely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." Based on a review of the FEMA Map (Section 1.0) the proposed site is outside of the 500-year floodplain, and there is no evidence of severe flooding problems encountered during our visit. TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: The downstream drainage course does not exhibit any major concerns and appears to contain plenty of capacity to convey the additional developed flows from Elliott Farm. Please refer to Exhibit A for the Upstream/Downstream Drainage Area Map Exhibit B for the Off-site Analysis Drainage System Table. Drainage complaints were requested from the city of Renton and King County Water and Land Resources as required, however, there were no applicable complaints within the downstream drainage course within the last 10 years. In the developed condition, storrnwater generated from the new impervious surfaces, including road and rooftops, will discharge in two locations. The westerly portion of the site will discharge into the conveyance system constructed by Molasses Creek and be conveyed to the existing water quality facility (wetpond) before discharging into the Cedar River. The drainage from the north easterly portion of the project will be conveyed to a proposed 24-inch conveyance system that will replace the existing ditch along the WA-169 frontage. From here the drainage will be directed through a series of ditches and culverts before entering into the existing wetpond. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc t ' TASK5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS The only mitigation required, based on the analysis performed on the downstream drainage course is to upsize the existing 12-inch storm pipe to an 18-inch where the project will be connecting to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek. Please refer to the 100 year Conveyance Capacity Analysis in section 5.0 showing that the existing convyance system in Molasses Creek contains enough capacity to convey the future developed fiows from Elliott Farm. The project is required to provide frontage improvements along WA-169. This will include installing curb, gutter and sidewalk. The existing ditches will be replaced ·.vith a 24-inch piped conveyance system along the frontage and will discharge to the existing ditch. The existing conveyance system appears to contain plenty of capacity to convey the future developed fiows from the. developed project to the Cedar River. 15734-PREL-TIRdoc Basin: Lower Cedar River Location Drainage Component ID Type, Name, and Size Type: sheet flow, swalc, stream, channel, pillC, pond; si:w, Sec Map ditunctcr, surfacc area A 18" CUL VERT IB Channel IC 18" CUL VERT 2A Channel 28 18" culvert 2C Channel 20 18" Culvert 2E Channel OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasin Name: Mainstem Reach 2 ... Distance .Drainage Component fromSite. Existil!g .... P11tentiaL ·Description Slo.pe Discharge Problems Problems Constrictions, under capucity, ponding, ovcrtopping, Hooding, habitat or organism Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, t..lc.struction, scouring, bank sloughing, depth, type of sensitive area, volume 'Yu Ft. sedimentation, incision, other erosion Drains across ex gravel road, 0-1% Discharges Outlet should 17.2 acre up-stream basin onto site be maintained 6"-I' wide x 1.5 to 2' deep 0-1% Along None seen. with gentle side slopes. site's west Covered in blackberry bushes boundary line Crosses under W A-169 0-1% Discharge None seen from Ditch at NE corner of site Channel draining cast to west 0-1% North None noted along south side ofWA-169, boundary 1.5'-2' deep with 4:1 side of site slopes Drains under existing access 0-1% 0 None noted Drains West along WA-169, 0-1% 0 None noted 1.5' to 2' deep with 4: I side slopes Drains under access 0-1% NW corner None noted of site Drains West along W A-169, 0-1% 0-220' None noted 1.5-2' deep with 4: 1 side Subbasin Number: ---- -Ob~~~~~ ' ·· .. J3.ea~, •. ;e.,, . . ,· • ... •Resident;:-; · Tributary arca, likclihoOO of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts Culvert conveying flows to existing ditch Flows observed in channel, heavy blackberry bushes Flows observed during site visit. Receives flows from pond on Pioneer place and 17 .2 acre upstream basin Grass lined channel with very little slope. No restrictions, outlets to channel Grass lined channel with very little slope No restrictions, outlets to channel Grass lined ditch outletting to 24" D.I. Culvert. Flows 15734-0IT-Sitc Analysis Drainage System Table.doc IBl >oz IO C ~~ 3 . -· O' i O CD .. ~ -i I (/) (/) ) ll> '< "' 3 • -· O' .;:· '·; ///"':\._ .a.a • CD -~ "' ~ --'·'./"\ ~-__ ./ ___ ,,.,, ' tt -· ::t: ::, ) CD a. a. o· . 0 I» ~ ii> ::fa. l CD 0 . 0 :'!: . -~ -"' ·~ ~ -· ll> ~3 = a. o~ =I: !!!. ~~ CD CC CD - l4 11/~~GH~c,,s.\ ~ L \" ; 'l, ' "'i:. 't,-~ ;e l'J~Q IMG\'dit,~ _1 __ 1!:l215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 2'1-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX CML [NGINEf:RlNC, LANO Pv.NNING, 5Ul~EYING, [NVJRONMENTAL S[R\JIC[5 o-11""4 Ml"$ U"'M ~!5_ Cl'.o~k•d .JL"!i.. Appr~a...!!.!di. ll<I!~~ lll\1~734\i,rolimi,,.,..y\Prolimmor~ TIR\157J4··Lid..>r.dwg OoJle/T,,ne.~/6/2015 ~:o, P~ ~~le·t" :.:-·; ,,_ -iJ<H\t<II 1· .. zoo· Ve,1..:;ol ,;, !.ISIJIJfiOK -x,-;f, For• I .. . / )" . I \ \ I • \\ / ' I \ '' • .\ I •,. " ,. "'! ........ 'i' . ;; i \ \ i . . "i' ... ,, '· I \ '<\ ',I • ( l,i ,.; \ / / I \~ '\/ '\/'I , • -I ( ·1 (\ . • \_ \ . \ --·x ·J r,,,i. ! ' \ \ \;' '\ \ ' J I-, ·-, .· ... ,,,J,I,, .' , ,., r., // C :,o-~~ \ ·-~.:"')" ' ; ;;I~ ~ .1..1; ('"') I,> \ \ \ \ •11l I // p , 1 (~ \ \ 6 ·' -~~Ill //./ . }/(jt~ ~r" 1.;1·r ,-) ,'~ f,;}\ r1 • • ~ I . · '/ . · 0, ,., (/7 \ JI.) • /' ( •J If I ,' \,I) .. ) , / ) • {; \"-.,, ····'. i,' ) ' \,.:) : '-. X \ .. ,\L,.'( • i,....,-... .. ( \ \, ~ .. _-.... :,i ') :. A.,,.. "i' -~\i'.-::·'\. \ t ) .. ~ . 1__ '1 \'·•,:':, /\\_, , , -·', .. , I .. 1\ ,.t''I ()/11 · \' . / ::_,,\ ','.<r/ . :' , .:·. · ... \/ '\.,-;(,/\..· ., . '',\ ,., .r--1 ~ 1,,.-~(f:"{_. ., },! ',, ~ \ ; " " '; . . , >?l :/ ,o I~ I 1.8.., ~ 8 ij 8 ~h;;-1 •. I", 1-f-- n1e, Brixlon Homes, LLC 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE AREA MAP ~ Rev,,,o~ • May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated design deviation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6,07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004), All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7-0808.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized residential access connection to SR-169, which is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access. The spacing of new public street connection and the existing single family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor can any feasible alternative as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0.00 collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) and million vehicle miles of travel (MWM). Staff has completed a review of the subject request and finds the proposed access spacing deviation request is approved, subject to the following conditions: Exhibit 24 Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Rentor, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required ta be placed an the face of the plat ta vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision ta SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject ta WSDOT approval. Please contact me at {425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~-..;--- AnnFowler ~ Civil Engineer II Enclosure: Elliott Farms (SR-169) Draft Channelization Plan (CH1) cc: Ramin Patooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSDOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, fnc. / Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record Ale LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD 1-"Tx"iii'w---------------------~l~~-~~~lfg-~7.___ ----m~-w:z-~iz----------------·z~ ~~~ t~~ :~j :~~ :~~ -· -Ii;~ t;QI: ... t;CI:$ ------_rct~ -t: _q~ -C!E C~" ~; lK , .L-...,N.R.5E.W.M. i~i ~ Cl ... ;s :~~ SECTION 22 :~ij czZ ~~; -wj •c i;~ ~~ ~~ _c OI g~ 154TH STA JO+OQ.OQ = SR 169 STA 94+65.41 • SR U!i9 M.P. 22.51 "\" ml ·1" "I" ; -·;i ~ ; E); EOP, TYP. l EX £OP. TYP. ,.. "' ~ "' "' ! ~ ii •. -,,.;I.DR=-~~-~ !''""LLINE,1)'.Pa3:.:~::...----~-~~~ .. ·-~ =--=----·rxs~ ·sHLOR-=-~-=-=-~~-------~-=-~ =-~~~--E.RQJf:Q_______ --· -·-··· ----- ~"' " 11 ' 169 MP 22.56 rx 11·- ,o °' "". --sR 15s csERENToN 1.1APLE VALLEY ROAD) _ ----s1< 169 9T+47.oo ___ -__ " ,,._ Vl ~ 0:-,-.-----10~.-57~ .. E-.. -~=-~ -------· .. r~-~-----·· -···· -·10,---------·-txe··· " s· H ----------97·· ---------------ii-"--··-·· ~~------95···-F:X g,- w ci ~---~~--__ -~~-----------~~--------~------------__ !!_!_ !_6 --------~=----~· _ _ -··-·---____ .::_ _____ ----·-· EX_£ ~ m EX 11' SR 169-LINE EX EDGE LINE. TYP. 11 '----~ ~ Ex11' &roc,TYP. WHITEEDGELINE.-TYP. --'-4 --·-1,-=--~. EXEOP,TYP., -------~~--------,._.=-·l_ -------= !'l 11· __ ~r,c ~ra ;IC •· -· ~, ~c -----EX 20' SHOULDER I-, EX 8 SHLOR \ -------·-';;-., EX 12" .- :§ :,:: A /---------------------------------:-=:-j__·_~,· :i:] ~~; I I ----...... '\ ,;/::;. ( I . < I O:R/W EXR/W '\,\ "'_::i:· ·--------------------------------------,· I ~:/-ti .--P DESIGN DATA : '!:, ·-: · I "'' .. ,' TYPICAL ROADWAY 'i. SECTION A-A DESIGN CRITtRIA SR 169 PL.AT A,CC[SS : i t:i ! ~ " ..,. I "' 103• H ruN<:nONAL CLASS uRBAH-PmN~PAL ARTERIAL (•) I \ t I ai:1 R/W I R/W I w NHS STATUS NHS NOi < NKS I 0 1 1 NEW e· -o.5' cuRB [ ' ~ ... z .i.c:crss coNTROL MAKAGED:: cuss J '' PLANTER NEW 5' I ::i ~ :l -r-··· . s == ~ _tl_ :SU-JO I NEW 5' ,,_..._._ EX 67' 1 ,.. o SIDEWALi( SHOULDE:R , S:! ~ ~ 8 ,.. POSTED SPEHI 50 MPH 05 .~ ~1 EX 11' tx 11• 1'"" e'lrx &' EX 11' EX 11' EX a• 'l. 1~ I:: :J ... E Ii "' DESIGN SPEED 55 MPH • ' THRU LAME THRU I.AN[ TWI.Tl I TWLTL TI-IRU LANE THRU LANE ASPH"LT ,ca: ~ TORAIN LEVEL ' SHOULOEI 1 ~ TRUCK PERCENTAGE 5,0). ~ 1' I (1) NOT APPLICABLE; CITY Of RENTON ROADWAY. ' ' ~i I i 25 MPH 25 MPH LEVEL <1,0,C I <i, NOT TO $CAL£ PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES UR/W ~R/W -------------------------------------------------------------------------G) WHITE 18-INCH STOP UN[ PER WSDOT STD. PLAN W-24.&0-04, ® ,., D0UBL£ YEU.OW CENTtR (DYC) LINE PER WSOOT STD, Pl.AN M-20.10-02. I <.> z "' Zv, @ WHITE 6-n TRAFF1C LETIERS COMLr) PER WSDOT sro. Pl.AMS M-80.10-01 AND W-B0.30-00. END PROJECT SR 169 MP 22.72 "EOP, TYi'. SR 169 105+93.64 ! ,., V> .... ,., 3:u <( <.> ""' \ 0 @ Wl>IITE EDGE LINE PER WSDOT STD. PLAN M-2.0.10-02. @ ~~.~b~ f~ J~~li-~_R0JhrifRR :SEmE SZP-sr"MS~ SHOWN. @ YELLOW PREC.tST CONCRETE DUAL f,t,CE SLOPEO MOUNTABL£ CURB PER WSOOT STD. PL.,IJ\I F-10.6.f.-OJ. EX O' SHLDR ----·-··· ____ J _ --~-EDC<_LJN~_TY_"..\ _________ -----... ------::i.:==:.·-_ ' "' EX S~HLDR + -----------• --------------p,() I-© Y[U.OW PRECAST SLOPE MOUNTABLE CURB PER WSOOT STD. EX 11' 0 I.. PLAN f-10.62-02. o: 11· --sR 169 (SE RENToN ~APLE-vALLEY RO-Ao} -----··---Ex 1-1-: : ~ @ wHITE cwosswAU< uNEs PER wsoor sTO. PLAN 1ro1-1s.10-01. ~--------------0 --~----107 57 •39•51•£--1 -----.-w ---------·1ai~----·-07-t;; ~ @ WHITE 2-4• HEIGHT POST DEUNEATOR (3• DIAM.) WITH 2 ROWS EX 11' --- EX e' , 0 Of WHITE REFLECTIVE TAPE. ____ ,_ ___ ,----------·--------~-----"'"sir-1sff=-uNE --------------------------_-WHnCJooE uNE,-m.·· ------------·----~=~----(: ,6,. ~~@ YELLOW 4-!NCH UN£, 10' o.c. ------~ ---,, ll'fi::IOc...J'l.P, -4 -~-..J La.I G) WHIT[ TYPE 2L TRAFFlC ARROW PER WSOOT STD. PLAN EX 11 :I: I.a.I M-24.20-02. CENTE:R tN LANE AT STATION SHONH, --. ----:J ---·· -------------:J-----~--. --·---. ---------__ _ _ a' PlNTR g PLHTR ~ VJ O WHITE WIDE LANE LINE PER WSOOT STD, PLN M-20, I 0-02. a=--~ EX [OP, 'M'. EX R GENERAL NOTES /W 1. All SIDEWAU< RAMP'S SHAU. MEET CURRENT ADA REQUIREMENTS EX 11' -----~--- EX 11• ___. EX B' SHLDR -~------- EXR/W:~ ---------w z ~ w TO THE: MAXIMUM EXTtMT FUSIBLE:. 2. CHANNE:UZATION TO BE IHSTAU.£0 PER CITY or l!ENTON STANDARDS ANO SPECIFlCATIOMS, CURRE:ITT EOITlON. ll~SIGN VARIANCES & VARIANCE:: ACCESS SPACING. OM 540.03(3XB)2., NOVEMBER 2015 & JUST1f1CATl0N; CURB OH HIGH SPEED fACIUTY. OM 12:S0.0:), NOVEMB£1t 2015, !~JI "% -. ~o Ill: ;~~ ~ ~ m ~'~ .,: c~~ -u ,ct:? Cl ~~, ~~w CURVE DATA BOX ___j 6. R TAtolGE~-L -Ti SUPER: Pl STA SE 1i+17.l2 1T39'20• 100.00' 22.0•· 22.09' I CR~';IN I \ ,. \ " 60 -I I 0 "' 90 SCALE IN rEET WSOOT NORTHWEST REGION APPROVED CHANNELIZATION PLAN TRAfflC n..Er.u.AR[A OPERATIONS Signed · (.i Prlnt JillK s,.,,_ Oqfe ft lA·l' ENGINEER!~'}' ~!.. /,,_ Signed ~ Date rj¥ Prial J/.,.g; Jl,m,}/ I I I FILE NAME TIME ""'" "'· ""' ~TENW -SR 169 M.P. 22.56 TO 22.721----------1 DESIGNED BY: ROLETIO I I I I ENTERED BY: DUBREUIL/ROLffiO CHECKED BY: BICKET PROJ. ENGR.: BICKET REGIONAL ADI.I. REVISION DATE BY 10 WASH =-- """"" "'· Transportation Engineering Northwest Transportation Planning l Desgl I Traffic: mpact & Operations 1 I .(00 SE 8th Street. Suite 200, Bellevue. WA 96004 Office l-425] 889--67-47 Project Contact Glen DuBrauil Phone: 425-250-0582 Drawer 236 Sequence 08 ~,-11, ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT SR 169 CHANNELIZATION PLAN RENTON/KING COUNTY JULY 2016 CH1 SHEET ' OF ' SHEET'S ., REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER FINAL DECISION, Dated 8-25-16 RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA15-000242, ECF,PP,SA-H,MOD Leland and Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 CITY OF RENTON SEP O 7 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE We own the single family residence directly south of the Elliott Farms Plat on the Southeast corner of the plat. Access to our property is a private road over property owned by the Pioneer Homes HOA on which we there are recorded easements for our use. Our request is based on 3 items that are detailed below. 1. OFF SITE DRAINAGE ISSUES Attached are 6 pages from the Preliminary Technical Information Report for the Plat, dated April 10, 2015, of the Off Site Analysis. The areas highlighted in Orange discuss the drainage as it relates to our property. There are several pertinent items missing from this report. Under Task 3 of the Upstream Drainage Area, it does not state that the drainage collected in the ditch and conveyed to an 18" culvert crossing WA -169 is first collected on the east side of the road into our property and then runs through a culvert under the road to reach the ditch, but this is noted in the System Table under Location 1A. The storm water from our property drains down into the Plat property along the south boundary between the 2 properties, on to the road with some collected in the area east of the road and some running directly into the ditch. The main item that is missing from this report is that the overflow from the retention pond for Pioneer Place Homes also drains into this area. Once the main part of the pond fills, the overflow area fills and then the water starts flowing into the area east of our road. Once this occurs, the area east of the road fills, the culvert under our road to the ditch is unable to handle all of the water and flooding occurs in this area with the excess water running cross the road into the ditch. A picture taken on December 9, 2015, shows what the area looks like when this happens. The area east of our road always contains water during the entire rainy season but when the retention pond overflow discharges to this extent, you can see the result. The Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan for Elliott Farms shows filling the area directly in front of our property approximately 5' higher that the existing grade of our road from the southeast corner of their property to the northeast corner where it tapers to a height of approximately 3' higher than the road. They show a 4' modular block wall along the entire north boundary of our property and continuing % of the way along their east boundary. They are covering the existing drainage ditch referred to above and replacing it with a storm drain that will flow into the existing 18" drain that goes underWA-169. The Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan shows a catch basin on the south part of this system that shows something extending into the road part way but no further details. We presume this represents the culvert under the road. Our concern is during periods of heavy rain, that the modular wall will act as a dam and allow storm water naturally draining from our property that now goes into the Plat property and also that drains off the road into the existing ditch, will now be blocked from draining and will collect and pool up against the wall. This same situation will occur on the road where the wall and fill will act as a dam. When the existing Pioneer Place pond overflows again, the water will flood our road, being held from draining by the modular wall. We wish to request that a condition of approval be included in your report, that the developers include off site details for the construction of a system to remove the storm water that collects both from the upstream drainage and from the overflow from the Pioneer Place retention pond once the existing ditch is covered. This should include some method of preventing the accumulation and pooling of water that will occur because of the erection of the modular wall along our property line and existing road. 2. SEPTIC SYSTEM AND DRAIN FIELD, WATER LINE. In the summer of 2015, we reviewed with Rick Lennon and Todd Levitt along with their engineer Mark Sumrok, that our current line was running through the Plat property and that our septic drain field was possibly on their property also. They agreed to review this and assured us that if this was the case, they would hook us up to the sewer and run the water line as necessary. We contacted them prior to the August 9, 2016 hearing to see if they had determined anything regarding these items. They responded after the meeting that they would again look into these matter and get back to us. The Preliminary Utility Plan indicates that the water to our property will need to be rerouted as needed but nothing is specifically shown as to where this will be routed. There is no reference on this plan to our drain field. We do not have any records regarding the drain field location and have checked the county records and did not find anything. The septic tank is approximately 8' from our property line with Elliott Farms Plat. We wish to request that a condition of approval be included your report, that the area of the septic drain field be located and the necessary actions required, if any, to provide sewer to our property be addressed. The impact of placing the fill over or near our drain field and the water pooling caused by the building of the modular block wall near the drain field location also needs to be considered. The Final Utility Plan should include the plans for rerouting the water line as well as the action required for the sewer. 3. SR-169 ENTRANCE TO ELLIOTT FARMS We have attached Exhibit 24 from the original hearing documents which is a letter from the City of Renton regarding the Spacing Deviation Determination for the access to WA -169 with areas highlighted by us. We have also attached the Final Approved Channelization Plan received from the City of Renton Planning Department dated 7-22- 16, which we did not find in the documents from the August 9th hearing. The City states that the spacing does not meet minimum standards of 330 feet of spacing between other connections and apparently approves the plan because there is no feasible alternative because of proposed elevation grades. In looking at the Preliminary On Site Grading and Drainage Plan dated 2-11-15, the elevations at the approved location are no different that the elevations shown at Alley 2 or Alley 3, so our question are: 1. How can this be used as the basis for accepting the design when there are no differences in the elevations? 2. Why can't the access to 169 be placed at Alley 2 or Alley 3 so that the 330 foot spacing minimum is adhered to? 3. What does the collision rate at the Molasses Creek access have to do with the creation of an entirely different designed exiUentrance to this Plat? The acceptance of this new plan allows us to exit only to the right from our road on to 169, and go down and turn around somewhere down the road. The new left turn only lane into Elliott Farm when approaching from the east will not allow us to cross to 169. The new entrance is only 90 feet from our driveway, not the 133 ft. noted in Exhibit 24. When we approach from the West to turn into our property now, we usually turn into the shoulder approximately 120 ft. before our entrance to avoid the traffic that usually is travelling at 50MPH. This may not be legal but it seems to make sense to get out of the traffic rather than slow the traffic down at this point. This shoulder will now be reduced to 5 ft. wide with the new construction. We are now going to have to put on our blinker after passing the Elliott Farm entrance and slow down in the 90 ft. space, check to make sure no one is exiting in the right turn only lane only from Elliott Farms and turn into our driveway. There is no longer a shoulder available to exit into. We are probably complaining a little here, but think that this has the potential of creating a real cluster in a short distance on this stretch of 169. We hope that this area will have an accident rate of .0 in a 3 year period. Moving the entrance to the West may not be preferable to the Elliott Farm owners but we feel this should be reexamined, if the criteria for the original placement of this was because of an elevation issue which does not exist. The proposed exit road could possibly be reduced in width so that Alley 2 of Alley 3 could be increased to meet the City Road design criteria. Thank you. Leland Gregory Date Date •• I I I I I • I • • I I I I • I I • • 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS The proposed Plat of Elliott Farm is an attached single-family residential project consisting of 45 lots zoned R-14. The tax parcel number is 2223059004 and is 6.07 acres in size. The site is located on the south side and adjacent to Maple Valley Hwy (WA-169) at the eastern terminus of 1401h Way SE (Private Road), in a portion of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton. Please refer to the vicinity map in the section. The site is rectangular in shape with 691.70' of frontage along Maple Valley Hwy (WA-169). A condominium site, known as Molasses Creek Phase 1, is located on the west side of the project. A single family residential development. known as Pioneer Place. is located to the east and a single family residence is located south. Ground cover mainly consists of weeds, grass and brush; however, the southwest corner of the site contains a mixed variety of trees. A wetland exists at the southwest corner of the site with a 50' buffer. This site is currently undeveloped, but contains remnants from an existing farm, including partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. Existing on-site utilities were constructed along the northern portion of the site for this development. On-site soils are mapped as Newberg (till soils). The on-site topography is generally flat. The southwest corner of the project (approximately 1.85 acres) gently slopes toward the wetland. The wetland is approximately 4-6 feet lower than the edge of the 50' buffer and drains westerly through more wetlands located behind Molasses Creek before entering into a 24-inch culvert under 1401 h Ave Se. The remaining portion of the site drains into the roadside ditch along WA-169. There is an existing drainage ditch along the east side of the project that conveys off-site upstream flows from the southeast. The elevations on the site range from 87 to 107 . TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW • Adopted Basin Plans: The site is located within Mainstem Reach 2 of Lower Cedar River Basin. Refer to Appendix A for the portions of the basin that applies to this project. • Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable. • Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: This site is located in the Mainstem Reach 2 in Lower Cedar River Basin, which is covered by the Lower Cedar River Basin and Nonpoint Pollution Action Plan dated July 1997 (included in Appendix A). • Critical Drainage Area Maps: This project will not discharge drainage to any critical areas or wetlands as it will be discharging developed run-off to existing conveyance system that is conveyed to an existing water quality facility prior to discharging into the Cedar River. Therefore, no critical areas are to be affected. • Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: Please see the attached FEMA Map (Section 1.0) utilized for this analysis. As indicated on the map, the site is located in Zone X and is outside of the 500-yearfloodplain. • Other Off-Site Analysis Reports: A site investigation was conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis. The United States Department of Agriculture Soils Conservation Service Map is also provi0ed. See Figure 4 -Soils Map in Section 1.0. Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on review of the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folios located in this section and special reports prepared by consultants included in section 6.0 of the TIR, the site contains a wetland and buffer at the southwest corner of the site. The site is also located within an erosion, landslide, and seismic hazard area . 15734-PREL-TIR.doc I I I I I I I I • I I I ' ; • • • TASK3 Road Drainage Problems: The project researched drainage complaints from King County and the city of Renton. The city had no records of any downstream drainage complaints within the drainage investigation areas. King County had a listing of the drainage complaints within a mile of the site; however, none of the complaints were within the downstream drainage area and were not applicable. United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: Based on the Soils Map (Figure 4 -Soils Map, Section 1.0) for this area, the site contains Newburg (Ng) silt loam with a small portion of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF), very Steep, located near the south boundary line. The soils were modeled as till soils for drainage computations. Wetland Inventory Map: From the Wetland Assessment Report by Radakke Associates located in section 6.0 of this TIR, there is a wetland in the southwest corner of the site. Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable . City of Renton Aquifer Protection Zones: Per the City of Renton's GIS Map, the project site is not located within an Aquifer Recharge Area. FIELD INSPECTION The field inspection for this Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis was conducted on April 3, 2015 for the purpose of analyzing the proposed project site and its upstream and downstream corridors. The weather was cloudy with occasional rain showers. The off-site drainage system was inspected from the project limits to the edge of the outfall at the Cedar River. The boundary and topographic survey and LIDAR map were also used to identify the drainage patterns associated with the property. Upstream Drainage Area The project contains two off-site upstream drainage areas that drain onto the project. See Exhibit A showing the upstream drainage areas. The more southwesterly upstream drainage basin (Basin OS1) area contains 3.3 acres of upstream drainage area. The majority of the area is steep slopes. The upstream drainage area drains to the existing wetland at the southwest corner of the site where flows are then conveyed westerly to a larger wetland. The south easterly upstream drainage area (Basin OS2) contains approximately 17.2 acres. The drainage from this upstream drainage basin is collected in a ditch along the projects easterly boundary line and conveyed to an existing 18-inch culvert crossing WA-169. Onsite Drainage In the pre-developed condition approximately 1.85 acres of the site drains toward the wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The remaining 4.22 acres drains toward the north into the existing ditch along WA-169. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Conveyance system nuisance problems are minor but not chronic flooding or erosion problems that result from the overflow of a constructed conveyance system that is substandard or has become too small as a result of upstream development. Such problems warrant additional attention because of their chronic nature and because they result from the failure of a conveyance system to provide a minimum acceptable level of protection. There were no conveyance system nuisance problems observed during the site visit. Furthermore, based on a review of the drainage complaints received from King County and the City of Renton, there is no evidence of past conveyance system nuisance problems occurring in the direct downstream drainage course, as there are no records that have been submitted. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc i ! I 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the concentration of runoff into erosion-sensitive open drainage features. Severe erosion problems warrant additional attention because they pose a significant threat either to health and safety or to public or private property. Based on our site visit, there was no evidence of, or potential for, erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard downstream within the limits of the study. All runoff sheet flows to existing conveyance channels, where flows are then conveyed off site. Stormwater runoff from the proposed roads and rooftops from the developed project will be collected in catch basins and conveyed through pipes to an existing water quality facility where it will then be discharged directly to the Cedar River. As a result no future erosion problems should occur downstream because of this development. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depr'9Ssions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: , Flooding of the finished area of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings. Flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." , Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or seve,ely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." Based on a review of the FEMA Map (Section 1.0) the proposed site is outside of the 500-year floodplain, and there is no evidence of severe flooding problems encountered during our visit. TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: The downstream drainage course does not exhibit any major concerns and appears to contain plenty of capacity to convey the additional developed flows from Elliott Farm. Please refer to Exhibit A for the Upstream/Downstream Drainage Area Map Exhibit B for the Off-site Analysis Drainage System Table. Drainage complaints were requested from the city of Renton and King County Water and Land Resources as required, however, there were no applicable complaints within the downstream drainage course within the last 10 years. In the developed condition, stormwater generated from the new impervious surfaces, including road and rooftops, will discharge in two locations. The westerly portion of the site will discharge into the conveyance system constructed by Molasses Creek and be conveyed to the existing water quality facility (wetpond) before discharging into the Cedar River. The drainage from the north easterly portion of the project will be conveyed to a proposed 24-inch conveyance system that will replace the existing ditch along the WA-169 frontage. From here the drainage will be directed through a series of ditches and culverts before entering into the existing wetpond. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc TASKS MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS The only mitigation required, based on the analysis performed on the downstream drainage course is to upsize the existing 12-inch storm pipe to an 18-inch where the project will be connecting to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek. Please refer to the 100 year Conveyance Capacity Analysis in section 5.0 showing that the existing convyance system in Molasses Creek contains enough capacity to convey the future developed flows from Elliott Farm. The project is required to provide frontage improvements along WA-169. This will include installing curb, gutter and sidewalk. The existing ditches will be replaced ·.vith a 24-inch piped conveyance system along the frontage and will discharge to the existing ditch. The existing conveyance system appears to contain plenty of capacity to convey the future developed flows from the. developed project to the Cedar River. 15734-PREL-TIR.doc Basin: Lower Cedar River ,_-/.1l/;j._ Locatio_. °'I ,:,s_.n __ · ~~,~~~~' ID, ... ,, .• ,,,,., .. , .. ,. ID ""'"' · ,~": · .... , .. e;t,..,a t,..,., Sec Map IA 18 IC 2A 28 2C 20 2E Type: sheet flow, swalc, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size, diameter, surface area 18" CUL VERT Channel 18" CUL VERT Channel 18" culvert Channel 18" Culvert Channel OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasin Name: Mainstem Reach 2 Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume Drains across ex gravel road, 17 .2 acre up-stream basin 6"-I' wide x 1.5 to 2' deep with gentle side slopes. Covered in blackberry bushes Crosses under WA-169 Channel draining east to west along south side ofWA-169, 1.5'-2' deep with 4:1 side slopes Drains under existing access Drains West along WA-169, 1.5' to 2' deep with 4:1 side slopes Drains under access Drains West along WA-169, 1.5-2' deep with 4: I side % 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% Ft. Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion Discharges I Outlet should onto site be maintained Along I None seen. site's west boundary line Discharge I None seen from Ditch at NE corner of site North I None noted boundary of site 0 I None noted 0 I None noted NW corner I None noted of site 0-220' I None noted Subbasin Number: ---- Tributary area, Hkelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts Culvert conveying flows to existing ditch Flows observed in channel, heavy blackberry bushes Flows observed during site visit. Receives flows from pond on Pioneer place and 17 .2 acre upstream basin Grass lined channel with very little slope. No restrictions, outlets to channel Grass lined channel with very little slope No restrictions, outlets to channel Grass lined ditch outletting to 24" D. I. Culvert. Flows I 5734MOffMSitc Analysis Drninage System Table.doc ........... .........,.,.,,.._;,,,,~~---=~---~-~,..-,,~~,:;~:;;,w~'-,·;f,k,,i"·i"·Jiy·~m•B·f-'~'HB IBl >oZ IO C ~ !!l. 3 : o· CT !. ::, <D ' en -. J ll> ~ : CJ) 3 .• -· CT ,a.o I (D -, ::, en I~•-· ~::, ) <D a. : a. o· ~ 0 '1) I :J -I <D I g:. Q. i <D 0 ' -::E i O ::J ~ = rn = ~ ~ -· ll> (5 3 = a. o .... =I: !!!. ~-:::J -ll> <D co <D - 34 ~G HA<,1$1 fll'r~\ . ..._ ... \ L•\ i ... ~, " .... 1~0 IMGl-',e; 1 ~ 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX CML [NGIN[£RINC, LANO PlANNlNC. SURVEYING, HMRONM[NJAL SERVICES Oeoi9f1H1 ...M§_ Drown~ Ctl«ked ....fil!i_ AU,,ovea.J!!!!i. o..,. ..±LU.!1.. 15734\prolimiJJQf)'\Pr~, TIFl\!573~-L.idar.d .. g o...t~/1,m.,Vs;2015 5,0~ ?M Sc01e:T'-~I ,.., Hor;zonlo/ 1· .. 200· v..,1,cul ,;, I.ISIJIJROJo: Xi~l: ---- ' I ~ . \ .\ /' \ ·~-, r I r:· \, •,_. ' \/ .: .. ::-. -i .''' "'• I I ',._ .. \.t-;~ \ r·. } {,. ,, ,. / ( ~ . • i;., \ i:. ...... .._......,),ll~ -·) / . S> ///,-, / I_ I ' I,, /"':. ,·. r , ·, I I ( I 1 i •,'·~ ,; I, /}/ l . ···, ' (' y--4 . \ (, . \ , -I For- Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bel-Red Road, SuHe 200 Benevue, WA 98007 No. ! Dot~ Trtle< 0 :i~ 8 [,, bJ,.~ UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE AREA MAP . ~ Rov,s.on Denis Law Mayor May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 - r)c City of t . r. \: ~· r ll r, r \; r l ....... _. . .....,, . -.,U. ' - Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, lUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated design deviation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6.07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7-0808.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized residential access connection to SR-169, which is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access. The spacing of new public street connection and the existing single family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor can any feasible alternative as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0.00 collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) and million vehicle miles of travel (MWM). Staff has completed a review of the subject request and finds the proposed access spacing deviation request is approved, subject to the following conditions: Exhibit 24 Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums {parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject to WSDOT approval. Please contact me at {425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~-,--- Ann Fowler -----~ Civil Engineer II Enclosure: Elliott Farms {SR-169) Draft Channelization Plan (CHl) cc: Ramin Pazooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSDOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ~ EXR7w--------o:!:w-o 011:)1:---------------i::>a::J: -o!;l -owe., aa:: oa: ·-----[XR/W----------~~~ ~~ ~8!! T.23N.R.5E.W.M. ~~1 ~~! ~~~ ~~! ~E~ Si~ gi~ gv<e SECTION 22 :oc :z~ :i;.~i':i :;;_v~ S,V~ .-wj Q •U •V 53 Q .u .u ,c:. ~a ~lit; ~Sr_!.: .cjg c : ~li:E •li:F.'. t;;lii: i!i o; b~ t;& t,~~ 111 o~ t;o~ 1!4THSTA3Q+QO.OQ- a,0 :.: l!ci,_ $0 : g:a,2 $d il:d SR 1H STA 94+ei5.41,,. ~ID ----~ -.: --EXEOP.TYP.J SR109M,P,22,51 a:: ti:'° a:: II: a:: a:: EX EOP, TYP. 1/1 11ib 111 "' ~~~:::~.SHIDR __ J _____ fX~~I->!~!~:'!'c-:t==--~~-:_---------------===: ----------------~--~~ ----i~~l~9~~~~~---------- ROAD) --------SR" 169 97+47.00 ------ -101 11 Xii' ·-----"7 · =,--------·----· -----",,-----· ··------·--~~-·es [)( 20' SHOULDER EX 11·-- VALLEY ROAD) ----,, EX 11·----- -~+-----.!~. -----·=·----------------· -~·-··-··--------------- _ __ , EX _EDGE LINE. TYP.l_ ---------~ .gf 90"07'3 EX 11'----- ~ ---l------.-.-.--.. EOP,_TYP:_--1 ________ -::=-=-=-==-=-=-=~-=-~-:-:-="i'_~·· ,------\ \ --(l: ~ ------ A~ EX 11'--- -;! :;j( ;;,'-~r wv z I ' :_, ....... .!!."/W ---------------EXR/W___ \\ I TYPICACROAOWAY SECTIO~_A_-A I R<O' l~<oe••=•--=•~ j DESIGN -~~TA j ----------I l ~, =t I , :I: I:,: ' \;; ~ li!i if' I .,. l!" I 1 -v. I I ------.... ~,.,.... 1,,ll'llt.ll'IA SR 199 PUT -'CCESS " . \ ~ EX 45• J EX 101· H ruNCTIONAL cuss URBAN-PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL (1) J ·, 1 • IX1 R/W I R/W I NHS STATUS NHS NON NHS , . . I w w 01 NEW 6 0.5 CURB ~ w ~ ACCtss CONTll:Ol 1.WfAGED; CLASS 3 (I) PLANTER • I z NEW 5 ~ w DESIGN VEHICLE WB-67 SU-30 slD£WAU<. SHOULDER , ~ 8 13 POSTED SPEED 50 MPH 25 MPH "-11 !ASPHALT I EX 07l , w ~ ,_j EX 11' [X 11' . EX 6' I EX&' EX 11' EX 11' EX 8' 1.-i: "" w ,.. DESIGN SPEED 55 MPH 25 MPH 0 ·5 1 THRU LA.NE THRU LAHE TWln I TWLTL THRu LANE THRU LANE ASPHALT 1 § Ii rrRRAIN LrV[L L.E:'l'EL 1 :SHOULDEf I TRUCK PERCENTAGE ~.O" <1.0" ~ 1' ! (, > NOT APPUCABLt: CITY or RENTON ROADWAY. ~1 I i I i NOT TO SCALE ..£.!}LW -----------------------------------------------------~~ w 0 ' z ' I < I END PROJECT ' ~ ~ 1 I I-w I SR 1 69 MP 22. 72 1 ~ 8 1 PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES Q) WHITE I 8-lNCH STOP UN[ PER WSDOT STI). PUN M-24.60-0-4. ® DOUBLE YULOW CENT£R {DYC) UNE PER WSOOT STD, PLMI M-20.10-02. @ WHITE 6-rr TRJ.rFlC LETTERS c·oNLY") PER WSDOT STD, PLANS M-30, 10-01 AND M-80.30-00. @ WHITE EDGE LINE PER WSDOT STD. PLAN M-20.10-02. @ WHITE TYPE 2SR TRAFrlC ARROW PER WSDOT STD. PLANS M-2'.40-02 ANO M-80.10-01. ClNTER IN LANE AT STATION SHOWN. EXEOP,TYP.1 SR 169 105+93.64 J """ l -: :::s::..------------__ '! !~-"'-"~.!"'·~ ---------------------~ _ _::_::_::__::_ _________ __:_·_--_=---------EX •:,,;.• ! t;: : EX,,.·.:::__ ---SR 169 (SE RENTON MAPLEVALLEY ROAD) ----~------EX;-;:-: ~@ YELLOW PRECAST CONCRETE DUAL FACE SLOPED MOUNTABL! CURii PER WSDOT STD. PLMI f-10.64-03. YELLOW PR£CAST SLOP£ MOUNTABLE CURB PER WSOOT Si0. PLAN F-10.62-0l.. 1D1Ex 6, . ,.,, ,oil 101 s, .... 39 ,51 -E 1-... ---_ ---1os tU4 n, 6, ~ ~@ EX e' _v = "' , ...., WHITE CROSSWALK LINES PER WSDOT STD, PUN W-15.10-01. WHrrt :u· HEIGHT POST OEUNEATOR (3· OIAM,} wrm 2 ROWS OF WHITE REFLECTIVE TAPE. EX 11' ___.. ·-------·-·sR-169-LINE --·---- EX 11' ----- ---·-., ··------~---·----WHITE ,{OGE LINE, TYl'.1 ~ 1~\g !1/@ __ _ _ ~FOc......I'/.P.l _ _ _ -Ci) ....J La.I 0) EX 11' ~ EX 11' :I: W (.) VI 0 YELLOW 4-tNCH LINE. 10' O.C. WHITE TYPE 2L TRArFlC ARROW PER WSDOT STD. PLAN M-24.20-02. CENTER IN u.N[ AT SlATION Sli0WN. EX B' SHLOR -__ --------~X-EOP~ ~;"J-----,x-,~-u:,~-~;J ------------__ EX R/W I I DESIGN VARIANCES & VARIANCE: ACCESS SPACING. DM 540.03{3)(8)2., NOVEMBER 20HS FILE NAME TIME & JUSTlntATlON: CURii ON HIGH SPEED fACIUTY. OM 1230.0~, NOVEMBER 201:!o. DESIGNED BY: ROLffiO ENTERED BY: DUBREUIL/ROLETTO CHECKED BY: BICKET \ ' ' ' ~ 6'_ PIJ.ITR ?--\- : ~r.:t ...; g~ ~ -~lj me~ix -. u a:~~fi!ii: C/11'1\'>IW::I ~-"'· - ,n ~·~ :; ..:: o~~ -:~~ l;;~z ~w 10 WASH =..- ~~. ~TENW Transportation Engineering Northwest Transportation Planning 1 Deslg, l Troffic Impact & Operations 11-400 SE 8th Street, Suite 200. Bellevue, WA 98004 Office [425) 889-6747 .... 6" Pi.MTR EX R/VI ~ WHITE WIDE LANE LINE PER WSOOT STO. PLN M-20, I 0-02. GENERAL NOTES 1, ALL SIDEWALK RAMPS SHALL MEET CURRENT ADA REQUIREMEHTS TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT rEASIBL£, 2, CHANNELIZATION TO BE INSTAWO PER CITY or RENTON STANDARDS AND SP[ClnCATIONS, CURRENT E01TIDH. SR 169 - CURVE DATA BOX Pl STA "T ll. l R I TANGENT l " SUPER SE !11+17.:U 12":$9'20~ 100.00' 22.04' 22.09' CR2a~N \ \ ~ •• I 0 30 90 SCAI..E IN rEET WSOOT NORTHWEST R[G/ON APPROV[O CHANNELIZATION PLAN TRAFF'IC /}JlE(/.AREA OPERATIONS Signed tp Dote 'i'-M-1£ Print JoAs« 5wtta CNGINEERJ~,:' Signed P- P,lnt V.lfll< J.l<d,)fl Dote# M.P. 22.56 TO 22.72 f--------, ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT SR 169 CHANNELIZATION PLAN CH1 SHEET ' or ' PROJ. ENGR.: BICKET REGIONAL ADM. REVISION DATE BY Project contact: Glen Du8reull Phone: 425-250-0582 RENTON/KING COUNTY JULY 2016 SHEDS Drawer 236 Sequence 08 Denis Law Mayor August 29, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72"d Av S Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halvorsen: The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Final Decision dated August 25, 2016. This document is immediately available: • Electronically online at the City of Renton City Clerk Division website at www.rentonwa.gov/cityclerk. Click the "Hearing Examiner Decisions" link on the right side of the screen located under the section titled, "Helpful Links." The Hearing Examiner Decisions are filed by year and then alphabetical order by project name. • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the above project number; and • For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the Hearing Examiner Documents is $3.90, plus a handling and postage cost (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-,;510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov RECONSIDERATION: A request for reconsideration to the Hearing Examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-llO(E)(B) and RMC 4-8- 100(G)(9). Reconsiderations must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the reconsideration process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of a reconsideration decision. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or mgregor@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Megan Gregor, CMC Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (11) Denis Law Mayor August 29, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Av S Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242) Dear Ms. Halvorsen: The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Final Decision dated August 25, 2016. This document is immediately available: • Electronically online at the City of Renton City Clerk Division website at www.rentonwa.gov/cityclerk. Click the "Hearing Examiner Decisions" link on the right side of the screen located under the section titled, "Helpful Links." The Hearing Examiner Decisions are filed by year and then alphabetical order by project name. • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the above project number; and • For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the Hearing Examiner Documents is $3.90, plus a handling and postage cost (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision ofthe Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 1055 South Grady Way• Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov • RECONSIDERATION: A request for reconsideration to the Hearing Examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-llO(E)(B) and RMC 4-8- 100{G)(9). Reconsiderations must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the reconsideration process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of a reconsideration decision. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or mgregor@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Megan Gregor, CMC Deputy City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Clark Close, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (11) August 29, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) MEGAN GREGOR, Deputy City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 29th day of August, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the HEX's Final Decision for Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA-15-000242} to the attached parties of record. Megan Gregor, CMC, Deputy City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 29th day of August, 2016. ; Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton, WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 John Eld 2079 Churchill Ave SE Salem. OR 97302 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall City, 98024 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, B104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton. WA 98058 Emilv O'Meara ('· ( ::_. ('('-...[.:·--•--~Ll_) Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Leland Gregory Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 • • Hearing Examiner's Decision 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO I I 12 13 14 15 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON ) RE: Elliott Farms ) ) FINAL DECISION Preliminary Plat j LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD) ) ) _______________ ) SUMMARY 16 The applicant requests preliminary plat and hearing examiner site plan approval for a 45-lot residential subdivision with a street modification. The preliminary plat, site plan and street modification are 17 approved with conditions. 18 19 20 21 22 23 TESTIMONY Vanessa Dolbee, City of Renton Planning Manager, summarized the staff report. Ivana Halvorsen, applicant's representative, testified that the project can be revised to address staff report concerns over landscaping. On active open space, the code is silent as to number of facilities required. As an alternative to recommended Condition No. 3, two small active facilities be required in lieu of "active play structures or courts". Staff had no objection to this substitution. Ms. Halverson noted that the private alleys will be dedicated to the public, so a street modification is no longer 24 necessary. Ms. Halverson summarized requested condition revisions in Ex. 47. 25 26 Chris Bicket, project transportation engineer, found that the project generates 27 AM peak hour trips and 31 PM peak hour trips. All affected intersections will operate within accepted City level of service PRELIMINARY PLAT-I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 standards. WSDOT has approved a channelization plan for access to the project. A Renton Public Works staff member testified that Public Works reviewed the applicant's traffic analysis and found it to be adequate. Vanessa Dolbee requested to have "bond" stricken from the applicant's proposed revision to Condition 2 because the City doesn't accept bonds for landscaping. EXHIBITS Exhibits 2-43 listed on page 2 of the August 9, 2016 Staff Report, in addition to the Staff Report itself (Ex. I), were admitted into evidence the public hearing. Additional exhibits admitted during the hearing include: Ex. 44 -City of Renton PowerPoint Ex. 45-City of Renton Core Maps (located on City's webpage) Ex. 46 -Google maps of project area Ex. 47 -Applicant's Proposed Condition Revisions Ex. 48 -Technical Information Report for Cedarwood Subdivision FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: I. Applicant. Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 2. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on August 9, 2016 in the City of Renton Council Chambers. 3. Project Description. The applicant is requesting preliminary plat and site plan approval for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The subdivision of 45 residential lots and 8 tracts would result in a net density of 9. 7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 sf of critical areas, 60,731 sf of open space and 4,915sf for alleys. The fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217sf to 3,939sf with an average lot size of2,586sf. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. The applicant is also requesting a modification from RMC 4-6-060F.2 "Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys" to reduce PRELIMINARY PLAT -2 2 3 4 5 6 the width of the residential access roadway and relocate a fair portion of the public sidewalks and planter strips into open space tracts away from vehicular travel ways. The undeveloped site contains high erosion hazards, landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a 50-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater would be conveyed to the existing water quality pond located west of 140th Way SE. Soils primarily consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut and 20,000 cubic yards of fill are anticipated for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project would remove 31 trees within the development area and replant 120 trees. All 74 significant 7 trees in the wetland and buffer are proposed to be retained. 8 To the north, south and west of the proposed project are residential low density (RLD) neighborhoods. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 There are also resource conservation areas (RC) to the north, south and west of the subject site. To the east and south are residential medium density areas (RMD) which are zoned R-8. A residential high density area (RHO) with an R-14 zoning density also lies to the west of the subject property. Some of the property to the south of the subject site is in unincorporated King County. This property lies within two zones; a King County Urban Residential Medium Density designation with 4-12 du/ac and a King County Residential 6 du/ac. Surrounding uses include multi-family and single family residences in the Residential-14 (R-14) and Residential-8 (R-8) zones, respectively. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. The applicant provided a Certificate of Water Availability (Ex. 15) and a Certificate of Sewer Availability (Ex. 16). A copy of the approved water plan and the approved sewer plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. B. Police and Fire Protection. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition that the applicant provides code required improvements and fees. Alleys are required to be 20 feet wide. The applicant is proposing a 16-foot wide alley. The applicant will be required to submit a variance request to reduce the width of the proposed alleys throughout the site. (See Ex I, FOF 30, Streets.) Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. PRELIMINARY PLAT -3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 C. Drainage. Drainage will be adequately addressed. The 6.07-acre site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and outside the I 00-year floodplain limits. According to the Preliminary Technical Information Report (Ex. 13), the project would maintain the natural discharge location for the site. However, less than 10% of the total basin area of the wetland would be diverted away from the wetland. The project's biologist does not expect the proposed diversion would result in a substantial change in the flow available to the wetland (Ex. 20). Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development would be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways within two (2) drainage basins. One (I) basin would be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the second basin would drain to a proposed 24-inch conveyance system along the project fronting SR 169 (Ex. 6). The proposed 45-lot subdivision is subject to full drainage review and water quality in accordance with the 2009 KCS WDM. According to the TIR, flow control is exempt for this project as the project is within a half mile of the Cedar River. Direct discharge to Cedar River is permitted per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. Cedar River is listed as a Major Receiving Water and the project is less than one-half mile to the I 00-year flood plain. The final Technical Information Report (TIR) must include a level 3 downstream analysis to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge would not cause flooding. The developer is intending to use an existing off-site water quality facility (wet pond). The wet pond is located at the southwest comer of the SR 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. According to the TIR, the off-site water quality drainage facility (wet pond) was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominium, areas of the WSDOT right-of-way, as well as the proposed Elliott Farms project. A SEPA mitigation measure was included that requires the applicant to provide a copy of the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond by King County, including the original design of the pond. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures would be provided in the final engineering plan set and would be subject to the 2009 Department of Ecology Guidelines. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. PRELIMINARY PLAT -4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 D. Parks/Open Space. No park is required as the total project size is less than 10 acres. The applicant plans to provide open space, walking trails and park amenities. Open space is required in the form of a park, common green, pea-patch, pocket park or pedestrian entry easement. The open space is required to have picnic areas, space for small recreational activities or other similar activities. The development includes 2.5 acres of common open space, well over the minimum three hundred fifty (350) square feet of common open space. The common open space includes walking trails, picnic benches and pocket areas for residents. Because the open space is located throughout the development it is highly visible and is easily accessible to the neighborhood. However, the open space is lacking recreational activities for all age groups and lighting for public safety. Therefore, a condition of approval will require the applicant to incorporate into the landscaping plan a minimum of two (2) active play structures or courts that provide opportunities for physical exercise and social interaction. The applicant must also incorporate low level trail lighting. The details of these amenities shall be identified on the final landscaping plan and shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. A Park Impact Fee is required for the future multi-family units. The current Park Impact Fee (per unit) is $1,532.56 for a 2-unit multi-family structure or $1,448.52 for a 3 to 4-unit multi-family structure. The fee in effect at the time of building permit application 1s applicable to this project and is payable at the time of building permit issuance. E. Streets. The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy (SR 169) along the north property line. SR 169 is classified as a Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Primary access to the site would be provided via a new channelized public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. A street channelization plan has been reviewed and approved by Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (Ex. 38). Adequate sight distance and frontage improvements along SR 169 would be subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. The City defers to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. This may include dedication of right-of-way (ROW) for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate six (6) 12-foot wide travel lanes and 8-foot wide shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder width may be reduced to 4 feet. Existing ROW width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4-6-060, half-street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet ( 44 feet from centerline), a 0.5-foot curb, an 8-foot planting strip, an 8-foot sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group would support PRELIMINARY PLAT-5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for SR 169. The City is supportive of the developer's request to retain the existing curb line, followed by a 6- foot wide planting strips and 5-foot wide sidewalks behind the existing curb along the project frontage of SR 169. The applicant may submit a formal request for modification to staff for consideration to deviate from the frontage improvements and dedication of right- of-way along SR 169. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169 (Ex. 2). The subject property has easement rights to use the existing private road through Molasses Creek Condominiums (Ex. 19). The preliminary road plans and profiles and onsite grading plan identify the existing and proposed grading and road improvements to serve the proposed 45 units (Ex. 5). As previously identified, the applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-6-060F.2 "Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys" that would modify the residential access road standard by disconnecting the majority of the public sidewalks and planter strips from the road and away from vehicular travel ways, into open space tracts throughout the development. The modified street standard includes ROW dedication between 35 feet and 53 feet along Road A. The majority of the street improvements include a paved roadway width of20 feet with 5-foot wide sidewalks and 8-foot wide planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips alternate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. In addition, portions of the paved road sections also include up to seven (7) on-street parking stalls along the north side of the road (Ex. 5). See FOF 30 for more information. The proposal also includes three (3) 16-foot wide alley Tracts (Tract A (alley 3), Tract B (alley 2), and Tract E (alley 1)). Under RMC 4-6-060], these three access tracts are identified as shared driveways. Shared driveways are not dedicated right-of-way and are owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. Deviation from the shared driveway standards of the code would require a separate street modification request. The applicant may submit a formal request for modification to staff for consideration to deviate from the shared driveway standards. The staff report does not identify what provisions of RMC 4-6-060] are not being met by the proposal. Also, the applicant testified that a street modification isn't necessary because the applicant is now proposing to make private easements public. The applicant didn't identify which of the several street modifications/variances referenced in the staff report would be affected by this public dedication, but as best as can be ascertained, it is modification to RMC 4-6-060]. PRELIMINARY PLAT -6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Alley I provides access to Lots 24-26, alley 2 provides access to Lots 5-13 and alley 3 provides access to Lots 1-4. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings and fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide fully paved, with 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside turning radius (including the turning radius to alley 2). Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30-ton vehicle with 75 psi point loading. In order to construct the proposal as is, the applicant must submit a variance request for approval by the Renton Fire Authority for 16-foot wide alley access to Lot 1-4, 5-13 and 24-26. An earlier site plan design included a T-shaped alley that included lots without pipestems, landscape screening between the alley and the public right-of-way and minimum turning radius (Ex. 43). Staff is more supportive ofa T-shaped alley design that meets all these items, but the applicant testified that the T-shape alley is no longer practical given the latest design iterations. The applicant has indicated that the proposed 45-lot subdivision would generate 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, IO exiting) (Ex. 12). The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: 50 percent to/from the west on SR 169; 30 percent to/from the east on SR 169; and 20 percent to/from the south on 140th Way SE. Based on the LOS results conducted at three study intersections, all intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels (LOS D or better) during the AM and PM peak hours in 2017 with no significant impacts created by the proposed Elliott Farm. An annual growth rate of two percent was applied to the existing volumes. The proposed project would result in impacts to the City's street system. In order to mitigate transportation impacts, the applicant must meet code-required frontage improvements, the City of Renton's transportation concurrency requirements (Ex. 36) based upon a test of the citywide Transportation Plan, and pay appropriate Transportation Impact Fees. The 2016 impact fee for condominium/townhome is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit. Based on 45 new dwelling units, the resulting impact fee would be $69,583.95 (45 x 1,546.31 per unit). Payment of transportation impact fees is applicable at the time of issuance of the building permit. The City of Renton transportation impact fee rate schedule is subject to change. All street lighting is required to meet city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and would be reviewed during the construction utility permit. A condition of approval will require a lighting plan and final detailed landscape plan to be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. PRELIMINARY PLAT-7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 F. Sidewalks, Paths and Pedestrian Easements. Pedestrian sidewalks and pedestrian connections are located throughout the subject property and would provide for safe and efficient pedestrian access throughout the site. In portions of the development, sidewalks have been disconnected from the road. Logical pedestrian connections are provided from SR 169 and Molasses Creek Condominiums to Road A. The applicant has included a primary 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of Road A and a 7-foot wide crushed rock trail throughout the open space tracts. Each portion of the trail that is directly connected to the SR 169 would be required to be paved in order to meet ADA standards. A condition of approval will require the proposed on-site seven-foot wide trail system to be paved with concrete, except the trail system located directly behind the rear yards of Lots 34-45. The final detailed trail system and profile plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. The sidewalk and trail systems would be used to connect buildings to common open space, on-street parking, neighboring properties, and the public right-of-way (Ex. 2, 5, 9, and 39). The front yards of Lots 1-13 abut common open space. A condition of approval will require the applicant to orient the front doors and front yards of the attached dwelling units on Lots 1-13 toward the street (Road A) or the common open space tracts. Each of these units shall provide a four-foot (4') entry walkway that connects the front entry to shared common green space trail or sidewalk system. A note to this effect shall be recorded on the face of the Plat map. Each of these units shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. Sidewalks or pathways for parks and green spaces shall be located at the edge of the common space to allow a larger usable green and easy access to homes. A condition of approval will require the applicant to relocate the shared common green space trail system, which runs north/south between Lots 3-18, to be located closer to the front yards of Lots 5-13 to provide more usable green space behind the lots. Lots 24-26 front Tract E (alley 1 ), therefore, the homes do not front on a residential access street, limited residential access street, a park, or a common green area. A pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk shall be provided. A plat revision that is consistent with this code regulation shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. It appears that the applicant could shift Lots 19-23 approximately five feet (5 ') to the north and incorporate a flush concrete sidewalk with the alley (alley 1) to comply with the pedestrian entry easement and sidewalk requirement of the code. A condition of approval will require the applicant to submit a revised plat plan that includes a pedestrian entry PRELIMINARY PLAT-8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 easement that is at least fifteen feet ( 15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk to the north of Lots 24-26. G. Tree Retention. The City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations require the retention of 20 percent of trees in a residential development. The undeveloped site contains 114 significant trees. The project would remove 31 trees within the development area and replant 120 trees. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer are proposed to be retained. A SEPA MDNS mitigation measure requires the applicant to remove concrete foundations within the wetland buffer and restore the affected area by planting trees and shrubs within the 50-foot wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. The condition of approval requires the applicant to provide a tree planting plan to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. The property is covered with a variety of trees. Several larger trees are located around the former residences at the southwest portion of the project site, including cedar, conifer, pine, spruce and alder trees (Ex. 8). The Arborist Report identified 114 significant trees (125 including eleven 6-inch alders/cottonwoods) on the parcel proposed to be developed (Ex. 14). Six (6) were classified as poor or dangerous, three (3) were located within private access easements/tracts, and 74 were located in critical areas and buffers. The net number of healthy trees for this development is 31. The average size of the trunk at diameter at breast height (DBH) for the surveyed trees is 14 inches (14") with the largest tree, a bigleaf maple at 60" DBH, located southwest corner of the lot in the Category II wetland (Tract H). The minimum tree retention requirement is twenty percent (20%) in the R-14 zone. After street and critical area deductions, the applicant is proposing to retain zero of the potential 31 healthy trees or none of the required 6 trees. The applicant is proposing to replant the subdivision with 120 new trees. These proposed onsite replacement trees exceed the minimum required replacement inches, 12 inches (12") for every tree that was unable to be retained, or 74 inches (74") for this project. Where there is insufficient ROW space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard(s). Compliance with tree density development standard would be would be reviewed by planning at the time of building permit review. A final tree retention and detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. H. Landscaping. As proposed, the conceptual landscape plan does not include the required 10- foot wide landscaping along all street frontage (Ex. 39). The applicant is required to include the required 10-foot wide landscaping along all street frontages, according to code. A condition of approval will require the applicant to submit a detailed landscaping plan, PRELIMINARY PLAT-9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 complying with RMC 4-4-070, for approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuance of the street and utility construction permits. A I 0-foot landscape frontage is not required along the frontage of the public alley. The applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan (Ex. 9 and 39) that includes a ten-foot (10') wide fully sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier between the R-14 subject property and the abutting R-8 parcel to the south. The sight-obscuring barrier includes the following cross-section: a 6 foot (6') high fence along the shared property line, landscaping abutting the fence, a maximum 4 foot ( 4 ') high retaining wall, followed by additional landscaping in front of the wall. The proposed landscape plan, along Road A, also includes a 0.5-foot wide curb, an 8-foot wide planting strip, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk along approximately half of the proposed public street. A final detailed landscape plan will be reviewed for compliance with RMC prior to issuance of the street and utility construction permit issuance. The landscaping plan proposes to plant 120 trees including, katsura, elm, flowering dogwood, Japanese snowbell, paperback maple, vine maple, serviceberry, and cornelian cherry at either 2-inch caliper or 6-10 feet in height (Ex. 9 and 14). A condition of approval will require the applicant to install all common landscaping and open space amenities prior to plat recording. A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. The applicant is proposing 60,731 square feet of open space within four (4) tracts (Tracts A, D, F and G) throughout the subject property. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer are proposed to be retained. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that retains or improves the existing vegetation within the open space tracts. A draft HOA document has been submitted as part of the application (Ex. 41 ). A final HOA shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City of Renton Current Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to Final Plat recording. Such documents shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. I. Parking. Sufficient area exists, on each lot, to accommodate off-street vehicular parking. This is typically achieved by providing a two (2) car garage for each building (Ex. 40). Each of the three (3) building options includes a 3-bedroom floor plan with up to two (2) garage parking stall per unit which, if rounded up, is compliant with RMC 4-4-080F.d. Compliance with individual driveway requirements would be reviewed at the time of building permit review. PRELIMfNARY PLAT -10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 J. Schools. The Renton School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the following schools: Tiffany Park Elementary School, Nelsen Middle School, and Lindbergh High School (Exhibit 29). Any new students attending the Renton schools would be bussed. The proposed project includes the installation of frontage improvements along the public street frontages, including sidewalks. The designated school bus stops are at the following intersections (at or near the project site): 14105 Maple Valley Hwy (Tum lane Molasses Creek) and 140th Way SE & SE 154th Pl. A sidewalk runs the distance from each lot to either of the designated bus stops. Therefore, there are safe walking routes to the school bus stops. A School Impact Fee, based on new single-family lots, would be required in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to the Renton School District. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code. Currently the fee is assessed at $1,385.00 per multi-family unit. 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no adverse impacts associated with the proposal. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4, the proposal provides for adequate infrastructure and is served by adequate public services. There are critical areas on and near the subject site. The site contains low to high erosion hazards, low to medium landslide hazards and a Category II wetland. Specific issues related to critical areas are discussed further below. A. Geologically Hazardous Areas. No adverse impacts are anticipated from geologically hazardous areas. The Geotechnical Engineering Study identified the majority of the site as low landslide hazard (LL), defined as areas with slopes <15%. A 10-to 20-foot wide centrally- located slope aligned northwest-southeast across the site was classified as medium landslide hazard (LM) area. LM is defined as areas with slopes between 15% and 40% and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel, or glacial till. The geotechnical engineer did not observe any indications of instability, emergent groundwater seepage, significant erosion, or historical movement on or adjacent to the site in areas where soils would classify as LM. No development activity is planned in the area of the steep slope in the southwest comer of the site. Development plans would remove or regrade the centrally-located slope during mass regrading. The geotechnical engineer concluded that the areas to be developed on the site do not pose a risk as a landslide hazard area. B. Wetlands. No adverse impacts to wetlands are anticipated. A Critical Areas Report was submitted by the applicant, prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. on December 15, 2014 (Ex. 11 ). Raedeke Associates, Inc. determined that the site contains a Category II wetland located in the southwest portion of the property. Under the vested City of Renton code, Category II wetlands must provide a standard buffer width of 50 feet. The wetland is a low-lying forested area in the southwest portion of the site. No other wetlands or critical areas were identified within the remaining portion of the property. PRELIMINARY PLAT -11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 In addition to the standard buffer, the applicant is also providing a minimum 15-foot wide common areas tract, immediately north of the wetland buffer (Tract F), in order to provide additional separation between the wetland buffer and the proposed rear lots of Lots 34-45. Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. As part of the SEPA process, a mitigation measure was included that would require the applicant to remove the existing concrete foundation( s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the 50-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. Conclusions of Law l. Authority. RMC 4-7-020(C) and 4-7-050(0)(5) provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. RMC 4-8-080(0) provides that the Hearing Examiner shall issue a final decision on Type III hearing examiner site plans. Both processes are Type III decisions subject to hearing examiner approval. 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is zoned Residential 14 dwelling units per net acre (R-14). The comprehensive plan map land use designation is Residential High Density. 3. Review Criteria/Street Modification. Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review. RMC 4-9-200 governs hearing examiner site plan review. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. The street modification request assessed in Finding of Fact No. 33 of the staff report is approved for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 33 of the staff report. Preliminary Plat RMC 4-7-0SO(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability: 1. Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code. 2. Access: Establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel. 3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied 23 because of flood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may be required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat. 24 25 26 4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. PRELIMINARY PLAT -12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4. As conditioned, this criterion is satisfied, as detailed by staff at pages 8-13 of the Staff Report, which is adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. With respect to parks, a condition of approval will require the applicant to incorporate into the landscaping plan a minimum of two (2) active play structures or courts that provide opportunities for physical exercise and social interaction and along with low level trail lighting. With respect to street layouts and pedestrian amenities, conditions of approval will require a street lighting plan and will require the applicant to submit a revised plat plan that includes a pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk to the north of Lots 24-26. With respect to tree retention, a condition of approval requires the applicant to provide a tree planting plan to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 5, no adverse impacts to geologically hazardous areas or wetlands are anticipated. With the proposed grading and critical areas setbacks, the developable site has physical characteristics suitable for development. As determined in the Finding of Fact No. 4, and as conditioned, the proposal makes adequate provision for drainage, streets, water and sewer. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 RMC 4-7-080(1)(1): ... The Hearing Examiner shall assure conformance with the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards ... 5. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan as outlined on page 7 of the staff report, which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedication of any areas shall be approved by the Hearing Examiner unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road or street (according to City specifications) to an existing street or highway. 6. Primary access to the development would be via a channelized public road access from SR 169 19 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek 20 Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. 21 22 23 24 RMC 4-7-120(B): The location of all streets shall conform to any adopted plans for streets in the City. 7. The internal road, Road A will connect to SR 169 and 140'h Way SE. RMC 4-7-120(C): If a subdivision is located in the area of an officially designed [sic} trail, 25 provisions shall be made for reservation of the right-of-way or for easements to the City.for trail 26 purposes. PRELIMINARY PLAT-13 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any officially designated trail in the vicinity. RMC 4-7-130(C): A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in conformance with the following provisions: 1. Land Unsuitable for Subdivision: Land which is found to be unsuitable for subdivision includes land with features likely to be harmful to the safety and general health of the future residents (such as lands adversely affected by flooding, steep slopes, or rock formations). Land which the Department or the Hearing Examiner considers inappropriate for subdivision shall not be subdivided unless adequate safeguards are provided against these adverse conditions. a. Flooding/Inundation: If any portion of the land within the boundary of a preliminary plat is 9 subject to flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State according to chapter 86.16 RCW before the Department and the Hearing Examiner shall consider 1 O such subdivision. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 b. Steep Slopes: A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication which would result in the creation of a lot or lots that primarily have slopesforty percent (40%) or greater as measured per RMC 4-3- 050J1 a, without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur, shall not be approved. 3. Land Clearing and Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. 4. Streams: a. Preservation: Every reasonable effort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of water, and wetland areas. b. Method: If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which indicates how the stream will be preserved. The methodologies used should include an overflow area, and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed. c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of water shall be discouraged and allowed only when going under streets. 24 d. Clean Water: Every effort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris 25 26 and pollutants. PRELIMINARY PLAT-14 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. As discussed in Conclusions of Law No. 4 and Finding of Fact No. 5, and as conditioned, the land is suitable for development. The property is not designated as a floodplain and no adverse impacts to critical areas are anticipated. The geologically hazardous area is a berm in the middle of the property which will be graded. No geologically hazardous area will remain after civil construction. The on-site wetland is adequately mitigated. There are no streams on site. As discussed in Finding of Fact 4, the City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations require the retention of20 percent of trees in a residential development. The undeveloped site contains 114 significant trees. The project would remove 31 trees within the development area and replant 120 trees, which exceeds the City's requirement. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer are proposed to be retained. RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi-family 9 residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingent upon the subdivider 's dedication 10 of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The requirements and 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Resolution. 10. The developer will provide common open space with recreational amenities as a condition of approval. The SEPA MONS requires the payment of Park and Recreation Impact fees. RMC 4-7-lSO(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to approving a street system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as defined and designated by the Department. 11. The internal road, Road A will connect to SR 169 and 140th Way SE. RMC 4-7-lSO(B): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. 12. As conditioned. 21 RMC 4-7-lSO(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum. 22 23 13. As proposed, there will be a single channelized street intersection with SR 169. The street design at the intersection will be required to meet WSDOT and AASHTO standards. 24 25 RMC 4-7-lSO(D): The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street 26 alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty-five feet (125') are not desirable, but may be PRELIMINARY PLAT -15 2 3 4 5 approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety measures. 14. As discussed in Finding of Fact 4, the Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the street alignment. RMC 4-7-150(E): 1. Grid: A grid street pattern shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the 6 predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalb, pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided within and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design Element, Objective CD-Mand Policies CD-50 and CD-60. 3. Exceptions: a. The grid pattern may be adjusted to a "flexible grid" by reducing the number of linkages or the alignment between roads, where the following factors are present on site: i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints; and/or ii. Substantial improvements are existing. 4. Connections: Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link existing portions of the grid system shall be made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required within subdivisions to allow future connectivity. 5. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible ... 6. Alternative Configurations: Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations. 7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 15. The project provides a grid connection by connecting the internal road, Road A to SR 169 and 140th Way SE. Adequate sight distance and frontage improvements along SR 169 would be subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. The proposed project includes the installation of frontage PRELIMINARY PLAT-16 I 2 improvements along the public street frontages, including sidewalks and in some places a separated pedestrian trail. 3 RMC 4-7-lSO(F): All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-oj:way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks 4 shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public 5 6 7 8 9 Works Administrator or his/her designee. 16. As proposed. RMC 4-7-lSO(G): Streets that may be extended in the event of future adjacent platting shall be required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shall be required in certain instances to facilitate future development. 10 17. There are no further street extensions possible for the proposed subdivision. 11 12 13 RMC 4-7-l 70(A): Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. 18. As depicted in Ex. 39, the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above. 14 RMC 4-7-l 70(B): Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private 15 16 17 18 19 20 access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. 19. As previously determined, each lot has access to a public street or road. RMC 4-7-170(C): The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density requirement as measured within the plat as a whole. 20. As previously determined, the proposed lots comply with the zoning standards of the R-14 21 zone, which includes area, width and density. 22 RMC 4-7-170(0): Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the side 23 lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of the required lot width except in the cases of (I) pipes/em lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty 24 feet (20') and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which shall be a minimum of thirty-five feet (35'). 25 26 21. As shown in Ex. 39, the requirement is satisfied. PRELIMINARY PLAT-17 RMC 4-7-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-oj~way, except alleys, 2 shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15'). 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 22. As proposed. RMC 4-7-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees, watercourses, and similar community assets. Such naturalfeatures should be preserved, thereby adding attractiveness and value to the property. 23, As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 5 and Conclusion of Law No. 9, geologically hazardous areas on site are limited and will be removed by grading. The on-site wetland will be adequately mitigated. There are no streams on-site. Significant trees are proposed for retention, where feasible on-site. RMC 4-7-200(A): Unless septic tanks are specifically approved by the Public Works Department and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 13 24. This requirement will be imposed during engineering review for final plat approval. 14 15 16 RMC 4-7-200(8): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage 17 system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include detention capacity for future development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be designed to 18 provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat. 19 25. The proposal, as conditioned, provides for adequate drainage that is in conformance with 20 applicable City drainage standards as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4c. A SEPA mitigation 21 22 23 24 25 26 measure was included that requires the applicant to provide a copy of the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond by King County, including the original design of the pond. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures would be provided in the final engineering plan set and would be subject to the 2009 Department of Ecology Guidelines. A Construction Storm water Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. PRELIMINARY PLAT-18 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 RMC 4-7-200(C): The water distribution system including the locations offire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements. 26. This requirement will be imposed during engineering review or final plat approval. RMC 4-7-200(D): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 9 27. This requirement will be imposed during engineering review for final plat approval. IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to.final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 28. This requirement will be imposed during engineering review for final plat approval. RMC 4-7-210: A. MONUMENTS. Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. B. SURVEY· All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. C. STREET SIGNS: The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. PRELIMINARY PLAT -19 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 29. This requirement will be imposed during engineering review for final plat approval. Site Plan RMC 4-9-200(E)(3) Criteria.-The Administrator must find a proposed project to be in compliance with the following: (Ord. 5676. 12-3-2012) a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation, and any applicable adopted Community Plan; ii. Applicable land use regulations; iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC 4-3-100. (Ord. 5759, 6-22-2015) 13 30. As discussed in Conclusions of Law No. 4 and 5 above, the proposed project complies with 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and all applicable land use regulations. As discussed in the Staff Report, pages 13-20, which is adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full, as conditioned the project complies with all applicable design regulations or will at the time of building permit review. According to staff, the proposed development is compliant with Pre- Annexation Development Agreement Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. (Ex. 42). These criteria are met. b. Off-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses, including: i. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular portion of the site; ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties; iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties; iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features; PRELIMINARY PLAT-20 2 3 4 v. Landscaping: Using landscaping lo provide transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project; and vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. 5 31. As proposed, the development will restrict overscale structures and overconcentration of 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 development on a particular portion of the site by providing two-story units of different sizes and facades with porches, decorative roof brackets, individual colors and other measures to prevent any one type of building or fa,;:ade from dominating any one portion of the development (See Staff Report, FOF 28). A loop circulation system using Road A and Molasses Creek Condominium private roadway allows for local serving traffic to access the multi-family properties from SR 169 to the north. The street sections and onsite internal pathways are intended to create a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere with wide sidewalks and landscaping. The proposed development provides screened landscaping around utilities and refuse bins and complies with all applicable design standards as noted in Conclusion of Law No. 30. No views would be obstructed by the buildings. The buildings fronting SR 169 will have territorial views. As noted above, the applicant has provided a detailed landscape plan which will provide screening, maintain privacy and enhance the appearance of the project. A condition of approval will require the applicant to submit a lighting plan. As proposed and conditioned, this criterion is met. c. On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including· i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation; ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs; iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces; and iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. PRELIMINARY PLAT -21 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 32. As noted in the Staff Report, the Site Plan (Ex. 39) includes an arrangement of buildings around the open space which will serve to reduce noise. The multi-family buildings would be limited to 30 feet in height. The height of the R-14 zone is consistent with the two-and three-story condominium development project completed in Phase I. Additionally, as noted in Conclusion of Law No. 30, as conditioned, the project will meet all applicable design standards. The developer proposes to mitigate the on-site geologically hazardous area through cut and fill. This area is limited and serves as a berm in the middle of the site. Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of material would be cut onsite and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill is proposed to be brought to the site. There is an existing Category II wetland onsite (Ex. 1 and 11) which will be adequately buffered. Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. As conditioned and as described in Finding of Fact No. 5, the applicant has provided a detailed landscape plan which will provide extensive pedestrian amenities and common open space. These criteria are satisfied. d. Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users, including: i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties; ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways; iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas; iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. 21 33. Access would occur from the through road that connects the development from SR 169 to 22 23 24 25 26 Molasses Creek Condominiums (Road A). The applicant is also proposing a 7-foot wide on-site trail system that connected to the off-site street frontage improvements along SR 169 which includes a 5- foot wide sidewalk. The wide trail system and sidewalk improvements would help to promote a walkable, pedestrian oriented, community connection that would promote safe and efficient circulation and linkages to the neighboring developments. The site plan proposes a through road system that creates a more logical and seamless road pattern than exists today. Pedestrian connections from the street to the buildings would be provided. The parking areas include up to seven (7) on-street parking PRELIMINARY PLAT -22 I 2 3 4 5 6 stalls along the north side of the road (Ex. 5). No specific loading and delivery areas are designated. The project development is residential in design. Per RMC 4-4-0SOF. I I .a bicycle parking spaces are required at one-half (0.5) bicycle parking space per one dwelling unit (attached dwelling). Spaces shall meet the requirements of subsection Fl le of this Section, Bicycle Parking Standards. Each unit contains a garage with enough space to provide one-half (0.5) bicycle parking space per dwelling unit. These criteria are satisfied. e. Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site. 7 34. As described in Finding of Fact No. 4, the proposal incorporates open spaces in common areas 8 which serve as distinctive focal points for passive and active recreation. As conditioned, this criterion is satisfied. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 35. area. 36. f Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines. There are no view corridors or public access to shorelines, nor is Mt. Rainier visible in this g. Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. As described in Finding of Fact No. 5, the site contains 47,91 lsf of critical area. Other than the acknowledged Category II wetland in the southwest portion of the site, no other wetlands or critical areas were identified within the remaining portion of the property. The applicant is also providing a minimum 15-foot wide common areas tract, immediately north of the wetland buffer (Tract F), in order to provide additional separation between the wetland buffer and the proposed rear lots of Lots 34-45. Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. This criterion is satisfied. 37. h. Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. i. Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, for phased projects. As described in Finding of Fact No. 4. The proposal, as conditioned, is served by adequate 24 public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. This criterion is satisfied. 25 DECISION 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT-23 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The proposed preliminary plat, site plan is approved and street modification are approved, subject to the following conditions: I. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated, dated July 15, 2016. 2. The applicant shall install or provide financial guarantees for all common landscaping and open space amenities prior to plat recording. A phasing plan and final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. 3. The applicant shall incorporate into the landscaping plan a minimum of two (2) active facilities subject to staff approval that provide opportunities for physical exercise and social interaction and low level trail lighting. The details of these amenities shall be identified on the final landscaping plan and shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits for approval. 4. The proposed on-site seven-foot wide trail system shall be paved with concrete, except the trail system located directly behind the rear yards of Lots 34-45. The final detailed trail system and profile plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. 5. The applicant shall orient the front doors and front yards of the attached dwelling units on Lots 1-13 toward the street (Road A) or the common open space tracts. Each of these units shall provide a four-foot (4') entry walkway that connects the front entry to shared common green space trail or sidewalk system. A note to this effect shall be recorded on the face of the Plat map. Each of these units shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. 6. The applicant shall relocate the shared common green space trail system, which runs north/south between Lots 3-18, to be located closer to the front yards of Lots 5-7 and 8-13 to provide more usable green space behind the lots. The revised plan shall be submitted along with the street and utility construction permits. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised plat plan that includes a pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk to the north of Lots 24-26. 8. The plat shall include a minimum of four (4) different building types (models) to provide additional character to the development. The detailed floor and elevations plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. 9. Prior to construction permit approval, the applicant shall submit, to the City of Renton Current Project Manager, a site plan and a roofing materials board that identifies a variety of colors throughout the development. PRELIMINARY PLAT-24 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 I 0. The applicant shall provide for the minimum standard of 24 feet (24') along street curves. A final detailed site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction pennit approval. 11. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan and final detailed landscape plan to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction pennit issuance. 12. The applicant shall create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that retains or improves the existing vegetation within the open space tract. A draft HOA document has been submitted as part of the application. A final HOA shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City of Renton Current Project Manager and the City Attorney to the extent pertinent to public subdivision review prior to Final Plat recording. Such documents shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 13. The applicant shall provide public easements for amenities that are outside of the right-of-way of the new public street. 14. The applicant shall provide access signage that identifies the trails system throughout the development for public access. 15. Finding of Fact 4(E) of this decision identifies an outstanding street modification required for a shared driveway standard modification and a variance for fire access width. Unless these requirements are nullified by approved design modifications, approval of the modification and variance is required prior to final plat approval. DATED this 25th day of August, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner APPEAL RIGHTS AND VALUATION NOTICES RMC 4-8-080(0) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-l lO(E)(l4) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period PRELIMINARY PLAT -25 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 as identified in RMC 4-8-IOO(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PRELIMINARY PLAT-26 ., Denis Law Mayor August 2, 2016 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Parties of Record Various SUBJECT: Report to the Hearing Examiner Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Parties of Record: A public hearing on Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat will be held on Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 11:00 am in the City Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, located at 1055 S Grady Way. The Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner, including exhibits and public comment letters, is available: • Electronically on line at the City of Renton website (www.rentonwa.gov) • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th Floor at Renton City Hall, 1055 S Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the project number LUA15- 000242. • Purchased for a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the staff report is $11.10, plus a handling and postage cost of $2.00 (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 or cclose@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COi. UNITY ------•Renton® AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT A. REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER HEARING DATE: Project Nome: Owners: Applicants: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Project Location: Site Area: August 9, 2016 Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Lennon Investments, Inc., 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Patrick 0. Lennon, 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 Todd Levitt, 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Clark H. Close, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, SEPA Environmental Review, and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The subdivision of 45 residential lots and 8 tracts would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 sf of critical areas, 60,731 sf of open space and 4,915 sf for alleys. The fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 sfto 3,939 sf with an average lot size of 2,586 sf. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. The undeveloped site contains high erosion hazards, landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater would be conveyed to the existing water quality pond located west of 140th Way SE. Soils primarily consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut and 20,000 cubic yards of fill are anticipated for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project would remove 31 trees within the development area and replant 120 trees. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer are proposed to be retained. SR 169 East of 140th Way SE (APN 222305-9004) 6.07 acres Project Location Map HEX Report City of Renton Department of ( wnity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY._ .T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 2 of 31 i 8. EXHIBITS: Exhibits 1-27: As shown in the SEPA Environmental Review Report Exhibit 28: Hearing Examiner Staff Recommendation (dated August 9, 2016) Exhibit 29: Renton School District Capacity email (received date May 6, 2015) Exhibit 30: Public Comment Letter from Emily O'Meara (received date May 14, 2015) Exhibit 31: Public Comment from Harrison and staff's response letter (dated May 22, 2016) Exhibit 32: Public Comment from Thierry and staff's response letter (dated May 22, 2016) Exhibit 33: Public query email from Bonaudi (initially received date February 15, 2016) Exhibit 34: Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program email (initially received date June 1, 2015 Exhibit 35: Environmental "SEPA" Determination, ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Exhibit 36: Advisory Notes to the Applicant: Traffic Concurrency Test -Elliott Farms Exhibit 37: Affidavit of mailing and posting Exhibit 38: WSDOT approved Channelization Plan for SR 169 Exhibit 39: Preliminary Plat Plan with Houses and Landscaping (Sheets 1 and 2) Exhibit 40: Preliminary Building Elevations, Roof Plans and Floor Plans (A2.l, A2.2, and A2.3) Exhibit 41: Draft Elliott Farms Homeowners Association CCR's Exhibit 42: Pre-Annexation Development Agreement Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. Exhibit 43: T-Shaped Hammerhead Alley (Marked-up Old Site Plan) I C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner(s) of Record: 2. Zoning Classification: 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 4. Existing Site Use: 5. Critical Areas: Hex Report Patrick 0. Lennon, 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024; Todd Levitt, 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Residential-14 (R-14) Residential High Density (RHD) Vacant Low to high erosion hazards, low to medium landslide hazards, and a Category II wetland City of Renton Department of r ,unity & Economic Development ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _ . T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000Z4Z, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOO Report of August 9, 2016 Page 3 of 31 6. Neighborhood Characteristics: a. North: Residential low Density (RLD) Comprehensive Pion lond Use Designation; Resource Conservation (RC} zone b_ East: Residential Medium Density (RMD) Comprehensive Plan land Use Designation; Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8} zone c. South: Residential low Density (RlD) and Residential Medium Density (RMD) Comprehensive Plan land Use Designations; Resource Conservation (RC) and Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8} zones (King County: Urban Residential, Medium (4-12 du/ac (um) Comprehensive Plan land Use Designation and R-6 Residential, six DU per acre) d. West: Residential low Density (RLD) and Residential High Density (RHO) Comprehensive Plan land Use Designations; Resource Conservation {RC) and Residentiol-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones 7. Site Area: 264,409 SF (6.07 acres) I 0. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Comprehensive Plan Zoning Pre-Annexation Development Agreement Annexation (Aqua Barn) I E-PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A A-07-001 Ordinance No. 5758 5758 N/A 5373 a. Water: Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Date 06/22/2015 06/22/2015 04/21/2008 06/09/2008 b. Sewer: Wastewater service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8-inch sanitary sewer main in Park Ave N, an 8-inch main in N 40th Street and a 10-inch main in Lake Washington Blvd. c. Storm Water: There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property. Z. Streets: There are no frontage improvements on Maple Valley Highway (SR 169). 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Authority (RFA) F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter Z Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-060: Zoning Use Table -Uses Allowed in Zoning Designations c. Section 4-2-llOA: Development Standards for Residential Zoning Designations d. Section 4-2-115: Residential Design and Open Space Standards Z. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations a. Section 4-3-050: Critical Area Regulations Hex Report City of Renton Department of C ,unity & Economic Development ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY._ .T Report of August 9, 2016 3. Chapter 4 City-Wide Property Development Standards 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards 5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations a. Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000Z4Z, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 4 of 31 b. Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan-General Requirements and Minimum Standards c. Section 4-7-150: Streets-General Requirements and Minimum Standards d. Section 4-7-160: Residential Blocks -General Requirements and Minimum Standards e. Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots-General Requirements and Minimum Standards 6. Chapter 9 Permits -Specific a. Section 4-9-250: Variances, Waivers, Modifications, and Alternates 7. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element I H. FINDINGS OF FACT (FOF}: 1. The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review, and a Street Modification for the construction of 45 new attached two-and three-unit buildings. 2. The 6.07-acre site is located at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy LOT, within the SE J. of Section 23, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M., and consists of one (1) parcel (Parcel Number 22305-9004). 3. The project site is currently vacant, formerly occupied by a working dairy farm with a residence and garage on the west side of the property and several barns and structures located on the south side of the site. 4. All former buildings and structures have been demolished. The only evidence of the former structures is the remaining concrete foundations and floor slabs from both the residence and barns. 5. The proposed development would result in a net density of9.7 dwelling units per acre. 6. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on April 13, 2015 and determined the application complete on May 5, 2015. The project was placed on hold on May 5, 2015 and taken off hold on July 28, 2016. The project was placed back on hold on September 15, 2016 and taken back off hold on January 8, 2016. 7. On January 27, 2016, the City of Renton reached out to Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to consider allowing a direct public connection to SR 169/Maple Valley Highway. The applicant was charged with submitting a channelization plan for the intersection of Road A and SR 169, subject to review by both the City of Renton and WSDOT for compliance with city and state transportation policies and guidelines. 8. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted resubmittal items for review and re-noticed the subject property on June 21, 2016. The re-noticed project complies with the 120-day review period. 9. The City ordinances governing the development of land up to and including adopted Ordinance No. 5755. 10. Primary access to the development would be via a channelized public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Hex Report City of Renton Deportment of r :unity & Economic Development ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY, =T Report of August 9, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Pages of 31 Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. 11. The property is located within the Residential High Density (RHD) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. 12. The site is located within the Residential-14 (R-14) zoning classification. 13. Surrounding uses include multi-family and single family residences in the Residential-14 (R-14) and Residential-8 (R-8) zones, respectively. 14. There are approximately 114 significant trees located onsite of which the applicant is proposing to retain 74 within the wetland and wetland buffer area. 15. The site contains low to high erosion hazards, low to medium landslide hazards and a Category II wetland. 16. The onsite topography is generally flat. The southwest corner of the project gently slopes toward the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into the roadside ditch along SR 169. 17. Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of material would be cut onsite and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill is proposed to be brought to the site. 18. The applicant is proposing to begin plat infrastruture construction in 2016-2017. 19. Staff received four (4) public comment letters or emails (Exhibits 30-33). To address public comments the following report contains analysis related to development, traffic, access, and noise walls. 20. Staff received agency comments from Washington State Historic Preservation Officer and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation requesting an archaeology-survey (dated July 5, 2016; Exhibit 26). 21. Staff received agency comments from Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program on May 12, 2015 regarding wetland mitigation from parcel 3423059202 with respect to the Lennon Critical Areas Alternation Exception Project (CAEX14-0008) (Exhibit 34). Lennon Investments, Inc. intends to complete the mitigation for CAEX14-0008 in Tract H. 22. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on July 11, 2016 the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (Exhibit 35). The DNS-M included six (6) mitigation measures. A 14-day appeal period commenced on July 15, 2016 and ended on July 29, 2016. No appeals of the threshold determination have been filed as of the date of this report. 23. Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated: a. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. dated February 25, 2015 or an updated report submitted at a later date. b. The applicant shall remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. A tree planting plan shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. c. The applicant shall submit the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond, including the original design, to the City of Renton Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. Hex Report City of Renton Deportment of C 1unity & Economic Development \ Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY, = T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 6 of 31 d. A professional archaeological survey of the project area shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the professional archaeological survey shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. e. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. f. The applicant shall record a covenant on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through Molasses Creek Condominium (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 24. A Critical Areas Report was submitted by the applicant, prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. on December 15, 2014 (Exhibit 11). Raedeke Associates, Inc. Soil and Wetland Scientist determined that the site contains a Category II wetland located in the southwest portion of the property. Under the vested City of Renton code, Category II wetlands must provide a standard buffer width of 50 feet. The wetland is a low-lying forested area in the southwest portion of the site. 25. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report (Exhibit 27). 26. Comprehensive Plan Compliance: The site is designated Residential High Density (RHD) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Map. The purpose of the RHD designation is to allow a variety of unit types, with continuity created through the application of design guidelines, the organization of roadways, sidewalks, public spaces, and the placement of community gathering places and civic amenities. The proposal is compliant with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies if fill conditions of approval are met: . Compltante: ,,:::"-'""''" ••••• < .. ,, ·' ; ., ;;,;; 'y,, -,-:' ·. "",<<>> '.::': . "· 'i::': :~:;/ :;: ·;:0 ,;,,:: '";;-,";'-;; ·,:,,:._::;,;-. ':\~;,:O,di ·<· ,,,,' · ... ' ' .. ·· ,/ Objective LU-MM: Encourage the development of infill parcels with quality projects in existing multi-family districts. Policy LU-173. Residential Multi-family designations should be in areas of the City ,/ where projects would be compatible with existing uses and where infrastructure is adequate to handle impacts from higher density uses. Policy LU-174. Land within the Residential Multi-family designation areas should be ,/ used to meet multi-family housing needs. Residential Multi-family designations have the highest priority for development or redevelopment with multi-family uses. Policy LU-179. Residential Multi-Family (RMF) projects should include landscaped ,/ open space common areas for residents, and other amenities compatible with existing buildings on adjacent and abutting lots. ,/ Policy CD-20: Orient site and building design primarily toward pedestrians through master planning, building location, and design guidelines. Policy CD-21: In areas developed with high intensity uses, circulation within the site ,/ should be primarily pedestrian-oriented. Internal site circulation of vehicles should be separated from pedestrians wherever feasible by dedicated walkways. Hex Report City of Renton Department of ( :unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _ .T Report of August 9, 2016 ,/ Page 7 of 31 Policy CD-23: Development should have buildings oriented toward the street or a common area rather than toward parking lots. 27. Zoning Development Standard Compliance: The purpose of the Residential-14 Zone (R-14) is to encourage development, and redevelopment, of residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine characteristics of both typical single family and small-scale multi-family developments. Structure size is intended to be limited in terms of bulk and scale so that the various unit types allowed in the zone are compatible with one another and can be integrated together into a quality neighborhood. Project features are encouraged, such as yards for private use, common open spaces, and landscaped areas that enhance a neighborhood and foster a sense of community. Civic and limited commercial uses may be allowed when they support the purpose of the designation. The proposal is compliant with the following development standards if all conditions of approval are met: c;oinptf~ri~ij::[ .. ··-· ·-· ~mt? 1~~ ... :,i;!i·':::", ::,;1-: ,,: ; .. , . I• 'C); ,·.' __ ·1:F·-·'i];.-"; :>?O: >>>he> S,. "· --< -,. -" ·!' :-::: _:----<:. ~2 , --,. )(-'JEi:: ,.,_ ···:--\,;""""""""'' f',.c···oc '~: :_ ·,-, ·,:, ·::;;,:--' .. Density: The density range permitted in the R-14 zone is a minimum 7.0 up to a maximum of 14.0 dwelling units per net acre. Net density is calculated after the deduction of sensitive areas, areas intended for public right-of-way, and private access easements. ,/ Staff Comment: After factoring in all density deductions (including proposed right-of- way dedications for public streets) the site has a net square footage of 205,517 square feet or 4.6 net acres (264,409 sf-62,892 sf= 205,517 sf). The 45-fotproposal would arrive at a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre (45 Jots I 4.6 acres= 9.7 du/ac}, which falls within the permitted density range for the R-14 zone. Lot Dimensions: The minimum lot size permitted in the R-14 zone is 3,000 sq. ft. for detached dwellings. There is no minimum lot size for attached dwellings. A minimum lot width of 30 feet is required (40 feet for corner lots) and a minimum lot depth of 60 feet is required. The following table identifies the proposed approximate dimensions for Lots 1-45: Proposed Lot Lot Size (sq. ft.) Lot Width (feet) Lot Depth (feet) Lot 1 2,220 32 69 Lot 2 2,217 32 69 Lot 3 2,217 32 69 Lot 4 2,220 32 69 Lot 5 3,657 50 74 ,/ Lot 6 2,232 30 74 Lot 7 2,377 32 74 Lot 8 2,249 32 70 Lot 9 2,250 32 70 Lot 10 2,364 32 70 Lot 11 2,656 32 78 Lot 12 2,824 32 70 Lot 13 2,980 32 70 Lot 14 2,390 32 72 Lot 15 2,263 30 75 Lot 16 2,406 32 75 Lot 17 2,407 32 75 Lot 18 2,406 32 75 Hex Report City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTTFARMSPRELIMINAR\. -·T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 8 of 31 Lot 19 2,567 32 80 Lot 20 2,847 36 80 Lot 21 2,847 36 80 Lot 22 2,415 30 80 Lot 23 2,852 33 81 Lot 24 3,330 39 79 Lot 25 2,557 32 80 Lot 26 2,610 32 80 Lot 27 2,698 32 81 Lot 28 2,610 32 81 Lot 29 2,628 32 82 Lot 30 2,646 32 82 Lot 31 2,674 32 83 Lot 32 2,821 32 82 Lot 33 3,029 32 81 Lot 34 2,458 32 76 Lot 35 2,296 30 76 Lot 36 2,445 32 76 Lot 37 2,445 32 76 Lot 38 2,379 32 76 Lot 39 3,145 43 72 Lot40 2,302 32 72 Lot 41 2,302 32 72 Lot42 2,302 32 72 Lot 43 2,365 32 72 Lot44 2,530 30 77 Lot 45 3,939 38 89 Tract A (Open Space) 43,898 N/A N/A Tract B (Alley) 1,125 N/A N/A Tract C (Alley) 2,405 N/A N/A Tract D (Open Space) 4,033 N/A N/A Tract E (Alley) 1,385 N/A N/A Tract F (Open Space) 11,396 N/A N/A Tract G (Open Space) 1,404 N/A N/A Tract H (Critical Area) 47,911 N/A N/A Staff Comment: As demonstrated in the lot dimensions table, all lots meet the requirements for minimum lot size, lot width and lot depth for attached dwellings. Setbacks: The required setbacks in the R-14 zone are as follows: front yard is 15 feet except garages must be 20 feet, side yard is 4 feet for detached units, for attached units the side yard is O feet, side yard along the street 15 feet, and the rear yard is 10 feet. ,/ To ensure adequate vehicular maneuvering area, garages and carports that are accessed through alleys required a nine-foot (9') garage door to be at least twenty six feet (26') from the back edge of the alley or sixteen-foot (16') garage doors must be at least twenty four (24') from the back edge of the alley. Staff Comment: The setback requirements for the proposed lots would be verified at the time of building permit review. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate Hex Report City of Renton Deportment of r · ,unity & Economic Development ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. ~ T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Compliance Page 9 of 31 area ta provide all the required setback areas. Building Standards: The R-14 zone has a maximum building coverage of 65% and a maximum impervious surface coverage of 80%. In the R-14 zone, a maximum residential building height of 30 feet is permitted. not yet demonstrated Staff Comment: Building height, building coverage, and impervious surface coverage Compliance not yet demonstrated Compliant if conditions of approval are met. Hex Report for the new multi-family residences would be verified at the time af building permit review. Maximum Number of Units per Building: In the R-14 zone, no more than 6 units per building are permitted. Staff Comment: The applicant has submitted elevations and floor plans far two-and three-unit buildings. Compliance with the maximum number of units per building requirement would be reviewed at the time of building permit review. Landscaping: The City's landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) require a 10-foot landscape strip along all public street frontages. Additional minimum planting strip widths between the curb and sidewalk are established according to the street development standards of RMC 4-6-060. Street trees and, at a minimum, groundcover, are to be located in this area when present. Spacing standards shall be as stipulated by the Department of Community and Economic Development, provided there shall be a minimum of one street tree planted per address. Any additional undeveloped right-of-way areas shall be landscaped unless otherwise determined by the Administrator. Where there is insufficient right-of-way space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard subject to approval of the Administrator. A minimum of two trees are to be located in the front yard prior to final inspection for the new Single Family Residence. A fifteen-foot (15') wide partially sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier, or ten- foot (10') wide fully sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier, is required along common property lines when a Residential Multi-family Zone or Use Is Abutting a Less Intense Residential Zone (RMC 4-4-070F.4). Staff Comment: As proposed, the conceptual landscape plan does not include the required 10-foot wide landscaping along all street frontages according, to the Preliminary Plat and Planting Plan (Exhibit 39}. The applicant would be required to include the required 10-foot wide landscaping along all street frontages, according to code. A detailed landscaping plan, complying with RMC 4-4-070, would be required to be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuance of the street and utility construction permits. A 10-foot landscape frontage is not required along the frontage of the public alley. The applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan (Exhibits 9 and 39) that includes a ten-foot (10') wide fully sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier between the R-14 subject property and the abutting R-8 parcel to the south. The sight- obscuring barrier includes the following cross-section: a 6 foot (6'} high fence along the shared property line, landscaping abutting the fence, a maximum 4 foot (4'} high retaining wall, followed by additional landscaping in front of the wall. The proposed landscape plan, along Road A, also includes a 0.5-foot wide curb, an 8-foot wide planting strip, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk along approximately half of the proposed public street. A final detailed landscape plan would be reviewed for compliance with RMC prior ta issuance of the street and utility construction permit issuance. City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PREL/MINAR\ . _ . T Report of August 9, 2016 Compliant if conditions of approval are met Hex Report Page 10 of 31 The landscaping plan proposes to plant 120 trees including, katsura, elm, flowering dogwood, Japanese snowbe/1, paperbark maple, vine maple, serviceberry, and carnelian cherry at either 2-inch caliper or 6-10 feet in height (Exhibits 9 and 14). Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant install all common landscaping and open space amenities prior to plot recording. A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. The applicant is proposing 60,731 square feet of open space within four (4) tracts (Tracts A, D, F and G) throughout the subject property. All 74 significant trees in the wetland ond buffer ore proposed to be retained. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that retains or improves the existing vegetation within the open space tracts. A draft HOA document hos been submitted as part of the application (Exhibit 41). A final HOA sho/1 be submitted to, and approved by, the City of Renton Current Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to Final Plot recording. Such documents shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. Tree Retention: The City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations require the retention of 20 percent of trees in a residential development. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and Significant trees over sixty feet (60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; Other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and Other significant non-native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot. Lots developed with detached single family dwelling units in the R-14 zone are exempt from the minimum tree density requirements. For multi-family development, the minimum tree density is four (4) significant trees for every five thousand (5,000) square feet. The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4-070F.1, Street Frontage Landscaping Required, or a combination. Staff Comment: The property is covered with a variety of trees. Several larger trees are located around the former residences at the southwest portion of the project site, including cedar, conifer, pine, spruce and alder trees (Exhibit 8}. The Arbarist Report identified 114 significant trees (125 including eleven 6-inch olders/cattanwoods} on the parcel proposed to be developed (Exhibit 14). Six (6) were classified as poor or dangerous, three (3) were located within private access easements/tracts, and 74 were located in critical areas and buffers. The net number of healthy trees for this development was determined to be 31. The average size of the trunk at diameter at breast height (DBH) for the surveyed trees is 14 inches (14"} with the largest tree, a bigleaf maple at 60" DBH, located southwest corner of the lot in the Category II wetland (Tract HJ. The minimum tree retention requirement is thirty percent (20%) in City of Renton Deportment of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000Z4Z, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY.~ .T Report of August 9, 2016 Hex Report Page 11 of 31 the R-14 zone. After street and critical area deductions, the applicant is proposing to retain zero of the potential 31 healthy trees or none of the required 6 trees. The applicant is proposing to replant the subdivision with 120 new trees. These proposed onsite replacement trees exceed the minimum required replacement inches, 12 inches (12") for every tree that was unable to be retained, or 74 inches (74") for this project. Where there is insufficient ROW space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard(s). A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each R-14 zoned lot. For multi-family development (attached dwelling units), the minimum tree density is four (4) significant trees for every five thousand (5,000} square feet. The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4- 070F.1, Street Frontage Landscaping Required, or a combination. Compliance with tree density development standard would be would be reviewed by planning at the time of building permit review. A final tree retention and detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. Parking: Parking regulations require that a minimum of two (2) parking spaces be provided for each detached dwelling. Parking regulations require that a minimum and maximum of 1.6 spaces be provided per 3 bedroom or large dwelling unit; 1.4 spaces per 2 bedroom dwelling unit; and 1.0 space per 1 bedroom or studio dwelling unit. Driveway cuts are required to be a minimum of 5 feet from property lines and new driveways may be a maximum of 16 feet in width at the property line. Maximum driveway slopes shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%); provided, that driveways exceeding eight percent (8%) shall provide slotted drains at the lower end with positive drainage discharge to restrict runoff from entering the garage/residence or crossing any public sidewalk. Staff Comment: Sufficient area exists, on each lot, to accommodate off-street vehicular parking. This is typically achieved by providing a two (2) car garage for each building (Exhibit 40}. Each of the three (3) building options includes a 3 bedroom floor plan with up to two (2) garage parking stall per unit which, if rounded up, is compliant with RMC 4-4-0BOF. d. Compliance with individual driveway requirements would be reviewed at the time of building permit review. Fences and Retaining Walls: In any residential district, the maximum height of any fence, hedge or retaining wall shall be seventy two inches (72"). Except in the front yard and side yard along a street setback where the fence shall not exceed forty eight inches (48") in height. There shall be a minimum three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights-of-way. Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing a modular block wall with a maximum height of four foot (4'). The retaining walls would be constructed near the south and east property lines within the subdivision. Specifically, within the rear yards of Lots 20-32. The retaining walls have been setback a minimum of 3 feet (3 ') from the public right-of-way following dedication. The applicant may terrace the rear yards in order to comply with the maximum height requirements for fences, hedges and/or retaining walls. Terracing is the act of forming hillside into a number of level flat areas (terraces) between retaining walls. No portion of a retaining wall shall be measured as part of the terrace width. The width of a terrace shall be equal to the City of Renton Department of, nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOO ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _ .T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 12 of 31 height of the tallest abutting retaining wall; however, the minimum terrace width shall be two feet (2') and the maximum required width shall be five feet (5'). Terrace width shall be measured from the back edge of a lower retaining wall to the foremost edge of the immediately succeeding and higher retaining wall. Terraces created between retaining walls shall be permanently landscaped with a mixture of shrubs and groundcover (trees are optional) in conformance with the standards of RMC 4-4- 0lOC.2.e, Landscaping. Landscaping pravided in /rant of retaining walls and within terraces shall contribute to any landscaping required by RMC 4-4-0lOF. The applicant is proposing terracing behind Lots 24-28, within the required 10-foot wide fully sight obscuring landscape visual barrier, that is compliant with retaining wall height standards of the code. Details of the terracing landscape plan shall be included in the final detailed landscape plan required to be submitted with the construction permit application. No new noise walls are planned by WSDOT along the project street frontage of SR 169 /Exhibit 33). The only noise walls WSDOT has "planned" in the generally vicinity is approximately 1 mile east of the site on the north side of SR 169. This project is currently un-funded with no real time-frame for completion. 28. Design Standards: Residential Design and Open Space Standards (RMC 4-2-115) are applicable in the R-14 zone. The Standards implement policies established in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Compliance with Site Design Standards must be demonstrated prior to approval of the subdivision. Compliance with Residential Design Standards would be verified prior to issuance of the building permit for the new single family homes. The proposal is consistent with the following design standards, unless noted otherwise: Compliance not yet demonstrated Hex Report Lot Configuration: Developments of more than four (4) structures shall incorporate a variety of home sizes, lot sizes, and unit clusters. Dwellings shall be arranged to ensure privacy so that side yards abut other side yards (or rights-of-way) and do not abut front or back yards. Lots accessed by easements or pipestems shall be prohibited. Staff Comment: The proposal includes three different elevation variations based on the two-and three-unit buildings. Several of units have been oriented to the open space tracts so that side yards abut other side yards (or rights-of-way) and do not abut front or back yards. The scope of the project includes a lot configuration that mimics the adjacent condominium development in appearance. None of the lots wauld be accessed by easement and or pipestem. Garages: Garages may be attached or detached. Shared garages are also allowed, provided the regulations of RMC 4-4-080 are met. Carports are not allowed. One of the following is required; the garage must be: 1. Recessed from the front of the house and/or front porch at least eight feet (8'), or 2. Detached and set back from the front of the house and/or porch at least six feet (6'). Additionally, all of the following is required: 1. Garage design shall be of similar design to the homes, and City of Renton Department of r ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY nunity & Economic Development T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Page 13 of 31 2. If sides of the garage are visible from streets, sidewalks, pathways, trails, or other homes, architectural details shall be incorporated in the design. If shared garages are allowed, they may share the structure with other homes and all of the following is required: 1. Each unit has garage space assigned to it, and 2. The garage is not to be located further than one hundred sixty feet (160') from any of the housing units to which it is assigned, and 3. The garage shall not exceed forty four feet (44') in width, and shall maintain an eight foot (8') separation from any dwellings. Staff Comment: The preliminary floor plans and elevations include a garage setback af at least eight feet /8'} from the front porch. Each unit has garage space assigned and attached to the unit and the garage designs are also similar in design to the homes. Compliance for this standard would be further verified at the time of building permit review. Standards for Parks: For developments that are less than ten (10) net acres: No park is required, but is allowed. For developments that are greater than ten (10) net acres: A minimum of one one- N/A half (.5) acre park, in addition to the common open space requirement, is required. Staff Comment: The development is less than ten /10) net acres, so no park is required. Although open space, walking trails, and park amenities have been provided by the development. Standards for Comment Open Space: Developments of four (4) or more units: Required to provide common open space as follows: 1. For each unit in the development, three hundred fifty (350) square feet of common open space shall be provided. 2. Open space shall be designed as a park, common green, pea-patch, pocket park, or pedestrian entry easement in the development and shall include picnic areas, space for small recreational activities, and other activities as appropriate. 3. Open space shall be located in a highly visible area and be easily accessible Compliant if to the neighborhood. conditions of 4. Open space(s) shall be contiguous to the majority of the dwellings in the approval are met development and accessible to all dwellings, and shall be at least twenty feet (20') wide. 5. A pedestrian entry easement can be used to meet the access requirements if it has a minimum width of twenty feet (20') with a minimum five feet (5') of sidewalk. 6. Pea-patches shall be at least one thousand (1,000) square feet in size with individual plots that measure at least ten feet by ten feet (10' x 10'). Additionally, the pea-patch shall include a tool shed and a common area with space for compost bins. Water shall be provided to the pea-patch. Fencing that meets the standards for front yard fencing shall surround the pea-patch with a one foot (1') landscape area on the outside of the fence. This area is to be landscaped with flowers, plants, and/or shrubs. Hex Report City of Renton Department of, ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY . ,unity & Economic Development . T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Page 14 of 31 7. Grass-crete or other pervious surfaces may be used in the common open space for the purpose of meeting the one hundred fifty feet (150') distance requirement for emergency vehicle access but shall not be used for personal vehicle access or to meet off-street parking requirements. 8. Storm ponds may be used to meet the common open space requirement if designed to accommodate a fifty (SO) year storm and to be dry ninety percent (90%) of the year. Staff Comment: The development includes 2.5 acres of common open space or nearly 7 times the minimum three hundred fifty (350} square feet of common open space. The common open space includes walking trails, picnic benches and pocket areas for residents. Because the open space is located throughout the development it is highly visible and is easily accessible to the neighborhood. However, the open space is lacking recreational activities far all age groups and lighting for public safety. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant incorporate into the landscaping plan a minimum of two (2) active play structures or courts that provide opportunities for physical exercise and social interaction and low level trail lighting. The details of these amenities shall be identified on the final landscaping plan and shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. Standards for Private Yards: Developments of four (4) or more dwelling units: Each ground-related dwelling shall have a private yard that is at least two hundred fifty (250) square feet in size with no dimension less than eight feet (8') in width. ,/ An additional two hundred fifty (250) square feet of open space per unit shall be added to the required amount of common open space for each unit that is not ground related. Staff Comment: Each two-story ground unit is located on o fee simple lot thot has o private yard that is two hundred fifty (250) square feet in size or greater with no dimension less than eight feet (8') in width. Sidewalks, Pathways, and Pedestrian Easements: All of the following are required: 1. Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the neighborhood. The sidewalk may disconnect from the road, provided it continues in a logical route throughout the development. 2. Front yards shall have entry walks that are a minimum width of three feet (3') and a maximum width of four feet (4'). Compliant if 3. Pathways shall be used to connect common parks, green areas, and pocket Conditions of parks to residential access streets, limited residential access streets, or Approval are other pedestrian connections. They may be used to provide access to met homes and common open space. They shall be a minimum three feet (3') in width and made of paved asphalt, concrete, or porous material such as: porous paving stones, crushed gravel with soil stabilizers, or paving blocks with planted joints. Sidewalks or pathways for parks and green spaces shall be located at the edge of the common space to allow a larger usable green and easy access to homes. 4. Pedestrian Easement Plantings: Shall be planted with plants and trees. Trees are required along all pedestrian easements to provide shade and spaced twenty feet (20') on center. Shrubs shall be planted in at least Hex Report City of Renton Department of, ~unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _ . T Report of August 9, 2016 Hex Report Page 15 of 31 fifteen percent (15%) of the easement and shall be spaced no further than thirty six inches (36") on center. 5. For all homes that do not front on a residential access street, limited residential access street, a park, or a common green: Pedestrian entry easements that are at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk shall be provided. Staff Comment: Pedestrian sidewalks and pedestrian connections are located throughout the subject property and would provide for safe and efficient pedestrian access throughout the site. In portions of the development, sidewalks have been disconnected from the road. Logical pedestrian connections are provided from SR 169 and Molasses Creek Condominiums to Road A. The applicant hos included a primary 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of Road A and a 7-foot wide crushed rock trail throughout the open space tracts. Each portion of the trail that is directly connected to the SR 169 would be required to be paved in order to meet ADA standards. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that The proposed on-site seven-foot wide trail system shall be paved with concrete, except the trail system located directly behind the rear yards of Lots 34-45. The final detailed trail system and profile plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. The sidewalk and trail systems would be used to connect buildings to common open space, on-street parking, neighboring properties, and the public right-of-way (Exhibits 2, 5, 9, and 39). The front yards of Lots 1-13 abut common open space. Therefore, staff recommends, os a condition of approval, shall orient the front doors and front yards of the attached dwelling units on Lots 1-13 toward the street {Road A) or the common open space tracts. Each of these units shall provide a/our foot {4') entry walkway that connects the front entry to shared common green space trail or sidewalk system. A note to this effect shall be recorded on the face of the Plat map. Each of these units shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. Sidewalks or pathways for parks and green spaces shall be located at the edge of the common space to allow a larger usable green and easy access to homes. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant relocate the shared common green space trail system, which runs north/south between Lots 3-18, to be located closer to the front yards of Lots 5-13 to provide more usable green space behind the lots. Lots 24-26 front Tract E {alley 1), therefore, the homes do not front on a residential access street, limited residential access street, a park, or o common green area. Therefore, a pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet {15') wide plus a five-foot {5') sidewalk shall be provided. A plat revision that is consistent with this code regulation shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. It appears that the applicant could shift Lots 19-23 approximately five feet {5') to the north and incorporate a flush concrete sidewalk with the alley (alley 1) to comply with the pedestrian entry easement and sidewalk requirement of the code. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant submit a revised plat plan that includes a pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet {15') wide plus a five-foot {5') sidewalk to the north of Lots 24-26. Primary Entry: Both of the following are required: City of Renton Department of ounity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _. T Report of August 9, 2016 Compliant if condition of opprovol is met Compliance not yet demonstrated Compliance not yet demonstrated Hex Report Page 16 of 31 1. The entry shall take access from and face a street, park, common green, pocket park, pedestrian easement, or open space, and 2. The entry shall include one of the following: a. Stoop: minimum size four feet by six feet (4' x 6') and minimum height twelve inches (12") above grade, or b. Porch: minimum five feet (5') deep and minimum height twelve inches (12") above grade. Exception: in cases where accessibility (ADA) is a priority, an accessible route may be taken from a front driveway. Staff Comment: lots 1-13 all take access from the alley tracts via Road A. The current design of the 13 lots provides the lot width along the alley and the depth parallel to Road A. This type of lot design could result in a development pattern where each of these four (4) units are oriented towards the alley and not the public street (Road A} or the common open space. An orientation towards the alley would not be consistent with building design orientation toward pedestrians or the street (see Comprehensive Pion Policy CD-20 and CD-23}. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, that the applicant shall orient the front doors of the units on lots 1-13 toward the street (Road A) or the common open space tracts; in order to meet minimum primary entry standards of Residential Design and Open Space Standards (RMC 4-2-115}. A note to this effect shall be recorded on the face of the Plat map. Each of these units shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. Furthermore, to ensure compatibility with the remainder of the subdivision the fa,ade modulation of these homes fronting Road A shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. Including at least one articulation or change in plane of at least two feet (2') in depth. The building designs shall be reviewed and approved at the time of building permit application. Fa~ade Modulation: Both of the following are required: 1. The primary building elevation oriented toward the street or common green shall have at least one articulation or change in plane of at least two feet (2') in depth; and 2. A minimum one side articulation that measures at least one foot (1') in depth shall occur for all facades facing streets or public spaces. Staff Comment: Compliance for this standard would be verified at the time of building permit review. Windows and Doors: All of the following are required: 1. Primary windows shall be proportioned vertically, rather than horizontally, and 2. Vertical windows may be combined together to create a larger window area, and 3. All doors shall be made of wood, fiberglass, metal, or glass and trimmed with three and one-half inches (3 Y,") minimum head and jamb trim around the door, and 4. Screen doors are permitted, and 5. Primary entry doors shall face a street, park, common green, pocket park, or pedestrian easement and shall be paneled or have inset windows, and City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINAR. , .AT Report of August 9, 2016 Compliant if condition of approval is met Compliant if condition of approval is met Compliance not yet demonstrated Hex Report Page 17 of 31 6. Sliding glass doors are not permitted along a frontage elevation or an elevation facing a pedestrian easement. Staff Comment: Compliance for this standard would be verified at the time of building permit review. Scale, Bulk, and Character: All of the following are required: 1. The primary building form shall be the dominating form and elements such as porches, principal dormers, or other significant features shall not dominate, and 2. Primary porch plate heights shall be one story. Stacked porches are allowed, and 3. To differentiate the same models and elevations, different colors shall be used, and 4. For single family dwellings, no more than two (2) of the same model and elevation shall be built on the same block frontage and the same model and elevation shall not be abutting. Stoff Comment: The applicant hos provided three /3) different building plans for the 45 units. The building plans include two-story units with either two-or three-units per building. The site plan includes in five /5) 3-unit buildings and fifteen 2-unit buildings. The 3-unit buildings are spaced out throughout the development. The models include one story porches that project out from the body of the units and units feature dark asphalt comp shingles, decorative roof brackets, board & batten siding, hardiboard siding, cedar channel siding, window glazing, shutters, and trim. The colors provided include shades of brown, tan, bronze, green, and gray. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the plat shall include a minimum of four /4) different building types (models) to provide additional character to the development. The detailed floor and elevations plans shall be submitted ta the City af Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. Roofs: Both of the following are required: 1. Primary roof pitch shall be a minimum six to twelve (6:12). If a gable roof is used, exit access from a third floor must face a public right-of-way for emergency access, and 2. A variety of roofing colors shall be used within the development and all roof material shall be fire retardant. Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing a 7:12 primary roof pitch for each building. However, only dark asphalt comp shingles are illustrated in the elevation details. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant shall submit revised building elevations and building plans to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. The roofing material shall include a variety of colors throughout the development. Eaves: The following is required: Eaves shall be at least twelve inches (12") with horizontal fascia or fascia gutter at least five inches (S") deep on the face of all eaves. Staff Comment: Compliance for this standard would be verified at the time of building permit review. Architectural Detailing: All of the following are required: 1. Three and one-half inches (3 Yz") minimum trim surrounds all windows and City of Renton Deportment of ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. ounity & Economic Development .T Heoring Exominer Recommendotion LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Page 18 of 31 details all doors, and Compliance 2. At least one of the following architectural details shall be provided on each not yet home: shutters, knee braces, flower boxes, or columns, and demonstrated 3. Where siding is used, metal corner clips or corner boards shall be used and shall be at minimum two and one-half inches (2 Y,") in width and painted. If shutters are used, they shall be proportioned to the window size to simulate the ability to cover them, and 4. If columns are used, they shall be round, fluted, or strongly related to the home's architectural style. Six inches by six inches (6" x 6") posts may be allowed if chamfered and/or banded. Exposed four inches by four inches (4" x 4") and six inches by six inches (6" x 6") posts are prohibited. Staff Comment: Compliance for this standard would be verified at the time of building permit review. Materials and Color: All of the following are required: 1. Acceptable exterior wall materials are: wood, cement fiberboard, stucco, stone, and standard sized brick three and one-half inches by seven and one- half inches (3 Y," x 7 Y,") or three and five eighths inches by seven and five- eighths inches (3 5/8" x 7 5/8"). Simulated stone, wood, stone, or brick may be used to detail homes, and 2. When more than one material is used, changes in a vertical wall, such as from wood to brick, shall wrap the corners no less than twenty four inches (24"). The material change shall occur at an internal corner or a logical Compliant if transition such as aligning with a window edge or chimney. Material condition of transition shall not occur at an exterior corner, and approval is 3. Multiple colors on buildings shall be provided. Muted deeper tones, as met opposed to vibrant primary colors, shall be the dominant colors. Color palettes for all new structures, coded to the home elevations, shall be submitted for approval. 4. Gutters and downspouts shall be integrated into the color scheme of the home and be painted, or of an integral color, to match the trim color. Staff Comment: Staff recommended under FOF 28 Residential Design and Open Space Standards: Scale, Bulk, and Character that the applicant provides a minimum of four (4) different building building types (models) to provide additional character to the development. In addition, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant submits, to the City of Renton Current Project Manager, a site plan and a roofing materials board that identifies a variety of colors throughout the development. Mail and Newspapers: All of the following are required: 1. Mailboxes shall be clustered and located so as to serve the needs of USPS Compliant if while not adversely affecting the privacy of residents; condition of 2. Mailboxes shall be lockable consistent with USPS standard; approval is 3. Mailboxes shall be architecturally enhanced with materials and details met typical of the home's architecture; and 4. Newspaper boxes shall be of a design that reflects the character of the home. Hex Report City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _AT Report of August 9, 2016 Page 19 of 31 Staff Comment: The standard United States Postal Service {USPS) mailbox would not satisfy this code requirement. The applicant would need ta submit a mailbox design that is architecturally enhanced and reflects the character of the homes. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a mailbox design to be reviewed by the Current Planning Project Manager at construction permit submittal. Hot Tubs, Pools, and Mechanical Equipment: Hot tubs and pools shall only be located in back yards and designed to minimize sight and sound impacts to N/A adjoining property. Pool heaters and pumps shall be screened from view and sound insulated. Pool equipment must comply with codes regarding fencing. Staff. Comment: No hot tubs or pools are proposed for Elliott Farms. Utilities: Utility boxes that are not located in alleyways or away from public Compliance gathering spaces shall be screened with landscaping or berms. not yet Staff. Comment: A final detailed landscape plan would be reviewed for compliance demonstrated with RMC prior to issuance of the utility construction permit issuance. Compliance for this standard would be verified at the time of utility plan review and building permit review. Dumpster/Trash/Recycling Collection Area: Both of the following are required: 1. Trash and recycling containers shall be located so that they have minimal impact on residents and their neighbors and so that they are not visible to the general public; and Compliance 2. A screened enclosure in which to keep containers shall be provided or not yet garages shall be built with adequate space to keep containers. Screened demonstrated enclosures shall not be located within front yards. Staff. Comment: Because the applicant has not identified refuse and recyclables deposit areas, it is anticipated that individual trash and recycling cans would be used far each unit. The applicant may submit a formal request for modification to staff for consideration to deviate from refuse and recyclables standards. 29. Critical Areas: Project sites which contain critical areas are required to comply with the Critical Areas Regulations (RMC 4-3-050). The proposal is consistent with the Critical Areas Regulations, if all conditions of approval are complied with: Hex Report Geologically Hazardous Areas: Based upon the results of a geotechnical report, conditions of approval for developments may include buffers and/or setbacks from buffers. A SO-foot buffer and 15-foot building setback are required from Very High Landslide Hazard Areas. Stoff. Comment: The Geotechnical Engineering Study identified the majority of the site as low landslide hazard (LL), defined as areas with slopes less than 15 percent. A 10- to 20-foot wide centrally-located slope aligned northwest-southeast across the site was classified as medium landslide hazard {LM} area. LM is defined as areas with slopes between 15 percent and 40 percent and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel, or glacial till. The geotechnical engineer did not observe any indications of instability, emergent groundwater seepage, significant erosion, or historical movement on or adjacent to the site in areas where soils would classify as LM. No development activity is planned in the area of the steep slope in the southwest corner of the site. Development plans would remove or regrade the centrally-located City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINAR . _ T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 20 of 31 slope during moss regrading. The geotechnicol engineer concluded that the areas to be developed on the site do not pose o risk as a landslide hazard area. Streams: The following buffer requirements are applicable to streams in accordance with RMC 4-3-0SOG.2: Type F streams require a 115-foot buffer, Type Np streams N/A require a 75-foot buffer, and Type Ns streams require a SO-foot buffer. An additional 15-foot building setback is required from the edge of all stream buffer areas. Staff Comment: No streams were identified in the Critical Areas Report submitted by the applicant and prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (Exhibit 11). Wellhead Protection Areas: N/A Staff. Comment: The site is located just outside the Wellhead Protection Area Zane 2. Wetlands: The following buffer requirements are applicable to wetlands in accordance with RMC 4-3-0SOM.6: Wetland Category Standard Buffer Width Category 1 100 ft. Category 2 50 ft. Category 3 25 ft. Sta[t Comment: A Critical Area Report was prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. Compliant if /dated December 15, 2014; Exhibit 11) was submitted with the application materials. condition of According to the report, there is a Category II wetland located in the southwest approval is portion of the property. Under the vested City of Renton code, Category II wetlands met must provide a standard buffer width of 50 feet. The wetland is a low-lying forested area in the southwest portion of the site. No other wetlands or critical areas were identified within the remaining portion of the property. The applicant is also providing a minimum 15-foot wide common areas tract, immediately north of the wetland buffer (Tract F), in order to provide additional separation between the wetland buffer and the proposed rear lots of Lots 34-45. Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. As part of the SEPA process, a mitigation measure was included that would require the applicant to remove the existing concrete foundation{s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the 50-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. 30. Compliance with Subdivision Regulations: Chapter 4-7 RMC provides review criteria for the subdivision. The proposal is consistent with the following subdivision regulations if all conditions of approval are complied with: Hex Report Access: Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by a shared driveway per the requirements of the street standards. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveways shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveways shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). Staff. Comment: Each lot would have access to a public street, road, or alley as shown in the Preliminary Plat Plans /Exhibits 2 and 39). A new public street /Road A) would City of Renton Deportment of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOO ELLIOTT FARMS PRELI MINAR .. ..AT Report of August 9, 2016 Compliant if modification request is approved Hex Report Page 21 of 31 provide direct access to SR 169. Blocks: Blocks shall be deep enough to allow two tiers of lots. Staff Comment: SR 169 to the north and critical area Tract H along the southwest corner of the parcel limit the depth of the subject site and the applicant's ability to provide two tier lots. The final layout of the lots reserved the development pattern created in Molasses Creek Condominiums with homes oriented to open space. Lots: The size, shape, orientation, and arrangement of the proposed lots comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations and the Development Standards of the R-14 zone and allow for reasonable infill of developable land. Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of the required lot width except in the cases of (1) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). Staff Comment: The lots are generally rectangular in shape with orientation far the maximization of views to open spoce. The minimum lot width in the R-14 zone is 30 feet, 80% of the lot width would be 24 feet. A majority of the lots provide a minimum frontage of 24 feet. Except for Lots 11-13 and Lot 33. Lots along street curves shall comply with the minimum standard of 24 feet os 35 feet would be wider than the minimum lot width for the zone. Therefore, stoff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant provide for the minimum standard of 24 feet (24') along street curves. A finol detailed site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager ond the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. Streets: The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets per the Street Standards outlined in RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards. Staff Comment: The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy {SR 169} along the north property line. SR 169 is classified os o Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Primary access to the site would be provided via a new channelized public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Ma/asses Creek Condominiums. A street channelization plan has been reviewed and approved by Washington State Department af Transportation {WSDOT) (Exhibit 38). Adequate sight distance and frontage improvements along SR 169 would be subject to design review ond approval by WSDOT. The City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials {AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. This may include dedication of right-of-way (ROW) for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate six (6) 12-foot wide travel lanes and 8- foot wide shoulders. If curbs ore used, shoulder width may be reduced to 4 feet. Existing ROW width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4-6-060, half-street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet {44 feet from centerline), a 0.5 foot curb, an 8 foot planting strip, an 8 foat sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group has determined and would support an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for SR 169. The City is supportive of the developer's request to retain the existing curb line, followed by a 61oot wide planting strips and 5-foot wide sidewalks behind the existing curb along the project frontage of SR 169. The applicant moy submit a formal request for modification to staff for consideration to deviate from the frontage improvements City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINAR .. ..AT Report of August 9, 2016 Hex Report Page 22 of 31 and dedication of right-of-way along SR 169. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private Jane to 140th Way SE and SR 169 /Exhibit 2). The subject property has easement rights to use the existing private road through Molasses Creek Condominiums /Exhibit 19). The preliminary road plans and profiles and onsite grading plan identify the existing and proposed grading and road improvements to serve the proposed 45 units /Exhibit 5). The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-6-060F.2 "Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys" that would modify the residential access road standard by disconnecting the majority of the public sidewalks and planter strips from the road, away from vehicular travel ways, into open space tracts throughout the development. The modified street standard includes ROW dedication between 35 feet and 53 feet along Road A. The majority of the street improvements include a paved roadway width of 20 feet with 5-foot wide sidewalks and 8-foot wide planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips alternate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. In addition, portions of the paved rood sections also include up to seven /7) on-street parking stalls along the north side af the road /Exhibit SJ. See FOF 30 for more information. The proposal also includes three /3} 16-foot wide alley Tracts (Tract A {alley 3), Tract B (alley 2), and Tract E (alley 1)). Under RMC 4-6-0601, these three access tracts are identified as shared driveways. Shared driveways are not dedicated right-of-way and are owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. Deviation from the shared driveway standards of the code would require a separate street modification request. The applicant may submit a formal request for modification to staff for consideration to deviate from the shared driveway standards. Alley 1 provides access to Lots 24-26, alley 2 provides access to Lots 5-13 and alley 3 provides access to Lots 1-4. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings and fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide fully paved, with 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside turning radius (including the turning radius to alley 2). Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 ton vehicle with 75 psi point loading. Applicant shall submit a variance request for approval by the Renton Fire Authority for 16-foot wide alley access to Lot 1- 4, 5-13 and 24-26. An earlier site plan design included a T-shaped alley that included lots without pipestems, landscape screening between the alley and the public right-of- way and minimum turning radius (Exhibit 43). Staff is more supportive of a T-shaped alley design that meets all these items. The applicant has indicated that the proposed 45-lot subdivision would generate 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour /5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour /21 entering, 10 exiting) /Exhibit 12}. The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: 50 percent to/from the west on SR 169; 30 percent to/from the east on SR 169; and 20 percent ta/from the south on 140th Way SE. Based on the LOS results conducted at three study intersections, all intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels (LOS Dor better) during the AM and PM peak hours in 2017 with no significant impacts created by the proposed Elliott Farm. An annual growth rate of two percent was applied to the existing volumes. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in impacts to the City's street system. In order to mitigate transportation impacts, the applicant would be required to meet code-required frontage improvements, City of City of Renton Deportment of, ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. nunity & Economic Development T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 ,/ Page 23 of 31 Ren ton's transportation concurrency requirements /Exhibit 36} based upon a test af the citywide Transportation Plan and pay appropriate Transportation Impact Fees. The 2016 impact fee for condominium/townhome is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit. Based on 45 new dwelling units, the resulting impact fee would be $69,583.95 {45 X 1,546.31 per unit). Payment of transportation impact fees is opplicable at the time of issuance of the building permit. The City of Renton transportation impact fee rote schedule is subject to change. All street lighting is required to meet city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and would be reviewed during the construction utility permit. A lighting plan and final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. Relationship to Existing Uses: The proposed project is compatible with existing surrounding uses. Staff Comment: The subject site is bordered by multi-family and single-family homes within the general vicinity of the subject property (Exhibit 3). The properties surrounding the subject site are residential low to high density and are designated RC, R-8 and R-14 on the City's zoning map. The proposal is similar to existing development patterns in the area and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, which encourages the development of infill parcels in existing multi-family districts. 31. Availability and Impact on Public Services: ,COITlpliam:er l~~il"~ " ,, ~· ~. ' " " . '~tiiii:'IH~ /~. >> ·.,.,. .> ·; ·· · >>: :), ·.· i:.'.c'./!\ .\, 'JP'·, (.ii·., ')< 0:, ::'i:-•J\'}>t·,F -.. ' .i,i,. "·' ·;· "'<<,-'·"' )'.!'.?'. " Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicates that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition that the ,/ applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. Applicant would also be required to submit a variance request to reduce the width of the proposed alleys throughout the site. See FOF 28, Streets. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Schools: It is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the following schools: Tiffany Park Elementary School, Nelsen Middle School, and Lindbergh High School (Exhibit 29). Any new students attending the Renton schools would be bussed. The proposed project includes the installation of frontage improvements along the public street frontages, including sidewalks. The designated school bus stops are at the following intersections ,/ (at or near the project site): 14105 Maple Valley Hwy (Turn lane Molasses Creek) and 140th Way SE & SE 154th Pl. A sidewalk runs the distance from each lot to either of the designated bus stops. Therefore, there are safe walking routes to the school bus stops. A School Impact Fee, based on new single-family lots, would be required in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to the Renton School District. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code. Currently the fee is assessed at $1,385.00 per multi-family unit. Parks: A Park Impact Fee would be required for the future multi-family units. The current Park Impact Fee (per unit) is $1,532.56 for a 2 unit multi-family structure or ,/ $1,448.52 for a 3 to 4 unit multi-family structure. The fee in effect at the time of building permit application is applicable to this project and is payable at the time of building permit issuance. Hex Report City of Renton Deportment of munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000Z4Z, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PR EL/MINAR .. ..AT Report of August 9, 2016 Page 24 of 31 Storm Water: An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Staff Comment: The applicant submitted a Preliminary Technical Information Repart {TIR}, prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. {dated April 10, 2015; Exhibit 13}. The 6.07-acre site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. According to the TIR, the project would maintain the natural discharge location for the site. However, less than 10% of the total basin area of the wetland would be diverted away from the wetland. The project's biologist does not expect the proposed diversion would result in a substantial change in the flaw available to the wetland /Exhibit 20). Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development would be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways within two /2) drainage basins. One /1) basin would be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the second basin would drain to a proposed 24-inch conveyance system along the project fronting SR 169 /Exhibit 6/. The proposed 45-lot subdivision is subject to full drainage review and water quality in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. Compliant According to the TIR,flow control is exempt for this project as the project is within a half mile of the Cedar River and direct discharge to Cedar River is permitted per City of if condition Renton Amendment ta King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, of approval provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City is met Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. Cedar River is listed as a Major Receiving Water and the project is less than one-half mile to the 100 year flood plain. The final Technical Information Report (TIR) must include a level 3 downstream analysis to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge would not cause flooding. The developer is intending to use an existing off-site water quality facility (wetpond). The wetpond is located at the southwest corner of the SR 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. According to the TIR, the off-site water quality drainage facility (wet pond} was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominium, areas of the WSDOT right-of-way, as well as the proposed Elliott Farms project. A SEPA mitigation measure was included that requires the applicant to provide a copy of the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond by King County, including the original design of the pond. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures would be provided in the final engineering plan set and would be subject to the 2009 Department of Ecology Guidelines. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Water: The applicant has provided a water availability certificate from Cedar River ,/ Water & Sewer District (Exhibit 15). A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. Sanitary Sewer: The applicant has provided a sewer availability certificate from Cedar ,/ River Water & Sewer District (Exhibit 16). A copy of the approved sewer plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. Hex Report City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINAR' .. _ . T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 25 of 31 32. Site Plan Review: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-200.B, Site Plan Review is required for development in the R-14 zoning classification when it is not exempt from Environmental (SEPA) Review. Given Site Plan applications are evaluated for compliance with the specific requirements of the RMC 4-9-200.E.3 the following table contains project elements intended to comply with level of detail needed for Site Plan requests: Compliance. •· s1tep1an.¢tiferJll lincfAnlilys~ ii' ?\; ' " ,·,······· ; ; ;,.; ;, ., ''' '" I' .,,, .CO'",CO'°''COO,,s·o ,.,,.,;,,,.,,,,,,,,""'·"'--'",','' ·.-·.,_ < 'i .,/· , :>cc ,, " ' Compliant if a. Comprehensive Plan Compliance and consistency. Conditions of Approval Staff Comment: See previous discussion under FOF 26, Comprehensive Pion Analysis. ore Met Compliant if b. Zoning Compliance and Consistency. Conditions Staff Standard of Approval Comment: See discussion under FOF 27, Zoning Development are Met Compliance. Compliant if c. Design Regulation Compliance and Consistency. Conditions of Approval Staff Comment: See discussion under FOF 28, Residential Design and Open Space ore Met Standards. d. Planned action ordinance and Development agreement Compliance and ,I" Consistency. Staff. Comment: The proposed development is compliant with Pre-Annexation Development Agreement Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. (Exhibit 42). e. Off Site Impacts. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular portion of the site. Stoff Comment: See FOF 28, Residential Design and Open Space Standards: Scale, Bulk, and Character. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties. Staff Comment: A loop circulation system using Road A and Molasses Creek Condominium private roadway allows for local serving traffic to access the multi-family properties from SR 169 to the north. The street sections and onsite internal pathways ,I" ore intended to create o pedestrian-friendly atmosphere with wide sidewalks and landscaping. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties. Staff Comment: See FOF 27, Zoning Development Standard Compliance: Landscaping and FOF 28, Residential Design and Open Space Standards: Utilities and Dumpster/Trash/Recycling Collection Area. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features. Staff Comment: The multi-family buildings, particularly those fronting SR 169 would provide for territorial views. Additionally, design regulations related to the height of Hex Report City of Renton Department of anunity & Economic Development ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARYlflT Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, £CF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Page 26 of 31 proposed structures can be found in FOF 27, Zoning Development Standard: Building Standards. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project. Stott Comment: See discussion under FOF 27, Zoning Development Standard: Landscaping. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. Staff Comment: A lighting plan was not provided with the application; therefore staff recommended that a lighting plan be provided at the time of building permit review. f. On Site Impacts. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation. Stat( Comment: The Site Plan includes an arrangement of buildings around the open space to reduce noise. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs. Staff Comment: The multi-family buildings would be limited to 30 feet in height. The height of the R-14 zone is consistent with the two-and three-story condominium development project completed in Phase 1. Additionally, design regulations related to the height of proposed structures can be found in FOF 27, Zoning Development ,/ Standard Compliance: Building Standards. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces. Staff Comment: Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of material would be cut onsite and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill is proposed to be brought to the site. There is an existing Category II wetland onsite (Exhibits 1 and 11). Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. Stott Comment: See FOF 27, Zoning Development Standard Compliance: Landscaping. g. Access Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets ,/ rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties. Staff Comment: Access would occur from the through road that connects the development from SR 169 to Molasses Creek Condominiums (Road A}. The applicant is Hex Report City of Renton Deportment of ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY ,unity & Economic Development T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Page 27 of 31 also proposing a 7-faat wide on-site trail system that connected to the off-site street frontage improvements along SR 169 which includes a 5-foat wide sidewalk. The wide trail system and sidewalk improvements would help to pramate a walkable, pedestrian oriented, community connection that would promote safe and efficient circulation and linkages to the neighboring developments. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways. Staff Comment: The Site Plan proposes a through road system that creates a more logical and seamless road pattern than exists today. Pedestrian connections from the street to the buildings would be provided. See FOF 30, Compliance with Subdivision Regulations: Access and Streets. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas. Staff Comment: The parking areas include up to seven (7) on-street parking stalls along the north side of the road (Exhibit 5). No specific loading and delivery areas are designated. The project development is residential in design. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access. Staff Comment: Per RMC 4-4-080F.11.a bicycle parking spaces are required at one-half (0.5) bicycle parking space per ane dwelling unit (attached dwelling). Spaces shall meet the requirements of subsection Fllc of this Section, Bicycle Parking Standards. Each unit contains a garage with enough space ta provide one-holf (0.5) bicycle parking spoce per dwelling unit. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. Staff Comment: See FOF 28, Residential Design and Open Space Standards: Sidewalks, Pathways, and Pedestrian Easements. h. Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the ,/ occupants/users of the site. Staff Comment: See FOF 28, Residential Design and Open Space Standards: Standards for Comment Open Space. i. Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines. ,/ Staff Comment: The proposed structures would not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier. The public access requirement to shorelines is not applicable to the proposal. j. Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. ,/ Staff Comment: The site contains 47,911 SF of critical area. Other than the acknowledged Category fl wetland in the southwest portion of the site, no other wetlands or critical areas were identified within the remaining portion of the property. The applicant is also providing a minimum 15-foot wide common areas tract, immediately north of the wetland buffer (Tract F), in order to provide additional Hex Report City of Renton Department of wnity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. _ .T Report of August 9, 2016 Page 28 of 31 separation between the wetland buffer and the proposed rear lots of Lots 34-45. Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. See FOF 15, 24, ond 29 Critical Areas. k. Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use: Police and Fire. Staff Comment: Police ond Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; if the applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. See FOF 31, Availability and Impact on Public Services: Police and Fire. Water and Sewer. .,, Staff Comment: See FOF 31, Availability and Impact on Public Services: Water and Sanitary Sewer. Drainage. Staff Comment: See FOF 31, Availability and Impact on Public Services. Transportation. Staff Comment: Access to the site is proposed via Road A along SR 169. Increased traffic created by the development would be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Currently this fee is assessed at $1,546.31 per dwelling unit. This fee increases each year and the applicable fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance. See FOF 30, Compliance with Subdivision Regulations: Streets. N/A I. Phasing: The applicant is not requesting any additional phasing. 33. Modification Analysis: The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-6-060F.2 "Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys" to reduce the width of the residential access roadway and relocate a fair portion of the public sidewalks and planter strips into open space tracts away from vehicular travel ways. The proposal is compliant with the following modification criteria, pursuant to RMC 4-9-2500, if all conditions of approval are met. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the requested modification, subject to conditions as noted below: Hex Report a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives. Staff Comment: The proposal to develop the subject property with 45 homes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations of the site. Neighborhood connectivity is facilitated by the construction of a new public road segment that would connect to the existing Molasses Creek Condominium private roadway to and from the site. The following Comprehensive Plan Objectives and Policies support development of the site as proposed with 45 units and the modified public road section: • Objective LU-FF: The project proposes urban density with efficient land utilization City of Renton Deportment of, ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY. wnity & Economic Development T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Report of August 9, 2016 Page 29 of 31 and extends a neighbarhaad feel of the existing neighborhood. • Policy LU-140: The project would infill with similar development adjacent to an existing development served by the connecting road system. • Policy LU-141: The project proposes a logical extension of existing development that is consistent and complimentary to the development through which it accesses. b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment. Stoff Comment: The new public road segment would connect ta an existing private road that serves Molasses Creek Condominiums. As a recommended condition of approval, the homeowners of the new project would enter into an agreement with the Molasses Compliant Creek Homeowner's Association far their proportionate share of maintenance of the off- if condition site private road network. An easement already exists to extend private access through Molasses Creek Condominiums to the site. The proposed roadway would provide a a/approval paved width of 20 feet with sidewalks that are separated from the vehicle lanes far is met most of the length. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval that the separated sidewalks (i.e. trail system) be paved with concrete with the exception of the trail system behind the rear yards of Lots 34-45. Each tawnhome unit would provide up to two {2} off-street parking spaces. A final HOA shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City of Renton Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to Final Plat recording. Such documents shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Staff Comment: The connection to the existing private road was previously ,/ contemplated and an easement was created for the purpose. There is no injury to surrounding properties from the public road segment that would connect to the existing private road as the extension was previously planned and an easement exists for access from the project through Molasses Creek Condominiums. d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code. Staff Comment: The intent of the Code is ta have roads that can provide safe and Compliant maintainable access ta development. The proposed modified public road design would if condition conform ta the need for pedestrian facilities as well as amenities such as street trees a/approval and street lighting. The public street would be dedicated to the City of Renton upon is met recording of the final plat. As a recommended condition of approval, public easements shall be provided far amenities that are outside of the right-of-way of the new public street. The applicant shall also provide access signage that identifies the trails system throughout the development far public access. e. ,/ Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and Staff Comment: See comments under criterians 'a' and 'b'. f. ,/ Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Staff Comment: See comments under criterion 'c'. Hex Report City of Renton Department of ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINAR Report of August 9, 2016 I 1, CONCLUSIONS: nunity & Economic Development .T Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 30 of 31 1. The subject site is located in the Residential High Density (RHD) Comprehensive Plan designation and complies with the goals and policies established with this designation, see FOF 11 and FOF 26. 2. The subject site is located in the Residential-14 (R-14) zoning designation and complies with the zoning and development standards established with this designation provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 12 and FOF 27. 3. The proposed plat complies with the Residential Design and Open Space Standards provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 28. 4. The proposed plat complies with the Critical Areas Regulations provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 29. 5. The proposed plat complies with the subdivision regulations as established by City Code and state law provided all advisory notes and conditions are complied with, see FOF 30. 6. The proposed plat complies with the street standards as established by City Code, provided the project complies with all advisory notes and conditions of approval contained herein, see FOF 30. 7. There are safe walking routes to the school bus stop, see FOF 31. 8. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed plat, see FOF 31. 9. The proposed density and land use is anticipated to be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses, see FOF 26, FOF 27 and FOF 30. I J. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review, and Street Modification, File No. LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD, as depicted in Exhibit 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non- Significance -Mitigated, dated July 15, 2016. 2. The applicant shall install all common landscaping and open space amenities prior to plat recording. A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. 3. The applicant shall incorporate into the landscaping plan a minimum of two (2) active play structures or courts that provide opportunities for physical exercise and social interaction and low level trail lighting. The details of these amenities shall be identified on the final landscaping plan and shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. 4. The proposed on-site seven-foot wide trail system shall be paved with concrete, except the trail system located directly behind the rear yards of Lots 34-45. The final detailed trail system and profile plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. 5. The applicant shall orient the front doors and front yards of the attached dwelling units on Lots 1-13 toward the street (Road A) or the common open space tracts. Each of these units shall provide a four foot (4') entry walkway that connects the front entry to shared common green space trail or sidewalk system. A note to this effect shall be recorded on the face of the Plat map. Each of these units shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. 6. The applicant shall relocate the shared common green space trail system, which runs north/south between Lots 3-18, to be located closer to the front yards of Lots 5-13 to provide more usable green space behind the lots. Hex Report City of Renton Department of nunity & Economic Development ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINAR .. _ . T Report of August 9, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 31 of 31 7. The applicant shall submit a revised plat plan that includes a pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (S') sidewalk to the north of Lots 24-26. 8. The plat shall include a minimum of four (4) different building types (models) to provide additional character to the development. The detailed floor and elevations plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. 9. The applicant shall submit, to the City of Renton Current Project Manager, a site plan and a roofing materials board that identifies a variety of colors throughout the development. 10. The applicant shall provide for the minimum standard of 24 feet (24') along street curves. A final detailed site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 11. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan and final detailed landscape plan to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. 12. The applicant shall create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that retains or improves the existing vegetation within the open space tract and enters into an agreement with Molasses Creek Homeowner's Association for their proportionate share of maintenance of the off-site private road network. A draft HOA document has been submitted as part of the application. A final HOA shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City of Renton Current Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to Final Plat recording. Such documents shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 13. The applicant shall provide public easements for amenities that are outside of the right-of-way of the new public street. 14. The applicant shall provide access signage that identifies the trails system throughout the development for public access. Hex Report Project Name: CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER EXHIBITS Project Number: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Date of Meeting August 9, 2016 Exhibits: Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 Staff Contact Clark H. Close Senior Planner ERC Report Project Applicants Patrick 0. Lennon, 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 Todd Levitt, 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Plan (with Cover Sheet) Neighborhood Detail Map Boundary & Topography Survey (Sheets 1 & 2) Preliminary On-Site Road Plans and Profiles Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan Preliminary Utility Plan Preliminary Tree Inventory and Clearing Plan Preliminary Planting Plan and Planting Schedule Project Location SR 169 East of 140th Way SE (APN 222305-9004) Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. (dated February 25, 2015) Critical Area Report prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated December 15, 2014) Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) (dated April 1, 2015; revised date December 11, 2015) Technical Information Report prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (dated April 10, 2015) Arborist Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated April 1, 2015) Certificate of Water Availability (dated February 24, 2015) Certificate of Sewer Availability (dated February 24, 2015) Construction Mitigation Description Pre-Annexation Agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot Inc. (public hearing date April 21, 2008) Private Easement Agreement through Molasses Creek Condominiums (Recording No.20000201000940) Technical Memorandum prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated September 8, 2015) -----~RentOil ® Exhibit 21 Exhibit 22 Exhibit 23 Exhibit 24 Exhibit 25 Exhibit 26 Exhibit 27 Exhibit 28: Exhibit 29: Exhibit 30: Exhibit 31: Exhibit 32: Exhibit 33: Exhibit 34: Exhibit 35: Wetland Drainage Area Map Channelization Plan Channelization Detail (Right In -Right Out) SR 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination (dated May 12, 2016) SR 169 Design Clear Zone Letter (dated June 2, 2016) Page 2 Archaeology-Survey Requested by Washington State Historic Preservation Officer and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (dated July 5, 2016) Advisory Notes to Applicant Hearing Examiner Staff Recommendation (dated August 9, 2016) Renton School District Capacity email (received date May 6, 2015) Public Comment Letter from Emily O'Meara (received date May 14, 2015) Public Comment from Harrison and staff's response letter (dated May 22, 2016) Public Comment from Thierry and staffs response letter (dated May 22, 2016) Public query email from Bonaudi (initially received date February 15, 2016) Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program email (initially received date June 1, 2015 Environmental "SEPA" Determination, ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Exhibit 36: Advisory Notes to the Applicant: Traffic Concurrency Test -Elliott Farms Exhibit 37: Affidavit of mailing and posting Exhibit 38: WSDOT approved Channelization Plan for SR 169 Exhibit 39: Preliminary Plat Plan with Houses and Landscaping (Sheets 1 and 2) Exhibit 40: Preliminary Building Elevations, Roof Plans and Floor Plans (A2.l, A2.2, and A2.3) Exhibit 41: Draft Elliott Farms Homeowners Association CCR's Exhibit 42: Pre-Annexation Development Agreement Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. Exhibit 43: T-Shaped Hammerhead Alley (Marked-up Old Site Plan) -----~RentOil. 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMM TY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ------.Renton 0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATES: August 31, 2015, September 14, 2015 and July 11, 2016 Project Name: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Project Number: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Project Manager: Clark H. Close, Senior Planner Owner: Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 Owner: Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Applicants: Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Contact: Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 Project Location: SR 169 East of 140'h Way SE (APN 222305-9004) Project Summary: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07- acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC). Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. ERC Report LUAlS-000242 The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots EXHIBIT 1 FULL DOCUMENT AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST mm!I ;~;~::: ~,:'s~',:!s,t 1mm .. ~ .. ,.~ .. ~ tpl'I'~! J:d~;;iij~ .;/\'l~!!:'.~ i ... s~e\, 'a~~~-l ~~~.,,~r~ "!' ' ~~;~ " .. S> B CEDAR FIVER LIOHTFOOT, U.C AW L.BIYON ~. NC. 1 ~:: :: : : ==:::==~:: -''"'" .... _....,_ ... -...... -- OF EUIOTT FARMS --------\1 --------\ ___ , --I \ ',, 11 ---------1 )' --------~',, -----; ' , ' '.,. jt'.l ,-~ 0i '~n ,' fi ~ I ~~ ,' (/);>., , rn n / i~ , WO , rn o ---------------/'------- / ! _../ ~ ~ ""'""""' .. I j ........ ! 11mm1 i '. 11! I ! i ~ • ' e !!! ~iliUiii l • I 11 .. i ' ~~~!,,~,,~~~=~--~~-~~~-' li!!!iii!il!iiii,C!ia!i ~ § ! ttt~~t~-~-~tt~~~~i~itti i ! 11······111111•·1•1••1 ! !H'il!i!!a,~ :iii D D~ 5 CEDAR FIVER LIQHTFOOT, LLC AND LENNON NYESTI.ENTS, NC. I I I I ./ I / / / ... -... --· ... f'IB.IMWIYPI.AT OF ELLIOTT FARJ/IS / / ./ / .. / 03: oo Zr ~ zm _en co s:: :a cnm: I I • ,/ ,/ I I c"i / ; . IT] ~ ~ 11 1, 11w I t 1 ,n .. •0 ·+··10e-··-··000····1,1; ii fii fir l -p-' ' 11w11111 i! j ! 11 m 11111•p1r i ill 11111~1 I ii '111', •ll!IP-111 •1!1t I I I J I '' ,I I f 1!1" j ! -111 1 , jl -,, - :~ "" ;,1·~ =~~'--z , .. "' ji;( ! • ill ,:11 ill 'Ii I I !U 1,1 !;I 1, I , i ,, 111 1 111 I I ,, l•i I !I " ·1-I !" i I I ~;.:~ " !i1 ,~a 11, ! I' 1i, • :! I ;: :Ii ! ' 1, ,i l;, • ! I ,. If I I fl 111 ! ' -1 1 I ! !1 ' ·-----· ' ... -~~ ' ( --· .. III 0 C z 0 )>, :Il -< po -I 0 "lJ 0 Ci) :Il )>, "lJ :::r: () (JJ C :Il < m -< 1-_____________________ J~,:t-~. ,ck.+-·-. --. ----:-::_-· - TB215 72ND AVENUE SOUTI-, K[KT, WA 9ll(IJ:> (42:1J.s1-62n (425)251-878Z FAJ: -- BRIXTON HOMES LLC CID QLEN MAURER 14410 B51.-RED-ROAD, SUITE 200 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 TIii.: BOUNDARY l TOPOGRAPHIC SUAVEV ftnl OF THE NW1/4, CW THE 8E1/4 OF IEC. 22, ANO PTN OF 1llE 8wtl4, Of THE NE1/A OF SEC. 22, TWP. 2:1, N., FIGI I IUST, W. Ill, CITY OF fliNTON KlllG COUNTY ITATI Of' WASHINGTON 18215 72NO AVENUE SOU™ KlNT. WA 91111.l2 (425)251-BZ.'2 (425)251-B762 fl,!. I ,~ BRIXTON HOMES LLC C/0 GLEN MAURER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUITE 200 BB.LEVUE, WA 98007 ) ! -.. ' I m 0 C z C )> ::0 -< po -I 0 "'O 0 G) ::0 )> "'O I (') en C ::0 < m -< .+-..--1-.--h±-+-------·--- Tltle: BOUNDARY I TOP08flAPHIC SURVEY PTN OF THE NW1/4, OF THE SE1/4 OF SEC. U, AfilD PTN Of THE IW1/4, o, THI Hl1/fil OF UC. 12, TWfl. 23 N., IIEE I EAIIT, W. Iii. CITY OF RENTON IDN8 C:OUNTY STATE OF WAIIIIIGTON • > s ' ' > ! 1 I ' ! m ' d, ! , .. !ol iijl !• ' . ,1 I !i ]·; J; liJ . ' 0 ' 1-, ! Ii !~ I' I j i ! ~ ~ ~ t i ~ " 1 I i i I i I • '" Qlf - • • • • ! ~ I i I I • • .. ~· • 1821~ 72~D .wu!UE SOUTH _ _.,_ ~E'4T. 11A 98Cl2 {425)251-6222 {425)251-87&2 FAX I R I R • • ' $1 .. )1+1'/ll{L•,,,2> Nlc<-· • 8 • • R CEDAR FIVER LIGHTFOOT, LLC A/CJ LENNON tNES'llENTS, NC. . ; r,l'i:\ ! " .~w~,~z \"' i ··1 ' i•' ~ t - • !I, • I 1'J=~-.~ ==...:,, ,, ' • I I a I a ~ .. -.. --· ... PFIELMNARY ON SITE ROAD PLAN /IICJ PAOFLE OF EU.IOTT FARMS • • i I ,,. I •. I ,,, • • ' . I I I I I I ' i I I i I \ i I i i 1 I i I I I ' ~I I I I 11 I ' i I I I I \ I I I I I I i I 1 I :--1 l i I I I I I I I I I • R R I, II . '· II i I' '- II I II • i 1· :1 II II I II i II 11 II II II . 11 II I II 1: II i II ! ! I I -. I I·• II f y -! I ! I / l \ l!I I 'I I I, ( ; I I ' I ...... ' I I I I CEDAR RIVER LJQHTFOOT, Ll.C AN:) LErH>N tNESTIENTS, NC. I I I ' ' ' ' ' i : •u,00·-1«...,. IPU:111--, 1 ,, ii t:,~ I ,, ... -.. ---... f", ~' " Pfa.U'4ARY SR-189 ROAD PLAN OF EUIOTT FARJIIS ! .. l.: I ! ~ I ' ",, I ' ---<-I I I :-,> I / / ' I I I • I I I I ' ' I _, ~ , . ,. ' ! --· ' ' :• ! ' ' ~ "- ' •: ' ' . : ' CEDAR FIVER LJGHTFOOT, LLC AN) L9NJN NYES1l.ENTS, NC. I I 1 I I I I I Ii I / OF ELUOTT FARMS I I /, I I I ! !!il''i ~h ~D C '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 1 ... ' ' ' ' ' ' ' • • !I ' • " ' ' ' ! ' ' ' ' ' ! ' ' ' ' d iii R~; -lo ill ;;:l §;-'" ,, I I I , l ' (-- ' ' ': ' ' ' ' ' ' ' .. -/ ' ' ' : ' ' ' : ' ' ' ' I ~.:,,:.lg I / •1n: , /FJ--·,i;; I . :tu ,'-1 15..,_,._, I /.'' . ' / •' ., / CEDAR FIVER LKlHTFOOT, LLC NO LEtH:>N HIESThENTS, NC. I 1 ¥..;t::t :i : : =::::g;:==~= . .,,,, .. ., .... _,,,,_ -.. --- OF ELLIOTT FARMS I. I' ,I j! OJ ,I ' 1, . l· I I ' i i I i I ' / \ ... I , I , • • !! • ' • • • ' • i ' ' ' • ·-.. ! • • • • • • • llllllllllllllliilllllllliliiilill!!ililiiil!lilllllllllllllllllllllllllll 1111111111111111111111111111111111111 CEDAR ~ LDfTFOOT, LLC NO LchNON INVEsnt:NTS, NC. ... -... --· OF ElLIOTT FARMS I ffi'!;? !~~ ~ ------------------- 1 i 1 .. ....£... ,,/// / 18215 72ND A\IENU€ SOUili KENT, WA 116032 (425)25\-~222 (425)251 -67&2 f">,}( ' ' ' , ' ' J ---.. , , , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , _,_ __ .,,. ... r I BFIXTON HOt.ES, Ll.C 1441) BELL -flED ROAD, BUTE 200 8EU..EVlE. WA 98007 CONTACT KFISTEN Ll.tlXlUST ,... I I~ I I PA8..MNAAY PLAHmO PLAN OF ELLIOTT PARMS I r, LJ~D u I ! I UUili !UHi 1111 1 !!HU I:; ~ i!;jn 0 I lii!lli ·1~11, =1i·i ~ ilull :;; 0 iiU!II I ~~1-I -0 ~ I al,-ii 11 11111 :;; 1 ·111 I I II ~ ~ ~ ~ 11t w II ~ I ! ~ ----- iiiHii i~iiii -i -i ' I ! .!l!!l!.! i EEUE EEU!E ~ !il!il!il!il!il !il!il!il!il!il!il ''''''' ' !!iii i!iiii UUUJ j "''' "'''' !HU ~~!~H 'liioi'lllli:'i1pp; i ggi::gggg ~g~~g gj:!g :::i::;; -----------"·----- I I ~-, I~ ee 1"---, 00 ° 0 . y; ... IU i1u1u in 1111 1;1 i 111 !~ !~ IH !-1!1• i -1-, • -I I ! I~ ilhhl 1111 1111 111 I I I i ·p Iii I H' I u ! i ! 111 ~ ! Im!! I'! ! i I I ! I I I I • ...... 'o! .. ,, --i iH~~ -· ~ )]; ~ i ; i:"jllllll ' " ! I.I I !HJ JH i" HE E ij II ... • ,H, HI I ni i Iii i .... iii ij '" ' iii§ aaa U• I 1, ;, . UI ! aasa JU Ji I i ~ a uu . ffl m -BFIXTON Ha.ES, U.C 14410 EEU.-fED ROAD, SUTE 200 BEU.EYUE, WA 98007 CONTACT, KFIISTEN LUtOOUST -PLAN1N>SCH3JU.E OF ELUOTT PARMS ~--Itenton e Entire Document Available Upon Request GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Elliot Farm 14207 SE Renton Maple Valley Road Renton, Washington Project No. T-6737 Terra Associates, Inc. Exhibit 10 Prepared for: Murray Franklyn Companies Bellevue, Washington February 25, 2015 Ctaedeke ' ' • ' j' December 15, 2014 Mr. Glen Mauer Pacific Properties, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 RE: Elliot Farm -Wetland Delineation R.A.I. Project #2012-024-002 Dear Glen: Wetland & Aquatic Sciences Wildlife Ecology Landscape Architecture ---R'.enton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request At your request, we conducted a site investigation on June 26 and 27, 2012 to determine whether wetlands and streams were present on the Elliot Farm property. PROPERTY LOCATION The Elliot Farm property consists of an approximately 6-acre parcel, located along the south side of SR 169 (Renton-Maple Valley Highway), approximately 1,000 feet east of 140th Way SE, in the City of Renton, Washington. The property is identified as Tax Parcel No. 2223059004. This places the property in a portion of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. Parcel maps retrieved on-line from King County (2012) iMAP depict the property boundaries. METHODOLOGY In order to identify potential wetland areas, we used the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The COE, which requires use of the 1987 delineation manual, as amended, has federal regulatory jurisdiction of the dredging or filling of"Waters of the United States," including wetlands. As outlined in this methodology, the interaction of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology must be present for an area to be classified as wetland. To be consistent with current regulations, field investigations were consistent with the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (COE 2010). BACKGROUND REVIEW Prior to conducting our site reconnaissance, we reviewed existing background maps and information from the U.S.D.A Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS 2014) Web Soil Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS 2014) National Wetland Inventory (NWI). 9510 Stone Avenue N. Exhibit 11 Seattle, WA 98103 206-525-81 l!l! www.raedeke.com MEMORANDUM DATE: December 11, 2015 TO: City of Renton FROM: Jeff Schramm TENW SUBJECT: Elliott Farm Residential -Renton, WA Traffic Analysis Addendum TENW Project #5021 c Assessment -Elliott Farm Residential ---Itenton e Entire Document Available Upon Request This memorandum documents the traffic impact analysis addendum conducted for the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farm multi-family residential development. The purposed of the addendum is to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to SR 169. The proposed project is located near SE Renton Maple Valley Rd [SR-169) and 140th Way SE, east of the Molasses Creek development in the Cily of Renton as shown in the Figure l site vicinily map. Executive Summary Proposal. The project proposes 45 townhome dwelling units on a site that is currently vacant. Vehicular access ta the site would be provided via a new residential access an SE Renton Maple Volley Rd ISR 169). Full project buildout is expected in 2017. Trip Generation. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AN\ peak hour 15 entering, 22 exiting!. ond 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour 121 entering, l O exiting). Intersection Operations Analysis. Based on the LOS results conducted at one off-site signalized study intersection and the site access location, both intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or better during the AN\ and PM peak hours in 2017 with no significant impacts created by the proposed Elliott Farm residential development. Concurrency. Since the signalized study intersection is expected ta operate at acceptable LOS D or better, this project is anticipated to meet Cily concurrency requirements. Mitigation. Based an our findings, the proposed project is not expected to have o significant adverse impact on the transportation system. The payment of transportation impact fees will adequately mitigate project impacts by funding the project's fair share of the cost of the Cily of Renton's planned tronsportotion improvements. Based on the Cily's current impact fee rote, the development's impact fee would be $53 137.80 145 X $1, 180.84/unit). Exhibit 12 Transportation Planning I Design I Traffic Impact & Operations 11400 SE a• Street. Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 I Office {425) 889-6747 PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT Exhibit 13 ----Renton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request Proposed Plat of Elliott Farm Renton, Washington Prepared for: Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bell-Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 April 10, 2015 Our Job No. 15734 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 25Hl222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES t TUMWATER, WA t LONG BEACH, CA t ROSEVILLE, CA t SAN DIEGO. CA www.barghausen.com Greenforest Incorporated April 1, 2015 Todd Levitt Murray Franklyn Companies 14410 Bel Red Road Bellevue WA 98007 ----Renton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA Dear Mr. Levitt: You contracted my services to inspect and inventory the surveyed trees at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy., Renton WA. This site, though currently undeveloped, has concrete remnants from former buildings. The main front portion of the parcel is relatively flat, and covered in dense brambles. Most of the significant trees (:>6" DBH) stand along the southern and western areas, and are mostly within a wetland and wetland buffer, or a steep slope at the SW corner of the site. I visited the site today and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. The following table summarizes my inspection results. Summary: 125 Total Surveyed Trees, 6" and greater DBH 1 Dead Trees 21 Dead, Diseased, Dying, and Defective Trees 3 Duplicate Trees 100 Total Viable Trees, 6" and Greater DBH Exhibit 14 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 t41 W04 Web date: 11/09/2012 KingCounty Department of Permitting and Environmental Review 35030 SE Douglas Street, Suite 210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065-9266 205-296-6600 TTY Relay: 711 www.klngcounty.gov Water Availability King County Certificate of Water Availabilitv For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. This certlfieate provides the Public Health -Seattle & King County Department and the Department of Permitting and Environmental Review with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. I Do not write in this box Number Name D Preliminary Plat or PUD 181 Building Permit D Short SubdMslon D Rezone or other: ----------------------- Applicant·s name: Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc. & Lennon Investments Inc. Proposed use: 45 unit Town home project Location (attach map and legal description W necessary): 151xx Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR169) Renton WA 98058 PN: 2223059004 A2-3 B2-4 Water purveyor information: 1. D a. Water will be provided by service connection only to an existing --------feet from the site. -------(size) water main that is OR 181 b. Water service will require an Improvement to the water system of: D (1) 20 feet of water main to reach the site; and/or 181 (2) The construction of a distribution system on the site; and/or 181 (3) Other (describe): Developer Extension Agreement 2. 181 a. The water system Is In conformance with a County approved water comprehensive plan. OR D b. The water system improvement is not in conformance with a County approved water comprehensive plan and will require a water comprehensive plan amendment. (This may cause a delay in issuance of a permit or approval.) 3. 181 a. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city, or is within the County approved service area of a private water purveyor. OR D b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. CE:! a. Water is or will be available at the rate of flow and duration Indicated below at no less than 20 psi measured at the nearest fire hydrant to be constructed feet from the building/property (or as marl<ed on the attached map): Rate of flow at Peak Demand: D less than 500 gpm (approx. gpm) 0 500 to 999 gpm D 1000 gpm or more D flow test of gpm D calctllalion of 3500 +-gpm Dun,f/on: D less than 1 hOur D 1 hour to 2 hours 1812 hours or more Othec OR (Note: Commercial building permits which include multifamily structures require flow -or calculation.) D b. Water system is not capable of providing fire flow. 5. 181 a. Water system has certificates of water rights or water right claims sufficient to provide service. OR D b. Water system does not currently have necessary water rights or water right claims. Comments/conditions: Developer Extension Agreement required I certify that the above water purveyor information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. Cedar River Water & Sewer District -t..:a::=:r~S=-·:.,:Kr=al::_I _____________ _ Agency name Developer Extension Administrator ".r,;;;~p>:::.;,,;,L-\:::=5e.~7'":.._ __ _ Title Sign 02-24-15 Date Check out the Permitting Web site ~at~ww::,::~w~.k!l!i:!.!n~==~:!!.!.l,.!.l:e:!.!rml!!!.!itso! Watar Avallability CedalWOOd SR169.doc b-oert-water.pdf Exhibi W04 11/09/2012Page 1 15 ~ S06 Webdate: 11/09/2012 KingCounty Sewer Availability: Department of Permitting and Environmental Review 35030 SE Douglas Street, Suite 210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065-9266 206-296-6800 TlY Relay: 711 www.klngcounty.gov King County Certificate of Sewer Availability For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. This certificate provides the Public Health -Seattle & King County Department and the Department of Permitting and Environmental Review with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. I Do not write in this box Number 181 Building Permit D Short Subdivision D Preliminary Plat or PUD D Rezone or other. Name Applicant's name: Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc & Lennon Investment Inc. Proposed use: 45 unit Townhome Project Location (attach map and legal description W necessary): 151xx Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR169) Renton WA 98058 PN 222305 9004 Sewer agency tnformat1on: A2-3 & B2-4 1. D a. Sewer service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing size sewer _______ feet from the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use. OR 181 b. Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of: 181 (1) 20 feet of sewer trunk or lateral to reach the site; and/or 181 (2) The construction of a collection system on the site; and/or 181 (3) Other (describe): Completion of Developer Extension Agreement 2. 181 a. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. OR D b. The sewer system improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment. 3. 181 a. The proposed project Is within the corporate limits of the district or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. OR O b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. Service is subject to the following: a. Connection charge: -'-'es=--------------------------- b. Easement(s): ~e"'s'-:----=----:---:----------------------- c. other: Developer Extension Agreement Comments: See Attachments I certify that the above sewer agency information Is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. Cedar River Water & Sewer District , /. } Lar~all ::o;; Extension Adminmrator C)\ -";s~,!~)fl -=2f2'7--'4/~1=5 _____ _ Tille Slgnatun,C: f--Date Check out the Permitting Web site ~=~=~===~'.!.!.!!.= SewerAvallability Cedarwood SR169 .doc b-cert-sewer.pdf Exhibit 16 S06 11/09/2012Page 1 Construction Mitigation Description for Elliott Farm The proposed plat of Elliott Farm will involve clearing and grading for the construction of new road improvements, installation of utilities, and other land disturbance activities. The following is a summary of how these activities are expected to be carried out and managed to minimize impacts and comply with applicable rules and regulations during this phase of the project: • Anticipated Construction Schedule: Clearing and grading is likely to begin in June 2016 assuming the entitlements and permits are approved. The bulk of the work should be completed in October 2016. Based on this schedule, we expect that the plat could be ready for recording in late 2016, with home building to commence after the plat is recorded. Model home construction may commence prior to recording as allowed by the City of Renton. • Hours and Days of Operation: The typical hours of operation for construction will be from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. during the winter months. During the summer months, construction will begin at 7 a.m. and may extend to 7 p.m. (pending approval from the City of Renton). The typical work week will be Monday through Friday. Construction work may also take place on Saturday, as normally allowed by the City of Renton, especially during the dry season (April to October) in order to expedite completion of the project during the dry season. • Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: The haul route for importing or exporting materials to and from the site will be determined after coordination with the City of Renton Inspector prior to the start of construction. However, we would anticipate that the haul route would begin at one of the site's existing gravel entrances onto the Renton-Maple Valley Road {WA-169) then travel either east or west depending on the location where the contractor decides where to receive/export materials. • Measures to be Implemented to Minimize Dust, Traffic and Transportation Impacts, Erosion, Mud, Noise, and other Noxious Characteristics: All temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures required by the City of Renton and other agencies will be implemented and maintained (e.g., rock construction entrance, silt fencing, temporary sediment pond, straw mulching and hydro seeding). Also, as required by DOE, a Certified Erosion Control Lead will be assigned to the project and all erosion BMPs will be implemented and maintained as required by the NPDES Permit for the duration of the project. Watering will be implemented, as necessary, to control dust during the summer months and all construction equipment will be equipped with appropriate mufflers to comply with local noise ordinances. • Any Special Hours Proposed for Construction or Hauling (i.e., weekends, late nights): If it is determined that additional hours are needed to complete the construction, the contractor will coordinate with the City of Renton to obtain approval for such ex1ended hours. Exhibit 17 -' -15734.003.doc • Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: A Preliminary Traffic Control Plan has not been prepared at this time. Once the haul route(s) has(have) been approved by the City Public Works Department, a traffic control plan will be prepared in accordance with the City Road Standards and WSDOT guidelines for the frontage improvement work within the WA-169 right-of-way. Frontage improvements will be limited to constructing curb, gutter, planter, and sidewalk along WA-169 where shoulder closures will be implemented. -2 -15734.003.doc PRE-ANNEXATOIN AGREEME ... N_T ______ -, CITY OF RENTON and ---Itenton e Entire Document Available Upon Request CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOOT, INC This PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT is entered into this _ day of _____ _, 2008, between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, ("City'') and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Lennon Inves1ments, Inc., a Washington corporation ( collectively referred to as "Cedar River"). RECITALS A. Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., and Lennon Investments, Inc., own the following described property ("the Property") as a joint venture: Parcel A of King County Boundary Line Adjustment No, L95L0113, recorded under King County Recording No. 9510179023, (being a portion of Government Lot 3 in the NE Y. of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, records of King CoWJty, Washington. B. The Property is approximately 6.07 acres in size and is immediately south of SE Renton Maple Valley Road (SR 169). C. The Property is currently located in unincorporated King County and is zoned R-6 by the County, a zoning which would permit development of the property with approximately 45 dwelling units as Phase 2 of the adjacent Molasses Creek Condominiums. The utilities serving the Property were designed and installed during construction of the first phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums to serve the Property based on its development capacity pursuant to the County zoning. In addition, access from SR 169 to the Property has been limited to a common access shared with the frrst phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums. D. The City of Renton is in the process of annexing the Property and other properties in the vicinity. E. The City of Renton does not have a zoning designation that is the equivalent of King County's R-6 zoning classification. F. The parties wish to enter into a pre-annexation agreement that will permit the development of the second phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums at a density which is comparable to the density permitted by King County. PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT-I Exhibit 18 Filed for Record by and After Recording Return to: Molasses Creek, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Attn: Glen Maurer CHICAGO TITLE EAS 19.00 20000201000940 PAGE Ht OF 812 IZ/81/2888 12:28 KING COUNTY, I.IA f ·cOPYOF i RECORDED DOCUMENT \ King County Recorder's Olfice ----Renton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request ROAD, LANDSCAPE, PARKING, EMERGENCY TURNAROUND AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT Grantor: Grantee: Abbrev. Legal Description: Tax Parcel Nos.: Reference No.: Molasses Creek, Inc. Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc. CHICAGO Tl I LE li·JS. CO REF# lAlO:x) lQ;lB{10) Tract A, Plat of Elliott Farm recorded Volwne 180 of Plats, Pages 4 through 15; (Complete legal descript!,9n per Exhibit A) :1311.f?(l-('9/-0 :t :W0&5-"ltl:4 (Ei(h. ~) n/a THIS ROAD, LANDSCAPE, PARKING, EMERGENCY TURNAROUND AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Easement Agreement") is made as of this '81-\lay of January, 2000 by MOLASSES CREEK, INC., a Washington corporation ("Grantor") and LANCASTER/CEDAR WOOD, INC. a Washington corporation ("Grantee"), Recitals A. Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in King County, Washington, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto (the "Burdened Property"). B. Grantee is the owner of property adjacent to the Burdened Property which is legally described in Exhibit B, attached hereto (the "Benefited Property"). C. The parties wish to create an easement over the Burdened Property for the benefit of the Benefited Property, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Easement Agreement. Y:\Wl'\WD\111:'4"\lZOA<MSA.ADll,IIOC 1 Exhibit 19 .edeke \''~'111,tt'' 1'1·· ' ' \ ' "• . ' ~ . ~ . TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: September 8, 2015 To: Todd Levitt, Pacific Properties, Inc. From: Chris Wright, Raedeke Associates, Inc. Re: Elliott Farm -Wetland Hydrologic Impacts (RAI #2012-024-002) Dear Todd, Wetland & Aquatic Sciences Wildlife Ecology Landscape Architecture At your request we have reviewed the potential hydrologic impacts to the wetland on the Elliot Farm site resulting from the proposed development of the parcel. We based our analysis of potential impacts on information gathered during site visits and basin boundary maps and calculations provided by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2015). Development and grading of the Elliot Farm parcel would result in the redirecting of water from a portion of the watershed of the on-site wetland. The wetland located partially on the Elliot Farm parcel lies within an approximately 7.2 acre basin. Development of the site would divert drainage from 0.4 acres of the basin away from the wetland, which represents approximately 5.6% of the total contributing area of the wetland. Areas are based on the Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2015) wetland basin map ( attached). The portion of the basin that occurs on the Elliot Farm parcel is a relatively flat, shrub covered area that currently intercepts a portion of the potential hydrology available to the wetland. The hydrologic support provided to the wetland from this portion of the basin is likely greatest during the wetter months of the year when the wetland is receiving greater amounts of water from the more steeply sloped land to the south and west. The total area to be diverted away from the wetland represents less than I 0% of the total basin area of the wetland. It is likely that the majority of the hydrologic input to the wetland is derived from the steeply sloping ground to the south and west of the wetland and that the relatively flat area to the north and east of the wetland contributes a much smaller volume of water. Thus we do not expect the proposed diversion to result in a substantial change in the flow available to the wetland. Exhibit 20 2111 N. Northgate Way Ste. 219 Seattle, WA 98133 206-525-8122 www .raedeke.com September 8, 2015 Mr. Todd Levitt Page2 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of Pacific Properties, Inc. and their consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information, analysis, or conclusions contained herein without permission from Pacific Properties, Inc. The determination of ecological system classifications, functions, values, and boundaries is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach different conclusions. With regard to wetlands and streams, the final determination of their boundaries for regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various resource agencies that regulate development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of such agency determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or construction activities. We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our field, and that this work was prepared substantially in accordance with then-current technical guidelines and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of our analysis of the information provided by the project proponents and their consultants, together with information gathered in the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any questions about this information, please call me at (206) 525-8122. LITERATURE CITED Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2015. Wetland Drainage Area Map Elliot Farm. Received September 4, 2015. r~\I I I (/ G ------ -·-\~~ 15734 \ / _1_ _1_ ,.,..,""o*'"'"'._ 16215 12NO AVLNUl SOUTH KDIT, WA 98032 {425) 251-6222 (~15) 251-8782 Fl.:< cm_E_UIW..___ s~. ~..._ SERW:£S \ \ q. { ____ ',, ---------z ·. __ ) ____ I \/ \ '\ . -----1. _..._ --"-_ _.,_ _ .. -~ ~ 11 I I ! I I I / I I \ • Brixton Homes. LLC 14410 Bel-Red Road. &.le 200 Belevue, WA 98007 - / ,' -._.,. 1, /) I ! I • • • • , \ 1,-· // . ' / "' I I Wetland Dra.nage Ares Map Elott Farm t• R/W T.23N:R.5CW.M~------ SECTION 22 0,-R/'II ~ < Zo -~ Zu ER ~ 5: [X •• SHLOff \ EX •• SHUlR BEGIN PROJECT ~~[XII s 169MP22.59 r,11·-- ;:!: ~ t• 11 SR 169 (SE RENTON MAPLE VALLEY ROAD) SR 169 99+00.00 CII ll' __ [fl g ~: :: ?5' ,02 N ., EX I' II g~ CJII' SR 169-LINE t EXI' ...J 90' I." EX [00[ UN[. TYP. ex 11' ----3 ~ t•1,· &•oc.l'l'f'.-.,_ "'"rrrooEuNt,TY•.-., ~ fi'I IEffi roc.T'l1'.\•x1,•y{Jr•11· E•tOP.TYP. I, EX II" ~ £..Li.JiI! ~-· (Jiqw sr .19+o,'.a ------ U"lT . ·, I .-!~-R/_or ,2.$· ~ r"'.-e ~ I ''"" , .' , ?)TlP. I 88 l'1 I ~• f<_!_!'"--"--.it•fi,,.,,r~· I CX R/W ~L_!!.illJ__ J" , , -\j;'·;;:;{J '' •j 9.4' ll • ••• '\, Al ~ ,.,.-10.7' R1 I ~· R/'11 E> •• SHLDR c, 1,· [> ,,. '°'!..!,__!'._ " . .. ,,. t• 1' [X B' SHlDR ex R/'11 ea STA >t IH17.J2 EX [Qe. TYP l EX EOG[ LINE, l'l'f'., END PROJECT SR 169 MP 22.72 SR 169 105+93.64 SR 1 69 (SE RENTON tr,jAPLE VALLEY ROAD) ,. SR 169-LINE .0 EOP, r,p,J Cl EOCE UNt, TYP.J CURVE DATA BOX ~ I R I TANG[NT I 1'Jl'1D"I n1a.oo· I 22.a•· I n.a,· II( SUPl:I\ " c•o"" S75'Jl'S1"[ '~1 I i !! .. sji :~~!~ DESIGN DATA ,~si ;~~! -~--·!! a a U I" SMlDff + c• ,,. ~~ c, 11· ..: "" ~: :· ~ g "..,.. Z< "w ·" u• ~ ! PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES (j) WIIITI: Ill-INCH STOP UN[ PER WSOQT STD •I.AH II-U.l0-04, @ 'tELI.OW DOUBLE 'tELLOW CEHl[R (DY<:) UIIE PE• WSOOT STD. l'UIM 11-20 10-02. @ ~..::.5g::;:;_-mc u:m:•s ("ONLY") PER WSOOT STO. PWS 11-IQ.10-01 ANO 0 WHIT£ [OCE UN[ PEIi WSOOT STD. PW! M->o.,o-oi. @ ~~'.l'.IO~~i. u:n~A:n~r.:?';,-ln~N :rwil. S"ID. PUNS M-U.00-01 AND !!....!'. = IOUI.DEI • ·--~-SE 1h01.1 I l+ ~ I.I' L.T _';_[ __ 1~_+00,~ 8 ,-,-., -K ltH-11.11 J..r-irr sr,,uu ~· SC.0.U:INFHT ' EN1fl:lln ® ISLAND DETAIL A ~ ··~· 1 ·~ _,...,.,... ._ r...,._,. J, ''7: .. c=-..... /=,~-, .... ~ TYPICAL ROADWAY ~ l . ....... , '"'" -· ™"" "]-" i WSOOT NORTHWEST R[G!ON APP RO V[O CHANN[UZAT!ON PLAN O[S,i:;N c•m•1A f\Jl,CTION.<oc CLASS .. '" UA1.o.,i-PR1NC_!Po.L Ol!Tfft~'e_ ru, ACC[SS @ ~~-1'::~ 5 .CONCftffi DY.W. F"AC( SLOPED NOUNIA.L[ CU•B PH W500T STD (!) 'tELI.OW PR£COS"I SLOP[ IIDUNTIJILE CURR PER WSDOT STO. PW! F-10.12-01. NQ1 TC s,::•u TRAmc ENGINEER -AREA OP(R,f,TIONS s;9n•d _______ _ P,1~• E~GINEERINC MANAGER s;gnod -------- Print FIL[ NAME ~ Oolo __ _ Dalo __ _ NHS SIATU• o.c(:[S, CONlltOL 0[51(;N Y[HICLE POSTED SP[[O O[St,;N SPCE:O ICRIWM l!IUC• P[RCl:NTAQ[ NMWJEO: CLASS 5 '#B-17 ~ ~ =, (I)~ APPUCAIIU; CITY OF RENTON RO&l)W,r,Y. .... -1,,.,. 10 IWASN --·m NON NHS w 5ij:""30 25 11,H 25 IIPH ""' ~1.011( @ Jl'NII[ CRllSSWAU< UN[S PU WSDOT S"ID. PUN N-15.10-01. @ :f/LfunW ,;,~1~,n POST DEUNUToR (3" o,,...) w11H 1 AO'WS or WHITE GENERAi NOTES ll.L SIDEWAlK AAIIP, $HALI. ME£'! cu•RElISTw.to PER CITY or HNICH ST&N[LIADS .O.NO SPCCl'1CATIONS, CURRENT E:tlfTION. DESIGN VARIANCES i1'.!. Y""IANCI:: ACCUS SPACING. DN S..O.OJ(.!)0)2 .. r<O'll[Nl[A io,s /£,.JUmnt.r.TION: CURI ON MIOM $PECO FACII.ITY. DN '"°-~· N~NB[~ 2015. ~ . ~ \ "- SCALE IM FCCT SR 169 M.P. 22.59 ENC''-REcJ 3Y· DUBREUIL ROLffiO ; !runsporia1.onl'lcmr,g I Oeslgn I Tro!l'<:lmpoc!B.Opeta#on< · ~ I!~ SR 169 CH1 SHEET DE.SIGNED BY ROLETIO I ..,..._. Tran!tirgITTb!g't{West i .,?s-:"\ ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT CHECKED aY, BICKET """""'"° ll-40DSEa1hltmet.Mu:ZOO.klll1tv111t.WAWKXM I .,.~, CHANNELIZATION PLAN PROJ. ENGR, B!CKET l'rajo~:,,f!~/::;;"~n_ ,'() ,;;.;,t I 0,' £1.~~iAL AJV REVISION DATE BY pe<,,.,,o25-~ ~--·· I RrnTON/KING COUNTY JUNE 201sl sHws I --· · f SR 169 ~-------~ < MP22.61·±. -. ----·, . . J ---------. ·.·. . ~~ti\f~iEc;~~N (stlR ~- WSDOT STANDARD // E:NroN SR . . . PLAN r 40 · ,, 16 · ------.16-02 TYP · "'·'P 9 . ·' -.. "' Lt . VALLty . ROAD) \ SIDEWALK TO CONNECT)~: TO ruTURE TRAIL---J-- 3' ~ ~ 0 10 HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FffT e• DEPTH CONCR£T£ EB MOUNTABLE ISLAND DETAIL W/ 12•i112• SCORING PATTERN PRECAST COl«:RETE SI.OPED MOUHTABLE CURB WSDOT F-1D.12-01, TYP. . £.X toa, t11;, z '---,I I 10· >.ii' :. -4·::~\\<:t·>Yti :~<;r.:~~·::--,~;;-;: ~~--.: ,.~-· :r;,. FINISHED ROADWAY '""'' 10' ... I '-' z I < ,~ !:: V, N C) D 20 HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FffT DATE: DJ/09/2016 SECTION A-A N.T.S. VICINITY MAP NTS ~TENW [LL/OTT FARM N[W SIGN D£TA1LS STOP R1-1 (JD'XJD') ® ~ RJ-SR (JD"XJ6") ® SHEET Tronsportalion Engineering Northwest I' ------------------------------t~~----,j1 frar,spa1a!lon F'l<mning I Design I Tmffic lmpoc;t & Operotion,.1-oF ll«JOSEBlhStnleULOte:ZO:,,S,,l'IM.ltl,WA~ R/GHT /N -RIGHT QLJT Offlc& 1425) 889-6747 l'rujt,ci Ct>n!aci: Glen Du8reull ~ EXH /8/T Phone· 425-2SO-OSB2 IFYhihitl 2 I I I I I I May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated design deviation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6.07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7-0808.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized residential access connection to SR-169, which is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access. The spacing of new public street connection and the existing single family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor can any feasible alternative as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0.00 collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) and million vehicle miles of travel (MWM). Staff has completed a review of the subject request and finds the proposed access spacing deviation request is approved, subject to the following conditions: Exhibit 24 Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject to WSDOT approval. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~>=_,~ ~-- Civil Engineer II Enclosure: Elliott Farms (SR-169) Draft Channelization Plan (CHl) cc: Ramin Pazooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSDOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Denis Law c· I _ _:M::aya, ___ ,,,,,,....1 {t11 t UJJ June 2, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Design Clear Zone for the City of Renton Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: It is our understanding that the City of Renton needs to provide a design clear zone letter that documents how the City applies the clear zone for the design of City streets that are also State Highways. This requirement comes from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Design Manual Section 1600.03(2)(a) Roadside and Median. With regards to the design clear zone, given the posted speed of SO mph along this section of SR-169, the City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. This would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of SR-169 as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee-in-lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighting along SR-169 as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Ann Fowler Civil Engineer II cc: Ramin Pazooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSOOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, tnc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Exhibit 25 Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov d July 5, 2016 Mr. Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A98057 1n future correspondence please refer to: Project Tracking Code: 051815-23-K.I Allyson Brook.s Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer Property: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H.MOD Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Re: Archaeology -Survey Requested Dear Mr. Close: Thank you for contacting the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). We have reviewed the documentation for this project. The project area has a high probability for containing precontact and historical archaeological resources. The project area is adjacent to the historical channel of the Cedar River and a portion ofa historic trail system is within the project area. Please be aware that archaeological sites are protected from knowing disturbance on both public and private lands in Washington States. Both RCW 27.44 and RCW 27 .53 .060 require that a person obtain a permit from our Department before excavating, removing, or altering Native American human remains or archaeological resources in Washington. Failure to obtain a permit is punishable by civil fines and other penalties under RCW 27.53.095, and by criminal prosecution under RCW 27.53.090. Chapter 27.53.095 RCW allows the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation to issue civil penalties for the violation of this statute in an amount up to five thousand dollars, in addition to site restoration costs and investigative costs. Also, these remedies do not prevent concerned tribes from undertaking civil action in state or federal court, or law enforcement agencies from undertaking criminal investigation or prosecution. Chapter 27.44.050 RCW allows the affected Indian Tribe to undertake civil action apart from any criminal prosecution if burials are disturbed. Identification of archaeological resources during construction is not a recommended detection method because inadvertent discoveries often result in costly construction delays and damage to the resource. We request a professional archaeological survey of the project area be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities. The completed survey should be sent to DAHP and the interested Tribes for review prior to ground disturbance. We also recommend consultation with the concerned Tribes' cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. Exhibit 26 Slate of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project and we look forward to receiving the survey report. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Assistant State Archaeologist, Local Governments (360) 586-3088 gretchen. kaehler@l,dahp. wa. gov cc. Dennis Lewarch, THPO, Suquarnish Tribe Laura Murphy, Archaeologist, Muckleshoot Tribe Cecile Hansen, Chair, Duwamish Tribe State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia. Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL'"ANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® Application Date: April 13, 2015 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058-8120 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Cyndie Parks 1425-430-7521 I cparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal impact on Police Services Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alann systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie 1425-430-7369 I bmaconie@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: CC&Rs: Bob Mac Onie 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Recommendations: Preliminary Plat: Bob Mac Onie 5/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, perWAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the ~LEGENDn block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do indude in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not indude a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Ran: July 12, 2016 Exhibit 27 Page 1 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP1 1"ANT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie 1425-430-7369 I bmaconie@rentonwa.gov Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otheiwlse fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Note: Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 2 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP 1 1CANT LUA 15-000242 --------Ren ton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie 1425-430-7369 I bmaconle@rentonwa.gov The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report notinn the vested nronertv owner. Community Services Review Comments Contact: Leslie Bellach I 425-430-66191 LBellach@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMENTS (from Community Services) 1. Parks Impact Fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street Trees: Space street trees 40 feet on center, not 30 feet on center. 30 Feet to street lights or further. Playground exists at new entrance. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 3 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP 1 1CANT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Community Services Review Comments Contact: Leslie Betlach I 425-430-6619 I LBetlach@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 1. Parks Impact fee per Ordinace 5670 applies. Recommendations: 2. Trees shall be spaced 40 feet on center, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, waterlines, and sewerlines, 10 feet from driveway approaches, 40 feet from traffic signs (stop, yield, etc.) and intersections without signs. Use only small maturing street trees if overhead electric wires exist. Other landscape trees shall also be small maturing species where overhead utilities exist. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Kamran Yazdidoost 1425-430-73821 kyazdidoost@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 8 13 2015 EXISTING CONDITIONS: WATER: Water seivice will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. SEWER: Sewer service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. STORM: There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property .. STREETS: There are no frontage improvements. CODE REQUIREMENTS Water Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Water availability certificate will be required. Sewer 1. Sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Sewer availability certificate will be required. Surface Water 1. There is conveyance/structure system at NE comer of the subject property. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report dated April 10, 2015 was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers. The proposed 45 lot subdivision, zoned R 14, 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. The 6.07 acre 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 Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development will be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways in two drainage basins. One basin will be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the other one will drain to a proposed 24 inch conveyance system along the project fronting WA 169. Flow control is not required for this project as the project is within half mile with Cedar River and can direct discharge to Cedar River per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. The drainage report must indude the level 3 conveyance capacity analysis of the downstream system to the outlet for the total tributary area to the outfall as required by the 2009 KCSWDM amended by City Of Renton to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge will not cause flooding. Water quality is required for this Development and developer is intending to use existing off site wet pond for water quality. The off site wet pond was built by previous development. Water quality treatment for the Elliot Farm's development must be provided per the 2009 King County Storm Water Design Manual. Applicant must provide a copy of the drainage report that was initially developed for the cottonwood, molasses creek and the proposed Elliot farm's developments that sized and approved the water quality pond by King County. 3. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015 was submitted by Terra Associates, Inc. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native's soil. Ground water/seepage was observed in 5 of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. Soil types encountered are glacially derived and alluvial. The glacial and alluvial soils have low permeability and would not be a suitable receptor soil for discharge of development stormwater using infiltration/retention facilities. 4. Surface water system development fee is $0.540 per square foot of new impervious surface, but not less than $1012. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required jf clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation/Street Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 4 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPi ICANT LUA15-000242 --------Renton O PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Kamran Yazdidoost I 425-430-73821 kyazdidoost@rentonwa.gov 1. Frontage improvements along SR 169 will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate 6, 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder may be reduced to 4 feet. 2. 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 right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 foot planter strip, a 5 foot sidewalk and LED street lighting installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road must be marked NO PARKING. 3. Sidewalk should be continued south side of the roadway front of lot 24 to lot 27, lot 34 to lot 45, and common area to match existing sidewalk to Molasses creek sidewalk. 4. A traffic analysis dated December April 1, 2015 was provided by TENW. The traffic study is required to include all impacted intersections: SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE, SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE. The proposed 45 lot subdivision would generate approximately 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting) , and 31 new trips occurring during weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 1 O exiting). 5. Primary streets/intersection impacted by this development are: a) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE b) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access c) Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE 6. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees of approximately $53,137.80. 7. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the Post Office. 8. LED street lighting meeting the residential lighting standards will be required per City of Renton Standards. 9. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 10. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveway shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveway shall not exceed sixteen feet ( 16'). 11. The subject property is within the well field Capture Zone/Aquifer area Zone II. The project must comply with special requirement# 6 (Aquifer Protection Area) per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual. General Comments 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. 4. A separate street lighting plan shall be included with the civil drawings. 5. All utilities serving the site are required to be undergrounded . . Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 5 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. Planning Review Comments Contact: Clark Close 1425-430-7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). I If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OR provide a public access roadway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway Is made to SR 169/Ma le Valley Highway. Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Holly Trader I 425-430-75191 htrader@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal imnact on nolice services. Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430-73691 aaskren@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: CC&Rs: Comments previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Comments are the same previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA 15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, perWAC332 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 6 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 ------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (wtth King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA}. Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 7 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP 1 1CANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren 1425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from Hie City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat. at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title re...,...rt notina the vested nronertv owner. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 8 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP' ,,..ANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 31 April 22, 2016 Planning Review Comments Contact: Clark Close I 425-430-7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the parcels direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right in/right out only) from Road B to SR 169. I A subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). I Submit an approved right in/right out (RIRO) channelization plan from WSDOT. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler I 425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonwa.gov 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be located behind ROW (typ} I 2. Taper landscaping across frontage of lot 18. Align lot 17 with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. I 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot 18 and join to pedestrian path through development. I 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas 1425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13. Not 16 feet as proposed. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 9 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLlrANT LUA 15-000242 ---------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Plannlng Review Comments Contact: Clark Close 1425-430-7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 1. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Multi family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m .• Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o"clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 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. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4 3 050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eaale Manaaement Guidelines (2007\ and /or =ur U.S. Fish and WIidiife Service oermit. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler I 425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonwa.gov 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be locsted behind ROW (typ) Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for the Elliott Farms at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (APN('s) 2223059004) and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS Water Water service is provided by the City of Renton. Sewer Wastewater service is provided by the City of Renton. Storm The existing properties do not contain stormwater facilities. There are stormwater mains located in Maple Valley Hwy. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. The applicant has provided a water availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SEWER 1. The applicant has provided a sewer availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A surlace water development fee of $1,485.00 per new single family dwelling unit will apply. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $66,825.00. This is subject to final design and payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. 2. A drainage report, dated April 10, 2015, was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. with the site plan application. Based on the City of Renton's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard for Forested Conditions. The development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. All core requirements and special requirements have been discussed in the provided drainage report. 3. The existing site is currently undeveloped with remnants from an existing farm, including partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. The site topography is generally flat with a steep slope in the southwest comer of the site, which also contains a wetland with a 50 foot that will remain undisturbed. A portion of the runoff from the existing site drains to the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into a roadside ditch along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), where flows are conveyed west. 4. A geotechnicat report, dated February 25, 2015, completed by Terra Associates, Inc., for the site has been provided. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native soils. Groundwater/seepage Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 10 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP' '"ANT LUA15-000242 -----~Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler I 425430-73821 afowler@rentonwa.gov was observed in five of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. The report discusses the soil and groundwater characteristics of the site and provides recommendations for project design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations presented in this report discount the use of full infiltration due to the underlying dense glacial till soil. 5. The project site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and the flowpath from the project site discharge point is less than a half mile to the 100 year floodplain of the Cedar River and qualifies for the direct discharge exemption in accordance with Section 1.2.3.1 of the City Amendments to the KCSWDM and must adhere to all requirements thereof. Staff Comments: i. The conveyance system analysis provided in the preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) does not provide a complete analysis of the system to the outfall in the Cedar River in accordance with the requirements for the direct discharge exemption as outlined in Section 1.2.3 of the 2009 KCSWDM. Applicant shall provide a complete conveyance system analysis, including new conveyance pipes within the proposed development and existing conveyance pipes from the development boundary to the outfall in the Cedar River. Applicant shall demonstrate the outfall and existing conveyance system is adequately sized to support the added run off from the development. 6. The development is required to provide basic water quality treatment prior to discharge. The development is proposing to convey surface water to an existing water quality facility (wetpond), located at the southwest comer of the WA 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. As stated in the drainage report, the existing off site wetpond was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominiums, areas of the WSDOT right of way, as well as the proposed Elliot Farms project. Staff Comments: i. The applicant shall complete a level 3 downstream analysis verifying capacity of the existing wetpond and conveyance system. ii. The applicant shall provide a copy of the as built plans and final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood Water Quality Pond. 7. No downstream flooding or erosion issues were identified in the drainage report. Additional Staff Comments: i. A Construction Stonnwater Pennit from Department of Ecology is required. ii. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is required to be submitted with the construction permit application. TRANSPORTATION 1. The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy 0/VA 169) along the north property lines. Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is classified as a Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Frontage improvements along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of Maple Valley Hwy 0/VA 169) to accommodate six (6) 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder width may be reduced to 4 feet. Existing right of way (ROW) width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4 6 060, half street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet (44 feet from center1ine), a 0.5 foot curb, an 8 foot planting strip, an 8 foot sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group has determined and will support an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), which shall be Installed by the developer as part of the proposed development, will allow retention of the existing curb line. Developer will be required to install 6 foot planting strips and 5 foot sidewalks behind the existing curb along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Staff Comments: i. Applicant will need to submit an application to the City requesting a modification of the street frontage improvements as outlined in City code 4 9 250C5d. ii. The posted speed limit of Maple Valley Hwy 0/VA 169) is 50 mph along this section of Maple Valley Hwy 0/VA 169). The City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones. which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. The required clear zone would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee in lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighting along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. 2. The proposal includes a new internal roadway providing direct access via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to the north and access through the existing access easement through the existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC) to the west. The applicant has proposed a street modification to provide a paved roadway width of 20 feet with 5 foot sidewalks and 8 foot planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips a Item ate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. Staff Comments: i. Emergency services access within 150 feet of all homes via a 20 foot paved roadway is required. As such, parking is not allowed along the internal access road proposed for the project. 3. The proposal includes three (3) 16 foot wide alleys. Alley 1 provides access to lots 24 26, Alley 2 provides access to lots 5 13, and Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 11 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLlr'ANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler 1425-430-73821 afowler@rentonwa.gov Alley 3 provides access to lots 1 4. i. Applicant shall submit a modification request for approval by City of Renton Fire Prevention for 16 foot alley access roads to lots 1 13 and 24 26. ii. If the modification request is approved, sprinkler systems would be required for each of the lots accessed from the 16 foot alleys. 4. ADA access ramps shall be installed at all street crossings. Ramps are not shown at the crossing between lots 33 and 34 and at the crossing located at the west end of the development. 5. Street lighting and street trees are required to meet current city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and will be reviewed during the construction utility permit review. 6. A traffic analysis dated April 1, 2015, was provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). The site generated traffic volumes were calculated using data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, (2009). The traffic analysis is required to include all impacted intersections: Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/140th Way SE, Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/140th Way SE. Based on the calculations provided, the proposed development would average 321 new daily vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 27 new vehicle trips, with 22 vehicles exiting and 5 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 new vehicle trips, with 21 vehicles entering and 10 vehicles exiting the site. 7. A supplementary traffic analysis, dated December 11, 2015, was provided by TENW in order to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Traffic volumes remained unchanged from the preliminary analysis previously noted. The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: 50 percent to/from the west on Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) 30 percent to/from the east on SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy 0/'IA 169) 20 percent to/from the south on 14oth Way SE As detailed in the report the proposed project is not expected to lower the levels of service of the surrounding intersections included in the traffic study. Direct public access to and from the site via Maple Valley Hwy 0/'IA 169) shall be channelized to provide right in/light out access only. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation Impact fees. 8. Refer to City code 4 4 080 regarding driveway regulations. Dliveways shall be designed In accordance with City standard plans 104.1 and 104.2. 9. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction of the development at the time of application for the building permit. The current rate of transportation impact fee is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit for condominiums. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $69,583.95. Traffic impact fees will be owed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. 10. Paving and trench restoration shall comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Adequate separation between utilities shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a. 7 ft minimum horizontal and 1 fl vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10 fl horizontal and 1.5 ft vertical. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall confirm to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. A landscaping plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Each plan shall be on separate sheets. 4. All electrical, phone, and cable services and lines serving the proposed development must be underground. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton inspector. I 2. Taper landscaping across frontage of lot 18. Align lot 17 with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. I 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot 18 and join to pedestrian path through development. I 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I clhomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward U,e requirement as long as Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 12 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL'"ANT LUA 15-000242 --------Ren ton © PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas 1425-430-70241 cthomas@rentonwa.gov they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13 and 24 through 26. Not 16 feet as proposed. Turning radius to Alley 2 does not meet code either. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 13 of 13 Clark Close From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject Answers in red below. Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us> Wednesday, May 06, 2015 7:41 AM Sabrina Mirante Clark Close RE: City of Renton Notice of Short Plat & School Information Request -Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat -LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Randy Matheson, Executive Director, Community Relations Renton School District I 300 SW 7th Street, Renton WA 98057 I 425.204.2345 I randy.matheson@rentonschools.us J www.rentonschools.us I E L1 __.... .. ~rt"<?n From: Sabrina Mirante fmailto:SMirante@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 5:27 PM To: Randy Matheson Cc: Clark Close Subject: City of Renton Notice of Short Plat & School Information Request -Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat -LUA15- 000242, ECF, PP, 5A-H, MOD SCHOOL INFORMATION REQUEST Subject: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development (CED) has received an application for a short plat located at the SW corner of the intersection of NE 9th St and Anacortes Ave NE. Please see the attached Notice of Application for further details. In order to process this application, CED needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this letter to my attention, City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057 or fax to {425) 430-7300, by May 19, 2015. Elementary School: Tiffany Park Elementary School (school bus transportation provided) Middle School: Nelsen Middle School (school bus transportation provided) High School: Lindbergh High School (school bus transportation provided) Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes YES No. __ _ Any Comments:. ____________________________ _ Exhibit 29 The Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 To Whom It May Concern, I am an original Molasses Creek Condominium owner. Part of the beauty of the property was that we had deer roaming through the valley that SR 169 runs along -and the beautiful nature trail to bike and run along. The 25 year easement of the property next to it along with the old white farm house were other attributes that led me to purchase the property. I know that as cities and towns grow you must find places to put new residents AND land owners and construction companies like to prosper, however it is such a pity to continue to remove the beautiful places that the suburbs of Seattle are known for ... I challenge the city council of Renton to put a stop to the continued spread of residential units and to not approve the Elliot Farms Preliminary Plan (LVA15-000242). The traffic on the exit for SR-169 from 1-405 has already at its exceeded the last fix and the rest of the residents living out even into Black Diamond already have an unsupportive infrastructure. Please take this into account when reaching your decision -the traffic in the Renton-Maple Valley area is unacceptable and the infrastructure is not going to be upgraded due to the price and limited space along the Cedar River. Please put a stop to more housing until Renton itself has utilized its already rundown capacity. I suggest that these builders create something more complimentary and useful for the city-like a community supported farm on that parcel. Not something that will call approximately 90 more cars in that stretch of road. I understand that the city would enjoy more property taxes coming in but there must be another way to stop the wheel that is turning our town into something unrecognizable. Please honor your current residents. There is something extremely annoying about receiving constant deals in the post from Comcast/Cox -weekly even daily some weeks. Instead of sending me offers to spend more on new services why can't companies send a thanks and a discount for staying with their company and stop sending adverts ... like a business I believe a city/town/county has the responsibility to keep its current residents happy before attracting new. Please say no to building on parcel #2223059004. Kind Regards, Emily O'Meara "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." -Edward Abbey, The Journey Home: Some Words in Defense of the American West Exhibit 30 May 17, 2015 City of Renton, CED Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Project Name: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Land Use Number: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Project Location: SR-169 East of 140th Way SE Clark H. Close, I am writing as a concerned citizen of Renton and as the president of the Molasses Creek Home Owner's Association. Molasses Creek (a community of 146 townhouses and condominiums) is located directly adjacent to the proposed building site. I would like to be on record as supporting the development of the above listed project. However, I am adamantly opposed to the easement through the existing main entrance of Molasses Creek. I am aware that a document exists giving the property developer the right to this easement. In 2000, when the easement was granted, this type of easement made sense. It is not appropriate now due to the horrific traffic patterns that already exist surrounding our property. The easement would funnel an additional 90 vehicles (and foot traffic) through an entrance that is already difficult to maneuver. Many times during my commute home, I try to use this Molasses Creek entrance, and I have to wait in the left-turn lane for up to five minutes just to be close enough to the property to turn left. Additional traffic will only exacerbate this problem. It is the Molasses Creek Board's proposal that the City of Renton grant permission for the planned emergency entrance ( off SR 169) to be used as the main entrance into the new development, instead of being used only as an emergency-vehicle entrance. I would like to be a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project. I am also interested in attending and speaking on behalf of Molasses Creek HOA at any public hearing where this project will be on the agenda. Respectfully submitted, Stan Harrison Molasses Creek HOA Board President 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton,WA 98058 (206) 399-4288 stanjava@yahoo.com Exhibit 31 Dr'r1·,; ,_:1_,11 May 22, 2015 Stan Harrison Molasses Creek HOA Board President 15150 1401h Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT COMMENT RESPONSE LITTER LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Mr. Harrison: Thank you for your comments related to the,Valley Vue Preliminary Plat; dated May 17, 2015 wherein you raised concerns regarding the proposed project. Your letter/email will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The applicant, Brixton Homes LLC, has only made application for Preliminary Plat, Environmental Review and Street Modification for the subject development and a decision has yet to be made. You received a notice soliciting public comment and these comments are used to help City staff complete a comprehensive review which will continue over the coming month(s). At this time, however, the application has been placed on hold in order to complete an evaluation of alleys. As part of your letter you stated that you were in support of the project, yet adamantly opposed to the existing road, landscape, parking, emergency turnaround and utility easement agreement (Recording No. 20000201000940), which was grcnted by Molasses Creek, Inc. to Lancaster/ Cedarwood, Inc. through the existing main cntrJnce of Molasses Creek Condominiums. Before making any recommendations, City staff will complete a full review of the traffic impacts including the submitted Traffic Assessment that was prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please contact me at 425-430-7289 or cclose@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: File LUA!S-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov May 17, 2015 Mr. Clark H. Close Associate Planner CED Planning Division 6th floor Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat -LUA15-000242 Dear Mr. Close. Thank you for your time to address concerns about the upcoming construction to property neighboring my home at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Strictly as a private homeowner and not representing any formal body or group related to the Molasses Creek Condominiums, I am writing to ask that the City of Renton seek and then report on specific information about the property before construction begins on the plat east and adjacent to Molasses Creek, currently to be named Cedarwood. Among other concerns, I believe the projected transportation impact is considerably more complicated than stated and requires greater study for the development of an alternative plan. The project as I understand it is on a temporary hold while alleys are discussed, so the time for further research should be available. The following pages summarize my primary concerns. I look forward to reading more about the status of the inquiry. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Deirdre Thierry Molasses Creek Homeowner Exhibit 32 LUAlS-000242 1 SR169 From Wikipedia: Every year the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) conducts a series of surveys on its highways in the state to measure traffic volume. This is expressed in terms of average annual daily traffic (AADT), which is a measure of traffic volume for any average day of the year. In 2009, WSDOT calculated that as many as 43,000 cars used the highway near Blaine Drive near Renton and as few as 6,600 cars used the highway about 7 mi (11 km) from the southern terminus_111 The entire highway is listed on the WSDOT List of Highways of Statewide Significance, w which marks this portion of the highway as critical to connecting major communities in the state 43,000 cars is a fairly high number of vehicles -even in 2009 -for a roadway where traffic flow is regulated by street lights rather than on and off ramps. Paraphrasing the Renton CED's Level of Service Options Phase 1 Summary, might this corridor or route not be expected to meet the travel-distance index used in Renton and then be considered for mitigation or improvement? This travel route -between roughly 140th Way SE and I-405 on SR169 intersections is short (just over 2 miles), but still would not produce travel times that could be compared with the City's current LOS methodology. And, if there are considerations in the formulation stages for SR169 at the 140tti intersection, how might the limited entrance proposed for this size property impact those plans? Traffic on State Route 169 has increased significantly since the opening of Molasses Creek in 1999, and construction completion in 2000. In fact, the WSDOT's Route Development Plan showed a 66% increase in traffic volumes in the Renton area as of 2004. At that time, there was mention of widening to 6 lanes including HOV lanes for SR169 from Jones Road to 140th Way SE and 140th Way SE to SE Maplewood Avenue. And east of there, to 4-5 lanes from SR 516 to Jones Road (196th Avenue SE) and out to Maple Valley to ease some of the bottleneck that exists in a town which, between 2010 and 2013, grew from 22,684 to 24,804. INGRESS/EGRESS AT MOLASSES CREEK It was disappointing to read that the Traffic Assessment submitted for this project was on a date - Wednesday, February 11, 2015 -so close to the President's Day holiday weekend and winter school break. The document does provide several good images which help explain the difficulties currently facing predominately working residents in this area that will be exacerbated by a projected increase of 90 more vehicles on a concentrated lot. (See Attachment A -Response to LOS Analysis and Attachment B - Response to Traffic Safety Assessment.) ALTERNATIVE EASEMENT .. " ,, 0 Oir. 0 H\i C t"!il. PHI'" CJJC uo .,, 25'1~ 143 + ....... EB '-4> " "' CM 2,419 H\r 8.1", PHf 0.62 NB 140th we<:= terminates at 169 • 1,3.A:9 ,..., 141 Ou! 9:20 ,I. HV 4.8,. PHI' C.9f F 0 ' rn-t. o --4-U!l" ~152 uo -0 F ,~ t ,..., NB .;< • t.,!151 1.:ZZ2 '" °"' "' v o HV D.9"- PHI" 0.9f The project developer states that the owner of the farmhouse at 14355-14573 SE Renton Maple Valley Highway/14235 Maple Valley Highway with easement to SR169 and might be shared refuses to negotiate easement rights to create an alternative entrance to this new property. If farmhouse lane cannot even become the emergency exit so the otherwise ER exit may be an entrance, I request specifics about the last dates of inquiry with the farmhouse owner and the extent of the conversation. If the owner of that farmhouse were communicated with back in 1999, things might have changed in 15+ years. Equally, if the farmhouse owner presented conditions under which they would entertain an arrangement, but the developer does not wish LUAJS-000242 2 to advance due only to price, the homeowners of Molasses Creek and future Cedarwood are being taken advantage of, seemingly with the City of Renton's permission. The developer added that there was also a barrier to that easement that would require significant effort and funds to retire as another reason the existing easement is not viable. Based on the view from the ground and in photographs, the barrier is non-existent except for a burm directly in front of the farmhouse that is not in play. I believe the concerns about traffic in and around Molasses Creek today are reason enough for more thorough questions and answers before proceeding. View of farmhouse entrance lane to the left of preliminary Cedarwood plat. -• l J '. { Overhead showing the existing lane where the new Cedarwood design terminates. The layout of homes along the private internal drive hint at a plan exists to one day connect with Pioneer Place. ;", :~1.:~~·e11f~~rf .~ .. :w.~. A closer look at the farmhouse shows the only existing barrier between the farmhouse lane and the Cedarwood plat is right outside the farmhouse, so not interfering with the lane should an additional exit be created. And, if the view or privacy, or the farmhouse owner's access to 169 be the primary concerns, terminating the property with the ER entrance should eliminate those worries. _-.;.:N0::;1,..·-40~9~ 310.4 ' ) PARKING Is it possible for the ER entrance to be located at the termination point of the inner track's private drive? Is there not some rule of law requiring utility The Cedarwood private drive inner lane terminates precisely at the farmhouse lane, but is not reflected as an active part of the plan. I .~:II ...,.'.·'..: i~:~,,~ . ' ··:,. [ ·. ·j 1H Molasses Creek currently has a serious overcrowding problem and insufficient parking spaces for existing residents and their guests. According to the preliminary plan, for 45 new family dwellings, 10 guest parking spaces are to be added, including 1 handicapped access spot. It is not clear whether parking will be allowed in front of the dwellings in addition to individual driveways, but there is currently no such parking at Molasses Creek except for spaces on the roundabout which are very much needed for current homeowners. There is a lot of green space including a lovely gravel walking path and active play area on the preliminary plan that might reasonably be reconsidered to provide for the cars of new family dwellings and their anticipated guests. Or even an alternate ER exit. LUAJ.'i-000242 4 SIGNAGE Did the arrangement the City of Renton made with the developer in 2008 include any amendment to the use of Molasses Creek's entryway to post signs for either selling or announcement of Cedarwood? The original CC&R's presented to Molasses Creek homeowners gave the developer rights to utilize our property, but at that time, the name for any expansion was to remain Molasses Creek. I understand there was a decision to change the name of the property, and through some private discussion provide for a separate Homeowner Association, but how will this affect signage for Molasses Creek? Will there be two additional signs to maintain at a single entrance? Will the new owners need to explain to their guests that they must look for the Molasses Creek signage to access Cedarwood? Will there be Cedarwood signs going up at the connection line between the two properties and who maintains additional signage? r .iat~~~:7,y;:j, Molasses Creek boasts a sign on each side of the SR 169 entrance/exit. How will Cedarwood's existence be communicated for visitors and vendors? CRIME Several members of the Molasses Creek community have raised concerns about construction site related crime that, per Renton Police Department, routinely increases burglaries and thefts to neighboring homes and businesses. Though we cannot force the developer and contractors to take out insurance policies to ease the concerns of anticipated victims nor hire guards to patrol the areas, we have made RPD aware of the situation and will track incidents that occur during the period of construction. Citizen public criticism of the developer and its contractors and sub-contractors may be our only recourse, but, the developer's less than proactive and supportive view of Molasses Creek suggests that we be prepared to utilize the tools available. There is also concern that the nature of the expansion inviting more family sized units, which could require significant changes to the rest of the property where the majority of residents are adults. The introduction of a sizable number of toddlers to teenagers will mean changes to Molasses Creek that are not yet known. While bringing young people into the area is supported, multi-age communities require very different House Rules to be in place for the safety and enjoyment of all homeowners. LUAJS-000242 5 ATIACHMENT A-RESPI : TO LOS ANALYSIS STATED SE Renton Maple Volley Rd/140th Way SE -This is a major signalized intersection with a five lone section at the eastbound and westbound approaches, and a five-lane section at the northbound approach. The current geometry is expected to remain for future conditions. ACTUAL 4 lanes -2 left turn only from NB 1401h to WB169, plus 1 right turn only from NB 140th to EB 169; and 2 SB 1401h plus 1 merge lane from EB 169. 4 lanes -2 WB 169 plus 1 left turn only that feeds from the turn island running the median of 169. 2 EB 169 that carry through past 140'h Way SE. Even if flexible bollards were put in place to better define or limit the left turn from WB169 to 58140th to leave open the turn island for access by Molasses Creek and other residents, the traffic line would still encroach upon travelers aiming to cross 140'h and continue WB on 169. However, cars making that left turn generally due run opposite of the greater amount of traffic during peak morning or evening commute times. STATED SE Renton Maple Valley Rd/Molasses Creek East Access -This access is a twa-way stopped contra/led intersection. The eastbound and westbound movements along SE Renton Maple Valley Rd operate as free movements. The northbound movement is stop contra/led and supports full access. This intersection will serve as ane of twa access locations for the proposed site. The current geometry is expected to remain far future conditions. ACTUAL Free movement is relative. To turn westbound onto 169 from this exit, assessment of cars traveling eastbound on 169 past 1401h and cars turning eastbound onto 169 from 1401h is necessary, in addition to monitoring cars using the turn island to access the left turn lane heading SB140th. It's a race to catch the signal light by people who will honk at you for holding them up when you're trying to gain access from the turn island into WB169 traffic. Judging the speed of all cars using the lanes and the island before making a move is not for the faint of heart. STATED 140th Way SE/Molasses Creek West Access -This access a two-way stopped controlled intersection. The westbound movement is stop controlled while the northbound and southbound movements operate free. The westbound approach is restricted to allow right in and right out only movements; no left turns ore permitted southbound along 140th Woy SE. This intersection is anticipated to serve as the second access location for the proposed site. The current geometry is expected to remain for future conditions. ATIACHMENT A-RESP< TO LOS ANALYSIS ACTUAL The volume of cars in the two northbound 1401h lanes that are held at the light before proceeding westbound onto 169 causes a backup that can proceed up 1401h near to SE 1541h Place. To exit Molasses Creek most mornings requires not blocking the right turn lane for northbound 1401h cars onto eastbound 169 that are traveling briskly down a steep grade plus negotiating entry into a line of cars competing for access to a crowded SR 169. 169 is often backed up to 152"d Avenue SE where the convergence of cars coming down from the Highlands and in from Maple Valley and Black Diamond intersect. Being so close to the left turn at 140'h means some cars use the island turn lane all the way back from 1491"Avenue SE. Drivers from Molasses Creek, Pioneer Place and the apartments at 169 and 140'h, the Preserve at Cedar River, are all impacted and should all be involved in the traffic study. The results of the LOS analysis shown in Tables 2 and 3 indicate that the study intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels (LOS Dor better) during the AM and PM peak hours in 2017 without or with the praposed Elliott Farm residential development. "Acceptable levels" generally differs depending upon whether or not the writer is living within the environment come 2017. Maple Valley, a Competitive Community and even Black Diamond, Rural by Design, have studied transportation for their expanding cities. To remain Ahead of the Curve, Renton is investigating several transportation issues, but I see few relating to the problem of SR169, the highest growth corridor in Renton that most definitely could be affected by the proposed entrance and exit design for Cedarwood. ATTACHMENT B RESPO TO TRAFFIC SAFETY ASSESSMENTS STATED The proposed site will share vehicle access locations with the existing and adjacent Molasses Creek residential development. Collision records nearest to study area were obtained for documentation purposes. Collision records in the study area were reviewed for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014. ACTUAL The truth is that many people circle around, heading to 149th Avenue SE to make a "U" turn after waiting and not succeeding exiting at either the 1401h or the 1691h access points from Molasses Creek, or head to the Highlands at 1s2•• preferring to travel back down the other end. Others are willing to start late for work after peak traffic is past rather than risk a collision. We sincerely ask that you use your knowledge of driving conditions to imagine how the All Traffic Data supplied numbers translate into a daily commute. 2/11/15 during a 60 minute period between -6:30am and 7:30am • 629 cars turned Right off NB 140'h onto EB 169, speeding up as they rounded the corner. • Meanwhile, 152 cars turned Left onto SB 1401h while 291 cars and trucks carried through 140th EB on 169. • Imagine it is winter with Daylight Savings Time in effect, and headlights are coming at you from all sides. • You are called upon to judge the speed of each car coming from each direction, including within the turn island before attempting egress from Molasses Creek onto WB 169. • Now, here comes a school bus stopping right at the ingress corner of EB 169 and Molasses Creek to pick up the kids for school. Can't run around them, but there goes your window. • Meantime, cars are behind you also anxiously looking to exit the property and make their way to work. Currently, there are a handful of homes east of the roundabout that maintains order for cars entering and exiting Molasses Creek. Imagine there are now 25 cars added to the traffic around the roundabout. Will there be speed bumps and yield signs added or will there be a race to reach the exit first knowing how long it can take to leave the property METRO ON SR169 As mentioned above, Metro currently offers some express bus service during peak commute hours between Maple Valley and downtown Seattle that travels SR169. Folks traveling the entire line look forward to a 2+ hour morning and evening commute. Walking from Molasses Creek involves crossing at 1401h to an unsheltered stop at 152•• during the winter months or to the Maplewood Golf Course during spring and summer (the trail winds alongside a dark Cedar River below 169 to reach the stop west of Molasses Creek). Though this provides for a healthy 15 minute walk, crossing at 1401h and 169'h to walk to the bus stop can be dangerous given the speed with which drivers take the right turn at 169. Drivers Molasses Creek ATTACHMENT B RESPO TO TRAFFIC SAFETY ASSESSMENTS often do not expect anyone to be walking, so it is with great care someone trying to use public transportation must utilize the crosswalks. To continue with the earlier imagined commute. • You left your garage at 7:10am and waited for a safe opening in the traffic. • Because the traffic at 1401h is thick, you know traffic will be a crawl all the way past 1-405 where you eventually aim to reach the Renton Transit Center. • You are hopeful a tenant from Metropolitan Place at RTC will depart late to make a parking space available for you in the Transit Only parking lot. • Following your 20-30 minute drive from 169 + 1401h to the RTC, you debate taking the 101 local bus weighing whether the extra 15 minutes it takes to route through the city will offset waiting for the express bus to make it to the RTC. • You opt to wait for the 143 that will be 20 minutes late and full, meaning standing room only all the way to Seattle. • Of course, you could take the Rapid Ride F line from RTC to the Tukwila link station. That's another 35 minute bus ride to the station but then, assuming you make the connection, you have the peace of knowing that you will arrive downtown Seattle in another 30 minutes. Except during winter and Spring breaks, due to the back ups in traffic, the bus usually runs at least 15-20 minutes behind because of the volume of traffic and the stoplight sequencing along 169. If not for the trucker who let me in at 7:20am on 5/10/15, I would never have exited Molasses Creek. But then we sat in our cars and waited 4 lights before we were able to cross 1401 h Way SE. There was no traffic emergency on 169 all the way through to 1-405, and 1-405 North and South were running their usual pace. Yet it still took 30 minutes from actually exiting Molasses Creek to reach the RTC. Sign says we're approaching 140tti Way SE. May 22, 2015 Deirdre Thierry 15150 1401h Way SE# MlOS Renton, WA 98058 Community & Economic Development Department CE. "Chip"Vincent. Administrator SUBJECT: ELLIOTI FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT COMMENT RESPONSE LETIER LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Dee: Thank you for your comments related to the Valley Vue Preliminary Plat; dated May 17, 2015 wherein you raised concerns regarding the proposed project. Your letter/email will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The applicant, Brixton Homes LLC, has only made application for Preliminary Plat, Environmental Review and Street Modification for the subject development and a decision has yet to be made. You received a notice soliciting public comment and these comments are used to help City staff complete a comprehensive review which will continue over the coming month(s). At this time, however, the application has been placed on hslcl in crder to complete an evaluation of alleys. As part of your letter you elaborated on the 1o:·c,\'inc 'tnms: 1) traffic volumes on SR 169; 2) ingress/egress at Molasses Creek Condominiu,m: 3) ex,sting road, landscape, parking, emergency turnaround and utility easement agreement (Recording No. 20000201000940); 4) alternate access to the farmhouse lane to SP, 1G9; 5) rJrl.ing; 6) signage; 7) crime; 8) traffic safety; 9) bus service; and 10) commute i11for:natio1. r·crore making any recommendations, City staff will complete a full review of the traffic i111 pets ; ,eluding the submitted Traffic Assessment that was prepared by Transportation Engineerinc tlor,h'.Vest (TENW), on-and off-site impacts, access and circulation, along with several other rcv:0 ,., cc'teria to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies. Thank you for interest in this project and if\ -L ",. ...,, f'lrther questions please contact me at 425-430-7289 orcclose@rentonwa.gov. Tim:'.,.,,, Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Clark Close From: Sent: Karen Bonaudi < kbonaudi@earthlink.net> Thursday, March 03, 2016 6:34 PM To: Clark Close Subject: RE: from Molasses Creek Again, thanks. Karen From: Clark Close [mailto:CClose@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 4:45 PM To: 'Karen Bonaudi' Subject: RE: from Molasses Creek Karen, The only noise walls WSDOT has "planned" in the generally vicinity is approximately 1 mile east of the site on the north side of SR 169. This project is currently un-funded with no real time-frame for completion. There is nothing immediately surrounding the Molasses Creek property. Thanks, Clark H. Close Senior Planner City of Renton 425-430-7289 From: Karen Bonaudi [mailto:kbonaudi@earthlink.net1 Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 3:01 PM To: Clark Close Subject: RE: from Molasses Creek Thank you, Clark. I want to reiterate that we are not advocating for a wall-we already have a privacy fence, a landscaped berm and trees-between the property and 169. I do, however need to follow-up on the query. Thanks again, Karen From: Clark Close [mailto:CC1ose@Rentonwa.gov1 Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 2:24 PM To: 'Karen Bonaudi' Subject: RE: from Molasses Creek Karen, See responses below. Thanks, ~ ~ Clark H. Close Senior Planner City of Renton 425-430-7289 From: Karen Bonaudi [mailto:kbonaudi@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 1 :42 PM To: Clark Close Subject: from Molasses Creek Hello Clark, Two brief queries: I have been asked if there is any chance of a noise wall going up between 169 and the Molasses Creek property. I am against it myself, but some residents who live on the road are complaining of increased traffic noise. The City is unaware of a noise wall going up between SR 169 and Molasses Creek. My plan reviewer is checking with WSDOT (who is responsible for road improvements on State Routes) and has not been very successful on getting a response (hence my delayed response). We will continue to reach out to WSDOT in order to provide a more thorough response to your inquiry. Thank you for keeping me on the Party(ies) of Record list. Has any date or estimate of one been set for a public meeting on the Elliott Farms project? No. The applicant is working towards designing a channelization plan from the site to SR 169. Thanks, Karen Bonaudi kbonaudi@earthlink.net 509-989-9292 2 Clark Close From: Sent: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Monday, June 01, 2015 1:25 PM To: Clark Close Subject: RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (DNS-M) Thanks for the update Clark! Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Clark Close [mailto:CClose@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 10:51 AM To: Karen Walter Subject: RE: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (DNS·M) Karen, The project has been placed on hold for redesign. We will address your comments following the project resubmittal. Thanks, Clark H. Close Associate Planner City of Renton 425-430-7289 From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 10:41 AM To: Clark Close Subject: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (DNS-M) Clark, We have reviewed the proposed Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat project referenced above. While not clearly noted in the NONproposed MDNS materials, the project will also include the wetland mitigation buffer from parcel 3423059202 from the Lennon Critical Areas Alternation Exception project (CAEX14-0008). We had several comments about the Lennon CAEX project which we are including as part of the Elliott Farms Project since we have yet to receive responses and all concerns are outstanding. We would appreciate the City's responses to the applicable comments. We also have some additional comment regarding the wetland mitigation proposed on this project site: 1. Who will actually be responsible for the wetland mitigation work both in the short and long term? ~ ~ 2. How does the Elliott Far lighting? Thank you, Karen Walter ,roject intend to minimize intrusions into Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Karen Walter Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:00 AM To: 'Johnson, Josh' Cc: 'Gillen, Nick'; Murphy, Michael nitigation area, including nighttime Subject: RE: Lennon Critical Areas Alteration Exception, CAEXl 4-0008, Notice of Application Josh, Thank you for sending us the applicant's responses to King County for the proposed Lennon Critical Areas Alteration Exception project. As you know, this project is seeking a critical areas exception permit from King County to impact a Category 1 wetland buffer on parcel #3423059202 and mitigate for these impacts offsite at parcel #2223059004 along SR 169 by enhancing buffer along a Category II wetland per Renton's code. The impact site involves a Category 1 wetland that is part of the headwaters for Molasses Creek, a tributary to the Cedar River. The mitigation site is wetland that is located between Molasses and Madsen Creek subbasins along the Cedar River valley floor. Per the NOA, the project proposes to remove 15 or so trees from the impact site. We never got specific information regarding the species or sizes as request; however, the arborist's memo dated 10/20/2014 indicates most of the trees are 8 to 30 inches in diameter from the existing coniferous forest. The applicant proposes to plant 2.76 trees to each tree removed per the December 16 2014 memo (Altmann Oliver, LLC). The biggest problem we see with the project is that a Category I wetland (as classified by King County and WDOE's rating system) buffer impacts are being mitigated at what is described as a Category 2 wetland per Renton's regulations. There are differences between King County and Renton's critical areas regulations so a direct comparison of impacts to mitigation is difficult. For example, Renton's current Critical Areas Code does not use WDOE's classification system; therefore, Renton's classification system is not directly comparable to King County's. Ideally, the mitigation site would be reassessed using King County's wetland rating system so that the two wetlands could be compared directly. If one assumes that this Category 2 mitigation wetland would be classified as a Category II wetland using WDOE's wetland rating and classification system, then the next step is to compare any differences between wetland buffer regulations. Per King County's CAO, a Category II wetland requires a standard buffer of 100-200 feet wide. Similarly, a Category Ill wetland per King County's CAO requires a 75-125 foot wide buffer. Either of these King County wetland buffer requirements are larger than the 50' buffer for Category 2 wetlands in Renton. The reduced wetland mitigation buffer is further compounded by the drawings submitted to King County and Renton (see Sheet 3/7 in packet) which indicate that the applicant will also seek to permit a multi-family project (tentatively named "Elliott Farm Preliminary Plat 45-lots") immediate adjacent to the mitigation wetland. If so, this future development project would reduce the opportunity to expand the wetland mitigation buffer so that it is at least equal the same area to that which would be required for a Category II wetland under King County's CAO. We are left with a difference in impacts to wetland types as well as reduced mitigation value. It seems that in this case, it would be better to use King County's Mitigation Reserves Program/In Lieu to mitigate for the Category I wetland buffer impacts as there is higher potential to restore wetland buffer for a different Category 1 wetland within the County's receiving sites in the Cedar River watershed than what is proposed. For what is proposed, the mitigation site should also be required to monitor and maintain the mitigation site for a minimum of 5 years, particularly given the existence of reed canary grass and Japanese knotweed in the Cedar River Valley. It is our understanding that King County, not Renton, will requiring monitoring and demonstration that the mitigation site is placed into a protective tract. We would appreciate copies of all monitoring reports generated for this project. 2 We appreciate the opportunity t, vide comments to this project. Please n hat if we have received responses and information sooner, we would have provided our comments sooner, too. If you have any questions, let me know. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Johnson, Josh [mailto:JoshJohnson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 1:04 PM To: Karen Walter Subject: RE: Lennon Critical Areas Alteration Exception, CAEX14-0008, Notice of Application Karen, Take a look through the attached PDF and let me know if it answers your questions. Josh From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us) Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 12:07 PM To: Johnson, Josh Subject: FW: Lennon Critical Areas Alteration Exception, CAEX14-0008, Notice of Application Josh, In yesterday's mail, we received King County's Notice of Land Use Decision for the Lennon project referenced above. have checked our records and cannot find any responses to our timely submitted comments below. Can you see if the King County responded to us and if so, please send them? If not, can we get responses to our comments prior to the comment/appeal deadline. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckle shoot Indian T dbe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Karen Walter Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 11:06 AM To: 'Claussen, Kimberly' Cc: Gillen, Nick; 'Simone Oliver' Subject: FW: Lennon Critical Areas Alteration Exception, CAEXl 4-0008, Notice of Application Ms. Claussen, We have received and reviewed the Critical Areas study for the proposed Lennon single family residence Critical Areas Alteration Exception project referenced. We have several comments as noted below: 1. Per Sheet 2 of the proposed project drawings, the new house and driveway will be build within the regulated 185' wide, Category 1 wetland. Per this site plan, approximately 15 or so trees will be removed. It appears that there is an existing 3 tree inventory for this site that w ,mpleted. If so, we would like a copy as 1ould like to know the species and sizes of the trees that will be removed for this project. The buffer is generally described as a coniferous forest in the Critical Areas Study dated August 29, 2013 but no further details are provided in the copy we received. 2. For the mitigation site, there should be a separate wetland assessment that describes the wetland category and the existing buffer conditions on this wetland to determine the adequacy of the proposed offsite wetland buffer mitigation. 3. More information is needed regarding the applicant's interest and ownership on the mitigation site and how the mitigation area will be protected in perpetuity as Sheet 4 of the plans show a subdivision adjacent to the mitigation site where it is currently undeveloped per IMAP and Google Earth. 4. A wetland mitigation buffer monitoring should be done for at least 5 years to ensure that the buffer surviving and functioning and is not overrun by non-native and invasive species. We request copies of all monitoring reports generated for this project. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the County/applicants' responses. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 -----Original Message----- From: Simone Oliver [mailto:Simone@altoliver.com] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 9:04 PM To: Karen Walter Cc: rick@tranquillityak.com Subject: RE: Lennon Critical Areas Alternation Exception, CAEX14-0008, Notice of Application Hi Karen -attached is the CAEX plan for the onsite area and the offsite mitigation and the critical areas study for the onsite parcel. We can't shift the site alteration area east as that is offsite and a county owned stormwater facility. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Simone -----Original Message----- From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 12:11 PM To: simone@altoliver.com Subject: FW: Lennon Critical Areas Alternation Exception, CAEX14-0008, Notice of Application Hi Simone, Can you send us the Critical Areas Study for this project ASAP??? The County has a comment deadline of June 13 and I would like to be able to meet the deadline without having to request an extension. Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader 4 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 -----Original Message----- From: Claussen, Kimberly [mailto:Kimberly.Claussen@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 11:23 AM To: Karen Walter Cc: Simone Oliver (Simone@altoliver.com); Gillen, Nick Subject: FW: Lennon Critical Areas Alternation Exception, CAEX14-0008, Notice of Application Thank you for your comments. Please contact the applicant's consultant Simone Oliver at Altmann Oliver Associates (425-333-4535) to obtain available electronic copies of documents. Otherwise, you may view the information contained in the alteration file at DPER Records M-T, Th-Fri 7:30-11:30 & 1-3. Thank you. -----Original Message----- From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 4:20 PM To: Claussen, Kimberly Cc: Casey, Laura Subject: Lennon Critical Areas Alternation Exception, CAEX14-0008, Notice of Application Ms. Claussen, We are reviewing the Notice of Application for the proposed Critical Areas Alteration Exception and need additional information. Specifically, we would like a copy of the Critical Areas Study by Altmann Oliver referenced in the Notice of Application and details regarding the proposed off-site mitigation on a parcel within the City of Renton's jurisdiction. From a review of the parcel in IMAP, it appears there may be an opportunity to shift the building permit to the east farther away from the Category I wetland and its buffer and potentially reduce impacts to these areas. Hopefully, the Critical Areas Study will provide information to explain why the site is proposed in its current configuration. We prefer electronic copies if available. If not, please have a hard copy sent to the address below. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 5 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ~-----Renton® ENVIRONMENTAL {SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED {DNS-M) PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9. 7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway {SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC). Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site ls currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: SR 169 East of 1401h Way SE (APN 222305-9004) City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Exhibit 35 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ---------Ren ton ® 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 July 29, 2016. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Public Works Department Kelly Beymer, dmini rator Community Services Department JULY 15, 2016 JULY 11, 2016 Date Date C.£ \.], C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development i/f:p )Ii{ Date Date DEPARTMENT OF ...... ,JIMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -------Renton® DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED {DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9. 7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC}. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100- year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off- site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: SR 169 East of 1401h Way SE (APN 222305-9004) The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. dated February 25, 2015 or an updated report submitted at a later date. 2. The applicant shall remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. A tree planting plan shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. 3. The applicant shall submit the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond, including the original design, to the City of Renton Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. 4. A professional archaeological survey of the project area shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the professional archaeological survey shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. 5. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. 6. The applicant shall record a covenant on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through Molasses Creek Condominium (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. ADVISORY 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. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 2 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 Application Date: April 13, 2015 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058-8120 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Cyndie Parks 1425-430-7521 I cparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal impact on Police Services Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas 1425-430-70241 cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as oro=sed. Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie I 425-430-7369 I bmaconie@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: CC&Rs: Bob Mac Onie 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Recommendations: Preliminary Plat: Bob Mac Onie 5/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, perWAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGENDn block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGENDn block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 1 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 --------Ren ton 0 PLAN • Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnle I 425-430-7369 I bmaconle@rentonwa.gov Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are Issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning infonnation on the final plat drawing. If there Is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrenUy with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrenUy with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat. Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Note: Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 2 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie 1425-430-7369 I bmaconle@rentonwa.gov The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title reoort notina the vested orooertv owner. Community Services Review Comments Contact: Leslie Betlach 1425-430-66191 LBeUach@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMENTS (from Community Services) 1. Parks Impact Fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street Trees: Space street trees 40 feet on center, not 30 feet on center. 30 Feet to street lights or further. Playground exists at new entrance. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 3 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 J December 16, 2015 Community Services Review Comments Contact: Leslie Betlach I 425-430-6619 I LBetlach@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 1. Parks Impact fee per Ordinace 5670 applies. Recommendations: 2. Trees shall be spaced 40 feet on center, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, waterlines, and sewerlines, 10 feet from driveway approaches, 40 feet from traffic signs (stop, yield, etc.) and intersections without signs. Use only small maturing street trees if overhead electric wires exist. Other landscape trees shall also be small maturing species where overhead utilities exist. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Kamran Yazdidoost I 425-430-7382 I kyazdidoosl@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 8 13 2015 EXISTING CONDITIONS: WATER: Water service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. SEWER: Sewer service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. STORM: There is conveyance/structure system at NE comer of the subject property .. STREETS: There are no frontage improvements. CODE REQUIREMENTS Water Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Water availability certificate will be required. Sewer 1. Sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Sewer availability certificate will be required. Surface Water 1. There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report dated April 10, 2015 was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers. The proposed 45 lot subdivision, zoned R 14, 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. The 6.07 acre 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 Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development will be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems In the new roadways in two drainage basins. One basin will be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the other one will drain to a proposed 24 inch conveyance system along the project fronting WA 169. Flow control is not required for this project as the project is within half mile with Cedar River and can direct discharge to Cedar River per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. The drainage report must include the level 3 conveyance capacity analysis of the downstream system to the outlet for the total tributary area to the outfall as required by the 2009 KCSWDM amended by City Of Renton to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge will not cause flooding. Water quality is required for this Development and developer is intending to use existing off site wet pond for water quality. The off site wet pond was built by previous development. Water quality treatment for the Elliot Farm's development must be provided per the 2009 King County Storm Water Design Manual. Applicant must provide a copy of the drainage report that was initially developed for the cottonwood, molasses creek and the proposed Elliot farm's developments that sized and approved the water quality pond by King County. 3. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015 was submitted by Terra Associates, Inc. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native's soil. Ground water/seepage was observed in 5 of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. Soil types encountered are glacially derived and alluvial. The glacial and alluvial soils have low permeability and would not be a suitable receptor soil for discharge of development stormwater using infiltration/retention facilities. 4. Surface water system development fee is $0.540 per square foot of new impervious surface, but not less than $1012. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation/Street Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 4 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Kamran Yazdidoost 1425-430-7382 I kyazdidoost@rentonwa.gov 1. Frontage improvements along SR 169 will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate 6, 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder may be reduced to 4 feet. 2. 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 right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 foot planter strip, a 5 foot sidewalk and LED street lighting installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road must be marked NO PARKING. 3. Sidewalk should be continued south side of the roadway front of lot 24 to lot 27, lot 34 to lot 45, and common area to match existing sidewalk to Molasses creek sidewalk. 4. A traffic analysis dated December April 1, 2015 was provided by TENW. The traffic study is required to include all impacted intersections: SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE, SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE. The proposed 45 lot subdivision would generate approximately 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiling). 5. Primary streets/intersection impacted by this development are: a) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE b) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access c) Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE 6. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees of approximately $53,137.80. 7. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the Post Office. 8. LED street lighting meeting the residential lighting standards will be required per City of Renton Standards. 9. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 10. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveway shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveway shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). 11. The subject property is within the well field Capture Zone/Aquifer area Zone II. The project must comply with special requirement# 6 (Aquifer Protection Area) per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual. General Comments 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. 4. A separate street lighting plan shall be included with the civil drawings. 5. All utilities serving the site are required to be undergrounded. Fire Review· Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas J 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 5 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLlf"'ANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Fire Review • Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. Planning Review Comments Contact: Clark Close I 425-430-7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OR provide a public access roadway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Ma le Valle Hi hwa Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Holly Trader I 425-430-75191 htrader@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal imoact on oolice services. Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: CC&Rs: Comments previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Comments are the same previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC332 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 6 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLl''ANT LUA 15-000242 ---------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are Issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and U,e Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Condtt.ions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.} as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with U,e plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development. alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & weUands. The creation of the Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 7 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL Ir ANT LUA 15-000242 -----~Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren 1425-430-7369 I aaskran@rantonwa.gov Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the 1and within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report notinQ the vested property owner. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 8 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Planning Review Comments --------Renton ® Version 31 April 22, 2016 Contaet: Clark Close I 425-430-7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the parcels direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right in/right out only) from Road B to SR 169. A subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). Submit an approved right in/right out (RIRO) channelization plan from WSDOT. Engineering Review Comments Contaet: Ann Fowler I 425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonwa.gov 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be located behind ROW (typ) 2. Taper landscaping across frontage of lot 18. Align lot 17 with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot 18 and join to pedestrian path through development. 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox . . Fire Review -Bulldlng Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13. Not 16 feet as proposed. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 9 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPi ICANT LUA 15-000242 --------Ren ton €) PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Planning Review Comments Contact: Clark Close I 425-430-7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 1. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Multi 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 U,rough Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 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. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4 3 050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, UNO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eaole Management Guidelines /2007) and /or your U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service oermit. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler 1425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonwa.gov 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be located behind ROW (typ) Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for the Elliott Farms at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (APN('s) 2223059004) and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS Water Water service is provided by the City of Renton. Sewer Wastewater service is provided by the City of Renton. Storm The existing properties do not contain stormwater facilities. There are stormwater mains located in Maple Valley Hwy. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. The applicant has provided a water availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SEWER 1. The applicant has provided a sewer availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A surface water development fee of $1,485.00 per new single family dwelling unit will apply. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $66,825.00. This is subject to final design and payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. 2. A drainage report, dated April 10, 2015, was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. with the site plan application. Based on the City of Renton's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard for Forested Conditions. The development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. All core requirements and special requirements have been discussed in the provided drainage report. 3. The existing site is currently undeveloped with remnants from an existing farm, inciuding partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. The site topography is generally flat with a steep slope in the southwest comer of the site, which also contains a wetland with a 50 foot that will remain undisturbed. A portion of the runoff from the existing site drains to the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into a roadside ditch along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), where flows are conveyed west. 4. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015, completed by Terra Associates, Inc., for the site has been provided. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native soils. Groundwater/seepage Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 10 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP1 1CANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler 1425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonwa.gov was observed in five of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. The report discusses the soil and groundwater characteristics of the site and provides recommendations for project design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations presented in this report discount the use of full infiltration due to the underlying dense glacial till soil. 5. The project site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and the flowpath from the project site discharge point is less than a half mile to the 100 year floodplain of the Cedar River and qualifies for the direct discharge exemption in accordance with Section 1.2.3.1 of the City Amendments to the KCSWDM and must adhere to all requirements thereof. Staff Comments: i. The conveyance system analysis provided in the preliminary Technical Information Report {TIR} does not provide a complete analysis of the system to the outfall in the Cedar River in accordance with the requirements for the direct discharge exemption as outlined in Section 1.2.3 of the 2009 KCSWDM. Applicant shall provide a complete conveyance system analysis, including new conveyance pipes within the proposed development and existing conveyance pipes from the development boundary to the outfall in the Cedar River. Applicant shall demonstrate the outfall and existing conveyance system is adequately sized to support the added run off from the development. 6. The development is required to provide basic water quality treatment prior to discharge. The development is proposing to convey surface water to an existing water quality facility (wetpond), located at the southwest comer of the WA 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. As stated in the drainage report, the existing off site wetpond was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominiums, areas of the WSDOT right of way, as well as the proposed Elliot Fanns project. Staff Comments: i. The applicant shall complete a level 3 downstream analysis verifying capacity of the existing wetpond and conveyance system. ii. The applicant shall provide a copy of the as built plans and final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood Water Quality Pond. 7. No downstream flooding or erosion issues were identified in the drainage report. Additional Staff Comments: i. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required. ii. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is required to be submitted with the construction permit application. TRANSPORTATION 1. The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy /:NA 169) along the north property lines. Maple Valley Hwy /:NA 169) is classified as a Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Frontage improvements along Maple Valley Hwy (:NA 169) will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to accommodate six (6) 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder width may be reduced to 4 feet. Exisfing right of way (ROW) width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4 6 060, half street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet (44 feet from centerline), a 0.5 foot curb, an 8 foot planting strip, an 8 foot sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group has determined and will support an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (:NA 169). The City established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (:NA 169), which shall be installed by the developer as part of the proposed development, will allow retention of the existing curb line. Developer will be required to install 6 foot planting strips and 5 foot sidewalks behind the existing curb along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Staff Comments: i. Applicant will need to submit an application to the City requesting a modification of the street frontage improvements as outlined in City code 4 9 250C5d. ii. The posted speed limit of Maple Valley Hwy (:NA 169) is 50 mph along this section of Maple Valley Hwy (:NA 169). The City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. The required clear zone would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy {YVA 169) as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee in lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighfing along Maple Valley Hwy /:NA 169) as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. 2. The proposal includes a new internal roadway providing direct access via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to the north and access through the existing access easement through the existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC) to the west. The applicant has proposed a street modification to provide a paved roadway width of 20 feet with 5 foot sidewalks and 8 foot planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips alternate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. Staff Comments: i. Emergency services access within 150 feet of all homes via a 20 foot paved roadway is required. As such, parking is not allowed along the internal access road proposed for the project. 3. The proposal includes three (3) 16 foot wide alleys. Alley 1 provides access to lots 24 26, Alley 2 provides access to lots 5 13, and Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 11 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APP1 1rANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton© PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler 1425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonwa.gov Alley 3 provides access to lots 1 4. i. Applicant shall submit a modification request for approval by City of Renton Fire Prevention for 16 foot alley access roads to lots 1 13 and 24 26. ii. If the modification request is approved, sprinkler systems would be required for each of the lots accessed from the 16 foot alleys. 4. ADA access ramps shall be installed at all street crossings. Ramps are not shown at the crossing between lots 33 and 34 and at the crossing located at the west end of the development. 5. Street lighting and street trees are required to meet current city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and will be reviewed during the construction utility permit review. 6. A traffic analysis dated April 1, 2015, was provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). The site generated traffic volumes were calculated using data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, (2009). The traffic analysis is required to include all impacted intersections: Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/140111 Way SE, Maple Valley Hwy <y-lA 169)/Molasses Creek East Access. and Molasses Creek West Accessl140th Way SE. Based on the calculations provided, the proposed development would average 321 new daily vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 27 new vehicle trips, with 22 vehicles exiting and 5 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 new vehicle trips, with 21 vehicles entering and 10 vehicles exiting the site. 7. A supplementary traffic analysis, dated December 11, 2015, was provided by TENW in order to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Traffic volumes remained unchanged from the preliminary analysis previously noted. The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: 50 percent to/from the west on Maple Valley Hwy <y-lA 169) 30 percent to/from the east on SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) 20 percent to/from the south on 140th Way SE As detailed in the report the proposed project is not expected to lower the levels of seivice of the surrounding intersections included in the traffic study. Direct public access to and from the site via Maple Valley Hwy <y-lA 169) shall be channelized to provide right in/right out access only. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation Impact fees. 8. Refer to City code 4 4 080 regarding driveway regulations. Driveways shall be designed in accordance with City standard plans 104.1 and 104.2. 9. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction of the development at the time of application for the building permit. The current rate of transportation impact fee is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit for condominiums. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $69,583.95. Traffic impact fees will be owed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. 10. Paving and trench restoration shall comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Adequate separation between utilities shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a. 7 ft minimum horizontal and 1 ft vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10 ft horizontal and 1.5 ft vertical. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall confirm to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. A landscaping plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Each plan shall be on separate sheets. 4. All electrical, phone, and cable seivices and lines seiving the proposed development must be underground. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton inspector. I 2. Taper landscaping across frontage of lot 18. Align lot 17 with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. I 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot 18 and join to pedestrian path through development. I 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. Fire Review • Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-70241 cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 12 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 15-000242 -----Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 Fire Review • Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi paint loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13 and 24 throuah 26. Not 16 feet as orooosed. Turnina radius to Allev 2 does not meet code either. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 13 of 13 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M July 27,2016 Clark Close, Senior Planner Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Traffic Concurrency Test -Elliott Farms; File No. LUAlS-000242 The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review, and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district {APN 2223059004). The subdivision of 45 residential lots and 8 tracts would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 sf of critical areas, 60,731 sf of open space and 4,915 sf for alleys. The fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 sf to 3,939 sf with an average lot size of 2,586 sf. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. The proposed development would generate approximately 321 net new average weekday daily trips. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 27 net new trips {5 inbound and 22 outbound}. During the weekday PM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 31 net new trips (21 inbound and 10 outbound). The proposed project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows: Exhibit 36 Transportation Concurrent st -Elliott Farms Page 2 of 3 July 29, 2016 Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Pass Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan Yes Within allowed growth levels Yes Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees Yes Site specific street improvements to be completed by project Yes Traffic Concurrency Test Passes Evaluation of Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the city's investment in completion of the forecast traffic improvements are at 130% of the scheduled expenditure through 2016. Within allowed growth levels: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the calculated citywide trip capacity for concurrency with the city adopted model for 2016 is 79,588 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the 321 additional trips from this project. A resulting 79,267 trips are remaining. Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees: The project will be subject to transportation impact fees at time of building permit for each new building. Site specific street improvements to be completed by project: The project will be required to complete all internal and frontage street improvements for the building prior to occupancy. Any additional off-site improvements identified through SEPA or land use approval will also be completed prior to final occupancy. Background Information on Traffic Concurrency Test for Renton The City of Renton Traffic Concurrency requirements for proposed development projects are covered under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-6-070. The specific concurrency test requirement is covered in RMC 4-6-070.D, which is listed for reference: D. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Test Required: A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department for each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according Transportation Concurrent . t -Elliott Farms Page 3 of 3 July 29, 2016 to rules and procedures established by the Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test. 2. Written Finding Required: Prior to approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity. A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit. 3. Failure of Test: If no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project fails the concurrency test, the project application shall be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application. The Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element on page Xl-6S of the Comprehensive Plan states the following: Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS-tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements. CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNl1Y & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT· PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 21st day of June, 2016, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ReNotice of Application and acceptance documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Ivana Halvorson, Barghausen Applicant Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot Owner Patrick Lennon Owner 300' Surrounding Property Owners See attached Parties of Record See attached . I . ' " I ., t (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) I ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante , ·. '· signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act '9qhe lises· aiid pbrpo)J?~ mentioned in the instrument. • . . --. Dated: i. 1 .1 t . , .... 1 .... --t------'--T---~ I J, I ':e;; , . ,. , • . , , . . ( ... , .. Jl!o~flry Public in and for the State o(il'{1js'filrigtori' Notary (Print): ____ ,"'".:"'"._,-_...._.._. ........... ____________ _ My appointment expires: l I Project Name: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Project Number: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD templale • affidavit of service by mailing Exhibit 37 ,_ RE-NOTICE OF APPLICATION ANO PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED jDNS·M) ::·~'~:,:::~:·;::.:;;: :::..:~1 •;: °'' '°'~' ••• ''-:.,,,.,..,.,_,,of,,.,. .. ,., I I,,,...,.~ ~,,,•<;,....,•, 1,,.,,, • ..,,., )t~•l h~••-"<~I~'""'' ,t. "'~"" t,,~ .. ., '-ct,-.., l"M!~'"'4n,.:OH !o~e, Seri I.or PIJnnt:1; fc1; 1-USI .110-7l89: EmJi!: ........... ~~• '' ,..,,. ,,,, .. ,.,.,.,•"•d•u ""'"'"""'-""""•'•"'•-"""" .:~[A ~·JIIEH CAUING-FOIi PAOPiA fl'lt tOEt!rlFICArum Otc..ouo<II.-.. ,,. , ,,,,,.,,o~••on. Totn·.ut,,,.,,..,, ..... .,,.,._ '""'' ,r.,.<1 ·--J( , .• ,JI I ;t t 'AL, 'Hf.L"' '.••• ~· ,,,.,..,, .. , ....... ,:•. •:,.:,-,,,' -,, '" " '• ·• ... ,, ,, t -u•: >..· :,i r , •. ;,. , t:c:, ,,,,.., .... ~ ... "°~" 1,,,n.W<'-1•1 ~··"",.,,, 1""""'"'"''''""''' ele,,,.,. .. ~C<•,,,O! .. H~ll f,, ... ,., .. \ .... , '"'·"···· .. ··-··, ....... , c, • .,._.,,.,, • ....,....,,,,1,. .. m,,~.,,...,..,.,1at1,,. ... - -. ....... :.,1kf ........ , •• , ......... 1,:,, .... -:. ............ , .... w. •.cir <::r:,m,,.00.1~..cw '·• .· ,, !:0•1•1°1•1:••<0""" .... , ...... , ........ ~ 1o., ........ ~ .. ,. ( -..,,-...-•. ,u,,1:,,,.,.,.-H 11 ~.,_.,ec,1J, .. 1<1,o j"·'''""''"'"Do'"'"'""'"" 1 •• ,..,., .............. ~ .. 1 ( ., .... ,.,..,,,1(•,,,,, ••'•"• ,.,.., .• o:,, r,.,,, .. ,.,.,,,..,,_ .. ,i .. ,u,,.. • ,u,., .. ,,_..Qt.O:O.J.Ll,•J,c·.,,c,. '"'"'·-··J••I-"<'< ................ h .. ,o: ... ···-·h·~-··, ....... 1•, l< • • , ,..,_.,.:,, ,.,.,_ . ., •'''""'to ... .,,1 •• t'O '""'"...i < .... 1 .. ,. . .,=~--··=-·" ,,,.,.., .............. , ..... , .. ,,f<.-1, ·o,.,...,.,.,.,., . .,.1,,...,.,_.,.,, . .,-c,,.,o•,1,,,,.. r«,~<t <e<t•<rw<""' , • .., ,, If~""'*" ~ ,~mi:!• w·I~ ,,,. •t~"'f•dcc~·• 1'>•"' Ito •~• tc"'«""•~.tl b~"".,,."' lt'1<1• Fl"''""' t,, r,,,. •,1<><l•rn h><. c'an-d 1,.,...,.. u. :cu"',,. ..pb,"6 ~,,.n ,~b'"·""' ., • /em N•r r~• a,:pl,«>tr , .... .,,,..,,, ,,.. ,.,,..,. '~"'"" r-,1o1i..,..J,1 .. u0<,o C"11 ,..,,.,,.,,.,,,,,6•<1',nu,• •~• ~~rewi .,_Jr''""'"•,,,,, ••-4 '~-"IH .,,1',.., •*• },ll/ao1 UP~>"' ,..,'.O'nd r...:t., o, ~o.•d o,,_.,.....,,~ ..... -~ "'"••'""""•"""''"°'"~·•-•~•,..,~"'"',f""'"'"l,...1"1 l.f•-rr}~,,,, ___ ..,..,,,,,.,,o«~L<"'"""-"'~••« r,, ............ '""" "'"""' c .. (l.'Ul ........ , • ...-.oonM ~ .. -.. ~"" IU c, ........ _ ...... , -···· 11<-.J. """'~'' .~ •• ,r; .. ar .,..,"'" ,~ ,~, (/tt{I/ "•-l'l<ur~"'""' ,,,,., ·~ r~a,:bl ~,P'(<vt1l ~· ..,, .,.,...., A"'"""" ll'art/11 ,...,,~"""4g'<ol/"•-''"-"'' '''~"'" onofffl•I "'' '""""-"" «L"""'""·""' a.-fMtr ,,,,~ l-lu ,.., ,,.. ro,•.,Jru,,r,,"° ....., ,__,,, o»rf'I ,~, ("7 6/ lr,o:"" :'>"'""II ~•t -•-d r,,1n· <~'i:,,vf<_,,..,...•<tUl -1~r1V.-1l ... ~ro,,J10ft O,pal'lm1•1 o/U<•°'*O'<lf""dlhC!O•i.-... ,.,.,...,,""' (a.,.,..,u ... ,,.. -• ....,.,,., ..... ,. ,, '""'"'"""'~""'-''I..., ti"" H 0<•, ,, ... , .,,....,. <c:1 • P:oso•-. c, . .,,-1'11 s,.,~c,,.., ,~ ...... , ................... ·°""" .. ,.,,, 1 111,. U ,, •• + ,.,., .• -,.: .... ,. ....... .. '-· •. , •• ,;: •••,-, ,~,,. u-.:..:, <>• ,:,,_,.·, C.. 'Q.1 ii 11;;1 •IHill '"' r, •~• :• J' , < 1 •• •·•I , .. , ,,_,,... J;•·• \(O~:,,c,,"·~a ·•. ,,,,,..,,.' '--"" O< .. _. .,.,., ,.., .... .,.., ,<.,. "--.-,, .,,,.,,.,.•:1 r a ....... ~., ''"' '"''& 1,..,....,. U ,c,,, ... l-~-: ,., •>•OA l' I ,•a,;·:"-"•,, ''l>O ""'. :Or'rj •' , ,., • ~,.-, ., ,;.,,:,-,_,.,.·;,,r..-.,,b,• P u,,.,;,•.,,.,_.,,.,..,,,..•'-'I" ...-.,,.,. ... ·a,,,....,_,..,"'""·""""' .,1 ,.•,~,, "'• '>; ,... I ~,:-,<l•r.,•:l 1">Lf,.,,Jt1 ..,-:,,~ ,r ~',<>a ·.~o ,, .. , C' ~,< .. , . ._-•'1'••t, -.,,....,,,,..-.,:,.,-4<? '''••'"""" ,r·rT,:~,,..,!' ,,·;·-C•::<.1. c,·='.-0''1 r '"'•'1 .,_....,,. L•,<i•• . .,_ "J •·..,v-.c .,o, ,11•., ,:,w~ ,,~,, "'' t::',' •:.T.,,,.,,1...-, UC.~'" .. ,•·, ".,., •~, / C.O) .•.C:JU [ :0 •• ~ 'l •-•-Co;> ·a,.,( I --~----·---"--- CERTIFICATION I, < LJrrt-{{... {I-· CLo~C hereby certify that J copies of the above document were posted in _3_ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: _ _;;.&_.(_-z_i ..._/..:...lr..,'------ STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING Signed: ___ <-c...~---/,-V.--=C~-c.,,--·~_..__ ___ =-- I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that I •• , signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. I (. Notary ublic in and for the State of Washington Date.d_: , . 11 •• \.:' •. ,., 1 ,1 1 ,. • ... ,,.':"''°'"""=,;.-. .. .-•. ;,.r, --~- Motary (Print): ·• I My appointment expires: . '< , 1 ---;.a.... ........... _ _.,.._..;-"-''-'------ " ~ ~ • • ~ "' "' ;(' .,, = • • • • = ., i 'ii ~1 ' d, ! i~ if HJl'--l '···i $!~iiJ 1.m l(lf!iz 1H::E ~fl i ~· ~ bl), u ! ! •• • • ! i 0 " ; . • 0 ~ i z < -{ t ,. " z .~ n " • -I h Ii i • L.!_L S1A 1D!l+S7.5 llD' LT, 00- I~~ I ' ~ ~I ' ' I ,~"-==-·L"":_h 1;-·~ ~- Fi -- ' ', MATCH LINE STA 103+50 SEE BELOW RIGHT I ' ' ' ' I i ~ : ' ' i .,} : ! ' •' I ' I ' .. ~ ' ' I !II -· 11."1 0.1>' IIT, etll!£I. ~- ' IH IU Sl.l ••+ I --1.0· IIT, 11:CI~ WIDt: I d ~, " iie ~! ' I ~, ' •" FILE NAME T•t.AE DFSIGNED BY: ENYEREb BY: CHECKED 8Y: PROJ. [NCR. REG:QNAL ADM. I ROLmo ~ L.!.e..!C..J \ 0 .. e-----< sc.+..t .. rttT EB ISL.ANO OETAIL A ~ •.•• flt ~.,..,. S[ 1,~1~.o / ·~.7 iii' PLAN VIEW 1[ 1,...0.., ----...,-;ii T.23N.R.5E.W.M. SECTION 22 = l.2!!..!C..J \ 0 .. ~ l,,, ' .~ I ~ ,.,·~·· -WOUNTUU: CUH l"JK~[O L . -,o.H~02, ~-~ ,=-I_ ~~--.... , .. '·' ,:[~ ··~ ,. 0['1'11 COHCllttt [w/U"uJ•,,_ .... m: ..... lYP. -'--"'-' S[j;IIQN 11-11 N.,.S. P,t.VEMENI MARKING NOIES ONl.1 IIOlU USill C1111 TN!$ SIG"T -SE£ SHa1 ~I f~ COIIPLnC UST Of ,,._ ..,,_ MOTlS @ -.E '!UJ.DW ctlff£II (DYC) LIM[ PU WSDQT $lP. l'UN .,..zo.,l)-02. (LI f~~:!.CAST IUll't -"'81.1 ~ ,n 'll500T m,. l'UN @ TtlUH ,-<141.1< UNt. 1D' O.~. O Wl4Tt -= UN[ t..: l'(R WSDOI m. l'I.H M~zo.it-PZ. "':""I""" ~TENW 101-~-Trcm1portction En~eering NorthWest DUBREUIL/ ROLEno Tn:,rispOffOllon Planrwig I !J<>1iO,> I lrofflc lmpocl & O;,e,o!lor,s ll«JDst:811'15mHll,Sulf1t2CXl.~.WAll!IO(),I BICK°-T -~ 0~ ('25188H7U BICKET f'fOjflCTC0<11<XlcGlenDIJllrevll REV!SION DATE BY Phc>n!l:,~250-0582 Drawer 236 Sequence 08 EB ISL.ANO DETAIL B l[ U' PL.Ai'! VIEW GENERM-NOTES ,. au.-u-s-i.wmetMBMT.111.1.~TO no, IWIIIIIM bTtMT ~- 2. --oo. ro IE 1NS1M1.ED l'n crrr or l!Dffllll P- NE SP[~-l;\j!IIIElfl UIJf!OM, \ WSOOT NORTHWCST RFGION APPROVE:O CHANNCUZA TION PIAN ~:::C ~ OPERATIONS Dol<I ~ "" a.., ~=[~ 0-.~ ~ ~ 0 • • Print µ,.. rff SCA!.[ 111 ,ur ,-! SR 169 M.P. 22.56 TO 22.72 ~ •~ I ELLIOTI F'ARMS PLAT CH2 ~ ! SR 169 -" I. ' I CHANNELIZATION PLAN ~ ' RE:NTON/k:ING COUNTY JULY 2016 - -------1 --------\ ~\ ' -----1 ' ' ' ' . ' f . ,/ '-~~~ / ,/ / , / C ' ' : , J ' , / ,, I >0••00-. ! ! P""P ~ ! .. ~s~s .. . 11! I I ' ~ I > ' ! ~ · 1,,m,i ~ p ' I i ~ .. ~~-~·--·~=~,-~·--·~·~~-§ 1,1,,·,·1·11iiii"''l''I ! § ~---LI I 'S~---g ~ tttt!t1r1r~11:~\:'~il~!na~:ic~:: !i > ! m,mmmmmml CEDAA FIVER LIOHTFOOT, LLC ..., L.0KJN INVESTMENTS, INC. ... -.. --· ... PIB.MNAR'(PlAT OF BLUOTT FARMS --- I ) / / ,.,,"',.// / ' ' ' ' ' ' j !821~ 7~0 AVENUE SOIJTH -..a. l([NJ, WA 9l!O~ (4.2>)2S1-5222 (U5)251-Hl!l2 f,IJ( ,,_ ....IL.. CM.-· l.*H) ,,,_r,c_ ..........,, ,,,,_,"""-"""""' -~ -•. ---~ / / ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , r I BFIXTON HOt.ES, L.l..C 14410 BEL.l.--RED ROAD, SllTE 200 ~WA98007 CONTACT= KRISTEN LlJOOUST - I PAEUfi<RYPLANTNGfUN OF EU.IOTT FARJIS • @ I C _,:' --~ / 11 ' T ' ' ' ''tc.. ',"< ,. ,· ~ • ...-,~ ,I '! ' • ' ' ' T I " 111111 r !rlf!f':·· Building Plans (Unit Type le) ·-·-·R;;;;;,; ;;:,-,;,~;,,;;;;· !l!i ,·. Jft~i. . BUILDINO 'A' Elevations & ELLIOTT FARMS D 11 j 1Jfill CUCN T: [)R!XTON I /OMCS Li_-C -, ' ......,,...,,_.~--""n"I'"'"' • 'L..~--...!I lb----------' lb::.:a.::::1-~'-:f!:=' "';:'~T=~=-=c~::;;:;;j "' '" j I d! ~ ' ~ ' ~ I ~ ' ' C ~I ~§l ~~~ m ' I ' ' ' I ~ ' N ' I I N ( ~ I ~ ~ l ~ §~ ~ .. ~ ' ~I Ii ii::: ; !_1:! !: :1[ ~ 1BLiii ~' -, •-=-..:ti! tW8 gg G~ BUILDING 'B' Elevations & Building Plans !Unit Type lbl rn ? ' 11111 ~ ir= ~ •, C ' I!! :, ! i¥; ~ i · '•I J I• - I ' I C I l e 8 ''), ~ -- ----~,' '', . ~ ~ ~ , ~ I ~1! _ __. ___ ,. 'i ~! ~r S , I ~ : --J -----~' ,' 1, "----- / / ' ' G ~~ r,,-------,., ;~ -·t:rt j I L___ ..,._.,.... ~~ 'i ;, ~ ~ ~ ;ii ~ ;; Cl ,. " G ~ii: ' 'ti ;, ~ ' 1$ j . ' ~ : ____ _ I ·~ I I l ' ' ; ' ELLIOTT FARMS RENTON. WJ\S//INGTON C/lfNr: BRIXTON HOMFS /IC \.Mlil> l:IEL-IIE> ""'"° ~me.- l .,:;. .,__ ___ _, /f' .• 0 1111!!!11 ·, ;! ii \ ·;,_· ! !; __ 1",j;;~~-;',E-;:· ==-=-~~~~ lb.--..~~~~..-~~ • I > ,,J i --"'----!i- ' ' / i ·, ' j, / --,;---!j- 'l -. ' ' " ' ' ' --t-c+-------_J__j___ _____ ____j,i Q I •n i ~!j --i ~ ·: I ' ~ ,r f r I ~ I : ~ , i I , ' I ' ' I ~,~3.... II i . ' ' ,~ l!!i ! ~ ~ ~ ~ T" ,o i "! ;l!Fl•! ~ nt t ! I !il, !!!i • j lie \l · Ii Ill!:;! ~ f "~ J9'~ ii~~ ' l !' i11it•11 ' • I m·, ' ' I _j ' I • i.q • RETURN ADDRESS: Jami Balint Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007 DRAFT ----Renton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet (RCW 65.04) DOCUMENT TITLE(S) (or transactions contained therein): Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements and Reservations for Elliott Farms Home Owners Association REFERENCE NUMBER(S) OF DOCUMENTS ASSIGNED OR RELEASED: NIA D Additional reference #s on page of document( s) GRANTOR(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials) CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC. D Additional names on page of document GRANTEE(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials) ELLIOTT FARMS HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION D Additional names on page of document LEGAL DESCRIPTION (abbreviated: i.e., lot, block, plat or section, township, range) PARCEL A OF KC BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO L95L0113 RECORDING NO 9510179023 BEING A PORTION OF GOV LOT 3 IN NE 1/ 4 OF SECTION 22-23-05 LY SLY OF SLY LINE OF RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY, SR 169, AND PORTION OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 (BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR CEDAR WOOD PU D D Additional le=I is on na2e of document ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL/ACCOUNT NUMBER 2223059004 D Assessor Tax #s not vet assiimed Exhibit 41 ----Itenton o Entire Document Available Upon Request DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PUBLIC HEARING April 21, 2008 Development Agreement Cedar River Lightfoot Inc The subject property, PID# 222305-9005, is a six-acre parcel with a two-story, five-bedroom home built in 1911. This 6-acre parcel is part of the proposed 397-acre New Life -Aqua Barn annexation. In 2007 Rick Lennon. property owner, requested Residential Medium Density (R.1\IDJ designation with Residential 14 (R-14) zoning. subject to a development agreement restricting development to no more than 45 dwelling units during the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment review cycle. The City Council approved this request in December 2007. The development agreement is now before the City for approval. The subject 6-acre site was already reviewed by King County as Phase 2 of the Molasses Creek Condominium development project, although it is not yet vested. According to the applicant, a number of improvements have already been completed to allow this 6-acre parcel to be added to the existing condominium project to its west. These include the storm water control system of Phase I that was designed and constructed to serve both Phase 1 and Phase 2. All utilities (water, sewer, etc.) have been designed and constructed to serve Phase 2 and utility lines have already been extended to the western edge of PID# 222305-9004 to facilitate future connections. Phase 2 is planned and has been designed for approximately 45 units with a density comparable to that of Phase I. The project was designed under King County zoning that allows a cluster form of multi-family and condominium development consistent with Renton' s R-14 zone development standards. RECOMJ\IENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to execute the proposed development agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot Inc. This agreement restrkts the total number of units on the 6-acre site to 45 condominium units that arc architecturally compatible with lhe character of Phase l of the Molasses Creek Condominium development. Exhibit 42 -- ' ' ( ' ' ( ' ' ( I' ( ';! )I f/ "' / ~ 10' BSBL (m>) J ~ / I / ( ( I I I I ' I I I I ' I ( ' I I :,J Ji,'. I 0 ',/ (; I I ,<--' / / !~rr-···· I\ -1 ,· ;.j_ I '( ·1 \ ! ' ' I ' I ~~ ... ,.1 'I ' I I I I I. I I I I DEPARTMENT OF COl\mv'IUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT A. REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER HEARING DATE: Project Name: Owners: Applicants: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Project location: Site Area: August 9, 2016 Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Lennon Investments, Inc., 35815 SE David Powell Roa Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite ·, Patrick 0. Lennon, 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 Todd Levitt, 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Clark H. Close, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, SEPA Environmental Review, and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The subdivision of 45 residential lots and 8 tracts would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 sf of critical areas, 60,731 sf of open space and 4,915 sf for alleys. The fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 sf to 3,939 sf with an average lot size of 2,586 sf. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from SR 169 that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private lane to 140th Way SE and SR 169. The undeveloped site contains high erosion hazards, landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater would be conveyed to the existing water quality pond located west of 140th Way SE. Soils primarily consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut and 20,000 cubic yards of fill are anticipated for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project would remove 31 trees within the development area and replant 120 trees. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer are proposed to be retained. SR 169 East of 140th Way SE (APN 222305-9004) 6.07 acres Project location Map HEX Report -~~~·----Denis Law -~oj City of .. · -M=-ayor ___ __,L~it@J]l July 13, 2016 Ivana Halvorson Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA} THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorson: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject pr,1ject and have issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report, for a list of the Miti~3tion Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 29, 2016, 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 RMC4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. Also, a public hearing has been scheduled by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall on August 9, 2016 at 11:00 am to consider the Preliminary Plat. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff recommendation will be mailed to you prior to the hearing. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-7289. Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Ivana Halvorson Page 2 of 2 July 13, 2016 For the Environmental Review Committee, Clark H. Close Senior Planner Enclosure cc: Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. / OWner(s) Patrick Lennon, Todd Leavitt/ Applicant • Karen Bonaudl, Leland Gregory, Joanne Gregory, Stan Harrison, Doris Knight, Emily D'Meara, Dee Thierry, J. Wruble / Party(ies) of Record Detennlnation.Letter.DNS-M_Elliott Fanns PP_ 15-000272 - ----D~en:is:L:a_w _______ .... r City of l Mayor . r µ· r r r r \ r l -~ .....,,,!-/ June 13, 2016 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAi THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on July 11, 2016: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 29, 2016, 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 information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7289. For the Environmental Review Committee, Clark H. Close Senior Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamlsh Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Engineers Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------Renton® ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district {APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet {SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC). Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: SR 169 East of 140th Way SE (APN 222305-9004) City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -------Kenton® 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 July 29, 2016. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Public Works Department Community Services Department JULY 15, 2016 JULY 11, 2016 Date Date Mark Prson, ~inist ~ Fire & Emergency Services C.£ \), C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development 7)1$ )l(p Date :z/11/fl, Date ~ANT ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000242 --------Kenton 0 Application Date: April 13, 2015 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058-8120 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 .. ' '·'"'"·' ' .. , ' Police Plan Review Comments ; · ............ . Contact: CyndililParksll 425-430-752t I cparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal imoact on Police Services ' ,' ', ''·''"· '" < Fi~ Re11iew • Building Comments .. .... ... . ,r:: . Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430,7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov' Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. Technical Secyices Commentil /0 ·•••... ·· fr .. Contact:ll!:!ob M~c:Oniel425-4:fo[73s9fbmacon1e@rentonwa.go11• Recommendations: CC&Rs: Bob Mac Onie 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Recommendations: Preliminary Plat: Bob Mac Onie 5/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA 15 000242 and LND 1 O 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 1 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLvANT LUA15-000242 --------Kenton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Note: Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation tor the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 2 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO AP LUA 15-000242 '.:;ANT PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Technical Services Comments • --------Renton ® Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Contact: Bob MacOnie I 425-430-7369 I bmaconie@rentonwa.gov The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut. pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report noting the vested orooertv owner . . Cqmmuhity Services Review Comments. :Ii> .. i Contact: Leslie Betlach l4:25-430-66l9 fl.BetlJth@r~ntonwa.gov Recommendations: A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMENTS (from Community Services) 1. Parks Impact Fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street Trees: Space street trees 40 feet on center, not 30 feet on center. 30 Feet to street lights or further. Playground exists at new entrance. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 3 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL,vANT LUA15-000242 ----------irenton ® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 Recommendations: 1. Parks Impact fee per .Ordinace 5670 applies. Recommendations: 2. Trees shall be spaced 40 feet on center, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, waterlines, and sewerlines, 10 feet from driveway approaches, 40 feet from traffic signs (stop, yield, etc.) and intersections without signs. Use only small maturing street trees if overhead electric wires exist. Other landscape trees shall also be small maturing species where overhead utilities exist. • •• . ... ...... .. . . . . .. .. . ....... .... .. . . .. . .....• '"· '.1.11.1.il.!1. ff.f.L.·.·.1.~.·\tn·.~:...l.i •. l'K"a"m•.:.ra···•:;;..;.,.,a'' .... di·c1'..l.~ ··s·t··•·.'1'1,·.:.,•. •,.:•:;,. .• • .. :.J.:;,,.• .. : ....... '.'.a··.··a••;;.. •• ·.n·.·.ij~.·.:U.•.•·.·.:.:.~.•."1:.:....•·.•.:.;·;""i.•.i.'"" ...... 1..!i."".".'.'.i.: ........ ".l.'"t··.ai.'.'.;...····.".·';:,_ "!_.·g,;;:.. '.· ..... • . . E~gl~ring!R~view.e.:imtmtnts:·~·-:J:i'i .... ... ... IG\it " ,, ~ ~ ""'"'"'""'"' "' " """"'"''·vu ........ VY Recommendations: 8 13 2015 EXISTING CONDITIONS: WATER: Water service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. SEWER: Sewer service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. STORM: There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property .. STREETS: There are no frontage improvements. CODE REQUIREMENTS Water Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Water availability certificate will be required. Sewer 1. Sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Sewer availability certificate will be required. Surface Water 1. There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report dated April 10, 2015 was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers. The proposed 45 lot subdivision, zoned R 14, 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. The 6.07 acre 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 Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development will be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways in two drainage basins. One basin will be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the other one will drain to a proposed 24 inch conveyance system along the project fronting WA 169. Flow control is not required for this project as the project is within half mile with Cedar River and can direct discharge to Cedar River per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. The drainage report must include the level 3 conveyance capacity analysis of the downstream system to the outlet for the total tributary area to the outfall as required by the 2009 KCSWDM amended by City Of Renton to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge will not cause flooding. Water quality is required for this Development and developer is intending to use existing off site wet pond for water quality. The off site wet pond was built by previous development. Water quality treatment for the Elliot Farm's development must be provided per the 2009 King County Storm Water Design Manual. Applicant must provide a copy of the drainage report that was initially developed for the cottonwood, molasses creek and the proposed Elliot farm's developments that sized and approved the water quality pond by King County. 3. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015 was submitted by Terra Associates, Inc. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 607 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native's soil. Ground water/seepage was observed in 5 of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. Soil types encountered are glacially derived and alluvial. The glacial and alluvial soils have low permeability and would not be a suitable receptor soil for discharge of development stormwater using infiltration/retention facilities. 4. Surface water system development fee is $0.540 per square foot of new impervious surface, but not less than $1012. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) is required for this site. Transportation/Street Ran: Julv 13. 2016 Page 4 of 13 I I I I i CANT ADVISORY NOTES TO AP LUA 15-000242 --------Renton PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 Engineering Review Comments,. .· "" Contact: Kamran YazdidoostJ 425-430-7382 J kyazdidoost@rentonwa.gov 1. Frontage improvements along SR 169 will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate 6, 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder may be reduced to 4 feet. 2. 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 right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 foot planter strip, a 5 foot sidewalk and LED street lighting installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road must be marked NO PARKING. 3. Sidewalk should be continued south side of the roadway front of lot 24 to lot 27, lot 34 to lot 45, and common area to match existing sidewalk to Molasses creek sidewalk. 4. A traffic analysis dated December April 1, 2015 was provided by TENW. The traffic study is required to include all impacted intersections: SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE, SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE. The proposed 45 lot subdivision would generate approximately 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting) , and 31 new trips occurring during weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). 5. Primary streets/intersection impacted by this development are: a) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE b) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access c) Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE 6. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees of approximately $53,137.80. 7. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the Post Office. 8. LED street lighting meeting the residential lighting standards will be required per City of Renton Standards. 9. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 10. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveway shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveway shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). 11. The subject property is within the well field Capture Zone/Aquifer area Zone II. The project must comply with special requirement# 6 (Aquifer Protection Area) per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual. General Comments 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. 4. A separate street lighting plan shall be included with the civil drawings. 5. All utilities servinq the site are required to be underqrounded. . .. Fire Review· Building Comments• Contact~ CoreyThomas J 425i430'7024 J clhomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 5 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLk,ANT LUA15-000242 ---------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 I ' Fit~ ~~J~~IsiJiiij1~t~l)m~ms !• ' " ' '' i Co~c:t: cc\fey•'JTllbm~J425,~30.7024i I ctliiilri~~@ 1r~rrt;m~~:g~Vi • 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. • If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). l·.···.11 a·p·p····l·i··c···a· ble., upda. te .th. e Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (T·E· NW .. ) .... t .. o .. reevaluate the change in · access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OFI provide a public access roacfway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Ma le Valle Hi hwa . Recommendations: Minimal im -rJJifr1~~Ser\/Jiesi•it:~met1Js,,, .• 1••·•·i 1l· '"'"' Cof\ticti''~ftrand.ii"'6kre9•11.•42$,~0·73€!9l. aiI<rlirli@iii~~g® Recommendations: CC&Rs: Comments previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Comments are the same previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Swvey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC332 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 6 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000242 4 C!TYOF ~ --------Renton~ PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 Technical Services Comments __ -: , __ ::;::;:::::;}\' > ' , ", ' ,, ':>> Contact: ArnandaAsk!ren.1425-430,7369 I aaskren@rentonwa,gov symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surtace water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 7 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL.vANT LUA 15-000242 -----------Ren ton ® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 Tec~nical!$li~~i.'~ijjij\~ri, / • ·•· . . .. .·· .·· . • cij~tiii:t~·~~ii~a~~~~~~rf 42SC430-7369 I ~askrEiri@r~li);V'(s/.~ Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of ; preseiving native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title reoort notina the vested orooertv owner. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 8 of 13 :ANT ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 3 I April 22, 2016 ,' '-' ',:::, ,:;::-.·"'·'' >: .; Planning Review Coniments Conta.cttClarttClose f 425-430-7289. I cclose@rentonwa.gov A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the parcels direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right in/right out only) from Road B to SR 169. I As. u. bdivision with fee simple lots requires that the·i·n···t-erna·l-·r·o· ·a···d···w···a-·y to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must. co. _mply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). ! Submit an approved right in/right out (RIRO) channelization plan from WSDOT. · '· Engineering Review Comments Contact~ Ann Fowler I 425'430,738fft'~towiJ!@rentonwa.gov 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be located behind ROW (typ) I 2. Taper landscaping across frontage of lot 18. Align lot 17 with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. I 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot_ 18 and join to pedestrian path through development ! 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. · .··· . Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13. Not 16 feet as proposed. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 9 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL,...,ANT LUA 15-000242 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use --------Renton® Version 41 :<: '.;::cs: ,-:i'rh<iLfod<!di!!!i!1nrn111,?s-AiCL;:-: ,_:r:;;·;;;-: · · · .,,, --2,:.,i.=--· >0--::.:0 !'lanning: flev~wi ~gmments•. · eoi:itaqt:ICfat1<•c1osaJ425'430'7289 I cclose@renloo~igiilv I Recommendations: 1. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Multi family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 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. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4 3 050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Ea le Mana ement Guidelines 2007 and /or our U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ermit. 11 ft maintenance strip is to bel_ocatedbehindH0\1,/ (typ) , .... , ,. ,, '' •, .•. :,_.·.'4···2·'·.·s··.J_ic_ ... ·o .. ·'7"""· •a· 'f'1.·· •;;·.·····e·_·r··.·@, ·re····· ;£;JJ=_·''i.,_'1t~::...::: .•. '. Contact:AnrfFow!l:it .,.,, . <>O« OV'll 'uv ... ,-.,v• Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for the Elliott Farms at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (APN('s) 2223059004) and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS Water Water service is provided by the City of Renton. Sewer Wastewater service is provided by the City of Renton. Storm The existing properties do not contain stormwater facilities. There are stormwater mains located in Maple Valley Hwy. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. The applicant has provided a water availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SEWER 1. The applicant has provided a sewer availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A surface water development fee of $1,485.00 per new single family dwelling unit will apply. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $66,825.00. This is subject to final design and payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. 2. A drainage report, dated April 10, 2015, was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. with the site plan application. Based on the City of Renton's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard for Forested Conditions. The development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. All core requirements and special requirements have been discussed in the provided drainage report. 3. The existing site is currently undeveloped with remnants from an existing farm, including partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. The site topography is generally flat with a steep slope in the southwest corner of the site, which also contains a wetland with a 50 foot that will remain undisturbed. A portion of the runoff from the existing site drains to the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into a roadside ditch along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), where flows are conveyed west. 4. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015, completed by Terra Associates, Inc., for the site has been provided. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native soils. Groundwater/seepage Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 10 of 13 :ANT ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 . Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ann Fowler Pl25-430-73821 afowler@reotonwa.gov was observed in five of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. The report discusses the soil and groundwater characteristics of the site and provides recommendations for project design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations presented in this report discount the use of full infiltration due to the underlying dense glacial till soil. 5. The project site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and the flowpath from the project site discharge point is less than a half mile to the 100 year floodplain of the Cedar River and qualifies for the direct discharge exemption in accordance with Section 1.2.3.1 of the City Amendments to the KCSWDM and must adhere to all requirements thereof. Staff Comments: i. The conveyance system analysis provided in the preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) does not provide a complete analysis of the system to the outfall in the Cedar River in accordance with the requirements for the direct discharge exemption as outlined in Section 1.2.3 of the 2009 KCSWDM. Applicant shall provide a complete conveyance system analysis, including new conveyance pipes within the proposed development and existing conveyance pipes from the development boundary to the outfall in the Cedar River. Applicant shall demonstrate the outfall and existing conveyance system is adequately sized to support the added run off from the development. 6. The development is required to provide basic water quality treatment prior to discharge. The development is proposing to convey surface water to an existing water quality facility (wetpond), located at the southwest corner of the WA 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. As stated in the drainage report, the existing off site wetpond was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominiums, areas of the WSDOT right of way, as well as the proposed Elliot Farms project. Staff Comments: i. The applicant shall complete a level 3 downstream analysis verifying capacity of the existing wetpond and conveyance system. ii. The applicant shall provide a copy of the as built plans and final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood Water Quality Pond. 7. No downstream flooding or erosion issues were identified in the drainage report. Additional Staff Comments: i. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required. ii. A Storrnwater Pollution Prevention Plan is required to be submitted with the construction permit application. TRANSPORTATION 1. The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) along the north property lines. Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is classified as a Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Frontage improvements along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to accommodate six (6) 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder width rnay be reduced to 4 feet. Existing right of way (ROW) width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4 6 060, half street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet (44 feet from centerline), a 0.5 foot curb, an 8 foot planting strip, an 8 foot sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group has determined and will support an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), which shall be installed by the developer as part of the proposed development, will allow retention of the existing curb line. Developer will be required to install 6 foot planting strips and 5 foot sidewalks behind the existing curb along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Staff Comments: i. Applicant will need to submit an application to the City requesting a modification of the street frontage improvements as outlined in City code 4 9 250C5d. ii. The posted speed limit of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is 50 mph along this section of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. The required clear zone would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee in lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighting along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. 2. The proposal includes a new internal roadway providing direct access via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to the north and access through the existing access easement through the existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC) to the west. The applicant has proposed a street modification to provide a paved roadway width of 20 feet with 5 foot sidewalks and 8 foot planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips alternate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. Staff Comments: i. Emergency services access within 150 feet of all homes via a 20 foot paved roadway is required. As such, parking is not allowed along the internal access road proposed for the project. 3. The proposal includes three (3) 16 foot wide alleys. Alley 1 provides access to lots 24 26, Alley 2 provides access to lots 5 13, and Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 11 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLvANT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 En~fr1eerir11f .. Revi~-Cornment~'•i•···· .• ,.,-,--Contact;;Ann::lf'9wle~·1i•425~.7~~1-;f~;r@f~iiion~,gov• Alley 3 provides access to lots 1 4. i. Applicant shall submit a modification request for approval by City of Renton Fire Prevention for 16 foot alley access roads to lots 1 13 and 24 26. ii. If the modification request is approved, sprinkler systems would be required for each of the lots accessed from the 16 foot alleys. 4. ADA access ramps shall be installed at all street crossings. Ramps are not shown at the crossing between lots 33 and 34 and at the crossing located at the west end of the development. 5. Street lighting and street trees are required to meet current city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and will be reviewed during the construction utility permit review. 6. A traffic analysis dated April 1, 2015, was provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). The site generated traffic volumes were calculated using data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, (2009). The traffic analysis is required to include all impacted intersections: Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/140th Way SE, Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/140th Way SE. Based on the calculations provided, the proposed development would average 321 new daily vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 27 new vehicle trips, with 22 vehicles exiting and 5 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 new vehicle trips, with 21 vehicles entering and 1 O vehicles exiting the site. 7. A supplementary traffic analysis, dated December 11, 2015, was provided by TENW in order to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Traffic volumes remained unchanged from the preliminary analysis previously noted. The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: • 50 percent to/from the west on Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) • 30 percent to/from the east on SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) • 20 percent to/from the south on 140th Way SE As detailed in the report the proposed project is not expected to lower the levels of service of the surrounding intersections included in the traffic study. Direct public access to and from the site via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) shall be channelized to provide right in/right out access only. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. 8. Refer to City code 4 4 080 regarding driveway regulations. Driveways shall be designed in accordance with City standard plans 104.1 and 104.2. 9. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction of the development at the lime of application for the building permit. The current rate of transportation impact fee is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit for condominiums. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $69,583.95. Traffic impact fees will be owed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. 10. Paving and trench restoration shall comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Adequate separation between utilities shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a. 7 ft minimum horizontal and 1 ft vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10 ft horizontal and 1.5 ft vertical. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall confirm to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. A landscaping plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Each plan shall be on separate sheets. 4. All electrical, phone, and cable services and lines serving the proposed development must be underground. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton inspector. 1 2. Taper lands ____ c_ a_ p ___ in ___ g _____ a __ cros __ s __ f_ r_ontage_ of -l-ot_1 ___ 8. Align lot 17--w_ ith roa_d way. Shift ba_ c_ kyard bo_ un_ daries as applicable for these lots. 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot 18 and join to pedestrian path through development. I 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. r:ire Review''• BuHdihg Ccirnrnehts . I" . . . .. .. <{ _-<;onta~ti co:irl"ho~as I 4~5-43&7024 I cthom~~@rehl&nwiiillso~ ! Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 12 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO AP LUA 15-000242 ~ANT PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use . Fire Review -Building Comments '' ---------Ren ton ® Version 41 < ', ,: ,-, ",, ', , ' " > > >Contact: Corey Thomas I 425°430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13 and 24 throuah 26. Not 16 feet as orooosed. Turnina radius to Allev 2 does not meet code either. Ran: July 13, 2016 Page 13 of 13 ~---·......_ __ ---------Ren toll OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE • MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD LOCATION: SR 169 EAST OF 140'" WAY SE (APN 222305-9004} Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two- and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004}. On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF} of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size o/2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169} that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC}. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a 50- foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF}. Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION HAS PROBABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED THROUGH MITIGATION MEASURES. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 29, 2016, 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 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. A PUBLIC HEARING Will BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON AUGUST 9, 2016 AT 11:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, SITE PLAN & MODIFICATION. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS 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 DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. DEPARTMENT OF COMML. .. rv AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -------t...Renton 0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATES: August 31, 2015, September 14, 2015 and July 11, 2016 Project Name: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Project Number: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Project Manager: Clark H. Close, Senior Planner Owner: Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 Owner: Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Applicants: Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt 35815 SE David Powell Road, Fall City, WA 98024 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Contact: Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 Project Location: SR 169 East of 140'h Way SE (APN 222305-9004) Project Summary: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07- acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would divide the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC). Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through MCC. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. ERC Report LUA15-000242 The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and MCC, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots City of Renton Deportment of Community anomic Development Environmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Page 2 of 13 and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. Site Area: 264,409 SF (6.07 acres) STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). Project Locotion Map: PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of a 6.07-acre parcel located on the south side of SR 169, between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE, within the SE 14 of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 05 East, W.M. (Exhibits 2 & 3). The specific address assigned to this parcel is 14207 Maple Valley Hwy LOT, Renton, WA 98058 (Parcel No. 2223059004). The site contains no existing structures, but there are remnants from past uses. Upon completion of the project, all existing vegetation within the developable portion of the property would either be removed or altered. The site is proposed to be subdivided into 45 single family residential lots, associated improvements, a modified limited residential access street (with utilities), and a critical area tract located at the southwest corner of the site (Exhibits 2, 7 & 9). An off-site water quality facility was previously constructed to accommodate the project (Exhibit 13). The subject site fronts Maple Valley Highway (SR 169). Maplewood Golf Course and Ron Regis Park are located across SR 169 or to the north of the project site. The MCC site is located immediately to the west ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUA15-00024l, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOO Page 3 of 13 of the project. A single family residential development, known as Pioneer Place, is located to the east and a single family home, Gregory residence, is located to the south. Table 1. Land Use and Zoning (Project vesting date May 5, 2015) Location Comprehensive Land Use Zoning Site Residential High Density (RHO) Residential-14 Dwelling Units per Net Acre (R-14) Table 2. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning (Effective date July 1, 2015) Location Comprehensive Land Use Zoning North Residential Low Density (RLD) Resource Conservation (RC) South Residential Medium Density (RMD); Residential-8 Dwelling Units per Net Acre (R-8); Residential Low Density (RLD) Resource Conservation (RC) East Residential Medium Density (RMD) Residential-8 Dwelling Units per Net Acre (R-8); West Residential High Density (RHD); Residential-14 Dwelling Units per Net Acre (R-14); Residential Low Density (RLD) Resource Conservation The project site is located within the Residential -14 (R-14) dwelling units per net acre zoning classification. The net density of the project is 8.3 dwelling units per net acre (45 / 4.63 net acres = 9. 7 du/acre) and the 45 lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF (Exhibit 2). The site contains 47,911 SF of critical area and 34,665 SF of public street area. The net lot area is 4.63 acres. The project includes approximately 1,035 lineal feet of public roadway (with utilities) constructed to serve the proposed lots and 692 lineal feet of frontage improvements on SR 169. A channelized intersection near the northeast property line would provide direct public access from the development to SR 169 as a right-in/right-out access. The public road would connect to an existing private access easement in MCC to the west. The project would develop the site with 45 fee simple lots with 45 townhomes that are attached in two- and three-unit buildings. The scope of the project is designed to mimic the adjacent condominium development to the west and would include alley-loaded and front-loaded product. The density of the project has been capped at 45 units, based on the 2008 Pre-Annexation Development Agreement, which is consistent with the R-14 zoning regulations (Exhibit 18). Each lot would contain a three bedroom townhome and have a two car garage and 250 SF of common open space. In addition, approximately seven (7) on-street parallel parking stalls, 4,915 SF of alley use, and approximately 60,731 SF (1.4 acres) of open space. Trails, picnic tables, benches and landscaping would also be provided throughout the plat. The site was formerly occupied by a working dairy farm with a residence and garage on the west side of the property and several barns and structures located on the south side of the site. All buildings and structures have been demolished. The only evidence of the former structures is the remaining concrete foundations and floor slabs from both the residence and barns. The ground cover consists primarily of weeds, grass, and brush. Ground cover on the western and southern portions of the site includes a forested area of small to medium growth trees. Residential LED street lighting would be provided throughout the plat. Road improvements would be completed on SR 169, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and planter strip. With regards to the design clear zone, given the posted speed of 50 mph along this section of SR-169, the City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same or similar clear zone requirements as the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). WSDOT Design Manual Section 1600.03(2)(a) Roadside and Median would preclude the ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report lUA15·000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Page 4 of 13 developer from installing street trees and street lighting along the frontage of SR-169 as part of the development (Exhibit 25). The on-site topography is generally flat. The southwest corner of the project gently slopes toward the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into the roadside ditch along WA-169, where it is conveyed westerly to the existing water quality drainage facility, then to the Cedar River (Exhibits 4 & 6). There is an existing drainage ditch along the east side of the project that conveys off-site upstream flows from the southeast. The elevations on the site range from 107 to 87. Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The proposed drainage system for this project is subject to the requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM)1, and the 2010 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. The project would discharge flows to the Cedar River, which is listed as a Major Receiving Water in the 2009 KCSWDM. As part of the improvements, the applicant is seeking to retain 74 trees within the wetland and wetland buffer tract. The project is proposing to remove 31 viable trees within the development area (Exhibit 8), and the property's vegetation consists of dense brambles and 114 significant trees (Exhibit 14). The project would replant 97 trees onsite (Exhibit 9). The Natural Resources Conservation Service has classified the majority of the site soils as Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) having a slight potential for erosion. The southwestern corner of the site was classified as Alderwood and Kitsap soils with a severe potential for erosion. No development is proposed within the wetland and wetland buffer located at the southwest corner of the site. A geotechnical study found the presence of organic soils up to 12 inches, followed by glacially-derived or alluvial soils (Exhibit 10). The site is served by Cedar River Water and Sewer District (Exhibits 15 & 16). I PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. dated February 25, 2015 or an updated report submitted at a later date. 2. The applicant shall remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. A tree planting plan shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapter 1 and 2. ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Environmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Page 5 of 13 C. 3. The applicant shall submit the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond, including the original design, to the City of Renton Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. 4. A professional archaeological survey of the project area shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the professional archaeological survey shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. 5. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. 6. The applicant shall record a covenant on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through Molasses Creek Condominium (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 ERC Report Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Plan (with Cover Sheet) Neighborhood Detail Map Boundary & Topography Survey (Sheets 1 & 2) Preliminary On-Site Road Plans and Profiles Preliminary Onsite Grading and Drainage Plan Preliminary Utility Plan Preliminary Tree Inventory and Clearing Plan Preliminary Planting Plan and Planting Schedule Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. (dated February 25, 2015) Critical Area Report prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated December 15, 2014) Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) (dated April 1, 2015; revised date December 11, 2015) Technical Information Report prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (dated April 10, 2015) Arborist Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated April 1, 2015) Certificate of Water Availability (dated February 24, 2015) Certificate of Sewer Availability (dated February 24, 2015) Construction Mitigation Description Pre-Annexation Agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot Inc. (public hearing date April 21, 2008) Private Easement Agreement through Molasses Creek Condominiums (Recording No. 20000201000940) Technical Memorandum prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated September 8, 2015) Exhibit 21 Wetland Drainage Area Map Exhibit 22 Channelization Plan Exhibit 23 Channelization Detail (Right In -Right Out) ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 6 of 13 Exhibit 24 SR 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination (dated May 12, 2016) Exhibit 25 SR 169 Design Clear Zone Letter (dated June 2, 2016) Exhibit 26 Archaeology-Survey Requested by Washington State Historic Preservation Officer and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (dated July 5, 2016) Exhibit 27 Advisory Notes to Applicant D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated ta occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely ta have the fallowing probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: A Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc, (dated February 25, 2015; Exhibit 10) was submitted with the project application. According to the submitted study, the existing site topography in the north-northeast portion of the site is flat. The southwest corner of the project gently slopes toward the wetland and the project site has an average slope of approximately two percent (2%). The remaining portion of the site drains generally toward the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into the roadside ditch along SR 169. A field exploration by Terra Associates, Inc. indicated that the site is generally underlain by 6 to 12 inches of organic surface soils and roots overlying either glacially-derived or alluvial soils. Glacially-derived soils are found on roughly the southwestern half of the site and consist of loose to very dense sand with silt and gravel, dense gravel with cobbles, and medium stiff to very stiff sandy silt (outwash and undifferentiated drift). Alluvial soils are found on roughly the northeastern half of the site and consist of three to five feet of loose silty sand and soft silt overlying dense gravel with sand and cobbles. The glacial and alluvial soils have low permeability and would not be a suitable receptor soil for discharge of development stormwater using infiltration/retention facilities. Groundwater was observed in 5 of the 8 test pits between 4.5 and 6 feet below current site grades. Based on current topography, the applicant is expecting cuts and fills up to ten feet may be needed to establish lot and roadway grades. Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut and 20,000 cubic yards of fill would be imported for the project from an approved fill source to support 45 two-story fee simple townhouse units and associated plat improvements. The on-site strippings (topsoil) would either be spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site to an approved location. A rockery retaining wall, ranging between two and four feet, would be constructed along the southeast corner of the site. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures would be implemented during construction (Exhibit 17). Vegetation consists primarily of weeds, grass, brush and a variety of trees. Most ofthe significant trees stand along the south and western areas, and are mostly within the wetland and wetland buffer, or a steep slope at the southwest corner of the site. Red alder, Bigleaf maple, Western red- cedar, and Scouler's willow make up the majority of the trees onsite in size and quantity (Exhibits 4, 8, 9 & 14). Other tree species on the site include Douglas-fir, Western hemlock, Moss cypress, Spanish fir, Pine, Black cottonwood, English holly, and Norway spruce. The applicant has identified 114 significant trees onsite. One (1) tree was classified as dead and 21 were determined as defect trees. All existing trees in development area would be removed for infrastructure, homes and safety. Whereas, all 74 trees within the wetland and wetland buffer would be retained. ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY Pl.AT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 7 of 13 A total of eight (8) test pits (TP-1 through TP-8) were excavated across the project site to a maximum depth of 15 feet below existing site grades using a track hoe. Seepage generally occurred within the gravel encountered at depths of about five feet. No groundwater was found in Test Pits TP-5, TP-6, or TP-7. Groundwater levels are expected to vary on a seasonal and annual basis. According to the geotechnical engineer, construction of the proposed residential development is suitable from a geotechnical standpoint. The proposed residential buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent native soils or on structural fill placed on competent native soils. Floor slabs and pavements can be similarly supported. Some of the native glacial and alluvial deposits encountered at the site contain a sufficient amount of fines (silt-and clay-sized particles) that would make compaction to structural fill requirements difficult or impossible when the soils are too wet. Site preparation activities would involve removal of existing foundations, site clearing and stripping, and implementation of temporary erosion control measures. After completion of site stripping and rough grading activities, Terra Associates recommends a proofroll using heavy rubber-tired equipment to determine if any isolated soft and yielding areas are present. If excessively yielding areas are observed, and they cannot be stabilized in place by compaction, the affected soils should be excavated and removed to firm bearing and grade restored with new structural fill. If the depth of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive, the use of geotextile fabrics could be used in conjunction with clean granular structural fill beneath embankment of fills or roadway subgrades. The submitted geotechnical report provides recommendations for site preparation and grading, excavation and slopes, foundations, slab-on-grade floors, lateral earth pressure for below-grade walls, drainage, utilities, and pavement sections. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that project construction be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated October 29, 2014) or an updated report submitted at a later date. Mitigation Measure(s): Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. (dated February 25, 2015; Exhibit 10) or an updated report submitted at a later date. Nexus: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Review, RMC 4-4-060 Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations, and RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetlands, Streams, Lakes Impacts: A Critical Area Report was prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated December 15, 2014; Exhibit 11) was submitted with the application materials. According to the report, there is a Category 11 wetland located in the southwest portion of the property. Under the vested City of Renton code, Category II wetlands must provide a standard buffer width of 50 feet. The wetland is a low-lying forested area in the southwest portion of the site. Vegetation in the wetland area is comprised of a red alder canopy over a salmon berry and Himalayan blackberry shrub layer. Field horsetail and creeping buttercup are the dominant species identified in the herbaceous layer. The majority ofthe species observed were rated facultative or wetter (Reed 1988), so the vegetation community would be considered hydrophytic, per the COE (2010) guidelines. Soils observed in the wetland were very dark grayish brown (lOYR 3/2) silt loam over gray (lOYR 5/1) and dark grayish brown (lOYR 4/2) silt loams. The deeper soil profiles exhibited many ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT momic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUA15·000l4l, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOO Page 8 of 13 redoximorphic features (mottles), and dark soils with mottles are positive indicators of hydric (wetland) soils. The soil and wetland scientist encountered a water table at 18 inches below the ground surface during June field investigations conducted in 2012.0ther than the acknowledged Category II wetland in the southwest portion of the site, no other wetlands or critical areas were identified within the remaining portion ofthe property. Additionally, there are no observed or known state or federally listed species utilizing the site or near the site. The applicant is also providing a minimum 15-foot wide common areas tract, immediately north of the wetland buffer (Tract F), in order to provide additional separation between the wetland buffer and the proposed rear lots of Lots 34-45. Based on the provided site plan, there would be minimal impacts to the wetland and its buffer. The applicant submitted a Technical Memorandum, prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated September 8, 2015; Exhibit 20) in order to review the potential hydrologic impacts to the wetland on the site resulting from the development. The wetland lies within an approximately 7.2 acre basin. Site development would divert drainage from 0.4 acres ofthe basin away from the wetland, representing approximately 5.6% of the total contributing area. The hydrologic support provided to the wetland from this portion of the basin is likely greatest during the wetter months of the year and it is likely that the majority of the hydrologic input to the wetland is derived from the steeply sloping ground to the south and west of the wetland and that the relatively flat area to the north and east of the wetland contributes a much smaller volume of water. On March 9, 2015, the site was approved with two (2) conditions by the City of Renton for an exemption from the Critical Areas Regulations in order to conduct wetland and wetland buffer enhancement activities (LUA15-000120). The enhancement project provides off-site mitigation for construction impacts associated with King County parcel no. 3423059202, under King County project number CAEX14-0008. King County conducted SEPA review and acted as lead SEPA agency and King County Department of Permitting and Environmental Review reviewed this parcel for off- site mitigation and consistency with King County Code 21A.24. The project, if carried forward, would enhance 5,110 square feet of the Category II wetland and 6,225 square feet of wetland buffer. The work plan includes removing an existing concrete foundation, removing non-native vegetation from the subject areas, and planting native trees and shrubs. The purpose of the plan was to enhance the structural and vegetative diversity on the site, leading to an increase in habitat and overall functional lift over existing conditions. Should the applicant elect to not move forward with the permitted wetland and wetland buffer enhancement activities, staff recommends, as a SEPA mitigation measure, that the applicant remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. Mitigation Measure(s): The applicant shall remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected areas by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. A tree planting plan shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. Nexus: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Review and RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations. b. Storm Water ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 ·nvironmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 9 of 13 Impacts: The applicant submitted a Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR), prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (dated April 10, 2015; Exhibit 13). The 6.07-acre site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. According to the TIR, the project would maintain the natural discharge location for the site. However, less than 10% of the total basin area of the wetland will be diverted away from the wetland. The project's biologist does not expect the proposed diversion would result in a substantial change in the flow available to the wetland (Exhibit 20). Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development would be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways within two (2) drainage basins. One (1) basin would be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the second basin would drain to a proposed 24-inch conveyance system along the project fronting WA-169 (Exhibit 6). The proposed 45-lot subdivision is subject to full drainage review and water quality in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. According to the TIR, flow control is exempt for this project as the project is within a half mile of the Cedar River and direct discharge to Cedar River is permitted per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. The Cedar River is listed as a Major Receiving Water and the project is less than one-half mile to the 100 year flood plain. The final Technical Information Report (TIR) must include a level 3 downstream analysis to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge would not cause flooding. The developer is intending to use an existing off-site water quality facility (wetpond). The wetpond is located at the southwest corner of the WA 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. According to the TIR, the off-site water quality drainage facility (wet pond} was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, MCC, areas of the WSDOT right-of-way, as well as the proposed Elliott Farms project. Staff recommends, as a SEPA mitigation measure, that the applicant provide a copy ofthe final drainage report(s} used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond by King County. The report should include the original design of the pond. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures would be provided in the final engineering plan set and would be subject to the 2009 and Department of Ecology Guidelines. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Mitigation Measure(s}: The applicant shall submit the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond, including the original design, to the City of Renton Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. Nexus: RMC 4-6-030 Drainage (Surface Water} Standards 3. Trees and Vegetation Impacts: The property is covered in weeds, grass, brush and a variety oftrees. Most ofthe significant trees stand along the south and western areas, and are mostly within the wetland and wetland buffer, or a steep slope at the southwest corner of the site. Red alder, Bigleaf maple, Western red-cedar, and Scouler's willow make up the majority of the trees onsite in size and quantity (Exhibits 4, 8, 9 & 14). Other tree species on the site include Douglas-fir, Western hemlock, ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Deportment of Community, ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 ·nvironmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, £CF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 10 of 13 Moss cypress, Spanish fir, Pine, Black cottonwood, English holly, and Norway spruce. There are approximately 114 trees over 6 inches in diameter on the parcel proposed to be developed. After street and critical area deductions, and the minimum requirement to retain 20%, the applicant is proposing to retain none of the required 6.2 trees (Exhibit 8). Attached dwellings are required to maintain a minimum tree density of (4) significant trees for every five thousand (5,000) square feet on each residential lot. The tree density may consist of existing trees or replacement trees. Rather than retain the required 6 trees, the applicant is proposing to replant the site with 126 new trees (not including street trees). The proposed tree species includes Katsura, Elm, Flowering dogwood, Japanese snowbell, Paperbark maple, vine maple, serviceberry, carnelian cherry, flowering dogwood, Leyland cypress, black pine, incense cedar, and western arborvitae at 2-inches in caliper, 6' to 10' in height (Exhibit 14). These proposed replacement trees exceed the minimum required replacement inches, 12 inches (12") for every tree that was unable to be retained, or 37 inches (37") for the project (6.2" x 12" = 74.4 required replacement inches; 74.4"/2" per tree= 37.2 trees required for replacement). A final detailed landscape plan must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of the street and utility construction permits (Exhibit 9). Mitigation Measure(s): No further mitigation required. Nexus: Not applicable 4. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts: Historically the Cedar River has meandered downstream in the Renton-Maple Valley area across the width of the river valley. Furthermore, developments within the vicinity of the Cedar River are more likely to be sites where significant historic and/or cultural resources would be found, and the subject development has indicated that site grading would be conducted. In addition, the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) considers this site to have a high probability for containing precontact and historical archaeological resources because it is adjacent to the historical channel of the Cedar River and a portion of a historic trail system is within the project area (Exhibit 26). Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure that would require a professional archaeological survey of the project area shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance and also require the applicant and/or developer to stop work and immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation if any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found. Mitigation Measures: 1. A professional archaeological survey of the project area shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the professional archaeological survey shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit issuance. 2. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT momic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 11 of 13 Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, RCW 27.44 Indian graves and records and RCW 27.53.060 Disturbing archaeological resource or site-Permit required-Conditions-Exceptions-Penalty. 5. Transportation Impacts: All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4-7-0806.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized plan that would provide vehicular and residential access connection to SR-169 (under review by WSDOT for compliance state transportation policies and guidelines), which would be located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west ofthe single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. WSDOT approval of the channelization plan would be subject to a right-in/right-out configuration only from Road A to SR 169 (Exhibits 22-23). Preliminary review of the channelization plan by WSDOT would require a covenant to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through Molasses Creek Condominium (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure that the applicant record a covenant on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through Molasses Creek Condominium (parcel no. 5568900000} road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. For example, "The City of Renton, at the request of the Washington State Department of Transportation, may modify, vacate, and/or eliminate the direct access connection to State Route 169, in the event that direct access from the plat to State Route 169 is provided via a public right-of-way over and across the Molasses Creek Condominiums property located to the west of the plat {APN 556890-0000)." The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east ofthe Molasses Creek development access (Exhibit 24). Secondary access to the site is proposed via an existing easement that goes through the adjacent MCC project. The easement originates from SR 169 and 140th Way SE and connects through MCC to Elliott Farms west property line (Exhibit 19). The homeowners association of the new project would enter into an agreement with the Molasses Creek Homeowner's Association for their proportionate share of maintenance of the off-site private road network. The applicant has proposed a street modification that includes several different cross sections to accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, street trees, and street lights. The proposed roadway would provide a paved width of 20 feet with sidewalks that are separated from the vehicle lanes for most of the length of the roadway. Residential street lighting would be provided on site. Three (3) tracts for alley access is proposed for 16 lots. Road improvements would be completed on SR 169, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and a planter strip, subject to design review and approval by WSDOT (Exhibit 5). This may include dedication of right-of-way for future planned widening of SR- 169 to accommodate 6, 12-foot lanes and 8-foot shoulders. A Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TENW (dated April 1, 2015, revised date December 1, 2015; Exhibit 12) was submitted with the application materials. The proposed 45-lot subdivision would generate 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting}, and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). Based on the LOS results conducted at three study intersections, all £RC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Department of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Page 12 of 13 intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels (LOS Dor better) during the AM and PM peak hours in 2017 with no significant impacts created by the proposed Elliott Farm. An annual growth rate of two percent was applied to the existing volumes. The traffic report concludes by stating that traffic impact fees would mitigate long-term traffic impacts, as created by Elliott Farms residential project. The 2016 impact fee for condominium/town home is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit. Based on 45 new dwelling units, the resulting impact fee would be $69,583.95 (45 X 1,546.31 per unit). Payment of transportation impact fees is applicable at the time of issuance of the building permit. The City of Renton transportation impact fee rate schedule is subject to change. It is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impacts the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code-required impact fees and the construction of code- required frontage improvements (Exhibit 27). The fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit issuance, shall be payable to the City. A concurrency recommendation would be provided in the staff report to Hearing Examiner based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS-tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation. The development would have to meet the City of Renton concurrency requirements. Mitigation Measure(s): The applicant shall record a covenant on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through Molasses Creek Condominium (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Nexus: RMC 4-6-060F.9 Vehicular Access and Connection Points To and From the State Highway System and Chapter 47.50 RCW, Highway Access Management. 6. Fi re & Police Impacts: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development subject to the construction of code-required improvements and the payment of code-required impact fees (Exhibit 27). Mitigation Measure(s): No further mitigation required. Nexus: Not applicable E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or listed under Exhibit 27 "Advisory Notes to Applicant." ./ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). ERC Report 15-000242 City of Renton Deportment of Community ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PIA T ,nomic Development Report of August 31, 2015; September 14, 2015; July 11, 2016 Environmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Page 13 of 13 Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals ofthe environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 29, 2016. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7'h Floor, (425) 430-6510. ERC Report 15-000242 $ ceDAA FIVER LIGHTFOOT, LLC AND lBN:JN INVESTMENTS, NC. .... -.. ----OO'IEA SI-EET OF ELUOTT FARMS 15734 ' , " , ; i , -~ 18215 72~C l,1/[NU£ SOUTH -_____.._ ,·.,o· ~~, . ~['l'l, lt'A980J2 _......_ (~Z~)2~1-5~~ Fii,X """ (d~Ji,1-e . :•.._ i° C!VO.E!ONE~.....:i~ -.J,ll.J \,.•n••/ •-~ _, .. , -"" --2 ---.,.,,. __ 7 _,,_,1/,S/>OIO >JO"' "' ------11.z~ C W---<t'-z / ,,-..,__ __ -·· ~~: . \ / ' / ' ' '! * ', I ~ ' ,, ' •,/ If ' - , ' r ' ' ' ' ' ' . ' \' < l . ---;;:;;:;~o--~-~-w~-!Ir I ,,,,,,... I SI i 1,!1111111111;11g111111 ! ! ,~ !ii -I ' """"' -! ,! • """""' , I ! ... ,,l!iil!lllll,ii ~ :s:in!i.l;.i _j:J ' . _l CEDAR AIYER UOHTFOOT, LLC LEl<'ION NO INVESTMENTS, INC. I 11; I I ,/ i/ ""°"'==~= . " ~~~-l l"At'.11 ~:::: --.,,,,,, .... -- .. -., f'RELMNAFIY PL.AT OF ELUOTT FARMS '•, L~ 1.•,'.L~, ,., ~ 1"=100' ,,,,,,STORM POND ,_. _ _....,...,, ~--~cA I·)': . ; ,, e,;c:~.;s,;,:JJ ·-~·.!.,\ ·.· r :1 ..;_, : ·. . ?::>~~= MOL~SSES CRE·-- CONDOMINUJlv1S ,! ,o:·,,· o'' (_\.\..\ yP..~"' NEIGHBORH ·s11-1e9 -~ MCJt.A..,,,c;:; '"'REEi( C0rfD(J :TAIL \• / C . ' '<e: ,.,,,, EDAR RIV SITE -, < k..~:::::-;;i~;;;:;::;:~- / I I /· ./ ~..._,...ct 'f'\~f:;,.·Ef', ~ (i, ... A<,•\<' .. 'l-~ r ~ " , \ .-: •,:..(~,,,. .............. .... 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 96032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING. SURVEYING, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SOURCE· KING COUNTY ASSE'SSOR ~APS MARCH25,2015 ' ) ~/ / 13215 72ND A\IENUE sourn KENT, WA gB1JJ2 (425]251 -5222 (425)251-678:/ fAX ' I ' - ~ L c /\~ ·~ I BRIXTON HOMES LLC C/0 GLEN MAUIER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUITE 200 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 ! .•.. ' ' } OJ 0 C z 0 )> :IJ -< po -I 0 "ti 0 G> :IJ )> "ti J: 0 (/) C :IJ < m -< Tillt: BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PTN OF TliE NW1/4, Of TIIE 8E114 Of SEC, 22, ANO PTN Of TltE 8W114, OF THE NE1/R OF SEC. 22, TWP. 23 N., RGE G EAST, W. M. QTY OF RENTON KINCl Cot.ltTV STATE OF WMMNGTON 1H715 12ND .0.\/lNUl SOUTH KE"1. WA 9/!052 (~25)251-6222 (~25)251-6782 FAA -..-lll<-, •• , ... Far: BRIXTON HOhES LLC C/0 GLEN MAURER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUTE 200 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Ill 0 C z C > :II -< po -I 0 -0 0 Ci) :II > -0 :::c: 0 (f) C :II < m -< Title: BOUNDARY l TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PTN OF TI-IE MW1/,4, Of THE SE1/,4 OF SEC. 22, AND PTN OF THE SW1/4, OF THE NEl/11 OF SEC. 22, TWP. 23 N., ROE II EA-IIT, W. M. ffY 0/F RENTON KING Cot.MTV STATE OF WASHINGTON • • • • I i 1, ] 1, ' !' ' '! ! ! m ' ~ ! , .. 1•! •1 !• ' "1 I ... i.i -,-1! ' ,j I I I .,, - I • • • • I • II ~ !' !! ! T. ' 0 ' 6 ! • • • 1821$ 7:,NO AVtNUE S0UT11 ....____,,_ 15734 1(£~. W,l 930l2 (425)251-6212 (•2~)2,1-~71!.2 FI.X • ' ' ' / .,.. •• IC...~......, ,.,,,m ... ,, I I • • • I • I ... J.. w,:,.,....,.,n ....... II ·;1 l' I '. ~ '~ i ~ • CEDAR RM:A L.DtTFOOT, LLC .,., LeN:lN NVESll.ENTS, NC. I I I • II, I I j! I ·~== ":"..:. II -. ·'"''' I w 6ii iiiliiiiri : i, 'i ''' \·· ' • • • I ... -.. --· OF BLLIOTT FARJ/18 ,, " ' ' ' ' '' : i ,, " " ' ! ' ; / ,, // ,, ,, , I ' ' '( ,, / I ., I •. I .. , I ,, I ,,, I .,, 15734 • • • I i I ' ' I I I I I i i I I 1 I I I I i . I ! \ I I I • ~ \ iai i i 1 1 I I I I I I I I :-- 1 I I I I I l I I I I s • s I I ' II s ' II i I I~ I II s i II I ,: II . II I II i ,: II I! II II II 11 l II /I i ! ! I II -s I • 11 f I __.. i I ! I / ' I \ 111 \ II \ i ( ; \ \ ' •. I !I"· I I I I I CEDAR FIVER L.DiTFOOT, LLC ,11,C LEM«>N M'ESTIENTB. INC. ' ' ' . '' ~o ,i,o-.j,..-rla•" ~-w..;==~-~ --.. -.... -PFELMNAR'f Sfr169 FIOAO PLAN OF ELUOTT FARJ/IS I ' r '. ! . .., --,- : --'-.'t :ii _______ _ ' 't' ' \i r ' ' I ' i / I I I I / I • ' ! ' r , . ,, ! ' : _______ _ I CIDAR FWEA LJCJiTFOOT, LLC AID l...ef40N M'ESllENTS, NC. .. -.. ""' - I I I ! I ! I I I I , '' I' OF ELLIOTT FARMS .. ' .r /_' '' ! ··/ I ! I I I -~--, , '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ) 1' ' ' ' ' • • • I I, I, I : (-- '' I' '' '' '' I' I / / '' ' --~ /i ' ~ llJ ,:;; § ! , ,ill~ I ' i1~~3 /I;~~ I ! ! i I ~ I I !/! s 'I ' ii I . ii ~~•.r-2 ~ I : ~:: z : : =:.s:=1%:t .. ---,.. PFEUANARY UTLfTES PLAN I' ,I I! IT] 11 11 i: 15734 \ ······,, ., ' ' i - ' • • • • , I i i :i I • .---' i I I I • • • ' / ,' '' I' '' ' ' ' ' : ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ( ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' / ,,:'/ / '--,..1 -/ iii i I , i . ,' I • / / / / , 1 ': I ·r! I :11L1.11 /,' i I ····· i/f // 17~~~. z ~ ,,;, "' ' llllillliiiliiillliilllilillllll!lilllll!!!illlllllllillllllllllllllilllll 1111111111111111111111111111111111111 CECAR AIYER LIGHTFOOT, LLC ""° lENNON~NC. .. -.. ""'--· OF EILIOTT FARMS n LJ / / / / / 1821~ 72ND ~NUE S0lfll1 KENT. WA 9ll();l2 (42S)2S1 -6222 (425)2~1-~/112 fl,)( CM.DICN!l!M:.~...-.... ' ' ' ' ' ' _,,/) --Sl.l!V£lNi, DM,.,,..ENr.,._ !EM:" ._ ..o£J.; r / BFIXTON Ha.ES, Ll.C 14410 EEL..l.. -RED ROAD, BUTE 200 BELL.EV1E, WA 98007 CONTACT= KRISTEN LlHXMBT I - BLUO'lT FARMS D~D I ' 111 UIUli 11nn. 11111 I ili~ir i1Uii l1Pi I ·r-' -~1n-1 I ~~1-I -1! ,. •ii 11 i I 1IIU ~I ,,ii i 111 • '•II a I ! ! i/H/H l!HH ~i I I !!U!!! ~! EEHE !il!il!il!il!il !{!!!!~ ' !!!!! iuun I "'" ~HH ~~~~;~~ • g innnn: 1H215 12ND AVEHl!t. SOUIH -_... .._ KEN'!. WA 980J2 .._ ___.._ ........,. (•25)251-6222 (~25)251 &782 fl,X "-""' ......_ "' - _,_,LNIJ..___ s~o,w,,:,..,C1<11<.~ts .... ..1£1. ,. LJ !!!IH 1111n I! ill I I II ,! ! ~i ' EUUE !il!il!il!ilil!il !!!!!! "'''' H~~;~ ~inn::~:=: I l•e 00 0 ~,, 0 ,';'. 't: ii IU r111;1 111 n1 I 1§1 na~ . I ! ! i I -i,r! -r • !~, eU~·~. iii, 'P ,_1, 1.i 1 Iii pd!~s u ' 'ii ! I H1 I I I u ! I ~ I I ! f i I ' I I ' I • I • • .. ,, ~-i ;;;; ~• , .. ' ' " EU I E!EE EEE~ ••• • ~~~~ 111 I !U ! mHi Uiij "' ~ ~~! ~ aaaa :,n,1~ "i nu u. • inn: g BFIXTON HaES. U.C 1441> BELL -flED ROAD, SUITE 200 BEl...lEVlE. WA 98007 CONTACT: KflSTEN UN)OUIST "' 111 i I 11 Ul 111 ' I ' I I~ 1-1 I I I I ii· ! I 11 : i ~;~ • • • ~ ~ HE E ~ H Uj i ii• I !, ~· ; I I I i i .. -.. ""' -- ----~no Entire Document Available Upon Request GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Elliot Farm 14207 SE Renton Maple Valley Road Renton, Washington Project No. T -6737 · Terra Associates, Inc. Exhibit 10 Prepared for: Murray Franklyn Companies · Bellevue, Washington February 25, 2015 .edeke Associates, Inc. December 15, 2014 Mr. Glen Mauer Pacific Properties, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 RE: Elliot Farm -Wetland Delineation R.A.I. Project #2012-024-002 Dear Glen: Wetland & A11uatic Sciences Wildlife Ecolog-y Landscape Architecture ---Renton() Entire Document Available Upon Request At your request, we conducted a site investigation on June 26 and 27, 2012 to determine whether wetlands and streams were present on the Elliot Farm property. PROPERTY LOCATION The Elliot Farm property consists of an approximately 6-acre parcel, located along the south side of SR 169 (Renton-Maple Valley Highway), approximately 1,000 feet east of 140'h Way SE, in the City of Renton, Washington. The property is identified as Tax Parcel No. 2223059004. This places the property in a portion of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. Parcel maps retrieved on-line from King County (2012) iMAP depict the property boundaries. METHODOLOGY In order to identify potential wetland areas, we used the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The COE, which requires use of the 1987 delineation manual, as amended, has federal regulatory jurisdiction of the dredging or filling of"Waters of the United States," including wetlands. As outlined in this methodology, the interaction ofhydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology must be present for an area to be classified as wetland. To be consistent with current regulations, field investigations were consistent with the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (COE 2010). BACKGROUND REVIEW Prior to conducting our site reconnaissance, we reviewed existing background maps and information from the U.S.D.A Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS 2014) Web Soil Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS 2014) National Wetland Inventory (NWI). 9510 Stone Avenue N. Exhibit 11 Seattle, WA 98103 206-.'\2.'>-8122 www.raedeke.com MEMORANDUM DATE: December l l, 2015 TO: City of Renton FROM: Jeff Schramm TENW SUBJECT: Elliott Farm Residential -Renton, WA Traffic Analysis Addendum TENW Project #5021 Tra sessment -Elliott Farm Residential ----Renton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request This memorandum documents the traffic impact analysis addendum conducted for the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farm multi-family residential development. The purposed of the addendum is to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to SR 169. The proposed project is located near SE Renton Maple Volley Rd [SR-169) and 140th Woy SE, east of the Molasses Creek development in the City of Renton as shown in the Figure l site vicinity map. Executive Summary Proposal. The project proposes 45 townhome dwelling units on a site that is currently vacant. Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a new residential access on SE Renton Maple Valley Rd ISR 169). Full project buildout is expected in 2017. Trip Generation. The proposed project is estimated to generate 32 l new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour 121 entering, l O exiting). Intersection Operations Analysis. Based on the LOS results conducted at one off-site signalized study intersection and the site access location, both intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or better during the AM and PM peak hours in 2017 with no significant impacts created by the proposed Elliott Farm residential development. Concurrency. Since the signalized study intersection is expected to operate at acceptable LOS D or better, this project is anticipated to meet City concurrency requirements. Mitigation. Based on our findings, the proposed project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on the transportation system. The payment of transportation impact fees will adequately mitigate project impacts by funding the project's fair share of the cost of the City of Renton's planned transportation improvements. Based on the City's current impact fee rate, the development's impact fee would be $53 137.80 [45 X $1, 180.84/unit). Exhibit 12 Transportation Planning j Design 1 Traffic Impact & Operations 11400 SE a~ Street. Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 I Office (4251889-6747 PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT Exhibit 13 ---~r1-0 Entire Document Available Upon Request Proposed Plat of Elliott Farm Renton, Washington Prepared for: Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bell-Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 April 10, 2015 Our Job No. 15734 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-3782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA t ROSEVILLE, CA t SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Greenforestlncorporated April 1, 2015 Todd Levitt Murray Franklyn Companies 14410 Bel Red Road Bellevue WA 98007 ---Renton.O Entire Document Available Upon Request RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA Dear Mr. Levitt: You contracted my services to inspect and inventory the surveyed trees at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy., Renton WA. This site, though currently undeveloped, has concrete remnants from former buildings. The main front portion of the parcel is relatively flat, and covered in dense brambles. Most of the significant trees (~6" DBH) stand along the southern and western areas, and are mostly within a wetland and wetland buffer, or a steep slope at the SW corner of the site. I visited the site today and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. The following table summarizes my inspection results. Summary: 12S Total Surveyed Trees, 6" and greater DBH 1 Dead Trees 21 Dead, Diseased, Dying, and Defective Trees 3 Duplicate Trees 100 Total Viable Trees, 6" and Greater DBH Exhibit 14 4S47 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 ti W04 Web date; 11/09/2012 KingCounty Department of Permitting and Environmental Review 35030 SE Douglas Street, Suite 210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065-9266 206-295-6600 TTY Relay: 711 www.klngcounty.gov Water Availability King County Certificate of Water Availabilitv For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. This certificate provides the Public Health -Seattle & King County Deparbnent and the Department of Permitting and Environmental Review with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. I Do not write In this box Number Name C8I Building Permit D Short Subdivision D Preliminary Plat or PUD D Rezone or other: Applicant's name: Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc. & Lennon Investments Inc. Proposed use: 45 unit Townhome project Location (attach map and legal desalptlon W neceasary): 151xx Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR169) Renton WA 98058 PN: 2223059004 Water purveyor tnfor tnillron · A2-3 82-4 1. D a. Water will be provided by service oonnection only to an existing --------feet from the site. -------{size) water main that is OR 181 b. Water service will require an improvement to the water system ot. D (1) 20 feet of water main to reach the site; and/or 181 (2) The construction of a distribution system on the site; and/or 181 (3) Other {describe): Developer Extension Agreement 2. 181 a. The water system is in conformance wtth a County approved water comprehensive plan. OR D b. The water system improvement is not in oonformance with a County approved water comprehensive plan and will require a water comprehensive plan amendment. {This may cause a delay in issuance of a permit or approval.) 3. 181 a. The proposed project Is within the oorporate limits of the district, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city, or is wtthin the County approved service area of a private water purveyor. OR D b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. 181 a. Water is or will be available at the rate of flow and duration Indicated below at no less than 20 psi measured at the nearest fire hydrant to be constructed feet from the building/property {or as marked on the attached map): RaofflowatPeakDemand: D less than 500gpm (approx. gpm) 0 500to 999 gpm D 1000 gpm or more D flow test of gpm O calallatlon of 3500 +-gpm Dut8tlon: D less than 1 hour D 1 hour to 2 hours 1812 hours or more Other. (-: Commercial building permits which include multifamily structures require flow test orca -,,-lal-1,..ati~.o-n.') _____ _ OR O b. Water system is not capable of providing fire flow. 5. 181 a. Water system has certificates of water rights or water right claims sufficient to provide service. OR D b. Water system does not currently have necessary water rights or water right claims. Comments/conditions: Developer Extension Agreement required I certify that the above water purveyor information is true. This certification shaH be valid for one year from date of signature. Cedar River Water & Sewer District ~~~S~-~Kra~II ____________ _ Agencynsme Developer Extension Administrator Tille S~n Check out the Permitting Web site ;::at~ww~ .. w;,;.k,.,.,in::==~'-""=== Water Availability Ceda,-,d SR169.doc b-c:ert-water.pdf Exhibit 15 W04 11/09/2012Page 1 ~ soe Web date: 11/09/2012 KingCounty Sewer Availability: Department of Permitting and Environmental Review 35030 SE Douglas Street, Suite 210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065-9266 206-296-6800 TTY Relay: 711 www.klngcounty.gov King County Certificate of Sewer Availability For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. This certificate provides the Public Health -Seattle & King County Department and the Department of Permitting and Environmental Review with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. I Do not write in this box Number 181 Building Permit D Short Subdivision D Preliminary Plat or PUD D Rezone or other: Name Applicant's name: Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc & Lennon Investment Inc. Proposed use: 45 unit Townhome Project Location (attach map and legal description if neeeasary): 151xx Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR169) Renton WA 98058 PN 222305 9004 Sewer agency information· A2-3 & B2-4 1. O a. Sewer service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing sl%e sewer -------feet from the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use. OR 181 b. Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of: 181 (1) 20 feet of sewer trunk or lateral to reach the site; and/or 181 (2) The construction of a collection system on the s~e; and/or 181 (3) Other (describe): Completion of Developer Extension Agreement 2. 181 a. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. OR 0 b. The sewer system improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment 3. 181 a. The proposed project Is within the corporate limits of the disb'ict or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. OR D b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. Service is subject to the following: a. Connection charge: --'-'e""s'---------------------------- b. Easement(s): -"'e""s'----::,-,---:--:----------------------- c. Other: Developer Extension Agreement Comments: See Attachments I certify that the above sewer agency infonnation is true. This certlflcation shall be valid for one year from date of signature. Cedar River Water & Sewer District e.. , /]. Lar~J :V":o: 8 ExtenFJon Admine;trator C\ ~cf~;~W:J -==2/2=-:41:..;1c.=5 _____ _ Tille Signawra' f-Date Check out the Permitting Web site 'P-J=~~~:!!!.!!.[:1,1!!!:!.!!!::!.!!!!.!2 SewerAvailability Cedarwood SR169 .doc tK:ert-sewer.pdf Exhibit 16 S06 11/09/2012Page 1 Construction Mitigation Description for Elliott Farm The proposed plat of Elliott Farm will involve clearing and grading for the construction of new road improvements, installation of utilities, and other land disturbance activities. The following is a summary of how these activities are expected to be carried out and managed to minimize impacts and comply with applicable rules and regulations during this phase of the project: • Anticipated Construction Schedule: Clearing and grading is likely to begin in June 2016 assuming the entitlements and permits are approved. The bulk of the work should be completed in October 2016. Based on this schedule, we expect that the plat could be ready for recording in late 2016, with home building to commence after the plat is recorded. Model home construction may commence prior to recording as allowed by the City of Renton. • Hours and Days of Operation: The typical hours of operation for construction will be from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. during the winter months. During the summer months, construction will begin at 7 a.m. and may extend to 7 p.m. (pending approval from the City of Renton). The typical work week will be Monday through Friday. Construction work may also take place on Saturday, as normally allowed by the City of Renton, especially during the dry season (April to October) in order to expedite completion of the project during the dry season. • Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: The haul route for importing or exporting materials to and from the site will be determined after coordination with the City of Renton Inspector prior to the start of construction. However, we would anticipate that the haul route would begin at one of the site's existing gravel entrances onto the Renton-Maple Valley Road {WA-169) then travel either east or west depending on the location where the contractor decides where to receive/export materials. • Measures to be Implemented to Minimize Dust, Traffic and Transportation Impacts, Erosion, Mud, Noise, and other Noxious Characteristics: All temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures required by the City of Renton and other agencies will be implemented and maintained (e.g., rock construction entrance, sill fencing, temporary sediment pond, straw mulching and hydro seeding). Also, as required by DOE, a Certified Erosion Control Lead will be assigned to the project and all erosion BMPs will be implemented and maintained as required by the NPDES Permit for the duration of the project. Watering will be implemented, as necessary, to control dust during the summer months and all construction equipment will be equipped with appropriate mufflers to comply with local noise ordinances. • Any Special Hours Proposed for Construction or Hauling (i.e., weekends, late nights): If ii is determined that additional hours are needed to complete the construction, the contractor will coordinate with the City of Renton to obtain approval for such extended hours. Exhibit 17 -I -15734.003.doc • Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: A Preliminary Traffic Control Plan has not been prepared at this time. Once the haul route(s) has(have) been approved by the City Public Works Department, a traffic control plan will be prepared in accordance with the City Road Standards and WSDOT guidelines for the frontage improvement work within the WA-169 right-of-way. Frontage improvements will be limited to constructing curb, gutter, planter, and sidewalk along WA-169 where shoulder closures will be implemented. -2 -15734.003.doc PRE-ANNEXATOIN AGREEME;....;N~T-------, CITY OF RENTON and ---Renton.0 Entire Document Available Upon Request CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOOT, INC This PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT is entered into this _ day of _____ _, 2008, between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, ("City") and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Lennon Investments, Inc., a Washington corporation ( collectively referred to as "Cedar River"). RECITALS A. Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., and Lennon Investments, Inc., own the following described property ("the Property") as a joint venture: Parcel A of King County Boundary Line Adjmrt:ment No, L95L0113, recorded under King County Recording No. 9510179023, (being a portion of Government Lot 3 in the NE \4 of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, records of King County, Washington. B. The Property is approximately 6.07 acres in size and is immediately south of SE Renton Maple Valley Road (SR 169). C. The Property is currently located in unincorporated King Cmmty and is mned R-6 by the County, a zoning which would permit development of the property with approximately 45 dwelling units as Phase 2 of the adjacent Molasses Creek Condominiums. The utilities serving the Property were designed and installed during construction of the first phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums to serve the Property based on its development capacity pursuant to the Collllty zoning. In addition, acce5s from SR 169 to the Property has been limited to a common access shared with the first phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums. D. The City of Renton is in the process of annexing the Property llD.d other properties in the vicinity. E. lhe City of Renton does not have a zoning designation that is the equivalent of King County's R-6 zoning classification. F. The parties wish to enter into a pre-annexation agreement that will permit the development of the second phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums at a density which is comparable to the density permitted by King County. PRE-ANNEXA110NAGREEMENT-I Exhibit 18 Filed for Record by and After Recording Return to: Molasses Creek, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Attn: Glen Maurer CHICAGO TITLE EAS 19.H 20000201000940 PAGE 1181 OF 812 e21e11zeee 12:20 KING COUNTY, UA f ·coPYOF I RECORDED DOCUMENT \ King County Recorder's Office ---Itenton e Entire Document Available Upon Request ROAD, LANDSCAPE, PARKING, EMERGENCY TURNAROUND AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT Grantor: Grantee: Abbrev. Legal Description: Tax Parcel Nos.: Reference No.: Molasses Creek, Inc. Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc. CHICAGO Tri LE INS. CO REF# IAllrrl l(Q'Jl.(u;>) Tract A, Plat of Elliott Farm recorded Volume 180 of Plats, Pages 4 through 15; (Complete legal descrip~n per Exhibit A) '231Lf?'t')-C9W) t ~-9a:t./ (E't-h. t':>J n/a THIS ROAD, LANDSCAPE, PARKING, EMERGENCY TURNAROUND AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Easement Agreement") is made as of this ~y of January, 2000 by MOLASSES CREEK, INC., a Washington corporation ("Grantor") and LANCASTER/CEDAR WOOD, INC. a Washington corporation ("Grantee"). Recitals A. Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in King County, Washington, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto (the ''Burdened Property"). B. Grantee is the owner of property adjacent to the Burdened Property which is legally described in Exhibit B, attached hereto (the "Benefited Property"). C. The parties wish to create an easement over the Burdened Property for the benefit of the Benefited Property, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Easement Agreement. ' Exhibit 19 .edeke Associates. Inc. \Vetland & Aquatic Sciences Wildlife Ecology Landscape Architecture TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: September 8, 2015 To: Todd Levitt, Pacific Properties, Inc. From: Chris Wright, Raedeke Associates, Inc. Re: Elliott Farm -Wetland Hydrologic Impacts (RAI #2012-024-002) Dear Todd, At your request we have reviewed the potential hydrologic impacts to the wetland on the Elliot Farm site resulting from the proposed development of the parcel. We based our analysis of potential impacts on information gathered during site visits and basin boundary maps and calculations provided by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2015). Development and grading of the Elliot Farm parcel would result in the redirecting of water from a portion of the watershed of the on-site wetland. The wetland located partially on the Elliot Farm parcel lies within an approximately 7.2 acre basin. Development of the site would divert drainage from 0.4 acres of the basin away from the wetland, which represents approximately 5.6% of the total contributing area of the wetland. Areas are based on the Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2015) wetland basin map (attached). The portion of the basin that occurs on the Elliot Farm parcel is a relatively flat, shrub covered area that currently intercepts a portion of the potential hydrology available to the wetland. The hydrologic support provided to the wetland from this portion of the basin is likely greatest during the wetter months of the year when the wetland is receiving greater amounts of water from the more steeply sloped land to the south and west. The total area to be diverted away from the wetland represents less than 10% of the total basin area of the wetland. It is likely that the majority of the hydrologic input to the wetland is derived from the steeply sloping ground to the south and west of the wetland and that the relatively flat area to the north and east of the wetland contributes a much smaller volume of water. Thus we do not expect the proposed diversion to result in a substantial change in the flow available to the wetland. Exhibit 20 2111 N. Northgate Way Ste. 219 Seattle, WA 98133 206-525-8122 www.raedeke.com September 8, 2015 Mr. Todd Levitt Page2 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of Pacific Properties, Inc. and their consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information, analysis, or conclusions contained herein without permission from Pacific Properties, Inc. The determination of ecological system classifications, functions, values, and boundaries is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach different conclusions. With regard to wetlands and streams, the final determination of their boundaries for regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various resource agencies that regulate development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of such agency determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or construction activities. We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our field, and that this work was prepared substantially in accordance with then-current technical guidelines and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of our analysis of the information provided by the project proponents and their consultants, together with information gathered in the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any questions about this information, please call me at (206) 525-8122. LITERATURE CITED Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2015. Wetland Drainage Area Map Elliot Farm. Received September 4, 2015. ;,, :~I '~ ~m ,.,m §~ ~~ " •1 ~\ 'i 1' ,f' 1·-\ I I // cl V ' ' " ,, ' ('., ' ' ' I ! ~ ~ ~, * .......... ""'--- """ -15734 Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bet-Red Road, Sule 200 Welland Drailage Area Ma.t'I ,-..,oo• Belevue, WA 98007 _!_ Eiott Farm >. :g ~ ~ e\ "' C, <:; --, " i ~ a, ~ ,;, :,:; ~ ~ "' --, • "' "' C, oS " ;1 "' ~ <;;: " ' Hf-+-+++-~ - ' ' :1 ' ~I 0 Sc '· a ~ i "~ ~ > ~-'. o 0 g :,,: 0 :!j •• , .. > STA 1DH9J.OM a.a· LT, 000 Wl<rTI: [CKiE Ut<[ ""'TtH ~G "--'-"---STA 1~+B7.5 ll.D' LT, [NO CYR& I~ ,. ' I ' ~ ' ' L ' ': i ' tJ ! ' I " ., m ' C z I~, " a ,~ • ii: ;a I~ ,o 1: !~ 3; ~.:= " ' -( I! r ' ' ' i§ ," ' ' ' ' "' ., ,. ~IQ :!: ;·; -: (·"'j--: -, l!;i: MATCH LINE STA 1 05+00 SEE ABOVE LEFT .. 16" STA 100H0,0 28.0' U. l(CIPI WHIT[ UlGl" UI( ~.k~.~ .. ~~t ••• -=~----~ ~/~. ·::t<.c..·~-------~ ~/~. ·::~7t:.c~"-~---~ o.o'AT,8(1;;1N~ A 1 +B7.0 ~°,,;,~T. C[NTU TDfTIC o.o· Ill, D[GII DYC UN[ ~ CUITill1""mC gm,,u,o ... O' IIT, TQ 18.0' 11T STOP UNE "iB 1M '!I& UH0-0 ~2.0' LT. CENTU Cl!OSSW..._. "ii' , •• STA H+5o.o _ 2!1.0' LI. [!jp WHIT[ EDGE UN[ SA 111 STA H<-00,0 ... .o· LT,"""'" WHITT: EIIG[ UNC W.TCH [l1S11NG • ,. 'I' ;f c;i : I I~ l ' 1 MATCH LINE STA 105+00 SEE BELOW RIGHT "!. l';i Q ::: ':l ' ; Ti=. -- ' I r;,, i _i i I ~i " a m b " . " " a " -i ,~-m, ' < > c, 1; ~I I Ii > I" ' ' • , ' I ~ ' i __ J ' ~ ' ~ ' e-----' MAINTENANCE ACCESS :; :i ,, '" :~ y ' > ' ;. t ' ' ' ' _) . ' v,N' rr, c..,..i' ozl ----l' -;,J O·' zUl' N;I N•' ;:::, I ------<: ... --::: --':.:::.._--::-_:;.::-~.:::::..-... _ EB MOUNTABLE: ISLAND DETAIL ------------------------.:::::::..-~~ -. ----<,<>e:,,, __ ::----------~~ SR 169 MP22.61 ± ""-~-- -~~~""' SINGLE DIRECTION (S~~~' -------,_~ CURB RAMP PER Rt S~ ----_ --WSDOT STANDARD -NroN A{ R 7 69 ~-- PLAN F-40.16-02, TYP. -----APLt V ~"' k'X~ f~r::',~1 R35" ---_ ___ 1 -_ ---~~ ROAD) "' ·\ --~ ~ ' --\ ' R35" ------ \ \ \ ! ••. 1 ,~ ~- SIDEWALK TO CONNECT ! I I: TO FUTURE TRAIL~J 3al- ~ Sf S2 HORIZONTAL SCAL£ IN F££T a• DEPTll CONCRETE W/ t2•x12• SCORING PA.TTtRN ~ z..._ __ __ "·~ 1'.{)h~f~?i/'~~}J:?;}:~i·/~ ?,~ ;.~·)<-~·;I w u z / ~ I ,_ I : iii I N DATE: O 20 SECTION A-A N.T.S. ~TENW PRECAST CONCRtTE SLOPED MOUNTABLE CURB WSDOT F~I0.82-01, TYP. RNISHED ROAt/WA.Y GRADE ELLIOTT FARM NE:W SIGN DETAILS -~ STOPII ~ RJ-SR Rf-f (JO"X36") (JO"XJO") ® CID (!) HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FffT I SHEET RIGHT IN -RIGHT OUT I uF OJ/09/20161 -. -. . I ir~~~~=~ ~~~~~t~~~~,f---------------------, " I loCOOSE 8th Street. S\/lle 200. Betle~ue. WA~~ Offk:e (-425) 889-6747 Proje,:,IContoct Glen DuB<e,..,J P'hon&: .(25-250-0$82 EXHIBIT 2 )>. C: "' .... -oG"l -.:i:: C: .... "' -:z:z u, I C: I :,:, c,,-oG"l :i:: "' .... ><o :!: C: !!:!-< .... O 0 .. ~ '-"' 0 .• "' ~ 0 .. "' r-r- 0 .... -, ~ "' ~ U) I 6 -SITE - 0 1 I ~ I I I I I I ' . I ,/ I 1/!~J I I l / 11: 1111 ,/ I • I Ii I i I 'I 1..-...... i / / /q j ;i,,/111 . . -, I I I~ I i;!{J/ /"1-// I I§ :t;/1 ;/ I§ f f l f /! __ s II 11 I 1, II I I I! I f 1 VI I II I fl/ ( I ,! /1 ! f I, I I Denis Law c· f -__ _:Ma:yo~r ------~ r 1ty O t May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 -.t_g·trw11 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated design deviation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6.07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7-0808.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized residential access connection to SR-169, which is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access. The spacing of new public street connection and the existing single family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor can any feasible alternative as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0.00 collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) and million vehicle miles of travel (MWM). Staff has completed a review of the subject request and finds the proposed access spacing deviation request is approved, subject to the following conditions: Exhibit 24 Renton City Hall • l 055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject to WSDOT approval. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Enclosure: Elliott Farms (SR-169) Draft Channelization Plan (CHl) cc: Ramin Pazooki, local Agency & Development Services Manager WSOOT Jennifer Hennin& Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick a. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD July 5, 2016 Mr. Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A98057 In future correspondence please refer to: Project Tracking Code: 051815-23-KI Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director State HistOfic Preservation Officer Property: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H.MOD Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Re: Archaeology -Survey Requested Dear Mr. Close: Thank you for contacting the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). We have reviewed the documentation for this project. The project area has a high probability for containing precontact and historical archaeological resources. The project area is adjacent to the historical channel of the Cedar River and a portion of a historic trail system is within the project area. Please be aware that archaeological sites are protected from knowing disturbance on both public and private lands in Washington States. Both RCW 27.44 and RCW 27.53.060 require that a person obtain a permit from our Department before excavating, removing, or altering Native American human remains or archaeological resources in Washington. Failure to obtain a permit is punishable by civil fines and other penalties under RCW 27.53.095, and by criminal prosecution under RCW 27.53.090. Chapter 27.53.095 RCW allows the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation to issue civil penalties for the violation of this statute in an amount up to five thousand dollars, in addition to site restoration costs and investigative costs. Also, these remedies do not prevent concerned tribes from undertaking civil action in state or federal court, or law enforcement agencies from undertaking criminal investigation or prosecution. Chapter 27.44.050 RCW allows the affected Indian Tribe to undertake civil action apart from any criminal prosecution if burials are disturbed. Identification of archaeological resources during construction is not a recommended detection method because inadvertent discoveries often result in costly construction delays and damage to the resource. We request a professional archaeological survey of the project area be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities. The completed survey should be sent to DAHP and the interested Tribes for review prior to ground disturbance. We also recommend consultation with the concerned Tribes' cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. Exhibit 26 State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project and we look forward to receiving the survey report. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Assistant State Archaeologist, Local Governments (360) 586-3088 gretchen.k,i,hler@dahp. wa. gov cc. Dennis Lewarch, THPO, Suquamish Tribe Laura Murphy, Archaeologist, Muckleshoot Tribe Cecile Hansen, Chair, Duwamish Tribe State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL --NT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 Application Date: April 13, 2015 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058-8120 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building pennit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as ro osed. Recommendations: CC&Rs: Bob Mac Onie 05/1512015 Elliott Fanns is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. ----, ____ ,, _______________ _ Recommendations: Preliminary Plat: Bob Mac Onie 5/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not direcUy impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGENDn block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do indude in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Ran: July 12, 2016 Exhibit 27 Page 1 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI ~ . NT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use : . >i",<:~~J~,i,fr,/f~:-.~%~t?t1E:?-{1$ft1\1¥-'#;\.:.-·;j('qyJ.::0\J)fJZZ(t:1"t ,,,_ .. t"'9~~-~'-:Zli~.:;>, .',1:r.f·:·\;\-·: sv.·.-.01~·,'A}"j;'tJ -·~-zA. .. ~<;ih~, :,:c11~ h.'\. :~~91: · Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are Issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Stenn Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Fanns Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Note: Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surlace water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 2 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI --NT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton® Version 1 I July 29, 2015 The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title re art notin the vested prope owner. Recommendations: A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMENTS (from Community Services) 1. Parks Impact Fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street Trees: Space street trees 40 feet on center, not 30 feet on center. 30 Feet to street lights or further. Playground exists at new entrance. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 3 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL!~ . NT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 =:::,,m •. ,:-::,~; ;;;_ "'~:;:.z-;A:,:,:;]'i,;;;:. !!\;;:,. :'iii\;:;,.,;1',:::'.',\:U;,::.::,:'c';:;:ili;,:;c.;17;,~k:"ll. ,:,:;t::;,~,_:::;r,J;l;;;;,;-::.,,,,:;;;Jiill •• :;::;,,w,:;::,.,~:;::ili/,,•~ ... ,. ",::: 1 ,~:::-. · ~:::::_,· :;;:,_ .;:::;,:,e::i:-. ·:l\:::-.1,-;;;~, ""ii•,.,\,l;l_.;,;:,lM'. · . .:-. t ~;,:;•''&<'~·-:"'",-• \"°' .;:;:,_ 8 •·,• ::0 :i)tjX.'1,lil:\!~j'j':_· .. ===="""""'-"'""'""" . . ,?,ti-"~f ttrl!lx~l:1f,;;i\t1wrltzt}f:~: . .!N~(,; i~lffi~t~ I_~,:~~ , · !1;~J.9';J . ""':;;;;"'"'· ! :,f!!le;":.::··'cc'l)c;'°'· ;a,ll\Vl!c:. :::• .. ~.i;,g i!:~u=•-. 1. P~rk-~ lmpai:;t fee p~r Ordinace~?-~?9-~l?J~-~~: . ___ _ Recommendations: 2. Trees shall be spaced 40 feet on center, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, waterlines, and sewerlines, 10 feet from driveway approaches, 40 feet from traffic signs (stop, yield, etc.) and intersections without signs. Use only small maturing street trees if overhead electric wires exist. Other landscape trees shall also be small maturing species where overhead utilities exist. Recommendations: EXISTING CONDITIONS: WATER: Water service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. SEWER: Sewer service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. STORM: There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property .. STREETS: There are no frontage improvements. CODE REQUIREMENTS Water Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Water availability certificate will be required. Sewer 1. Sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Sewer availability certificate will be required. Surface Water 1. There is conveyance/structure system at NE comer of the subject property. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report dated April 10, 2015 was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers. The proposed 45 lot subdivision, zoned R 14, 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. The 6.07 acre site is located within the Lower Cedar River basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this stte falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development will be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways in two drainage basins. One basin will be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the other one will drain to a proposed 24 inch conveyance system along the project fronting WA 169. Flow control is not required for this project as the project is within half mile with Cedar River and can direct discharge to Cedar River per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. The drainage report must include the level 3 conveyance capacity analysis of the downstream system to the outlet for the total tributary area to the outfall as required by the 2009 KCSWDM amended by City Of Renton to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed stonn system and that the approval of direct discharge will not cause flooding. Water quality is required for this Development and developer is intending to use existing off site wet pond for water quality. The off site wet pond was built by previous development. Water quality treatment for the Elliot Farm's development must be provided per the 2009 King County Stonn Water Design Manual. Applicant must provide a copy of the drainage report that was initially developed for the cottonwood, molasses creek and the proposed Elliot farm's developments that sized and approved the water quality pond by King County. 3. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015 was submitted by Terra Associates, Inc. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native's soil. Ground water/seepage was observed in 5 of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. Soil types encountered are glacially derived and alluvial. The glacial and alluvial soils have low permeability and would not be a suitable receptor soil for discharge of development stormwater using infiltration/retention facilities. 4. Surface water system development fee is $0.540 per square foot of new impervious surface, but not less than $1012. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation/Street Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 4 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLII~ .. IT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton© PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 .-., ,;•· ·:::·ii·,~~"" '.· ;~l&-1~. ····;..u1.'1· !:;$~"',~;fftl}i•,C ,:tit';.1.Jf?N~'iif};'. ¢'·ct-'-'q;4-,-~,;.:.{kff~-··\1't~f;,~"1-~~\r~#-.)i·,,P'' ·-it,:f:W'~iltki~ti~~Ji[Jl.~-·~,. ~ . ,,., ·;.'-,i., M-:,..-;,·-'.,,;.·,-. t -.:;-,i·n-,, .. ,." J.t 1-;;. _:i,t1 iifllfill-~ ·,c_ .• : __ .ittt.¥1J~?ff":~l~r:'.}f.\:~l{?1?If:~J'."fftir¥~~{~ronm:f@idJQt~,u-~~:i ·,_ . .Jl~it@riffloilM(~(~ki. 1. Frontage improvements along SR 169 will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate 6, 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder may be reduced to 4 feet. 2. 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 right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 foot planter strip, a 5 foot sidewalk and LED street lighting installed along both sides of the street One side of the road must be marked NO PARKING. 3. Sidewalk should be continued south side of the roadway front of lot 24 to lot 27, lot 34 to lot 45, and common area to match existing sidewalk to Molasses creek sidewalk. 4. A traffic analysis dated December April 1, 2015 was provided by TENW. The traffic study is required to include all impacted intersections: SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE, SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE. The proposed 45 lot subdivision would generate approximately 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). 5. Primary streets/intersection impacted by this development are: a) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE b) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access c) Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE 6. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees of approximately $53,137.80. 7. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the Post Office. 8. LED street lighting meeting the residential lighting standards will be required per City of Renton Standards. 9. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 10. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveway shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveway shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). 11. The subject property is within the well field Capture Zone/Aquifer area Zone II. The project must comply with special requirement# 6 (Aquifer Protection Area) per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual. General Comments 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. 4. A separate street lighting plan shall be included with the civil drawings. 5. All utilities servin the site are required to be unde rounded. Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee ls paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 5 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI ~. NT LUA 15-000242 CITYOF ~ -------Renton~ PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 "'•' . '• ' ''• '' ' · 'JL'tt:"'!t· ' ,,,,t;-·> ·· '"'' ' JJ.,,.,,,," ''' ,.x,, ... , .. ,: .. ~· ,. '\lii,~,l,{.'<11$1!:;~•,;,!\'iif'~~~;;;,\li,iciJ . ''"''Ii' Hl!;'''''''' '•:;;;,~"'·;,, ' '' ·,ff.-: ·:-:' ~-'.'.i',, ~; : Jfi'.l~iii· ,~1 • ~ ,·_ ~f-Wfitif}:'i~. 'tJ-:j~fj\-;!~?ff:~.:t:t}i1!~~-:-~~nt1~i;®:iP1'Thl~1,~. :i· 1-' --~~riiJ\a,~:QOY'f 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 vehide with 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as ro osed. If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must ~~P!Y ~i!h t~e ~~id~n~i.~I a~~s r<?~d ~!~-~~~.!:.c!s.~_!l].~.!3_~~~n}~~-~~i_p_~ ~~~~_(~!'J1-~--~-6-~6~ ~!~~_e_t_~t~-:i~a~~~L -·'>···· If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. ~Re·d;~-ign the project into·conc1·ominiu-ms-i~ o~erto-retaii,privatEI roads througho~t the p~ject OR provide a public aCCe:s:-s-i-()adWay to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Ma le Valle Hi hwa Recommendations: CC&Rs: Comments previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect Comments are the same previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC332 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do indude in said "LEGEND" block the Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 6 of 13 I ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL!r. "IT LUA 15-000242 CITYOF 0. ---------Renton v PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director _ A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include lhe following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a weUand management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 7 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI ~ -\IT LUA 15-000242 --------Ren ton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 December 16, 2015 'i;.W,~f~~\~_}; < L t:kc~f~ijl~tt~~/'r,~''i'a~~knin®~i>n~:~ ·• Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a owner. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 8 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI---~T LUA 15-000242 C!TYOF ~ --------Renton <SJ PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 31 April 22, 2016 A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the parcels direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network. or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right in/right out only) from Road B to SR 169. -- A subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the ff:l~_idential acce~s-road stan_d_c1rds_ of the R~nton Mu_nicipal_ Code .(_RMC 4 6 _060 __ Street Standard~): Submit an approved right in/right out (RIRO) channelization plan from WSDOT. !,!flma~ntena_i:,ce_~tri~istob!lloc,,tedbe~irl~~()~t~l-___ _ _____ _ ____ •... ___ . _ .~-.. !~_per lands~_ei!1§J_ ~er?~~ ~nJ~.~~ ~! _l?t -~~:.~~~-~~-~! __ ~ith _r~~~-~~Y :--~~l~--~a-~-k~~~ -~-~-~~~-~ri~s ~s ~ppli~bl_~_ for _!_~ese I?!~: _ 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot 1B_and.join to pedestrian path through deve.lopme~t. 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13. Not 16 feet as ro osed. Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 9 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI ~ -NT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® Recommendations: 1. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Multi family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 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. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4 3 050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement. providing fencing and signage. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing ~ less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual lrees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, lhe applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit Is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Ea le Mana ement Guidelines (2007 and /or your U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ermit. r---------~~--------~· ~_.,....-..-,.,,...=--~----·-c~----w--,.-~~~-~·-.,...,.....,.,,---~,-,,-,,.-...,_~.,.,..,.~~"T""<"--"" f2 1.::lli~a!d!!1:1JJ~:Wli~~!l.i)1&L~~ ~.~ .. ~L,a.....~~-.... .ki} 1~;l.t!\1J11,r~:.:t~~iJ~~-tJfu;;j~ , 1: 1_ ft_maintenance strip is to be located _behind ROW (typ) __ ,.,. ·-·---·------.... ._, . _______ .. __ .... ___ , .. __________ ...... ·-· Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for the Elliott Farms at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (APN('s) 2223059004) and have U,e following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS Water Water service is provided by the City of Renton. Sewer Wastewater service is provided by the City of Renton. Storm The existing properties do not contain stormwater facilities. There are stormwater mains located in Maple Valley Hwy. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. The applicant has provided a water availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior ta approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SEWER 1. The applicant has provided a sewer availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar RWer Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A surface water development fee of $1.485.00 per new single family dwelling unit will apply. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $66,825.00. This is subject to final design and payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. 2. A drainage report, dated April 10, 2015, was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. with the site plan application. Based on the City of Renton's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard for Forested Conditions. The development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. All core requirements and special requirements have been discussed in the provided drainage report. 3. The existing site is currently undeveloped with remnants from an existing farm, inciuding partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. The site topography is generally flat with a steep slope in the southwest comer of the site, which also contains a weUand with a 50 foot that will remain undisturbed. A portion of the runoff from the existing site drains to the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into a roadside ditch along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), where flows are conveyed west. 4. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015, completed by Terra Associates, Inc., for the site has been provided. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native soils. Groundwater/seepage Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 10 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI -. NT LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 f.:~.tfi}l"'S~~t~~S-d:;{f~ .-··lH".,tii".'-',_~•":J:•'l·H'.s'PE:-irfYWfi~f~t •,y,., .. -:~-,, .... ,,;,. ~ ''·(" •. ,, .-·,ti.;'¢:\j_-,'\'f.i" ··Si,' N .,.-•.-< '"'1 '"'''*'1'ill' s .,-,, ',·'ff' '•'. ·;.,t . ';j .• ~ . ''·J:;.Oi·' ,:•;.·,'!/,"" iJ!fintWfl"''NVl·"~J;_P.t(WfiZlt;i).:~J~_\1JJF·!~f~1I:Jt3:_r:-;.~;}·'; ~;:/~·~rJ,f-~f i:t;\fiJ;;Ol)li&.~160~:er 1f~tj8"fti~-~~~tdo~:QW-1 was observed in five of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. The report discusses the soil and groundwater characteristics of the site and provides recommendations for project design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations presented in this report discount the use of full infiltration due to the underlying dense glacial till soil. 5. The project site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and the flowpath from the project site discharge point is less than a half mile to the 100 year floodplain of the Cedar River and qualifies for the direct discharge exemption in accordance with Section 1.2.3.1 of the City Amendments to the KCSWDM and must adhere to all requirements thereof. Staff Comments: i. The conveyance system analysis provided in the preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) does not provide a complete analysis of the system to the outfall in the Cedar River in accordance with the requirements for the direct discharge exemption as outlined In Section 1.2.3 of the 2009 KCSWDM. Applicant shall provide a complete conveyance system analysis, including new conveyance pipes within the proposed development and exisling conveyance pipes from the development boundary to the outfall in the Cedar River. Applicant shall demonstrate the outfall and existing conveyance system is adequately sized to support the added run off from the development. 6. The development is required to provide basic water quality treatment prior to discharge. The development is proposing to convey surface water to an existing water quality facility (wetpond), located at the southwest comer of the WA 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. As stated in the drainage report, the existing off site wetpond was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominiums, areas of the WSDOT right of way, as well as the proposed Elliot Farms project. Staff Comments: i. The applicant shall complete a level 3 downstream analysis verifying capacity of the existing wetpond and conveyance system. ii. The applicant shall provide a copy of the as built plans and final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood Water Quality Pond. 7. No downstream flooding or erosion Issues were identified in the drainage report. Addttional Staff Comments: i. A Construction Stormwater Pennit from Department of Ecology is required. ii. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is required to be submitted with the construction permit application. TRANSPORTATION 1. The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) along the north property lines. Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is classified as a Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Frontage improvements along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to accommodate six (6) 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder width may be reduced to 4 feet. Existing right of way (ROW) width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4 6 060, half street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet (44 feet from centerline), a 0.5 foot curb, an 8 foot planting strip, an 8 foot sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group has determined and will support an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), which shall be installed by the developer as part of the proposed development, will allow retention of the existing curb line. Developer will be required to install 6 foot planting strips and 5 foot sidewalks behind the existing curb along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Staff Comments: i. Applicant will need to submit an application to the City requesting a modification of the street frontage improvements as outlined in City code 4 9 250C5d. ii. The posted speed limit of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is 50 mph along this section of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. The required clear zone would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee in lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighting along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. 2. The proposal includes a new internal roadway providing direct access via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to the north and access through the existing access easement through the existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC) to the west. The applicant has proposed a street modification to provide a paved roadway width of 20 feet with 5 foot sidewalks and 8 foot planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips alternate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. Staff Comments: i. Emergency services access within 150 feet of all homes via a 20 foot paved roadway is required. As such, parking is not allowed along the internal access road proposed for the project. 3. The proposal includes three (3) 16 foot wide alleys. Alley 1 provides access to lots 24 26, Alley 2 provides access to lots 5 13, and Ran: July 12, 2016 Page 11 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL'~. NT LUA15-000242 Kenton 0 Alley 3 provides access to lots 1 4. i. Applicant shall submit a modification request for approval by City of Renton Fire Prevention for 16 foot alley access roads to lots 1 13 and 24 26. ii. If the modification request is approved, sprinkler systems would be required for each of the lots accessed from the 16 foot alleys. 4. ADA access ramps shall be installed at all street crossings. Ramps are not shown at the crossing between lots 33 and 34 and at the crossing located at the west end of the development. 5. Street lighting and street trees are required to meet current city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and will be reviewed during the construction utility permit review. 6. A traffic analysis dated April 1, 2015, was provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). The site generated traffic volumes were calculated using data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, (2009). The traffic analysis is required to indude all impacted intersections: Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)1140th Way SE, Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/140th Way SE. Based on the calculations provided, the proposed development would average 321 new daily vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 27 new vehicle trips, with 22 vehicles exiting and 5 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 new vehicle trips, with 21 vehicles entering and 10 vehicles exiting the site. 7. A supplementary traffic analysis, dated December 11, 2015, was provided by TENW in order to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Traffic volumes remained unchanged from the preliminary analysis previously noted. The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: 50 percent to/from the west on Maple Valley Hwy (:/'IA 169) 30 percent to/from the east on SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy (:/'IA 169) 20 percent to/from the south on 140th Way SE As detailed in the report the proposed project is not expected to lower the levels of service of the surrounding intersections included in the traffic study. Direct public access to and from the site via Maple Valley Hwy (:/'IA 169) shall be channelized to provide right in/right out access only. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation Impact fees. 8. Refer to City code 4 4 080 regarding driveway regulations. Driveways shall be designed in accordance with City standard plans 104.1 and 104.2. 9. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction of the development at the time of application for the building permit. The current rate of transportation impact fee is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit for condominiums. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $69,583.95. Traffic impact fees will be owed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. 10. Paving and trench restoration shall comply with the City's Trench Restoration and overlay Requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Adequate separation between utilities shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a. 7 ft minimum horizontal and 1 ft vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10 ft horizontal and 1.5 ft vertical. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall confirm to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. A landscaping plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Each plan shall be on separate sheets. 4. All electrical, phone, and cable services and lines seiving the proposed development must be underground. The construction of th~se franc~_ise utilities must be inspected and approved by" a C!~_«?.!.~~)on ~spe~!.S'!.:..-------~ .. ,----···"-·. ,,.,_ ..... , .... ____ ......... _ .... ~ ---·-__ _ ~ T_ap_~r landscaping across frontage of_ lot 18: Align lot 1_7 _with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. 3._ Te_rminate _sidewalk at lot 18 and join.to pedestrian path through development. _ ---·-------------------___________ ---···-·--·---- 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495. 10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems. no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as Ran: July 12, 2016 Version 41 Page 12 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPL -~ NT LUA 15-000242 CITY OF l:!J:\ --------Renton~ PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13 and 24 through 26. Not 16 feet as proaosed. Turning radius to Alley 2 does not meet code either. Ran: July 12, 2016 Version 41 Page 13 of 13 Leslie Betlach ------Renton® Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: LUAlS-000242 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 MAPLE VALLEY HWY Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would be divided the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 8.04 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium . The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year fioodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. Review Type: ' Date Assigned: Community Services Review-Version 4 06/22/2016 Date Due: 07/05/2016 Project Manager: Clark Close Environmental Impact Earth Animals Air Environmental Health Water Energy/Natural Resources Pia nts Housing Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/Glare Hi stori c/Cultura I Preservation Recreation Airport Environmental Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added c?~in{~~ .kM µ,r0tvfJY7aY't:c 5b7D~ ~e~~rEai!' c oa'9 c:2,---; -fq Terry Flatley -----Rentoi10 Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: LUAlS-000242 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 MAPLE VALLEY HWY Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-Jot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Resldential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would be divided the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 8.04 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,91S SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots wourd be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium . The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year fioodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam !Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. Review Type: Community Services Review-Version 4 Date Assigned: 06/22/2016 Date Due: 07/05/2016 Project Manager: Clark Close Environmental Impact Earth Animals Air Environmental Health Water Enerrru/Natural Resources Plants Housins Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/Glare Historic/Cultural Preservation Recreation Airport Environmental Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Recommendation· Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered In Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added corrections in Correctio,,,.. • Planting strips -include an 8-foot wide planting strip at all public street locations. Use large maturing trees where no overhead electric wires exist and spaced SO-feet on-center. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 1~-- Denis Law .-··.·· a City of/' - ____ :M:ay:or~--------,01 'I L~®rfi (l[])Jfi 1 July 13, 2016 Gretchen Kaehler DAHP PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: ELLIOTI FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT COMMENT RESPONSE LEITER LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Dear Ms. Kaehler: Thank you for your comments related to the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat proposal; dated July 5, 2016 wherein you requested the City require an archeological survey of the project area to be conducted by a professional archeologist prior to ground disturbing activities. Your letter has been included in the official project file and the reviewing official will consider your concerns and request as part of their review. You have been made a party of record and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7289 or cclose@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov On the 21st day of June, 2016, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ReNotice of Application and acceptance documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached Ivana Halvorson, Barghausen Applicant Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot Owner Patrick Lennon Owner 300' Surrounding Property Owners See attached Parties of Record See attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON \j ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) ,,,,""'11 1111 ............. Q\..l y P ,,,,, ..:f" ~ ... , ... ,"'\\"\"" oii.. ''" I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante 3 .r"'r,•"'188IO+~,,,, ~ ~ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act §'>ic,l;tffe 'cise!ih11>_p~~ mentioned in the instrument. ;:; :::! i -o • ' "', ~ ,; ~ \ v <o# _. ~ ~ ~cP. al,c : :: z~,,.~< ~ - Dated: fr. ( \ O '~ 9-1 7 ,,-:i' ~ E i/J( :)) J Ol fe \\,,,..;. _ ry Public in and for the State o Notary (Print): ____ u::.· i~l""l +---1-P .... cw.Jl,....l:s;.,(•t....<S:,.' ___________ _ My appointment expires: ,q ·, r-. t·--::1 ':\0-o-\ CX <J-<-' ·t 0 / Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology '' Envlronmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region ' Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers ' Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers ... Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box47015 Olymoia, WA 98504-701S KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Jalaine Madurai Attn: SEPA Responsible Official 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY {DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology'' Attn: Misty Blair PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Duwamish Tribal Office ' 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division • Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 WDFW -Larry Fisher' 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 City of Newcastle Attn: Tim McHarg Director of Community Development 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 Newcastle, WA 98056 Puget Sound Energy Wendy Weiker, Community Svcs. Mgr. 355 1101• Ave NE Mallstop EST llW Bellevue, WA 98004 Puget Sound Energy Doug Corbin, Municipal Liaison Mgr. 6905 South 2281• St Kent, WA 98032 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. " Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program•• Attn: Laura Murphy 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program •• Attn: Erin Slaten 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation• Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Charlene Anderson, AICP 1 ECO 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City ofTu kw Ila Jack Pace 1 Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 '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 emall address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov "Karen Walter, Laura Murphy and Erin Slaten with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. are emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist1 Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following emall addresses: KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us / Laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us L erin.slaten@muckleshoot.nsn.us "'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 Dee Thierrv 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton, WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent. WA 98032 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, 6104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 DORIS KNIGHT 15150140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 Leland Grel!orv Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 Emilv O'Meara Joanne Grel!orv 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Patrick Lennon Lennon lnvestments 1 Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall Citv. 98024 5568900000 2314300340 5568900000 AHN HEE JUNG+HUR JAE LYUNG AQUINO FRANCIS E+GLADYS L BANKS SUSAN L 15150 140TH WAY SE #A-102 15461141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #JlOl RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2223059026 5568900000 BERKLEY MARK L BNSF BRILL RHIANNON 15150 140TH WAY SE #M303 PO BOX 961089 15150 140TH WAY SE #S201 RENTON, WA 98058 FORT WORTH, TX 76161 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 6806100740 2314300500 BROUGHTON GARY L CALLON ROBBERT CARPENTER CRAIG L +BARBARA L 27822 31ST PL S 14512 SE 154TH ST 15408 141ST PL SE AUBURN, WA 98011 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300100 5568900000 COKE C DALLAS COLLIER BRENT LEE+NICOLE M DAHLEN JILL 15150 140TH WAY SE #P104 14154 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #J103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300970 2314300490 S568900000 ELLIOTI FARM HOMEOWNERS ASC EVANGELISTA REY C & MARIA J EWING TAMMY\, ' 16915 SE 272ND ST #100-197 14115 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #S-105 COVINGTON, WA 98042 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300190 5568900000 6806100020 FALES ROBERT C+NGUYEN CRYST FERGUSON MARC C+HARRISON ST GARCIA ROBERT F+FLORDELIZA 14198 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #T-201 15319 145TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300160 5568900000 2223059118 GOWEN MICHAEL K+PANTHA C GRANT AIMEE P GREGORY LELAND W+JOANNE M 14186 SE 154TH PL PO BOX 1232 14235 SE RENTON MAPLE VALLEY RD RENTON, WA 98058 BELLEVUE, WA 98009 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300470 2314300530 GUSTIS STEPHEN J HALL ROBERT G HAMILTON FREDERICKJ 15150 140TH WAY SE #M104 15409 141ST PL SE 15422 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 5568900000 2314300210 HARDEBECK AMANDA L HARDY CYNTHIA M HEINZ RICHARD A 15150 140TH WAY SE #M202 15150 140TH WAY SE #P204 25526 SE 275TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98058 2314300211 2314300560 5568900000 HEINZ RICHARD A HILL CHERYLL & DOUGLAS W HILL MICHAEL K 15462 141ST PL SE 15438 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #N202 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300230 2314300220 2314300070 HIRANO KENDALL S+ THUY-LINH HONG JOHNNY+YENNIWATI SUSAN HUNT ANDREW R+LISA R 15470 141ST PL NE 15466 141ST PL SE 14136 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300400 2314300S40 2314300541 HUYNH HUY VAN PHUC+SAKHONE JACOX DONALD M JACOX DONALD M 15437 141ST PL SE 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N 15426 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 SEATILE,, WA 98103 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300460 5568900000 5568900000 JAMES THOMAS L JENSEN LINDA D JOHNSON AARON R 15413 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #U203 15150 140TH WAY SE #P103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300440 2314300180 2314300990 KIDD LAVERN C KING BRUCE A+KATIE A KING COUNTY-ROADS 15421141ST PL SE 14194 SE 154TH PL 5004TH AVE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 SEATILE,WA 98004 2314300410 6806100480 6806100710 KOZAREZOV SERGEY LE HUYEN CHI LEE DENNYWING+YAN PING LIA 15433 141ST PL SE 14518 SE 153RD PL 14534 SE 154TH ST RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300250 2314300020 2314300010 LEE THOMAS H MAI DINH HAl+DO CAT-UYEN MILLER EASTER & DIANE 15478 141ST PL SE 14106 SE 154TH PL 14100 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300060 5568900000 2314300130 MROCZEK LAWRENCE C & JUDI A NEAGLE LAMAR J NELSON MICHAEL H 14130 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #R-103 14172 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300040 2314300450 2314300150 NGUYEN DINH & LAN NGUYEN HANG LE NGUYEN HUY+SHUM SAU MAN 14118 SE 154TH PL 15417 141ST PL SE 14182 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300520 5568900000 2314300090 NGUYEN LANH V & THERESE H NOLL BERNARD V PAUL MARY M 1S418 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #T-304 14148 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300510 5568900000 5568900000 PAYSENO GORDON A+JENNIFER J PEITL RENATA PENTZOLD STACY L 15414 14ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #E-103 15150 140TH WAY SE# N203 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 6806100720 2314300110 5568900000 PHAM THANH-TUNG PONTON ANTHONY W+JUDITH N REAU LINDA 4603 NE 1ST CT 14160 SE 154TH PL 29016 SE 477TH ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98058 ENUMCLAW, WA 98022 2314300120 5568900000 2314300030 RODRIGUES YVETTE M+CHRISTOP SCHOFIELD JOHN M+LYNN M H SCHRENK WENZHEN+YINAN GUO 14166 SE 154TH PL 2505 N MEADOW AVE 14112 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300240 2314300480 5568900000 SHEAJOSHUA+RACHAEL SITTHIDET KHAMSING SKINNER TALVIN 15474 141ST PL SE 1540S 141ST PL SE 15140 140TH SE #D101 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 980S8 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300200 5568900000 SOU SOPHEAVY SPISAK DIANA M SYMENS BRENTW 15150 140TH WAY SE #ElOl 15458 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #C-104 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98056 5568900000 5568900000 5568900000 THIERRY DEIRDRE E TORRETTA MICHAEL P+HEATHER TORR ETTA NICHOLAS JAMES+REB 15150 140TH WAY SE #M105 15150 140TH WAY #N34 15150 140TH WAY SE #T302 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300080 2314300390 TRACEY JOHN+ SUSAN TRAN LONG TUPLING PAMELA 57292 MERION 14142 SE 154TH PL 15441141ST PL SE LA QUINTA, CA 92253 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300550 2314300170 VERGEL PETER G VU MAILY+VIET H WALLACE KENNETH L 15150 140TH WAY SE #ClOl 15432 141ST PL SE 14190 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 5568900000 5568900000 WAXJACKJ WHEELER TIMOTHY AND CHRISTI WRIGHT DOUGLAS R+LAWSON CHE 15150 140TH WAY SE #D-102 15150 140TH WAY SE #U202 15150 140TH WAY SE #K101 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300430 2314300140 2314300050 WRUBLE JOHN WUJOHNJ ZAED DIAA ELDIN 15425 141ST PL SE 14178 SE 154TH PL 1520 NW AMBERCREST WAY #102 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 SILVERDALE, WA 98383 2314300051 ZAED DIAA ELDIN 14124 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RE-NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: June 21, 2016 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, 5A-H, MOD PROJECT NAME: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 14Sth Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would be divided the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 8.04 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. PROJECT LOCATION: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS·M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a ONS-M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed ONS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: April 13, 2015 May 5, 2015 Ivana Halvorsen/ Barghausen Consulting Engineers/ 18215 12nd Ave S / Kent, WA 98032 / 425·251-6222 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat/ LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, 5A-H, MOD NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: _______________ CITY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE ND.: ______________ _ Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Renton Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, Street Modification Building Permit, Construction Permit, Sign Permit Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborlst Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, Geotechnical Engineering Study Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 The subject site is designated COMP-RHO on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R-14 on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-UOA; 4-3-050; 4-4; 4-6-060; 4-7; 4-9 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing Codes and regulations as cited above. • Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnica/ Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. dated February 25, 2015 or an updated report submitted at a later date. • The applicant·sha/1 remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected area by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. A tree planting plan shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to·construction permit Issuance. • The applicant shall submit the final drainage report(s} used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond, including the original design, to the Cjty of Renton Plan Reviewer prior to final plot approval. • If any Native American grave(s} or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts} are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to aark H. Close, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on July 5, 2016. If you are interested in attending the future public hearing, please contact the Planning Division at (425) 430-6578 for the date and time. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way1 Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat/ LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: _______________ CllY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: ______________ _ ___ .,~~ RE-NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON•SIGNIFJCANCE·MITIGATED (DNS-M) A"'Hl1<Applmjonh.,...,,r,ltdo,,:1a<mptm.,ldlilu,Do ""'""'11olC ~b~t:.::. Dl,!<icn of tM a.,. of RontDn. n,0 followl"C :.ilfly daulb::,~::,!.~c:::::,~:::::;,.1 DAnDFN(ITUl!OFA!'PUCATlON; Juoeil, lOli lANDU5ENUMlnt: PROJfCT LOCATION; PERMITAl'l'I.IU.TlOfl C.O.TE: NOTICJ Of OOMPUR APPUCATION, APPUCAlfT/l'IIOJKT CCNTACf p-, LUAlS.ooaI4J, eCT, PP. SA·II. MOD Ellloltf"m,Pr.lrmm,,yf'!lt 14lQ1 M1~, Valloy ""°'l' ~% CiTYO~ . --·-·"""""Renton© r.m,lu/R .. i....,Requot1od: En!O,onll'ltlllal IIE.PA) RNow, -lmlnary Pio~ ~•rinl tam nor SIio ,ion, 5trHtMadlllatio,i ••o~fflod Studlot, Cnticol -Aopo,t, To<hnlcal lnformollon floport, Jtalllc lmp,ct A.1............,llrt,ori,CAopo",W«londpojlnHtlon,LfflarolUndt,m>odl<!f al GooloikAllk. --iqlnoai"I 5t<>dy 1<><.o11<1n,..noro1pplk:IUORm•1 b, __ u,..i,o,f'fO)KCMl~p~on, p..,..,,.dMloptlOdMUSII..,. Dopanmar,taltom..,.....ll'• fo,N>nll<o.v.l_... ltUII-P1ann1n1 Di.Won,-..-R, ..... ci.,.~a11.1DSS5<>vl!ia ....... WO/f,RMto,i, WA ·-Toe subfe<, ,ita Is o'vol"1•l•d COMP-IIHD on tho Cll'I c,j'Renton Comp•ohoos""' Lind u,, Mop and R·l4 on Ill• Oly',Iooln1 Mo9-- Tho pro)o" ..in oo ,ul>joct to 10, Cl<('5EPAon:!IOlnOI, ~MC4-Ullll.; 4-,i.-05a;4-t;t-6-06!!;.f.7;-4-9or>doth«a~i<ablllcadelaodrqulallord "''"'""'""' fli< """"'""I J,,Mtjptic,n "''"'"'°' ...ml likoly 00 imi>Off oot«Mt!Mbyoxirtqcodel '"" "'IIU•tloOI Hcllod-· PraJ•d """"""'°" J/la!I b.o rrr;<Jired h> c,:r,rrp/y with th .. n,com,Mndailans J<,uml ht rflo G«lie<ltrt/cal EnglnnriniJ srud1 pr,,p<Srffl by J"snr Aaodafa,, Inc. drw.d ~brua,y 1$, 2015 ar on upr/otod rt1pffl ><tb"'lmd ara later daM. Th, app//aml oh,r/J ,._.,.. th, abt/ng COi'lafteft,<Jttdallan/•J Within Ille wrrl""d bu/far and,,,.._ the a/fe(l,:d area Ir)' p/ant/l!IJ lttOJ al>d sJln,t,s wl<llln tli• 31>-/oOC nana'ard ....rland t,,Jffu b1 hand and wit/tout,,_.., modl/nr,y. A ltH plaatlnp plan >ltaU h pnr,/hd h> tlnr Cl/rNIOI Planning J>ro}fff Manapr /r,t rnlow Olld approlllll pr/r,rh> ,,11,nno<thllt pv,n/1! WU<lnai. Tin! app/katll mall subm!t tlnr pnaJ drvktall" npo,f(•/ ..,..,i u, l,uJJd rfle CM!°""""" """"' quallty pond, llldlJdlnt IINt t>rlglnol da)g1>, ro !IN Oty af-.O />Jan 11.-., pnartaJlllaf plot appravai. If anv /o'affff Amo,rla,n _{,} a, atdloeaioglml/<Wfllnrl .-/lndhm artl/t>m) an fo,md, all camtn,dlaa arlMly shall stop a,,d the -•ar/rlrmopufhllll /lll/lllldlata))I nod/rt/I• Clfy a/ Rarrron p/lrnn/ng d•,oanmao,; (l)IICfflM!d Trlltn' <llllura/ ,:am,r,lltff,. and th• Wmhlngran Stat, aepanmtlll' ofArd,l!f1/0g/""1andHlrf;ori,,-r{OJ1, (omm,ntl on tho abava 1pplaflon m..i l>o•ubn,ltta-PlanolnJ 01'ASlon, 10SS -&'""'1' Wl'f, Rentt!n, w,. 98057, by HIii PM on.Ju!y ,, 1016. lf ,«u ,,. jntt,n;ttod In onendl"II tlia lutuni ouOII< ~"""'-/Ou.. mntlc:l Iha Pl...,.."11 OiYlllon >t (U!i) 430-6018 lot ""9 -an! rtme. Fol••"~ Iha I"""""' of tho !.l'PA Oow,nloatlan, J'OU moy ,~11 •~?Mr or tM hHr1n1 ,n,:J Pf'l'tnC "°"' commenU ro1ardlos Iha propoool l>okiro tr.t HHr1"11 tam/nor. II"°" n ... question,""°"' th~ prcpolil, or"''" ,o 00 mad,, p,rty of n,o,n:I and rEffill..WilloNI lnlum,adon by mai,plnH cmtatttho pr<Jo<1man,..,. . ...,.,,ewl,oS1JtwnltaWfitl<n """"'"'" will W!Dmatl,:ally l,,ocomo, l"l"'l' o/ "'°"'d ,no wlll 00 ,o,mod ofOO"/ dodlk>n on ttn pro1e«- llyllU W<IIJld 1,.., to bo m><10, P•"I' ofrocord to reuWe runh .. lnl<trmatlcn on !hi>''"""'" pml"", campieto !hf< !(J(ffl ,no ,ebJm to, Cltyof-.n, CEO -•lannl"I DM>oon, l0SS Sa. G,adv W"I, Ronton, W.0.98057 ,..m,JAlo NO .. !Ilion Farma Pr.Umin"')' Plot/ LUAis.-000242, EC!', PP, So\,H, ...00 I-IAME, _______________________ _ M.O.ILINGADOIIE!.S: ___________ CITY/!iTATI"/IIP.. ______ _ HLEPHONE~O. ---------- CERTIFICATION :lose, Senior Planner; Tel: !425) 430-7289; Email: I, C-~ II--· C-w;C hereby certify that J copies of the above document were posted in _)_ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: /, { "l-( / /(,, --~-~---------Signed: ____ ~ ___ 1/._~~C&.------=C--- STATE OF WASHINGTON 55 COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that C lh" ~L C \ 9 s e signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Datecl:-''''' "'1111 ' Ii .:- .:::-~ ~'"\'''111 I :: .,,., •• "'1.1, ,,,, ~ 'l .,, • ..i #.1',, A', 'l - -§ O"" +OT"' l'i: f,"" ~ ,.... :: (.i •...c. \ v• ~ :;::rJ>i '• ... ~ :::; ·.~ -'1 I "'°' •1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ e. "•l\(, $ ~ ' "' ~ '"'9 11 _,, .... = I ,~· t11 <C • ,.:, ~ - i1, O,e,,. i,"\"'~'''"" ... +: u"' .;:; 1111 11 WAS\-11~ ,._,$ I I,,'.\\\\\\.,,,'- ublic in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ' ~ '1) l:kl \OJl'i/) My appointment expires: A -·t 1 <T 20 1• --, __ _._.J-\"l"-!?)+''"-'cl'--'---"c-7,.,._~· ·"'"-'-J~--- Denis Law Mayor June 21, 2016 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave 5 Kent, WA 98032 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: Resubmittal of Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has accepted the resubmittal items for the subject application for review. Your project is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on July 11, 2016. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on August 9, 2016 at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner cc: Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot Inc./ Owner(s) Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Leavitt/ Applicant Dee Thierry, Doris Knight 1 J. Wruble, Joanne Gregory 1 Karen Bonaudi, Leland Gregory, Stan Harrison, Emily 0 1 Meara / Parties of Record Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov RE-NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: June 21, 2016 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD PROJECT NAME: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would be divided the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 8.04 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. PROJECT LOCATION: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS-M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated {DNS-M). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPUETE APPLICATION: APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: April 13, 2015 Mays, 201s Ivana Halvorsen/ Barghausen Consulting Engineers/ 18215 72"d Ave S / Kent, WA 98032 / 425-251-6222 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat/ LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD NAME'------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: _______________ CITY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: ______________ _ I Renton Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA} Review, Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, Street Modification Other Permits which may be required: Building Permit, Construction Permit, Sign Permit Requested Studies: Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, Geotechnical Engineering Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: The subject site is designated COMP-RHO on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R-14 on the City's Zoning Map. Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-UOA; 4-3-050; 4-4; 4-6-060; 4-7; 4-9 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts • • • • not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. Project construction shall be iequired to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. dated February 25, 2015 or an updated report submitted at a later date. The applicant shall remove the existing concrete foundation(s) within the wetland buffer and restore the affected area by planting trees and shrubs within the SO-foot standard wetland buffer by hand and without heavy machinery. A tree planting plan shall be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to construction permit Issuance. The applicant shall submit the final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood water quality pond, Including the original design, to the City of Renton Plan Reviewer prior to final plat approval. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeologlcal and Historic Preseroation. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Clark H. Close, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on July 5, 2016. If you are interested in attending the future public hearing, please contact the Planning Division at {425) 430-6578 for the date and time. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. lf you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written .comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. lf you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Elliott Farms Preliminarv Plat/ LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS:---------------CITY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: ______________ _ .S CITYOF ~ ------~Renron ~ 5 7 CONTACT PERSON: Clark H. Close, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7289; Email: cclose@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 June 15, 2016 HAND DELIVERY CIVIL CNGII\JEE.~ING, LAND PLf\NNING. SlJRVFYING RE: Request for Modification for Modified Public Road Cross Sections Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat King County Parcel No. 222305-9004 City of Renton File No. LUA 15-000242 Our Job No. 15374 On behalf of Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., and Lennon Investment, Inc., we are requesting a modification of the City of Renton Street Standards to allow a modified public road design to serve the proposed residential subdivision of Elliott Farms. The project is intended to be a preliminary plat consisting of 45 single-family townhouse dwellings that will be attached in groupings of two and three units. The site will access via SR-169 with a public road segment that will connect to the private road in the Molasses Creek Condominiums parcel. The new intersection at SR-169 will be a right-in/right-out configuration. The following items are enclosed for your review: 1. One (1) Modification Request Narrative 2. One (1) Vicinity Map 3. One (1) set of the 11-x 17-inch reduced Preliminary Plat Plan Set, including: a. Cover Sheet b. Preliminary Plat Map c. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan d. Preliminary Road Plan and Profile e. Preliminary SR-169 Road Improvement Plan f. SR-169 Channelization Plan by TENW dated June 3, 2016 Please initiate your review of this modification at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at this office. Respectfully, ~~ Senior Planner IH/kb 15734c.003.doc enc: As Noted cc: Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. Rick Lennon, Lennon Investment, Inc. Mark Sumrok, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Clark Close Senior Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 June 15, 2016 HAND DELIVERY RE: Resubmittal for Preliminary Plat, SEPA, and Site Plan Review Elliott Farms City File No. LUA 15-000242 Our Job No. 15734 Dear Clark: CIVIi FNGINEERING LANO f-'LANNING. sunVEY/NG We have revised the plans and technical documents for the above-referenced project in accordance with the comments in your letters dated September 15, 2015 and February 1, 2016 reflecting the City's requirements for a public street connection to SR-169. Enclosed are the following documents for your review: 1. Twelve (12) copies of the revised Project Narrative prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016 2. Twelve (12) copies of the SEPA Environmental Checklist prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 2016 3. Four (4) copies of the Draft Covenant to vacate Elliott Farms' direct public access to SR-169 if a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (Parcel No. 556890-0000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek Condominiums parcel. 4. Twelve (12) copies of the updated Density Worksheet 5. Three (3) copies of the Road Modification Request prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016, including: a. Road Modification Request Cover Letter b. Road Modification Request Narrative c. Vicinity Map d. Reduced (11-by 17-inch) Preliminary Plat Plan Set, including: i. Cover Sheet prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. ii. Preliminary Plat Map prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. iii. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. iv. Preliminary Road Plan and Profile Plans prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Clark Close Senior Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Dept. -2 -June 15, 2016 v. Preliminary SR-169 Road Improvement Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. vi. Channelization and SR-169 Access Plan prepared by TENW 6. Twelve (12) copies of the Overall Preliminary Plat Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016 (Sheets 1 and 2 of 7) 7. Five (5) copies of the Preliminary Landscape Plans prepared by Brumbaugh & Associates (Sheets 1 and 2 of 2 -pending) 8. Four (4) copies of the Preliminary Tree Inventory/Clearing Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016 (Sheet 7 of 7) 9. Twelve (12) copies of the Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016 (Sheet 3 of 7) 10. Twelve (12) copies of the Preliminary Street and Profile Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016 (Sheets 4 and 5 of 7) 11. Five (5) copies of the Preliminary Utility Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated June 15, 2016 (Sheet 6 of 7) 12. Twelve (12) copies of the SR-169 Channelization Plan (pending WSDOT approval) prepared by TENW dated June 3, 2016 13. Two (2) copies of the reduced (8-1/2-by 11-inch) Preliminary Plat Plan Set (all sheets, not stapled) 14. One (1) copy of the Colored Maps, including: a. Site Plan b. Landscaping Plan (pending) 15. One (1) compact disk containing PDF copies of the entire submittal package Please contact me at this office with any plan review comments or questions. Thank you. IH/dm/kb 15734c.007.doc enc: As Noted Respectfully, /yv~~ Ivana Halvorsen Senior Planner cc: Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. (w/enc via Newforma) Rick Lennon, Lennon Investments, Inc. (w/enc via Newforma) Mark Sumrok, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. , ____ _ Denis Law .· d City of_/ -____ :M:ay:or~--------, f"',, J l May 12, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 L.~®Jo (lt®ill Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Ac:cess Spacing Deviation Determination Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: This letter is written in response to the proposed 45-unit Elliott Farms multi-family residential development and associated design deviation request from WSDOT's standard requirements under WAC 468-52-040 (3) for managed access to Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169). Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat is a 6.07-acre site located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4- 7-0808.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. Vehicular access to the vacant site is proposed via a new channelized residential access connection to SR-169, which is located approximately 875 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access, approximately 133 feet west of the single family driveway access to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy, and approximately 552 feet west of Pioneer Place at 145th Ave SE. The proposed project is estimated to generate 321 new weekday daily trips with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting), and 31 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). The proposed project also includes abandoning the former single family driveway connection approximately 515 feet east of the Molasses Creek development access. The spacing of new public street connection and the existing single family driveway to 14235 Maple Valley Hwy does not meet the minimum standard requirements of 330 feet of spacing between other public or private connections to the state route, nor can any feasible alternative as a result of proposed elevation grades. The collision rate for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 at the intersection of SR-169 and Molasses Creek access was 0.00 collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) and million vehicle miles of travel (MWM). Staff has completed a review of the subject request and finds the proposed access spacing deviation request is approved, subject to the following conditions: Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov • 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the plats direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169, subject to WSDOT approval. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~'< Ann Fowler ""'~ - Civil Engineer II Enclosure: Elliott Farms (SR·169) Draft Channelization Plan (CHl) cc: Ramin Pazooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSDOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Denis Law Mayor June 2, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 ·--------• o ! City of/l .L~lt®lo( Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vi ncent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Design Clear Zone for the City of Renton Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUA15-000Z4Z, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: It is our understanding that the City of Renton needs to provide a design clear zone letter that documents how the City applies the clear zone for the design of City streets that are also State Highways. This requirement comes from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Design Manual Section 1600.03(2)(a) Roadside and Median. With regards to the design clear zone, given the posted speed of 50 mph along this section of SR-169, the City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. This would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of SR-169 as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee-in-lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighting along SR-169 as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Ann Fowler Civil Engineer II cc: Ramin Pazooki, Local Agency & Development Services Manager WSDOT Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Clark Close, Senior Planner Lennon Investments, lnc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov February 1, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: State Route 169 Access Letter Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: All new residential subdivisions are required by Renton Municipal Code to establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel (RMC 4-7-080B.2); therefore, a direct public connection to SR 169 is being pursued. On January 27, 2016, the City of Renton reached out to WSDOT to consider allowing a direct public connection to SR 169/Maple Valley Highway as part of the proposed preliminary plat. The most recent public road exhibit (enclosure) shows a viable location for a public access connection from Road B, a north/south modified residential access road within the subdivision, to SR 169 near the northeast corner of the parcel. In this meeting WSDOT indicated that in order to allow direct public access to the State Route, the following two (2) provisions would be required: 1. Covenant: A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the parcels direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. 2. Channelization: Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right-in/right-out only) from Road B to SR 169. Please submit covenant language and a channelization plan for the intersection of Road B and SR 169 that achieves the provisions identified above. Once the channelization plan has been submitted, it will be reviewed by both the City of Renton and WSDOT for compliance with city and state transportation policies and guidelines. Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 if you have any questions. Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner • Enclosure: Public Road Exhibit of Elliott Farms cc: Ramin Pazooki 1 local Agency & Development Services Manager WSDOT Jennifer: Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Ann Fowler, Plan Review Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot 1 Inc./ Owners Patrick 0. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD ,, , ,o -.,., .... ., 1 ... • ~ ~ 1::;:~:: ; ,\\ ,if ·J j ' ' '. , ' ' '· ' ' ~,/ :> ' ',. , l '.it·. ! ... =j,_ l . i ~ ' u ' < ' < ' I m , d, ' Denis~ r,-o-·~•-~c!i~ty~o~f·-------_----~M:•:o:r _____ .......... 1 ) /• ) .. ·· \Cs!!~o f rro \l·~1 -~ .WJU January 8, 2016 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the September 15, 2015 letter from the City. Your project has been taken off hold and the City will continue our review of the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat project. Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner cc: Lennon Investments, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc./ Owners Patrick O. Lennon and Todd Levitt/ Applicants Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Responses to "On Hold" Notice Comments Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat December 15, 2015 HAND DELIVERY City File Nos. LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Our Job No. 15734 Dear Clark: CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING We have revised the plans and technical documents for the above-referenced project in accordance with the comments in your "On Hold" Notice letter dated September 15, 2015. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: 1. One (1) copy of the City comment letter dated September 15, 2015 2. Five (5) copies of the Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum prepared by TENW dated December 11, 2015 3. Twelve (12) copies of the Public Road Exhibit prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated December 15, 2015 4. One (1) compact disk of the entire package in PDF format The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: The following information will need to be submitted before December 15, 2015 so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OR provide a public access roadway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Maple Valley Highway. Response: As shown on the enclosed Public Road Exhibit, the project can be redesigned with a modified public road. Several cross sections are provided as discussed at our meeting of November 18, 2015. Two stacking spaces were determined necessary by the traffic engineer, so the full-width 53-foot-wide road section is provided for 60 feet and then the public road transitions to a narrower section. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development -2-December 15, 2015 • If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-6060 Street Standards). Response: As discussed at the November 18, 2015 meeting, we will update the project to include a modified public road section upon receiving confirmation from the City of Renton that the public road will be agreed to by WSDOT As you are aware, WSDOT has issued a written objection to the public road connection to SR-169 and WSDOT prefers that the project access via the Molasses Creek private road network. • If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 I Road A intersection. Response: Please see the enclosed Addendum by TENW that addresses the public road access to SR-169. We believe that the above responses, together with the enclosed revised plans and technical documents, address all of the comments in your "On Hold" Notice letter dated September 15, 2015. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. Respectfully, ~1~ Senior Planner IH/dm 15734c 006.doc enc: As Noted cc: Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. (w/enc via Newforma) Rick Lennon, Lennon Investments, Inc. (w/enc via Newforma) Mark Sumrok, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Denis Law Mayor September 15, 2015 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice r t -Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on May 5, 2015. During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted before December 15, 2015 so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OR provide a public access roadway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Maple Valley Highway. • If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-6- 060 Street Standards). • If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425} 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner cc: Cedar River Lightfoot/ Owner(s) Todd Leavitt/ Applicant Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor September 15, 2015 Ivana Ha lvo rso n Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice •----... · 6 CityoL J p;/~/-,.· L. ·o· ... --/-l -~JU1W.fil Community & Economic Development Department CE."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on May 5, 2015. During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted before December 15, 2015 so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OR provide a public access roadway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Maple Valley Highway. • If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-6- 060 Street Standards). • If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Senior Planner cc: Cedar River Lightfoot/ Owner(s) Todd Leavitt/ Applicant Bonaudl, Gregory, Harrison, ](night, O'Meara, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Terry Flatley Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: LUAlS-000242 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 MAPLE VALLEY HWY . _,,.. · City of .,.- 'RE C~JVED-:;· JUL 30 2015 CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY SERVICES Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision. The 6.07-acre site Is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The parcel would be divided into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts and would result in a net density of 7.77 dwelling units per net acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical area and approximately 67,542 SF of common area. The proposed lots would range in size from 2,265 SF to 3,441 SF with an average lot size of 2,702 SF. Access to the lots would be via a private alley through the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. Additionally, a gated emergency-only access to SR-169 will also be used near the east end of the site. The site Is currently undeveloped and contains a localized moderate landslide hazard area (steep slope) and a category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Prior to annexation in 2008, the City of Renton entered into a development agreement that capped the density of the project to no more than 45 units. The project will be developed with two-and three-unit buildings with fee simple lots. No right-of-way dedication is planned. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material will be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. Review Type: Date Assigned: Community Services Review-Version 2 07/29/2015 Date Due: 08/05/2015 Project Manager: Clark Close Environmental Impact Earth Animals Air Environmental Health Water Energy/Natura! Resources Pia nts Housing Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/GI a re Historic/Cultural Preservation Recreation Airport Environmental Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Recommendation • Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction· Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and/or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -1 have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added corrections in Corrections. Street trees: Trees shall be spaced 40-feet on-center, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, waterlines, and sewerlines, 10 feet from driveway approaches, 40 feet from traffic signs (stop, yield, etc.) and intersections without signs. Use only small maturing street trees if overhead electric wires exist. Other landscape trees shall also be sma1l maturing species where overhead utilities exist. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Leslie Betlach <p!.t,, of /.-<-:--·.--... --··••m•@•omml>ml,;,;,&,w)lllillihif•lli-• 'RECEJVEtri:D JUL 30 2015 Plan Review Routing Slip CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY SERVICES Plan Number: LUAlS-000242 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 MAPLE VALLEY HWY Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The parcel would be divided into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts and would result in a net density of 7.77 dwelling units per net acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical area and approximately 67,542 SF of common area. The proposed lots would range in size from 2,265 SF to 3,441 SF with an average lot size of 2,702 SF. Access to the lots would be via a private alley through the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. Additionally, a gated emergency-only access to SR-169 will also be used near the east end of the site. The site is currently undeveloped and contains a localized moderate landslide hazard area (steep slope) and a category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year ftoodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Prior to annexation in 2008, the City of Renton entered into a development agreement that capped the density of the project to no more than 45 units. The project will be developed with two-and three-unit buildings with fee simple lots. No right-of-way dedication is planned. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material will be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. Review Type: Date Assigned: Community Services Review-Version 2 07/29/2015 Date Due: 08/05/2015 Project Manager: Clark Close Environmental Impact Earth Animals Air Environmental Health Water Energy/Natural Resources Plants Housing Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/Glare Historic/Cultural Preservation Recreation Airport Environ men ta I Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet . Public Service Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. ~grm;p;;1::·-;;7J;;;;;:;;;:·~;~;·;~-·~·"~ Sign~utl!:ti~ oat? ~ 5(-/5 CIVIi FNGINEERII\IG LAND PLANNING. SUHVE::YING Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 July 23, 2015 HAND DELIVERY RE: Resubmittal for Preliminary Plat, SEPA, and Site Plan Review Elliott Farms City File No. LUA15-000242 Our Job No. 15734 Dear Clark: JlJL 2 ,t ;n :;:; ' , .. ~· We have revised the plans and technical documents for the above-referenced project in accordance with the comments in your letter dated May 5, 2015. Enclosed are the following documents as listed in your letter dated July 14, 2015 for your review and approval: 1. Twelve (12) copies of the revised Project Narrative prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 2. Twelve (12) copies SEPA Environmental Checklist prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 3. Twelve (12) copies of the Density Worksheet 4. Twelve (12) copies of the Overall Preliminary Plat Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 (Sheets 1 and 2 of 7) 5. Five (5) copies of the Preliminary Landscape Plan prepared by Brumbaugh & Associates dated April 9, 2015 6. Four (4) copies of the Preliminary Tree Inventory/Clearing Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 7. Twelve (12) copies of the Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 (Sheet 3 of 7) 8. Twelve (12) copies of the Preliminary Street and Profile Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 (Sheets 4 and 5 of 7) 9. Five (5) copies of the Preliminary Utility Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated July 23, 2015 (Sheet 6 of 7) 10. Two (2) copies of the reduced (8-1/2-x 11-inch) Preliminary Plat Plan Set (all sheets) 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251 -6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department-2 - 11. One (1) copy of the Colored Maps, including: a. Site Plan b. Landscaping Plan 12. One (1) compact disk containing PDF copies of the entire submittal package Please contact me at this office with any plan review comments or questions. Thank you. IH/dm 15734c.005.doc enc: As Noted Respectfully, , /7 //,,?fl c /tV ,.,t-k Ivana Halvorsen f'U ~ Senior Planner · cc: Todd Levitt, Brixton Homes, LLC (wlenc via Newforma) Mark Sumrok, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. July 23, 2015 Denis Law Mayor July 28, 2015 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting 18215 72"d Ave S Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Community and Economic Development Department C. E.'Chip'Vincent, Administrator Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorsen: Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the May 5, 2015 and July 14, 2015 letters from the City. Your project has been taken off hold and the City will continue our review of the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat project. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on August 31, 2015. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on October 13, 2015 at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: Cedar River Lightfoot/ Owner(s) Todd Levitt/ Applicant Bonaudi, Gregory, Harrison, Knight, Thierry, Wruble / Party(ies) of Record File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov • .__ __ Denis Law :--·. ¢ . Cit.Y of _____ M:a:yo:r ___ ............ , [) ~ L L1$jf Jliig~ 0-\ July 14, 2015 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting 18215 72nd Ave 5 Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Request for Resubmittal Items Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorson: Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the May 5, 2015 "Notice of Complete Application" letter from the City. The project was simultaneously placed "On Hold" following the City's preliminary review of the plat. The identified on hold letter indicated that alley access is the preferred street pattern for all new residential development and suggested that alleys are practical for your project (RMC 4-7-150E.5). On June 30, 2015, staff received (via email) a site plan that incorporated alleys into the design and subsequently you requested to know what items would need to be resubmitted to the City in order to take the project off hold. The City has completed a preliminary review of the revised site plan with alleys and considers the request made by the City to incorporate alleys into your project satisfactory. Proposed modifications to a preliminary plat application, as it exists or may be amended, which have been deemed to be complete, and as proposed by the Department of Community and Economic Development to an application are not considered a new application {RMC 4-l-045G.l). The following submittal requirements will need to be updated and resubmitted before October 14, 2015 so that we may continue our review of the above subject application: • • • • • • • • • Project Narrative: Please provide 12 copies Environmental Checklist: Please provide 12 copies Density Worksheet: Please provide 12 copies Plat Plan: Please provide 12 copies Landscaping Plan, Conceptual: Please provide 5 copies Tree Retention/Land Clearing (Tree Inventory) Plan: Please provide 4 copies Utilities Plan, Generalized: Please provide 5 copies Grading Elevations and Plan, Conceptual: Please provide 12 copies Plan Reductions of submittal items Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov • • Colored Maps for Display (Site Plan and Landscaping Plan): Please provide 1 color copy on full size plan sheets • Digital Copies At this time, your project will remain "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425} 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: Cedar River Lightfoot/ Owner(s) Todd Leavitt/ Applicant Denis Law Mayor May 22, 2015 Stan Harrison Molasses Creek HOA Board President 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 •---~ ---• City of. L~.fillMJ.C.l Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: ELLIOTI FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT COMMENT RESPONSE LffiER LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Dear Mr. Harrison: Thank you for your comments related to the.Valley Vue Preliminary Plat; dated May 17, 2015 wherein you raised concerns regarding the proposed project. Your letter/email will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The applicant, Brixtorr Homes LLC, has only made application for Preliminary Plat, Environmental Review and Street Modification for the subject development and a decision has yet to be made. You received a notice soliciting public comment and these comments are used to help City staff complete a comprehensive review which will continue over the coming month(s). At this time, however, the application has been placed on hold in order to complete an evaluation of alleys. As part of your letter you stated that you were in support of the project, yet adamantly opposed to the existing road, landscape, parking, emergency turnaround and utility easement agreement (Recording No. 20000201000940), which was granted by Molasses Creek, Inc. to Lancaster/ Cedarwood, Inc. through the existing main entrance of Molasses Creek Condominiums. Before making any recommendations, City staff will complete a full review of the traffic impacts including the submitted Traffic Assessment that was prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please contact me at 425-430-7289 or cclose@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: File LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor May 22, 2015 Deirdre Thierry 15150 1401h Way SE# M105 Renton, WA 98058 ·-----L ~] l 1 WO l Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD 0 Dear Dee: Thank you for your comments related to the Valley Vue Preliminary Plat; dated May 17, 2015 wherein you raised concerns regarding the proposed project. Your letter/email will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The applicant, Brixton Homes LLC, has only made application for Preliminary Plat, Environmental Review and Street Modification for the subject development and a decision has yet to be made. You received a notice soliciting public comment and these comments are used to help City staff complete a comprehensive review which will continue over the coming month(s). At this time, however, the application has been placed on hold in order to complete an evaluation of alleys. As part of your letter you elaborated on the following :terns: 1) traffic volumes on SR 169; 2) ingress/egress at Molasses Creek Condominiums; 3) existing road, landscape, parking, emergency turnaround and utility easement agreement (Recording No. 20000201000940); 4) alternate access to the farmhouse lane to SR 169; 5) parking; 6) signage; 7) crime; 8) traffic safety; 9) bus service; and 10} commute information. Before making any recommendations, City staff will complete a full review of the traffic impacts including the submitted Traffic Assessment that was prepared by Transportation Engineering North West (TENW), on-and off-site impacts, access and circulation, along with several other review criteria to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please contact me at 425-430-7289 or cclose@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: File LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov May 17, 2015 City of Renton, CED Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Project Name: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat Land Use Number: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Project Location: SR-169 East of 140th Way SE Clark H. Close, lam writing as a concerned citizen of Renton and as the president of the Molasses Creek Home Owner's t\ssociation Molasses Creek (a community of 146 townhouses and condominiums) is located directly adjacent to the proposed building site. I would like to be on record as supporting the development of the above listed project. However, I am adamantly opposed to the easement through the existing main entrance of Molasses Creek. I am aware that a document exists giving the property developer the right to this easement. In 2000, when the easement was granted, this type of easement made sense. It is not appropriate now due to the horrific traffic patterns that already exist surrounding our property. The easement would funnel an additional 90 vehicles (and foot traffic) through an entrance that is already difficult to maneuver. Many times during my commute home, I try to use this Molasses Creek entrance, and I have to wait in the left-turn lane for up to five minutes just to be close enough to the property to turn left. Additional traffic will only exacerbate this problem. It is the Molasses Creek Board's proposal that the City of Renton grant permission for the planned emergency entrance ( off SR 169) to be used as the main entrance into the new development, instead of being used only as an emergency-vehicle entrance. l would like to be a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project. I am also interested in attending and speaking on behalf of Molasses Creek HOA at any public hearing where this project will be on the agenda. Respectfully submitted, Stan Harrison Molasses Creek HOA Board President 15150140th Way SE, UnitT-201 Renton, WA 98058 (206) 399-4288 stanjava@yahoo.com RECEIVED MAY I 9 2015 May 17, 2015 Mr. Clark H. Close Associate Planner CED Planning Division 6th floor Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat -LUA15-000242 Dear Mr. Close. Dee Thieny 151501400J Way SE, Unit M105 Renton, WA 98058 Thank you for your time to address concerns about the upcoming construction to property neighboring my home at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Strictly as a private homeowner and not representing any formal body or group related to the Molasses Creek Condominiums, I am writing to ask that the City of Renton seek and then report on specific information about the property before construction begins on the plat east and adjacent to Molasses Creek, currently to be named Cedarwood. Among other concerns, I believe the projected transportation impact is considerably more complicated than stated and requires greater study for the development of an alternative plan. The project as I understand it is on a temporary hold while alleys are discussed, so the time for further research should be available. The following pages summarize my primary concerns. I look forward to reading more about the status of the inquiry. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Deirdre Thierry Molasses Creek Homeowner RECEIVED MAY 1 9 2015 CITY or-RF.NTOtJ PLANNl!'.;C. ~:::v::;,:.JN /_/J415-01)0242 1 SR 169 From Wikipedia.· Every year the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) conducts a series of surveys on its highways in the state to measure traffic volume. This is expressed in terms of average annual daily traffic (AADT), which is a measure of traffic volume for any average day of the year. In 2009, WSDOT calculated that as many as 43,000 cars used the highway near Blaine Drive near Renton and as few as 6,600 cars used the highway about 7 mi (11 km) from the sou/hem terminus.&11 The entire highway is listed on the WSDOT List of Highways of Statewide Significance, r,i which marks this portion of the highway as critical to connecting major communities in the state 43,000 cars is a fairly high number of vehicles -even in 2009 -for a roadway where traffic flow is regulated by street lights rather than on and off ramps. Paraphrasing the Renton CED's Level of Service Options Phase 1 Summary, might this corridor or route not be expected to meet the travel-distance index used in Renton and then be considered for mitigation or improvement? This travel route -between roughly 140th Way SE and 1-405 on SR169 intersections is short (just over 2 miles), but still would not produce travel times that could be compared with the City's current LOS methodology. And, if there are considerations in the formulation stages for SR169 at the 140th intersection, how might the limited entrance proposed for this size property impact those plans? Traffic on State Route 169 has increased significantly since the opening of Molasses Creek in 1999, and construction completion in 2000. In fact, the WSDOT's Route Development Plan showed a 66% increase in traffic volumes in the Renton area as of 2004. At that time, there was mention of widening to 6 lanes including HOV lanes for SR169 from Jones Road to 140th Way SE and 140th Way SE to SE Maplewood Avenue. And east of there, to 4-5 lanes from SR 516 to Jones Road (196th Avenue SE) and out to Maple Valley to ease some of the bottleneck that exists in a town which, between 2010 and 2013, grew from 22,684 to 24,804. INGRESS/EGRESS AT MOLASSES CREEK It was disappointing to read that the Traffic Assessment submitted for this project was on a date - Wednesday, February 11, 2015 -so close to the President's Day holiday weekend and winter school break. The document does provide several good images which help explain the difficulties currently facing predominately working residents in this area that will be exacerbated by a projected increase of 90 more vehicles on a concentrated lot. (See Attachment A -Response to LOS Analysis and Attachment B - Response to Traffic Safety Assessment.) ALTERNATIVE EASEMENT •• v " ' 0~' HV O.C.'!i. PHF O.DO In ,U4 out 2,419 11V l!.1'Jli. PHf 0.1!2 NB 14011, terminates at 169 l,..J i ~ ~ t ,. 1,222 i:29 UC WB ¢, In 1 ,3'9 out 920 In 1,1551 Out 2!i5 fiV l'.I.~ PHF 0.95 The project developer states that the owner of the farmhouse at 14355-14573 SE Renton Maple Valley Highway/14235 Maple Valley Highway with easement to SR169 and might be shared refuses to negotiate easement rights to create an alternative entrance to this new property. If farmhouse lane cannot even become the emergency exit so the otherwise ER exit may be an entrance, I request specifics about the last dates of inquiry with the farmhouse owner and the extent of the conversation. If the owner of that farmhouse were communicated with back in 1999, things might have changed in 15+ years. Equally, if the farmhouse owner presented conditions under which they would entertain an arrangement, but the developer does not wish LU415-00024.' 2 to advance due only to price, the homeowners of Molasses Creek and future Cedarwood are being taken advantage of, seemingly with the City of Renton's permission. The developer added that there was also a barrier to that easement that would require significant effort and funds to retire as another reason the existing easement is not viable. Based on the view from the ground and in photographs, the barrier is non-existent except for a burm directly in front of the farmhouse that is not in play. I believe the concerns about traffic in and around Molasses Creek today are reason enough for more thorough questions and answers before proceeding. ,a,<'<'-'_-Jif View of farmhouse en.trance lane to the left of preli~inary Cedarwood plat. } I Overhead showing the existing lane where the new Cedarwood design terminates. The layout of homes along the private internal drive hint at a plan exists to one day connect with Pioneer Place. A closer look at the farmhouse shows the only existing barrier between the farmhouse lane and the Cedarwood plat is right outside the farmhouse, so not interfering with the lane should an additional exit be created. And, if the view or privacy, or the farmhouse owner's access to 169 be the primary concerns, terminating the property with the ER entrance should eliminate those worries. PARKING Is it possible for the ER entrance to be located at the termination point of the inner track's private drive? Is there not some rule of law requiring utility and City service access through private land? The Cedarwood private drive inner lane terminates precisely at the farmhouse lane, but is not reflected as an active part of the plan. ,'.,;., ••••• 1H i ,: . Molasses Creek currently has a serious overcrowding problem and insufficient parking spaces for existing residents and their guests. According to the preliminary plan, for 45 new family dwellings, 10 guest parking spaces are to be added, including 1 handicapped access spot. It is not clear whether parking will be allowed in front of the dwellings in addition to individual driveways, but there is currently no such parking at Molasses Creek except for spaces on the roundabout which are very much needed for current homeowners. There is a lot of green space including a lovely gravel walking path and active play area on the preliminary plan that might reasonably be reconsidered to provide for the cars of new family dwellings and their anticipated guests. Or even an alternate ER exit. LUAJS-00024/ '1 SIGNAGE Did the arrangement the City of Renton made with the developer in 2008 include any amendment to the use of Molasses Creek's entryway to post signs for either selling or announcement of Cedarwood? The original CC&R's presented to Molasses Creek homeowners gave the developer rights to utilize our property, but at that time, the name for any expansion was to remain Molasses Creek. I understand there was a decision to change the name of the property, and through some private discussion provide for a separate Homeowner Association, but how will this affect signage for Molasses Creek? Will there be two additional signs to maintain at a single entrance? Will the new owners need to explain to their guests that they must look for the Molasses Creek signage to access Cedarwood? Will there be Cedarwood signs going up at the connection line between the two properties and who maintains additional signage? ~:~? ;..;,. ~ - Molasses Creek boasts a sign on each side of the SR 169 entrance/exit. How will Cedarwood's existence be communicated for visitors and vendors? CRIME Several members of the Molasses Creek community have raised concerns about construction site related crime that, per Renton Police Department, routinely increases burglaries and thefts to neighboring homes and businesses. Though we cannot force the developer and contractors to take out insurance policies to ease the concerns of anticipated victims nor hire guards to patrol the areas, we have made RPD aware of the situation and will track incidents that occur during the period of construction. Citizen public criticism of the developer and its contractors and sub-contractors may be our only recourse, but, the developer's less than proactive and supportive view of Molasses Creek suggests that we be prepared to utilize the tools available. There is also concern that the nature of the expansion inviting more family sized units, which could require significant changes to the rest of the property where the majority of residents are adults. The introduction of a sizable number of toddlers to teenagers will mean changes to Molasses Creek that are not yet known. While bringing young people into the area is supported, multi-age communities require very different House Rules to be in place for the safety and enjoyment of all homeowners. WA 1.5-000142 5 ATIACHMENT A-RESPONSE TO LOS ANALYSIS STATED SE Renton Maple Valley Rd/140th Way SE -This is a major signalized intersection with a five lane section at the eastbound and westbound approaches, and a five-lane section at the northbound approach. The current geometry is expected to remain for future conditions. ACTUAL 4 lanes -2 left turn only from NB 140'h to WB169, plus 1 right turn only from NB 140'h to EB 169; and 2 SB 140'h plus 1 merge lane from EB 169. 4 lanes -2 WB 169 plus 1 left turn only that feeds from the turn island running the median of 169. 2 EB 169 that carry through past 140'h Way SE. Even if flexible bollards were put in place to better define or limit the left turn from WB169 to SB140th to leave open the turn island for access by Molasses Creek and other residents, the traffic line would still encroach upon travelers aiming to cross 140"' and continue WB on 169. However, cars making that left turn generally due run opposite of the greater amount of traffic during peak morning or evening commute times. STATED SE Renton Maple Valley Rd/Molasses Creek East Access -This access is a two-way stopped controlled intersection. The eastbound and westbound movements along SE Renton Maple Valley Rd operate as free movements. The northbound movement is stop controlled and supports full access. This intersection will serve as one of two access locations for the proposed site. The current geometry is expected to remain for future conditions. ACTUAL Free movement is relative. To turn westbound onto 169 from this exit, assessment of cars traveling eastbound on 169 past 140'h and cars turning eastbound onto 169 from 140'" is necessary, in addition to monitoring cars using the turn island to access the left turn lane heading SB140th. It's a race to catch the signal light by people who will honk at you for holding them up when you're trying to gain access from the turn island into WB169 traffic. Judging the speed of all cars using the lanes and the island before making a move is not for the faint of heart. STATED 140th Way SE/Molasses Creek West Access -This access a two-way stopped controlled intersection. The westbound movement is stop controlled while the northbound and southbound movements operate free. The westbound approach is restricted to allow right in and right out only movements; no left turns are permitted southbound along 140th Way SE. This intersection is anticipated to serve as the second access location for the proposed site. The current geometry is expected to remain for future conditions. ATIACHMENT A-RESPONSE TO LOS ANALYSIS ACTUAL The volume of cars in the two northbound 1401h lanes that are held at the light before proceeding westbound onto 169 causes a backup that can proceed up 140th near to SE 1541 h Place. To exit Molasses Creek most mornings requires not blocking the right turn lane for northbound 140th cars onto eastbound 169 that are traveling briskly down a steep grade plus negotiating entry into a line of cars competing for access to a crowded SR 169. 169 is often backed up to 152"' Avenue SE where the convergence of cars coming down from the Highlands and in from Maple Valley and Black Diamond intersect. Being so close to the left turn at 1401h means some cars use the island turn lane all the way back from 1491hAvenue SE. Drivers from Molasses Creek, Pioneer Place and the apartments at 169 and 1401h, the Preserve at Cedar River, are all impacted and should all be involved in the traffic study. The results of the LOS analysis shown in Tables 2 and 3 indicate that the study intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels /LOS Dor better) during the AM and PM peak hours in 2017 without or with the proposed Elliott Farm residential development. "Acceptable levels" generally differs depending upon whether or not the writer is living within the environment come 2017. Maple Valley, a Competitive Community and even Black Diamond, Rural by Design, have studied transportation for their expanding cities. To remain Ahead of the Curve, Renton is investigating several transportation issues, but I see few relating ta the problem of SR169, the highest growth corridor in Renton that most definitely could be affected by the proposed entrance and exit design for Cedarwood. ATIACHMENT B RESPONSE TO TRAFFIC SAFETY ASSESSMENTS STATED The proposed site will share vehicle access locotians with the existing and adjacent Molasses Creek residential development. Collision records nearest to study area were obtained for documentation purposes. Collision records in the study area were reviewed for the three-year period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014. ACTUAL The truth is that many people circle around, heading to 149th Avenue SE to make a "U" turn after waiting and not succeeding exiting at either the 140'h or the 169'h access points from Molasses Creek, or head to the Highlands at 152"' preferring to travel back down the other end. Others are willing to start late for work after peak traffic is past rather than risk a collision. We sincerely ask that you use your knowledge of driving conditions to imagine how the All Traffic Data supplied numbers translate into a daily commute. 2/11/15 during a 60 minute period between -6:30am and 7:30am • 629 cars turned Right off NB 1401h onto EB 169, speeding up as they rounded the corner. • Meanwhile, 152 cars turned Left onto SB 140'h while 291 cars and trucks carried through 140th EB on 169. • Imagine it is winter with Daylight Savings Time in effect, and headlights are coming at you from all sides. • You are called upon to judge the speed of each car coming from each direction, including within the turn island before attempting egress from Molasses Creek onto WB 169. • Now, here comes a school bus stopping right at the ingress corner of EB 169 and Molasses Creek to pick up the kids for school. Can't run around them, but there goes your window. • Meantime, cars are behind you also anxiously looking to exit the property and make their way to work. Currently, there are a handful of homes east of the roundabout that maintains order for cars entering and exiting Molasses Creek. Imagine there are now 25 cars added to the traffic around the roundabout. Will there be speed bumps and yield signs added or will there be a race to reach the exit first knowing how long it can take to leave the property METRO ON SR169 As mentioned above, Metro currently offers some express bus service during peak commute hours between Maple Valley and downtown Seattle that travels SR169. Folks traveling the entire line look forward to a 2+ hour morning and evening commute. Walking from Molasses Creek involves crossing at 140'h to an unsheltered stop at 152"' during the winter months or to the Maplewood Golf Course during spring and summer (the trail winds alongside a dark Cedar River below 169 to reach the stop west of Molasses Creek). Though this provides for a healthy 15 minute walk, crossing at 140'h and 169'h to walk to the bus stop can be dangerous given the speed with which drivers take the right turn at 169. Drivers • Molasses creek ATTACHMENT B RESPONSE TO TRAFFIC SAFETY ASSESSMENTS often do not expect anyone to be walking, so it is with great care someone trying to use public transportation must utilize the crosswalks. To continue with the earlier imagined commute. • You left your garage at 7:10am and waited for a safe opening in the traffic. • Because the traffic at 140'h is thick, you know traffic will be a crawl all the way past 1-405 where you eventually aim to reach the Renton Transit Center. • You are hopeful a tenant from Metropolitan Place at RTC will depart late to make a parking space available for you in the Transit Only parking lot. • Following your 20-30 minute drive from 169 + 140'h to the RTC, you debate taking the 101 local bus weighing whether the extra 15 minutes it takes to route through the city will offset waiting for the express bus to make it to the RTC. • You opt to wait for the 143 that will be 20 minutes late and full, meaning standing room only all the way to Seattle. • Of course, you could take the Rapid Ride F line from RTC to the Tukwila link station. That's another 35 minute bus ride to the station but then, assuming you make the connection, you have the peace of knowing that you will arrive downtown Seattle in another 30 minutes. Except during winter and Spring breaks, due to the back ups in traffic, the bus usually runs at least 15-20 minutes behind because of the volume of traffic and the stoplight sequencing along 169. If not for the trucker who let me in at 7:20am on 5/10/15, I would never have exited Molasses Creek. But then we sat in our cars and waited 4 lights before we were able to cross 140'" Way SE. There was no traffic emergency on 169 all the way through to 1-405, and 1-405 North and South were running their usual pace. Yet it still took 30 minutes from actually exiting Molasses Creek to reach the RTC. Sign says we're approaching 1401h Way SE. Leslie Betlach Plan Review Routing Slip R£c,:,,,,~D Plan Number: LUAlS-000242 Name: Elliott Farms MAY 05 2015 CJTyo- Site Address: 14207 MAPLE VALLEY HWY C01'.fMurv/rl§~~/V Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval aff§ Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The parcel would be divided into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts and would result in a net density of 7.77 dwelling units per net acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical area and approximately 67,542 SF of common area. The proposed lots would range in size from 2,265 SF to 3,441 SF with an average lot size of 2,702 SF. Access to the lots would be via a private alley through the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. Additionally, a gated emergency-only access to SR-169 will also be used near the east end of the site. The site is currently undeveloped and contains a localized moderate landslide hazard area (steep slope) and a category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Prior to annexation in 2008, the City of Renton entered into a development agreement that capped the density of the project to no more than 45 units. The project will be developed with two-and three-unit buildings with fee simple lots. No right-of-way dedication is planned. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material will be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. Review Type: Date Assigned: Community Services Review-Version 1 05/05/2015 Date Due: 05/19/2015 Project Manager: Clark Close Environmental Impact Earth Animals Air Environmental Health Water Energy/Natural Resources Plants Housing Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/Glare Historic/Cultural Preservation Recreation Airport Envi ronmenta I Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: t~ '0sJ1 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-MJ A Mantt Appllcllian has bun fllod and aca,pted with thl Depart1nom ol Ccmmunlty & fainamlc O.Velopm•m (CEO)-Plannil'II!! DIYl,lon of lh• City of Ronu>fl. n.e fottowtnr btleftv der<tlbu 1h• applJa~an and th,, neousary PubllcAppro,.t.. OATE Of NOTICEOFAPPUCA,TION: Mav 5, l015 LAND LISENUMBEfl.: lUA15-000l42, E~, PP, SA+I, MOD PROJECT ~AME: Elliott Farm, ProimlnaryPlat PROJECTDUOIIP'TlON: Th• appllcor,t Is roquerun1 PnOlmlnary Pia!, f.lf!arlnt e .. miner Sic. Plan, !!PA Enuiroomerrral ~eviow appn,val and a Strut Modlftutlcn for a 4SSot £ubdivl~on. The 6.07-acr,, <ite is IDCa!od alon1 'ifl- 169 b•lw•on 140th Way SE and 14S1h A•e $E within tho Rl!!ldencia~14 ,onln1 dlilflct (APN H230S9004). The parcel NOuld ba d1v,ded ln!o 45 ro!ldontlal lots and 8 tract> and '""uld ,...ult In a not c!11n~ty ol 7.77 dwelilnJ units~· net acre. Tho ~ Include 47,9ll oquar• ~ 15FI of ultjtal anu, and •?llro,imately 67,54.Z SF of carnmon ar,a, The ,ropo~ lot,; 11111uld ranp, In ~.., from 2,265 5F to 3,441 SF w~h an avera1• lot ~u, o! 2,702 SF. A<aw Ill tho lot,; woold """ • JJri .. t11 alley thn:iuP, tho u,.un, prtvat• eMl!m""t throul!h tOl!I Mol .... s er,..: Condominium. Addl~c,..lly, a !•~ emef'i<!nc:y-cnly ao:e"' !D SR-16!1 will aim be u>entlllns, lacall,ed mcd, .. -.ie landslide hu1rd area (,tnp slope I and a cateeorv II wall.and with• SO-foot blll'fe'. rt.,•~•" In the Cedar A Iver dAinaee ba,ln illd outside tho 100-o/eoctloodpjaln llm,ts. Stormwai.r w,11 be ,onveyedto t,,, ••i>lln1 water q~lu;y pond that wa, <Dnltructed as part of IN! Plat of €Ilion faml:I and Mnlosses Croek :ondomln1um1, l<>nted west of 140th W•v se. •rtor to anneutlon In WOB, the d!y ofRentr:m ente~d Into a dewlopment aw-mont tllat cap1>11d Ille density of Iha irojoctto no rnora than 45 unit<. Tho projllCC w,11 bl!l dlwlop.1d with two-and thr......,~ bulldln15 with ftt 5impJe lot,;. lo rl1ht-<1f-~ ded(ca~an U: piannNL oJI• con1l<t of NewbLO'I 5<11 Loom (Ng) will, a ,maH ;orn al Ak!eni.ODd and l(jt,;ap l/1.kFI. ApproDmotely W,000 cub(< ml, of 1111 materi.1 will bl lm]ICrted tor the pro)oa. Tha ,.u, canto In• 114 <lgn,ftcantlrees. Tho projodwill remove 31 ,able """'W"" and detid<1<>11> lr•m w~hOI the deveiojlment ,,..,._ All 74 ,i1n!flcam Ir!~ I" 11\e w.iland •r>d bufh,r wil emain. Tho project will r<!plant 97 cru, onsit•. he •ppll,oant has submitted I Crrtk:al Area Rep0rt. Technical ln!ormal!on lleport. Traffic Impact As......,ont, Arborlrt •11<>rt. Welland OeHneallon, Letter of Undersund/11,1 ofG..:,jc,ic Rl,k, and a Geotechnial Ena/nHrin1 Study w,th the ppl,c.rtton ROIEtT LOCATION: SA-169 Eartof140th W•y SE >PTIDNAL DETEll,..NAT!ON OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MmGArro jDNs-MJ: As the lead Al•ncy, 1h11 Clly of Renton ha, etumlned that signfflcant en,irol'o'T\tfntal lmpam ""' unlikaly to -ult ln>m me proposed project. l'har11for1!, o, erm1ttfld under !he RCW 4l.HC.1J.0, !ho Oly of Renton;, u54nr 111• Opljonal DNS-M proce,.s to arve notiu, th,t a I.IS-M 1, likelr le be im,ed. Commen11111r1oib lor me proJecl and 1ho propo~ ON$-M ar<! lnt'1ra1ed Into • sln1I• ,mment 1>11riad. Then, ,.,11 be "o comment ~DO followil'll!l lhe i,suana, of tho! Th,..,hold DMermlnatlon of Non-- 9nl~cance-MiU1111rd IDN'i-M) n,;, may be !ha only oppnrtunlly ro oomment on th• envotlnmental lmparu of the ·opo,al. A l4·dav app.1111 peri<>d will !oiow the i:,..,,f!CII of the DNS-M ,i!MfT A.Pflt.lCAT!ON DATE: AprilU,lOl.S DTICI D,F COMPl.m APPIJCATION: Mays, 2015 -----,~· ~--- ''I~ :~Gf Jf t (_) s J 0 T/PROJEtT CONTACTPEIISON: Ivana Halvor>en / Bugtiausen Con,ultlnJ En1lnttr> / IB:US n"' p,..., s / kent, WA ;111Jn/ 425·251-6122 111:!; which may bo roqulred: Studlts: ,ere 1ppllcatlon m..,. • cr OVERVIEW: dU,e: ital Dacum•nb ttm ePro~Projea: mtllapl-1:lons 'ojea. Mltlptlon:: JHtlpflon Meuu .... , Environmental ISEPA) llavlow, Prellmlna,y PIIII, liearl"I Eomlnor Sit• Pla11, Strut ModlfitaUon B~Hdlrqi l'<!rmlt, C..rtmUctlon Permit,. 511111 Parmlt Cril!calAru Aepcrt,. Toc:hnlcal Information R•JIC'rt. Traffic Impact Au ... m..,t. /1.rbal'lst R•11<>n, Wetland D•llnullon, Latter of Undo,rffllndln1 of Gmlat;lc Rl11l,. Geottdinical In1lnltfflnl Study Departmllnt af CGmtnunflv a !mnolllk Dffdc,prnenc (O:D)-P!lnlllrc Dlvi•lon, S!rth Floor Renton Cty Harr, 1055 South Gr.ldV Way, R<intcn, w.c. "''' The s..tlject 54\o i, di!!1en1ted COMP-IIMD on the Clly of Renton Comprehensive L.ond Use Map Ind A-14 on the Clty's Zanin! Map. Envlroornental (SEPAi Chetl:llrt The proJKC will be subject to the Otys s~PA ordlo.;ince. RMC4-l-1111A; 4-3-ll50; 4-4; 4-6-060; 4-7; 4-9 and olher applicable <>:Ide and ll!gulltlons as appropr1,m. Tho followllli MiUptlon Mea,unu will likely bi, 1mpo~ on II"! proPOSe<f pmJ~ n,o,.. recamm.-,d•d Mttlp!lon Measur .. addnts:s project lmp1tts oot aisored by .,.lrtln1 aidl, ,...r .. .,.1,t1ons as eked above. ~e applicant shall comply with the recommendations Including ,e Geatechnlcal Engineering Report prepared by Terra Associates, ,c. (dated February 25, 2015), , on the IINMI applallon mUA bo nrbmttt..l In """""to Cl1tk II. Clo-, Auad1t,, !'!Inner, CEO-Plm,nlna 055 Sovth Grady Way, R1ntof!, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM an M1y U, 2015.. lfv,," •~ Interested In attendl"I public hearfn1, plaas• contact the Plannl!ll Division at 14251 4~578 for th, d,ta or><! Ume. Follow/1'1111/11 1f th~ SEPA Do>termlnaUon, you may 51111 ilPI>"•• at Iha h .. rtng and p-nt you, i:cmm,nts n,pn:lln1 th~ >elora th~ Hearlne Eiramlnar. lf~ou havo qul!fflons abuut thr, prnpc,saL or '"lsh to be madl, party-ofreaird ., addlUonal informacion bv mall, pl•"'" a,ntact the pro]Ht mon•-· Any0<1• w!>o submits Wf1tten comrnants 1allcally boc:om• a party of record ond ,.,11 be notified of any dlo,lon on thli pmject. 100 would t••• to be made a party of roccrd le re<elV<! furtl,er information on t111, ~OJIC'sed proje<t,. cornplet• this ould llke to bl made• p1rty of record 10 re<•M! lurther lnformacion on this propu,od pm)ect, a,mplote tt,~ rm and rflurn !<>: (tty of Renton.CED-Plonnln1 Dlllkloo, 10S55o. Gradyw.-.,, Ronton, W/1.98057. j murr, 10: OlyofKl!nl<:111, CED-Plannln1~v .. ion, 10SS So. Grady Way, Ronton, WA 91111.'i7. >mo/Flit No .. Elliott F,rm, Prelimln1ri Plat/ Ll!Als.-000242, EC!', PP. SA·H, MOD le No.: Elliott Farm, Prollmlnary Plat/ LUAiS-000242, ECF, PP, 'i/1.-~. MOD '"' --------------------------- AILJNGADDRESS: ____________ ClfY/STAIT/ZIP: _______ _ LfPHONEND.·----------- :;ADDRESS ____________ CITY/STATI/Zli> _______ _ ONE NO.: __________ _ CERTIFICATION I, (_LJW.ic /!-CLosC , hereby certify that ? copies of the above document were posted in_]__ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: __ ~,_,/ f'.'-+/-"-1=-,;-____ _ Signed:_!::::~~~,K~U:..&:=::===---- STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that L \<>, "-L~. (_\.c,se signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated:. !)'.X\,':!'r i;J ,1.p,5 .· -<POW,, O~';,,:,~N'~'!!,~ -9." lie in and for the State of Washington J:, ,.,. ....,,,,, ". · _/0•· +0~"•1-\ \ Notary (Print): It /~ p ~ ---""'a"-'-"'!. __,_.,c>yy""""".""a'-'"''-. -----s u -4 -! ~ ~ \ ~·\.~:'\ J E} My appointment expires.·_ ----"du,,.,~f--fi""'''-'t'---"'1-:.;+,--"'k?""· '-'-I,;;,.'./ ____ _ ',,,..,~~+ei ____ : u '•,,, 0~ W/>.ST-.,.- 1 •I\\\\\'•''''' On the 5th day of May, 2015, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Acceptance and Hold documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached Ivana Halvorson Contact Cedar River Lightfoot Owner Todd Levitt Applicant Parties of Record See Attached 300' Surrounding Property Owner See Attached (Signature of Sender): ''''"""'''' ) ,,, ,y p lj .$' Q\..'-01.,,,,,, } SS : '('I ~'"'a'icl'1011 r~ fl -'!'-~~4\f 111 '\A\, II COUNTY OF KING ) 3 ~, .,.oT,-~\ ~" '; -=(,Ii 'I"' ..,., i~ \I• ,,. .,, ~ .... ~ ,, :: (II' ... • ~ ,,. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante ; ~ \ -""' ~ .. j § signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act%~~~,jlf»~s mentioned in the instrument. ",, O.it-:::,,._, ~o"-2 111 11 ""-'SH~ ,,,..::- '"''''"''''' STATE OF WASHINGTON Dated: I'((/ 5··,,,-,1 >·--'-'-'"'"""Y,/'---4--""==""'---() J Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 1-k\\1j. F' Uw«s; ----~="", E--~~=~------------- My appointment expires: -~J "'6t° c)3 1 ;).() 11 Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology " Environmental Review Section PD Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region • Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers*** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR--0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Timothy C. Croll, Attn: SEPA Responsible Official 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology•• Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. ** Attn: Misty Blair Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box47703 39015 -172"' Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office• Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program** 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Laura Murphy Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program** Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Erin Slaten Ms. Shirley Marroquin 39015 172"' Avenue SE 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR--050 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 WDFW -Larry Fisher• Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Issaquah, WA 98027 PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Tim McHarg Attn: Acting Community Dev. Director Director of Community Development 220 Fourth Avenue South 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Newcastle, WA 98056 Puget Sound Energy City ofTukwila Wendy Weiker Jack Pace, Responsible Official 355 110" Ave NE 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Mailstop EST llW Tukwila, WA 98188 Bellevue, WA 98004 Puget Sound Energy Doug Corbin, Municipal liaison Mgr. 6905 South 228" St Kent, WA 98032 "'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.gov ** Karen Walter, Laura Murphy and Erin Slaten with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. are emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email addresses: KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us / laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us L erin.slaten@muckleshoot.nsn.us *,...Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy ofthe Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template • affidavit of service by mailing Cedar River Lightfoot 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton. WA 98058 Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M105 Renton, WA 98058 Leland Gregorv Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Todd Levitt Brixton Homes LLC 14410 Bel-Red Rd Bellevue. WA 98007 5568900000 2314300340 5568900000 AHN HEE JUNG+HURJAE LYUNG AQUINO FRANCIS E+GLADYS L BANKS SUSAN L /1s1so 140TH WAY SE #A-102 15461141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #JlOl RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2223059026 5568900000 BERKLEY MARK L BNSF BRILL RHIANNON 15150 140TH WAY SE #M303 PO BOX 961089 15150 140TH WAY SE #S201 RENTON, WA 98058 FORT WORTH, TX 76161 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 6806100740 2314300500 BROUGHTON GARY L CALLON ROBBERT CARPENTER CRAIG L +BARBARA L 27822 31ST PL S 14512 SE 154TH ST 15408 141ST PL SE AUBURN, WA 98011 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300100 5568900000 COKE C DALLAS COLLIER BRENT LEE+NICOLE M DAHLEN JILL 15150 140TH WAY SE #P104 14154 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #J103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300970 2314300490 5568900000 ELLIOTI FARM HOMEOWNERS ASC EVANGELISTA REY C & MARIA J EWING TAMMY 16915 SE 272ND ST #100-197 14115 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #S-105 COVINGTON, WA 98042 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300190 5568900000 6806100020 FALES ROBERT C+NGUYEN CRYST FERGUSON MARC (+HARRISON ST GARCIA ROBERT F+FLORDELIZA 14198 SE 154TH PL 1S150 140TH WAY SE #T-201 15319 145TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300160 5568900000 2223059118 GOWEN MICHAEL K+PANTHA C GRANT AIMEE P GREGORY LELAND W+JOANNE M 14186 SE 154TH PL PO BOX 1232 14235 SE RENTON MAPLE VALLEY RD RENTON, WA 98058 BELLEVUE, WA 98009 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 2314300470 2314300530 GUSTIS STEPHEN J HALL ROBERT G HAMILTON FREDERICK J 15150 140TH WAY SE #M104 15409 141ST PL SE 15422 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 5568900000 2314300210 HARDEBECK AMANDA L HARDY CYNTHIA M HEINZ RICHARD A 15150 140TH WAY SE #M202 15150 140TH WAY SE #P204 25526 SE 275TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98058 2314300211 2314300560 5568900000 HEINZ RICHARD A HILL CHERYLL & DOUGLAS W HILL MICHAEL K 15462 141ST PL SE 15438 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #N202 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300230 2314300220 2314300070 HIRANO KENDALL S+ THUY-LINH HONG JOHNNY+YENNIWATI SUSAN HUNT ANDREW R+LISA R 15470 141ST PL NE 15466 141ST PL SE 14136 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300400 2314300540 2314300541 HUYNH HUY VAN PHUC+SAKHONE JACOX DONALD M JACOX DONALD M 15437 141ST PL SE 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N 15426 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 SEATILE,, WA 98103 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300460 5568900000 5568900000 JAMES THOMAS L JENSEN LINDA D JOHNSON AARON R 15413 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #U203 15150 140TH WAY SE #P103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300440 2314300180 2314300990 KIDD LAVERN C KING BRUCE A+KATIE A KING COUNTY-ROADS 15421141ST PL SE 14194 SE 154TH PL 5004TH AVE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 SEATILE, WA 98004 2314300410 6806100480 6806100710 KOZAREZOV SERGEY LE HUYEN CHI LEE DENNY WING+YAN PING LIA 15433 141ST PL SE 14518 SE 153RD PL 14534 SE 154TH ST RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300250 2314300020 2314300010 LEE THOMAS H MAI DINH HAl+DO CAT-UYEN MILLER EASTER & DIANE 15478 141ST PL SE 14106 SE 154TH PL 14100 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300060 5568900000 2314300130 MROCZEK LAWRENCE C & JUDI A NEAGLE LAMAR J NELSON MICHAEL H 14130 SE 154TH PL 15150 140TH WAY SE #R-103 14172 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300040 2314300450 2314300150 NGUYEN DINH & LAN NGUYEN HANG LE NGUYEN HUY+SHUM SAU MAN 14118 SE 154TH PL 15417 141ST PL SE 14182 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300520 5568900000 2314300090 NGUYEN LANH V & THERESE H NOLL BERNARD V PAUL MARY M 15418 141ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #T-304 14148 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300510 5568900000 5568900000 PAYSENO GORDON A+JENNIFER J PEITL RENATA PENTZOLD STACY L 15414 14ST PL SE 15150 140TH WAY SE #E-103 15150 140TH WAY SE# N203 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 6806100720 PHAM THANH-TUNG 4603 NE 1ST CT RENTON, WA 98059 2314300120 RODRIGUES YVETIE M+CHRISTOP 14166 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 2314300240 SHEAJOSHUA+RACHAEL 15474 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 SOU SOPHEAVY 15150 140TH WAY SE #E101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 THIERRY DEIRDRE E 15150 140TH WAY SE #M105 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 TRACEY JOHN+ SUSAN 57292 MERION LA QUINTA, CA 92253 5568900000 VERGEL PETER G 15150 140TH WAY SE #C101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 WAXJACKJ 15150 140TH WAY SE #D-102 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300430 WRUBLEJOHN 15425 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 2314300051 ZAED DIAA ELDIN 14124 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 2314300110 PONTON ANTHONY W+JUDITH N 14160 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 SCHOFIELD JOHN M+LYNN M H 2505 N MEADOW AVE RENTON, WA 98056 2314300480 SITIHIDET KHAMSING 15405 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 2314300200 SPISAK DIANA M 15458 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 TORRETIA MICHAEL P+HEATHER 15150 140TH WAY #N34 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300080 TRAN LONG 14142 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 2314300550 VU MAILY+VIET H 15432 141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 WHEELER TIMOTHY AND CHRISTI 15150 140TH WAY SE #U202 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300140 WUJOHNJ 14178 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 REAU LINDA 29016 SE 477TH ST ENUMCLAW, WA 98022 2314300030 SCHRENK WENZHEN+YINAN GUO 14112 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 SKINNER TALVIN 15140 140TH SE #D101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 SYMENS BRENT W 15150 140TH WAY SE #C-104 RENTON, WA 98056 5568900000 TORRETIA NICHOLAS JAMES+REB 15150 140TH WAY SE #T302 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300390 TUPLING PAMELA 15441141ST PL SE RENTON, WA 98058 2314300170 WALLACE KENNETH L 14190 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 5568900000 WRIGHT DOUGLAS R+LAWSON CHE 15150 140TH WAY SE #K101 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300050 ZAED DIAA ELDIN 1520 NW AMSERCREST WAY #102 SILVERDALE, WA 98383 t, \ _r-1-·1 I·-.· I. j ! · . l ~} fs. l '"'c(-.. RECEIVED King County . APR I 3 ZJ:5 '· GolflCourse '_./ \! ; ;-'l'· 11 ·, ~i C I ' I/ ' .-- ,,./_,,.. ,,..::·-"' I ........... ·vJ.t,------L , ;, j j ,,; ....,_ /" / / • .._, r ~ ......... ,-/ , _..,./ __.,. ...... ...... lo ~>-·-, ,. ,· __.,. .,,,.... ........ "" ~ i,~::s / / /// "··.,:"21. -::, !,··,',/ 1 , l .· -----' ,..._ _...,......,...-...._ ~ I ~··~1<.c ' ,/ I _,,, ·-.... " -.::i -..... ' /_. •• -....._ ,· .,, I ., ~ "'-... - ' 1'A;_:, ~. ' ..., } /" "\. ' I 1'",..__-Ct,1 ~' _-. ............ ./' ,,.-,/ , '--... \. I I -... ~t . . ,,-· / . _., ., -... .I -;tl.:. ............ -~.-."'{ ,,..,/ ·-...... /,. '\ / -----... / ..._...:J, .... "),,,' .... ..,, ...... _.../ t"~ ' --;/ ;,....._ ....... , .... ....___,__~ ' _..._s.· ,"/ ... _ ' '!Ii:?--\ ,,;<......__f. .i'-..,._, .................. r:z"'-,, ... , 1)-/ I 1'-·r),, "· ·--......., ~ i / I / /... '---... '' ··1· I' · .¥ .... ~ ... ~:'i I I ,Vj-----, ..... ', .. _ --..___ 1,,_ I •.:· ( cl..~'-::/ ;' / ;; ----~-::.·\ ...... -f•., f 8 1c-:1 1-)j ''or.; l 11.\Jl;I"' ::,_ "' -·; \' i r ~ ,,--~\ I .' I,; ..-· ~ ~ I I I'"'- \ ..._ \ I I k -...._ \ ,; ...... -~-----......L,...-..J \ \ 7 0..£. """,. \ \ \ 'y / '~\\ i / ·' ~ I Y',r~\ ',., "',;;,"' :;-·1 1 ./,.,,..,,,, \ ............ ~ ..... ~ -- \ ' -' ' -.... ... ' A:.a,..,- \ ' "-, '• \ 0 ' ' -.J../ I . /"P; '-'/i So'()s Cree I<\ ;':,.,_--~\·; . ./'>i-/:-~:?i:it,·~--i Lg·~;, I : Par-k and \ 1 ~~..:-17, '·,."<:~~)'./~;2=l 1 -JJ~<-, i::JE:.-=7/ ~ 0 I t; ' ' \\ ' ·. ''·li'''/ "1 -. Trail \ \~\ 'II ~·'-·. ',, ',,, ..._j, /,. " 1 ~ ' ' -, '\. .. -.... --L, 'I \ L ..... ..--...... , -.............. IT°''J;;"'' '·· " , 1 ,-., 1{~ · ll.61-:->," ---", ', )I '1.h·'c.-I ~ .,....,._ ,/" ,' I'-.,.,,.,· ~ I -J._1 r-~ --., ...... ... I.__ .,.. "("~· ) '( '.-,-. .., ..... ", ____,. ~ \ I I /-a,...... ,.._ ' -----!.---' ) ~. t'· r I -I ' ~-...:: I t' ... ' ' ~ ,,.~..,,. (' ,.._ ·':::l~ \, -.... -, --.../ '-~-, ' n~' $'vi.·_~ 7,, \'v ~-·, ;\' .-\ ,,_. ' ' ....... • /--. I ~ ......._ -, \~ ;.. ,; / ' \ ' Y!: ..>,'~Y I ....,,__ -....~/ , r~-'...__.... ------.( r·--...,...--. .-:;:,-~" -.... ~r<"'i '>... \\~.>.. ~.. -·"\'r 7 ~I " C~I "' ~ • .r-~,.,~. ·., -' ;./ :1z~ , .. -" ·sc:--f I h -t:\ 1/'C' '--..., '. 5\,!_ I F, ~I \ I -;;) ~971', ,.,·~<>, '-$",< \ / / " \\--) ~..,,,.} ~ . i'( /.---'-:,,__&, -~ r 1 1 r --'>: ... 't.Y~ ..:i ,·Li*>·:r-l / 0 . .t.,/-..:..,__>1 : ,1~1 r, \ f I ~LI:: '(--.,.~,,. \ ,L,_ Pa,\51"~ J;,dunty, King cpunty Assessor's Office, King County GIS \;enter The hforma~on ind.1ded on \tJjs map has been comp led by Kmg Coonty staff from a variety of sources and is subject to charge v.ithout notice. King County makes no rep--esentaLions or warm nties, exprnss a r implied. as ta accuracy, completeness, trnelness, or rights ta the use of such information. This document is not interde:1 for use as a survey product King County shall not be la~e for any general, special, ridirect. incidental, or consequential damc,Jes including, but not linited to, lost revenues or bst profits resulting from the use or misuse of the informatbn cootained on this map My sale of tllis map orinforma~onon this map is prol1 bi led except by written penrission of King County Date: 4/10/2015 1 in : 922 feet 0 1 0.2 ft N A tQ King County GISCENTER ~ .. 5568900010 5568900020 5568900030 TA TE RONALD A AHN HEE JUNG+HUR JAE L YUNG HONG HONG+HUANG MAN Y 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #A-101 ~5150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #A-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #B-101 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900040 5568900050 5568900060 PARSONS CAROLS KEMP MARKO BONAUDI KAREN R 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #B-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #B-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #B-104 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900070 5568900080 5568900090 VERGEL PETER G PENNYMAC HOLDINGS LLC MARSHALL ERICA BERNADETTE 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #C-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #C-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #C-103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900100 5568900110 5568900120 SYMENS BRENT W SKINNER TALVIN WAXJACKJ 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #C-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #D-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #D-102 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900130 5568900140 5568900150 SCHMIDT BRYAN L GLICKMAN CARON NELSON+MARK SOU SOPHEAVY 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #D-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #D-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #E-101 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900160 5568900170 5568900180 SHERMAN KEVIN J+LEANNA K PEITL RENATA KNOX DENA LEE 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #E-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #E-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #E-104 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900190 5568900200 5568900210 YOUNG DANIEL P EISEMAN LINDA M BUCHMAN WILLIAM B 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900220 5568900230 5568900240 MILLER ROXANNA CLEMENS MALORIE L TRACEY JOHN + SUSAN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-105 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-106 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900250 5568900260 5568900270 SAVILLE RICHARD MARK+DROLLI RUSSELL FRANKLIN H BRINKER JACQUELINE M 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-201 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-202 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-203 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900280 5568900290 5568900300 DICKSON DANIEL +LINDA EBALO ANECITA A WHIT AKER KERRY J 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-204 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-205 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-206 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900310 5568900320 5568900330 NORDRUM JEFFREY J KLEIN MARCIA S SMITH MONAJ 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-302 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-303 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-304 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900340 5568900350 5568900360 BROUGHTON GARY L GOSS JULIAN+ERIN SCHOFIELD JOHN M+L YNN M H 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #F-305 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #G-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #G-102 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900370 5568900380 5568900390 RADUTSKIY MIKHAIL +OLGA A CH NOON MOHAMMED+NAGHMANA KNIGHT DORIS A 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #G-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #G-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-101 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900400 5568900410 5568900420 WEST TERI K TRUONG DIEU MINH KWAIJASONT 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-104 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900430 5568900440 5568900450 O'MEARA EMILY AZURIN VENERANDO S ANDAL NICOLAS 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-201 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-202 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-203 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900460 5568900470 5568900480 DAVIS FREDERICK W FONTMARTAT SOUTHERN HELEN A 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-204 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #H-302 15150140THWAYSE, UNIT#H-303 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900490 5568900500 5568900510 BANKS SUSAN L ADAMS REGINE NOEL DAHLEN JILL 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #J-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #J-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #J-103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900520 5568900530 5568900540 BEAN ROBERT M DO DANIEL H MILLER LYLE W 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #J-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-102 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900550 5568900560 5568900570 CHOYUNHEE GUSTIS STEPHEN J THIERRY DEIRDRE E 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-105 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900580 5568900590 5568900600 MARKHAM JAMES G HARDEBECK AMANDA L STANDRING DAVID MICHAEL+ANN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-201 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-202 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-203 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900610 5568900620 5568900630 HANSON KORRIN A WONG MICHELLE L BERKLEY MARK L 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-204 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-205 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-302 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900640 5568900650 5568900660 PHELAN ERYN VALENTINE CLINTON+JANIS PLUEGER GARY L 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #M-304 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-102 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900670 5568900680 5568900690 SWEENEY DANETTE M GRANT AIMEE P MURPHY JONS 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-105 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900700 5568900710 5568900720 STEGER JESSICA E GIESEN ERIK M HILL MICHAEL K 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-106 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-201 15150140THWAYSE, UNIT#N-202 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900730 5568900740 5568900750 PENTZOLD STACY L ZHOU JULIA ZE KANG ETHE MARGERET +JOHN N 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-203 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-204 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-205 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900760 5568900770 5568900780 MALUANAS ABGAROVA GALINA SMITH BARBARA A 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-206 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-302 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-303 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900790 5568900800 5568900810 TORRETIA MICHAEL P+HEATHER WOOD EDWARD W HYLDAHL STEPHAN J+REBA G 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-304 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #N-305 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-101 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900820 5568900830 5568900840 HOLLAND KIMBERLY L BAUM MICHAEL LAM DONOVAN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-104 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900850 5568900860 5568900870 EWING TAMMY JOHNSON CORRINA BRILL RHIANNON 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-105 15150140THWAYSE, UNIT#S-106 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-201 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900880 5568900890 5568900900 FAN XING+GUO RUI PARKHYUNGW MAHER HELEN M 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-202 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-203 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-204 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900910 5568900920 5568900930 THONG MUl+CHI KIM HUDSON OLIVER JAY PALMER BRIAN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-205 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-206 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-302 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900940 5568900950 5568900960 LEROUX JUSTIN JAMES YOKOYAMA KALEN J SHIMIZU DIANE 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-303 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-304 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #S-305 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568900970 5568900980 5568900990 REAU LINDA WRIGHT CHERIE RAY BARBARA 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-102 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-103 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901000 5568901010 5568901020 TAYLOR BRYAN J SCHAEFER CASSIDY WILLIAMS KIMBERLY LYNN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-105 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-106 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901030 5568901040 5568901050 FERGUSON MARC C+HARRISON ST CARR KRISTINE MAE A KNAPP JODIE 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-201 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-202 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-203 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901060 5568901070 5568901080 AZORIT-WORTHAM LISA M CHANG ALEX LOOMIS SUSAN R 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-204 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-205 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-206 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901090 5568901100 5568901110 TORRETIA NICHOLAS JAMES+REB WALKER RENEE L NOLL BERNARD V 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-302 15150140THWAYSE, UNIT#T-303 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-304 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901120 5568901130 5568901140 MONTES THOMAS L WRIGHT ERICA A+JEFFREY A MOLASSES CREEK CONDOMINIUM 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #T-305 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-101 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-102 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901150 5568901160 5568901170 SCHUSTEK BETH L JORDAN DANIEL AND DUANE A PRIETO GERBIEL YN VALENTIN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-103 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-104 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-201 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901180 5568901190 5568901200 WHEELER TIMOTHY AND CHRISTI JENSEN LINDA D JIMENEZ JOHN P+CHARISMA P 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-202 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-203 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-204 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901210 KENNY RYAN C 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-302 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901240 NORTH LINDA M 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #V-102 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901270 WRIGHT DOUGLAS R+LAWSON CHE 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #K-101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901300 CARLSON CHRISTOPHER W 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #K-104 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901330 JOHNSON AARON R 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-103 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901360 WONG KENNETH M 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-201 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901390 HARDY CYNTHIA M 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-204 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901420 HOPPER DEANNA L 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-304 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901450 NEAGLE LAMAR J 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #R-103 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901220 NEWTON BRITIANY 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #U-303 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901250 FOX PATRICIA A 15150140THWAYSE, UNIT#V-103 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901280 ELFALAN BERTHA N 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #K-102 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901310 MOAK DONALD J+REBECCA L 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901340 COKE C DALLAS 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-104 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901370 RIVERA MARTIN JR 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-202 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901400 POPE JILL M 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-205 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901430 EMAN ROBERT L 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #R-101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901460 SCHAEFER SETH C+LUKKES STAC 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #R-104 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901230 ZHANG WU LIANG+CHANG HSIAO 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #V-101 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901260 MCGUIRE JUSTIN+MEGAN 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #V-104 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901290 EZE OKEZIET 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #K-103 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901320 ARAGHI SAYEDALI G 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-102 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901350 VICKERS KIMBERLY D 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-105 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901380 MAU DIANA N H+NOWIK JOANNA 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-203 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901410 BAKER CARMELITA L 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #P-303 RENTON, WA 98058 5568901440 SPERRY MICHAEL M+MURPHY STE 15150 140TH WAY SE, UNIT #R-102 RENTON, WA 98058 15734CondosMailLabels.001.doc 2223059004 2223059007 2223059026 BNSF CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT RENTON CITY OF 14500 SE RENTON-MAPLE VALLEY 14410 BEL-RED ROAD, SUITE 200 1055 S GRADY WAY RD BELLEVUE, WA 98007 RENTON, WA RENTON, WA 98058 2223059118 2314300060 GREGORY LELAND W+JOANNE M 2223059141 MROCZEK LAWRENCE C & JUDI A 14235 SE RENTON-MAPLE VALLEY RENTON CITY OF 14130 SE 154TH PL RD RENTON, WA RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300070 2314300080 2314300090 HUNT ANDREW R+LISA R TRAN LONG PAULMARYM 14136 SE 154TH PL 14142 SE 154TH PL 14148 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300100 2314300110 2314300120 COLLIER BRENT LEE+NICOLE M PONTON ANTHONY W+JUDITH N RODRIGUES YVETIE M+CHRISTOP 14154 SE 154TH PL 14160 SE 154TH PL 14166 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314300130 2314300140 2314300970 NELSON MICHAEL H WUJOHNJ ELLIOTI FARM HOMEOWNERS ASC 14172 SE 154TH PL 14178 SE 154TH PL RENTON, WA RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 2314301030 5568900000 6806100010 TOSCANO KENNETH L +LISA N ELLIOTI FARM HOA 15150 140TH WAY SE 15311145THAVESE RENTON, WA RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 6806100020 6806100030 6806100040 GARCIA ROBERT F+FLORDELIZA TAN JING DO MINH QUANG 15319 145TH AVE SE 15327145TH AVE SE 15335 145TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 6806100050 6806100060 6806100750 PURGANAN ISMAEL G+ADORACION MEUANSOURINHAKOUN PHONESAY RENTON CITY OF 15343 145TH AVE SE 15351 145TH AVE SE RENTON, WA RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98058 15734ParcelReportMailLabels.001.doc Denis Law Mayor May 5, 2015 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting 18215 72 00 Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chi p"Vincent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application and "On Hold" Notice Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA·H, MOD Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. However, during our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be completed so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • A complete evaluation of alleys. Alley access is the preferred street pattern for all new residential development. New residential development in areas without existing alleys shall utilize alley access for interior lots. If the developer or property owner demonstrates that alley access is not practical, the use of alleys may not be required. The City will consider the following factors in determining whether the use of alleys is not practical: a. Size: The new development is a short plat. b. Topography: The topography of the site proposed for development is not conducive for an alley configuration. c. Environmental Impacts: The use of alleys would have more of a negative impact on the environment than a street pattern without alleys. d. If site characteristics allow for the effective use of alleys (RMC 4-7-150E.5}. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending completion of the above information. Please contact me at (425) 430-7289 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Clark H. Close Associate Planner cc: Cedar River Lightfoot/ Owner(s) Todd Leavitt/ Applicant Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: May 5, 2015 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD PROJECT NAME: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR- 169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004). The parcel would be divided into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts and would result in a net density of 7.77 dwelling units per net acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical area and approximately 67,542 SF of common area. The proposed lots would range in size from 2,265 SF to 3,441 SF with an average lot size of 2,702 SF. Access to the lots would be via a private alley through the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. Additionally, a gated emergency-only access to SR-169 will also be used near the east end of the site. The site is currently undeveloped and contains a localized moderate landslide hazard area (steep slope) and a category II wetland with a SO-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100-year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Prior to annexation in 2008, the City of Renton entered into a development agreement that capped the density of the project to no more than 45 units. The project will be developed with two-and three-unit buildings with fee simple lots. No right-of-way dedication is planned. ,Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam {Ng) with .a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material will be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Engineering Study with the application. PROJECT LOCATION: SR-169 East of 140th Way SE OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS-M is likely to be issued. Comment pe.riods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: April 13, 2015 May 5, 2015 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat/ LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD NAME:------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: _______________ CITY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.:---------------- APPLICANT /PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Ivana Halvorsen/ Barghausen Consulting Engineers/ 18215 72"d Ave S / Kent, WA 98032 / 425-2S1-6222 Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, Street Modification Building Permit, Construction Permit, Sign Permit Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborlst Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, Geotechnical Engineering Study Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 The subject site is designated COMP-RMD on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R-14 on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental {SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC4-2-110A; 4-3..050; 4--4; 4-6-060; 4-7; 4-9 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. • The applicant shall comply with the recommendations including the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. (dated February 25, 2015}. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Clark H. Close, Associate Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on May 19, 2015. If you are interested in attending the future public hearing, please contact the Planning Division at (425) 430-6578 for the date and time. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on t~is proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat/ LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD NAME'------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ CITY/STATE/ZIP:----------- TELEPHONE NO.: ______________ _ CONTACT PERSON: Clark H. Close, Associate Planners; Tel: (425) 430-7289; Email: cclose@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION CIVIL f:NGINffRING, LAND PLANN1NG. SUR\IEY'NG Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 April 13, 2015 HAND DELIVERY RE: Application for Preliminary Plat, SEPA, and Site Plan Review Elliott Farms City File No. PRE15-000029 Our Job No. 15734 Dear Clark: On behalf of Brixton Homes, LLC we are submitting the formal application for Preliminary Plat, SEPA, and Site Plan Review. This submittal is provided as a complete application for the permit reviews noted above with all items listed in the submittal checklists as applicable. The project is proposed as a preliminary plat of 45 residential lots that will be developed with 45 attached townhome style units. A private alley access will extend into the site from the adjacent Molasses Creek Condominium project to serve the new homes. A separated walkway is provided for most of the project. Existing utilities serve the site including water, sewer, power, natural gas, telephone, and cable. Stormwater will be routed to an existing water quality pond to the west that direct discharges to the Cedar River. As listed in the Submittal Requirements Checklists for Preliminary Plat, SEPA, and Site Plan Review, the following items are enclosed: 1. Five (5) copies of the Pre-Application Meeting Summary dated February 5, 2015 2. Five (5) copies of the Submittal Requirements Waiver Form dated April 10, 2015 3. Original and eleven (11) copies of the Land Use Permit Application Form 4. One (1) check from Murray Franklyn Companies for the following fees: a. Preliminary Plat fee: $4,500 (plus 3 percent technology fee) b. SEPA Review Fee: $1,000 (plus 3 percent technology fee) c. Site Plan Review Fee: $1,500 (plus 3 percent technology fee) 5. Twelve (12) copies of the Project Narrative prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 9, 2015, including: a. Construction Conveyance Agreement b. Private Access Easement AFN 20000201000940 c. Pre-Annexation Agreement and Council Meeting Minutes RECEIVED .APR 1 3 2015 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department-2 - d. Fence Detail e. Lighting Detail April 13, 2015 6. Twelve (12) copies SEPA Environmental Checklist prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015 7. One (1) copy of the Modification Request for Private Alley Access prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015, including: a. Cover Letter b. Narrative c. Vicinity Map d. Private Access Easement AFN 20000201000940 e. Project Plans showing proposal 8. Twelve (12) copies of the Density Worksheet 9. Five (5) copies of the Construction Mitigation Description prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 10, 2015 1 o Three (3) copies of the Plat Certificate (Title Report) issued by Chicago Title 11. Five (5) copies of the recorded documents from the Plat Certificate (Title Report) 12. Four (4) copies of the Draft Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) 13. Five (5) copies of the King County Plat Name Reservation Certificate dated February 18, 2015 14. Original and one (1) copy of the Affidavit of Public Information Sign Installation for two signs 15. Twelve (12) copies of the Neighborhood Detail Map 16. Twelve (12) copies of the Overall Preliminary Plat Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015 (Sheets 1 and 2 of 7) 17. Five (5) copies of the Preliminary Landscape Plan prepared by Brumbaugh & Associates 18. Five (5) copies of the Boundary, Topographic and Tree Survey prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated February 18, 2015 19. Four (4) copies of the Preliminary Tree Inventory/Clearing Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015 20. Four (4) copies of the Arborist Report prepared by Greenforest Inc. dated April 1, 2015 f.': (::;,JV[D C-:"~\-C~': \.:~r: ~·:;\)N i-',.r.'.:":'::,;C:,,::\':<:iY·l Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department-3 - 21. Two (2) copies of the Tree Retention Worksheet 22. Twelve (12) copies of the Wetland Plan prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. April 13, 2015 23. Five (5) copies of the Wetland Delineation Report prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. dated December 15, 2014 24. Five (5) copies of the Geotechnical Report prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. dated February 25, 2015 25. Five (5) copies of the Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk 26. Five (5) copies of the Preliminary Utility Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015 (Sheet 6 of 7) 27. Four (4) copies of the Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015 (Sheet 3 of 7) 28. Four (4) copies of the Preliminary Technical Information Report prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 10, 2015 29. Eleven (11) copies of the Preliminary Street and Profile Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 13, 2015 (Sheets 4 and 5 of 7) 30. Twelve (12) copies of the Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated April 10, 2015 (Sheet 3 of 7) 31. Five (5) copies of the Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC dated April 1, 2015 32. Two (2) copies of the Water Availability Certificate issued by Cedar River Water and Sewer District dated February 24, 2015 33. Two (2) copies of the Sewer Availability Certificate issued by Cedar River Water and Sewer District dated February 24, 2015 34. Five (5) copies of the Architectural Elevations and Floor Plans Set prepared by GMS Architectural Group, and Five (5) copies of the 11-x 17-inch Color Elevations prepared by Murray Franklyn 35. One (1) photo (PMT) reduction and one (1) paper copy of the reduced (8-1/2-x 11-inch) All oversized plans, including: a. Neighborhood Detail Map b. Preliminary Plat Plans prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (7 sheets) c. Preliminary Landscaping Plans prepared by Brumbaugh & Associates (2 sheets) .L\FR I 3 1'015 C~T\/ <;,:-": < ;"i:~!N iPLflP,:>.,.".:(i i/n~1.;JN Clark Close Associate Planner City of Renton Community & Economic Development Department-4 - d. Architectural Elevations prepared by GMS Architectural Group (4 sheets) e. Color Elevations prepared by Murray Franklyn (5 sheets) April 13, 2015 f. Boundary and Topographic Survey prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2 sheets) 36. Public Notice Package, including: a. Map of 300-foot radius b. List of property owners within 300 feet 37. One (1) copy of the Colored Maps, including: a. Neighborhood Detail Map b. Site Plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. c. Landscaping Plan prepared by Brumbaugh & Associates d. Building Elevations prepared by GMS Architectural Group e. 11-x 17-inch Color Elevations by Murray Franklyn 38. One (1) compact disc containing PDF copies of the entire submittal package The enclosed materials comprise complete applications for Preliminary Plat, SEPA, and Site Plan Review. Please route and review the enclosed materials at your earliest convenience. The applicant looks forward to working with the City on this project. Please contact me at this office with any plan review comments or questions. Thank you. IH/dm 15734c.004.doc enc: As Noted Respectfully, Ivana Halvorsen Senior Planner cc: Todd Levitt, Brixton Homes, LLC (w/enc via Newforma) Mark Sumrok, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. APR 1 3 20i5 cnv (;;::: i; .. ',·~t.1 ·r,'",~' "'.; ,, Pi.AN:'-!!:'.'.( __ --. CITY OF RENT( DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: August 3, 2016 To: City Clerk's Office From: Sabrina Mirante Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUA (file) Number: LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD Cross-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Clark H. Close Acceptance Date: May 5, 2015 Applicant: Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Owner: Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc/Patrick Lennon, Lennon Investments Contact: Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers PID Number: 2223059004 ERC Determination: DNS-M Date: July 11, 2016 Aooeal Period Ends: July 29, 2016 Administrative Decision: Date: Anneal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: August 9, 2016 Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Aooeal Period Ends: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat, Hearing Examiner Site Plan, SEPA Environmental Review approval and a Street Modification for a 45-lot subdivision for the future construction of attached two-and three-unit buildings. The 6.07-acre site is located along SR-169 between 140th Way SE and 145th Ave SE within the Residential-14 zoning district (APN 2223059004 ). On June 16, 2016, the applicant submitted revised plat plan that would be divided · the parcel into 45 residential lots and 8 tracts that would result in a net density of 9.7 dwelling units per acre. The tracts include 47,911 square feet (SF) of critical areas, 60,731 SF of open space and 4,915 SF for alleys. The proposed fee simple lots would range in size from 2,217 SF to 3,939 SF with an average lot size of 2,586 SF. Primary access to the development would be via a managed public road access from Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) that runs through the development and connects to an existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums. Secondary access to the lots would be available through the existing private road due to the existing private easement through the Molasses Creek Condominium. The scooe of the oroiect is to mimic the i adjacent condominium lopment as contemplated by the I Annexation Agreement and Aqua Barn Annexation in 2008. The site is currently undeveloped and contains moderate landslide hazards and a Category II wetland with a 50-foot buffer. The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside the 100- year floodplain limits. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed as part of the Plat of Elliott Farms and Molasses Creek Condominiums, located west of 140th Way SE. Soils consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut would spread on the finished lots and/or exported off-site and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material would be imported for the project. The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees within the development area. All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees onsite. The applicant has submitted a Critical Area Report, Technical Information Report, Traffic Impact Assessment, Arborist Report, Wetland Delineation, Letter of Understanding of Geologic Risk, and a Geotechnical Enqineerinq Studv with the annlication. Location: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy Comments: ERC Determ1nat1on Types: DNS -Determination of Non-Significance; DNS-M -Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated; OS -Determination of Significance. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Applicant Parties of Record See Attached Todd Leavitt, Cedar River Lightfoot Owner (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary (Print): __ .!..!..l,'-'-\14----"""--'"""'"-""----------'==....,.,...~~'-----"'- My appointment expires: Ellliott Farms Preliminary Plat LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD template -affidavit of service by mailing Dee Thierry 15150 140th Way SE, #M 105 Renton. WA 98058 Ivana Halvorsen Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S Kent, WA 98032 Karen Bonaudi 15150 140th Way SE, B104 Renton, WA 98058 Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton, WA 98058 DORIS KNIGHT 15150 140th Way SE, HlOl Renton, WA 98058-5819 J. Wruble 14201 SE Petrovitsky Rd, #A3-344 Renton, WA 98058 Leland Gregorv Todd Levitt Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 Emilv O'Meara Joanne Gregory 14235 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 SE David Powell Rd Fall Citv, 98024 ADVISORY NOTES TO AP-· .!CANT LUA 15-000242 --------'.Kenton e Application Date: April 13, 2015 Name: Elliott Farms Site Address: 14207 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058-8120 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 ... Police Plan Review Comments 'iii: Colltact: Cyndie Parks I 425-430-7521 I cparl<s@rentdriwa,gdv Recommendations: Minimal impact on Police Services ,->-·.-' " .. ·-"" :," Fire Review. Building Comments: ·.. ContacttCoreyffhomas I 425;430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. Recommendations: CC&Rs: Bob Mac Onie 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Recommendations: Preliminary Plat: Bob Mac Onie 5/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA 15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found. per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Ran: August 03, 2016 Page 1 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLI(.,, .. JT LUA15-000242 --------1tenton ® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surtace water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract: upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Note: Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surtace water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. Ran:Auaust03.2016 Page 2 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO A,-·JCANT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 .· .. • .. Technical Services Comments .. •· ?H Contact: Bob MacOnie I 425'430-7369 I bmac6nfe@rentonwa.gov The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the lime of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report notinq the vested property owner. . Engineering Review Comments •.. · . u/ Contact: Brianne Bannwarth l425-430°7299:fbbannwarth@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Street Modification Analysis: The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4 6 060F.2 "Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys" to locate the majority of the public sidewalks into open space tracts away from vehicular travel ways. The proposal is compliant with the following modification criteria, pursuant to RMC 4 9 250D, if all conditions of approval are met. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the requested modification, subject to conditions as noted below: RECOMMENDED CONDITION 1. A 1 O foot landscape strip is provided between the back of sidewalk or the back of curb. 2. The pedestrian pathway located in open space tracts shall be placed in a public access easement. 3. The homeowners of the new project will enter into an agreement with the Molasses Creek Homeowner's Association for their proportionate share of maintenance of the off site private road network. Compliance Street Modification Criteria and Analysis a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment n_ecessary to implement these policies and objectives. Staff Comment: The proposal to develop the subject property with 45 homes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations of the site. Neighborhood connectivity is facilitated by the construction of a new public road segment that will connect to the existing Molasses Creek private road into the site. The following Comprehensive Plan Objectives and Policies support development of the site as proposed with 45 units and the modified public road section: • Objective LU FF: The project proposes urban density with efficient land utilization and extends a neighborhood feel of the existing neighborhood. • Policy LU 140: The project will infill with similar development adjacent to an existing development served by the connecting road system. • Policy LU 141: The project proposes a logical extension of existing development that is consistent and complimentary to the development through which it accesses. b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment. Staff Comment: The new public road segment will connect to an existing private road that serves Molasses Creek Condominiums. As a recommended condition of approval, the homeowners of the new project will enter into an agreement with the Molasses Creek Homeowner's Association for their proportionate share of maintenance of the off site private road network. An easement already exists to extend private access through Molasses Creek Condominiums to the site. The proposed roadway will provide a paved width of 20 feet with sidewalks that are separated from the vehicle lanes for most of the length. Each townhome unit will have two parking spaces. c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Staff Comment: The connection to the existing private road was previously contemplated and an easement was created for the purpose. There is no injury to surrounding properties from the public road segment that will connect to the existing private road as the extension was previously planned and an easement exists for access from the project through Molasses Creek Condominiums. d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code. Staff Comment: The intent of the Code is to have roads that can provide safe and maintainable access to development. The proposed modified public road design will conform to the need for pedestrian facilities as well as amenities such as street trees and street lighting. The public street will be dedicated to the City of Renton upon recording of the final plat. As a recommended condition of approval, public easements shall be provided for amenities that are outside of the right of way of the new public street. e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and Staff Comment: See comments under criterions 'a' and 'b'. f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Staff Comment: See comments under criterion 'c'. Ran:August03,2016 Page 3 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICn,~T LUA 15-000242 -------Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I July 29, 2015 Community s;~ces, Re\llewrConimenfs . ./ < C1>~factfili~slie B~llru:n;li'425·430-661is:l I LBE!!1abn<iirf~t6~.\}ovl Recommendations: A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMENTS (from Community Services) 1. Parks Impact Fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street Trees: Space street trees 40 feet on center, not 30 feet on center. 30 Feet to street lights or further. Playground exists at new entrance. Ran: Auaust 03. 2016 Page 4 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO A--·_icANT LUA 15-000242 ---------Ren ton PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 .,,, < .. ·--:,: . _, __ Community Services Review Comments . Contact:' Leslie Betlach I 425-430-6619 I 1:.Betlach@renlonwa.gov Recommendations: 1. Parks Impact fee per Ordinace 5670 applies. Recommendations: 2. Trees shall be spaced 40 feet on center, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, waterlines, and sewerlines, 10 feet from driveway approaches, 40 feet from traffic signs (stop, yield, etc.) and intersections without signs. Use only small maturing street trees if overhead electric wires exist. Other landscape trees shall also be small maturing species where overhead utilities exist. lahgineering Review Comment11, · ')Y i Contact: Kamran Yazdidoost ! 425°430.73$;,!iJkyazdidoost@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 8 13 2015 EXISTING CONDITIONS: WATER: Water service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. SEWER: Sewer service will be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. STORM: There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property .. STREETS: There are no frontage improvements. CODE REQUIREMENTS Water Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Water availability certificate will be required. Sewer 1. Sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Sewer availability certificate will be required. Surface Water 1. There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report dated April 10, 2015 was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers. The proposed 45 lot subdivision, zoned R 14, 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. The 6.07 acre 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 Site Condition. Surface water runoff created by this development will be collected through a series of new catch basins and pipe systems in the new roadways in two drainage basins. One basin will be drained to the existing conveyance system in Molasses Creek and the other one will drain to a proposed 24 inch conveyance system along the project fronting WA 169. Flow control is not required for this project as the project is within half mile with Cedar River and can direct discharge to Cedar River per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual section 1.2.3.1, provided that the direct discharge exemption requirements, as described in the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, are met. The drainage report must include the level 3 conveyance capacity analysis of the downstream system to the outlet for the total tributary area to the outfall as required by the 2009 KCSWDM amended by City Of Renton to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the existing and proposed storm system and that the approval of direct discharge will not cause flooding. Water quality is required for this Development and developer is intending to use existing off site wet pond for water quality. The off site wet pond was built by previous development. Water quality treatment for the Elliot Farm's development must be provided per the 2009 King County Storm Water Design Manual. Applicant must provide a copy of the drainage report that was initially developed for the cottonwood, molasses creek and the proposed Elliot farm's developments that sized and approved the water quality pond by King County. 3. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015 was submitted by Terra Associates, Inc. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native's soil. Ground water/seepage was observed in 5 of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. Soil types encountered are glacially derived and alluvial. The glacial and alluvial soils have low permeability and would not be a suitable receptor soil for discharge of development stormwater using infiltration/retention facilities. 4. Surface water system development fee is $0.540 per square foot of new impervious surface, but not less than $1012. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) is required for this site. Transportation/Street Ran:August03,2016 Page 5 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICn,~T LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 ': -· ·;\· ., ., 'i·""" -. ,. --"'"'' ,, . .. :c:-=-,.-, · ., >>> ,,__ . ·-:" .,, . ,,,.,. _ ·:::" -,, · ,~-'.:1t <: '· ·.-,~--", .,. --"""" .,.·. "·""''· ·--.... · ·: .. ;! Enairieerii:lg:Revi~ Comments · --;;:: · .-· ' c'Conta~kK11mr11n Ya~idoostt 425,43Qi'7382,fkyazdii:19QSl,~lllQllWl!(gov 1. Frontage improvements along SR 169 will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of SR 169 to accommodate 6, 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If cums are used, shoulder may be reduced to 4 feet. 2. 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 right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 foot planter strip, a 5 foot sidewalk and LED street lighting installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road must be marked NO PARKING. 3. Sidewalk should be continued south side of the roadway front of lot 24 to lot 27, lot 34 to lot 45, and common area to match existing sidewalk to Molasses creek sidewalk. 4. A traffic analysis dated December April 1, 2015 was provided by TENW. The traffic study is required to include all impacted intersections: SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE, SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE. The proposed 45 lot subdivision would generate approximately 321 new weekday daily trips, with 27 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (5 entering, 22 exiting) , and 31 new trips occurring during weekday PM peak hour (21 entering, 10 exiting). 5. Primary streets/intersection impacted by this development are: a) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ 140TH Way SE b) SE Renton Maple Valley RD/ Molasses Creek East Access c) Molasses Creek West Access/ 140TH Way SE 6. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees of approximately $53,137.80. 7. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the Post Office. 8. LED street lighting meeting the residential lighting standards will be required per City of Renton Standards. 9. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 1 O. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveway shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveway shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). 11. The subject property is within the well field Capture Zone/Aquifer area Zone II. The project must comply with special requirement# 6 (Aquifer Protection Area) per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual. General Comments 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. 4. A separate street lighting plan shall be included with the civil drawings. 5. All utilities servinq the site are required to be underqrounded. Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. Page 6 of 14 l ' ADVISORY NOTES TO A--·_icANT LUA 15-000242 ---------Itenton PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 ,··. ' ' ' "'<: "'' ', Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas. I 425-4S0-7024 l.cthomas@rentonwa.gov 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 24 through 26. Not 17 feet as proposed. ' '' Planning Review Comments '' Contact: Clark.Close I 425-430'72891 cclose@rentonwa.gov If applicable, a subdivision with fee simple lots requires that the internal roadway to be made public. Therefore, the roadway design must comply with the residential access road standards of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4 6 060 Street Standards). I If applicable, update the Traffic Assessment prepared by Tra.nsportation E··n····g···i·n-eering Northwest (TENW) to reevaluate the change in access classification at the SR 169 / Road A intersection. Redesign the project into condominiums in order to retain private roads throughout the project OR provide a public access roadway to each segregated fee simple lots as part of the plat redesign, such that a direct connection from the internal public roadway is made to SR 169/Ma le Valle Hi hwa . ' ''" ''""' '_,:' ' .. · Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Holl}"1fadefj 425°430-7519 t htrader@rentonwa,gov Recommendations: Minimal imoact on police services. TethnicalSenrices Cdmments { .. :··.:_, •.i Co11tact: /\rrianda.'J\skren l425~430-7369.jaaskren@rentonwa.gov, Recommendations: CC&Rs: Comments previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Elliott Farms is identified as a Short Plat in the Recitals this is incorrect. Comments are the same previously from Bob Mac Onie on 05/15/2015 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA15 000242 and LND 10 0523, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, perWAC332 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city at final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the Ran:August03,2016 Page 7 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLIC/"\1.JT LUA 15-000242 ---------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I December 16, 2015 .. ,. symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otheiwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Do not show building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. Include the following blocks: TRACT NOTES A 'Tract' is land reserved for specified uses, including, but not limited to reserve tracts, recreation, open space, critical areas, surface water retention, utility facilities and access. Tracts are not considered building sites for the purposes of residential dwelling. Tract '998' is a Storm Drainage tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract 'A' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). An easement is hereby granted and conveyed to the City of Renton over, under and across Tract '998' is a wetland management and critical area tract and is subject to a Native Growth Protection Easement. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otheiwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in Tract '998' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Tract '999' is an Access, Landscape, Recreation, Open Space and Pedestrian Access tract; upon the recording of this plat, Tract '999' is hereby granted and conveyed to the Elliot Farms Home Owners Association (HOA). Maintenance of all improvements and landscaping on said Tract '999' shall be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otheiwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract '999' previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract is prohibited except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City and except for required maintenance of the utilities located within the tracts that is granted written City of Renton authorization and conducted using best available science. Tract 999 should be segregated into at least two separate tracts, one for access and the other of Landscaping, Recreation and Open Space. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT The Native Growth Protection Easement (NPGE) on this Plat identifies critical areas steep slopes & wetlands. The creation of the R~n· A11m1~t 0~ ?01R Paoe 8 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO A,--.ICANT LUA 15-000242 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use . .. Technical Services Comments .. • --------Renton® Version 2 I December 16, 2015 Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430, 7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov Easement conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the Easement Area. This interest shall be for the purpose of preserving native vegetation for the control of surtace water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The Easement imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the Easement area enforceable on behalf of the public by the City of Renton, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the Easement area. The vegetation within the Easement area may not be cut, pruned covered by fill, removed or damaged without express written permission from the City of Renton. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report notina the vested oropertv owner. Ran:August03,2016 Page 9 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLIC,,,JT LUA 15-000242 --------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 3 I April 22, 2016 Planning fleview Comments Contact: Clark Close{425,430-7213\'l\d~ld$a@~ntdn;a,gov A covenant would be required to be placed on the face of the plat to vacate the parcels direct public access to SR 169 when a future access to a public road can be achieved either through the existing Molasses Creek Condominiums (parcel no. 5568900000) road network or via a redevelopment of the Molasses Creek parcel. Public access from Elliott Farms subdivision to SR 169 would be required to provide channelization (right in/right out only) from Road B to SR 169. I ~:~~::~:~~i:1-::::: ~~:~1:t:~~~;!u~~:h!~:~~~n~~~~!;;;~0aJe'~:it:!e:e~b~~;e:~~t::~:·r~~r.roadwaydesignmust comply with I I Submit an approved right in/right out (RIRO)~channelization plan from WSDOT. · · · ·· I '"!,:,I'::,;\, "~i-.gli'leerlt'l!l'·R~view.ci>rtime"ntai,'""':,1·· ·······-·,:0-1.-s•-·········-·· 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be located behind ROW (typ) I 2: Taper landscaping across frontage of lot_ 18. Alignlojii with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. j 3. Terminate sidewalkatlot18and jointopedestrian path through development. ! 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicula·r access/parking to mailbox . . ," " . ""·' ,-. . . . " ,'· .· '·_., ', . ' ·.: . "' ... · ' . ,; ., ,' -; __ :";'. . :/\-_-:::;: <;:;'::':>-/~ ·: ,_::::(·.;'':;:;::}::>_: <>'>< _>::i::(<.'.! . ", ', ,' . ' Fire Review"· Building_ Cqmments •• Contact:• Coray Thomas I 425•43lF7'024Jc.tl'iomas@rentonwa;gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13. Not 16 feet as orooosed. Pagp 10 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TOA ___ _ICANT LUA 15-000242 ---------Ren ton PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 41 July 14, 2016 " , ,,' , , /,, " ,, ' Planning Review Comments ---···· -Contact: crark Close I 425-430° 7289 I cclose@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 1. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm. Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Multi family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 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. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4 3 050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eaale Mananement Guidelines (2007) and /or vour U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service nermit. E~gineering RevieW 0 Comments ContactSAfln·-F"oWler·1•42~/~~'ji~~~--t-afovvliir.~teritonwagov 1. 1 ft maintenance strip is to be located behind ROW (typ) Recommendations: have reviewed the application for the Elliott Farms at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy (Af'N('s) 2223059004-)ancl have.the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS Water Water service is provided by the City of Renton. Sewer Wastewater service is provided by the City of Renton. Storm The existing properties do not contain stormwater facilities. There are stormwater mains located in Maple Valley Hwy. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. The applicant has provided a water availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SEWER 1. The applicant has provided a sewer availability certificate from Cedar River Water & Sewer District. A copy of the approved water plan from Cedar River Water & Sewer District shall be provided to the City prior to approval of the Utility Construction Permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A surface water development fee of $1,485.00 per new single family dwelling unit will apply. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $66,825.00. This is subject to final design and payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. 2. A drainage report, dated April 10, 2015, was submitted by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. with the site plan application. Based on the City of Renton's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard for Forested Conditions. The development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. All core requirements and special requirements have been discussed in the provided drainage report. 3. The existing site is currently undeveloped with remnants from an existing farm, including partially buried building foundations and concrete slabs. The site topography is generally flat with a steep slope in the southwest corner of the site, which also contains a wetland with a 50 foot that will remain undisturbed. A portion of the runoff from the existing site drains to the wetland. The remaining portion of the site drains into a roadside ditch along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), where flows are conveyed west. 4. A geotechnical report, dated February 25, 2015, completed by Terra Associates, Inc., for the site has been provided. The field study included eight exploration pits on the 6.07 acre site. These exploration pits were dug up to 15 feet in native soils. Groundwater/seepage Ran:August03,2016 Page 11 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICn.,~T LUA 15-000242 -------Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 4 I July 14, 2016 , ·C"t:Ern;;;,::>i.;,-. --:;:o::-:::,·y·_->;;ii:::in:::i1;:::/"·---+ < ,,, . ·.; -: .. ::,, ::-;_ ·<1u1 :::,:i-:'2''° /J<-:0-"_:'<,><<::<:'i:;,';0_f -__ ,:_,-, -.-·s: --. i '.:.:::,,"'··:-_ _ :· _,._.-, .. ,;::;;;::::::mnn<·-;;,:,_'/i;;,,,,, '?:-'ii!JF E:osin1111ring l'leview,(fomments ---. < .••. •.c . .'.c. Contai:tfMn li'ciwler I 425'43<>"7382 I afowret1.llil'~tmwa,gov was observed in five of the eight test pits. The seepage occurred below depths of about five feet. The report discusses the soil and groundwater characteristics of the site and provides recommendations for project design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations presented in this report discount the use of full infiltration due to the underlying dense glacial till soil. 5. The project site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and the flowpath from the project site discharge point is less than a half mile to the 100 year floodplain of the Cedar River and qualifies for the direct discharge exemption in accordance with Section 1.2.3.1 of the City Amendments to the KCSWDM and must adhere to all requirements thereof. Staff Comments: i. The conveyance system analysis provided in the preliminary Technical Information Report (TIA) does not provide a complete analysis of the system to the outfall in the Cedar River in accordance with the requirements for the direct discharge exemption as outlined in Section 1.2.3 of the 2009 KCSWDM. Applicant shall provide a complete conveyance system analysis, including new conveyance pipes within the proposed development and existing conveyance pipes from the development boundary to the outfall in the Cedar River. Applicant shall demonstrate the outfall and existing conveyance system is adequately sized to support the added run off from the development. 6. The development is required to provide basic water quality treatment prior to discharge. The development is proposing to convey surtace water to an existing water quality facility (wetpond), located at the southwest corner of the WA 169 and 140th Way SE intersection. As stated in the drainage report, the existing off site wetpond was built and sized for several divisions of Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek Condominiums, areas of the WSDOT right of way, as well as the proposed Elliot Farms project. Staff Comments: i. The applicant shall complete a level 3 downstream analysis verifying capacity of the existing wetpond and conveyance system. ii. The applicant shall provide a copy of the as built plans and final drainage report(s) used to build the Cedarwood Water Quality Pond. 7. No downstream flooding or erosion issues were identified in the drainage.report. Additional Staff Comments: i. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required. ii. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is required to be submitted with the construction permit application. TRANSPORTATION 1. The proposed development fronts Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) along the north property lines. Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is classified as a Principal Arterial Road and is a Washington State Highway. Frontage improvements along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) will be required and are subject to design review and approval by WSDOT. This may include dedication of right of way for future planned widening of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to accommodate six (6) 12 foot lanes and 8 foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder width may be reduced to 4 feet. Existing right of way (ROW) width is approximately 150 feet. Per City code 4 6 060, half street improvements shall include a pavement width of 88 feet (44 feet from centerline), a 0.5 foot curb, an 8 foot planting strip, an 8 foot sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. However, the City's transportation group has determined and will support an alternate standard to match the established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City established standard street section for Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169), which shall be installed by the developer as part of the proposed development, will allow retention of the existing curb line. Developer will be required to install 6 foot planting strips and 5 foot sidewalks behind the existing curb along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Staff Comments: i. Applicant will need to submit an application to the City requesting a modification of the street frontage improvements as outlined in City code 4 9 250C5d. ii. The posted speed limit of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) is 50 mph along this section of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). The City defers to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard clear zones, which provide the same, or similar, clear zone requirements as WSDOT. The required clear zone would preclude the developer from being able to install street trees and street lighting along the frontage of Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the development. A request for modification or a fee in lieu would be required to not install the street trees and street lighting along Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) as part of the platting process of Elliott Farms. 2. The proposal includes a new internal roadway providing direct access via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) to the north and access through the existing access easement through the existing private lane at Molasses Creek Condominiums (MCC) to the west. The applicant has proposed a street modification to provide a paved roadway width of 20 feet with 5 foot sidewalks and 8 foot planter strips along one side of the roadway. Sidewalks and planter strips alternate between the north side of the roadway and the south side of the roadway in order to provide pedestrian access to the pathways used to connect common areas. Staff Comments: i. Emergency services access within 150 feet of all homes via a 20 foot paved roadway is required. As such, parking is not allowed along the internal access road proposed for the project. 3. The proposal includes three (3) 16 foot wide alleys. Alley 1 provides access to lots 24 26, Alley 2 provides access to lots 5 13, and Ran:Auqust03,2016 Page 12 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO AP-· .ICANT LUA 15-000242 ¢ C!TYOF ~ ---------Renton~ PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 4 I July 14, 2016 ·.,:: " .. """ . << . ,_'·---·o-:::>:Y<----___ :·. Engineering Review Co_tnments --Co11tact:'A/i'il"F;:\wler I 425-430-7382 I afowler@rentonW&.gov Alley 3 provides access to lots 1 4. i. Applicant shall submit a modification request for approval by City of Renton Fire Prevention for 16 foot alley access roads to lots 1 13 and 24 26. ii. If the modification request is approved, sprinkler systems would be required for each of the lots accessed from the 16 foot alleys. 4. ADA access ramps shall be installed at all street crossings. Ramps are not shown at the crossing between lots 33 and 34 and at the crossing located at the west end of the development. 5. Street lighting and street trees are required to meet current city standards. Lighting plans were not submitted with the land use application and will be reviewed during the construction utility permit review. 6. A traffic analysis dated April 1, 2015, was provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW). The site generated traffic volumes were calculated using data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, (2009). The traffic analysis is required to include all impacted intersections: Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/140th Way SE, Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169)/Molasses Creek East Access, and Molasses Creek West Access/140th Way SE. Based on the calculations provided, the proposed development would average 321 new daily vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 27 new vehicle trips, with 22 vehicles exiting and 5 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 new vehicle trips, with 21 vehicles entering and 10 vehicles exiting the site. 7. A supplementary traffic analysis, dated December 11 , 2015, was provided by TENW in order to provide an updated analysis of the project assuming a new access to Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169). Traffic volumes remained unchanged from the preliminary analysis previously noted. The estimated distribution of project traffic was based on existing traffic patterns and were generally distributed as follows: • 50 percent to/from the west on Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) • 30 percent to/from the east on SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) • 20 percent to/from the south on 140th Way SE As detailed in the report the proposed project is not expected to lower the levels of service of the surrounding intersections included in the traffic study. Direct public access to and from the site via Maple Valley Hwy (WA 169) shall be channelized to provide right in/right out access only. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. 8. Refer to City code 4 4 080 regarding driveway regulations. Driveways shall be designed in accordance with City standard plans 104.1 and 104.2. 9. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction of the development at the time of application for the building permit. The current rate of transportation impact fee is $1,546.31 per dwelling unit for condominiums. The project proposes the addition of 45 new residences. The estimated total fee is $69,583.95. Traffic impact fees will be owed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. 10. Paving and trench restoration shall comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Adequate separation between utilities shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a. 7 ft minimum horizontal and 1 ft vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 1 O ft horizontal and 1.5 ft vertical. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall confirm to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. A landscaping plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Each plan shall be on separate sheets. 4. All electrical, phone, and cable services and lines serving the proposed development must be underground. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton inspector. I 2. Taper landscapingacrossfrontage of lot 18. Align lot 17 with roadway. Shift backyard boundaries as applicable for these lots. I 3. Terminate sidewalk at lot· 18 and join to pedestrian path through development: · · I 4. Provide mailbox location and vehicular access/parking to mailbox. .. Community Services Review Conunents ..... . .' .... :-" .· . .-.· ---,-.. ,-<, ,. . . . ·.-·'. ' . Contact: Leslie Betlachf425.430,6619 I LBetlach@rentonwa;gov Recommendations: 1. Parks Impact Fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Planting strips include an 8 foot wide planting strip at all public street locations. Use large maturing trees where no overhead electric wires exist and spaced 50 feet on center. .. ···. . .. Fire Review • Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430"7024 j'dhomas@r,1ntonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: Ran:August03,2016 Page 13 of 14 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICn,~T LUA 15-000242 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use -------Renton® Version 4 I July 14, 2016 _ -: ':'. ___ ·" ,_ . ''.~i(.:1<.tt;i!:!::ii;,i_i,: . _.· . ,. """':'',, <'>>:i:l:!J:':'_:'j:/::,:.: . -: -·:· ,. ·:_ . . _ > ,, ,. , ,Yi ":":;>i)r-00--,,;:;i!H· Fire Review:,.Bilil@;iil!iComments . C<int!l~t(;c;!'!ly;Juomas:1;425-430~ 7024 I cthomas@rentOl'l~!f,Qc;v:: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5 inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. All roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide including road to lots 5 through 13 and 24 throuah 26. Not 16 feet as orooosed. Turnina radius to Allev 2 does not meet code either. Ran:Auaust03.2016 Page 14 of 14 City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: Lennon Investments, Inc. AND Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: ELLIOTI FARMS ADDRESS· 35815 SE David Powell Road AND · 144 1 O Bel-Red Road PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ADDRESS NOT ASSIGNED CITY: Fall City, WA AND ZIP· 98024 AND Bellevue, WA . 98007 SR-169 EAST OF 140TH WAY SE TELEPHONE NUMBER: (206) 399-2775 AND (425) 644-2323 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 222305-9004 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: Patrick 0. Lennon AND Todd Levitt EXISTING LAND USE(S): VACANT . . Lennon Investments, Inc. AND COMPANY (if applicable): Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. PROPOSED LAND USE(S): 45-LOT PLAT FOR 45 TOWNHOUSE UNITS ADDRESS: 35815 SE David Powell Road AND 1441 o Bel-Red Road EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: RMD (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY) CITY: Fall City, WA AND ZIP: 98024 AND Bellevue, WA 98007 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) RMD (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY) TELEPHONE NUMBER: (206) 399-2775 AND (425) 644-2323 EXISTING ZONING: R-14 CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): R-14 SITE AREA (in square feet): NAME: IVANA HALVORSEN 264,409SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): BARGHAUSEN CONSUL TING ENGINEERS, INC. DEDICATED: NONE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 18215 -72ND AVES 26,079 SF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: KENT, WA ZIP: 98032 ACRE (if applicable) TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 45 (425) 251-6222 ihalvorsen@barghausen.com NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 45 H:\CED\Data\Fonns-Templates\Self-Hclp Handouts\Planning\masterapp.doc -1 -03/11 PROJECT INFORMATION(contin_ue_d~)------~--- NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable) PROJEcT VALUE: _;\ SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): f'A 745 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE {if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN {if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ~f applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): Nil\ NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): ~I!,\ L___ ____ .. - 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO 0 FLOOD HAZARD AREA it' GEOLOGIC HAZARD 12 480 0 HABITAT CONSERVATION 0 SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES IS WETLANDS 1r,,747 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY /Attach leaal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the followina information included) sq_ fl. sq. ft sq. ft sq_ ft. sq. ft. SITUATE IN THE SE QUARTER OF SECTION ___;u_, TOWNSHIP~. RANGE __2_, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Namels) Patrick 0. Lennon for Lennon Investments, Inc .• declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one)~ the current owner of the property involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to acl for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. q--h fiZ"" r ________ _ ~e Signature of Owner/Representative Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) pot,~((c)-o. '-,1\11 I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that \ ( Iv \...e, l,\yl, signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary {Print) JVLfilO\.. L0JVW S 1 . lt'.)f . /) /) l t? My appointment expires __ _.___,_:J.......__~c.,.v~----------- -2 -03/11 PROJECT INFORMATION (continued) ,=..:...:....1.::c.::..:...:.=;;..:.::..:::..=.c__ ________ ~ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: -l} $:lAOG.000 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 54.745 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable}: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable}: NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable}: NIA D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA ii{' GEOLOGIC HAZARD 12 480 D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES M WETLANDS 15,747 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY I Attach leaal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the followina information Included\ sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. SITUATE IN THE SE QUARTER OF SECTION 23 , TOWNSHIP 22 , RANGE 5 , IN THE CITY ------OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Namels) Todd Levitt for Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) __ the current owner of the property involved in this application or L_ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization} and that the foregoing statements and answers herein co~fz:_are in all r\~~;-~:~; correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of Owner~Representativel Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date Todd Levitt for Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that --'T-"o-"dd=-=Le=-•cc·it=-t _____ _ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. Dated $' h.: • • • • • • • • • ,...,... ~ =" '>·~\on Ex.O'i,> ~ .::-, n....: .'~il'o S', .,,. cr5i ' 4. -......... .I:"' <$'', .... (/6 :: §'{ ;<,P,,.\W ·. ~ := ! o ~o -~. , z = Notary (Print): __ ulf ..... ~.t:~i_,_--"-.,_/J..LLQ...;....,......c-'<W""'--'-n.5-'=='---- 3 ;u <i?' ~\V ,: Q ,: ::. ·.. p\.l'o ,,,: ;.::; :: 5 I---, , ) a~ ~ · E•' <!I -:-My appointment expires _ ........ l\.....,..,1 .. ,¢=~u'-1-./a&Z""'------------~ ·... n 2.b.:1,,7-· ~ ~ r • ~ 0',:.'···'1'.~.-..•.•. ~~ ...... ~ ,,,,, '4r1: Of >N~ ,,,,, 11111111 II \II\'\''\\ H \CED\Data\Fonns-Temp ates1Self-Help Handouts\Plannmg\masterapp doc • 2 -03 li 'l;l(IJ7 MURRAYFRANKLYN A fomlly of Comj>anle, April 6, 2015 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Signature Authority To whom it may concern: Todd Levitt, an employee of the Murray Fronklyn Family of Companies, is an Authorized Agent of Cedar River Lightfoot, lne., owner of the property known as King County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 22230S-9004 (the "Property"). Mr. Levitt is authorized to sign, submit and/or receive applications, records and any other documents related to the Property. Should you have any questions, please call Jami Balint at 425.649.8139. George Reece President ELLIOTT cARMS 15734 PRE-APPLICATION MEETING COMMENTS FOR ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT (45-LOTS) PRE 15-000029 CITY OF RENTON .APR 1 3 201: CITY Of RINTON PLANNING DIVtSK.>N Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division February 5, 2015 Contact Information: Planner: Clark H. Close, 425-430-7289 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Kamran Yazdidoost, 425-430-7382 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425-430-7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425-430-7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre-application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies In effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Publlc Works Administrator and City Council). FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM February 5, 2015 Clark Close, Associate Planner Corey Thomas, Plan Review/Inspector (Elliott Farms Prellmlnary Plat (45-Lots) -14207 Maple Valley Hwy) PRElS-000029 Comments based on no fire sprinkler systems, no fire alarm systems and construction per the International Residential Code. 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 2. The preliminary required fire flow for this proposed development is 2,500 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150-feet and two within 300-feet of the proposed buildings. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code, including 5-inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 75-psi point loading. Access is required within 150-feet of all points on the buildings. Page 1 of 1 ~Ft? ADMINISTRATIVE RULING Subject: Number: Fire Annaratus Access Gate Standards Effective Date Supcrse<les Page Staff Contact Approved By 12/lS/08 NIA 1 of3 Dave Par1!Rs 1.0 PURPOSE: To provide guidelines for the standardization of automated gate access for commercial occupancies, residential communities and single family residences to provide Fire and Emergency Services reliable and easy emergency access. 2.0 ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED: ' .. Community Risk Reduction, Response Operntions, and Police Department. 3.0 REFERENCES: IFC S03.6 4.0 POLICY: Where fire and emergency apparatus access is restricted because of secured, automated openings and where immediate access is necessary for emergency services such as fire, medical aid and law enforcement activity, those gates or barl'iers shall be fully automatic and shall be maintained opel'able. S.O DEFINITIONS: 6.0 PROCEDURES: 6.l All automated vehicle access gates or barriers installed in fire apparatus access roadways or fire lanes, shall be electrically operated for entry and exit by an approved method acceptable to the City of Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department. 6.1.1 Click2Enter®, or equal, radio operated controller is the _preferred method of operation. All automated gates or barriers shall be eqmpped with a range- able radio receiver capable of receiving access commands from public safety mdio transceivers. Such emergency access control device will be able to operate with the radio systems used by public safety agencies operating within the City of Renton utilizing 'Stale Ops 3' radio frequency. 6.1.2 Radio controlled exit activation LED device may be waived by installation of a "free exit" loop. Revised I 0/30/08 6.1.2.1 Gates requmng radio-controlled exit/LED activation shall be provided with an approved means of communicating the need to activate radio-controlled exit with an approved sign. 6.1.3 Wiring of electl'ical gates shall be provided by normal underground wiring methods utilizing AC voltage. 6.1.3.1 Electrically operated gates shall fail in the open position when the power is off. They shall remain open until power is restored. 6.2 All gate mstallations must be submitted for approval to the Fire and Emergency Se1vices Depat1ment's Plan Review Section prior to initiating the wo1·k. Separate permits are requil'ed from the Building and Electrical Departments. 6.2.1 Plan submittal shall include the following information: 1. Roadway width 2. Gate Location 3. Setbacks from city streets 4. Location of sidewalks 5. Gate swing 6. Support posts 7. Motor control location 8. Click2Enter® 1·eceiving unit location, 9. Location of "NO PARKING -FIRE LANE" signs to clear path for gate. 10. Gate panel detail · 11. Cut sheets for all devices 12. Location of signage noting use of 'State Operational Channel 3' for access. 6.2.2 Operation of the Click2Enter® activation shall be as follows: I. When 'State operations channel 3' is selected and the mic1"0phone button is held for 15 seconds, the gate activation shall begin. 2. Upon activation of the microphone the red Click2Enter® activation light shall turn on. 3. When Click2Enter® red light turns off and the microphone is released the red light shall blink rapidly and the gate opens. 6.3 Gate installation shall comply with all building, planning and zoning requirements. 6.3.l Gates shall provide a minimum 20-feet full, unobstnicted width, inclusive of items such as the hinges and the gate itself. Minimum ve11ical clearance shall be 13-feet, 6-inches. 6.3.2 Gates may consist of two separate leafs that swing in opposite directions, one · large leaf that swings open, or a sliding leaf that opens parallel to security fences. Swinging gates shall open in the direction of travel in conjunction with nonnal traffic dkection. 6.3.2.1 Sliding gates shall be provided with the ability to easily re-set on tract. 6.3.3 Gates shall automatically open in case of power failure using battery or emergency generator power and remain open until power is restored. 6.3.4 Swinging gates shall maintain a minil'num of 12-inches of clearance from the road surface to the bottom of the gate through its entire swing. 6.3.5 Gates shall be equipped with a Click2Enter® receiver to allow for radio activation upon approach of emergency vehicles. 6.3.6 Gates shall be pl'Ovided .with signs stating "no parking -fire lane" on each side of each leaf of the gate. These are in addition to the signs required adjacent to the gate to keep vehicles fl'Om parking in the path of the gate swing next to the cw-b. Signs shall be a minimum of 12-inches by 18-inches Revised 10/30/08 2 with white background and red lettering with 4•inch high lettering and I-inch wide letters. 6.3.7 Gates shall be provided with sign that states "FIRE EMERGENCY ACCESS - CLICK2ENTER -STATE OPS 3". Signs shall be posted on the upper portion of the ingress side of the gate and shall have white 4·inch high lettering and 1" inch wide letters on a red background. 6.4 Approval of gate installation will be conducted by the Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department. The acceptance test will verify compliance to all requirements as shown of the approved plans. Until the gate has been accepted on the final inspection, gates in fire access roadways shall remain open and out-of-service. 6.5 All gates installed in fire access roadways and fire lanes shall be inspected and tested at least annually to insure compliance with all requirements, except fo1· single-family residences. Inspections can be conducted by the Renton Fire and Emergency Services Depru'tment or may be conducted by an approved third party contractor/maintenance company. Written certification will be required from a third party inspection company. 6.6 Single family residences with automated gates may use a Supra® lockbox with toggle switch or a Knox® box with key-switch cap as an alternative to the Click2Enter® activation inethod of eme1'gency se1vices access • ••• •l Revised I 0/30/08 . . .. ' ... ; 3 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M February S, 2015 Clark Close, Associate Planner Kam ran Yazdidoost, Plan Review Elliot Farms Plat East of 1401h Way SE and Maple Valley Hwy PRE 15-000029 NOTE: The applicant Is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non- binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision-makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above-referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre-application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. Water 1. Water service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A water availability certificate will be required to be submitted with the site plan application. 2. The applicant shall provide the City of Renton with a copy of the civil plan for the on-site and off-site water main improvements as approved by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Sewer 1. Sewer service will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A sewer availability certificate will be required to be submitted with the site plan application. Storm Drainage 1. There is conveyance/structure system at NE corner of the subject property. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report will be required with the site plan application. The report shall comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, Chapter 1 and 2. Based on the City's flow control map, the site lies within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Site Conditions). All core and any special requirements shall be contained in the report. 3. A geotechnical report for the site will be required. Information on the water table and soil permeability with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the geotechnical engineer shall be submitted with the application. 4. Surface water system development fee is $0.540 per square foot of new impervious surface, but not less than $1,012. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater Permit from Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. Transportation/Street 1. Frontage improvements along SR-169 will be required and are subject to design review and approval by W5DOT. This may include dedication of right-of-way for future planned widening of SR-169 to accommodate 6, 12-foot lanes and 8-foot shoulders. If curbs are used, shoulder may be reduced to 4 feet. 2. To meet the City's complete street standards for residential access streets, street improvements including, but not limited to 13 feet of paving from centerline, 0.5-foot curb, gutter, an 8-foot planter strip, a 5-foot sidewalk, and storm drainage improvements are required to be constructed in the right- of-way per City code 4-6-060. Minimum residential street width is a 53 feet right-of-way. 3. Payment of transportation impact fee is applicable at the time of issuance of the building permit. 4. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveway shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double- loaded garage driveway shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). 5. A traffic impact analysis is required when estimated vehicular traffic generated from a proposed development exceeds 20 vehicles per hour in either the AM (6:00 -9:00} or PM (3:00-6:00) peak periods. A peak hour volume of 20 vehicles per hour would relate to daily volume of approximately 200 vehicles per day. Generally this would apply to commercial sites that generate 20 vehicles per hour. Traffic study guidelines are included with the pre-application packet. 6. The subject property is within the well field Capture Zone/Aquifer area Zone II. The project must comply with special requirement# 6 (Aquifer Protection Area) per City of Renton Amendment to King County Storm water design manual. 7. All utilities serving the site are required to be undergrounded. 8. Street lighting is required for this project. General Comments 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. POLICY GUIDELINES FOR. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT A traffic impact analysis Is required when estimated vehicular traffic generated from a proposed development exceeds 20 vehicles per hour in either the AM (6:00 -9:00) or PM (3:00 -6:00) peak periods. A peak hour volume of 20 vehicles per hour would relate fo daily volume of approximately 200 vehicles per day. Generally this Includes residential plats of 20 lots or more and commercial sites that generate 20 vehicles per hour. The developer shall select a registered professional engineer with adequate experience in transportation planning and traffic engineering. Upon request, the Public Works Department will offer potential candidates. The analysis shall incorporate the following elements in the suggested format: Introduction: The introduction should, in a narrative fashion with graphics where appropriate to enhance the text, describe the proposed development (including proposed time frame), establish study area boundaries (study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% Increase In peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development), describe existing and proposed land uses within the study area, and describe the existing transportation system to include transit routes, roadway and intersection conditions and configuration as well as currently proposed improvements. Roadways and intersections to be analyzed will be determined through coordination with the Public Works Department and Community Development staff. Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. The trip generation information provided in the traffic Impact study must be based on the current edition of the ITE Trip Generation book. Site Generated Traffic Distribution: The distribution of site-generated traffic should be presented by direction as a percentage of the total site generated traffic in a graphic format. The basis for the distribution should be appropriately defined. Site Generated Traffic Assignment: A graphic presentation should be provided illustrating the allocation of site-generated traffic to the existing street network. The presentation should Include Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and AM-PM peak hour directional volumes as well as turning movements at all intersections, driveways, and roadways within the study area. Existing and Projected Horizon Year Traffic Volumes With and Without the Proposed Development: The report should include graphics, which Illustrate existing traffic volumes as well as forecasted volumes for the horizon year of the proposed development. Forecasted volumes should include a projected growth rate and volumes anticipated by pending and approved developments adjacent to the proposed development. If the development is multi-phased, forecasted volumes should be projected for the horizon year of each phase. The site-generated traffic should then be added to the horizon year background traffic to provide a composite of horizon year traffic conditions. Condition Analysis: Based upon the horizon year traffic forecasts with the proposed development, a level of service (LOS) analysis should be conducted at all Intersections (including driveways serving the site). Based upon this analysis, a determination should be made as to the ability of the existing and proposed facilities to handle the proposed development. The level of service (LOS) analysts technique may include any of the commonly accepted methods. An analysis should be made of the proposed project in light of safety. Accident histories In close proximity to the site should be evaluated to determine the impact of proposed driveways and turning movements on existing problems. Mitigating Measures: Based upon the results of the previous analysis, if it Is determined that specific roadway improvements are necessary, the analysis should determine what Improvements are needed. If the developer can reduce vehicular traffic by means of promoting transit and rldesharing usage, these methods are acceptable. Any proposed traffic signals should be documented with an appropriate warrant analysis of conditions in the horizon year with the development. Traffic signals should not be contemplated unless they meet warrants as prescribed in the Federal Highways "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices". Proposed traffic signals shall provide coordination programs to compliment the system. Any modifications necessary to insure safe and efficient circulation around the proposed site should be noted. Conclusions: This section should serve as an executive summary for the report. It should specifically define the problems related dlrectly to the proposed developments and the improvements necessary to accommodate the development in a safe and efficient manner. A draft report shall be presented to the Development Services Division so that a review might be made of study dates, sources, methods, and findings. City Staff will then provide in writing all comments to the developer. The developer will then make all necessary changes prior to submitting the final report. Revised S/9/2013 H:\CED\Development Services\Development Engineering\TIA GUIDELINES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U DATE: February 5, 2015 TO: Pre-Application FIie No. 15-000029 FROM: Clark H. Close, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat (45-lots) M 14207 Maple Valley Hwy -Murray Franklyn Famlly of Companies General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes In effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov. Project Proposal: The proposed project site is located on the south side of State Route 169 (Renton-Maple Valley Highway), east of 140th Way SE, in the Cedar River District Planning Area (APN 222305-9004). The parcel was annexed under the New Life -Aqua Barn Annexation, effective June 9, 2008 (Ord. No. 5373). The site area Is approximately 264,409 square feet (6.07 acres) and is zoned Resesidential-14 {R-14}. The project proposal is to subdivide the property into 45 fee-simple lots with attached residential units in two and three unit buildings as Phase 2 of the adjacent Molasses Creek Condiominiums. The buildings will be 2-story wood-framed with private 2-car garages and driveways {18 duplex & 27 triplex units). Primary access would be from an existing street to the west from an existing access easement from the Molasses Creek Condominiums. A secondary emergency access will be provided to SR-169. The property Is presently vacant. The applicant has submitted a Wetland Delineation and _a Draft Geotechnicai Engineering Report with the pre-application. Current Use: The site was formerly occupied by a dairy farm with a residence and garage on the west side of the property and several barns and structures located on the south side of the site. All buildings and structures were demolished prior to a field exploration by Terra Associates on June 15, 2012. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 2 of9 Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-llOA, "Development Standards for Residential Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "R-14 standards" herein). The purpose of the Residential-14 Dwelling Units per Net Acre Zone (R-14) is to encourage development, and redevelopment, of residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine characteristics of both typical single family and small-scale multi-family developments. Zoning/ Density: The property Is located within the Residential-14 (R-14) zoning classification. Attached residential dwelling units are allowed in the R-14 designation. In general, the R-14 zone allows for densities between ten (10) to fourteen (14) units per net acre with opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net acre, subject to Density Bonus Review (RMC 4-9-065). Structure size is intended to be limited in terms of bulk and scale so that the various unit types allowed in the zone are compatible with one another and can be integrated together into a quality neighborhood. The maximum number of units per building is six (6). Project features are encouraged, such as yards for private use, common open spaces, and landscaped areas that enhance a neighborhood and foster a sense of community. Prior to New Life -Aqua Barn Annexation, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. and Lennon Investments, Inc., requested a pre-annexation agreement with the City of Renton. The Renton City Council held a public hearing on April 28, 2008 in order to gain City Council's permission to authorize the Mayor to execute the development agreement. The Agreement permits the development of the second phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums at a density comparable to the density permitted by King County at the time. The City of Renton agreed to zone the property R-14 with the condition that "(t)he maximum number of dwelling units permitted on the property shall be forty-five (45)." The applicant Is proposing to subdivide the property Into the 45-lots. The gross density of the site is 7.41 du/acre (45 units / 6.07 acres = 7.41 du/ac), which Incidentally falls within the allowable range of the existing zone. The applicant would be required ta demonstrate compliance with the R-14 minimum standards. Development Standards: Type of Standard R-14 Minimum Standard Lot Size Detached dwellings: 3,000 square feet Attached dwellings: n/a Lot Width (Corner Lots) 30 feet (40 feet) Lot Depth 60 feet Front Yard 15 feet., except garage must be 20 feet Side Yard Detached Units: 4 feet Attached Units: 4 feet for unattached side(s), 0 feet for the attached side(s). Rear Yard 10 feet Side Yard Along-A-Street 15 feet Building Coverage Ratio 65% Impervious Surface Area 80% Height 30feet Landscaping Tree Retention At least 20% of the significant trees Tree Density Attached Units: 4 significant trees per 5,000 sf of lot area H:\CED\Plannlng\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 3 of 9 Developments shall create pedestrian oriented environments and amplify the mutual relationship between housing units, roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities, while also protecting the privacy of individuals. Developments of more than four (4) structures shall Incorporate a variety of home sizes, lot sizes, and unit clusters (RMC 4-2-115). Dwellings shall be arranged to ensure privacy so that side yards abut other side yards (or rights-of-way) and do not abut front or back yards. Lots accessed by easements or pipestems shall be prohibited. The appl/cant w/11 need ta adequately demonstrate variety of lot sizes upon submittal of the plat plan. Setbacks, lot coverage, impervious coverage, and building height for the new residences would be reviewed at the time of bulldlng permit. Access: Primary access would be from an existing street at Molasses Creek Condominiums on the west (over which there Is an easement for this purpose) and secondary access from SR 169 on the east end of the site. The SR 169 access would be for emergency use only and be fitted with an automated gate. All abutting rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat are required to be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards RMC 4-6-060. Parking: Off-street parking shall be provided as follows (RMC 4-4-0BOF.10.d): Use Number of Required Spaces Attached dwellings in RM-U, A minimum and maximum of 1.6 per 3 bedroom or large RM-T, RM-F, R-14 and R-10 dwelling unit; 1.4 per 2 bedroom dwelling unit; 1.0 per 1 Zones: bedroom or studio dwelling unit. If the proposal provides more or less parking than required by code, a request for a parking · modlflcotion would need to be opp/led far and granted. This detailed written request should be submitted by the applicant along with ar prior to the land use opp/icatlan process. Bicycle parking shall be provided for all resident/al developments that exceed five (5) resident/a/ units (attached dwe/1/ngs) at a rate of one-half (0.5) bicycle parking space per one dwe/1/ng unit. Bicycle parking shall meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-0BOF.11. Designated bicycle parking spaces within Individual garages can count toward the minimum requirement. Driveways: Outside of the wetland area the site is relatively flat and it is likely that the applicant will be able to achieve the maximum driveway slope threshold of 15%. Driveways exceeding 8% must provide slotted drains at the lower end of the driveway. Driveway widths are limited by the driveway standards In RMC 4-4-080!. Landscaping: All portions of the development area which are not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought- resistant vegetative cover. Ten feet (10') of on-site landscaping is required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways according to the landscaping standards of RMC 4-4-070F. Such landscaping shall include a mixture of trees, shrubs, and groundcover as approved by the Dept. of Community and Economic Development. The property borders an R-8 zoned parcel along the eastern half of the south property line and along the east property line; in addition Resource Conservation (RC) zoning is located along the south property line and along the south half of the west property line. As a result, RMC 4-4- 070F.4.b states that when a residential multi-family zone is abutting a less intense residential zone a 15-foot wide partially sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier, or 10-foot wide fully sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier, is required along the common property line. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page4of9 Minimum planting strip widths between the curb and sidewalk are established according to the street development standards of RMC 4-6-060. Street trees and, at a minimum, groundcover are to be located in this area when present. Street tree spacing standards shall be as stipulated by the Department of Community and Economic Development, provided there shall be a minimum of one street tree planted per address. Any additional undeveloped right-of-way areas shall be landscaped unless otherwise determined by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee. Broad leaf trees planted in residential zones must be a minimum of one and one-half inches {1.5") in diameter {dbh). Conifer trees at the time of planting must be fully branched and a minimum of six feet (6') in height. A conceptual landscape plan must be provided with the formal land use app/lcatlon as prepared by a registered Landscape Architect, a certified nurseryman or other certified prajesslonal meeting the requirements in RMC 4-B-120D.12. Parks and Open Space (R-14): For developments that are less than ten {10) net acres, no park is required, but is allowed per RMC 4-2-llSE.2. For each unit in the development, 350 square feet of common open space shall be provided. Open space shall be designed as a park, common green, pea-patch, pocket park, or pedestrian entry easement in the development and shall include picnic areas, space for small recreational activities, and other activities as appropriate. Open space shall be located in a highly visible area and be easily accessible to the neighborhood. Open space shall be contiguous to the majority of the dwellings and accessible to all dwellings and be at least 20 feet wide. A pedestrian entry easement can be used to meet the requirements if it has a minimum width of 20 feet with a minimum five feet of sidewalk. Pea- patches shall be at least 1,000 square feet in size with individual plots that measure 10 x 10 feet. Based on the provided site plan It appears that the common open space, Identified as 26,811 SF}, has been provided and meets the minimum size requirement of 15,750 SF {45 units x 350 SF= 15,750 SF} of common open space. The two major access points serving the larger open space tract are less than 20 feet wide, pedestrian entry must be a minimum width of 20 feet with a minimum five foot sidewalk. Private Yards (R-14): Each ground-related dwelling shall have a private yard that is at least 250 square feet in size with no dimension less than 8 feet in width. Significant Tree Retention: A Tree Retention/ Land Clearing {Tree Inventory) Plan along with a tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the formal land use application. The tree retention plan must show preservation of at least twenty percent {20%) of significant trees, and indicate how proposed building footprints would be sited to accommodate preservation of significant trees that would be retained. The Administrator may authorize the planting of replacement trees on the site if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction that an Insufficient number of trees can be retained. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and significant trees over sixty feet {60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and other significant non-native trees. H:\CED\Planning\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 5 of 9 Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. For multi-family projects a minimum tree density is required at a rate of 4 significant trees per 5,000 sf. ft. of lot area. The Administrator may require independent review of any land use application that involves tree removal and land clearing at the City's discretion. Each residential lot to be created by subdivision shall have retained, or newly planted, trees that satisfy the lot's minimum tree density requirement. Any protected tree, whether retained or newly planted, that is in excess of the individual lot's minimum tree density shall not contribute to the total number of trees that are required to be retained for the Land Development Permit. Trees required to be retained (i.e., protected trees), and/or Administrator approved replacement trees (excluding required street trees pursuant to RMC 4-4-070F, Areas Required to be Landscaped), that are not necessary to provide the required minimum tree density for residential lots, shall be preserved by establishing a tree protection tract that encompasses the drip line of all protected trees. Building Design Standards: Compliance with Residential Design Regulations shall be required; see RMC 4-2-115. Below are some of the Identified design standards that need to be addressed in the proposal: 1. One of the following Is required; the garage must be: a. Recessed from the front of the house and/or front porch at least 8 feet, or b. Detached and set back from the front of the house and/or porch at least 6 feet. 2. Additionally, all of the following is required: a. Garage design shall be of similar design to the homes, and b. If sides of the garage are visible from streets, sidewalks, pathways, trails, or other homes, architectural details shall be incorporated in the design. 3. Entrances to homes shall be a focal point and allow space for social interaction. Front doors shall face the street and be on the facade closest to the street. a. Both of the following are required: i. The entry shall take access from and face a street, park, common green, pocket park, pedestrian easement, or open space, and ii. The entry shall include one of the following: 1. Stoop: minimum size four feet by six feet (4' x 6') and minimum height twelve Inches (12") above grade, or 2. Porch: minimum five feet (S') deep and minimum height twelve inches (12") above grade. Exception: in cases where accessibility (ADA) is a priority, an accessible route may be taken from a front driveway. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Ell Iott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 6 of9 4. Buildings shall not have monotonous fa~ades along public areas. Dwellings shall include articulation along public frontages; the articulation may include the connection of an open porch to the building, a dormer facing the street, or a well-defined entry element. a. Both of the following are required: i. The primary building elevation oriented toward the street or common green shall have at least one articulation or change in plane of at least two feet (2') in depth; and ii. A minimum one side articulation that measures at least one foot (1') in depth shall occur for all facades facing streets or public spaces. 5. Windows and front doors shall serve as an integral part of the character of the home. Primary windows shall be proportioned vertically rather than horizontally. Vertical windows may be combined together to create a larger window area. Front doors shall be a focal point of the dwelling and be in scale with the home. All doors shall be of the same character as the home. Sliding glass doors are not permitted along a frontage elevation or an elevation facing a pedestrian easement. 6. The primary building form shall be the dominating form, and elements such as porches, principal dormers, or other significant features shall not dominate. 7. Primary roof pitch shall be a minimum six to twelve (6:12). If a gable roof is used, exit access from a third floor must face a public right of way for emergency access. A variety_of roofing colors shall be used within the development and all roof material shall be fire retardant. 8. Eaves shall be at least twelve inches (12") with horizontal fascia or fascia gutter at least five inches (5") deep on the face of all eaves. Pedestrian Access (R-14): The applicant would be required to demonstrate pedestrian connections throughout the development as a part of site plan review. All of the following are required: 1. Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the neighborhood. 2. Front yards shall have entry walks that are a minimum width of 3 feet and a maximum width of 4 feet. 3. Pathways shall be used to connect common parks, green areas, and pocket parks to residential access streets, limited residential access streets, or other pedestrian connections. They may be used to provide access to homes and common open space. They shall be a minimum 3 feet in width and made of paved asphalt, concrete, or porous material such as: porous paving stones, crushed gravel with soil stablllzers, or paving blocks with planted joints. Sidewalks or pathways for parks and green spaces shall be located at the edge of the common space to allow a larger usable green and easy access to homes. 4. Pedestrian easement plantings shall be planted with plants and trees. Trees are required along all pedestrian easements to provide shade and spaced twenty feet (20') on center. Shrubs shall be planted in at least fifteen percent (15%} of the easement and shall be spaced no further than thirty six inches (36") on center. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 7 of9 5. For all homes that do not front on a residential access street, limited residential access street, a park, or a common green: Pedestrian entry easements that are at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk shall be provided. Refuse and Recycling Areas: Refuse and recycling areas are regulated by RMC 4-4-090, "Refuse and Recyclables Standards." All new developments for multi-family residences, commercial, industrial and other nonresidential uses shall provide onsite refuse and recyclables deposit areas and collection points for collection of refuse and recyclables in compliance with the requirements of RMC 4-4-090. Outdoor refuse and recyclables deposit areas and collection points shall not be located in any required setback or landscape areas. Outdoor refuse and recyclables deposit areas and collection points shall not be located within fifty feet (SO') of a property zoned RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, R-10, R-14, or RM, except by approval through the site development plan review process, or via the modification process if exempt from site development plan review. Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this section, modifications may be granted for individual cases In accordance with the procedures and review criteria in RMC 4-9-250D. Exterior lighting: Exterior lighting shall be provided In order to enhance visibility and security while accenting key architectural elements and landscape features. Lighting shall be minimal where possible to achieve the desired purpose. Light spillover for all lighting, as well as single source lighting of large areas shall be avoided. See RMC 4-4-075 for standards and more information. Screening: Standards pertaining to screening of mechanical equipment and outdoor service and storage areas apply as per RMC 4-4-095. For example, all on-site surface mounted utility equipment shall be screened from public view. Screening shall consist of equipment cabinets enclosing the utility equipment, solid fencing or a wall of a height at least as high as the equipment it screens, or a landscaped visual barrier allowing for reasonable access to equipment. Equipment cabinets, fencing, and walls shall be made of materials and/or colors · compatible with building materials per 4-4-095. The landscape plan and utility plans should be coordinated in this regard. Signs: Development signage is regulated by RMC 4-4-100. Critical Areas: Based on City of Renton Critical Area maps, the following conditions may exist on the site: unclassified landslide hazard area (south 2/3 of site); unregulated flood hazard (northeast Y, of site); Five Year and Ten Year Wellfield Capture Zone (entire site); erosion hazard (southwest Y, of site); regulated slopes up to 40 percent (center of site); seismic hazard (entire site); and wetlands are present at the southwest corner of the site. The applicant has prepared a Wetland Delineation Report by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (dated December 15, 2014). A category 2 wetland was Identified and delineated as a low-lying forested area in the southwest portion of the site during site visits on June 26 and 27, 2012. No other wetlands or critical areas were identified on the remaining portion of the property. Currently, Category II Wetlands are provided with a standard buffer width of 50 feet. The City's regulations regarding Critical Areas are required to be amended. As part of the mandatory Comprehensive Plan update, the City is required to ensure that the regulations regarding the protection of critical areas meet the Best Available Science (BAS). Review and revisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance is ongoing and the Draft Critical Areas Regulations are H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 8 of9 available on the Planning Commission Information homepage. The proposed buffer range for Category 11 wetlands is 100 feet (low wildlife function) up to 225 feet (high wildlife function). The applicant has prepared a geotechnical report by Terra Associate, Inc. (dated June 28, 2012). In their opinion, the soil and groundwater conditions at the site are suitable for the proposed residential construction provided recommendation identified in the report are incorporated into the project design and construction. An additional analysis of landslide hazards off-site should be performed due to know landslide hazards in the area. Location in the Aquifer Protection Zone requires a fill source statement. Environmental Review: The proposed project would be subject to Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review due to the size of the project and critical areas onsite. Therefore, an environmental checklist is a submittal requirement. An environmental determination will be made by the Renton Environmental Review Committee. This determination is subject to appeal by either the project proponent, by a citizen of the community, or another entity having standing for an appeal. Note: The fee for Environmental (SEPA) Review Is $1,030.00 ($1,000.00 plus 3 % Technology Surcharge Fee). Permit Requirements: Site plan review is required for all development in the R-14 zone per RMC 4-9-200. The purpose of Site Plan Review Is the detailed arrangement of project elements so as to be compatible with the physical characteristics of a site and with the surrounding area. Site plan review ensures quality development consistent with City goals and policies. An additional purpose of Site Plan is to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies General review criteria includes the following: a. Compliance and Consistency. Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: b. Off-Site Impacts. Mitigation of Impacts to surrounding properties and uses; c. On-Site Impacts. Mitigation of Impacts to the site; d. Access and Circulation. Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users; e. Open Space. Incorporation of public and private open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site; f. Views and Public Access. Provision of view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, incorporates public access to shorelines, and arranges project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable; g, Services and Infrastructure. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; h. Slgnage. Use of signs primarily for the purpose of identification and management of sign elements -such as the number, size, brightness, lighting intensity, and location -to complement the visual character of the surrounding area, avoid visual clutter and distraction, and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; and H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\15-000029 Elliott Farms February 5, 2015 Page 9 of9 I. Phasing. Inclusion of a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, if applicable. The proposed subdivision would require Preliminary Plat Approval, Site Plan Review, and Environmental (SEPA) Review. All land use permits would be processed within an estimated time frame of 12 weeks. After the required notification period, the Environmental Review Committee would issue a Threshold Determination for the project. When the required two-week appeal period is completed, the project would go before the Hearing Examiner. Once the Hearing Examiner issues a decision, a two-week appeal period will commence. The Preliminary Plat Review and Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review application fees are $4,500 and $1,500 respectively. The application fee for SEPA Review (Environmental Checklist) is $1,000. A 3% technology fee would also be assessed at the time of land use application. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. The applicant will be required to install a public information sign on the property. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal requirements is provided In the attached handouts. Once Preliminary Plat approval is obtained, the applicant must complete the required Improvements and dedications, as well as satisfy any conditions of the preliminary approval before submitting for Final Plat review. Once final approval Is received, the plat may be recorded. The newly created lots may only be sold after the plat has been recorded. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction and building permits would be required. Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, impact fees are required. Such fees apply to all projects and would be calculated at the time of building permit application and payable prior to building permit issuance. The fees for 2015 are as follows: • A Transportation Impact Fee of $1,180.84 per each new Condominium; • A Parks Impact Fee of $1,204.40 per each ~ two-unit multi-family residence; $1,094.35 per each new three or four unit multi-family residence; or $975.90 per each new four unit multi-family residence; • A Fire Impact fee of $463.66 per each~ multi-family residence; and • A Renton School District Impact Fee of $1,339.00 per each new multi-family residence. A handout listing all of the City's Development related fees is attached for your review or is available at www.rentonwa.gov. Note: When the formal application materials are complete, the applicant Is strongly encouraged to have one copy of the application materials pre-screened at the 6th floor front counter prior to submitting the complete application package. Please contact Clark Close, Associate Planner at 425-430-7289 or by email at cclose@rentonwa.gov for an appointment. Expiration: Upon approval, preliminary plats are valid for five years. Permit applications, such as Site Plan Review applications that are approved as a companion to a preliminary plat application shall remain valid for the duration of the preliminary and final plat. H:\CED\Planning\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\15-000029 Tree Retention/ Land Clearing (Tree Inventory) Plan: Please provide 4 copies of a fully dimensioned plan drawn by a certified arborist or a licensed landscape architect if ANY trees or vegetation are to be removed or altered. The plan shall be based on finished grade, drawn at the same scale as the project site plan with the northern property line at the top of the paper, and clearly show the following: • All property boundaries and adjacent streets, location and dimensions of rights-of- way, utility lines, fire hydrants, street lighting, and easements; • Location of all areas proposed to be cleared; • Location, species, and sizes of trees on or immediately abutting the site. This requirement applies only to trees with a call per of at least six inches (6"), or an alder or cottonwood tree with a caliper of at least eight inches (8"), at fifty-four inches (54") above grade; • Clearly identify trees to be retained and to be removed; • Future building sites and drip lines of any trees which will overhang/ overlap a construction line. Where the drip line of a tree overlaps an area where construction activities will occur, this shall be indicated on the plan; • Show critical areas and buffers. Arborlst Report: Please provide 4 copies of an arborist report by a certified arborist or a licensed landscape architect that correlates with the Tree Retention/ Land Clearing Plan and addresses the following: • Reason(s) for any tree removal (e.g. poor health, high risk of failure due to structure, defects, unavoidable isolation (high blow down potential), unsuitability of species, etc.) and for which no reasonable alternative action is possible (pruning, cabling, etc.); • For trees proposed to be retained, a complete description of each tree' s health, condition, and viability; • For trees proposed to be retained, a description of the method(s)used to determine the limits of disturbance (e.g., critical root zone, root plate diameter, or a case-by- case basis description for individual trees); • A description of the impact of necessary tree removal to the remaining trees, including those in a grove or on abutting properties; • The suggested location and species of supplemental trees to be used when required. The report shall include planting and maintenance specifications; • An analysis of retained trees according to Priority of Tree Retention Requirements specified in RMC 4-4-130H.1.b. \ \ ' I;. :, ··1 I• ' ' ,, ' ·' / ' ,, /r I.,. " 'l: \.I / / ' I} fl I / ' ' I i I I I I I I ' I _, t, ''-.......__ • '\" l!i~~ .. • m, f "' C = =ll z I ,-!ll o I ' I' {, I • ~I--- ~ ~ z 'TI 0 c;) Oc m :ti Cm Z IV ~ 0 z ; . , I\ I ·1 I .,~ ' ·1 · . ' ? ~ .. _J . ~ .; ; t i ,-; . ·-:.1 '.\ ., I I.-... ,,,-···--: ,:,;. ....... f/ , ' .,. _~,.,. :i{ , .. J.! i I I I I -I .,I 5 !-G ~'f' PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN •4 EUIOT FARMS [;::l"' I \i;. ' 1 '• i --·· • · ·: ._ • .. ~ : I ,'.' ' .•. ,~<-.,.,. "'-.:. .,_·f ··'-' , I • ' '~ La--·--------·-' L.--~·· .. ·-·-·--·-··_-_ ... _._'_'_··--..JJ ~ .=. .. :r ' ::i_ co C: P 0 z Cl 00 z -~ $~ i. . -'-I· - :',·· --~·1,1 i.t:t, .. I' • ' t ·~1 ·-.· : : ' L:. .1 ' F L ,, ,. I. =-·-z.r. -'i,."'=~ ,--r :.1·-- ~-·:·;-.... , ,· J· '.;-'·" -----, ' . !' :i r::; 0:, C _, c-,.,. ---:, r m S2 z Cl > ,, . f'r1 A'·n >, IE 11/-." : .• "·~-'.'. .• '.•.: !':\ •.. ::.·' ~; . ~'~ ,, ' .. DEPARTMENT OF COMMU Y AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS --. .-.. -~ .. --- Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 APR 1 3 2015 C !''"' r,'C •:,;•} 'T/'"' •. I 4 1 ,...., .. , ,~,,,~,i',,t . ..'l't: WAIVED MODIFIED ~-~.-''.;';, -,,,\,_l ~·· ! :; '/1,; '..;:'1 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITIAL REQUIREMENTS: BY: BY: COMMENTS: Arborist Report • Architectural Elevations a AND• Biological Assessment 4 cM-t- Calculations 1 Colored Maps for Display 4 C £"t'(-/ I -;: I 1-n.e.v Ml,.,.... r Construction Mitigation Description 2 AND, Deed of Right-of-Way Dedication 1 Density Worksheet 4 Drainage Control Plan 2 Drainage Report 2 Elevations, Architectural 3AND, Environmental Checklist 4 Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy) lAND• Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) 1 AND, Flood Hazard Data, a,tr., Floor Plans a AND, Geotechnical Report ZAND, Grading Elevations & Plan, Conceptual 2 Grading Elevations & Plan, Detailed 2 Habitat Data Report 4 ~ Improvement Deferral 2 Irrigation Plan 4 PROJECT NAME: -E~t,./0 Tt pft""fl./1115" DATE: ---'-i.f ,_/1_,0 /-""/'7'-------- 1 H :\CED\Data \Forms-T emplates\Self-H elp Ha ndouts\Plan ning\ Wa iversubmittalreqs.docx Rev:02/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: BY: BY: King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site 4 Landscape Plan, Conceptual• Landscape Plan, Detailed 4 Legal Description 4 Letter of Understanding of Geological Risk 4 Map of Existing Site Conditions 4 Master Application Form 4 Monument Cards (one per monument) 1 Neighborhood Detail Map 4 Overall Plat Plan 4 Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis 4 Plan Reductions (PMTs) 4 Post Office Approval 2 Plat Name Reservation 4 Plat Plan• Preapplication Meeting Summary 4 Public Works Approval Letter, Rehabilitation Plan 4 Screening Detail 4 Shoreline Tracking Worksheet 4 Site Plan"""• Stream or Lake Study, Standard 4 C1K Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental 4 {AK Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan 4 ~ Street Profiles 2 Title Report or Plat Certificate 1AND • Topography Map, Traffic Study 2 Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan 4 Urban Design Regulations Analysis 4 uf,tc-- Utilities Plan, Generalized 2 Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Final 4 Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Preliminary 4 2 H :\CED\Data\Forms-T emplates\Self-Help Handouts\Plan ning\ Wa iversu bmittalreqs.docx Rev:02/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Wetlands Report/Delineation 4 Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND, Lease Agreement, Draft IANDJ Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND, Map of View Area IANDJ Photosimulations 2AN0, This Requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2 Development Engineering Plan Review 3 Building 4 Planning WAIVED MODIFIED BY: BY: 3 H:\CED\Oata\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Waiversubmittalreqs.docx COMMENTS: - rt''.\ HV'-U -:ad"~ .. [! ~ t;,., APR 1 3 2015 Rev: 02/2015 I PROJECT NARRATIVE ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT Prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. April 13, 2015 Revised June 15, 2016 SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located east of the Molasses Creek Condominium development on Maple Valley-Black Diamond Road (SR-169). The site is undeveloped and contains a localized moderate landslide hazard area (steep slope) and category II wetland with a 50 foot buffer. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal is to subdivide the subject property into 45 residential lots, several tracts, and a public roadway. The development will be comprised of attached homes in two-and three-unit buildings with contained parking. A 2008 development agreement between the developer and the City of Renton is enclosed that documents the density of the project to be capped at 45 units, which is consistent with the proposed site plan. ACCESS: The proposed development's primary access will be a public road segment from SR-169 that connects to an existing private lane that runs through Molasses Creek Condominiums. The subject property has easement rights to use the existing private road. The project will construct a new public road segment that will serve the proposed 45 units with a right-in-right-out connection to SR-169. The public road is proposed to consist of several different cross sections to accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, street trees, street lights. Please see Sheet 4 for the site plan with all of the public road cross sections proposed. STORMWATER: The site is in the Cedar River drainage basin and outside of the 100-year floodplain limits. The site has been recognized to be part of a larger planned development of the Plat of Elliott Farms/Molasses Creek that is within a direct-discharge drainage area. Stormwater will be conveyed to the existing water quality pond that was constructed for the Plat of Elliott Farms and the Molasses Creek Condominiums. A Construction and Conveyance Agreement (enclosed) was reached between the developer and King County for a coordinated stormwater facility that was sized to accommodate drainage from the subject property upon development. UTILITIES: Water and sewer utilities are available and stubbed to the property in existing easements and/or in SR-169. ATIACHMENTS • Shared Access Agreement AFN 20000201000940 • Construction and Conveyance Agreement • Pre-Annexation Agreement • Fence Detail • Lighting Detail -1 -15734.002.doc REQUIRED NARRATIVE ITEMS PROJECT NAME, SIZE, AND LOCATION OF SITE • Project Name: Elliott Farms • Gross Site Area: 6.07 acres • Location: SR-169 between 140th Way S.E. and 145th Avenue S.E. LAND USE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT • Preliminary Plat • SEPA Environmental Review • Administrative Site Plan Review • Modification for Road Standards for Road Cross Sections ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE SITE AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES • Site: R-14 • Adjacent properties: R-14, R-6, R-8, and RC CURRENT USE OF THE SITE AND ANY EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS The site is currently vacant and contains some gravel and concrete areas and a foundation from prior residential and agricultural uses. SPECIAL SITE FEATURES (I.E. WETLANDS, WATER BODIES, STEEP SLOPES) The site contains a Category II wetland along the south boundary and a small localized area of steep slopes in the southwest corner. The site may be in Well Field Capture Zone II/Aquifer Area Zone II. STATEMENT ADDRESSING SOIL TYPE AND DRAINAGE CONDITIONS The soils on the site consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng) with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Drainage from the site sheet flows to the north into a roadside ditch along SR-169 that flows to the regional water quality pond west of 160th Way S.E. and then into the Cedar River. PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY AND SCOPE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The project will develop the site with 45 lots to be developed with 45 townhomes that are attached in two- and three-unit buildings. The scope of the project is to mimic the adjacent condominium development as contemplated by the Pre-Annexation Agreement with the City of Renton that was approved in 2008. The appearance of the project will be contemporaneous with the adjoining development; however, fee simple lots are proposed. The density of the project is capped at 45 units per the Development Agreement, which also is consistent with current zoning regulations for density. Each lot will contain a three bedroom townhome and have two garage parking spaces, which assumes rounding of the 1.6 stalls per 3 bedroom unit. In addition, approximately seven (7) on-site guest parking spaces will be provided as on-street parking. Approximately two off-site parking spaces are also provided in the off-site easement. Bicycle parking will be provided in each garage. -2 -15734.002.doc The site will be landscaped in the common open space areas. The east and southeast property lines are adjacent to R-8 zoned property. To the south, one single family home exists on R-8 property. The project proposes a six-foot fence on the property and a 10-foot wide landscape area that will also contain a maximum four-foot high modular block retaining wall that is setback from the property line a minimum of two feet. The property abutting the east boundary of the site is also zoned R-8, but that is a tract from the Plat of Pioneer Place and is used for access only. Along the east property line, a retaining wall and solid wood fence is proposed (maximum total height 6 feet). The site will be lower than the abutting R-8 zoned properties. FOR PLATS INDICATE THE PROPOSED NUMBER, NET DENSITY, AND RANGE OF SIZES (NET LOT AREA) OF THE NEW LOTS The project will contain 45 fee simple townhouse units on 45 lots. The lots range in area from 2,217 square feet to 3,939 square feet, with an average area of 2,586 square feet. The net lot area is 2.67 acres (116,374 square feet). Net density of the project is 7.8 dwelling units per acre (du/acre). Each lot contains a minimum of 250 square feet of private open space in their rear yards. Approximately 1.32 acres (57,923 square feet) of common open space will be provided for the residents in addition to the 1.10 acres (47,911 square feet) of native open space that will be Tract H (steep slopes, wetland, and buffer). ACCESS The proposed development's primary access will be a public road segment from SR-169 that connects to an existing private lane that runs through Molasses Creek Condominiums. The subject property has easement rights to use the existing private road. The project will construct a new public road segment that will serve the proposed 45 units with a right-in-right-out connection to SR-169. The public road is proposed to consist of several different cross sections to accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, street trees, street lights. Please see Sheet 4 for the site plan with all of the public road cross sections proposed. PROPOSED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS (I.E., INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS, FIRE HYDRANTS, SEWER MAIN, ETC.) Off-site improvements are not needed for the project. All utilities are either stubbed to the site or mains exist on the site. Road improvements will be completed on SR-169 consisting of new curb, gutter, sidewalk, and a planter strip with street trees and street lighting. TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST AND ESTIMATED FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The estimated construction cost is $3M and the estimated fair market value is expected to be $3.4M. ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AND TYPE OF MATERIALS INVOLVED IF ANY FILL OR EXCAVATION IS PROPOSED Approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material will be imported for the project from an approved fill source. At this time, the source of fill material is unknown; that information will be provided as required as part of the grading and construction permit process. NUMBER, TYPE AND SIZE OF ANY TREES TO BE REMOVED The site contains 114 significant trees. The project will remove 31 viable evergreen and deciduous trees (alder) in the development area (see the Preliminary Tree Inventory/Clearing Plan). All 74 significant trees in the wetland and buffer will remain. The project will replant 97 trees to achieve the required tree . 3. 15734.002.doc density of four trees per 5,000 square feet of total lot area. Tree replanting is proposed to occur in the common open space/landscaping areas and/or on the lots (if required). The arborist report states that the site contains 125 trees; however, the arborist's report included eleven 6-inch alders/cottonwoods that are on the site survey but should not be counted as significant trees based on the new regulations. EXPLANATION OF ANY LAND TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY No right-of-way dedication is planned. All required frontage improvements on SR-169 will fit within the existing right-of-way. ANY PROPOSED JOB SHACKS, SALES TRAILERS, AND/OR MODEL HOMES A job shack will be placed on at the east end of the site. A model home complex will be constructed in the western portion of the site. The sales office will likely be integrated with the model home complex. -4 -15734.002.doc DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PUBLIC HEARING April 21, 2008 Development Agreement Cedar River Lightfoot Inc The subject property, PID# 222305-9005, is a six-acre parcel with a two-story, five-bedroom home built in 1911. This 6-acre parcel is part of the proposed 397-acre New Life -Aqua Barn annexation. In 2007 Rick Lennon. property owner, requested Residential Medium Density (RMD) designation with Residential 14 (R-14) zoning. subject to a development agreement restricting development to no more than 45 dwelling units during the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment review cycle. The City Council approved this request in December 2007. The development agreement is now before the City for approval. The subject 6-acre site was already reviewed by King County as Phase 2 of the Molasses Creek Condominium development project, although it is not yet vested. According to the applicant, a number of improvements have already been completed to allow this 6-acre parcel to be added to the existing condominium project to its west. These include the storm water control system of Phase I that was designed and constructed to serve both Phase 1 and Phase 2. All utilities (water, sewer, etc.) have been designed and constructed to serve Phase 2 and utility lines have already been extended to the western edge of PID# 222305-9004 to facilitate future connections. Phase 2 is planned and has been designed for approximately 45 units with a density comparable to that of Phase I. The project was designed under King County zoning that allows a cluster form of multi-family and condominium development consistent with Renton's R-14 zone development standards. RECOMl\IENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to execute the proposed development agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot Inc. This agreement restricts the total number of units on the 6-acre site to 45 condominium units that arc architecrurally compatible with the character of Phase I of the Molasses Creek Condominium development. CLIENT'S COPY CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING --.:- ·>.~ !_j ~·: ·-:. -~:.~·-·.···. 'J1,:·; ''.(..\_;·.)f~·:.:>f -,.:.'..,ii~-r i ·.;· :·,..:~ · < •T. -·.-', '1 ,..,.~----··~---•c••--•,-·, ._,,,.••• •· ! NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 21st day of April, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City HalL 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, to consider the following: Pre-annexation development agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. and Lennon Investments, Inc. for the 6-acre Lennon Property, PIO# 222305-9004. located immediately south of SE May Valley Road, abutting the south side of lhe Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR 169), within the proposed New Life-Aqua Barn annexation area, restricting development to no more than 45 ( condominium) dwelling units in the proposed R-14 zone. AU interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published: Renton Reporter April 12, 2008 Account No. 50640 PRE-ANNEXATOIN AGREEMENT CITY OF RENTON and CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOOT, INC This PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT is entered into this _ day of _____ _, 2008, between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, ("City") and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Lennon Investments, Inc., a Washington corporation ( collectively referred to as "Cedar River"). · RECITALS A. Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., and Lennon Investments, Inc., own the following described property ("the Property") as a joint venture: Parcel A of King County Boundary Line Adjustment No, L95LOI 13, recorded under King County Recording No. 9510179023, (being a portion of Government Lot 3 in the NE Y. of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, records of King County, Washington. B. The Property is approximately 6.07 acres in siz.e and is immediately south of SE Renton Maple Valley Road (SR 169). C. The Property is currently located in unincorporated King County and is z.oned R-6 by the County, a zoning which would permit development of the pmperty with approximately 45 dwelling units as Phase 2 of the adjacent Molasses Creek Condominiums. The utilities serving the Property were designed and installed during construction of the first phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums to serve the Property based on its development capacity pursuant to the County z.oning. In addition, access from SR 169 to the Property has been limited to a common access shared with the first phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums. D. The City of Renton is in the process of annexing the Property and other properties in the vicinity. E. The City of Renton does not have a zoning designation that is the equivalent of King County's R-6 z.oning classification. F. The parties wish to enter into a pre-annexation agreement that will permit the development of the second phase of the Molasses Creek Condominiums at a density which is comparable to the density permitted by King CoWlty. PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT· I AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and duties set forth in this Agreement, the City of Renton, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. and Lennon Investments, Inc. agree as follows: I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Agreement to Annex. Cedar River hereby consents to and agrees to support the annexation of the Property to the City of Renton. Zoning of Property. Toe City of Renton agrees that, following annexation of the Property, the Property will be zoned R-14 pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Renton Development Regulations, Title IV of the Renton Municipal Code, subject to the following condition: The maximum number of dwelling units permitted on the Property shall be forty-five ( 45). Parties and Authority. The signatories to this Agreement represent that they have the full authority of their respective entities to commit to all of the terms of this Agreement, to perform the obligations hereunder and to execute the same. A complete copy of this Agreement may be recorded and a copy kept at Renton City Hall and made available to anyone requesting review or a copy. Voluntary Agreement. The Parties intend and acknowledge that this Agreement is a voluntary contract binding upon the Parties hereto, as well as their successors and assigns. Amendment of Agreement. This Agreement shall only be amended in writing, signed by all Parties to this initial Agreement and only after approval by the Renton City Council. Successors and Assigns. The terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successor and assigns of the Parties hereto. Dated as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF RENTON CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC. a Washington corporation. By---------~ Title ___________ _ PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT-2 By __________ _ Title ___________ _ LENNON INVESTMENTS, INC. a Washington corporation. By _________ ~ Title ___________ _ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I hereby certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the -----------,-~ of the City of Renton, a Washington mwiicipal corporation, and is the person who appeared and acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument on behalf of such City, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the free and voluntary act of such City for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED: ___________ _ Notary Seal STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) ~---------(Print Name) Notary Public Residing at ___________ _ My appointment expires:------- I hereby certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the ______ of Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc, a Washington corporation, and is person who appeared and acknowledged that he signed this instrument on behalf of such corporation and company, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the free and voluntary act of the corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED:------------ Notary Seal STATEOFWASHINGTON ) PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT-3 __________ (Print Name) Notary Public Residing at---=---------- My appointment expires:------- ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I hereby certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the ______ of Lennon Investments, Inc, a Washington coiporation, and is person who appeared and acknowledged that he signed this instrument on behalf of such coJpOration and company, on oath stated that he was authoriz.ed to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the free and voluntary act of the coiporation for the uses and pUJpOses mentioned in this instrument. DATED:------------ Notary Seal --,---.,...,,.-------(PrintNante) Notary Public Residing at ____________ _ My appointment expires:------- Pre-Annexation Agreement • Molasses Creek Ph 2 Rev. 04·01-08 PRE-ANNEXAUON AGREEMENT-4 April 21, 2008 Monday, 7 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCILMEMBERS CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE PROCLAMATIONS Arbor Day/Earth Day - 4/26/2008 National Volunteer Week - April 27 to May 3, 2008 PUBLIC HEARINGS Planning: Development Regulations (Title JV) Docket Review RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting MINUTES Council Chambers Renton City Hall Mayor Denis Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. MARCIE PALMER, Council President; DON PERSSON; KING PARKER; TERRI BRIERE; RICH ZWICKER; GREG TAYLOR; RANDY CORMAN. DENIS LAW, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Public Works Administrator; TERRY HIGASHIYAMA, Community Services Administrator; TERRY FLATLEY, Parks Maintenance Manager/City Forester; ALEX PIETSCH, Community and Economic Development Administrator; REBECCA LIND, Planning Manager; PREETI SHRIDHAR, Communications Director; MARTY WINE, Assistant CAO; DEPUTY CHIEF CHUCK DUFFY, Fire Department; CHIEF KEVIN MILOSEVICH, Police Department. A proclamation by Mayor Law was read declaring 4/26/2008 to be "Arbor Day/Earth Day" in the City of Renton and encouraging all citizens to join in this special observance and to endeavor to think and act ecologically, economically, and ethically to create a sustainable future. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED. Accepting the proclamation with appreciation, Parks Maintenance Manager/City Forester Flatley encouraged everyone to celebrate Arbor Day and Earth Day by helping to plant vegetation at Heritage Park on April 26. A proclamation by Mayor Law was read declaring April 27 to May 3, 2008, to be "National Volunteer Week" in the City of Renton and encouraging all members of the community to express appreciation to volunteers across the City for their commitment to service and to promote the spirit of volunteerism in families and neighborhoods. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED. Community Services Administrator Higashiyama accepted the proclamation and acknowledged the approximately 3,500 volunteers who donated over 57,000 hours to the City in 2007. This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Law opened the public hearing to consider City Code Title IV (Development Regulations) Docket Item 08-01: text amendments for Monopole I in residential zones and housekeeping amendments to wireless regulations in all zones. Planning Manager Lind noted that the amendments are needed due to changes in industry standards, which include the public demand for greater wireless coverage and the need for more poles and smaller land areas. She defined a Monopole I as "A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, less than sixty feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances." Aphl 21. 2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 125 Ms. Lind explained that the proposal allows Monopole I structures on residentially zoned sites of one-half acre with an administrative conditional use permit when setbacks are I 00 feet or more from adjacent residentially zoned properties, and with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit when setbacks are less than 100 feet from adjacent residentially zoned properties. Finally, the structure locations will be restricted within the public right-of-way to designated arterial roads. Pointing out that the proposed housekeeping amendments do not change the regulatory content of City Code, Ms. Lind stated that the amendments are needed to increase consistency and accuracy by clarifying language, adding cross-referencing, and changing the names of reviewing staff to the more generalized "Reviewing Official." In conclusion, she indicated that the next step is for the Planning and Development Committee to present its report on the matter to the full Council. Public comment was invited. Michael Cady (Sammamish), representing T-Mobile USA, Inc., expressed support for the amendment allowing Monopole I structures on half-acre lots in residential zones. However, he noted that the amendment does not address the need for additional height. Additionally, Mr. Cady voiced opposition to the amendment that allows the structures only on designated arterial roads, pointing out the lack of right-of-way space available to place necessary equipment. He recommended that the City allow additional height if a structure is located on a half-acre parcel and allow equipment on residential properties subject to review by the Hearing Examiner. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL ALLOW THE SPEAKER TWO MORE MINUTES. CARRIED. Mr. Cady submitted a letter outlining his comments. In response to Council inquiries, Mr. Cady detailed the size of space needed to contain the equipment in cabinets, shelters, and underground vaults. He indicated that once installed, the equipment may need maintenance once a month. Additionally, Mr. Cady noted that the equipment needs to be placed within 50 to l 00 feet of the monopole, preferably within ten feet, and he affirmed that increasing the height of the monopole increases the coverage area. Michael Ekness (Renton) voiced his support for the amendments, especially the 100-foot setbacks and allowing the monopoles only in arterial rights-of-way. He noted that the poles are very obtrusive in neighborhoods. Responding to Council member Corman's inquiry, Ms. Lind explained that City Code distinguishes between different monopole heights, for example, the Monopole II is greater than 60 feet and has its own set of standards. Mr. Corman questioned whether a different set of standards is needed in the future for monopoles that are 30 or 40 feet in height. Chuck Gitchel (Renton) agreed with the amendment regarding the 100 foot setbacks on one-half acre lots; however, he expressed concern regarding the lack of setbacks for rights-of-way. Mr. Gitchel pointed out that these structures lower property values. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY PARKER, April 21, 2008 Annexation: New Life -Aqua Barn, Development Agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT AUDIENCE COMMENT Citizen Comment: Witt -Sikh Temple Event, Parking Violations Citizen Comment: Troxel - Joe's Bar and Grill Renton City Council Minutes Page 126 SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Law opened the public hearing to consider a pre-annexation development agreement with Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. and Lennon Investments, Inc. regarding a six-acre parcel located within the proposed New Life -Aqua Barn Annexation area that abuts the south side of Renton-Maple Valley Hwy. (SR-169). Planning Manager Lind reported that the during the 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendment review cycle, R-14 zoning was approved for the parcel, subject to an agreement restricting development to no more than 45 units. Explaining that King County has already reviewed the site as Phase 2 of the Molasses Creek condominium development project, she pointed out that the project is not yet vested and that shared utility improvements exist with Phase 1 of the development. Ms. Lind stated that the development agreement is needed to prevent a maximum density of approximately 86 units if the project were to be re- designed. She relayed the staff recommendation to approve the development agreement, which restricts the total number of units to 45 and establishes R-14 zoning. Public comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC. AND LENNON INVESTMENTS, INC. CARRIED. Chief Administrative Officer Covington reviewed a written administrative report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2008 and beyond. Items noted included: * Oakesdale Ave. SW will be closed under I-405 April 22 through April 24, from approximately 8 p.m. to 5 a.m., to allow the contractor to hang three large girders for the new I-405 southbound bridge over Oakesdale Ave. SW. Paul Witt (Renton) stated that a large event was held at the Sikh Temple located on Talbot Rd. S. on April 19, and as a result, many vehicles were parked illegally along S. 53rd Pl. blocking the street, mailboxes and fire hydrants. Mr. Witt expressed concern regarding the blocked access for emergency vehicles and the lack of consequences for Jaw violators. Pointing out that multiple calls were made to 911, he voiced concern regarding the lack of response. Mr. Witt requested that the City take steps to ensure that the neighborhood is kept safe, and to work with the temple so that events are successful, safe, and legal. Mayor Law stated that the Transportation and Police departments did work with the temple on the event and the City will review what took place. Jon Troxel (Friday Harbor) stated that he is the owner of an I I-unit apartment building located next to Joe's Bar and Grill (2621 NE Sunset Blvd.), and Aphl 21. 2008 Disturbances (NE Sunset Blvd) CONSENT AGENDA Council Meeting Minutes of 4/14/2008 CAG: 08-038, City Center Parking Garage Police Substation, MJ Ness Construction Co CAG: 08-037, Police Locker Rooms, HS Builders CAG: 08-033, Ripley Lane N Storm System Improvement, Rodarte Construction Budget: 2008 Amendment, Information Technology Projects Police: Lateral Police Officers Hire at Step D CAG: 07-033, Trails and Bikeways Study and Map, MacLeod Reckard Utility: Low-Income Senior & Disabled Utility Rates UNFINISHED BUSINESS Planning & Development Committee Development Services: Release of Restrictive Covenants Placed by King Renton City Council Minutes Page 127 expressed concern regarding the noise that emanates from the bar and disrupts his tenants who have a right to a peaceful home. Pointing out that approximately thirty 911 calls have been made since the first of the year, Mr. Troxel urged the City to find a solution to this ongoing problem. Mayor Law assured that the Police Department is sensitive to this, and he said the Police Chief will send the bar ownership a letter and use various tactics to address the matter. Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 4/14/2008. Council concur. City Clerk reported bid opening on 4/15/2008 for CAG-08-038, City Center Parking Garage Police Substation; five bids; engineer's estimate $150,000; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to low bidder, M.J. Ness Construction Co., Inc., in the amount of $219,680.70. Council concur. City Clerk reported bid opening on 4/16/2008 for CAG-08-037, Police Locker Rooms; five bids; engineer's estimate $450,000; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to low bidder, H.S. Builders, Inc., in the amount of $245,895.20. Council concur. City Clerk reported bid opening on 4/15/2008 for CAG-08-033, Ripley Lane N. Storm System Improvement; seven bids; engineer's estimate $1,565,069; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low responsive bidder, Rodarte Construction, Inc., in the amount of$ I ,475,874. Council concur. Finance and Information Services Department recommended approval to amend the 2008 Budget in the total amount of $486,000 to carry forward funds from 2007 for information technology projects that were not completed in 2007. Refer to Finance Committee. Police Department recommended approval of the starting compensation for four specific Lateral Police Officers at Step D of the salary range. Council concur. Transportation Systems Division requested approval of Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to CAG-07-033, agreement with MacLeod Reckard for a trails and bikeways study and map, in the amount of $16,719.30 for additional work and a term extension to 12/31/2008. Council concur. Utility Systems Division recommended approval to adjust current utility discount rates for low-income senior/disabled residents. Council concur. (See page 130 for ordinance.) MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee Chair Parker presented a report regarding the release of restrictive covenants for 6,000 square foot lots. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the release of the restrictive covenants placed by King County on older plats restricting lot size and width to standards different than current City zoning standards for the property. April 21, 2008 County re Lot Size and Width Planning: Development Regulations (Title IV) Docket Review Community Services Committee Appointment: Planning Commission Renton City Council Minutes Page 128 The Committee found that the requirements for approving a release of these restrictions are met. The change in Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning of the properties constitutes a change in circumstance. The restrictions are now undesirable as they prevent properties from being developed to the standards anticipated under approved existing zoning and development standards. The application of these outdated restrictions is also found to be duly burdensome to the property owners as they are thereby prevented from exercising the same property rights as owners of similarly zoned properties. The Committee further recommended that Council direct staff to ignore these outdated restrictions. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee Chair Parker presented a report regarding the City Code Title IV (Development Regulations) docket. The Committee recommended concurrence in the Planning Commission recommendation to approve Docket Item 06-28, Assisted Living, as follows: • Create a new definition for assisted living to replace retirement residence. • Revise the definition for convalescent centers to clarify that a skilled nursing staff administers convalescent care. • Apply density standards to assisted living facilities, but allow them to develop at a ratio of 1.5 units per the base density of the zone. • Allow assisted living facilities in the R-14 zone. • Limit assisted living facilities in the R-1 and R-10 zones to a maximum of 18 total residential units per acre. • Include assisted living in the parking standards table and require one parking space per residential unit of assisted living, plus dedicated parking spaces for facility fleet vehicles. The Committee further recommended concurrence in the Planning Commission recommendation to approve Docket Item 07-01, Height Requirement for Utilities in Residential Zones, as follows: • The proposed height for above ground and elevated water reservoirs and public utility of: I) 175 feet for an above-ground standpipe water reservoir, an elevated water tank, and a water treatment facility to the highest point of the water storage reservoir; and 2) 50 feet maximum height for water facilities such as water treatment facilities and pump stations. • Allow additional setbacks for water treatment facilities and pump stations through the administrative site plan review process. • Allow modification to lot coverage through the administrative site plan review process. • Require graphic treatment of new water tanks to be reviewed by the Municipal Arts Commission. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services Committee Chair Briere presented a report recommending concurrence in Mayor Law's appointment of Ed Prince to the Planning Commission for an unexpired term expiring 6/30/2010.* Councilmember Briere introduced Mr. Prince, who was present in the audience, and noted that he is the first resident of the Benson Hill Communities area to join the commission. Arri! 21, 2008 EDNSP: 2008 Neighborhood Program Grants Renton City Council Minutes Page 129 *MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT CARRIED, Community Services Committee Chair Briere presented a report regarding the 2008 neighborhood grant projects (first round), The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the following grant awards: L Downtown Committee/South Renton Neighborhood Association -Includes a spring clean up and planting assorted plants in containers in the downtown ($2,371). 2, LaCrosse Homeowners Association -Placing two entrance signs at the north and south entrances into the neighborhood ($454). 3, Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association -Creating a small playground and installing a bench, swings, and a play structure with appropriate landscaping ($23,517), 4. Maureen Highlands Homeowners Association -Landscaping around a neighborhood retention pond and adding benches, doggie stations, trash cans, and newsletter holders ($7,860), 5. May Creek Homeowners Association -Replacing an existing fence, which was part of the original development in 1989 ($2,871). 6. Parkside Court Homeowners Association -Cleaning up and landscaping around the neighborhood retention pond ($3,039). 7. Renton Hill Neighborhood Association -Placing two neighborhood entrance signs at points of entry on Renton Ave. S. and I-405 and Cedar Ave. S. and 1-405 ($8,210). 8. Rolling Hills Homeowners Association -Installing an improved fence barrier to comply with Washington State Department of Health mandate ($6,087). 9. The Vineyards Homeowners Association -Sandblasting an entrance rock sign ($4,224). I 0. Tiffany Park Neighborhood Association -Continuing development of a neighborhood park, Ginger Creek Urban Park, located on Seattle Public Utilities-owned right-of-way in Renton ($1,189). 11. Victoria Park Homeowners Association -Installing an entrance sign, with lighting, at the south entrance into the neighborhood ($2,782). 12. Windwood Homeowners Association -Landscaping improvements at the front entrance and lights installation around the entrance sign ($1, I 00). 13. Windwood Homeowners Association -Placing signs within the neighborhood to identify areas where children play and signs to encourage residents to clean up after their pets ($1,152). The Committee further recommended approval of funding for the following administrative newsletter applications: I. Aster Park Homeowners Association -Annual costs for newsletter printed quarterly and distributed door-to-door ($36). 2. Earlington Neighborhood Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed quarterly and distributed door-to-door and by United States Postal Service (USPS); $440. 3. Heritage Garden Estates Homeowners Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed and distributed by USPS six times a year ($50). 4. Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association -Annual costs for a newsletter April 21, 2008 Utilities Committee Utility: Automatic Meter Reading System Evaluation, HOR Engineering Public Safety Committee Fire: Emergency Response Times for Medical Aid CAO: 00-049, Valley Communications Center Interlocal Agreement Community Services: Sister City Visit to Nishiwaki, Japan RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Utility: Low-Income Senior & Disabled Utility Rates Renton City Council Minutes Page 130 printed qua1terly and distributed by USPS ($572). 5. Maureen Highlands Homeowners Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed and distributed door-to-door twice a year ($125). 6. North Renton Neighborhood Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed quarterly and distributed door-to-door ($915). 7. Renton Hill Neighborhood Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed and distributed door-to-door twice a year ($433). 8. Rolling Hills Homeowners Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed and distributed door-to-door and by USPS ($330). 9. Summit Park Homeowners Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed and distributed door-to-door twice a year ($48). I 0. Victoria Park Homeowners Association -Annual costs for a newsletter printed and distributed by USPS ($248). The first round of applications totals $68,053, leaving a balance of $8,947. A second round will follow, with a deadline for applications of 10/10/2008. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Utilities Committee Chair Zwicker presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the engineering consultant agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement with HOR Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $80,928 for professional services to support the City's acquisition, development, and implementation of an automatic meter reading system. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safety Committee Chair Taylor presented a report regarding Fire Department response times. The Committee was briefed on this issue in 2007 and recommended no changes to the current policy at this time. MOVED BY TAYLOR, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safety Committee Chair Taylor presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to authorize Mayor Denis Law to ratify the first amendment to the Valley Communications Center governing interlocal agreement. MOVED BY TAYLOR, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilmember Corman recapped his recent trip to Renton's Sister City Nishiwaki, commenting that it was an amazing visit. Stating that a formal presentation about the trip is forthcoming, Mr. Corman noted that this opportunity is available to any citizen, and that each delegate paid for his or her own travel expenses. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 4/28/2008 for second and final reading: An ordinance was read amending Chapter I, Garbage, Chapter 2, Storm and Surface Water, Chapter 4, Water, and Chapter 5, Sewers of Title VIII (Health and Sanitation) of City Code by adjusting current utility discount rates for low- income senior/disabled residents. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 4/28/2008. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and Apiil 21. 2008 Ordinance #5370 Vacation: Alley, Burnett Ave S & S 2nd St, Friedman Development, V AC-04-004 Ordinance #5371 Transportation: Logan Ave N Bicycle Lane, Boeing, Budget Amend NEW BUSINESS Community Event: Piazza Renton Spring Festival AUDIENCE COMMENT Citizen Comment: Gitchel - Monopole Conditional Use Permit Appeal, T-Mobile, CU- 07-065 ADJOURNMENT Recorder: Michele Neumann April 21, 2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 131 adoption: An ordinance was read vacating a portion of alley right-of-way located south of S. Tobin St., between Burnett Ave. S. and Williams Ave. S. (Friedman Development, LLC; VAC-04-004). MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL A YES. CARRIED. An ordinance was read amending the 2008 Budget to transfer from Fund 303 to Fund 316 for the Cedar River Trail Extension Project (Logan Ave. N. Bicycle Lane) expenses, and appropriating revenues in Fund 316 and authorizing expenses in that fund in the net amount of$11 l,875. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL A YES. CARRIED. Council President Palmer thanked the volunteers, City staff, and all those who attended the Piazza Renton Spring Festival and participated in the Downtown Renton Poker Run on April 19. She stated that the turnout was good despite the stormy weather. In response to the question posed by Chuck Gitchel (Renton), Chief Administrative Officer Covington indicated that the Committee of the Whole will likely discuss the T-Mobile monopole conditional use permit appeal in June. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:06 p.m. Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Filed For Record At Request Of AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Glen Maurer Pacific Properties, Inc. 14410 Bel•Red Road, Suite 200 Bellewe WA 98007 \ CONSTRUCTION Ai"ID CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT THIS CONSTRUCTION AND CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made as of this ~} day of Jv1 ai,_~ , 2000, by and between LANCASTER/CEDAR WOOD, INC., a Washington corporation and LENN N INVESTMENTS, INC., a Washington corporation, as tenants in corrunon, doing business as THE CEDAR WOOD GROUP, LENNON INVESTlvlENTS, INC., LANCASTER HOMES, INC., MOLASSES CREEK, INC., a Washington corporation, and CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC., a Washington corporation, (collectively, "Cedarwood") and KING COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Washington ("King County" or the "County"). Recjt;tls A. Cedarwood is the developer of the real property which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto (the "Cedarwood Properties"), is illustrated in Exhibit A· I and which includes the three divisions of The Cedarwood Plat, Cedarwood Division No. 4, real property located adjacent to Division No. 4 which is owned by Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. and real property located adjacent to the easterly of Cedarwood Division 3, Tax Parcel No. 222305·9004, which is owned by The Cedarwood Group, a tenancy in conunon. The Cedarwood Group is the fee owner of real property on which is located a stonn drainage water quality treatment pond, which is a portion of the Cedarwood, Division No. 4, and which is illustrated in the drawing attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Existing Pond Area"). The stonn drainage pond and conveyance system located within the Existing Pond Area have been designed to manage and treat all of the anticipated stonn runoff volumes from all of the Cedarwood Properties described in this Recital A, which are illustrated in Exhibit A· 1. B. The County will be widening 140"' Way Southeast, and in coMection therewith will be installing certain improvements. As part of this construction project, (the "140 111 ClP''), it will be necessary for the County to provide stonn drainage water quality treatment facilities, including a stonn drainage water quality pond. C. The parties wish to coordinate construction ofstonn drainage water quality facilities with sufficient capacity to service the Cedarwood Properties and the 140'" CIP, as well as a portion of the Maple Valley Highway (SR 169). NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties agree as follows: Construction and Conveyance Agreement I. General Maintenance Agreement. The parties wish to relocate the Existing Pond Area and construct a larger storm drainage water quality pond with sufficient treatment capacity to service all the Cedarwood Properties, a portion of the Maple Valley Highway and the 140 .. CIP (the "New Pond"). The New Pond is illustrated in Exhibit C, attached hereto. In order to relocate the Existing Pond Area and construct the New Pond, the County has obtained consent from the Washington Department of Transportation to locate a portion of the New Pond within the State right-of-way for the Maple Valley Highway, which consent is governed by that certain Agreement GMO 1331 between the County and 1he State dated as of January 26, 1999 (the "General Maintenance Agreement"), which is attached hereto and referred to as Agreement GMOl33 I and is hereby incorporated by this reference. 2. Construction of New Pond. The County hereby directs the Cedarwood owners, on behalf of and as agent for the County, to construe! the New Pond, substantially in accordance with the tenns of the General Maintenance Agreement and with the engineering plan which has been approved by the County and the State and which is attached as Exhibit D to the General Maintenance Agreement (the "Pond Plan"), a copy of which is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit D, which in incorporated herein by this reference. The New Pond has been designed with capacity sufficient to accommodate the volumes provided by the County and the volumes generated by all of the Cedarwood Properties, and both the Cowity and the State have reviewed and approved the projected volumes and have reviewed and approved the Pond Plan. The County acknowledges and agrees that Cedarwood shall be proceeding to construct the New Pond pursuant to its existing grading permit, Land Use Permit No. S9101004, Activity No. L98GR066, Project No. L96G0054. The County specifically acknowledges and agrees that after conveyance of the New Pond from Cedarwood to the County, Cedarwood shall be entitled to COMect to the stonn drainage facilities and to use the New Pond for disposal and treatment of storm water rwiofffrom all of the Cedarwood Properties, including without limitation its planned Cedarwood Apartments, consisting ofup to 201 multifamily units to be located on Cedarwood Division No. 4/1..ightfoot and the proposed multifamily project to be located on real property located adjacent to and east ofCedarwood Division No. 3, Tax Parcel 222305-9004, without cost or charge to Cedarwood. 3. Acceptance of New Pond. Prior to the acceptance of the New Pond by the County, Cedarwood shall provide all engineering plans and calculations used to size the facility. Cedarwood shall schedule final inspection with Department of Development & Environmental Services (ODES) and County Roads Division Staff. Cedarwood, at its sole cost and expense, shall correct all construction deficiencies which do not substantially conform with the approved Pond Plan attached hereto as Exhibit D, and which are noted by DOES or County Road Division Staff at time of field inspection. 4. Convevance to Countv. Upon Cedarwood's completion of construction of the New Pond and acceptance of construction by the Cowity: (which shall not be unreasonable withheld provided construction substantially conforms with the Pond Plan and required corrections, if any, are completed): (i) the Cowity shall: reimburse Cedarwood the arnowit of Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000), which the parties have allocated as the County's share of construction costs; and (ii) The Cedarwood Group shall convey that portion of the New Pond which is located on real property owned by Cedarwood to the County, by Warranty Deed, free and clear of monetary encumbrances, and other encumbrances except those reasonable acceptable to the County. The County shall not object to encumbrances of record which do not materially interfere with the use and operation of the New Pond for its intended purpose. The County shall be responsible for preparing the conveyance documents, at the County's sole cost and expense. If the County fails to reimburse Cedarwood the $75,000 within 30 days following completion and acceptance of the New Pond, interest shall commence accruing on the outstanding unpaid balance at the rate of I% per month, until paid. During construction of the New Pond 2 Construction and Conveyance Agreement and prior to acceptance by the County, Cedarwood shall not be required to post any bonds other than the Construction Performance Bond normally required by ODES for construction of plat improvements, which the County acknowledges has already been provided by Cedarwood. Upon acceptance of the construction of the New Pond by the County, after Cedarwood's correction of any noted deficiencies, the Construction Performance Bond shall be released by the County and a two-year maintenance bond shall be provided by Cedarwood for that portion of the New Pond which is not located on State right-of-way. After conveyance of the New Pond from Cedarwood to the County, the County, at County cost and expense, shall be responsible for performing all of its obligations set forth in the General Maintenance Agreement and for maintaining, repairing and replacing that portion of the New Pond which is located within the State right-of. way, including any related facilities and appurtenances. During the term of the two year maintenance bond, Cedarwood shall be responsible for maintaining, repairing and replacing that portion of the New Pond which was conveyed by Cedarwood to the County and which is not located within the State right-of-way, including any related facilities and appurtenances. Upon release of the maintenance bond, the county shall be responsible for maintaining, repairing and replacing all of the New Pond, including any related facilities. S. Aulhoritv. Each person signing below represents and warrants that execution of this Agreement has been duly authorized and that no further action on the pan of any party is necessary to make this Agreement binding in accordance with its terms. 6. Attornevs' Fees. In the event of litigation between parties hereto, declaratory or otherwise, in connection with this Agreemen~ the prevailing party shall recover its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, including for appeals, which shall be determined and fixed by the court as pan of the judgment. 7. Binding. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns lo the panies hereto. LANCAS~CEDARWOOD, INC., a Was~;n ~rporation By: .I-( Ge6rge Reece Its: President LENNON INVESTMENTS, INC., a Washington corporation By:£6:&·-?: •.. _ Patrick 0. Lennon Its: President 3 LANCASTER HOMES, INC., a Washington corporation By: xc a.?orge Reece Its: President MOLASSES CREEK, INC., a Washington corporation 2_L By: J ,./~~~~ (Printed Name) Its: v'(CC ~r:e-s·,,,C>.c:A./T" CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC., a Washington corporation B~/d~- atrickO.Lennon Its: President KING COUNTY, a political Subdivision of the State of Washington By:2~ ;/!7::(~ (Printed Name) Its: Manager, Property Service Division Construction and Conveyance Agreement 4 Construction and Conveyance Agreement STATE OF WASHINGTON ) : Ss COUNTY OF KING ) On the frs r day of /llP f" , 2000, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared GEORGE REECE to me known to be the PRESIDENT of Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc. and Lancaster Homes, Inc., the corporations that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be free and voluntary act and deed of said corporations for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute said instrument. Given under my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. ,,,u1111u,.,,, ,,,, ~ Pft 1111 ,,.. ~~ r ••I.. ,,, ...... O''!';. •• •• •• • . . . .st'6',., j ~ .•'\,,lOI i'•. :,t..\ .·~-·, _.,."'° .. ~ ' : .,.-~OTA~r> '• ·· -:. ~ : 0 ~ ~ :·: -. .,, -·-.. . : 1 "': l>IJO\.le : :a: I ;A\IJ ~:a_: ':; -,:.· ••. ci-... , ... <1:.·',,'. ,, .,.. .. .. . ...... ~ ,· ,, ,. D •••.... ,iir-. ···,, F' "'"s" ... ·· '•,,,,,,. ........ ',,•' STATE OF WASHINGTON ) : Ss COUNTY OF KING ) NOT ARY PUBLIC i!J..IJl~ fo e swe of Washington Residing at: 6('~51 /VD My Appoinnnent expires:0-Z: 9 -&/ 1-,,;r A I/ On the ::;:i day of / v~A r , 2000, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared PATRICK 0. LENNON to me known to be the PRESIDENT of Lennon lnvesanent, Inc. and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., the corporations that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be free and volwuary act and deed of said corporations for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute said instrument. Given under my hand and official seal the day and y first above written. ................ . «;n,. -~-4./ ,,,, ~E F .... . ,-,.. "ft ,, ..... 'T. •• .. IQ~ .......... 1., •,, . / ~.-···,~,,or / .. :.9,i·.. NOTARY PUBL~C in and r the State of Washington f f ~•11,0TA11:~\ ~' Residing at: /(,1£/C /v'L> ~ : 8 •·-::: : ~ My Appoinanentexpires: Ip -.. c7-0( :.r,t't•,, -· .. ; ... \ 1101.,e ; :o:f ;. ,:. ..,,.Ci!! o ...... "' ; ~":, ff" • ••• 'f,-... · ""./· ,.,, () ········ ~~., 1''1,, F IV AS~\ ,,, .... ~ ,,,,,.,, , ... ,,,,,,. 5 Construction and Conveyance Agreement STA TE OF WAS HIN GT ON ) : Ss COUNTY OF KING --} mS' I',;, On the? __ day of /!.1!f T , 2000, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared ,:;:;.p,,:;,G--e-~Ec:::6' to me known to be thetf:'l{~Ol!;/r of Molasses Creek, Inc., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrumen~ and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and volwttary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and pwposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that (s)he is authorized to execute said instrument. Given wtder my hand and official seal the day and STATE OF WASHINGTON } : Ss COUNTY OF KING } On the~ day of ~ , 2000, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned ands~personally appeared DAVID PREUGSCHAT to me known to be the MANAGER. Property Service Division of KING COUNTY, the entity that executed the foregoing instrumen~ and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and volwttary act and deed of said entity, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that ( s )he is authorized to execute said instrument. '"'""""'0 Given wtder,~~.R!i!!.Mi,~J.eseal the day and year first above written. ~ '-" ••• :;{,;$1011 fi,A·• •• ( -~ ,, ....... w w:'{"~ s...,,..-~~· ~-..>~ ~ .~ o•AR ~-. ~ ::: \\')' ·-= : :.l = -. ----= i : = ~ i PUal\(. l ~ ~fP\""' ~/ ~s ~ .,.., ··.f11 1.111:1 ••• , c::, ~ ~/"··' ··~:-:-~ ~o·· .... , ..... °'"' ,, 11111 F WAS°II ,,,,, 1111 II 1111111 \\II 6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CEDARWOOD GROUP OAAINAGE AREA AT CEOARWOOO Eilictt Fatm aeco/ding to the Plat thereof recorded In Volume 180 of Plats. Pages 4 tllrough 15, Records of King County. Washingtcn exce,:,; thar portion thereof lying within the Renton/Maple Valley Highway Southeasl {SR 1 S9) as c!edi<::ated en said Plat; TOGETHER WITH that porticn of :he NorthWest 1/4 of the Sc1,;theast 1/4 of Sac~on 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willarr:ette Mer.dian, King Ccunty, Was:iin~tcn desc:it:ed as follows: Beginning at Paint A as shown on said Plat of Eiliott Farm: Thence N as•, 7•47• W a distar.ce of 675.00 feet. Thence N 01°41'41~ Ea distance of 473.SS feet to the Southerly ma;gin of AentorJMaple Valley Highway; Thence S 75•3a•59· E along said Southerly margin a distance ol 691.70 feet to ar: ir.tersection with the West line ot the East 35 feet of said Northwest 1/4 of th9 Southeast 1/4; Thence S 01•41•41•w along said West line a distance of 310.4-! tee! to the Pei~! of B!ginning. ANO TOGETHER WITH that ~ortion of Govemment Lot 9 in said Sac!lon Z2 lying Easterly of the Cedar River and South of !he AentonJM.1ple Valley Highway Southeast (SA 169), the Southarly margin beir:g descrttied \J/lder Aecorcing No. 6484109; ANO TOGETHEA WITH that portion of the Northwest 1/4 of the Sou!hwa:o: 1/~ of said Section· 22 lying Southerly ot the Cedar Aiver EXCEPT the South 970.00 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH that portion al Govemment Lot a in said Section 22 lying Southerly ol the Renton/Maple Vaney Highway Southeast (SA 169) and Westerly of 140th P!ace Southeast as conveyed to King County by Oeeds recorded under Recording No's. 5596210, 6354693, and 6391812. EXCEPT those portions conveyed to the State of Washington for tt,e widening of the Junction of Renton/Maple Valley Highway and 140th Place Soutlleast by Oeeds recorded under Recording No's. i707110208, 7701110209, and no1110210. ANO TOGETHER WITH that portion ot the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 22 lying Westerly or said 14oth Way Southeast and Northerly of the Southerly margin of a drainage easement recorded under King County Recording No. 8806270224. EXHIBIT A Pr~pnred by: Checked by: Q rf? 1-i~!lhG.Gofdsrnilh \{)'"U &~o<:ic1res.1nc :a::--=""' 0 Q .. 0 I I i ; I I I I' I I • I /-.__ I I I 0 N ~ ,.. I .. • <C • • ~ ~ ; ! ... '-' l!i ,: " .. .. 0 z 0 a.. ~ 00 Q 1-a a: " (!) 0 0 0 :?: ~ Q .. "' z a:: .. -<l'. Q .., <l'. a '-' !o a:; w ;: Ou Cf) <C w a:: <C ,.. ~ 3 0 " .. ~ • 0 I .... % 0 in :a: 0 0 "' I Cl z 0 a.. >- I- ~ .....lo 5 <r:o C ::, 0 .. a 0~ 0 " :, a::: a::: .. .. W<C " w I-Cl u '!! <CW ;:: 3: u (.!) z I- U) >< w -i • • ii ' • i i i • .. ' • • • -• • -• lh • • • • i • -. .. : ~ l • 5 ~ I .. .. i s • : • • ~ • ii s : • • • d C 1~ .s • rt _; !; .. -.... ii -.l!. g ls i!~ R -!.I -... i a ... i ;;; .. • >-... = il u .. ~ i • • li • = : i • • 3 • • Cl • I-' :c X l,IJ ,J -·· . . . ·, -~ l . -·· . •• ~: .. ... l ,, ' ; J .,, -i,; F 1 :t. J~~ : .. .: 11·~1 • :J• I • oo! ·1 • .It~ ' • i•ft I t!aJ l • • i I ; ,· • ; i : • : : i . . . . ·. I ..• ~·. .41fl Filed for Record by and After Recording Return to: Molasses Creek, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Attn: Glen Maurer CHICAGO TITLE EAS 1e.ee 20000201000940 PRGE HI OF eu e2,e112eee 12:2e KING COUNTY, LIA f ·coPYOF 'l RECORDED DOCUMENT \ King County Recorder's Office ROAD, LANDSCAPE, PARKING, EMERGENCY TURNAROUND AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT Grantor: Grantee: Abbrev. Legal Description: Tax Parcel Nos.: Reference No.: Molasses Creek, Inc. Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc. CHICAGO Tri LE INS. CO REF# wcm l0l'R(10) Tract A, Plat of Elliott Farm recorded Volume 180 of Plats, Pages 4 through 15; (Complete legal description per Exhibit A) :2314'3'1-CSt-O t :t9'a=c5-9a:t-f (0(h. t':>J n/a THIS ROAD, LANDSCAPE, PARKING, EMERGENCY TURNAROUND AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Easement Agreement") is made as of this ~y of January, 2000 by MOLASSES CREEK, INC., a Washington corporation ("Grantor") and LANCASTER/CEDAR WOOD, INC. a Washington corporation ("Grantee"). Recitals A. Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in King County, Washington, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto (the "Burdened Property"). B. Grantee is the owner of property adjacent to the Burdened Property which is legally described in Exhibit B, attached hereto (the "Benefited Property"). C. The parties wish to create an easement over the Burdened Property for the benefit of the Benefited Property, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Easement Agreement. Y:\Wf'\WBB\ll244\J2ctAO~.ooc • Agreement NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties agree as follows: 1. Easement Area. Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee and to all utility providers including without limitation the power company, telephone company, natural gas company, water and sewer district, the cable company or any other utility provider ( collectively, the "Utility Providers") which may now or in the future provide utilities to the Benefited Property a permanent, non-exclusive easement over the portion of the Burdened Property which is legally described and illustrated in Exhibit C, attached hereto (the "Easement Area") for the benefit of the Benefited Property. 2. Use of Easement Area. Grantee shall use the Easement Area for vehicular and pedestrian access to the Benefited Property, landscaping, emergency turnaround and parking purposes for the benefit of the Benefited Property. Grantee and the Utility Providers shall use the Easement Area for the construction, installation, maintenance, operation, repair and replacement of utilities located within the Easement Area, such as water, sewer and storm drainage pipelines and facilities, cable and electrical lines which serve the Benefited Property. 3. Maintenance of Facilities. It shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee to maintain, repair and replace the landscaping, emergency turnaround and parking areas which are located in the Easement Area. It shall be the sole responsibility and cost of Grantee or, as applicable, the Utility Providers to maintain, repair and replace any utilities which serve the Benefited Property and which are located in the Easement Area. Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee and to the Utility Providers a right of entry to enter onto the Easement Area to perform necessary maintenance, repair and replacement work. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, where landscaping, utilities, parking or an emergency turnaround benefit both the Burdened Property and the Benefited Property ( collectively, the "Properties"), both parties shall share maintenance, repair and replacement costs on an equitable basis, based on allocation of actual use or benefit. If an allocation cannot be determined or agreed upon, each party shall be responsible for payment of one half of the costs. Either party who believes it is necessary for work to be performed on a facility which benefits both Properties and is located within the Easement Area shall notify the other party, in writing, as to the nature and estimated cost of such work, and a time and place for a meeting to discuss the proposed work, which shall be not less than two weeks nor more than one month following the date of delivery of the notice. At the meeting, the parties shall attempt to agree on the scope and cost of the work. After the Transition Date, each party shall be represented by the president of the applicable homeowners ( or condominium owners) association. If, after the meeting, bids are received which exceed the estimate by 15%, another meeting shall be called and a new vote of the parties shall be taken, based upon the actual bid amounts. In the event of a deadlock or for resolution of any other dispute with Y:\WP\WDWl44UlOM145A.ADB.1'0C 2 respect to maintenance or operation of the facilities located within the Easement Area, either party may submit the matter to arbitration, which shall be binding upon the parties. All disputes arising out of this Section 3 shall be resolved by a single arbitrator before th\: American Arbitration Association ("AAA") under the Arbitration Rules of the AAA, modified as follows: (i) the total time from date of demand for arbitration to final award shall not exceed 25 days; (ii) the arbitrator shall be chosen by the AAA without submittal of lists and subject to challenge only for good cause shown; (iii) all notices may be by telephone or other electronic communication with later confirmation in writing; (iv) the time, date and place of the hearing shall be set by the arbitrator in his or her sole discretion, provided that there be at least 3 days prior notice of the hearing; (v) there shall be no post-hearing briefs; (vi) there shall be no discovery except by order of the arbitrator; and (vii) the arbitrator shall issue his or her award within 7 days after the close of the hearing. The arbitration shall be held in the City of Bellevue, Washington. The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding on the parties, not subject to appeal, and judgement on the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction. The fees and expenses of the arbitrator shall be paid half by each party unless the arbitrator decides otherwise in its discretion. The parties shall each hold harmless and indemnify the arbitrator from any claims arising in connection with the arbitration. The prevailing party in the arbitration shall recover its costs and attorney's fees actually incurred, which shall be determined and fixed by the arbitrator as part of the arbitration award. Each party shall promptly pay its share of the costs of maintaining, repairing and replacing the facilities located within the Easement Area within thirty (30) days after receipt of an invoice setting forth the total amount paid and the party's share. If a party fails to pay their proportionate share when due, the other party may pay the defaulting party's share and the unpaid sums shall constitute a lien on the property of the defaulting party, from the date the payment is made until paid in full. The lien for such unpaid sums shall be subordinate to tax liens on the property in favor of any assessing unit and/or special district, but to the extent permitted by applicable law shall have priority over all other liens against the property. The lien for delinquent payments may be foreclosed by suit by the party making the delinquent payment. The party making payment for a delinquent owner may charge interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the sum so paid, from the date of payment. 4. Repair of Easement Area. Immediately following completion of any maintenance, repair and replacement work within the Easement Area, Grantee, or, as applicable, the Utility Provider performing the work, at its expense, shall repair and restore the Easement Area to substantially the same condition as existed prior to commencement of such work. All work shall be performed in a careful, workmanlike manner, free of claims or liens. Upon completion of any work, the owner of the Benefited Property or the Utility Provider, as applicable, shall remove all debris. 5. Use of Easement Area by Burdened Property Owner. Grantor may use the Easement Area for any purposes not inconsistent with the provisions of this Easement. Provided, however, Grantor shall not locate any structures, including without limitation fencing, within the Easement Area except for landscaping and other improvements which have been expressly 3 approved, in writing, by Grantee. The owner of the Easement Area also shall not locate trees or large shrubs within the Easement Area except as otherwise expressly approved, in writing, by Grantee. ' 6. Rlll111ing with the Land. This Easement Agreement shall run with the land and shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Granter, the Grantee and their heirs, successors and assigns. 7. Attorney Fees. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce or interpret the terms of this Easement Agreement shall be entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred in said action, including on appeal, whether or not suit is commenced. 8. Breach. In the event of any breach or threatened breach of this Easement Agreement by Grantor or Grantee, the non-defaulting owner shall have the right to sue for damages and/or for specific performance and/or to enjoin such breach or threatened breach. 9. No Termination Upon Breach. No breach of this Easement Agreement shall entitle either party to cancel, rescind or otherwise terminate this Easement Agreement; provided, however, that this provision shall not limit or otherwise affect any other right or remedy which a party may have hereunder by reason of any breach of this Easement Agreement. GRANTOR: MOLASSES CREEK, INC., a Washington corporation By: »-- Ge<ige Reece Its: President GRANTEE: LANCASTER/CEDARWOOD, INC., A Washington corporation ·~ .·~ ~ ece. (Printed :; STATEOFWASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that George Reece signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it in his capacity as the President of Molasses Creek, Inc. to be the free and voluntary act of such COipOration for the uses and pw:poses mentioned in the instrument Dated this ·~ 'ih.. day of ya.-,,, , '--"'} , 2000. (Signature) (PrintedN e) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at tu1 }-1 ll /4:: My commission expires / I -1-03 STATEOFWASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that~-f<eecp_.... signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the ~t and acknowledged it in his capacity as thel3@dei-d-of Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc. to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated this '29:,<\l.-, day of ~UD..!:Y), 2000. (Signl{ture) ' M~ .L {i;ttflt?r (Printed N) 1 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at/~ 144-. My commission expires //-I-a 3 . 5 EXHIBITA Legal Description Burdened Property Tract A, Elliott Farm, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 180 of Plats, Pages 4 through 15, in King County, Washington, as corrected by Affidavit of Correction of plat recorded under Recording Number 9810121777; Except that portion thereof conveyed to King County for road purposes by deed recorded under Recording Number 9902252114. Y :\WP\W1111\Gl"4\310A04!A..4DI.DOC 6 HISTORICAL SITE December 8, 1999 LEGAL OESCRIPTION F08 THE CEDARW00D GROUP That portion Government Lo1 3 and of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, King County, Washington descnbed as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said subdivision; Thence S 01°41'41# W along the East line thereof a distance of 23.02 feet to the Southerly margin of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway (Primary State Highway No. 5); Thence continuing S 01°41'41# W along said East line a distance of 521.98 feet to a point 545.00 feet Southerly of said Northeast comer of said subdivision and a point oil the Northeasterly boundary of Elliott Farm, according !o the Plat thereof, recorded in Volume 180 of Plats, pages 4 through 15, Records of King County, Washington; Thence N 89°17'47"' W along said Northeasterly boundary a distance of 200.00 feet; Thence N 01°41'41• E continuing along said Northeasterly boundary a d"JStance of 220.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the herein descnbed tract; Thence N 89°17'47"' W continuing along said Northeas1erly boundary a distance of 510.00 feet; Thence N 01°41'41# E continuing along said Northeasterly boundary a distance of 473.66 feet to said Southerly boundary of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway; Thence S 75"38'59" E along said Southerly margin a distance of 691.70 feet to an intersection with the West line of the East 35.00 feet of said Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 22; Thence S 01°41'41· W along said West line a distance of 310.44 feet; Thence N 89°17'47"' W a distance of 165.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Pago! oC I a94-0S7bl969 . llecembet 9. l 999 Prepared by: C_hecked by: '• November 29, 1999 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE CEDARWOOD GROUP ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS FOR THE HJSTORICAL SITE The East 30.00 feet of that portion of Tract A, Elliott Farm, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Volume 180 of Plats, pages 4 through 15 (Molasses Creek Condominium as recorded in Volume 159 of Condominiums, pages 84 through 96), Records of King County, Washington, lying between Tract C and the Southerly right-of-way of Renton-Maple Valley Highway, as shown on said Plat; TOGETHER WITH that portion of said Tract A lying w~hin a strip of land 24.00 feet in width, 12.00 feet on each side of the followlng described centerline: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Tract A; Thence N 75°41 '09" W along the North line thereof a distance of 30. 74 feet: Thence S 01°41'41" W along the West line of the above described East 30.00 feet a distance of 87.85 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the herein described centerline; Thence S 87°43'30" W a distance of 143.85 feet; Thence N 88°17'06" W a distance of 37.31 feet to a point of curve; . Thence Westerly along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 100.00 feet through a central angle of 21°56'49" a distance of 38.31 feet; Thence N 66°20'17" W a distance of 90.06 feet to a point designated as "Point A·· for the purposes of this description; Thence S 82°22'03" W a distance of 84.35 feet to a point of curve; Thence Westeriy along th·e arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 600.00 feet through a central angle of 04°44'56" a distance of 49.73 feetto a point of compound curve; · Thence Westerly along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 212.50 feet through a central angle of 09"23'52" a distance of 34.86 feet; Thence N 83°29'09" W a distance of 69.83 feet to a point of curve; Thence Westeriy along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 1,200.00 feet through a central angle of 04°58'08" a distance of 104.07 feet; Thence N 88°27'18" W a distance of 109.36 feet to a point of curve; Thence Westerly along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 100.00 feet through a central angle of 05°52'25" a distance of 10.25 feet; Thence N 82°34'53" W a distance of 241.18 feet; Thence N 77°55'03" W a distance of 46.64 feet to a point of curve; Pagel of 3 a94057bl939 November 29, 1999 Prepared by: Checked by: :h, 2'-, • Q r[? Hu~h G.Qoldsmlth \{)'U & ~ociates, Inc. Thence Westerly along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 67.50 feet through a central angle of 29°49'21" a distance of 35.13 feet to a point designated as "Point B" for the purposes of this description; Thence continuing along said curve to the left, through a central angle ol 03°37'08" a distance , of 4.26 feet to a point designated as "Point C" for the purposes of this description; Thence continuing along said curve to the felt, through a central angle of 31°32'41" a distance of 37.16 feet; Thence S 37°05'46" W a distance of 6.53 feet to a point of curve; Thence Southwesterly along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 100.00 feet through a central angle of 28°46'48" a distance of 50.23 feet to a pcint designated as "Point D" for the purposes of this description and the terminus of said centerline; TOGETHER WITH a strip of land 60.00 feet in width, 30.00 feet on each side of the following described centerline; Beginning at the above described "Point A"; Thence N 14°21'37" Ea distance of 121.39 feet to a point on the North line of said Tract A, distant thereon 312.65 feet Westerly of the Northeast corner thereof and the terminus of said centerline; TOGETHER WITH that portion of said Traci A lying wtthin a circle having a radius of 55.00 feet, the center of said circle being the above descriood "Point A"; TOGETHER WITH that portion of said Traci A lying with a strip of land 15.00 feet in width, 7.50 feet on each side of the following described centerline; Beginning at the above described "Point B"; Thence N 12°14'58" W a distance of 116.73 feet; Thence N 00°58'48" W a distance of 116.00 feet; Thence N 87°57'02" W a distance of 166.21 feet to a point on the West line of said Traci A and the terminus of said centerline; Thence s 03°26'34" W along said West line a distance of 139.35 feet to a point of curve; Thence Southerly continuing along said West line along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 676.20 feet through a central angle of 15°51'58" a distance of 187.25 feet; Thence S 77°34'36" W continuing along said West line a distance of 10.00 feet to a point on the arc of a curve, the center of which bears N n°34'36" E; Thence Southerly continuing along said West line along the arc of a curve to the felt, said curve having a radius of 686.20 feet through a central angle of 06°23'26# a distance of 76.54 feet to the Southwest corner of said Tract A; TOGETHER WITH that portion of said Traci A lying wtthin a strip of land 24.00 feet in width, 12.00 feet on each side of the following described centerline; Beginning at the above described "Point C"; Thence N 15°19'06" W a distance of 99.07 feet to a point of curve; Thence Northerly and Westerly along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 37.50 feet through a central angle of n•oa'or a distance of 50.49 feet; Thence S 87°32'47" W a distance ol 132.22 feet to a point on the West line of said Tract A and the terminus of said centerline; Thence S 03°26'34# W along said West line a distance of 19.17 feet to a point of curve; Page 2 of 3 a94057bl 939 November 29, 1999 I Prepared by: Checked by: Q (',...0 Hl.jghG.Goldsml!h \{)'U & ""5sociates, Inc. • • • Thence Southerly continuing along said West line along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 676.20 feet through a central angle of 15°51'58" a distance of 187.25 feet; Thence S 77'34'36" W continuing along said West line a distance of 10.00 feet to a point on the arc of a curve, the center of which bears N 77°34'36" E; Thence Southerly continuing along said West line along the arc of a curve to the left. said curve · having a radius of 686.20 feet through a central angle of 06'23'26" a distance of 76.54 feet to the Southwest comer of said Tract A; TOGETHER WITH that portion of said Tract A described as follows: Beginning at the above described "Point D"; Thence N 24°07'26" W a distance of 12.50 feet to a point on the arc of a curve, the center of which bears N 24°07'26" W; Thence Westerly along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 87.50 feet through a central angle of 30°21'52" a distance of 46.37 feel; Thence N 83'45'34" W a distance of 46.60 feet to a point of curve; Thence Westerly along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 55.00 feet through a central angle of 24°43'22" a distance of 23.73 feet to a point on the West line of said Tract A and a point on the arc of a ctJrve. the center of which bears N 81°34'04" E; Thence Southerly along said West line along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 676.20 feet through a central angle of 03°59'28" a distance of 47.1 O feet: Thence S 77°34'36" W continuing along said West line a distance of 10.00 feet to a point on the arc of a curve, the center of which bears N 77'34'36" E; Thence Southerly continuing along said West line along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 686.20 feet through a central angle of 04°06'55" a distance of 49.29 feet to a point on the arc of a curve. the center of which bears S 68°37'09" E; Thence Northeasterly along the arc of a cuive to the right, said curve having a radius of 55.00 feet through a central angle of 44°29'43" a distance of 42.71 feet; Thence N 65°52'34" E a distance of 92.39 feet; Thence N 24°07'26" W a distance of 12.50 feet to the Point of Beginning. EXPIRES 3/92900 Prepared by: Page 3 of 3 a94057bl.939 November 29, 1999 ., Checked by: Hugh G.Goldsmith & A"ssociates, Inc. CURVE RADPJS ARC DELTA Cl C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 CB C9 CIO CR Cl2 Cl3 Cl4 Cl5 100.00 38.31 21°56'49" 600.00 49.73 04•44'56• 212.50 34.86 09•23•52• I00.00 10.25 05'52'25" 67.50 35.13 29•49'21· 67.50 4.26 03'37'08" 67.50 37.16 .31•12•,41• 100.00 50.23 2a•4&14e· 37.50 50.49 77'08'07" 686.20 76.54 06 ... 23'26~ 87.50 46.37 30°2152" 55.00 23.73 24•43122" 676.20 47.10 03"59'28" 686.20 49.29 04•0,•55• 55.00 42.71 44°29143,t -------- SR /69 --------MopJe \1011 --- ey H111y. S.t. h ~ _J __ ~~;~1~~j __ _ ~ -1:.-:::..·.:::-.:.:._ :::::.·f.::1 L-CENTERLINE PROPOSED ~ 1 tj l"-UTILITY EASEMENT '-· l''C>QJ ..... 'IC):,,. ~ l·~~ (Q I I• Cl, "' 1 N 81"32'41' £ I' I C) • -1-"· ··-------,II I ~ T -~ ,.,,.,, __ _., -.J I 0 ~ -----'7-\11 § n--------~i";,"-~~,. \\ -:z N l ~~ ~-I ''\, ,;;; N .... ~ r§.'<:.¢t ~\.,,\~i-MOLASSES CREEK CONDOMINIUM ~ ~ 4f c,'-l .., "'\\..,.~ Vol. 159. Pages 84-96 .c: &, 'Ii o c• . ,, • [/J 'Ii b ]'. ,l 1..G "'• i"\ \ I p T. •9• ~ ii, a;~ <,,,~ f?,'i-PT. •c• "'-1 ', -s-:_---/jCENTERLINE PROPOSED • ~ ;;( ~!!l_ ,f ~4.. . -a..,.:;~---.JJI'!,!!Y B ACCESS ESMT. ,t ~ "> <>,~~" ,;> / ' ----.. >!. --------------l N88°27~8"W 0 0 • ~ ., / ---------------l -~ t fer' r-------2-11.10-·---. .::-----,09_35--- ::r ["-" l!O C/1~~7)' • NB,e•34'5.;;-----------------. -0----~---., ... .., W , C4 ----------- t""I, • ,·~7 / / -PT. ''()" "" 1 -.. L. i;. ' ... · .· .. ,· '//,// ,.;.,,::_ . D 50 IDO ~00 3DD = LB / ..... // / / / :>"" N 0 / / ,,, ... ., ...... ,\ ----- --« ·~>:, .,,., 1..1 -----SCALE ..... .,\" If' 5\{ c; ACCESS, UTILITY, LANDSCAPE. - I"' '' EMERGENCY TURNAROUND 8 N ----... , w ---• <' • I" = 100' PARKING EASEMENT ELLIOTT FARM Vol. 180. Pages 4-15 Traci "B" 0 ~ Hugll C. Goldomilb & Aaociolea, lne. ~ Conlllllhrc lqilllffl • S.,..,... • l'IIDlm P.O. Box 3565 TEL: \425, 462-1080 Belleme, 11A 98009 FAX: '25 482-7719 MOLASSES CREEK. INC. JOB NO: 97510 SCALE: I" = 100' APR: BJ BY: KJT ACCESS EASEMENTS MOLASSES CREEK CONDOMINIUM 1/2 PSSF: 94D57P DATE: 11/29/9~9 KING COUNTY WASHlNGTON DWG: M:\ACAD\SURV£Y\97\2_?'_5JD\97510XIO.dw 97~0XIO.dwq KJUSTE ll/~9,1_9·9 11:22 LINE BEARING LI N 88°17'06" W L2 N' &,•zo'1r w L3 N 82"22'03' E L4 N 83'29'09' W LS N 77"55'03' W LG N 37"05'46' E L7 N 03'26'34" E LB N 77"34'36" E L9 N 24'07'26' W LIO N 83'45'34' W LIi N &s•s2•34• E LIZ N 24'07'26' W Ll3 N 75•41•09• W DIST. 37.31 90.0G 84.35 69.83 46.64 6.53 19.17 N .... 0 -----·---SR /69 -M ------ Op/e \/otfey Hw ------ Y. S.c. f---6p• 1 ,V ?50~/l:;9·,,. P.0.8. l i t:1• : Jt.?. 6s uJ I -' . ' ~-. I "'o, I r·· ~ , ;,;_, , ·"r,: .il CBflERUNEPROPO~' ,;7/?1~) ', Pr. 0 • ~-ij:;:. :> oo ft {l.,.l, /TY 8 ACCESS£ // / / 1// './'/, ~ "' "'<5 /<ii "'· , .. , ... , '. . ... • '"'°"oo • o '/ •, · rmo !!__ ~ J: O•o-,•ss'oa· ! f -------:+:~~ f:{{({l../. __________ l_~'!.-,4!.ss:~,;') ----A•/04.0?---------.,..,,...-~ /,Y///'.<",_ 1'--.,,.__ ----------,, /,, •----~---=-ro c,-C,<----/'" . ;, ''··.Jr>J:L_ -------'" /. -, . .. ,. 1onn ,z ... n 46.60 92.39 12.50 30.74 'l..d .. n ------------1-.t. 3 --r----""V /\.,.,;. --1 T.P.0.8. ~ k ,lo'.J --• I ··· ''l'h ... c -I ' ANOSCAPE, • .::. -I .. ~ K CONOOMINIUM ACCES, UT,UTY. ;ROUND 6 • ;::~ MOLASSES 5C9Ri~,., 84-96 EMERCENC;;::., TYPICAL l;:V,!i<,<:>, Vol. I • p;JRKNH:£ ~r / 'C) / ,•I -,//., .. _ • I .,,._ I ~ "":,·~: ~ ,, ' ELLIOTT ''"!'.,s Tm! "c" '~ . Vol. 180, Poges ~ N Traci "B" Ll4 N 59•4:11,'1A•. 0 50 100 300 200 ---- SCALE Q ~ Huch G. Gold1mltll II Aaoclate., lne, ~ Comallhrc ....... ~ • Pluaen P.O. Box 3565 TEL: 425 462-1080 Belle,u,, n 98009 FAX: 4251462-771t SCALE: I" = 100' APR: BJ BY: KJT PSSF: 94057P DATE: 11/29/99 DWG: M:\ACAD\SURVEY\97\97510\97510X10.dw -- KING COUNTY 1" = 100° MOLASSES CREEK, INC. ACCESS EASEMENTS MOLASSES CREEK CONDOMINIUM 97510XIO.dwg !(JUSTE 11{29/99 09:3 7 JOB NO: 97510 2/2 WASHINGTON ;:: ' ..----e-;--' < ~. ~~- i'--2x4 RAIL v-1 X 3 OR .,. IX4 FENCING ;:: ' ·, .. ' ·' - f;,. 8'-'2'" MAX. 2 X4RAIL ------~ ~POST CAP I" / ~ TREATED 4 X 4 POST \ --+~---------·---~-1-------· --~-1----1--· >-1-++-i-· -----------------------1----- J II ----CEDAR lx3 OR lx4 FENCING (USE NON-CORROSIVE OR GAL V. NAILS) --1--------------1-------------------· -------:,L.. -1-----------1-------------------------- •. .. ' :. f. EMBED POSTS IN CONC. 2'-'2)" i--MIN. (TOP OF CONC. MOUNDED , ,. FOR DRAINAGE) ; ,,---2 X 4 RAIL / ~-' , r ' .. ., ( . "" ' MURRAYFRANl<LYN TITLE I SECTI~ I 6' H. FENCE -STYLE "3 c.> lt=================l I REV. DATE: IIDETAFIL4 I . ll-'2)3-1'2) . FULL CUTOFF LED Li TI LI TY S ER I ES Operating Characteristics (L70 Life Expectancy and Lumen Depreciation Tables) -9 LEADER IN LIGH TING SOLUTIONS ... I DECORATIVE I LED Full C•J·o;f Llt1 1tv Ser,e LED POST TOP L 70 LIFE CURVES WASHINGON PosTLITE" L70 vs Ambient Temperature 350mA (70w) ~ 4s 0 c -··--··-----· e 400c i!:. 35°C L_ ____ _ . • 1 30°( ---;- ' . m 2sec I i C J__ ____ _'_ _______ _,_ __ J__~---'-----'--_J ·~ 20°c i 15"(-i---'----'------~--'---'.---lf----'------1 ~ ,ooc ; .ffi 5oc.l---'----'----'-----'-----~-----i---'---i---l .a 0°(+------------1---------1---1----1 ~ 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 L70 Hours (thousands) ARLINGTON L70 vs Ambient Temperature 350mA (70w) ~ 45°( ~ 40"( !_ 35°( E 3CPC ,!! gi 25"( ·~ 20"( X. 15°( 0 10"( i S"C 1i O"C E < 85 PD5TDP ' . ' ' 90 95 i I I i ' ' ' ' I i I ' I I I ! I . I I I I ! . • I I I 100 105 110 115 120 L70 Hours (thousands) L70 vs Ambient Temperature 350mA (70w) ~ 45°( 12 40"( !:. 35°C i 30°( g' 25°( i 20°( ~ 15°( 0 10"'( 1 5"( :Ei 0"'( ' I ' ' ' I ' ' i I . . :l 85 90 95 100 105 110 LEADER TN LIGHTING SOLlITIONS An ~cultyBrands Company Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. Holophane Headquarters 3825 Columbus Road Granville, OH 43023 Contact your local Holophane factory sales representatM! for applicatia'l assistance, and computer-aided design and cost sttx:lies. HY information on other Holophane products and systems. call the Inside Sales Service Departmerrt. at 866-759-1577. In Canada call 905-707-5830 or fax 905-707-5695. l70 Hours (thousands) . ' . . 115 120 125 130 . I I 125 130 ' I ' I 125 130 VISit our web site at www.holophane.com 02011 Acuity Br;mds Lighting, Inc. All Rights Resefved_ Lumen Depreciation Table Operating Hours 50,000 25,000 .. 25°( 0.88 0.94 ... tn :i C: C: ~ 30•c 0.87 0.93 $'+i ra ·-ra ._ .a~ .. E" a. 35°C 0.86 0.93 <C "'E o{! 40"C 0.84 0.92 Lumen Depreciation Table Operatmg Hours 50,000 25,000 .. 25°C 0.87 0.93 ... tn:i c: c~ 30°C 0.86 0.93 GJ+:i ra ·-m ._ .a~ .. E" a. 35"C 0.85 0.93 <C "'E o{! 40°C 0.83 0.92 Lumen Depreciation Table Operating Hours 50,000 25,000 f 2s0 c 0.86 0.93 ~ "':i ~~~ 30°C 0.85 0.93 ·-1G ... .a~., E "a. 3s 0 c 0.84 0.92 <( "'E o{! 40°C 0.82 0.91 The tables above, on the right, give recommended lumen depreciation values, which may be utilized in lighting design analysis based on typical operating temperature and desired time period. •• -anc, I I est. Printed in USA • I DECORATIVE I LED ;:ull Cutoff Ut1l1ty Se•1e LED POST TOP L 70 LIFE CURVES WASHINGON PosTLITE" L70 vs Ambient Temperature 525mA (105w) ~ 45°( ~----------------,- ~ 40°(t-------~---;::---------------j X. 35°c +---------~---=-----=-------·--··-·--! 30°Ct-------------~-=-... ::---------, a,, 25°( +----------------~---=-----_j C ·~ 20°(+-----------------------< X. 15°(+-----------------------< 0 10°(+-----------------------< ~ S"C+-----------------------< :i:i 0°(+-----------------------< E ' ' ' ' ' <( 50 55 60 65 70 75 L70 Hours (thousands) ARLINGTON L70 vs Ambient Temperature 525mA (105w) ~ 45°c e 40"( X. 35°c E 30"C /! g' 25°( °; 20"( i 15°( 2 lO"C .i 5"( t O"C <( 50 PD STOP ' 55 ~ ~ . --. ' ' 60 65 70 75 L70 Hours (thousands) L70 vs Ambient Temperature 525mA (105w) ~ 45°( ; 40"( 8_ 35"( E 30"( /! g1 25°( i 20°c &_ 15°( 0 10"( i 5"( :s 0°( E <( 50 ~ ' 55 -~ ' 60 65 L70 Hours (thousands) LEADER IN LIG!fllNG SOLUTIONS An «;lcuttyBrands Company Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. Holophane Headquarters 3825 Columbus Road Granville, OH 43023 ~ y<JIO" local Holophane factory sales representative for application assistance. and computer...-.:led desiljn and cost studies. For informabon on other Holophiwle ?OOucts and sy.;tems. call the Inside Sales Sefvice Department at866-759-1577. In Canada call 905-707-5830 er-fax 905-707-5695. 70 75 80 80 80 Visit our web site at www.holophane.com 02011 Acuity Brands Ughting, Inc. AJI Rights Reserved Lumen Depreciation Table Operating Hours 50,000 25,000 .,. DI~ 25°( 0.81 0.90 c.s .... 30°c 0.79 0.90 "~ ~ ·-I'll ... -" ~ " E " c. 35°( 0.77 0.89 <t "-E o,! 40"( 0.75 0.87 Lumen Depreciation Table Operating Hours 50,000 25,000 .., DI; 25°( 0.79 0.90 .!·i! 30"( 0.78 089 -" ~ " E "c. 35°( 0.76 0.88 <t "-E o,! 40"( 0.74 0.87 Lumen Depreciation Table Operating Hours 50,000 25,000 I!! 25"( 0.79 0.89 ~ °':, ;-~,; 30"( 0.76 088 ·-1G .. -" ~ " E "c. 35°( 0.74 0.87 <t "-E oi! 40"( 0.72 0.86 The tables above, on the right, give recommended lumen depreciation values, which may be utilized in lighting design analysis based on typical operating temperature and desired time period. ·~ lUWUl.Ll-W best. Printed in USA • j ,· .. -, ,-,~ Construction Mitigation Description for Elliott Farm The proposed plat of Elliott Farm will involve clearing and grading for the construction of new road improvements, installation of utilities, and other land disturbance activities. The following is a summary of how these activities are expected to be carried out and managed to minimize impacts and comply with applicable rules and regulations during this phase of the project: • Anticipated Construction Schedule: Clearing and grading is likely to begin in June 2016 assuming the entitlements and permits are approved. The bulk of the work should be completed in October 2016. Based on this schedule, we expect that the plat could be ready for recording in late 2016, with home building to commence after the plat is recorded. Model home construction may commence prior to recording as allowed by the City of Renton. • Hours and Days of Operation: The typical hours of operation for construction will be from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. during the winter months. During the summer months, construction will begin at 7 a.m. and may extend to 7 p.m. (pending approval from the City of Renton). The typical work week will be Monday through Friday. Construction work may also take place on Saturday, as normally allowed by the City of Renton, especially during the dry season (April to October) in order to expedite completion of the project during the dry season. • Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: The haul route for importing or exporting materials to and from the site will be determined after coordination with the City of Renton Inspector prior to the start of construction. However, we would anticipate that the haul route would begin at one of the site's existing gravel entrances onto the Renton-Maple Valley Road (WA-169) then travel either east or west depending on the location where the contractor decides where to receive/export materials. • Measures to be Implemented to Minimize Dust, Traffic and Transportation Impacts, Erosion, Mud, Noise, and other Noxious Characteristics: All temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures required by the City of Renton and other agencies will be implemented and maintained (e.g., rock construction entrance, silt fencing, temporary sediment pond, straw mulching and hydro seeding). Also, as required by DOE, a Certified Erosion Control Lead will be assigned to the project and all erosion BMPs will be implemented and maintained as required by the NPDES Permit for the duration of the project. Watering will be implemented, as necessary, to control dust during the summer months and all construction equipment will be equipped with appropriate mufflers to comply with local noise ordinances. • Any Special Hours Proposed for Construction or Hauling (i.e., weekends, late nights): If ii is determined that additional hours are needed to complete the construction, the contractor will coordinate with the City of Renton to obtain approval for such extended hours. -1 -15734.003.doc .,. • Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: A Preliminary Traffic Control Plan has not been prepared at this time. Once the haul route(s) has(have) been approved by the City Public Works Department, a traffic control plan will be prepared in accordance with the City Road Standards and WSDOT guidelines for the frontage improvement work within the WA-169 right-of-way. Frontage improvements will be limited to constructing curb. gutter, planter, and sidewalk along WA-169 where shoulder closures will be implemented. -2 -15734.003.doc DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 1 . Gross area of property: 1. 306,624 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets** Private access easements** Critical Areas* Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 34,665 square feet 0 square feet 28,227 square feet 2. 62,892 3. 243,732 4. 5.60 5. 45 square feet square feet square feet acres units/lots 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 6. 8.04 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways_" Critical areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. ** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. R:\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\Planning\density.doc Last updated: 11/08/2004 1 I Print Form DEPARTMENT OF COMMU .... Y AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT •r· . Cityof, __ __..__..-1 _tl1·r £.JS1 TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 1. Total number of trees over 6" diameter1 , or aider or cottonwood trees at least 8" in diameter on project site 114 trees ___ .:.,;_.:,_ __ 2. 3. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dangerous 2 Trees in proposed public streets Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts Trees in critical areas 3 and buffers Total number of excluded trees: Subtract line 2 from line 1: 6 trees ----- 0 trees --"--- 3 trees __ :;_ __ 74 trees --'--'--- 83 trees ----"-"'--- 31 trees ___ ..;;,.;, __ _ 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4, multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, R-6 or R-8 0.2 in all other residential zones 0.1 in all commercial and industrial zones 5. List the number of 6" in diameter, or alder or cottonwood trees over 8" in diameter that you are proposing5 to retain 4: 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (if line 6 is zero or less, stop here. No replacement trees are required) 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 6.2 trees 0 trees 6.2 trees 74.4 inches Reset Form 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) 2inch inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6: (If remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 37.2 = 37 trees MULIT-FAMIL Y TREE DENSITY 121,587 x 4 ~ 97 trees 1 Measured at 4.5' above grade. 5 000 2 A tree certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous 'to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 Critical areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in RMC 4-3-050. 4 Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. 5 The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-130H7a. 6 When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted. See RMC 4-4-130.H.l.e.(ii) for prohibited types of replacement trees. 1 H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\P1anning\Tree Retention Worksheet.docx 03/2015 Minimum Tree Density A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot (exempting single-family dwellings in R-10 and R-14). The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, or a combination. Detached single-family development 7 : Two (2) significant trees 8 for every five thousand {5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. For example, a lot with 9,600 square feet and a detached single-family house is required to have four (4) significant trees or their equivalent in caliper inches (one or more trees with a combined diameter of 24"). This is determined with the following formula: ( LotArea ) x 2 = Minimum NumberofTrees 5,000sq.ft. Multi-family development (attached dwellings): Four (4) significant trees 8 for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. (_ LotArea ) 4 \ 5,()()()sq.ft. X Minimum Number of Trees Example Tree Density Table: Lot Lot size Min significant New Trees Retained Trees Compliant trees required 1 5,000 2 2 @ 2" caliper 0 Yes 2 10,000 4 0 1 tree (24 caliper Yes inches) 3 15,000 6 2 @ 2" caliper 1 Maple-15 Yes caliper inches 1 Fir-9 caliper inches. 7 Lots developed with detached dwellings in the R-10 and R-14 zoned are exempt from maintaining a minimum number of significant trees onsite, however they are not exempt from the annual tree removal limits. 8 Or the gross equivalent of caliper inches provided by one (1) or more trees. 2 H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Tree Retention Worksheet.docx 03/2015 ; t4 S06 Webdate: 11/09/2012 KlngCounty RECEIVED !\PR 1 3 201\ C!iY Of RENTON Sewer Availability: Department of Permitting and Environmental Review 35030 SE Douglas Street, Suite 210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065-9266 206-296-6600 TTY Relay: 711 www.klngcounty.gov King County Certificate of Sewer Availability PLAN~·!!NG D!Vi51:)N For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. This certificate provides the Public Health -Seattle & King County Department and the Department of Permitting and Environmental Review with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. I _Do not write in this box Number 181 Building Permit D Short Subdivision D Preliminary Plat or PUD D Rezone or other: Name Applicant's name: Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc & Lennon Investment Inc. Proposed use: 45 unit Townhome Project Location (attach map and legal descripllon W necaaaary): 151xx Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR169) Renton WA 98058 PN 222305 9004 Sewer agency information· A2-3 & B2-4 1. D a. Sewer service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing size sewer -------feet from the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed usa. OR 181 b. Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of: 181 (1) 20 feet of sewer trunk or lateral to reach the site; and/or 181 (2) The construction of a collecllon system on the site; and/or 181 (3) Other (describe): Completion of Developer Extension Agreement 2. 181 a. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. OR D b. The sewer system improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment. 3. 181 a. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the disbict or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. OR D b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. Service is subject to the following: a. Connection charge: _,_,.e,e:s~-------------------------- b. Easement(s): -'-'e::.::s=------------------------------- c. Other: Developer Extension Agreement Comments: See Attachments I certify that the above sewer agency Information Is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from dale of signature. Cedar River Water & Sewer District Q/} Lar~S. Krall Agency name ~ye~,~ Sf n ~~ Developer Extension Administrator :.::=::::s ~ l_ ~2/2=-"4/c..:1.::.5 _____ _ TIiie Slgn811Jn,'-Date Check out the Permitting Web site lit www.kinqcounty.gov/permits SewerAvailability Cedarwood SR169 .doc S06 11/09/2012Page 1 I , ADDIDONAL PROVISIONS TO SEWER AND WATER CERTIFICATE OF AVAILABILITY The following terms and conditions are hereby made a part of and incorporated by references into the certificate of availability to which it is attached. A. Certificate Not a Contract. This certificate does not constitute a contract for water or sewer ("Utility") connections. Utility connections to the property will be considered by the Utility provider only after (a) the full payment of the Utility provider's connection charges and the ordering of service; or (b) the owner has agreed .in writing to the terms of the Utility provider's then current application form for constructing extensions to its Utility systems, which form, in it's sole discretion, may contain such additional conditions as the Utility provider may require. B. No Guarantee. The Utility provider issues certificates of availability based upon a brief analysis of the capacity of its general and local facilities and upon information provided by fue property owner. Certificates are not intended (i) to guaranteethai Utility service is feasible or that improvements other than those listed on the face of the certificate to which this is attached will not be required, or (ii) to reserve capacity in any part of its Utility systems. C. Unavailability of Water. The Utility provider shall not be responsible for the unavailability of Utility service as a result of events beyond its control, including, but not limited to, earthquakes, slides, floods and other acts of God, the unavailability of government permits and approvals, SEP A requirements, the issuance of limitations, restrictions, bans, moratoriums and other orders of government entities of courts. D. Fees and Charges. Utility connections to the subject property are subject to the fees and charges of the Utility provider. These may include connection charges, reimbursement charges, surcharges and other charges of the Utility provider. The amount of connection charges may be increased to include the costs of facilities determined to be necessary in the future. It is the owner's responsibility to check with the Utility provider in advance to determine the total amount due for the connection sought. Rates and charges may change from time to time by resolution of the Board of Commissioners. E. Endangered Species Act. The listing of Chinook and other species of salmon as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act has created the likelihood of future regulations and restrictions that may restrict or even prolnbit the Utility provider from allowing additional connections to its Utility system. All representations and obligations contained in this certificate are subject to all such restrictions and prohibitions ("ESA Restrictions"). Any person or entity relying on this Certificate for any reason ( 1) accepts the same subject to all ESA restrictions; and (2) releases the Utility provider from all damages of every description arising from or out of the ESA Restrictions. In the event that ESA Restrictions impose conditions on the connections anticipated under this Certificate which increase the cost of providing such service, such increases shall be the sole responsibility of the property owner. F. Term. This Certificate shall terminate and shall have no force or effect one(!) year from its date of issuance. \\crwsddcO I \compan)'lofficelfoons & templales\customa fomlsladditional provisions cc:rtificare of avail .doc WATER CERTIFICATE OF AVAILABILITY ATTACHMENT The following terms and. conditions are hereby made a part of and incorporated by references into the certificate of availability to which it is attached. 1. Fire flow information is determined by use of a hydraulic model under maximum day demand conditions. Actual fire flows may vary due to water system configuration changes, time of day, demands on system, and operational parameters. 2. Cedar River is a Seattle utilities purveyor. Wetland & Aquatic Sciences Wildlife Ecology Landscape Architecture TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: September 8, 2015 To: Todd Levitt, Pacific Properties, Inc. From: Chris Wright, Raedeke Associates, Inc. Re: Elliott Farm -Wetland Hydrologic Impacts (RAI #2012-024-002) Dear Todd, At your request we have reviewed the potential hydrologic impacts to the wetland on the Elliot Farm site resulting from the proposed development of the parcel. We based our analysis of potential impacts on information gathered during site visits and basin boundary maps and calculations provided by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2015). Development and grading of the Elliot Farm parcel would result in the redirecting of water from a portion of the watershed of the on-site wetland. The wetland located partially on the Elliot Farm parcel lies within an approximately 7.2 acre basin. Development of the site would divert drainage from 0.4 acres of the basin away from the wetland, which represents approximately 5.6% of the total contributing area of the wetland. Areas are based on the Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (2015) wetland basin map ( attached). The portion of the basin that occurs on the Elliot Farm parcel is a relatively flat, shrub covered area that currently intercepts a portion of the potential hydrology available to the wetland. The hydrologic support provided to the wetland from this portion of the basin is likely greatest during the wetter months of the year when the wetland is receiving greater amounts of water from the more steeply sloped land to the south and west. The total area to be diverted away from the wetland represents less than 10% of the total basin area of the wetland. It is likely that the majority of the hydrologic input to the wetland is derived from the steeply sloping ground to the south and west of the wetland and that the relatively flat area to the north and east of the wetland contributes a much smaller volume of water. Thus we do not expect the proposed diversion to result in a substantial change in the flow available to the wetland. 2111 N. NorthgateWaySte. 219 Seattle, WA 98133 206-525-8122 www.raedeke.com September 8, 2015 Mr. Todd Levitt Page 2 LIMITATIONS • We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of Pacific Properties, Inc. and their consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information, analysis, or conclusions contained herein without permission from Pacific Properties, Inc. The determination of ecological system classifications, functions, values, and boundaries is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach different conclusions. With regard to wetlands and streams, the final determination of their boundaries for regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various resource agencies that regulate development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of such agency determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or construction activities. We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our field, and that this work was prepared substantially in accordance with then-current technical guidelines and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of our analysis of the information provided by the project proponents and their consultants, together with information gathered in the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any questions about this information, please call me at (206) 525-8122. LITERATURE CITED Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2015. Wetland Drainage Area Map Elliot Farm. Received September 4, 2015. \ ) ( / / / / ,_ ) / ,,. -, l' () :.:::: 15734 1 _1 I / / I / ""<l ....... ~ ,0 l'TI () m '8215 1mc AVE~UC SCU!i-l Kf~l. WA 9Ba5] (425) 25' -6222 (4l5) 151-Bl~l f/,X ;;;;,;---;-,oa,, "'" '"""'~ er..,~,,.,r ,.,,. __ , ... ,, '"" • -·-..m.. , ... ~ I ! I For. Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bel-Red Road, Suite 21 Bellevue, WA 98007 ' I .. -""" I t .. Wetland Oranage Area Map Eliott Farm DRAFT COVENANT FOR VACTION OF DIRECT SR-169 ACCESS PLAT OF ELLIOTI FARMS THE CITY OF RENTON, AT THE REQUEST OF THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, MAY MODIFY, VACATE, AND/OR ELIMINATE THE DIRECT ACCESS CONNECTION TO STATE ROUTE 169, IN THE EVENT THAT DIRECT ACCESS FROM THE PLAT TO STATE ROUTE 169 IS PROVIDED VIA A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER AND ACROSS THE MOLASSES CREEK CONDOMINIUMS PROPERTY LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE PLAT (TPN: 556890-0000). City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 June 15, 2016 HAND DELIVERY CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING RE: Request for Modification for Modified Public Road Cross Sections Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat King County Parcel No. 222305-9004 City of Renton File No. LUA 15-000242 Our Job No. 15374 On behalf of Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., and Lennon Investment, Inc., we are requesting a modification of the City of Renton Street Standards to allow a modified public road design to serve the proposed residential subdivision of Elliott Farms. The project is intended to be a preliminary plat consisting of 45 single-family townhouse dwellings that will be attached in groupings of two and three units. The site will access via SR-169 with a public road segment that will connect to the private road in the Molasses Creek Condominiums parcel. The new intersection at SR-169 will be a right-in/right-out configuration. The following items are enclosed for your review: 1. One (1) Modification Request Narrative 2. One (1) Vicinity Map 3. One (1) set of the 11-x 17-inch reduced Preliminary Plat Plan Set, including: a. Cover Sheet b. Preliminary Plat Map c. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan d. Preliminary Road Plan and Profile e. Preliminary SR-169 Road Improvement Plan I. SR-169 Channelization Plan by TENW dated June 3, 2016 Please initiate your review of this modification at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at this office. IH/kb Respectfully, Ivana Halvorsen Senior Planner 15734c.003.doc enc: As Noted cc: Todd Levitt, Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. Rick Lennon, Lennon Investment, Inc. Mark Sumrok, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com ROAD STANDARDS MODIFICATION NARRATIVE ELLIOT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT Prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. April 10, 2015 Revised June 15, 2016 SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located east of the Molasses Creek Condominium development on Maple Valley-Black Diamond Road (SR-169). The site is undeveloped and contains a wetland and a required buffer. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal is to subdivide the subject property into 45 residential lots that will support zero-lot line townhomes. The development will be comprised of attached homes in two-and three-unit buildings with contained parking and a public road. A development agreement between the developer and the City of Renton is enclosed that documents the density of the project is to be capped at 45 units, which is consistent with the proposed site plan. ACCESS: The proposed development's primary access will be a public road segment from SR-169 that connects to an existing private lane that runs through Molasses Creek Condominiums. The subject property has easement rights to use the existing private road. The project will construct a new public road segment that will serve the proposed 45 units with a right-in-right-out connection to SR-169. The public road is proposed to consist of several different cross sections to accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, street trees, street lights. Please see Sheet 4 for the site plan with all of the public road cross sections proposed. MODIFICATION REQUEST Below in Italics, is the standard by which a Modification Request can be considered by the City along with the applicant's responses as to how each criterion is met: Decision Criteria: Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided he/she shall first find that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical, that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan is met and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such modification: a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives; Response: The proposal to develop the subject property with 45 homes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations of the site. Neighborhood connectivity is facilitated by the construction of a new public road segment that will connect to the existing Molasses Creek private road into the site. The following Comprehensive Plan Objectives and Policies support development of the site as proposed with 45 units and the modified public road section: • Objective LU-FF: The project proposes urban density with efficient land utilization and extends a neighborhood feel of the existing neighborhood. -1 -15734.005.doc • Policy LU-140: The project will infill with similar development adjacent to an existing development served by the connecting road system. • Policy LU-141: The project proposes a logical extension of existing development that is consistent and complimentary to the development through which it accesses. b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; Response: The new public road segment will connect to an existing private road that serves Molasses Creek Condominiums. The homeowners of the new project will enter into an agreement with the Molasses Creek Homeowner's Association for their proportionate share of maintenance of the off-site private road network. An easement already exists to extend private access through Molasses Creek Condominiums to the site. The proposed roadway will provide a paved width of 20 feet with sidewalks that are separated from the vehicle lanes for most of the length. Each townhome unit will have two parking spaces. c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; Response: The connection to the existing private road was previously contemplated and an easement was created for the purpose. There is no injury to surrounding properties from the public road segment that will connect to the existing private road as the extension was previously planned and an easement exists for access from the project through Molasses Creek Condominiums. d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; Response: The intent of the Code is to have roads that can provide safe and maintainable access to development. The proposed modified public road design will conform to the need for pedestrian facilities as well as amenities such as street trees and street lighting. The public street will be dedicated to the City of Renton upon recording of the final plat. Public easements will provide maintainable areas for amenities that are outside of the right-of-way of the new public street. e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and Response: The modified road sections are necessary due to the limited development area of the site. The site is constrained by SR-169 to the north and a wetland to the south. The narrow development area can only be served by a "spine road" with lots on either side. The proposed street sections adequately accommodate sidewalks or connections to trails, street trees, street lights, and a 20-foot wide travel way. In some areas, the modified street section includes street trees and street lights in an easement. f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Response: No adverse impacts would result from the new public road's connectino to the existing private road. Once extended to the subject property as it was originally intended, the public/private road system will serve its maximum number of residents. -2 -15734.005.doc REFERENCE: King County Department of Assessments (Dec. 2011) Scale: Horizontal: N. T.S. Vertical: NIA 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES P:\ 15000s\15734\exhibit\.graphics\ 15734 amap.cdr For: ELLIOT FARM RENTON, WASHINGTON Title: ASSESSOR MAP Job Number 15734 DATE: 03120115 N ~J~ w'."."~E \~ ~ s f -200' 0 100· 2r· 1 I I ·r ------- COVER SI-EET OF ELLIOTT FARMS A PORTION OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 23 N., RANGE 05 E., W.M. RENTON. WASHINGTON J FiENr0ry~~~--~ ~ . ~ Flo40 (W,i_ __ jl .· . ""'""' ; , -. ___ !!M'1 1 169) ~ --\\. ,;:• X. \'"'"' "" ·-,/Si'~. ,-,~l®["*~d ;f:'':"~=l·°'u .. ti Jj~ ----_' 1--, , ~I .,:;'.r';, f/ >"-..::-<-"'* · '· I :,_;·v,· l~~i., 1$t \·@!~~--~ .,._ __ ~~~-tt? fl~~ ,, ;' , ,,,;mTI1iiir~. _· I VICNTYMAP NOTES 1 T.U f: 222J05-9004 -~ 2. CROSS SITE ~ 26'1,5113 S.F. (6.07 AC) ~ SffE AOORESS: N/A 4. EXISTINC USE. VACANT SIIICL( FNilll.Y 5 PROPOSED US[: 45 2ERO LOI L'"[ IOilES 6. UISnttG ZONING: R-14 (I• DU/ACRE) 7 EXISTtMG COMPREHENSIV£ PV,N OESIGNATN)N: ~ / . •. " "... ' --·---•. ,t f>RJV A TE ACQESS __ ~· • , . --=:::_-:..._-:__ -----:...~--==-----__: ---. --->..:..... 8 REOUIR'EO IMN. LOT WOTH: JO f[ET /COIN:R 40 f[Ef LEGAL DE9CRPTlON """"""""""' PMCEL A Of" KttG CCUNT'r a:ltHlN!J Ult£ M>.k.lSTIIIEMT 'fl. Lt5Ul113 RECOAllttC NO. 9510179023 SURVEY DA TIJM HORllOlfl""LDIITIAI: HORIZONToll 0,.11.11 IS tiAD 198J(91) P{R CITY Of FICNTOM. (J1'r Of ROITDN CONfROl P(afl N:1. 18$7 11AS 11(1.t) f(fl POSIIION AND A 1,11,E E£Tl£:CM DTY Of ROmlN CCMROL POINT MO. \&-40 #Ill caffllOI. POINT Jj(), 1860 *"5 ~LD m~ AOTATION. BEINC S86'32'2IT """"''""" ',{RI« ()IITUU FOR !HS SIT[ IS IIAYO 1!168 P{R CITY or R(l,fll'.JJI. OTY IY A(lfl'OII CCMROl PC9IT NO. 2192 WAS IICLO FOR [l!VATM)I, 8(1NC $16.!0SI F£ET[NA\11e8) SH3:TNlEX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 OF OF OF OF OF OF OF 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 AREAS L.EOEtO COVER SHEET PRELIMINARY PLAT PRELIMINARY ONSITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PRELIMINARY ON SITE ROAD PLAN AND PROFILE PRELIMINARY SR-169 ROAD PLAN PRELIMINARY UTILmES PLAN PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY-CLEARING PLAN SOUAR[ f"O(Jl•GE OF LAND IN l'iClLA~[I ,~.747 ~' SOUARE <OOT'-GE OF l.•hD IN S'.E£P S"-JPE 12.460 :;, F SOUAR[ FO{,TACE or l).t.0 IN SlrFER 19.'56 SF SQUARE FOC,T•(,E OF l.A'ID IN ~~6LIC 3T~EETS ;us:, '.'.f $QUA~[ F(H)T,\CE o, LAkD IN 0~1-1,rt: •c•:[~5 OAS01,[~TS C SF 5c,uAqE FOOTI.G[ C•F L)J,Q IIJ 0 AS51.'[ OH~, $Pl,,([ 00.l.ll ,, F (JP.ACTS A. [•. f Ii Gj SOllARf FOOT.:.GF Cf L!lt.U IN ,.i,;TUR"1 OViti SHCf 4?_g1s ~F ilRJ>Cl H) F~f."~;:;c::y--~ 9. PROPOS£0 MIN. LOT MOTH: 30 f[Ef 10. REOUIRCD IIIN LOT OEPTH· 60 ftET I 1. l'ROPOSED MIN LOT DEPTH, 69 f[Ef --------------- 12 CROSS OENSITY: 7.8 DU/ACRC I~. N[T OEl'ISITI'! 8.04 00/lrCRE 1'. RCOUIRED IMN. S[TBI.CKS: 11 --• /) ' ----' I . . -/ / I --'" / , I~ _ _./ \ v ..-\ --/--'-'"-I I I I I I /",-/'. \--~' = --"c--~---. I ' I'\ '---'----'--I/ / I I \-· /. '-"', / "•\ , '\ \ , I ;' , , '--"----C ______ I___ I .L____! \I '1-~ '" \ \ I I ;, "-92;--. ~--"-,----_)/---ti<~/ ~~-1 I.. /f I ', ' ', ' '· ' ( -,' "· ' ' ,' ' ' ' -, -- ' ' ' '"-,_ ' -' . [7 --/ ', / / > \::, ; I' ' --, I \ -----\ ..--,,, \' 1 ; '' V Y ' -J..._ I I / •, ~-\ I / • ',, ' --I '' / /-...-.....r-.!.. l_~___.,.1-I I, ~/ ---/ I y' • _.>, _. - /~,,II\ I /' \ • .-\ J/ 1 ~-' ·--y1 ' I , .• I , ' I ,, ''/\/ / \.-..,,-\ \ / ( /' / / / \ \ \ \/ \ / /'' \ / ;'\\,.,,,.,// \;,--'( ,,/ ~ OWNERS/DEVB.OPERS I I ~/Sl0£ STRE(T· 15 Ft[T GARI.GE: 20 f[(T IMTER'll'.lR: • FEET REAR: 10 HET 15. Woll 8AS£ HEIGHT or 9JILDINGS: JO f[Ef 1G t,AA)j 8UILDll'fG COY(RA(;(c G5 PERC[NT 17. Woll lMPEIMOUS COl/£R.liGE: 80 f'ERCENI 16 MIN OPEN SPAC[: J50 Sf /1,nr 19. IMN PRIV.l,T[ YARD J.R(A; 250 Sf 20. SOURCE Of" EM)JNCIAAY IINO TOPOGIW'tfr· f£LO Y(Rlf"EO 8Y IIAAGHAUS£N CONSUlrt.G ENGlNEEl!S. fDlR\INt!" 2015 l1Tl.lTES/SEFMCE$ W.1.~/S[IIIE/1 POWER/G,IS; ""' flRE: =· CCDAR /IIVEll WATCR .I.NJ SEWER ~STRICT 1&121 S.E. f'ETROVITSK1' RO,,O RCNTON, WA !l80!i8 (425) 255-6370 P\JGEI SOUMll ('4CRCY 8001 SOUTH 212TH STREET k[NT. W.1. 98032 (253) 395-7065 C[NlU/IY LINK 23.315 66TH ol.'ot:NUE SOUTH kENT. W.1. 98032 (25ll :m-5388 CITY OF" RCNTON -FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU I 055 SOUTH GJWlY WAY RCNlON. WA 98055 ('2~) •J0-70IIO RENTON SCHOOi. DISTRl:T J40l JOO SW 7TH Sll!EET RENTON. WA 98057 (•25) 2~-2300 1010 BEU.-RED R0,1,1). SUITE 200 ~1~ S.E. DlWJ POWELL ROIO C£!WI RIVER UCHTfOOl, LLC I LEN!Oi IIM:STMENTS. NC. BEU.EWE. WA. 9$007 FAt.L CITY, P 98024 {425) 6'4-4-2J23 - CONT.-.CT: TODD l£VITT CIJH'TACT: P,t,TI!ICI( LEIIIION ENGtEER/PLAN'EA/SUR\IEYOFI BliRCtWISCN CONSULTltte: E!IIGlfilEERS. IMC. 18215 72ND AV£. SOJTH Kr,,rl, WA. 98032 (42~) 251-6222 FAX (425) 2~1-11782 co,n"(r: 111,1. Q!IJ88/-HAI.YORSEN/BRW<I GUOOI.Y WETLAND BIOLOGIST R4EDCKE ASSOClliTES. INC. !r.ilO STOtl[ 1'YENUE NORTH SU,OLE. P 9l1103 (206} 52~·8122 FU (206) 526-2880 TAAFRC ENGtEER TRANSPORTATION EffGll«:ERING NORTHWEST. U.C 816 -6TH STl!C[T SOUTH KIRKLN(I, WA 98015 (425) 250-5001 fAX (425) 889-836!1 CONT.OCT: J£F"f t9iffilE/CHR1S EIIC!(Ef GE01ECH TERRA "5SOQliTES. JI.IC. 1P.125Wll.l.OWS~. Sl)1'( 101 ICIIKlAIID.W#I IJ8DJ.4 {425) 821-nn fAX (425) 821-4"4 AACHTECT GMS ARCHTECTURN.. GROUP 111CM -IJGTII Pl.AC£ NE. sure ,, 9£U.EYI£. WA 980re {425) 644-14-46 CONTlrCT: ~ GU.STROii TRAFFIC ENGINEER TRNilSPOl!T.I.TIOII [JtGllt[(RIJIG ~ST. U.C 816 -6TH S1R£ET SOUTH IOIIIU.ANO. WI, 9803.3 {'25) 250-5001 FAX (425) 889-8369 a:HrACT: JEf"F Hol.l'kE AABOAIST GRCEN"OREST INC. •:>47 SOUTH LUCILE Slfl(£1 SU.TILE. W.I. 98116 (206) 723-06!,6 COHT.1.CT: f.l.YERO Gll[ENF"OREST LAfll)SCAfE ARCHTECT ~ a .I.SSOCIAfES 600 N B1,TH STR££T, SUITE 102 SEliTTLE. WI, 98103-3826 (206) 782-3650 FAX (206) 782-3675 COffTACT: KRISTEN WNOOUIST "" < fl.I! iS :i oo I n . i !!• ii.; H! ~ ~ HI_ ~ ~ :El:I: i n;i; 5 :.!:.!:.! li' :,.;::.i , I 0 ' :I ~ ~ i ~jl ~ ~ !lf z @ ~ 0 !! 8 • < ' " ~ 'z' , . ' £ '- ~ ' , , ' ~ l ~ I" I i ! ! l j .e I ~~ 5 !~ :;: ., W X o!z ~ 0::::: !'> I~ ~~Ng g~ :~~:;; 5! - ~: _!. _!. ~0 I" ,..._ ~ ~ f ~~ ~ ..:;;:;-.,., _,~ N z N N :i:'=:, ttl"-'v.:::_. u,n 1 ~ ~ Y. ~ ::· s t'-~'e ,.,~ ... I' ::, \ ;; 11111' ffi :;: ~ l 0 •' - CITY FLE NO LUA15-000242 l ~ 1-": ~ i le, .l -I '. ~ -I .la j ... ,_ a: t5 <( ;;:; ~ w a: ... ~ ' w "' 0 !'1l ~ SWHV.l .LJ,0177:il ::IO 1'--.S ll'ld -1llld Ill HI l'W ~l/rl/0 Si/VS Qln(I SJ.l(lfft» /.10 ald a1SII\JII HI HI l'W ~l/rl:/1 g,/1/l Ql.1¥0 SJ.Nlflr'IO:l /.10 ald a3So\Ji:I lfl HI rw 111/,;1/9 ;~ Zz ~ ~~ ~ !i_ "' ti "ONI 'SJ.N3rtl.S3ANI NONN3l OIV o,i '!~ 1:13M:11:1Va3o ·! ;c, :i§ / <t, I $ ' ,/~ I ~ I 1~ i" I I / ! I I -;. ~~~l~~J~~~f~~~~~~~ij~~~ w i ~ -§ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~,~ <( ~ " " ············~••§'§'''"" g i ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ -§ -~n~~c~~~~=~~!~~~~~~N~~ •I 'I /" ~ ~~ ~~ '- 'I:! . ;f I i ... <( ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I ~/ ·/ ' / I I I ' . / .' if ?' i J / / I ____ / / 2 \~,_,_;: '/ - .::.:-: I 1:) "'T c_, ((:, :;_· v-., tj ~ / (.L -4: ' (_'. (I / r/) n./ I , I _-· ~ en cy, I_;")/ </ I , I I I I I I I I iol :i w al • • ~ ~ ! i i § § i I i / o:T/T1It "~ 53JIN:13S W1N]l'Ut00W,I] ·~u.JN:tns ~ ,1, '~NINNVld OIM '~N1~33Nl~Nl lWJ . .. ''"!l .. A • --' . i 0 X\IJ lBLs-1,;z(r;zv) . 0 .os-.1 ---i:i,· ~3a\13 I lll9-it;l(t;;lt) \ ,Aa, r<>,uolµOH iv--U""J(J l£OB6 'IN. 'lN]~ Hr-i:-~ HHlOS ]nN]A\I ONll Sll8l ,s,1)1,,1-10~ ;o,o,s -·,~•.ua ~ ; ~-~~-;:-!;; ; i • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ii i ~~~~~Hi i i ..... u o ...... ',!>,: i --i --} i , / I .J (----------- ' \ \ /--------- ~------ r----------- I I I -----------, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --[------- I I I -~------t--- 1 I r--- ~-------- L ,. C: I ' I I ' I 1/', r , S.MIV.i J,.J,01773 =lO ·oNI 'S1N3V'l1S3ANI NONN31 ON\f N\fld 30\fNl\flla GN\f ONIOVl:IO 311SNO At!VNll'fl3tld 011 '100:ilHOll t13Altl t!V030 ' ~ ~ 4 z ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 4 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ H! o._ / I I 1/iMAn~ 1~1.1 Yrt.,,,.111a" c;,'si·-'11ml ,,m~"'C' JJ,) a:d c:Lolld 9s:l,C •11J>a SJ/ll~NC:, '1'J d,J ciSV,J~ j "" ~fi'~u: g .• • I .... <> .. ., •• '/ ,cc I I ' / I ! I / I I I I / ~ ! I w I "' I 0 ' f/1 ~ / ;~ ~ iij I r.. ~ ~/ ~ ~ !! 0 ~! I I ~~ ~~ i I I < i I I· I I ' I I ,/ I -- / I I f-/ I I I ! . I I / / I ' I I I ; I I I •"111.l ~' 'i '-l •I«: I o,. Hi ,-.,, :;;1:'i11, Ill -. <;1/£~-, 111 ,., s,:~, 'a I I u/1e' '?-co·, ,,J,o::: .. ,-·-/ 80 -/ --- / ,/ I -I ·- I I i ' / l ' /' / ,, ' ~/ I "'~ :...---=="'1--r· ' ' ' ' : ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' -----------;:, ~- / =-,-1!/' ' ~ 1~1 ~ ~ I ' '-+---------L.j·--=J ------: ' --------+--r:!~L -~---+- ' C ' Ii .. 1.1 ~~ ' I/ ) /<_ " ,-11,,,,y -,--""'''" ' < I ' ' ' --_/_ 'i ,. ' ' ' 1v1,u~111,_1~1.o.~1;; '-''ii v-.~1,, ,mv--,Nk,1111•,ril ''"'-, A•/.I ,;!~l'J , <:;, (';-;~:, :(s,:v· 7 \Cbl' vi/, ·:r-n-. Hl('('i'-, ~·-,t,J],W ,:'l.7i ,:;!(?L / / /// / J ' r I I I I I. 7 ~0·, "-<--------------tx , __________ '° _____ ---:' ~ ! --~/ , :.__"'-j, • I "< / ' / / J.--- L C uu ' I ' I ' I , I " II i ' 0 i ~ ~ ~ i ! I 8 ,_ C s I £ ~ ~ ~ ' ! § 0 § 1 :i:-2 :,,. g ' I CD . ' ¢ IJJ g g ' ~ , ,, _-:]--------r J T-1, 'I If ~ ----t m. '"' ~ i:~ ---'------' - II :~: I"· "~ ... ~ j ~§ t a • ---'------' -----r tll.!' '." ~ '£1"" ITr,il ~'.'- '\ !' en ---+ _t} l "• ~~ :·:~11 I ~~~ i ' ~;;~ ~-~i ~~ II ,. Io. ~' 0 .. -~ ! ' l" ' -, f~ ~]! C;i IJiil r: i~ 1: ~ cci'> IE ~er, ;;;11r1 --1"; ]~ ! J_j_ -.-- I-. --! !I~ ~~ F ,, ~=N' ~-~l ;~i "'· ~-: i -· t'.:. s ' I ~ ~ I :c,;_ l!'.i s ~ "6 .,, ~ I G ' ! -~ l~ ~~ i: :':'ii! TILl s ; l] l ! Ii~"' ! I ~~-- i : ::i1·-·- '" _--------,rr i ''" c.__93:0,~ 9~8 ----.rr i "" 9'_1Ji" '" ~ i 92•J 95.07 92 ') .. i ·o, ~ 9U2 ·o: & -gs-:; +~ ~ 10)9 T@ 9J 3 100.48 91 2 -99~"5 § 90 I --;m~- 9C 5 .. i 9(,_9 94.82 "' § " ' 92.84 I ! s Rf! LINE ST.t.•11+8Hl4 a 8 i (1 i I I I j I ' i 8 I '· I I I I I I I \ I I ' S. ~ / --,~ s II EIX.E or E•. PN/£1,j[l,fT f'VI ST• • 2+602J P';I ':L['/ -·el~ PffOPffifY LINE STA•S+OO 1MT(l!S£CTION Al.LEV J Sl,..5+16.08 El•94.2J BV( S: 6+UU 00 BVC[ <J5 07 .1K1'£11StCTION IIU£T 2 SJA.,6+~5.79 E~4tlif0C.OO Evn· %82 a, !~ ?:i' ~~ ;~---~j J,JCS· 8+29 19 °B'i'.:t· 10007 l\l('.; ·:+~9 /~ cvcE· g.,·34 - IM1'£RSEC~ ALI..E'!' 1 ST.t.•9+6!.23 EL•99.28 P\ol •;TA " 11 <WOO ----,;,~,TL[,· -9: 46 - '\~ PVI ST~" 1;,+04 47 I .L V " SNJCUT LIN[ s s II a ii ~t~~ ii;~~~ .;ii;j '" ,~~5 ~;~;; ~·~7~f ~t~r: a ··~j- ~~g ii ~~ ,\ti·, ! I - -- I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I ,- v---/ --~, ___ ..J/ ) / -------...... ~ y --;;,--~ --=--..... I'"/ ./ I .;/ ,---..... I I I "· ~ ,,,,. ..... ,,,. "J I / !:! ij ~ 8 Iii ' /~ !!l Ii ~ I --_J - '(-( " /) I I I r I I I I l II Ir--·-·:, ~ ,, In 8 § f -< ) 91 o i"" ..... / I I 100.18 1-. ~ (- 2_1 _ _1_ "" ' cSi~ 1, J),s I (,. ,i i I .;. I m s ~ ; ~ \ -~· g 0, 1'; m;t I c:""' i~ ' ~ 8 / ·/ I• ' =,; ~ ~~ I U)~~ ,~'7. !!! ~."' loo \ 7' "" / · IE ; 11. ii , 11:I ,~ .:.: I I O :S,/ , "';,,_, / i} ;!/-' -.. re, e "!i' ;c(-/ -,; I. 1 d' ~I , I; §Ji "'·' ~/ ~1 1'1 ':"': ' I ' I :,,. '/i. I '' ' ' I I I I :/i i ~ /; I ' ' I 0 .... C ,, "'~ ;:: ~ t I "'S"'~ ~z 0~ 2 0 "' ~ ij ~ ~~ §! ;~ ~ 2 c., z ~z ~ ii! 0 : I: I I ,; ~-j -.~ ~~ ~ .;;;~ ~~ :c;i ~~ " J a \-,~~r?~CT~(Xl 00 P\11 [LE~· ~ 99 2il ENO Of PAVlltC pV1 :1~; Zl+IY,5 ---p,;,u~-9BL _.,,,,,,_ ~ rn ~ g ~ )11 ~ § II 8 Ill s II '°i '~ ! 'I~ I s 8 a S 11 9 ~ -~ I , 10 . ' 3 0 ! JO(J _._ :,,, ,); <, 15734 -· 4.,. 7 1--< ';1? ·-mi,- " '• ' "' '1-o ~ I .RACl LINl -.-r "· -- I ~lif1f I! \'t 9_1_2_ 9410 90 S "" ;~L- I r s HA . -1 _IH_l Seo .. q..G ;'(/.$' 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH ~ --- ~~ KENT. WA 98032 o,,.,.~ .........61... Ho,-;1onto1 ;r_ ~: . ~ i:~;?i;: =~;~i FAX Che<'od _BL ,·._5a· 0 • /i llppro-.ood !H \fart,<Ol ~ .,."': CML ENGINEERING. ~ Pl/INNING. 1"•!>" "(,._ 't."<-'° Sl!Rv{YING. [NVIR()tN[Nl"-1. 5(FIYIC[S Dole .l/)'i'~ '"'a n,:.1\l I •I' • .. IS/_14'(·••1, . -1,4 ,,•µ d~: [1~!·· .• ,.,e P .. , C ·:c IC 2 i8 f'~ ,_,", I A_1o_,t.L' I _,/ r!' 8 ,-~=,.,,.,s,-¥{' ' ;1:; _ ST.t.•301'00.00 •96."8 ~ ~ J E II F~II ~;j 8 s s Slb31+74.29 EL•93.21 DC) Of IICWl¥!AY Ill s Fer, II ~ 8 ~~ ' (.> -s i / ------;.. ~ I~ 9'·:' _ .!,----/ .. ' IJ'IT(IISECTION AU.E'V 3 STA-~+00.00 H•9'!.2J ~ ~ //,;,~~-~+9\29 .~·91 J7 i . I 1 '" I ' ! L__----" 8 II 8 6/1,/16 A. 1H IH 7/l]/15 AJ 1H 1H t;1J11, I ,.. 1H I 1H No. I Dole I~ IC~d,j_~ Till> II !! F1£111SCD PER err, COIM:NTS D,\l[D 2/1/16 R£YISCO PER CIT¥ COIM:"1'S l».TED V~/1~ PRO._. Pl,\.! Sl911fll<. - CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, LLC AND PAELMNARY ON SITE ROAD PLAN AND PROFLE LENNON INVESTMENTS, INCO OF ELUOTT FARMS 1 PRELIMINARY SR-169 ROAD PLAN OF -=EL=UOTT FARMS A PORTION OF SECTION 22. TOWNSHP 23 N., RANGE 05 E., W.M. BENTON. WASHINGTON. '· ; ! :1 f --_________________________________________________________________________ [l( EDGE_ OF_ PA'¥tMEl<II MAPLE VALLEY HWY (WA-169) ::=;_ ,-3J'no US ll'EOT S\SrMtNT ,----- .,," 1 ~'" 'El "' ss''°''"' -1~· )RAtlO,._,l lA5Cf.lEMT I P£F ~30~0Cl '7~ ' 1M ,~ 1 :,--Jrrnrn11, o,u i"' 8:1 ~:; ~ii 2 b; ,02 21e ~ ;·I, ii~--=,§-;:r-..... '"' E<(C{{C,:7 PIV;.M£KT E> 'UtlNE lX 0<]'.,s - ,>,(\,.~I. ---c.eia:\ (ft,•,•~ ,;,' 0., I - ACCE"o~. LAtcD'.i:APE, PAF~l~G.- ~MERG[r,:, -uRM~R,)UtW ,, ,,TILI-Y cASE',IH,T "~C /ICJJOOCC10%94C ~ CABLE Tl \'J.l!I ' / / ;POWE~ l<AAH0J:~ _I /I -~-- PIIQPQSED 12" SD (NP) .~ ~TC~ PROPOSED 24" SD o O.JOI fTrP: ~--9'2~ j;o, vi:": :;,1~ i'--[ [) rocu...-: ~~ &:I"' :r' !';: "-;::. ,Lr l[)C-:. D" ,pq(JfCSED I.,. r " I' i'[ . [ /_"_"""'-.../ ~-~--1-U .11'17Jlll! I~ ,.' ye.-\,,"' ,-,.-~~'.~"'~~c.cct== ____ c-: __ ---- ~, ~/ ,)•~··ce·'---~=r-------=== -, .,__,., \ ::. ~ ,~ ,,,]ii:; -:;;;,,;: -~ • C"",, ,,,, ,,C: .:::=:, ~, -,, - ;.c . ~ • • --···-----r ... '~,c,,ee-/-~-~--=--~---~~:.:;"::.::-·----J~;_-J{_:fi\P '1/.;/ ~ _ .t ---'2-• 1 --_------~---·-_-, -E~ "rR~--:;;;;-,--,;;_~-~'::!!.;j!f.:·c-··-·,, '-,, • /1-/,/i , -__ , I I C!L I 12° TWO WAY T1.J!N I.Nit s· s· m .. 00- ... ml "I ·J ,L I I ;I "I •I . . g "I al I ! o.j ,1 -..... 3HOO 32fflO 11' TAAl'Cl I.Nit tW..f RK'.HT-Of-'IIAY (VARIES) ~, SlDEWAI.K -j-:.:. !I ~r-- = = c= = = = 1 1\.~ -.. _ INSTALL NCW PAVCIIENT ~ "'"" "" '""''" """""' """"' ""' PAVEMENT S£CT1Ql,t 0£SIGN ANO Q.JnER PER C.O.R OR ME£T N#:1 lillrTCH STAND.I.ROS EXISTII«. PA~l(l """' SR 169 -MAPLE VALLEY HKlHWA Y r"1T :,') ~-:A_[ LEXISTlttC GIWI: AT f"I.OWI.N: Of HJTU'it CURB -------------------- SR 169 -MAPLE VAL.LEY HKlHWAY >":50' , 1'~5 -1 I ~1 ~1 "I -1 __ { __ a[ ,I ., '! 'I o, . I . I ....., ....., ..... .. • EX F0:; STI!PE J£W M'E 2-...a· ca:: E• SINGLE 'll'HIIE L.H STRIP£ R&l•9J.3 IE•8B (24") ;:: EX _l!(IUBLE YEUOW PAINTED STRIPE ,oo I . ~ ;., -[X TWO WAr-11JRNi.Nit ri_([[X;l(I;:: / Pll'(~NI EX OOUlll.E 'l'tllOW PAIIIT(O STRFE 1~· EXISTING DRAI~ EASEVENT !0° J>SE E>.SEMENT ~:X-1$TltlG OITCH I~ " ·- ,I "I I · ~1 ,I .. ! , .. ".__ " ;;I a I ' I I I I 3IH<XJ 37 ... m .. .. .. 37+oo 1 ....... •• ~ fl.I! ,1. \ " ~~ le W\~;E ~i j Q --r ih ~ I.; ~s ··~ ! ti; ~ ··1 "' ::i ,,r:30· .,ih.., I ij Hii l n;a; ~ 22 2 ~ ~ ~ ~21 ~<~ ~ -~ i 6i15·;>016 j 7 } ~ ·-j z , --. • • • ~ l J l ~ I ! l i ' • ;= .e ~ ~~ 0 ~: ~ w X ~ ~I z ;:< ~~NN -~ ON~ !~ c:,a:I N r,.. z"'"'"° N ' ' '" ,..._;:ii:;:; ' . 0~ N N ~~ ';! , ... : -.;;--.;;- NZNN ,:Ot....J -.i--.i-b -:.:: ................ u, Lot\ -:»w~4' o.r~··· .::, t <{~,', ffi ::t !t 0 ,, i$,L ' . ••' .,...9 co~ C ! C ' I 1 ~ I CITY R.E NO LUA15-000242 I 1 -I "'ii: l "'J ·------- PRELIMINARY UTILITES PLAN OF ELLIOTT FARMS '"' --..________ • A PORTION OF SECTION 22. TOWNSHIP 23 N., RANGE 05 E., WM. ----. -------1,!'J,C,SC,.ILV\ Ii. (~;:~,· \ \ ---tl ----- ---------=-_ rwh _ '" --. - fOC,c~ --JO'XJO' U S.WES1 EASEMENT PE-11 R:EC NO 9808030223 --_,--!~-/,r,o ;;;_, / -~c_~ jfq.u_r . r ''"''"""'----· ,-r'011f~- ··- w(lltltlSl'Ol!WCP __ ___ & ,JG Ill~ -----ICl.j ,r-:fl ~S(R --1a· cr:w; Wc'i I{ E~~lf -.. _ - ,-WCIJl,K('>J,." ACCESS, LANDSCAPE. PARKING. EM£RG£NcY TURN.I.ROUND & UTILITY E.<.SEIAENT REC f2000020 I 0009~, -:::-:_ -i=-r~----.-L~ :·t·-._·1·----~<:-~-1r \ 1 • ~~ WHH'I>''.{ ~---~~--- Ill~ . +,..--- [X 8"1'\CJ . [(Y/lllOL!C/11 +·····,,-"' \ -"B ~-D GP~][ MOTE: 'l!W=9047' 11·1.1)'·[ [·f'" C IDO •[ W•11li 6" Pl'( CO ~a8) 8) t," P,,,:: IL ;-!?!I l'Oltjl Of STORM C~CTl()I; S'J.1!1--·-+-/ ~;.!: ;·~· • a;· u I a·r,,:10 'lf,e.':,1 POINT Of SE'll'E!1 I C0181lCTl'.lN I I fN[, <([Wl/U.0 ~--, 1,1,,,·; - \ 0.2' l Of P~)' .1N( (fO{IPI.WI\JW;;, ', ' ', ' , __ _ A CRAvlTY 5AklTNIY SIDE SEWER SHAlL BC ..STAU[I) Sl'IJ88£D TO EACH lOT ~ """"" ''""'" """"' CATCH BASIN (C8) STORM MAN..ot.£ (SDMH) ----------'\. j •j ' ., --------..... ' -', ' 0 " \ ' \ "'--------~-, /" " l I TRACTH \ f '1 CIIITICN..~ l \ I \ I '4 ~ I \ \ \ I I \ I \ l " + I I I \ " 1----,, \ ,), '\ ' \ '1·'1 '.:/ V \ """"' '"'"'" ['==-:J SANl\"AR'I' SEWER l,Wft!OI.[ (SSl,IH) WAltlf w.t.\o'E ('It',') ,:::- r.:1 ;:, ~ ... flRE HYDIWIT (FH) -----l>~•t-1 :~: :t • """ SNIITARV SEWER LM: """'"' -· WATER 1 ·- UNOERCROuND POl,0 UHDERCROUH[l TEl!PtiONC EOG£ or ASF'Hll!.T L( 'l=ei,.! \ ' ' ,, RENTON, WASHINGTON ~- ~- ----- !Dj-·--R&ir,------ v~ Ro-40 C'W;1.'69J TRACTF (_)PEN SPACE ,,_., .. .,.,: t1S.Olt ,_ -.. PllOPOS[[) Ml{ 2~-----.!~! CATCH ~ (TYP) ----- Pl!OPOSCD 24" SO ~---=-- 33 ~ 32 r-,,tm] & ' :1J I~'[~ VAL\!:3 10 • 12 31 "n~ wm.[i· p;,31 ,] 30 ;~~\I, 1~P\/, l't ·.~<c,-~(1', ~-·,,; nx, IINf "' ~ ---- :'J<lJl..l '.\' Viv.- 15 .. ,. ~ ----- -------·-.....____ ___ _ Ki;;W,i;f 'L'KE Of ~ Cf l)I;[ ~fN0'!-'-81/l/:W L", fl~',) (ftBRI.Wh JL•·a\-- y I -5'. .J~ w(~E ,r s 1" -30' 0 15" 30· .,. ~: --~- ~i C ~ >~ I 00 ' ee • •• I HI ··~ HI I Hr - iiiiii i ... 3 ~ I i.; ~ t: 3 b:'I ----<<< ~ 1~· cw° CVLV ,,51r ~E ii! ;a-;::.:_. ,..,_' i ----- 1-"8" ·~ 24 2S ' ,Hf, Rffll,F/;:.tl' LS J!e,:)16 01(1 W i:N' PR,)P (CF (ff~~' ··- ,--1i;'(1JN( I " . I /'"·--•• 95 I - 'CX ll~£ -------; .-(9 S:XO 1.10 1-' "1M=\l 1\ ,a·ci:tt::,t t•6n'. ,s· (,:o: , , We;j(j 1:: .--...__ 1,·i._s; II \[•90:>.1 -,_ -------------~-. ---1e· <:ONo: c•!L'o' I[ #•)) '.,1' 'Sljj< PIWa94<) B"f\lcll CoS!i:',6 s· "'I.: 1r ~-,,ia 1---- 1 I -, ' ' CITY R.E NO LUA15-000242 ~ ~ i !2 ~ a: <( ~ ~ -~ ~ i Cl z ~ ~ .ii ~ 3 .. R • "° ' .)I '.... } z 1:! < :!; :!; s } ' ! " !J.ljl' " 5 ~~ : X ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i " ~~~~ i~ ;' ~O>ID.:0 a:~ ~-<( ! ~ !;i'"'. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ 1-·,n,n ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ::,:.._,..._,. '-'"' I,:' ~-· °''• •• I~ .:, .• .. .·~ " ~ ' : 0 l '1,,-6,,; ' . ,;,~" 8 -co¥ ! i ~ 1 -<01 ,, ;;c r-EXivw----------------------~=~~~-~;~f:~~=~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~-~-~~~~-~~~~~~~~~=~-=~-~~=~-~~~~======~~~==~-~-~~E~X=R~/cW~-~=====~==~-~--~==~= oww ·oz ~~::J cww ,;,we., oa,:3: ,;,c,,:3: g~~ g~! :2~ii: ~~~ ow g~ ;;;~ d~~ i~~ T.23N.R.5E.W.M. o~~ gp:!~ +aei:: ~o< ~ .o «~;;: EX EOP, TYP, } o I _ -·· _____ IX __ EQG_t __ LI~~._TI'_P..'..._""=\-__________ _ U') ---,,_ -··· ·--__ j ,j; I-~~HLOR ___ ___ __ _ __ _ ___________ ·- ~ 6 EX 11' g+ ow zZ -w:l .. /:,. STA Z0+00.00 ::a tii Ji: ~ SR 169 STA 100+00.00 = m C! SR 169 W.P. Z2.61 .. .o A.._, ffi + ~o ~o ~· w ~ . -~ ~ ~o • ~ .o <I[ ... ;;: ~~~ :~g ~o ~ ~ <°' >--,:: SR 169 (SE RENTON MAPLE VALLEY ROAD) -~:-~·- 103 S75"J9'51"E .. _ -1~r--' --,o, + + !a + ...,a:: + ...,a:: ~:z~ ~Ux ~u< ~o< Cl>i3!i c,,s..., O> .u O> .u <"" ,<( ~ ,<(I-~ < ... ~ SECTION 22 ~- ti~~ ~ ci .... ,_ CD ... zu ... C.:.._ ... °'Lo. "' . vq;:,-v, < vi. -< mt: :~~ :~~ mde: ll!il a:: IO "'"' "' "' ... c, ... ,..: ... ... EX EOP, TYP. l __.... u, U'l. V, 11'1 ~ ----~-------------. --1--------------- --------1-----------EX 8 1 SHLOR ----+---+ BEGLN PROJECT _ '-.. _f'-.. EX 6' ' SR 1 69 MP 22.56 SI< 169 97+47.00 " 15-4TH STA J0+00.00 - SR 169 ST A 9-4+65.41 - SR 169 M.P. ZZ.!il -air···-,, A " EX 20' SHOULDER EX 11'-- EX 11·-- ~· "'o w--' zW :J a, w :i:w UVl ... EX 11' ~· g_!'. EX 11' SR 169-LINE EX 11' & FOC, TYP.\ WHITE EOGE LINE, TYP.\ Ei._s•/..._ \.__~ ,. ---· ~ b ___ 15 EX EDGE LINE, ,.;P.~ . ----- EX EOP, TYP, \ ____ \_ ---· -·--·- 6' IEX 6 CT sa-01·~s~-~-EX w ~ EX " " EX .f 11·-- 11· ____ < :,; 5' SHLOR 6' PLNTR \ EX 8' ~H~R _ __ __ __ _ ___ J=-=----------------_ ____ ~:" EX 12' ---"--, ~. R35' EXR "--_J_ \\. I r---;'\ EX R/W EX R/W '\ ! I 1~------------------------------,, I DESIGN DATA lj i TYPICAL ROADWAY It_ SECTION A-A DESIGN CRITERIA I SR 169 I PU.T ACCESS I \ ~ EX 45' I EX 103' H F\JNCTIONAL CLASS I URBAN-PRINCIPAL ARTE:Rl,t,L I (1) 1 \ a<:1 R/W I R/W , 1:'.i' NEW 6 0.5 CURB I 1 ':zl ..., ~ \ PLANTER NEW 5' I I : ~ ~ 5 : -~~~s~7~ k+- I NHS STATUS NHS NON NHS I ACCESS CONTROL WANAGED: Ct.ASS J (1) I DESIGN VEHICLE WB-67 SU-JO SIDEWALK SHOULDER , 1..1 (I] !::'! . w VI (I) 8 1o1 NEW ~·1 !:ASPHALT EX 67'1 I 8 ; ; .., 8 ,_j EX 11' EX11' EX6'1EX6' EX11' EX 11' EX8' , ltei~'=!~ ~m ~ \~ ~ ei ,-. 0 ~0 ~0 ~ POST£D SPEED 50 MPH Z!i MPH 0 •5 , THRU LANE THRU LANE TWLTL I TWLTL THRU LANE THRU LANE ASPHALT • ;II:: S!: i ~ v ai :I 11:: e: ~ u § 11:: <Ou cit:: 0 j; ' SHOULD[~ ,i'.;'.i6 6ci::...,~o~a.o 01:iO o<> ':;:a:~j~ .1 I e ~ e ~ ~ u ~ c 3: r.: ~ r;; 3: ~ g ?j ~ O> ~ g: 0 g: ~ ¥ <J I ,<(w,<(w+c+cc.,+z +Cl+'::c+ ,<(w,<(:z w ... :: : tii~lii~~~~a~~~ ~~~e:~e~ ~ ... ~ ... m-~ OESIGN SPEED 55 MPH 25 WPH TE:RRAIN LEVEL LEVEL TRUCK PERCENTAGE 5,0,C f 1...J I I' <' I ' t :r ! i=f ln'/1 1 tt"I '. l°Wl I I ' .,. -, I -t l " i I" SUPER '"'I , I ~~m~~~~~~~~:1: ~ti;:!~~~:::im':i'°':i ':i~ j -'b -'b VJ. VJ •• VJ. ii: VJ. Vl!i; vi. ~ -b -'b -'b~ a,:n;ia,:o,iwC!wC!C!wC!a:: ...,('!,..,...,,..,C!,_a,:~a,:n;ia,:n;i.,; i_ NOT TO SCALE VIN v,,t v,,;, v,,;,,;, <1111><11: vi,;, VIU Vl,t<II <II <IIN <IIN:::11 SE 19+17.32 l,2•39'2o~l 100.oo· I 22.04' I 22.09' " CROWN EX R/W ---------_ ------------------------------------------------------_ -EX R/W END PROJECT SR 169 MP 22.72 SR 169 105+93.64 w u :i I zu, I ~~ I ~u I ""U I "'"" I (j) @ PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES WHITE 18-INCH STOP LINE PER WSOOT STD. PLAN f.1-2-4.60-0-4. DOUBLE YELLOW CENTER (DYC) LINE PER WSDOT STD. PLAN M-20.10-02. @ WHITE 6-FT TRAFFIC LITTERS roNLr) PER WSOOT STD. PLANS W-80.10-01 ANO M-BO.J0-00. 0 @ WHITE EDGE LINE PER WSDOT STD. Pl.AN M-20,10-02. WHITE TYPE 2SR TRAFflC ARROW PER WSOOT STD, PLANS M-24.40-02 AND M-80.10-01, CENTER IN LANE AT STATION SHOWN. EX B' SHLOR EX EOP,_ ~p~ l __ ____ E~!D_E~l:!._N~_!Y!.·-=::\-· --· ·-.. ···---· -• -------J, ----------·-· --·------·----- EX 11· ---- @ YEU.OW PRECAST CONCRETE DUAL FACE SLOPED MOUNTABLE CURB PER WSOOT STD. PLAN f-10.64-03. ' 15l EX e~HuiR ~ t:: 0 YELLOW PRECAST SLOPE MOUNTABLE CURB PER WSOOT STD. Pl.AN F-10.62-02. EX 11' EX 11' -SR 169 (SE RENTON MAPLE VALLEY ROAD) EX 11' l09EX 6' 1t1" 107 575•39•51~E 10 105 1 EX s' EX 6' c.---V EX Ex 11· __ --~---·sR169-LINE -----·--··· -------------------WHITE fDGE LINE. TYP. --· EX EX 11•=:... -~x 1,·&oc......nP. ----G,l !L ,, . -- i:X 11' -w WHITE CROSSWALK LINES PER WSOOT STD. PLAN M-15.10-01. WHITE 24• HEIGHT POST OELINEATOR (3" DIAW.) WITH 2 ROWS or WHITE REFLECTIVE TAPE. YELLOW ,4.-INCH LINE, 10' O.C. WHITE TYPE 2L TRAFFIC ARROW PER WSOOT STD. PL.AN M-24.20-02. CENTER !N LANE AT STATION SHOWN. EX 8' SHLOR ------------]----------· ~ vi (j) -----~------EX EDGE LINi.-TYP. ------s· P~NTR 6 PLNTR ~ WHITE WIOE LANE LINE PER WSDOT STD. PLN M-20.10-02. EX EDP, TYP. EX R w -EX ,1w1--------------------------I -- , I w z 0 DESIGN VARIANCES Lh VARIANCE: ACCESS SPACING. OW 5-40.0J(3)(B)2 •• NOVEMBER 2015 &JUSTIFICATION: CURB ON HIGH SPEED FACILITY. OM 12J0.05, NOVEWBER 2015. ..,. 13 c., :!! 8~ l a, .... !!!: ml~ ,ie ~ ~-. 3Q -.:""!c,-a,:,-~z.,; u, ln (',l .... ::IE Fl LE NAME REGION ~. TIME fil<TIC I ~ ' ~ + -~ ml~~a ~:~~ c,:,-..,z ln ln I<) l,J 10 WASH DESIGNED BY: ROLETIO J08 HUN8£R ENTERED BY: DUBREUILZROLETIO CHECKED BY: BICKET CONTR.OCT f«l. ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest Transportation Planning I Design I Trame Impact & Operations I l•IOO SE 8th Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 Office 1-425) 889-67-47 GENERAL NOTES 1, ALL SIOEWALI< RAMPS SHALL t.lEET CURRtNT ADA REOUIREWENTS TO THE WAXIWUM EXTENT FEASIBLE. 2. CHANNELIZATION TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF RENTON STANOAROS ANO SPECIFICATIONS, CURRENT EOIT!ON. RECEIVED JUL 2 6 2016 CITY OF RENTOr SR 169 \\ ~ 0 ~ ~ SCALE IN FEET WSOOT NORTHWEST REGION APPROVED CHANNELIZATION PLAN TRAFFIC ~~~AREA OPERATIONS Signed 0tf;,.~~~""I;>""' Print '41kc ,S..,..t..,.,, '""'"'ER'Nu~-~ Signed ~~'-,,;--J""~~ Print J/,JaJ& ~ Date :?,, .to-" Date 02~£1, M.P. 22.56 TO 22.72 r-----, ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT SR 169 CHANNELIZATION PLAN CH1 SHEET ' OF PROJ. ENGR.: BICKET Project Contact: Glen DuBreuil Phone: -425-25().0582 PLANNING DIVISION RENTON/KING COUNTY JULY 2016 REGIONAL ADM. BY SHE[":<; REVISION DATE Drawer 236 Sequence 08 T.23N.R.5E.W.M. SECTION 22 (j) ,s=o om,c , (j) ,s=o m•c , ~ Q 0 r-+-8 SR 92 19+67.0 37' G SE 19+67.0 <p •! a 8 RT ~ 2.0' RT -......._ 7 TYP ' SRt69 100+35.0 SRl69 100+05.0 R2,5' R2.5' \6,0' RT (7'I 6.0' RT\ 62J SE 19+63.0 \ ~ TYP. \ r -.__ IISLAND AREAi / ()) / 10.7 RT IISLAND AREA -------. 148 sr SE 19+64.5 ~r _ SE 19+60.5 355 Sf z N V o.s· LT 8.9 RT TYP. SE 19Hi0.5 n ill -----1f-----'t"",o7<Cc__-'s,----,------,,f'--------- \ ;;::,~; .. , Di:;TYP~[ '!~".; \ -~":: ~ "'< ~·· ~ \ SE 19+.41!1.0 Lil SE 19+.47.S "\ ,t,69 ioa+3S.0 / SR169 100+!7.0 \\, 0.5' LT F, )',.,_ '-..._ 2.5 RT S.O' LT TYP.@ 6.0 LT 1' I ~1.S' SE 19+45,5 25' Q 10 t-+8 0,0 RT, END CURB D 10 ---------------i SCALE IN FEET PLAN VIEW SCALE IN FEET PLAN VIEW i 1------,S.5' 5' 9' ----------< PRECAST CONCRETE ( SLOPED ~OUNTABL.E CURB FINISHED f 5• DEPTH CONCRETE WSOOT F-10.62-02, TYP. rSIDEWALK W/ 12•x12~ SCORING GRADE PATTERN, TYP. \',l · ~ ._. ,· •. · ' ' • .t.:'· ,-"''..i -• .• : , .. ·· • -•• · ··• •r_:•.- SECTION B B N.T.S. PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES ONLY NOTES USED ON THIS SHEET SHOWN. SEE SHEET CHI FOR COMPLETE LIST OF PAVEt.lENT t.lAAKING NOTES. GENERAL NOTES @ DOUBLE YEU.OW CENTER (DYC) LINE PER WSDOT STD. PLAN 1 • ~~ ~~~~~ ::T~~~ }~!M-eL~~ET CURRENT ADA REOUIREt.lENTS TO t.t-20.10-02. 2. CHANNELIZATION TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY or RENTON STANDARDS (i) YELLOW PRECAST SLOPE t.lOUNTABLE CURB PER WSDOT STD, Pl.AN AND SPECIFICATIONS, CURRENT EDITION. F-10,62-02. @ YELLOW 4-INCH LINE, 10' O.C. @l wH,rE W1DE LANE LINE PER wsoo, STD, PLN ,-20.10-02. WSDOT NORTHWEST REG/ON \ APPROVED CHANNELIZATION PLAN "4, TRAFF'IC :->::~~AREA OPERATIONS 1 \ Signed ~ ---= Dcte 1·to-tr- Prlnt Jnkc %>H,,.... ENGINEERIN)Jj~ _/_ • /, ~ Signed "'77_ Dcte~ o 30 90 Pr!nt _;../1/'(,a,JIJ. SC.AL.£ IN FEET ~:~~ NAME ",;;" ~m ®.GIT EN w T SR 169 M.P. 22.56 TO 22.72 10 WASH @r ,<l;~,',;···'C RECEIVED CH2 DESIGNED BY: ROLETIO = ,,_ Transportation Engineering Northwest ~t ~Ji~) ELLIOTT FARMS PLAT ENTERED BY: OUBREUIL/ROLETIO Transportation Planning I Design I Trofficlmpact&Operotions /1 :t... i}f! SR 169 SHEET CHECKED BY: BICKET co=TNO. ll4QOSEBihS~~:~~$(~~~f~/t;~7vue.WA 9B00 4 Lr7;i~rlf.t:t:r JUL 2 6 2016 CHANNELIZATION PLAN ;F PROJ. ENGR.: BICKET Project Contact: Glen DuBreuil ON,o,L :t,,...\'f 2 REGIONAL ADM. REVISION DATE BY Phone,425-250-0582 -,,\ CITY OF RENTON RENTON/KING COUNTY JULY 2016 SHEETS Drawer 236 Sequence 08 PLANNING DIVISION z 0 ti: UJ NZ UJ ::J a: UJ ::> 0 \,!) 0 LL Z <( .....J 1- UJ $ V'll:IV:::l ilOnl3 lJ81HX3 OVl:::l ON'\fll3M - . ;-..__; £0086 VM '3lA3Tl38 OCIZ 3.LlnS OVOl:I <El:l-138 Cllt1'l 83t1Vcft>O NA l»Ml:::l-A Vl:l:IM uo,i ____ 'JaJK ):JYTh'Md ,l •• l:otD3$ rid WZ ZlOl/rft:~w1J./OtQO MP'lOll#,K'lSl\li,wno\i,rL<;L\~L\_'d'~' / / / / / / / / I I //J .,~ '17 I I I I I I I I I ~~1':.11'3 ~"' ~ ~ ~ I .,..,... \ I r-".-'1 I I I I I ( I , I I I,. I~ '• ·'~ g[§ I I I \ \ \ \ ' City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 April 3, 2015 RE: Owner's Letter of Understanding Geologic Risk Elliott Farm Preliminary Plat King County Parcel No.: 222305-9004 City of Renton File No.: 15-000029 BCE Job No.: 15734 This letter acknowledges that CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, LLC the owner of the property referenced above contains an area of geologic hazards. The owner hereby acknowledges that it understands and accepts the risk of developing in an unstable area and that it will advise, in writing, any prospective purchasers of the site, or any prospective purchasers of structures or portions of structures on the site, of the unstable potential of the area. Respectfully, ~ ;:>~~ Name \'<o~)_ \.ev; 'r\. Title ~ ,\ . \. I\ ~.~,,-u., M")<-r-'\ RECEIVED APR 1 3 20\5 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION • -~--=~=-· -~G_r_e_e_n_f o_r_e_st_l n_c_o_rp_o_r_a_te_d_-i.4U-M...l.,.t;F,,~~ ii:zc,''i 1 April 1, 2015 Todd Levitt Murray Franklyn Companies 14410 Bel Red Road Bellevue WA 98007 RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA Dear Mr. Levitt: You contracted my services to inspect and inventory the surveyed trees at 14207 Maple Valley Hwy., Renton WA. This site, though currently undeveloped, has concrete remnants from former buildings. The main front portion of the parcel is relatively flat, and covered in dense brambles. Most of the significant trees (>:6" DBH) stand along the southern and western areas, and are mostly within a wetland and wetland buffer, or a steep slope at the SW corner of the site. I visited the site today and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. The following table summarizes my inspection results. Summary: 125 Total Surveyed Trees, 6" and greater DBH 1 Dead Trees 21 Dead, Diseased, Dying, and Defective Trees 3 Duplicate Trees 100 Total Viable Trees, 6" and Greater DBH 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 2 of 9 TREE INSPECTION I visually inspected each tree from the ground and rated tree condition, including both health and structure. I identified and recorded tree trunk diameter (4.5' from grade), canopy dripline, tree species and visible health/structural defects. No invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are based on what is visible at the time of the inspection. No trees are tagged. I am not a qualified surveyor and every effort was made to match the trees onsite with those shown on the survey. The attached table provides the following information for each tree: Tree number as indicated on the attached survey. Tree Species Common name. Diameter Trunk diameter in inches 4.5 feet from the ground. Dripline Canopy dripline or average branch extension, as radius in feet from the trunk. Condition rating 'l' indicates no visible health-related problems or structural defects, the tree appears normal and healthy; '2' indicates minor visible problems/defects that may require attention if the tree is retained, or the tree should be retained as a grove tree; [This rating includes minor diseases which are common on some species, namely willow, and that are not life threatening to the tree.] and '3' indicates substantial visible problems or defects. These trees are dead, dying, diseased or dangerous, and are certified as such through this inspection, and removal is recommended. Visible Defects Specific problems with trees rated either 2 or 3 for Condition, and includes the following: Asymmetric canopy-the tree has an asymmetric canopy from space and light competition from adjacent trees. Branch dieback/decline -Mature branches in canopy are dying/dead. Bow in trunk-a trunk lean characterized by the top of the tree leaning over. (Common with edge trees) Dead -tree is dead. Foliar disease -Foliage is diseased with common fungus. Multiple leaders -the tree has multiple stem attachments, which may lead to tree failure and require maintenance or monitoring over time. Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 3 of 9 Previous failure -Tree trunk previously broken and defective. Slender -tree lacks adequate trunk taper to stand lone. Sweep in trunk-characterized by a leaning lower trunk and a more upright top. Stumpsprout-Tree previously cut at grade with multiple stems and potentially weak attachments. Suppressed -tree crowded by larger adjacent trees; with defective structure and/or low vigor. Retain tree only as a grove tree, not stand-alone. Sweep-tree leans away from adjacent trees. Topped-the tree is previously topped and has poor structure and/or stem decay. Tree leans -Trunk has significant lean from vertical. Tree suppressed -Tree is suppressed by adjacent tree canopies. Trunk decay -Wood decay is visible in the trunk. Thank you very much for your business. Please let me know if you need anything further. Sincerely, Digitally signed by Favero Greenforest F G & t ON: cn=Favero Greenforest, o, ou, a Vero r ee n 1 0 re S email=greenforestinc@mindspring.com, c=US Date: 2015.04.0119:04:11 .OTOO' ISA Certified Arborist # PN -0143A • ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #379 ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor Attachments: 1. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2. Inventory of 125 Surveyed Trees. 3. Boundary & Topographic Survey Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 4 of 9 Attachment No. 1-Assumptions & Limiting Conditions 1) A field examination of the site was made 4/1/15. My observations and conclusions are as of that date. 2) Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 3) Unless stated other wise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects the condition of those trees at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of the subject trees without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied that problems or deficiencies of the subject tree may not arise in the future. 4) All trees possess the risk of failure. Trees can fail at any time, with or without obvious defects, and with or without applied stress. A complete evaluation of the potential for this (a) tree to fail requires excavation and examination of the base of the subject tree. 5) The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made. 6) Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 7) Unless required by law otherwise, possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. 8) This report and any values/opinions expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant's/appraiser's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 5 of 9 Attachment No. 2 -Tree Inventory n ;;,;, 0 -I ~ "' :J ... a. .... "' 5· ~ CD CJ' CD -OQ a· CD Tree No. DBH Species DL :J 350201 15 Red alder 12 3 No 350202 8,8 Bigleaf maple 10 3 No 350203 16 Red alder 16 1 Yes 350325 24 Norway spruce 18 2 Yes 350327 8,8,8 English holly 12 3 No 350338 8,8 Red alder 14 2 Yes 350465 6,6,6,6 Scouler's willow 8 2 Yes 350466 6 Scouler's willow 8 2 Yes 3S0467 6 Scouler's willow 8 2 Yes 350468 15 Scouler's willow 12 2 Yes 350469 15 Scouler's willow 12 2 Yes 350470 12 Scouler's willow 12 2 Yes 350471 12,12,6 Scouler's willow 12 2 Yes 350507 12 Bigleaf maple 16 1 ~ 350508 17 Bigleaf maple 16 1 Yes 350510 46 Western red-cedar 18 1 Yes 350511 46 Western red-cedar 12 3 No 350512 29 Western red-cedar 14 1 ~ 350513 29 Western red-cedar 14 1 Yes 350536 6, 6 Bigleaf maple 10 2 Yes 350538 6,6,6 Bigleaf maple 12 2 Yes 350539 6 Bigleaf maple 14 1 Yes 350613 12,12 Red alder 14 2 Yes 350614 12 Red alder 14 2 Yes 350615 6 Red alder 8 2 Yes 350616 6 Black cottonwood 8 2 Yes 350617 6 Red alder 10 2 Yes 350618 10 Red alder 12 2 Yes 350619 12,12 Black cottonwood 14 2 Yes 350620 6 Red alder 8 2 Yes 350621 6 Red alder 8 2 Yes 350622 12 Red alder 14 2 Yes Visible defects Topped for overhead power lines Double leader Diseased Multiple leader Diseased Diseased Diseased Diseased Diseased Diseased Diseased Duplicate: same tree as 508 Previous failure; top broken Duplicate: same tree as 513 Multiple leader Multiple leader Double leader Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Green forest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 6 of 9 n :,;, 0 --1 $ Ql :::, .... a. , Ql 5· a: ro er ro - OQ 0 ro Tree No. DBH Species DL :::, 350623 12 Red alder 14 2 Yes 350624 12 Red alder 14 2 Yes 350625 8 Red alder 10 2 Yes 350626 12 Red alder 14 2 Yes 350627 20 Pine 10 3 No 350634 10 Red alder 12 3 No 350635 12 Red alder 16 2 Yes 350636 12 Red alder 14 3 No 350637 12 Red alder 16 3 No 350638 22 Red alder 18 2 Yes 350639 13 Red alder 16 3 No 350640 15 Red alder 16 3 No 350641 16 Red alder 18 2 Yes 350642 12 Red alder 16 2 Yes 350643 10 Red alder 16 3 No 350644 8 Red alder 16 2 Yes 350645 10 Red alder 12 3 No 350646 15 Red alder 18 3 No 350649 12,20 Western red-cedar 14 2 Yes 350653 14 Western red-cedar 12 1 Yes 350655 36 Western red-cedar 18 1 Yes 350656 42 Bigleaf maple 25 2 Yes 350660 11 Western red-cedar 10 1 Yes 350661 6 Red alder 10 1 Yes 350662 12 Red alder 14 1 Yes 350663 11 Red alder 16 2 Yes 350664 11,11 Red alder 14 3 No 350665 12,12,12 Red alder 14 1 Yes 350666 6 Red alder 10 1 Yes 350667 6,6,10 Red alder 14 1 Yes 350670 8 Red alder 10 1 Yes 350671 10 Red alder 14 1 Yes 350672 6 Red alder 8 1 Yes Visible defects Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Dieback, decay Severe lean Asymmetric canopy Dieback Asymmetric, lean Bow in trunk Dieback Dieback, lean Bow in trunk Asymmetric canopy Previous failure; top broken Asymmetric canopy Previous failure; top broken Decline Double leader Asymmetric, lean Lean Dieback Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 7 of9 n ;;,:, 0 -I $ DJ :, .... a. .., DJ 5· i=1.'. ro er O'Q o· ro ro Tree No. DBH Species DL :, 350673 12 Red alder 14 1 Yes 350674 10 Red alder 12 1 Yes 350675 14 Red alder 12 3 No 350676 10,10 Red alder 12 1 Yes 350677 8 Western hemlock 10 1 Yes 350678 14,14 Red alder 18 1 Yes 350679 16 Red alder 18 1 Yes 350680 14 Western hemlock 12 1 Yes 350692 10 Red alder 8 3 No 350707 18,24 Moss cypress 16 2 Yes 350717 26 Spanish fir 18 1 Yes 350718 22 Moss cypress 16 2 Yes 350719 28 Moss cypress 16 2 Yes 350726 12 Red alder 15 1 Yes 350727 6 Red alder 8 1 Yes 350728 10 Red alder 12 1 Yes 350729 8 Red alder 10 1 Yes 350730 6 Red alder 8 1 Yes 350731 6 Red alder 8 1 Yes 350732 10 Red alder 14 1 Yes 350743 28 Western red-cedar 0 3 No 350749 36,36,20 Western red-cedar 18 2 Yes 350750 12 Bigleaf maple 18 2 Yes 350751 16 Bigleaf maple 18 2 Yes 350752 8 Western hemlock 6 2 Yes 350753 12 Bigleaf maple 16 3 No 350754 6 Western hemlock 6 2 Yes 350755 8 Bigleaf maple 14 2 Yes 350756 42 Douglas-fir 20 1 Yes 350757 20 Western red-cedar 16 1 Yes 350758 12 Western red-cedar 10 2 Yes 350765 18 Western hemlock 14 3 No 350766 8,8 Bigleaf maple 16 2 Yes Visible defects Dieback Decline Double leader Multiple leader Multiple leader Dead Multiple leader Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Suppressed Slender Suppressed Sweep, suppressed Asymmetric canopy Conk on trunk, decay Asymmetric canopy Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray .. _nklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborist Report, Maple Valley Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 8 of 9 n :,:, 0 -I $ 0, ::, .... a. ... OJ s· a: n, r;; n, - "" 0 n, Tree No. DBH Species DL ::, 350767 14 Bigleaf maple 18 2 Yes 350768 22 Douglas-fir 16 1 Yes 350769 26 Western hemlock 18 2 Yes 350770 10 Bigleaf maple 14 2 Yes 350772 6,6 Bigleaf maple 14 2 Yes 350778 10 Bigleaf maple 12 2 ~ 350779 10,12 Bigleaf maple 14 2 Yes 350780 8 Bigleaf maple 10 2 Yes 350781 12 Western hemlock 10 1 Yes 350784 12 Western red-cedar 10 1 Yes 350785 60 Bigleaf maple 25 1 Yes 350788 20 Western hemlock 16 1 Yes 350789 14 Western red-cedar 12 3 No 350790 22 Western red-cedar 14 3 No 350791 18 Bigleaf maple 18 1 Yes 350792 16 Western red-cedar 8 2 Yes 350793 26 Douglas-fir 16 1 Yes 350794 42 Bigleaf maple 30 2 Yes 350795 22 Western red-cedar 14 1 Yes 350796 36 Bigleaf maple 25 2 Yes 350797 12 Western hemlock 16 1 Yes 350799 6 Western hemlock 10 2 Yes 350800 18 Western red-cedar 12 1 Yes 350801 36 Bigleaf maple 25 2 Yes 350802 20 Douglas-fir 18 1 Yes 350803 14 Western red-cedar 8 1 Yes 350804 10 Bigleaf maple 14 2 Yes Visible defects Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Asymmetric canopy Slender Duplicate: same tree as 779 Stumpsprout Suppressed Trunk decay Previous failure; top broken Suppressed, double leader Lean Asymmetric canopy Suppressed Lean Slender Green forest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Todd Levitt -Murray Franklyn Companies RE: Elliott Farm Arborisl Report, Maple VaUey Highway, Renton WA 4/1/15 Page 9 of 9 Attachment No. 3 -Boundary & Topographic Survey I / I I I I L ! !, ' L I I I I ~~s~. h ~.e.:~~~ ~~ i 1· ' I I -~~~-~-~1-1 ~-t~ --rn,:,<; ----I "'""'" . -• I , I /• \ •1><1 \ ., "i''\ ~.;!, 1' ?'".~ 1/, ,I,,' \ 1 I r ~\i: , I I r,-i<1 I I ~!;;:g ~ , ., ~I I~ I~ Le, I I •• I ! I •, ~ , • rn, '---. ,. ~>'+--!,~ "-,~!(,, /' IX.,\ J 1g !J . : ~ s' ,•t--,,--~_:_ !,. , \ , ; • !,l\ I I! ,! B ,, /d .,.,_ '\11,i,,1 I ·' ·I ·Ii _____ . a-~, .!( :~I I' /j--'. I _ i,' I ., .,-% -~i ~,;--1'1'0"'0< -~ ~;,\i:I,. I /i ~ :a; I ~ ~,.,. i, ·, ·~'• -*1 , _ __, .,., I -!_ -· i / ' . c.-0, 1 ·1 as ., -~, V . ' I -;, ---C::C"f'~ (2~-~: \ \ :!-1\t! -~ ./ '-'\, I c >_:;' -·--!, I' / ' \'\ ' ,! ,., ,., ~IC 1, I•' ' } i\'\•,-\-.-'/ / 1 1 ~ ,;, , /1~~~1l 1a1 1 111w1 !l· !l / !! i!!i!! ~r, -.,, ' ' ' . ' J ' ' I I ) -, ' r I I I I I r--1 ----J r" ~.O ig I;, • c: ( -!_ ·-t ' ' 1(,) i-,, «' I !! ,~I.-, ' / -·( ?:;,"\ I ., ·,· ,'· I 1 •. ~. . ,~·-, ·\' u I, :.:. !: t 0 '?,!! 1 'G,_ I ,i;! I '-,· 1 , •!--I If 1~,,,,- ' ./. "' ·-~ I '-., -' ,,~ ·, • I ·-d] ~~ f :"-:-~ -' ' 7=) ·• , -0Y• ' ,I r;:,~.1 "· <:i /f'-~! '"" I ~t /' i:i" / 1, .. , ··~ '· ----~ ~ ~ ::iii M .,, i::t ~.ii ~ Qh ~~' .:,.,;_ 61 (" ~~ ..... ~!!~ L~ ;», G~;~~g ~· . ·-!i I '· ._ ·--., ) f •! l{lii ,,,,/ ' / ,,., / / / ,. I I ~ ~----.... / -, "-./"'· '"'· ------/ ~/ ~ . /, .-. ~-/ /. . / // ,/// / / ~- !-h rf d I IC-,,, t/ J{ ,_/., ?' _.-{Z l'(·--i· ·, !1 \ !! !!!! r *y ,f t ' / ( //\)/ I ,~·- I ! ' ~!!! ~! '! )) - i ~.'"/ •j. "", i /·'~" "1~, : .,,, ~, .. ·,,i ;,.,1 ,,' ,: r~t·"~ .. ,~ '' \ fJj~ ~~,,1.-p ~fr~ M~ ~~ ~~ ~. ~ r~ ,- \'?> \ I I -/)>.. I ,, '1, I I :;;'~ ;;:g / :" :" ?1~, ' ' r~ ~~ /' "K. ~~ i_: // ?~ i" ""(::} ;/ ··' ii' . . . !~ ..... _.: --/ W'I, . ; ~ '~ll !j ' Ii ~:~ S(Jl'4(f•it"114~l~ ~] ~~ !' 11 \ I! r . ' 11 ., ' ' ,: - ~ I I I I I -- ~ .l:. ;:!! 1'17 --~ I § ,-,- 1'17 -.:' ~~-"" > "' ...... ~ r . /' 1>¢1 m -----~ uo=--\~;--z '. ~ ..... "~fp tTl -., '-, "· -<~ I ' ~ ~~ J ',,,,.., ~~ "' .• -~: o, s I_... -_. ; \ ) ,:-; ( ~h., l " \ CD 0 C z C )> :IJ -< s,o -I 0 ""[J 0 G> :IJ )> ""[J :c -() en C :IJ < m -< ~7,1 ,, \ ,.--~--- /.'/~'ff, • .,,...--------·-·--£) "ffaf -' / I ) --\ 'T ___ 'l:: l , ...... i : · I I ___--NJr' I -----~~Uo•· c¢_/,_ f ~~---------) • ! '~-'!j·_ • 4j ~' ;0"·!~1 0 .. ~ . ' ' .. ~,. "'9:-1 1 I i,v,; n1G'~"' , __ ,, __ I I I I I I 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 980.32 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAX C1¥1L (NG1N((R1NG. LANO PLANNING. SURVE'rlNG. ENVIRONMENTAL SEfl\/lCES Oes<jne<i _:_ <;colo· 0.-ow~~ Ho,;zon!ol 1"•JO" Clle<:Oocl .J1Q!,_ Appro,od.Jl!lli.. Vo,\,col O<it•~ P\ '.,GQ,;,,'-1 ·rel,i11n,,·,',,el\ 10,7\4-:·lc~,J O•:le/1,rn" l'.w · llsr,m ,c,:le 1".1 u 0 t0 ;l',7.-,4-·,<d•·i ,.--;--- For: BRIXTON HOMES LLC C/0 GLEN MAURER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUITE 200 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 ------------ ~Q. I CMo I Br_ I C<d. I App, ; I \ ) R""io;on ' ; Title: BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PTN OF THE NW1/4, OF THE SE1/4 OF SEC. 22, AND PTN OF THE SW114, OF THE NE1/R OF SEC. 22, TWP. 23 N., RGE 5 EAST, W. M. CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF C01v1MUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT r r Cityof, -------~1\tlJIDIJ PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply'' only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal. even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAD AGENCIES: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. 15734.004.doc 05/14 USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B even though questions may be answered "does not apply". In addition the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proponent", and "affected geographic area" respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B -Environmental Elements -that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Elliott Farms 2. Name of applicant: Brixton Homes, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant Cedar River Lightfoot Inc. 14110 Bel-Red Road, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Contact: Todd Levitt Lennon Investments, Inc. 35815 S.E. David Powell Road Fall City, WA 98024 Contact: Patrick Lennon 4. Date checklist prepared: April 2015, Revised June 2016 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton Contact Person Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Contact: Ivana Halvorsen 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 2 15734.004.doc 05/14 Plat infrastructure construction is expected to occur in 2016-2017. There are no plans to phase the project. Construction of the project is expected to take 3 to 4 months for site development and another 12 to 24 months for home construction, depending on market conditions. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Preliminary Plat plan set prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated June 14, 2016 • SR-169 Channelization Plan prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC dated June 3, 2016 • Geotechnical Report prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated February 25, 2015 • Wetland Delineation prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc., dated December 15, 2014 • Arborist Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated dated April 1, 2015 • Boundary and Topographic Survey prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated February 18, 2015 • Preliminary Technical Information Report/Drainage Report prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated April 10, 2015 • Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC dated April 1, 2015 • Certificate of Water Availability from Cedar River Water and Sewer District dated February 24,2015 • Certificate of Sewer Availability from Cedar River Water and Sewer District dated February 24, 2015 • Off-site Wetland Buffer Mitigation Enhancement Plan prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. A Certificate of Exemption (File No. LUA15-000120} has been issued so that the owners can complete wetland buffer enhancement on the site as off-site mitigation for another project (King County Project No. CAEX14-008 on Parcel 342305-9202} in unincorporated King County. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • City of Renton Preliminary Plat approval 3 15734.004.doc 05/14 • City of Renton SEPA Determination • City of Renton Site Plan Review • City af Renton Road Modification (if applicable) • City of Renton Construction plan approvals (roads, storm, and grading) • Cedar River Water and Sewer District Developer Extension Agreements for Water and Sewer Utilities • City of Renton Right-of-Way Use Permit • WSDOT Review for SR-169 Channelization and Improvements • WSDOT Access Permit (if applicable) • Ancillary City of Renton construction permits including building permits for retaining walls • Department of Natural Resources Forest Practice Application (if applicable) • Department of Ecology NPDES Permit • City of Renton Final Plat Approval • City of Renton Building Permits for Residential Homes • City of Renton Residential Design Standards Review 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project involves the subdivision of approximately 6.07 acres of land encompassing one tax parcel into 45 single-family homes, an associated critical area tract. There will be approximately 1,035 lineal feet of public roadway (with utilities) constructed to serve the proposed lots and 692 feet lineal feet of frontage improvements on SR-169. The proposed lots and alleys will be cleared and graded as needed. The proposed public road will connect to an existing private access easement in Molasses Creek Condominiums to the west. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The subject property is located in Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East and abuts SR- 169 and is approximately one-quarter mile east of 140th Way SE. For the exact location, please reference the attached Vicinity Map. 4 15734.004.doc 05/14 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): IB rolling, hilly, ~ .. t-e-ep-sl'o-p-es-,,!mountainous, other _____ _ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Most of the project site has an average slope of approximately two percent; however, there is a small isolated area in the southwest corner of the site with slopes exceeding 40 percent and up to approximately 90 percent. There is also a small ridge of slopes from 15- 25 percent in the southeast portion of the site -the southeast slope will be eliminated with development. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. According to the NRCS Soil Survey, the soils on the site consist of Newburg Silt Loam (Ng} with a small area of Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF). Newburg Silt Loam is classified as Prime Farmland. The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux (1965}, maps the soils at the site as Cedar River alluvium (Qac), recessional glacial outwash (Qpa), and undifferentiated glacial drift (Qsr). The native site soils we observed are generally consistent with the mapped geology. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. The geotechnical report prepared for the project indicates that there are no indications of unstable slopes on or adjacent to the site. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. s 15734.004.doc 05/14 A preliminary grading plan has been prepared for this project. We anticipate the on-site grading including approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut and 20,000 cubic yards of fill from an approved source. The on-site strippings (topsoil) will either be spread on the finished lots and/or exported off site to an approved location. A rockery retaining wall (ranging between 2 feet and 4 feet) will be constructed along the southeast corner of the site. There will also be additional lot grading that will occur (on a lot by lot basis) during the home construction phase as foundations are constructed. Imparted aggregate materials used for construction of the roads and infrastructure as well as for house foundations will be imported as needed from nearby available sources, most likely from pits in the Maple Valley or Renton area. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Soil erosion could occur as a result of the site clearing, excavation, and grading activities once soils are exposed to rainfall. However, as required by City Code, a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP} will be prepared and implemented to mitigate for such erosion potential. Additionally, erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be provided (i.e., straw mulch, silt fences, rock check dams, etc.). g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The on-site impervious surface (roadways and sidewalks) will be approximately 33,000 square feet (0.75 acres), equaling approximately 12 percent of the gross site area (6.07 acres). Based on a maximum impervious area per lot of 80 percent, we have estimated a total impervious area (for 45 Jots with an average lot size of 2,702 square feet) of approximately 2.23 acres. Combined, approximately 2.35 acres, or approximately 38 percent of the site will be impervious. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. AIR All applicable BMPs and other typical and necessary TESC measures will be implemented and maintained during the plat and home construction phases. An NPDES permit will be acquired and the site will be monitored during the entire build-out phase of the plat. 6 15734.004.doc 05/14 a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During plat and home construction, emissions from construction equipment and vehicles will occur on a temporary basis. When houses are completed, there will be emissions generated from automobile, service truck traffic, and other typical machinery used in single-family neighborhoods. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. The site is surrounded by existing single-family or condominium developments that are the source of emissions from potential fireplaces and vehicles. In addition, the site is located adjacent to SR-169 which has a high concentration of vehicular traffic. These sources and emissions are typical of urban/suburban communities and are not expected to have any impact on the proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: All construction equipment will be equipped to comply with all applicable air-quality regulations. Dust will be controlled during the dry season with water trucks. Gas fireplaces will be used in accordance with requirements of the Puget Sound Air Quality Board. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. There is one Category II that requires a 50-foot buffer and will be protected/ preserved within proposed Tract 998. The site drains to and is within 0.5 miles of the Cedar River which flows to Lake Washington. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. 15734.004.doc Yes. The plat and home construction will occur within 200 feet of the on-site wetland. 7 05114 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. S) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. The site is not mapped on FEMA or King County maps as flood plain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The project will be served by public water and sanitary sewer service from the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. The project will not involve any groundwater withdrawals or any discharge to the groundwater of septic system effluent. No discharges to the groundwater aquifer are proposed. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 8 15734.004.doc 05/14 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water will be collected by a series of catch basins and conveyed by underground stormwater pipes to an offsite water quality pond vault west of the site at the southwest corner of the 140th Way SE and SR-169 intersection. The off-site water quality pond was designed and sized to accommodate development of the subject property as proposed. The subject property has been planned for development as a future phase of Cedarwood or Molasses Creek Condominiums. Development of the Elliott Forms site was delayed by a prior King County historical designation, then annexation into Renton, and finally by the economic downturn that affected all property development. As such, a formal development application of the subject Elliott Farms site has been delayed until now. What remains consistent is that the development of the site was planned as a future phase of either Cedarwood or Molasses Creek Condominiums, and the drainage systems for those projects accommodated the development of the subject Elliott Farms site. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Unlikely. As discussed above, all stormwater will be collected and conveyed to an approved offsite water quality pond. All sewage disposals will be via the Cedar River Water and Sewer District sewer system. No on-site septic systems are proposed. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: The project is exempt from flow control requirements based on the direct discharge exemption in core requirement no. 3 of the 2009 KCSWDM and the 2010 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. The flowpath from the project site discharge point to the edge of the 100-year floodplain of the Cedar River is no longer than one-half mile. The water quality wetpond was originally sized for several divisions of the Cedarwood projects, Molasses Creek, areas of the WSDOT right-of way, and this Elliott Farm project. As identified in the Hugh G. Goldsmith Memorandum, the wetpond contains 28,748 9 15734.004.doc 05/14 cubic feet of extra storage. The Elliott Farms project only requires 17,125 cubic feet of storage based on the Wetpool sizing worksheet found in this section. 4. PLANTS a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: _X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X_shrubs _X_grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops _x_ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bull rush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Upon completion of the project, all vegetation within the developab/e portion of the property will be removed /altered. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: As required by code, 10% of the significant trees (approximately 4) must be protected or mitigation provided (tree replacement). As outlined in the current proposal, grading will impact the entire developable are of the site; therefore, we anticipate replacing the tree inches on the site with 22 trees planted in the open space areas to achieve compliance with the code requirements of RMC 4-4-130. We will also be preserving and protecting the on-site wetland and buffer, as approved by the City, in designated open space areas, (Tract 998} as wildlife habitat. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. 10 15734.004.doc 05/14 The site contains reed canary grass and Himalayan and evergreen blackberry that will be removed with development and with the wetland mitigation project that will be completed in spring 2015. 5. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: Birds: hawk. heron, eagle, songbirds. other:------ Mammals: deer. bear, elk. beaver, other: small rodents Fish: bass, salmon. trout. herring, shellfish. other ___ _ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, there are no threatened or endangered animal species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. It is our understanding that the site is located in the "Western Flyway" migration route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife. if any: Substantial native habitat will be provided on site through preservation of approximately 1.10 acre of permanent native open space (Tract 998) that will provide some wildlife habitat. The on-site critical area abuts other critical areas tracts that were created by past development on adjacent properties. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, there are no invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy {electric, natural gas. oil. wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing. etc. Each lot will require power, natural gas, cable, and phone service. Power and natural gas will be the primary source for heating. 11 15734.004.doc 05/14 b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: All future homes will be designed in accordance with the Washington State Energy Cade. Also, as required by code, the streetlights will use LED luminaires to reduce electrical cansumptian. 7. ENVIRONMENTALHEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Unlikely. However, during construction there is always the risk of an accident involving construction equipment and hazardous or flammable materials during home construction. These risks are common to all construction sites. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None to our knowledge. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. During the construction of the project, there may be stored diesel fuel and/or products. However, upon the completion of the construction, these materials will not be present. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. 15734.004.doc Medical EMT response and Fire Department response. 12 05114 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: All construction will be in accordance with applicable Jaws including OSHA safety regulations for machinery and proper storage, care, and handling of any hazardous materials during construction. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Existing sources of noise in the immediate area are automobile traffic as well as regional urban/suburban noises. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. During the construction phase there will be short term impacts to noise levels from the operation of heavy equipment and truck traffic, as well as contractor tools. These impacts will be generated only during the hours of operation and will terminate permanently upon completion of construction. Upon occupancy of the homes, there will be added noise impacts from residential vehicles and activities, consistent with what is already found in the surrounding community. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: All equipment and construction operations will comply with applicable City of Renton noise ordinances. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Adjacent properties include residential development in single family and condominium developments. The proposed project is consistent with the surrounding properties. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non-forest use? 15734.004.doc 13 05/14 The site has previously been used as a portion of a working dairy farm. There will be no farmland or forest land tax status conversions as part of this project. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No. There is no existing farmland in the surrounding area. c. Describe any structures on the site. The site contains na existing structures. There are concrete foundations and slabs remaining from past uses. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? All of the concrete will be removed with development. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Single-family, R-14 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? RMD -Residential Medium Density. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable to this project. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Yes. There are Moderate Landslide Hazard Areas and a Category II wetland located on the project site (Tract 998}. The site may also be located within Well Field Capture Zone/Aquifer Area II. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The 45 lots are expected to bring approximately 113 people to the project after all homes are built and occupied (this assumes an average of 2.51 people per home). 15734.004.doc 14 05/14 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? No people would be displaced by the completed project. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable to this project. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: As part of the preliminary plat process, the project will be reviewed in accordance with the R-14 development standards, which are compatible with the surrounding property. The project has been designed with alley-loaded product which is the preferred access method in the R-14 zone. Development as planned is consistent with neighboring development on both sides of the project. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: Not applicable to this project. There is no agricultural or forest lands near the site. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The project will create 45 housing units in the middle income range. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None are proposed or required. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 15 15734.004.doc 05/14 The tallest structure would be the proposed townhomes, which has a maximum height as established in the zoning code of 30 feet without a variance. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. Development of the site will modify the appearance of the site from vacant to 45 townhouse units. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: All future homes within the project are subject to the City building design standards. In addition, the new homes to be built in this project will be single-family residences as found in the surrounding community and that will appear to be an extension of the Molasses Creek Condominiums through which the site is accessed. Alley access is proposed for some of the units, as preferred for the R-14 zoning district. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Construction is expected to be in the daytime hours only (7 am -6pm or 7pm). During night time there may be streetlight illumination and car headlights as well as both interior and exterior lighting in houses typically found in single-family subdivisions. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: All lighting related to streetlights and houses will be designed in accordance with City code regulations to avoid impact to adjacent properties. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? 15734.004.doc 16 05/14 The subject property is located within 0.25 miles of the Cedar River Trail, Ron Regis Park, ond Maplewood Golf Course. There is a variety of recreation opportunities in the surrounding area. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: On-site open space is provided that will accommodate walking paths that are separated from vehicular traffic. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. No. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Is there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. None to our knowledge. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. We reviewed the Department of Archeology and Historical Preservation website (WISAARD system). d. Proposed measures to avoid, m1nim1ze, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Not applicable to this project. 15734.004.doc 17 05/14 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site will be accessed via a new public road segment that will connect to an existing private road in the neighboring community of Molasses Creek Condominiums. The public road segment will connect to SR-169 as a right-in/right-out access. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Transit routes 143 and 907 run along SR-169. There are no transit stops near the site within 0.25 miles. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Each lot will have two off-street parking stalls and the development provides seven (7) on- street parking stalls far guests. No parking will be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). There will be approximately 1,035 lineal feet of new public roadway and several alleys. Frontage improvements, including curb, gutter, planter strip, and sidewalk will be constructed on SR-169. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non-passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Per the Traffic Analysis completed for the project, the proposed development would generate approximately 321 weekday vehicular trips per day, none of which would be 18 15734.004.doc 05/14 trucks. Peak traffic volumes (31 trips per day} would occur during the weekday PM peok hour (one-hour period between 4:00pm and 6:00pm}. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Not applicable to this project. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Frontage improvements, including curb, gutter, planter strip, and sidewalk will be constructed on SR-169. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The future construction of homes on each of the 45 lots will result in a proportional need for public services normally associated with single-family development such as police, fire, health care, schools, postal service, garbage service, etc. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Property tax revenue will assist with offsetting the proportional impact on public services. Mitigation fees will be collected at the time of building permit for individual lots to offset traffic, fire, and school impacts. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: !electricit~ !natural gasj, ~ !refuse servicii ~elephonii !sanitary sewe~ septic system, other ----- b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The project will install pipes 8-inches in diameter and larger on and off-site for water, sewer, and/or stormwater utilities. Impacts to public or private property or critical areas, if any, will be restored to pre-existing conditions. 19 15734.004.doc 05/14 • Water and Sewer: Cedar River Water and Sewer District • Electricity and Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy • Refuse: Waste Management -Rainier • Telephone: Century Link • Cable: Comcast C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Proponent Signature: --~~'---'--'---1&-<c,,'--"----------------- Name of Signee (printed): ~'v~a~n=a~H=a~lv~o~rs~e=n'------------------- Position and Agency/Organization: Senior Planner. Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. Date Submitted: -~6-_1~5-_2~01_6~---- 15734.004.doc 20 05/14 <-· SE·! sgTH PL-=-SE-t 59TH Pl r·, ___ J'i REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2015) Scale: Honzontsl: N. T.S. Vertical: NIA 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT. WA 98032 (4lo) zo1-ozn (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES P:\ 15000s\ 15734\exhibit\graphiesl 15734 vmap.cdr For: ELLIOT FARM RENTON, WASHINGTON Title: VICINITY MAP Job Number 15734 ~03/20115 B9 ~ 1":100' STORM POND ~ -------------- MOL,\SSES CRE CONDt'.>MINlutJIS . o"" <-\.\. \ f J>,.~w, NEIGHBORH ~ ----------------SR-169 ---_ ~Ssts c~eE,.. COf.foo SITE // i I f --~ / '--_/ --.~ ----------~ ' -.___ ~ R 16,i------------...._ -----..... ........._ ----; ------ V'G~ 9\0~'<:-~'?-'i' ~~o,tlA<,.,<\ l . 'l. n \.. t: u· '!,. ,! . ,. '°<~ •• ,,.., .N .. , ... 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 {425) 251-6222 {425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING. LANO PLANNING SURVEYING. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SOURCE· KING GQUNTY ASSESSOR ~APS ~ARCH25.2015 1!' 21:l' J"N 47° 27 S4" '\J ~ ,, ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 563930 563970 r,&4010 564050 563970 564010 564050 Map Sea~: 1: 1,900 if printed 00 A landsG:IP2 (11" x 85'') sr)2€t Soil Map-King County Area, Washington 564090 564130 564170 564090 564130 564170 Met8S 563930 N 0 25 SO 100 150 -FM 0 SO 100 200 300 A Map pm_iec:t:ioo: Web Men:ator CDrnercoon::l1nates: WGS84 Edge tics: lJTl'v1 Zone 10N WGS84 l ',!),.\ Natural Resources 0 iFi Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 564210 564250 564290 56:1210 564250 564290 • ~ • a 564330 564J30 • ~ • a I ~ ~ I ~ ~ ; 4/7/2015 Page 1 of3 47"28YN 47" 27'54'N ~ Soil Map-King County Area, Washington MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Solla ' Soil Map Unit Polygons _J -Soil Map Unit Lines • Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features ~ Im lll 0 ;x; . 0 A • 1t' 0 0 V + .. -0 31- ti Natural Resources Conservation Service Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Waler Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spol Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot § Spoil Area 0 Stony Spot In Very Stony Spot '(7 Wet Spot 6 Other .. Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation t+t Rails -Interstate Highways -US Routes Major Roads local Roads Background • Aerial Photography Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal•area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below . Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: King County Area, Washington Version 10, Sep 30, 2014 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows)for map scales 1 :50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 8, 2014-Jul 15, 2014 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 4/7/2015 Page 2 of 3 Soil Map-King County Area, Washingto1 Map Unit Legend King County Area, Washington (WA633) Map Unit Symbol I Map Untt Name I Acres inAOI I ' AkF I Alderwood and Kitsap soils, _cerysteep 3.1 Ng ! Newberg silt loam 13.9 PITS Pits 0.1 ~---------~---------~---------!-· 'Totals for Area of Interest 17.1 1 Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey Parcent of AOI 18.3% i -1 ----~~~ 0.3% 100.0% I 417/2015 Page 3 of 3 Map Unit Description: Newberg silt loam--County Area, Washington King County Area, Washington Ng-Newberg silt loam Natural Resources Conservation Service Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 1 hmth Elevation: 30 to 3,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 150 to 210 days Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland Map Unit Composition Newberg and similar soils: 75 percent Minor components: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Newberg Setting Landform: Flood plains Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile H 1 -0 to 10 inches: silt loam H2 -10 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmitwater(Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 36 to 48 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Other vegetative classification: Soils with Few Limitations (G002XN502WA) Minor Components Puget Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Depressions Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/7/2015 Page 1 of2 Map Unit Description: Newberg silt loam~-County Area, Washington Brisco! Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions Woodinville Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions Oridia Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: Natural Resources Conservation Service King County Area, Washington Version 10, Sep 30, 2014 Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 417/2015 Page 2 of 2 Map Unit Description: Alderwood and Kits ·1s, very steep--King County Area, Washington King County Area, Washington AkF-Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep Natural Resources Conservation Service Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 1 hmsn Elevation: 50 to 800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 160 to 220 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Alderwood and similar soils: 50 percent Kitsap and similar soils: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Alderwood Setting Landform: Moraines, till plains Parent material: Basal till with some volcanic ash Typical profile H1 -0 to 12 inches: gravelly ashy sandy loam H2 -12 to 27 inches: very gravelly sandy loam H3 -27 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 25 to 70 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): le Hydrologic Soil Group: B Description of Kitsap Setting Landform: Terraces Parent material: Lacustrine deposits with a minor amount of volcanic ash Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 417/2015 Page 1 of2 Map Unit Description: Alderwood and Kits Is, very steep-King County Area, Washington Typical profile H1 -0 to 5 inches: ashy silt loam H2 -5 to 24 inches: ashy silt loam H3 -24 to 60 inches: stratified silt to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 25 to 70 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 11.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): le Hydrologic Soil Group: C Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: USDA Natural Resources 3lili Conservation Service King County Area, Washington Version 10, Sep 30, 2014 Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4nt2015 Page 2 of 2 The 11lormation iici.Jded on trus rrap has been compled ~ Kiig County s1aff Imm a vanety of sources and s subje<:;t lo diange wihou1 notice. Kiig County makes no reprmentatrms orwarrailles express or 1mpled. as to accuracy, completeness. tmeli'iess, or rghls to the use of a,ch informatio, Tt;s cbcument ,s mt ,ntended br use as a sul\/ey product. ~ng Coa . .mty sh.II ml be liable fer any general. special. 11d1red, ind dental. or oonsequential damages ,ndudng. but n(j lirrited to. bsl rewnues or bst pn;ifi$ resuling from the use or mi51.1se d the informamn ccntamed onth1smap. hly sale ol tllsmap or 1nlormat11J1 on th1smap is proti,t:Jled eMCept by wnten permiss,1J1 ofK1rg County. Date: 4/10/2015 King County 1 in : 376 feet 0 0.04 N 0.08 Miles A King County tQ King County GISCENTER ,~·· ' ' ' ' \' ,, }' !l' "l'!H' ! .,U,.I , I , .,,~~h·i ! ., ' I , - I' ii 182'5 72ND ~·,E~liE SOUTH >r~L 'I#\ 9HC.l2 !~25)251-0)22 1•2'.iJ251-e1e2 ,.., ,;r,,, [MCIN(l~ ... , '""'"""'"""'· SlJ""t'11N(:.,~ ... :......:c; '''"= ,~ BAIXTON HOliES LLC C/0 GLEN MAlllER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUITE 200 BB.LEVUE. WA 98007 -.. I ! -;..;;-.. -~\ I \~ ii i I !/ ,,.-~~' ' ' ( ., /..-/'; /., ( / ri ~/ ,/,/ OJ 0 C z 0 > ::0 -< po -I 0 "C 0 G> ::0 > "C :::c () en C ::0 < m -< ~ I ?/~ -J// ,54(,;~ \__ "/~ ,, ' · BOUNDARY I TOPOBRAPHIC SURVEY .TN OF TitE NW11', OF TIE IIEt/4 OF IIEC. 22. nM OF Ttl! 1'#114. 0, THE Nl1111 OF IIC, ti, TWP. 23 N., 11:SE: a EAIT, W. M. CITY Of RENTON Qt8 COUNTY 8TA1E OI WA ... 8TON 1e210 ,,~c ~l'l~Ul ~QUI~ f,[Hf, WA 9P01i (46):~1-0:2: ,:•2si:,s1 B782 FM ..... ,r.:;,..,"""'-'-""'"-w•,c..--.,,-... s.l"l.:[s I I ' r~/ ,, :1 ~· «!I.' I Wlai .• I--=-' i 1--1~-~ '"' BRIXTON HOMES LLC C/0 GLEN MAURER 14410 BEL-RED-ROAD, SUTE 200 BELLEVUE, IA 98007 T'·' . BOUNDARY l TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY IJJ 0 C z C )> ::n -< po -I 0 "'C 0 G> ::n )> "'C :::c () Cl) C ::n < m -< Ill OF THE NW1/4, OF THE R.1/4 OF SEC. 22, PTN OF TME IW1/4, OF TME N1!1lfl OF UC, 12, TM'. 2i!I N., ll8E 15 EAIIT, W. It . aTY OF RENTON KINCI COUIITY STATE Of WAIHINGTON ~ ,,_ 1":100' ·"-r,;<,t "--....._ -~ "· '·-~~ .... -- "--....._~--... ...... _ ~~ .... --............................... ""----"-\ STORM~--j[ POND I I \ \ \\ \ \ I ; \f \\\ MOL,\SSES CRE CONDtfMINUJ!I/IS ' ' ,c...\.\.,o' 'i'r,,.~""' NEIGHBORH -~~ SF1-1s9 "'OJ.AsSfs c~f"fco; c~Do SITE ,,.~ ........ <,._.. ... i. ~ 't'"' ~ i ~ ... ....-... (,.,"'-~ ....... ... 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 {425) 251-6222 {425) 251-8782 CIVIL Ei'<GINEERING. LAND PLANNING SURVEYING. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SOUACE; KING COUNTY ASSESSOR MAPS MARCH 25, 201S ·~:,, :,~o Avc~u, s0s.,r,.. ,(~T. WA ]SQO:' ,_,2~J;s ~2,; il?5)75; -R7~'. FAX , ... ,~--"""-"""""'"'E"""-'"TAlSE"J>Cf'S""',= 'sJO>Ol~G3r->-:m ll ll ll ll ll ll ll i_i; '-I .......... -J '-I ..... -..I ~ C8::>AR FWe=t UCliTFOOT, LLC NO L.EhNON IH\l'EsnENTS, NC. i "' j''~ ·-: ~~~-2 ~ .,:,, ·a t:<j . . ' / I I OF BLUOTT FARMS -1 '/ I i I : I J I / --" I ' ,':., ,, f~ !~ /~@ I , 07 ' ! ' ! ' ! ' ! ' ! ' ', ,/. : ' _) L----------------------JI-...._______ ---~ ' ' ) / I I ""'""""" .. """"'"" 1/, I l,t, ! 1e21~ ,:ND "''~·Jf SOJT~ <EN:. ~~ 9ao>2 1~~5)251-0::,; (4:'~J2i 1-a1a~ ,.,. CEDAR RIYffi U<.JiTFOOT, LLC AK> ""'' ''"""""'""· """ ""'"-' '"""'"'""'·'""-'"'"->l:""«$0.,, • ..= L.aNON IWESTI.ENTS. INC. / ' " I: .. ~ t~ ;,; ' !/, I :,~ J ! t ,_/. 1 '/ l'lllll'IAAYPI..AT OF ELUOTT FARMS !! ! 11 ' .. Ii -.n.·.·o' ! ~ ' ~I I ~~ r ".;,/"f ;\~ • I _I __ \ ' I ; i~~? "rl , i -~ ~ / :/ I ,,;11 '.,1 / ii >t ' ' i Ii I !I ' ' ;:s, : . ; "'I / §;- I ,._ I 11 / ;:;; : I "</ i,l ii/ ' ,. ' ' ~ r O,' ~/ Ii ti I I I ii / t:T ij ;, I / ~-/ ! ' ! I I ! ! I ,' / / I I ! ! -. ! > --/ ! ~ I 11 § i !~ ~ ~1 11 ! I ! 1 i al I I I I 8 ~ : l" : ' I i ---.e,,.·f··· ·'·;,;;·.,1·fo1•· -•,c.-,-,ae / I . / I !~- ! I / /11 1 );ilfl E : "' ,,,., .. ""' - OF EILIOTT FARMS ' . ---'--------, ~ > --.-----r l m ' d, ! 'I I ,t L ,--~ H I I ! '" ,,, 1~--p+,-- 1 ' ., f i • • • • '.'"U..C • ' • s """"'"'*"''U!"' ;i •• ;,,,,.o.-'1<."i, "'"''"""-... -,, .;11'.t/',itl"" e.,_P.j,:~~"t," s R • ' I ' ' ' __ , 1f i 1' i ~ I,, ' ( • • • 1~~-o .'~N:i >','.%l ·;·~--~ •[NT '/IA 980~1 i<1'.;·251-62.'2 :<:0)251-8/~~ FA< ,,,c""""""""·'-""'~ S,'""1:Y..;, _,...._ ~tM:[i ""· = • • • • !, -~ t---l!Ni" • ' ' ' ' • I I I , ' ' / --' • s ' i!f'! '·-1, ,:.::: ' • ' i - • ,. ,, '! I I • • ' I I I i/; I, ' ,, .. -1, ! ',', I I ,, R',..,"'J,':".~oooo ;;.m;.,1_1 JI § !i i !, _ _., ~·-""''""""'' s R • s ,;, ./ 4 CEDAR FIVER L.ICliTFOOT, LLC NO ......... ·-.wn-Cfll SITE ROAD~ AtO PROFLE L..eN:IN NVES'RENTS, NC. OF EU/OTT FARMS 1--· I ; i I, H i P'----, I ,,, i ;L_J, 'II I ' ~ ; i • • • I I • • ~-I ,, I ~i 11 I, i • • s ''II { I -' ! ; i > < s ~··-1 i I 1', II II I ;I II Ii II I r CEDAR AIVEA LOiTFOOT, LLC ""° l..BIHON tM=Sll.EHTS, NC. - OF ELLIOTT ,ARMS L I I 111.D!J () OCI ( m ' ' ,•-=: --1 !~ ,,, • • • • • • ' ....... ""' _ j _ --' .. ,,,.,.,.,,,, '82''. 1/~C, ~Y(NUE S·'}(J-~ KE~T. W~ S8()!2 f4:?5J:5"-6ll2 il75):?5' -R?~: 'A< C..cENG.""~~"'-"'-'. ~'.....,...."'"'-S~E>Do<•-U.!.l..!.> ' • ··, i ;;;1; . I -"a.;. -Ii I / tn - I '"'""' i~ CEDAR flVER UGfTFOOT, LLC AN:) L..eff.'.)N NVESTMENTS, NC. / i I - u;' c;! I I ! i-t' -, h OF ELLIOTT FARMS ' ' ' It~ ,, I !! li I~ ,.~ ! !. '· l; / ,· I I ' I I !I • ! , , I , • ' ,/ .--·· i • I ' • • I • i ,,, I ( Lt··-i w !I .J I I 't~fl f_ "i'lll rf • • • " I • i L_•_ .--? ' ' ' ' ' ' • • • • • ' ' • -----------.......J / i I fl ii E/ ;Ji! ( "I I I ~/£ ~· "' ' ""I jyl ,. ' "' ' I ~/ 'I ;s, ,!? / /ii- ' ' ' ·,._ ! / i, "' ('1 ' ~'.< "• .' .f'!_ !; ,, ,, ~i ll!ll!l!ll!!lllllllll!l!ll!!ll!!l!ll!llll!!ll!l!lll!!!ll!!ll!!lll!!l!llll! il!liiil!iiiliiiiilli!!llii!l!!ilil!i CEOAFI FIVER ua-rJFOOT, LLC AIO L..Eft.NON NVES'TMENTS, NC. l ::;i;:: !: = ~ =~:;;=~:;:{:: · .,.)/•, .. ,M1M ;...,_,.,,.,,._..., .. CE ELLIOTT FARMS _I ' HEV.O.llOfl~TU ,~-~-' :::::~ ~=-:~; __,. ~ &'':'!-'::"i:.~" •• ~.:.ioce,,._ •. ._,Dl><<-<OODf!tt'1•0<>.c ll > ·, •·•··•· •-=:c•A ,o,:,•"" , u,n (l-_;,:, ,,...,~, ...,....,.,_,.,..,_._. fr~~t~~-.. :§;~~~ -"'""°"'" ,.. .. "'"'~'' C!'-• J""'~. ~,,v. ~'<'-:;:;~~~.'-.;.':,:··· c.RADE F'L4NE LOT6 <I I dJ .......... =.a,o ... """'"""-' ,l·-.-, 'M • ..,,1-~""'" .......... ~ ..... -.c,,.,..,..._L"E<l- :~,,.~"."'~~O,.,< ;.,"':.··· ~,,,.,.,.. ~C'O'ffi .... .~,~Z~'=£~~:-,,.., . .tn, "°'"""" ... ..,.,..,..... 'I'"' (F-~~:;§~~:: ... '~" (B:'. t:".'i,;~ .. ,.., "'°""' ..... ,.,, ,o ~~·ra..:,;..., :.:,~t,~';' e·, ,~'.;;;~£;- ~~~~-~~=~·e C/>_ooo"'!, .. "-'CP~"" ,~~~"'.¢f"-i'.~~,, ........ !'.;S,;~~::': ,:-" ~}~;~~~ r_r.r,,, • .,.,.,,,..,"'.,....,,._cr,o., -----... '"'" "'~ .... ,""'~""' "'"'''COL"">< °"'LOOI< 1~:::r-::1 ~·~ .. ,.., ... i'.Ft}jyj:• t-- _,:_-:..,-1 ~ ':>-;,,_ -~ I ~ F ~(~ ---~~-;:-,._,.. ---·,:; ,-~ ~ ~ -- , ,, I' ~,,, vr·, L fl"U<'-' r;'.4N! ' , I ---, i--,.;::..-:c.. { :1 lL.:J·-:,,:::.:,,··---+ , .. ,..,, ' ! ' :q t - ~·~-4,.,:~...,, l ! "'' .1.&"' •' - "Iii ~J+-:·.,, ·r r~-Y .+b; ;;_:~·:r ~ l ~11 TY~! J, - !iP --, .~•I _, ..... ===J .. ,f~ ~ ·.~:·,l' /\-,I\ -':1 ' ' ··•· .. .-' -~ I l \/1 L : ;{;: it ;~l -i ,. \~11 fYPI I, ~ -'.. ... "' .... ~~~--- ~ (·-., 1 Blllf{M'C A' 5[(.<.'}1-~"?..FLt.kW Bw~iY!lE /'! ,rN {i OlS J<l::.:Y)' Ir· ,·) 8b:'/.[J/iK_": _"4 __ 'f!lfS!. l?. C-CR /ii.f,,fjwr,,' f-} ;1.;;·>21J/S .... J/!_,.:!.l) ~--!j_C<lf 1/8" -! ,1-.:__. 3(A/£ I ·;ti"~ I -,J' -----,-----, --I ~ ::_,~~- Bt.:ILDING A+ EAST ELEVATION OPT. I !1{~:;0f'~/~9/Ar'.~0/V(F'-1CW 1 1/)T~ -------------------- .:i, 1:,11 ,YPI· I• 10].j{l BJ)_!1Q!_J\I_(; 0, ~ WEST E(_.f,_\!_A TIUN OPT. ~ '-''-"U·'-'"''--' n • "''-''--' , , • LLL, '~-'-"~'··•. "' ~, , ·, [';d,;}·1!~: .. J~ f ,' 4 '.(W OP/1(),V .:' -,f p,I:,' J_Q ff. {/)_/ • -',/ • 4 ' , .. :,) s =--#°T---liNITll'Pci; ------" 1l U)T!I I IOTU ,1-~UILDING A -ALLEY NORHI ELEVATIONS OPT I --,------ BUILDIN_Q __ A • EAST ELEVATIONS OPT. 2 ' ~ 1. - !;, l; r 'i "' -!- 11. 1 .. 1-..-111 .... 1 11o1owo, .... ""'"'-•m1ut-Putfllt:!I ......... .._.. .. _ --·-·-..... on .r ---------................ n, I ~ ·-.., ,;. I l .J ... ,J!~~l.~~§1 ::gtf"? S!~J o:: ... _., '..)i,:,; -,:i::p: J_!i'~ ""'cl'"! " • ., •J .. E--< ~ ~ ':: ~-, :=;./;)--,~-, ;;I, ::i ! ~ ,,, ; , fj~~!~fzg ~ ; C: ~ ! ! ! ;; .. - " ~ C ;,. .g 1- ~ i .!! w ~ aa 0 i[ ~ g, Q,_ .J :!1 5·5 mm ~ ' " - /:\ 1:J \ ~J'" ~ ., "' . " . ·- ~ 1 1111 ·". BUILDING 'B' Elevations & I Building Pla1 nit Type lbl I 1 i r,r1 111 I =' . ' ' I I .,,,___ __ _ ' f~!.---- ' '~ '1<;:::> :~i~' (~ $ -. .,s ' ,,'-i:: -;-;;:.1 \~: ' • ______ r--!~: ' . ": ..• ,, • I • I ~ ' ' • I ELLIOTT FARMS ?.Er, TON, WJ <:HJNC, T')N I ~LI£!/ r.-BPI.', TC,','; HOME~· U ... C t.wr,:,eeL-~"<'"O ~1~100 ~-M-Too;_., I -·, -------" ·- c· i: I I ' ' I ,,; ~ '! --) ~ i; ~ ,:~ '<, l'I' : ~ ~ : ;:2z ' >-C. I z..., ' BUILDING 'C' Elevations & Building Plan nit Type la,llla) ' ' C.1-1 ..:..' of'3F' I. ' ;_J 1+-+-~-,;:::IJ.:... j '. ,. +..--s~~~,....~--, I ;; ' ; 'IT' ::::::. I' q • L- h I 1, l,±= ,,, ,,, ,, ! :!~~!{ ~·-~i I I ' '! ' ' -{'.:' ' ' ' ' ' tl .. fVAflON A fod4 I• 5W 5049 Mmtere4 fan ;fod4 2 5W 5059 fobacco Ir·· - !frim 5W 6149 RelaKed Khaki I ------- !Accent 5W 1069 lrm_Qrte ------·, \_\'\ -(3 \;':' -~o -I 'i I <! Es i _, (ij i >! -------+-[)~d4 I: 5W 5042 Woodland "' ~ I O"'< 2 SW 6112 fhdw~, S ~ l.L l.L fnm_:_.'.i.W 6149 Relai._ed Khaki ____ ~-.,,<i _____ i ~ _cent 5W 2724 flack Cherr4 ""--.u_ ""-__ "'-' ---~----- E:LfVA110N A-OP110N 2 :[7ody I: 5W 6102 Portabello I---- l3ody I: 5W 6105 fea Che5t 1[7ody 2 5W 6068 Brevity i3rCM'n frr-1~SW 2829 Cla55ical White 1------------·----------- ,1\ccent: 51/v JOSS E.:ndurinci l:5r_onze ------- l7ody 2 5W 2827 Cdonial Revival Stone ------------, frim: 5W 2829 Classical White cent: 5W 6069 French Roa5t IS'\ -o ~ . <C T D. 0 I ' • : I ' I ' '.j'' . :. '. .. · ... ~ ------, z C) '\== es ' < (S 1 "--' \J\ \J\ i E E ! ~ ~ i ~ 1...1.._i ""'=t~=ti <C ·-~ ·-' -l--...i....= 5::)____ 'u...:. ~ ~-j E:lrVA110N B Bod4 I: 5W 6089 Cirronded . Bod4 i-5W 7052_W_a-rm_5Ull_e _____ _ frim: 5W 1020 Black foK ---------------··· --------- .Accent: 5W 6048 ferra Brun --··--------- I L __ _ \S\ b ~ -<T GQ . l , ' : '.).' ii:; 6 I ~ Bod4 I: 5W 5025 flacisU11e = "' ~ ! Bod4 2 5W 7052 Ur~an Puttij ..... .. ~ ~ i r.-..:...--"--'-----'.L '.L I ---+lf_ri;-~-n:-~:j66 ~1;~~f-~~~----~~----·-~·~ --~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~J [E:lE:VA110N D-OP-flON 2 Ii\ 0 ~ . <C T <;::,. 0 a -. ~ ·. z C) \- SL C) ' ~ bod4 I: SW 6175 Cocoon .~ 9 Dod4 I : SW 7 009 riki Hui:, ,,':; ,-· --. ------IJ\ \JI bod4 2: SW 2070 backpack fan bod4 2: SW 7040 Smokenru5e != != -·· --------------------------I\) I\) Trim SW 7041 Van t74ke bro.vn ~rim SW 7041 Van t74ke bro.vn ·-~ ~ ~ ~ !Accent: SW 2167 Can4on Wall l\ccent: SW 2858 Polished Mah0<jan4 IS:: ~ if: ~ ' -------------------------I : -- E:LE:VAtlON C Bod4 I 5W 1027 River Pebble Bod4 2 5W 5020 Caribou frim 5W 7051 Canva5 fan ···-· --------------- . Accent: 5W 1650 Rai5in \I\ I'- \;" Q <C T G Q "''. u 5 ~ _jBod4 I: 5W 5001 L.odC,Je Br(Nln Bod4 1:_Jl/j 1061 Cit45cape j '.Bod4 2 5W 7054 Outerbanb Bod4 2: 5W 2848 Ro4croft Pewter ~ ~ ' ---------. ~ ~ frim: 5W 7051 ~§_ltl'liJ5_~---frim: 5W 7051 Canva5 fan ___ ~ ~ ¢ ~ Accent: 5W 6006 Black Bean ___ .. __ A.ccent: 5W 2121 Cardamom ~·-···~ ~ ,;-:; ll, MJ <l~~ ... ~;:; i~J ' ·r I! ~J =~~ I'~ ;;;~~ ;=j~ g~& _,_ t , I ~!, !! i~ ~? '! l'~ !; ,! l! 'I --~ '' \i ,,, " " ,, ,, :, ,, 1,,, 1 , j 11 'I I :rr· •0 ·+•·1•0···,~•""'"'''!! w i~n1·0 fir !; ~ ,,. ! "!Wl!!!i!!!!! H! ljljl'!llj!ii!lii!illij ~I "r ·ii!·. i •• 1,1, 11. --1! • ·! "1·!!'1 ., I ~ ~ j: ,:~. ~ ' -::! i1-t-" -i ! l i ! i ! .. l I 'I , , · · j I ~ l :i 1r _____ I .. co-->{-$)-z '"' s 181!~ 71~0 ~o[N•I( SOJTH ~-ENT. WA 9aJ.IC (•25\:51-5:?~C BRIXTON HOMES LLC C/0 OLEN MAURER <•'51251 -aoa: fAX i;; ji! 'li !ii ·'~~ '" ~!II~ 11, !I 1~ ' I ' ' :Mt.C..;«!o,..;,_.,,c,,_ '-·-'"""'""""''"-"""-(' 14410 88..-REO-ROAD. SUITE 200 BeLLEVUE. WA t8007 ;;:;, i~g ?!~ ~! i~n j:~ !,. !'" ·;1 1-i'ii ~: Jii i .t~ ~ii i !, ~ g~ ,I_ ~ .~ -, Ii\ i! 'ii ,, 'n ,, " ,,, I ii ~~~ -,~ "' §~ !!I • I· ! llj ·! ' l1 , ... ""·'" ""' - . ' ~,..,~ .. ' /~/ (I 'p' y CD 0 C z C )> ::IJ -< ~ -i 0 "O 0 Ci) ::IJ )> "O ::c 0 (J) C ::IJ < m -< ,/ 1,/ if-r i IV .. '-..{~·-1 '" " Tltt.: BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY ~ OP THI Nwt/4, 0, THI .. ,,. OI" arc. 12. PTW OF 111E IIWV4. OF THE NE1/II OF IIEC. 22, TWP. as N., IIGE II IAIIT, W. M. CITY OF IElffON Ul8 CCU.TY IUTE OF Wi\lHtNGTON ,,215 '2"D '''"'-'E so,_,1~ ,£~'. W~ 'MC!< 14;;,::~1-0,,:: (•2s,12s,-a,e2 r•, ''"''-""'""""'"-' ~.[t1,1f!Ol"'!;s!'<\CTMC!S '''"~ ,~ BRIXTON HOMES LlC C/0 GLEN MAI.IIER 14410 BB.-AED-AOAD, SUITE 200 ea.LEVI.£, WA 98007 I I II= I• ' Tltlt: BOUNDARY l TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CD 0 C z CJ > :JJ -< go -I 0 "'O 0 G) :JJ > "'O :I: 0 (/) C :JJ < m -< ~ 0, THI NW'l/4, 0, 'hll Hl/4 OF SEC. 22, l"TN OF TllE 8W114, OF THE NE1/II OF ftC. 22. TWP. 23 N., IIGI! 15 IMT, W. M. QTY OF RENTON IONG COIIIITY STATE OF WAIIMCiTON C a N 0 ' () I . • < !I I :1 11 ' ;u, ~J ' ' i I i ~I ,, I ' ' l L_ ' i : ~1 ~' ' C "I I ' ~ ~ -' ;~ h ' " ,M !! I~ .f, ,o :~ ,z i~ ' ~ - ' : ii~ !5 ~~M ~~z !Z: 0 mm~ 3 ··~ 0 -~~ O~M ~ n I +N~ <N ~:...i mN • r/a. ':t~,~ 0ovc UN[ ~ .. ID l!M.tfo,,m ' ' I: ,, ~ATCH LINE STA 105+00 SEE BELOW RIGHT ' ~ ' l ) I I I l i ~ 1 ) i I " " ~ Ii " M ~ z -1 ci i~I i'! I< ' ,. C !~ z M IM ' j~ ' [~ ,M '< '" '~ r I I I I I i I I ::i ! '' I ~ '=1 J i -1!1 l ' ' ' ' ' i ~ 1--' ' ,, ! ! MAINrO.ANC( ACC(SS • ' ,, ' I :I ,, , i·· ' i ' i ! '' ' ? 1 '"'' I l> '· ~ ~. 0 I ! I. ,'-\ 1l-1 : •• cal--·-?r,~ rt1.·· 1, , ' 'l l 1;:i .... I i~ --c!lc!Jj-~,,c---- , I~ > _d ! I i' -· " BUILDING 'A' Elevations & II , ,,..,, """ ">["""''''"" """' ,,..,_,,,, ,,.,. •. ,..., .,,. ""' .. ,,,~ ~,, .. _,.,..., .... , • .,,.._ ... .., ~-,--a.=~E"'L""L""1"""o"""T"T"""f'"A-R~M"""s==a..., 'I Building Plan ;r; ~· . I nit Type la> I' ~J!!CO' "'°'°""'..,,_ 14',:, r,,:.~~ """-·~-~L.Y HENTQ/V, WA )."i!,'1(. TC>r. '_'~/[NT fl,/;:/; .',~•1\' /--1()~1£::, LLc ,...."' eel.·lln) llO..IO ~l'l'f w.:, ~~~. "~-..C.T<:>, .,..,.,, ' ' !' ~ -.:::__ j---j I ,1 l'j ' ' • • C BUILDING 'B' Elevations & Building Plan ·-·nit Type lbl (-i...) I , I ' I ; ' ELLIOTT FARMS ~~, ,u;,CfOli .... "°'"' .,,.,.,_r, -tALC~' ~"' __ _!!_~'!...r_°!~~?!_l':_('_!_:_'J:!__~~ I CLl[l,'T: SP1.YTOa, HOM[:C L~'.: i i.u..,. ee'L·IIE> '00.10 !OJI'!?' ,oo I NU:11:-.. __ T,;:t< _., ' CC>J-.:.cr ""°" ~~VITT ..... ,...u..m, rr, ~J.i :1 • !'· • 1 ! . , I (~) 'I ,i,i u " I" H I I , t ~ ' ·~ I I' I " ~ I ' , ' C ' l ; I ~ Er .. ·.·.'.'.--.... -.. -.... :~:* }; : : -. '~ ---- ' ,-:: ----____:J:·----------< +---,Hr-, ',; " ?~ '"' ~t :"'. ' ' . ! ~};:;' _____________ j \:~ ,., 1.:- i~ l,o I I§ I! lt'. k I~, lie BUILDING 'C' Elevations & Building Plan nit Type la,lllal c-· ;----- , -~ +--! !+-+-~-""Li • '. ' ·~ t--,,--,'---.; I f.:~ i 1 ' I '. ' I ..... 1 1q -,' ~r'' ~ Hi $~H~ fi!H ,I !! ! ,! 'I I ' l I ' t ' 1: " I~ ~ [~ i ~;~ ::l~i ;H; r!"'l · '·!· .; r ,i~g~I j 11 1!!h;i ~ ~ ,~ii ;r] : 1i 1,11:I·' I H,·, 1! ,~ ' ' ' . jj i: ,( ~. ' .,• /' ' I ' ' . ·~ I mj I!:~- -1~ -' " ELJVAflON A f ody I : SW 5049 Monterey f. 1fody 2 SW 5059 fobacco t ·1frim SW_t5149 R~axed K--haki Accent SW 1069 Iron Ore an Body I: SW 5042 Woodland Body 2: SW 6172 Hardware -- 'rim SW 6149 Relaxed Khaki --------------·-·-· t\ccent: SW 2724 Black Cherry - .. t . ' ' I -L __ =--===---~ \i\ 0 ~ -<~ !::; 0 < ~ 9 ___3! "'--' "' "' E E I L L 1--~ --S l:s sl ~ sl ~~--~ ~ E:l-EVAflON A-OP110N 2 1boc1_4 I 5W 61c:)~!ortabello 11 '.7od4 2 5-W 6068 Brevil4 Brcwn frm 5W 2829 Classical White ---------. --------------- f'\ccent 5W 7000 E'nduril1lj Bronze - IBod4 I: 5W 6105 foa Chest \S\ --I'----~ Q i§; 0 ---------+---~ Bod4 2 5W 2821 Cdonial Revival Stone E ------------------(13 ilrim: SW 2829 Classical White "'-' ::; f-----------<C -'cs cent 5W 6069 French Roast E:' ~ -- \ 2 Cl "" I:',_ Cl ' <C ~ j --"l "--' ~ E L (IJ "- ¢ '€ <C -- I:',_ "--' rl-r:VAflON B ' ' .. , ' . , , I "' ti \;':::' . <C 'T GO ~ (S ' ... ~ ~: 5W 6089 Cirwnded Bod~ I: 5W 5025 flacis'W'le ~ IBod~2 5W 1052 w~~~ '7'UX1e Bod~ 2 5'jv 1052 Urban Put:lt.1 ~ ~ lfrnn SW 70~QBlac,kfox _____ ~--·-··----. frim: 5W 1020 Bl"~.k fox __ ____ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ccent: 5W 6048 ferra ~run _____ _ _ .. Accent 5W 1062 Rock Bottom iS::' ~ ~ ~ I il:L.fVAflON B-OP110N 2 l3od4 I 5W 6177 Cocoon Bod4 I 5W 7009 fiki Hut \,\ (3 <;::' - <CT I:::,. 0 -----------;-= "' 7od4 2 5W 2010 Dackpack fan Bod4 2: SW 7040 5mokehwse E ---------------------------.. . -. i\S fnm 5W 7041 Van t74ke Brown frim: 5W 7041 Van t74ke Brown _ ,,_:__: ~ l,,,.. sw21&1c"';_wa1 _ _ _ ___ ~~ swwsaro,,.,,M:;;;;;;i--------_ --~ ~ z C) \-s:,_ C) ' cG G 1 "'--' "' E L "' l.L ;_s:: cg < - s:,_ "'--' E:U:'VAflON C .--~ ·· . I I . · -~·~ --~ Yr~ -~~ ~Les:,,~~, . -/ ~~ --~L~, I --~ , c----, • -, ___ _ __ ___ -~-'-~==,-, -·-------, , ' I••.. i i i ..... ' '--~: •• I ••• liri, •••!•, ! --·-i;,. ; .... ; j , ...... !: 1•••~ .... ,,.. ••• .,_ 111••1•• •••. i ..... :: I 1 "'l•i i i ,. ,. ,.. ~-,,. ! ,,. : i 1 -------• -----------I --------------1 --: : V-1~ L'~ I Y-/'~ -l-_____ 11~,---:.1--··----.-;-:-.u u,.. --1 ·-~,--11 co I,.. -1·. .wu ... ,_ --, ,._,i~.,-,._ -I : 1 ~• I ·,; a.;u ULI\.; ·_ :,u r.;;;" : 11~1 .. ~~,.,-i ! -~. ·' . I , . . I I ' i i ! _I _·: ... ,.. ·--~--! __ , ~-; __ i_ --- \I, -() i,;'::' -~o l~odLJ_J_'5WJ_027 r'ille_rfebble !Body I 5W 5001 lodcie Bw11n Body I: 5W 1061 ~1Ujscape _____ -----1 1Dod4_?: 5W 502S, Ca-ribrn 1 1Bod-4 2 ___ sw_1s_5 ___ 4 Outerbanks Body 2: 5W ~848 r'o4croft Pewter ---~ !frim 5W7S51 Canvac'fan frim_:_5W7S51~anva_s_fan lrim 5W7S51 Canvas fan_____ _ ·."'-' ~ I, '< <> !Accent 5W 16 50 Raisin ______ 'f'ccent _SW 6006Black Dean Accent 5W 2121 Cardamom I~ ,;::; u ~ 1 "--' "' ~ I.L ¢~ < - "-"--' PLAT NAME RESERVATION CERTIFICATE TO: TODD LEVITT 14410 BEL-RED ROAD BELLEVUE, WA 98007 PLAT RESERVATION EFFECTIVE DATE: February 18, 2015 The plat name, ELLIOTI FARMS has been reserved for future use by MURRAY FRANKLYN. 1 certify that I have checked the records of previously issued and reserved plat names. The requested name has not been previously used in King County nor is it currently reserved by any party. This reservation will expire February 18, 2016, one year from today. It may be renewed one year at a time. If the plat has not been recorded or the reservation renewed by the above date it will be deleted. Deputy Auditor RETURN ADDRESS: Jami Balint Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007 DRAFT \ ... WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet (Rew 65.04) DOCUMENT TITLE(S) (or transactions contained therein): Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements and Reservations for Elliott Farms Home Owners Association REFERENCE NUMBER(S) OF DOCUMENTS ASSIGNED OR RELEASED: NIA D Additional reference #s on page of document( s) GRANTOR(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials) CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC. D Additional names on oa2e of document GRANTEE(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials) ELLIOTT FARMS HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION D Additional names on oage of document LEGAL DESCRIPTION (abbreviated: i.e., lot. block, plat or section, township, range) PARCEL A OF KC BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO L95L0113 RECORDING NO 9510179023 BEING A PORTION OF GOV LOT 3 IN NE 1/4 OF SECTION 22-23-05 LY SLY OF SLY LINE OF RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY, SR 169, AND PORTION OF NW I/4 OF SE I/4 (BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR CEDARWOOD PU D 0 Additional lel!al is on oa1;1:e ofdocwnent ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL/ACCOUNT NUMBER 2223059004 D Assessor Tax #snot yet assi1med DECLARATION AND COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RESERVATIONS FOR ELLIOTT FARMS HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION THIS DECLARATION AND COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RESERVATIONS FOR ELLIOTT FARMS (the "Declaration") is made by Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. a Washington corporation ("Declarant") as of this __ day of , 20 __ RECITALS Declarant is the owner of certain real property (the "Property") in King County, Washington, legally described on Exhibit A hereto. The Property is subdivided as shown in the Elliott Fanns Final Short Plat No. _____ _ recorded under Auditor's File No. , records of King County, Washington (the "Plat"). Declarant wishes to subject the Property to this Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant declares that the Property, subject to all restrictions and easements of the Plat, shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed, leased, used and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, assessments, and liens hereinafter set forth which are for the purpose of protecting the value and desirability of and which shall touch and concern and run with title to the Property and which shall be binding on all parties having any right, title, or interest in the Property or any portion thereof, and their respective heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof. ARTICLE l. DEFINITIONS Section l. l Words Defined. In this Declaration and any amendments hereto, the following terms shall have the following meanings and all definitions shall be applicable to the singular and plural forms of such terms: l. l.l "Association" shall mean Elliott Farms Home Owners Association described m Article 4 of this Declaration, its successor and assigns. I. 1.2 "Board" shall mean the Board of Directors of the Association, and "Directors" shall mean members of the Board of Directors. l. l.3 "Common Areas" shall mean the real property (including the improvements and facilities thereon) described as all areas of the Property outside the Lots, including roadways, walkways, parking areas, parks, open space buffer and landscape areas shown on the Plat which are owned by one Lot Owner or in common by the Lot Owners, and shall be held for the common use and enjoyment of the members of the Association, but shall not include any streets or other areas now or hereafter dedicated for public use. Maintenance, repair and replacement of improvements located within the Common Areas shall be the responsibility of the Association. In the event the Association is dissolved, each Lot Owner shall have an equal obligation to maintain the Common Areas. 1.1.4 "Construction" and "Constructed" shall mean any construction, reconstruction, erection or alteration of a Structure, except wholly interior alterations to a then existing Structure. 1.1.5 "Declarant" shall mean Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. or such successor or assign (including a Participating Builder) as Declarant may designate by a writing recorded in the records of the Auditor of King County. 1.1.6 "Declaration" shall mean this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, and Reservations for Riley's Walk, as it may from time to time be amended. 1.1.7 "First Mortgage" and "First Mortgagee" shall mean, respectively, (a) a recorded mortgage on a Lot that has legal priority over all other Mortgages thereon, and (b) the holder of a First Mortgage. 1.1.8 "Lot" shall mean any legally platted plot ofland shown upon any recorded subdivision map of the Property, with the exception of the Common Areas. 1.1.9 "Mortgage" shall mean a recorded mortgage or deed of trust that creates a lien against a Lot and shall also mean a real estate contract for the sale of a Lot. 1.1.10 "Mortgagee" shall mean the beneficial owner, or the designee of the beneficial owner, of an encumbrance on a Lot created by a mortgage or deed of trust and shall also mean the vendor, or the designee of a vendor, of a real estate contract for the sale of a Lot. l. l .11 "Owner" shall mean the record owner, whether one or more Persons, of fee simple title to a Lot within the Property, including a contract purchaser entitled to beneficial possession. I.I. 12 "Participating Builder" shall mean a Person who acquires from Declarant one or more Lots for the purpose of improving the same for resale to future Owners. 1.1. 13 "City" shall mean City of Renton. 1.1.14 "Person" shall mean an individual, corporation, partnership, association, trustee, or other legal entity. 1.1.15 "Plat" shall mean the recorded plat of Elliott Farms and any amendments, corrections or addenda thereto subsequently recorded. I. 1.16 "Property" shall mean the land described on Exhibit A and such additions thereto as may hereafter be subjected to the tem1s of the Declaration, and all improvements and structures now or hereafter placed on the land. 1.1.17 "Structure" shall mean any building, fence, wall, driveway, walkway, patio, garage, storage shed, carport, mailboxes, basketball hoop, play equipment, swimming pool, rockery, dog run or the like. 1.1. 18 "Transition Date" shall be as defined in Section 4.9. Section 1.2 Fonn of Words. The singular fonn of words shall include the plural and the plural shall include the singular. Masculine, feminine, and neuter pronouns shall be used interchangeably. Section 1.3 Exhibits. The following are exhibits to this Declaration: ARTICLE 2. Exhibit A -Legal Description of the Property Exhibit B -Fence Detail COMMON AREAS AND EASEMENTS Section 2.1 Ownership of Common Areas. Tract 999, Tract_, Tract_, Tract_, Section 2.2 Use. Each Owner shall have the right to use the Common Areas in common with all other Owners. The right to use the Common Areas shall be appurtenant to and pass with the ownership of each Lot and shall extend not only to each Owner, but also to his agents, tenants, members of his household, invitees, and licensees. The right to use the Common Areas shall be governed by the provisions of the Plat, this Declaration, the Bylaws, and the rules and regulations of the Association. Section 2.3 Abandonment of Common Areas. The Common Areas may not be abandoned, partitioned, subdivided, encumbered, sold, or transferred by any Owner or any third party, except in connection with the sale of a Lot, and such sale shall be subject to the provisions of this Declaration, which shall run with the land. With the approval of at least 67% of the Owners and compliance with any restrictions on the face of the Plat, the Common Areas may be transferred to or encumbered for the benefit of a public agency, authority, or utility that consents to such easements or transfers. The granting of easements for utilities or for other purposes consistent with the intended use of the Common Areas by the Owners shall not be deemed a partition or division. Section 2.4 Alteration of Common Areas. Nothing shall be altered or constructed in or removed from any Common Areas except upon the prior written consent of the Board. Section 2.5 Conditions for Grant of Easements. Except as otherwise provided in this Declaration or utility easements with service providers, the easements granted in this Declaration are subject to the agreement of grantees to compensate grantor ( or grantor's successors and assigns) for any damage to the affected property caused by the exercise of grantee's easement rights; to use reasonable care in carrying out any construction or repair in the easement areas and to restore such areas, to the extent reasonably practicable, to the condition they were immediately prior to such work; and to indemnify and hold harmless grantor (and grantor's successors and assigns) from any and all claims for injuries and/or damages suffered by any person caused by grantee's exercise of the rights therein granted. Except as otherwise provided in utility easements with service providers, all work perfonned within an easement shall be conducted in a timely and workmanlike manner, free and clear ofliens. ARTICLE 3. CONSTRUCTION ON LOTS, USE OF LOTS AND AREA USES. Section 3.1 Uniformity of Use and Appearance. One of the purposes of this Declaration is to assure within the Property a uniformity of use and quality of workmanship, materials, design, maintenance and location of Structures with respect to topography and finish grade elevation. It is in the best interests of each Owner that such uniformity of use be maintained as hereinafter provided. Notwithstanding anything herein set forth, the Construction of any Structure shall comply with the more restrictive of either (i) the terms and conditions of this Declaration or (ii) the laws, codes, ordinances and regulations of any governmental entity having jurisdiction. Section 3 .2 Submission and Approval of Plans 3.2.1 Construction. No Structure shall be Constructed or caused to be Constructed on any Lot unless the Plans for the Structure have been approved in writing by the Board in its capacity as the Architectural Control Committee. The Board's approval of any Plans shall not constitute any warranty or representation whatsoever by the Board or any of its members that such Plans were examined or approved for engineering or structural integrity or sufficiency or compliance with applicable governmental laws, codes, ordinances and regulations, and each Owner hereby releases any and all claims or possible claims against the Board or any of them, and their heirs, successors and assigns, or of any nature whatsoever, based upon engineering or structural integrity or sufficiency or compliance with applicable governmental laws, codes, ordinances and regulations. 3.2.2 Submission. At least 45 days before commencing Construction of any Structure on any Lot, the Owner shall submit to the Board two complete sets of detailed building, construction, surface water run-off control and specifications and a site plan showing the location of all proposed Structures (the plans, specifications and site plans are individually and collectively referred to herein as the "Plans"). 3.2.3 Awroval. The Board may withhold its approval by reason of its reasonable dissatisfaction with the location of the Structure on the Lot, color scheme, finish, architecture, height, impact on view from another Lot or Lots, appropriateness of the proposed Structure or materials used therein. The Board's approval or disapproval of Plans shall be made within 45 days of submission of a complete set of plans, shall be in writing, and approval shall be evidenced by written endorsement on such Plans, one copy of which shall be delivered to the owner of the Lot upon which the Structure is to be Constructed. Except for violation of those restrictions specifically set forth in Sections 3.3 through 3.5, if the Board has not provided a Lot Owner with written notice of objections to any construction within six (6) months after its completion, Board approval shall not be required and the related Covenants shall be deemed to have been fully complied with. After delivering its notice of objections to a Lot Owner, the Board shall be entitled to take whatever action the Board deems reasonably appropriate to enforce the provisions of the Declaration, including, without limitation, commencing an action against the Lot Owner. Section 3.3 Size and Height. 3.3.1 Floor Area. The floor area of the main house Structure, exclusive of open porches and garages shall be not less than 1800 square feet for a dwelling containing two levels. 3.3.2 Lot Size. No Lot or portion of a Lot in this Plat shall be divided and sold or resold, or ownership changed or transferred whereby the ownership of any portion of this Plat shall be less than the area required for the use district in which the Lot is located. 3.3.3 Local Codes. All buildings or Structures shall be constructed in accordance with King County and other applicable Codes. In the event of a conflict between any applicable codes and this Declaration, the codes shall govern. Section 3.4 Appearance. Unless otherwise approved by the Board, the following design/construction requirements shall apply. 3.4.1 Roofing. The roof shall be of architectural asphalt shingle composition, with at least a 30-year life. 3.4.2 Siding. All siding materials shall be of masonry (including dryvit, cultured stone, brick, stone, or similar material), and/or wood or wood type siding material. All paints or natural finishes shall be those colors commonly known as earth tones. 3.4.3 Entry Walks, Porches and Decks. All front entry walks shall be exposed aggregate concrete, and all decks and wood porches shall be constructed of cedar or pressure-treated materials. 3.4.4 Driveways. All driveways shall be constructed of exposed aggregate concrete paving. Section 3.5 Use Restrictions. 3.5.1 Residential Use. The Lots shall be used only for single family residential purposes, and only one single family residence (and such accessory structures as are approved pursuant to this Article 3) shall be constructed on each Lot. Temporary "model homes" and real estate sales offices established for the purpose of marketing the Plat shall be considered a residential use until houses have been built and sold on all Lots. 3.5.2 Maintenance of Buildings and Lots. Each Owner shall, at the Owner's sole expense, keep the interior and exterior of the Structure on the Owner's Lot, as well as the Lot, in a clean and sanitary condition, free of rodents and pests, and in good order, condition and repair and shall do all redecorating, painting, landscaping, and maintenance at any time necessary to maintain the appearance and condition of the Structure and the Lot. Each Owner shall at all times keep the front yard landscaping well maintained, including weed removal, mowing, fertilizing and watering (subject to governmental restrictions on watering.) If an Owner fails to so maintain the front yard, and fails to cure the defect within thirty (30) days after notice from the Board, then the Board may, by resolution adopted by seventy-five percent (75%) of the total Board membership, engage a commercial landscape company to do necessary maintenance and may separately assess such maintenance as a charge against the Lot. 3.5.3 Completion of Construction. Any Structure erected or placed on any Lot shall be completed as to external appearance within eight months from the date Construction is started, however, with good cause shown, the Board may extend this term. All front landscaping must be completed within one month from the date of issuance of the certificate of occupancy, all side and rear landscaping must be completed within six (6) months of issuance of certificate of occupancy, however, with good cause shown, the Board may extend this term. All Lots shall be maintained in a neat and orderly condition during Construction. 3.5.4 Parking. No commercial-type trucks, campers, trailers, motorhomes, boats or motorcycles shall be parked or permitted to remain on any Lot, unless the same is stored or placed in a garage, in a rear yard area screened from adjoining lots, or in a screened carport. No such vehicles shall be parked overnight on any street adjoining any Lot; provided that such vehicles belonging lo guests may occasionally be so parked. No motor vehicles, inoperative for reasons of mechanical failure, shall be parked and/or stored on any Lot or in the street right-of-way for more than 72 hours. 3.5.5 _fugm. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on or from any Lot without the prior written consent of the Board, except for "For Rent" or "For Sale" signs in a form not prohibited by any rules and regulations of the Board. This Section shall not apply to the Declarant or any Participating Builder. 3.5.6 Animals. No horses, livestock, poultry, reptiles, pigs or other non-domestic animals shall be kept on any lot. All animal enclosures must be kept in a clean, neat and odor-free condition at all times. Notwithstanding anything set forth herein all Owners shall comply with all applicable governmental laws, codes, ordinances, and relations pertaining to animals. 3.5.7 Temporary Structures. No Structure of a temporary character, trailer, tent, shack, garage, barn, or other outbuilding shall be installed, placed or used on any Lot as a residence, either temporarily or permanently. 3.5.8 Clothes Lines. No washing, rugs, clothing, apparel or any other article shall be hung from the exterior of any Structure or on a Lot so as to be visible from the streets and roadways adjoining the Lots. 3.5.9 Radio and Television Aerials and Satellite Dishes. No television or radio aerial shall be erected or placed on any Lot. No rotary beams, separate towers or other similar devises shall be constructed on any Lot without the written approval of the Board. All aerial and satellite dish installations must receive prior written approval from the Board. 3.5.10 Trash Containers and Debris. All trash shall be placed in sanitary containers either buried or screened so as not to be visible from adjoining Structures or streets or roadways. No Lot or any portion thereof shall be used as a dumping ground for trash or rubbish of any kind. Yard rakings, dirt and debris resulting from landscaping work or Construction shall not be dumped onto adjoining lots or streets or roadways. Compost piles may be kept upon the Lots provided they are kept in a clean, neat, odorless and sanitary condition. 3.5.1 l Offensive Activity. Unless otherwise approved by the Board, no trade, craft, business, profession, commercial or manufacturing enterprise or business or commercial activity of any kind, including day schools, nurseries, or church schools ( except in-home day care for not more than four children, provided that there shall be no external signage of such activity), shall be conducted or permitted on any Lot, nor shall goods, equipment, vehicles or materials used in connection therewith, be kept, parked, stored, dismantled or repaired outside of any Lot or any street within the Property. No noxious activity, including but not limited to the creation of excess levels of noise, shall be carried on in any Lot, nor shall anything be done therein which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to other Owners or tenants. 3.5.12 Underground Utilities. No outdoor overhead wire or service drop for the distribution of electric energy or for telecommunications purposes nor any pole, tower or other structure supporting said outdoor overhead wires shall be erected, placed or maintained within the Property. All Owners shall use underground service wires to connect any Structure to electric or telephone utility facilities. 3.5.13 Water Supply/Sewage Disposal. No individual water supply system or individual sewage system shall be permitted on any Lot. 3.5.14 Damage. Any damage to streets, Plat improvements, entry structure, fences, landscaping, mailboxes, lights and lighting standards by Lot Owners, their children, contractors, agents, visitors, fiiends, relatives or service personnel shall be repaired and restored to like new condition by such Owner within twelve (12) days from the occurrence of such damage. 3.5.15 Window Coverings. Curtains, drapes, blinds or valances shall be installed on all windows within ninety (90) days of occupancy. No newspapers, bed sheets or other makeshift window coverings shall be visible from the exterior of the Structure. 3.5.16 Wood Piles. No wood piles shall be located within the front yard setback or otherwise in a location visible from the street. 3.5.17 Fences. All fences shall conform to the fence details shown on Exhibit B unless otherwise authorized by the Board. Unless otherwise authorized by the Board, no fence, wall hedge or mass planting over three feet in height, other than foundation; landing, shall be permitted to extend nearer to any street than the minimum setback line; however, nothing shall prevent erection of a necessary retaining wall, the top of which does not extend more than two feet above the finished grade at the back of said retaining wall. 3.5.18 Climbing Apparatus or Play Equipment. No climbing apparatus or play equipment shall be constructed or caused to be constructed on any lot unless the Plans for such Structure have been approved in writing by the Board in its capacity as the Architectural Control Committee in accordance with the provisions of Article III of this Declaration. 3.5.19 Drainage. All building downspouts, footing, drains and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings on file with King County. This plan shall be submitted with the application for any building permit. All connections of the drains shall be constructed and approved prior to final building inspection approval. For those Lots that are designated for individual Lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be designed and constructed as part of the building permit process and shall comply with the approved construction drawings on file with King County. 3.6 Landscaping. Maintenance of landscape strips separating the sidewalk from the roadway, planter islands and/or planted medians shall be responsibility of the Association or, as determined by the Board at its discretion allocated to the adjoining Owners. Under no circumstances shall the County bear any maintenance responsibilities for landscaping strips, planter islands or planted medians ARTICLE 4. ELLIOTT FARMS HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION. Section 4.1 Form of Association. The Owners of Lots within the Property shall constitute the members of The Elliott Farms Home Owners Association, a Washington nonprofit corporation to be formed by Declarant. The rights and duties of the members and of the Association shall continue to be governed by the provisions of this Declaration, and the Association's Articles oflncorporation and Bylaws. Section 4.2 Board of Directors. The affairs of the Association shall be governed by a Board of Directors (the "Board"). The initial Board shall be as described in the Articles of Incorporation of The Elliott Fanns Home Owners Association and shall serve until the Transition Date. Except, however, so long as Declarant owns any Lot within the Plat, the initial Board shall continue to function in its capacity as the Architectural Control Committee, as more particularly set forth in Article 3. At such time as the last Lot owned by Declarant is sold to a retail purchaser, the duties of the Board set forth in Article 3, in its capacity as the Architectural Control Committee, shall be assumed by the Board elected to serve after the Transition Date. After the Transition Date, the Board shall consist of such numbers of members as provided for in the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Association. Subject to any specific requirements hereof, the Board shall have authority to establish operating rules and procedures. ln the event of death or resignation of any member or members of the Board, the remaining member or members, if any, shall have full authority to appoint a successor member or members. Members of the Board shall not be entitled to any compensation for services performed as Directors pursuant to this Declaration. Upon the Transition Date and without further action by any person or persons, (i) the term of the initial Directors or their successors shall end, and (ii) the initial Directors and their then successors shall be released from any and all liability whatsoever for claims arising out of or in connection with this Declaration, excepting only claims arising prior to the Transition Date. Section 4.3 Qualification for Membership. Each Owner of all or a portion of the fee interest in a Lot (including Declarant) shall be a member of the Association. Ownership of a Lot shall be the sole qualification for membership in the Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be separate from Ownership of any Lot, and shall not be assigned, transferred, pledged, hypothecated, conveyed or alienated in any way except upon the transfer of title to the Lot and then only to the transferee of title to the Lot. Any attempt to make a prohibited transfer shall be void. Any transfer of title to a Lot shall operate automatically to transfer the membership in the Association to the persons constituting the new Owners. Section 4.4 Voting Rights, The Association shall have two (2) classes of voting membership: Class A: Class A members shall be all Owners with the exception of the Declarant and shall be entitled to one ( 1) vote for each Lot owned; provided, that if a Lot has been sold on contract, the contract purchaser shall exercise the rights of an Owner. Except with respect to contract purchasers, when more than one person holds an interest in any Lot, all such persons shall be members. Class B: Class B members shall be the Declarant and shall be entitled to three (3) votes for each Lot owned. The Class B membership shall cease and be converted to Class A membership effective on the Transition Date. Section 4.5 Voting. If a Lot is owned by more than one person and only one of them is present or represented at a meeting, the one who is present or represented will represent the Owner. The vote for a Lot must be cast as a single vote, and fractional votes shall not be allowed. If joint owners are unable to agree among themselves how their vote shall be cast, they shall lose their right to vote on the matter in question. An Owner may, by written notice to the Board, designate a voting representative for the Lot. The designated voting representative need not be an Owner. The designation may be revoked at any time by written notice to the Board from a Person having an ownership interest in a Lot, or by actual notice to the Board of the death or judicially declared incompetence of any Person with an ownership interest in the Lot, except in cases in which the Person designated is a Mortgagee of the Lot. This power of designation and revocation may be exercised by the guardian of an Owner, the attorney-in-fact for the Owner under a durable power of attorney, and the administrator or executor of an Owner's estate. If no designation has been made, or if a designation has been revoked and no new designation has been made, the voting representative of each Lot shall be the group composed of all of its Owners. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Declaration, a quorum is present throughout any meeting of the Association if the Owners to which thirty-four percent (34%) of the votes of the Association are allocated are present in person or by proxy at the beginning of the meeting. Section 4.6 Pledged Votes. An Owner may, but shall not be obligated to, pledge his vote on all issues or on certain specific issues to a Mortgagee; provided, however, that if an Owner is in default under a Mortgage on his Lot for 90 consecutive days or more, the Owner's Mortgagee shall automatically be authorized to declare at any time thereafter that the Owner has pledged his vote to the Mortgagee on all issues arising after such declaration and during the continuance of the default. If the Board has been notified of any such pledge to a Mortgagee, only the vote of the Mortgagee will be recognized on the issues that are subject to the pledge. Section 4.7 Annual and Special Meetings. Within one year following recording of the final plat, on a date selected by the Board, there shall be a meeting of the members of the Association and thereafter there shall be an annual meeting of the members of the Association in the first quarter of each fiscal year at such reasonable place and time as may be designated by written notice from the Board delivered to the Owners no less than 30 days before the meeting. At the first such meeting, and at each annual meeting thereafter, the Owners shall elect by majority vote individuals to serve as Directors until a successor is elected at the next annual meeting. Each Lot shall be entitled to one vote for each Director and the voting for Directors shall be non-cumulative. The financial statement for the preceding fiscal year (if any) and the budget the Board has adopted for the pending fiscal year shall be presented at the annual meeting for ratification by the members, as more specifically provided in Section 7.1. Special meetings of the members of the Association may be called at any time upon not less than 14 days prior written notice to all Owners, for the purpose of considering matters which require the approval of all or some of the Owners, or for any other reasonable purpose. Any First Mortgagee of a Lot may attend or designate a representative to attend the meetings of the Association. Section 4.8 Books and Records. The Board shall cause to be kept complete, detailed, and accurate books and records of the receipts and expenditures (if any) of the Association, in a form that complies with generally accepted accounting principles. The books and records, authorizations for payment of expenditures, and all contracts, documents, papers, and other records of the Association shall be available for examination by the Lot Owners, Mortgagees, and the agents or attorneys of either of them, during normal business hours and at any other reasonable time or times. Section 4.9 Transition Date. The "Transition Date" shall be the date control of the Board passes from the initial Board to the Association. Prior to the Transition Date, Declarant shall be entitled to exercise all rights and powers of the Board and the Association. At Declarant's option, the Transition Date will be either: (i) the date designated by Declarant in a written notice to the Owners, which date may be by Declarant's election any date after this Declaration has been recorded; or (ii) the 120th day after Declarant has transferred to retail purchaser's title to all Lots in the Property. For purposes of the foregoing clause (ii) transfer of title to a Lot by Declarant to any Participating Builder shall be disregarded and title to any Lot owned by Participating Builder shall not be deemed transferred for purposes of dete1mining the Transition Date until the Lot is further transferred by Participating Builder to a purchaser who is not either a Participating Builder or Declarant. Section 4.10 Common Areas. Notwithstanding that each Owner owns an undivided percentage interest in Tract A and Tract B, each Owner hereby appoints the Board as its true and lawful attorney for each Owner and in their name, place and stead to perfonn all work and take all actions as may be deemed necessary by the Board to maintain, repair and replace all Common Areas and any common facilities or appurtenances located therein and to take any other actions which the Board deems reasonably necessary to manage the Common Areas. The Board may assess the Lot Owners for their proportionate share of maintenance, repair, replacement or management expenses, including the payment of real property taxes, all in accordance with the provisions of this Declaration. This power of attorney shall be irrevocable and the appointment of the Board as attorney in fact shall be a grant of authority coupled with an interest which shall survive the death or incompetence of any successor Lot Owners. ARTICLE 5. NOTICES FOR ALL PURPOSES. All notices given under the provisions of this Declaration or rules or regulations of the Association shall be in writing and may be delivered either personally or by mail. If delivery is made by mail, the notice shall be deemed to have been delivered on the third day of regular mail delivery after a copy has been deposited in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed to the Person entitled to such notice at the most recent address known to the Board. Mailing addresses may be changed by notice in writing to the Board. Notices to the Board may be given to any Director or mailed to the following address: Board of Directors c/o George Reece Elliott Farms Home Owners Association 14410 Bel-Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007 The Board's address may be changed from time to time by the execution and recording of an instrument in the real property Records of King County, Washington which (i) refers to this Declaration and this Article 5 and (ii) sets forth the Board's new address. ARTICLE 6. AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD Section 6.1 Adoption of Rules and Regulations. The Board is empowered to adopt, amend, and revoke on behalf of the Association detailed administrative rules and regulations necessary or convenient from time to time to insure compliance with the general guidelines of this Declaration to promote the comfortable use and enjoyment of the Property and to govern the operation and procedures of the Association. The rules and resolutions may, without limitation, authorize voting by proxy or mail, or both, on Association matters. The rules and regulations of the Association shall be binding upon all Owners and occupants and all other Persons claiming any interest in the Property. Section 6.2 Enforcement of Declaration, Etc. The Board shall have the power to enforce the provisions of this Declaration, and the rules and regulations of the Association for the benefit of the Association. The failure of any Owner to comply with the provisions of this Declaration, or the rules and regulations of the Association will give rise to a cause of action in the Association (acting through the Board) and any aggrieved Lot Owner for recovery of damages, or injunctive relief, or both. If a legal action is brought to interpret or enforce compliance with the provisions of this Declaration, or the rules or regulations of the Association, the prevailing party shall be entitled to judgment against the other party for its reasonable expenses, court costs, and attorneys' fees in the amount awarded by the Court. Section 6.3 Goods and Services. The Board shall acquire and pay for as common expenses of the Association all goods and services reasonably necessary or convenient for the efficient and orderly functioning of the Association and maintenance of all portions of the Common Areas not maintained by public utility companies or a governmental entity and of any planter islands and other landscaping, including street trees, within the public Right of Way inside the Plat. The goods and services shall include (by way of illustration and not limitation) irrigation systems for landscaping maintenance, utility services for the Common Areas; policies of insurance; and maintenance, repair, landscaping, gardening and general upkeep of the Common Areas. The Board may hire such employees as it considers necessary. Section 6.4 Protection of Common Areas. The Board may spend such funds and take such action as it may from time to time deem necessary to preserve the Common Areas, settle claims, or otherwise act in what it considers to be the best interests of the Association. ARTICLE 7. BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT FOR COMMON EXPENSES. Section 7.1 Fiscal Year: Preparation of Budget. The Board may adopt such fiscal year for the Association as it deems to be convenient. Unless another year is adopted, the fiscal year will be the calendar year. As soon as the Board in its discretion deems advisable after formation of the Association, and prior to the expiration of each fiscal year thereafter, the Board shall establish a budget for the Association, which shall include, without limitation, the costs of maintaining the Common Area during the ensuing fiscal year, and shall mail a summary of the budget to all of the Owners. Within thirty days after adoption by the Board, the Board shall set a date for a meeting of the Owners to consider ratification of the budget not less than fourteen nor more than sixty days after mailing of the summary. Unless at that meeting the Owners of a majority of the votes in the Association are allocated or any larger percentage specified in the Articles or Bylaws reject the budget, in person or by proxy, the budget is ratified, whether or not a quorum is present. In the event the proposed budget is rejected or the required notice is not given, the periodic budget last ratified by the Owners shall be continued until such time as the Owners ratify a subsequent budget proposed by the Board. The Board shall then assess each Lot within the Property with its pro rata share, based upon the number of Lots then within the Property, of such estimated costs. The Board, at its election, may require the Lot Owners to pay the amount assessed in equal monthly or quarterly installments or in a lump sum annual installment. The Board shall notify each Lot Owner in writing at least ten days in advance of each assessment period of the amount of the assessment for said period, which notice shall be accompanied by a copy of the budget upon which the assessment is based. The assessments levied by the Board shall be used exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety and welfare of the Lot Owners and for the improvement and maintenance of the Common Areas and provision of other goods and services described in Section 6.3, including without limitation the amount of all taxes and assessments levied against, and the cost of liability and other insurance on, the Common Areas; the cost ofutilities and other services; and the cost of funding all reserves established by the Board, including, when appropriate, a general operating reserve and a reserve for replacements. Section 7.2 Certificate of Unpaid Assessments. Any failure by the Board or the Association to make the budget and assessments hereunder before the expiration of any fiscal year for the ensuing fiscal year shall not be deemed a waiver or modification in any respect of the provisions of this Declaration, or a release of the owners from the obligation to pay assessments during that or any subsequent year, and the assessment amount and payment method established for the preceding fiscal year (if any) shall continue until a new assessment is established. Upon the request of any Owner or Mortgagee or prospective Owner or prospective Mortgagee of a Lot, the Board will furnish a statement of the amount, if any, of unpaid assessments charged to the Lot. The statement shall be conclusive upon the Board and the Association as to the amount of such indebtedness on the date of the statement in favor of all purchasers and Mortgagees of the Lot who rely on the statement in good faith. All assessments and other receipts received by the Association shall belong to the Association. Section 7.3 Initial Contribution, Annual Assessments. Each Lot Owner, at the time of purchase of his/her lot, shall make a start-up contribution to the Association in the amount of (which shall supplement annual assessments to reimburse Declarant for construction, landscaping, maintenance and operating expenditures of and for Common Areas during the house sales period). For purposes of this Section 7.3 only, "Lot Owner" shall include Participating Builders. The initial annual assessment (which is in addition to the start-up fee) shall be er year and shall be prorated for any partial year at the time of purchase of the Lot. Notwithstanding the provisions set forth above, the Declarant shall not be liable for any fees or assessments assessed or due so long as Declarant owns any Lot within the Plat. Section 7.4 Special Assessments: Capital Improvements. In addition to the annual assessments authorized above, the Association may levy, in any assessment year, a special assessment applicable to that year only for the purpose of defraying, in whole or in part, the cost of any construction, reconstruction, repair or replacement of the Improvements upon the Common Area or any other area owned or required to be maintained by the Association, provided that such assessment shall be approved by a majority of the members voting at a meeting duly called for such purpose; provided, however, that where the special assessment is a result of or arises from the imposition of governmental requirements, a court order or any other requirements outside the control of the Association or the Board, then approval of the members shall not be required prior to imposition of the special assessment. ARTICLE 8. LIEN AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS. Section 8.1 Assessments Are a Lien: Priority. All unpaid sums assessed by the Association for the share of the common expenses chargeable to any Lot and any sums specially assessed to any Lot under the authority of this Declaration shall constitute a lien on the Lot and all its appurtenances from the date the assessment becomes due and until fully paid. The lien for such unpaid assessments shall be subordinate to tax liens on the Lot in favor of any assessing unit and/or special district, and to all sums unpaid on all First Mortgages of record, but, to the extent permitted by applicable law, shall have priority over all other liens against the Lot. A First Mortgagee that obtains possession through a Mortgage foreclosure or deed of trust sale, or by taking a deed in lieu of foreclosure or sale, or a purchaser at a foreclosure sale, shall take the Lot free of any claims for the share of common expenses or assessments by the Association chargeable to the Lot which became due before such possession, but will be liable for the common expenses and assessments that accrue after the taking of possession. The Lot's past-due share of common expenses or assessments shall become new common expenses chargeable to all of the Lot owners, including the Mortgagee or foreclosure sale purchaser and their successors and assigns, in proportion to the number of Lots owned by each of them. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, however, the Owner and the real estate contract purchaser shall continue to be personally liable for past due assessments as provided in Section 8.3. For purposes of this Section, "Mortgage" does not include a real estate contract and "Mortgagee" does not include the vendor or the assignee or designee of a vendor of a real estate contract. Section 8.2 Lien May Be Foreclosed. The lien for delinquent assessments may be foreclosed by suit by the Board, acting on behalf of the Association, in like manner as the foreclosure of a mortgage of real property. The Board, acting on behalf of the Association, shall have the power to bid in the Lot at the foreclosure sale, and to acquire and hold, lease, mortgage, and convey the same. Section 8.3 Assessments are Personal Obligations. In addition to constituting a lien on the Lot, all sums assessed by Association chargeable to any Lot together with interest, late charges, costs and attorneys' fees in the event of delinquency, shall be the joint and several personal obligations of the Owner and any contract purchaser of the Lot when the assessment is made and their grantees. Suit to recover personal judgment for any delinquent assessments shall be maintainable without foreclosing or waiving the liens securing them. Section 8.4 Late Charges and Interest on Delinquent Assessments. The Board may from time to time establish late charges and a rate of interest to be charged on assessments delinquent for a period of more than 10 days after the date when due. In the absence of another established, nonusurious rate, delinquent assessments shall bear interest at the rate of 12% per annum. If an installment on an assessment against a Lot is not paid when due, the Board may elect to declare the entire assessments against the Lot for the remainder of the fiscal year to be immediately due and payable. Section 8.5 Remedies Cumulative. The remedies provided herein are cumulative and the Board may pursue them, and any other remedies which may be available under law although not expressed herein, either concurrently or in any order. Section 8.6 No Avoidance of Assessments. No Owner may avoid or escape liability for assessments provided for herein by abandoning his or her Lot. ARTICLE 9. FAILURE OF BOARD TO INSIST ON STRICT PERFORMANCE NO WAIVER. The failure of the Board in any instance to insist upon the strict compliance with this Declaration or rules and regulations of the Association, or to exercise any right contained in such documents, or to serve any notice or to institute any action, shall not be construed as a waiver or a relinquishment for the future of any term, covenant, condition, or restriction. The receipt by the Board of payment of any assessment from an Owner, with knowledge of any breach by the Owner, shall not be a waiver of the breach. No waiver by the Board of any requirement shall be effective unless expressed in writing and signed for the Board. ARTICLE 10. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. So long as a Director, or Association member, or Declarant, acting on behalf of the Board or the Association, has acted in good faith, without willful or intentional misconduct, upon the basis of such actual information as is then possessed by such Person, then no such Person shall be personally liable to any Owner, or to any other Person, including the Association, for any damage, loss, or prejudice suffered or claimed on account of any act, omission, error, or negligence of such Person; provided that this Article shall not apply to the extent the liability of such person for such act, omission, error, or negligence is covered by any insurance actually obtained by the Board. ARTICLE 11. INDEMNIFICATION. Each Director, and Declarant shall be indemnified by the Association against all expenses and liabilities, including attorneys' fees, reasonably incurred by or imposed in connection with any proceeding to which such person may be a party, or in which such person may become involved, by reason of holding or having held such position, or any settlement thereof, whether or not such person holds such position at the time such expenses or liabilities are incurred, except to the extent such expenses and liabilities are covered by insurance actually obtained by the Board and except in such cases wherein such Director or Declarant is adjudged guilty of willful misfeasance in the performance of his or her duties; provided, that in the event of a settlement, the indemnification shall apply only when the Board approves such settlement and reimbursement as being for the best interests of the Association. ARTICLE 12. INSURANCE. At such times as the Board deems appropriate, the Board shall cause the Association to purchase and maintain as a common expense a policy or policies which the Board deems necessary or desirable to provide casualty insurance; comprehensive liability insurance; with such deductible provisions as the Board deems advisable; insurance, if available, for the protection of the Association's Directors, and representatives from personal liability in the management of the Association's affairs; and such other insurance as the Board deems advisable. The Board shall review the adequacy of the Association's insurance coverage at least annually. ARTICLE 13. DAMAGE AND REPAIR OF DAMAGE TO PROPERTY. In the event of any casualty, loss or other damage to the Common Area for which the then current assessments by the Board are insufficient to repair, or restore or for which there are not insurance proceeds or insufficient insurance proceeds available to the Board for such restoration or repair, the Board may make a special assessment against each Lot within the Property for its pro rata share of the cost and expenses to repair and/or restore the Common Areas. The special assessment shall be payable, at the determination of the Board, in either monthly or quarterly installments or in a single lump sum amount. The Board shall notify each Lot Owner of any such special assessment not less than 20 days prior to the date such special assessment or the first installment thereon is due and payable, which notice shall be accompanied by a reasonably detailed statement of the Board's estimated costs and expenses of repairing and/or restoring the Common Areas. ARTICLE 14. AMENDMENTS OF DECLARATION. After the Transition Date, any Lot Owner may propose amendments to this Declaration to the Board. A majority of the members of the Board may cause a proposed amendment to be submitted to the members of the Association for their consideration. If an amendment is proposed by Owners of 20% or more of the Lots, then, irrespective of whether the Board concurs in the proposed amendment, it shall be submitted to the members of the Association for their consideration at their next regular or special meeting for which timely notice may be given. Notice of a meeting at which an amendment is to be considered shall include the text of the proposed amendment. Amendments may be adopted at a meeting of the Association or by written consent of the requisite number of Persons entitled to vote, after notice has been given to all Persons entitled to receive notice of a meeting of the Association. The unanimous consent of all Owners shall be required for adoption of an amendment changing the voting power or portion of assessments appurtenant to each Lot. All other amendments shall be adopted if approved by at least 67% of all Lot Owners. Once an amendment has been adopted by the Association, the amendment will become effective when a certificate of the amendment, executed by a member of the Board, has been recorded in the real property Records of King County, Washington. ARTICLE 15. ANNEXATION AND SUBDIVISION. Residential property, including Common Areas, may be annexed or added to the Property by Declarant at any time prior to the Transition Date. Thereafter, residential property other than Common Areas may be annexed or added to the Property only with the consent of 67% of the Lot Owners. No Lot shall be subdivided or combined without the approval of all Lot Owners. ARTICLE 16. DURATION. The covenants, conditions, and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and bind the Property and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the Owners, their respective legal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, for a period of 15 years from the date this Declaration is recorded, after which time the covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be automatically extended for successive periods of 10 years each unless an instrument signed by a majority of the then Owners has been recorded agreeing to tenninate the covenants, conditions and restrictions. ARTICLE 17. RESERVATION OF DECLARANT'S RIGHT TO AMEND. Section 17. I Amendment by Declarant. Declarant reserves the right to amend the Declaration as may be necessary to comply with Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("FMC") or Federal National Mortgage Association ("FNMA") or Federal Housing Administration ("FHA") regulations or requirements as necessary to enable the holders of first mortgages or deeds of trust to sell first mortgages or deeds of trust to FHLMC or FNMA or if such amendment is necessary to secure funds or financing provided by, through or in conjunction with FHLMC or FNMA or FHA or, if such amendment is necessary, in Declarant's sole opinion, for the efficient functioning of the Association, the Property, or the Plat. Section 17 .2 Authorization to Amend. If Declarant, at its option, determines that it is necessary so to amend the Declaration, then Declarant, on behalf of all Lot Owners in the Association, is hereby authorized to execute and to have recorded ( or filed, in the case of the Articles) said required amendment or amendments. All Lot Owners hereby grant to Declarant a full and complete power of attorney to take any and all actions necessary to effectuate and record said amendment or amendments and agree that said amendment or amendments shall be binding upon their respective Lots and upon them and their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns to the same extent as if they had personally executed said amendment or amendments. All Lot Owners hereby acknowledge and agree that the power of attorney granted herein shall be deemed coupled with an interest and shall be irrevocable. Section 17.3 Duration. Declarant's rights under this Article 17 shall exist until the last Lot owned by Declarant is sold to a retail purchaser. ARTICLE 18. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Declaration shall be independent and severable, and the unenforceability of any one provision shall not affect the enforceability of any other provision, if the remainder affects the common plan. ARTICLE 19. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Declaration shall be effective upon recording. ARTICLE 20. ASSIGNMENT BY DECLARANT. Declarant reserves the right to assign, transfer, sell, lease, or rent all or any portion of the Property and reserves the right to assign or delegate all or any of its rights, duties, and obligations created under this Declaration. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) ss. ) DECLARANT: Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. a Washington Corporation By: ___________ _ George Reece, President On this day personally appeared before me George Reece, to me known to be the President Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc. the corporation who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. GNEN under my hand and official seal this __ day of ________ , 20 __ (Signature) (Print Name) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at ______ _ My commission expires ______ _ • EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A OF KC BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO L95L0113 RECORDING NO 9510179023 BEING A PORTION OF GOV LOT 3 IN NE 1/4 OF SECTION 22-23-05 LY SLY OF SLY LINE OF RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY, SR 169, AND PORTION OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 (BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR CEDARWOOD PU D • EXHIBIT B ~ 2X4 RAIL IX 4 IX 30R IX 4 FENCING r ·.~ f FENCE DETAIL e·~e" MAX. POST CAP I" ·----· ··- TREATED 4 X 4 PO&T CEDAR tx.3 OR lx4 FENCING: (USE N -CORRO&IYE OR GALV. NAIL&) ~~-EMBED P05HI IN CONC. ''-©' MIN. (TOP OF CONC. MOUNDED FOR DRAINAGE) M U ,:; r:z ,\ ·· F fl, /\ '\ K L ·.• N ~IO S.Htsd Road a.ti.~. WA ~1 "25b44»7' r.,:ic .+2!1ob4,.l-l-1, ,, 1 • CHICAGO TITLE ('OJV[PANY OF WASllINGTON Jami Balint Murray Franklyn Companies 1441 O Bel-Red Road, #200 Bellevue, WA 98007 SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 Title Officer: Commercial / Unit 6 Property: S.E. Renton Maple Valley Rd Renton, WA Borrower(s): The Cedarwood Group Seller(s): Order No.: 0036793-06 The above numbered report with an Effective Date of September 16, 2015 including any supplements or amendments thereto, is hereby modified and/or supplemented in order to reflect the following: The effective date is amended as follows: The Effective Date of March 27, 2015 is hereby amended to be: September 16, 2015 at 08:00 AM The currant owner is/are as follows: 4. TITLE TO THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND IS AT THE EFFECTIVE DATE VESTED IN: Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Lennon Investments, Inc., a Washington corporation, as tenants in common, doing business as The Cedar Wood Group The following items/notes have been changed on your report: ITEMS: 13. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 222305-9004-09 Levy Code: 2156 Assessed Value-Land: $486,000.00 Assessed Value-Improvements: $0.00 General and Special Taxes: Billed: Paid: Unpaid: $6,303.09 $3,151.55 $3,151.54 The following items/notes have been intentionally deleted from your report: ITEMS: 15. and 16. Supplemental SSCORPD5190.doc/ Updaled: 10.30.14 Page 1 Printed: 09.22.15@ 12:32 PM by MH -0036793-06 SUPPLEMENTAL (continued) For title inquiries, please contact the issuing office: Chicago Title Company of Washington 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2300 Seattle, WA 98104 Supplemental Date: September 22, 2015 Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent Supplemental SSCORPD5190.doc I Updated: 10.30.14 Page2 Phone: (206)628-5610 Fax: (206)628-9717 Email: CTISEATitleUnit6@ctt.com Printed: 09.22.15 @ 12:32 PM by MH -0036793-06 ,. • @ 1/,7 Chicago TIiie Ret• ra l1SQUl1! -13.S Wblln recorded return to: Cedar River Lightfoot 14410 Bel-Red Road 8ell11YU9, WA 98007 Attn: Jami Balint DOCUMENT I1Tb£lS) Quit Claim Deed flit.Record loAllach Legal GRANTORlS) E2754222 n:.c~· ,.,., TAX TY, SM ..... 'IUl LancaslerlCedafWOOd Inc., a Washington Cofporation [J Addilionll namu on pag• ____ of document GRANJEEfS} ~ River Ligh11oot Inc., a Washington COrporation a Additional namet on page ____ ot document ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION '-20150904001481.001 PAGI-Nl CF Nt Parcel A, King C01.11ty Boundary une Adjustment Number L95L0113, recorded under Reoordlng No. 9510179023 Complete legal dewiplion Is on page ____ of document TAX PARCEL NUMBEB1S2 222305-9004 Additional Tax Accounts are on page ____ of document Th• Aud!IDrtRKordel' w1• tety on 1M lnlonnM!on pt'O'l'lcled on 1h11 form. The stall' wll nd rud the document to Wrily lhe accurac:r cir complll9MA of !tie lnde,dng lnforrn•tlon piQlllldod Mr11ifl. "I un •1"""11 NIN and pay!nt an acld!Uonal $50 tHONllnl r.a (u proYlded In RCW Jt.11.011 and ,.,.,_ co •• an -•rvencr nonstaridard cloculMfll). ~ lhla documenl don not mNI margin and fonMalng '"""--* FultlllirmoN. I heNbJ unclWatand Ulat thl recotdln9 practu may ~r up orotMrwtH obact.lN HfM part of ltM wxt ot tM Driglnal document u a tNUD of thla ,....at." ------------------Sli,,awr.,otRequestlngPany Note to 11111m1aer: Do not ,ion IOOYt "°" pay ,ddlllonal $50 "' 11 th1 doanltnt ff'IMtl 8*9Wff:11'1'Ntll"G requ1,_,.n1t C--P• lar ,_,.,... WAOOOCIUl.doc I LlpllMld: 01.31.13 Order: 36793-06 Doc: KC:2015 20150904001488 Page 1 of 6 Created By: s.holstine Prtnted: 9/16/2015 12:47:00 PM PST • # ' ' . ' . RETURN ADDRESS: 20150902001721 Codar River Ligh1foot 14410 Bel-Red Road Bellovuc, WA 98007 Attention: Jami Balint CD 7•.N L ... E2753n1 n:.f=t.".:" Jel ' 'U:I WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheel(RCW6l.O.J DOCUMENT TITLE(S) (or nmac1io111 canLliacd lbcn:in): Qui1 Claim Deed REFERENCE NUMBER(S) OF DOCUMENTS ASSIGNED OR RELEASED, n/a C Addt1fonal reruence Is on. e or s GRANTOR(S) (Lui ...,.. nm, lhta linl ..... and lnill&IJ) Lancater/Ccda,wood Inc., a Washington CCIJ>Oralion a Additionll names on or docurnellt CIL\NTEE(S) (Last nan nnn, then W11 nUIIC' and initials) Cedar River Ugb1foo1 Inc., a Washington corpontion C Addi1kmtlnameson afdoaunent LEGAL DESCRIPTION lohbrovialed: i.~. lol, block, pit! or ,..,ioa, IOwnship, nnso) Parcel A, Kin& County Boundary Une AdjUSlmcnt Number L95L0113, rcc:ordcd "'*1 recordina number 9Jl0l7902J 0 Addilional le I i1 on I of docimau ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEi/ACCOUNT NUMBER 2223059004 CJ AuessorTax-# not Order: 36793·06 Doc: KC:2015 20150904001488 Page 2 of 6 Created By: s.holstlne Printed: 9/16/2015 12:47:00 PM QUIT CLAIM DEED THE ORANTOR, Lancaster/Ccdarwood Inc., a Wuhinaton corpontion, in consideration of tho transfer of the Propeny to an affiliated company with the samo beneficial interest, and for no monetary consideration, conveys and quit cl.aims to Cedar River Liahtfoot lne., a Washington corporation, all its right, 1itle and inlerest in and 10 lhc real propcny legally described in Uhibit A, attached hcrc\O and incorpor1ted herein by this reference (the "Property") situated in the County of Kin& State of Washington, to&elhcr with all after acquired tide of the Gr1ntor herein. OATEO: St.lttf ()I, 1Ji'? LancasterlCedlJWQod Inc. a Washin~corpontion By: ti-- oeirge Reece It,: President Order: 36793·06 Doc: KC:2015 20150904001488 2 Page 3 of 6 Created By: s.holstlne Printed: 9/16/2015 12:47:00 PM PST • STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss. County of Kina l I certify that I lcnow or have satisfactory evidence that GEORGE REECE is the person who appean,d before me, and said persoo acknowledged that he signed this instniment, on oath stated that ho was authorized lo execute the instrument and aclcnowledge ii as the President Laneaster/Cedarwood In<, to be the free and volwitary Kl of sud, parl)I, for the.,.. and purposes mentioned in the instrument. .. \\I"•,,.•,: :t I, .. "': ~ ....... j / ' ' .,-./f<··.' -~ .. ., ~. !· ·~ . -· ;-.. -, . • I • '" • I ',"( ,:IJ .<I •'hl • \, ;,; ........ ~·; · .. .. ,, ,.-!).(!(,~~ .... I\ \. '._ ~ (Print Name) NOTARY PUB UC In llllrt9r }.!t_ _State of Washington midina at ___Q&e::t,r My Commission E.pin:o: ~7 J /, 3 { 1!1Hllv.1:Uc",\Wi1uttrl\.1?. 1,:m;n,., ~ ........ , to11b.#.:P.1,'Jj•) "MA,'.." ...... , I •'l,.,t,,rr,•,'l'lit1'1Ui!tU-..II' ~A,• •11,1,i, ... 1:n , t.J ...... :; : ,Ill· .. A :11, 11'11 :nld,,a"II ,'t'..-...i,t.tl "l'j lllj, .. , ... ,: ..CL.I •.l t, I .•f• "..i,1111Jll1'1l1l'!l'lli!td .. u.~·~· ··.-1~-,I ,IW'nJ 'ftt..r ·-· , ,-.1;1,'111,,.~~ ........... ;-~:,d· I .Iii 1., ..... -.nu.,·,1lfJ1 1iL, ..... ,,·1,1ln,~Utllfl ,'lrqy,dl•,f,,,111 r'I i,,,1,w l,_.1,-'11. Li,., l'I I 111"1,•ta,•1 u,tr..,..,., ·(O.l> ___ ,.iolt !1,!oo\ h;l.,.i!•, wn. lr1•,,t ·!11, , .. .,..11w --'~ I,, 1¥Jlm·,"'.1,-.. 1,.,,..,.,:111,,,.-4'1MI ---=""'~· _tll tllll}',0 20150904001488.004 Order: 36793-06 Doc: KC:2015 20150904001488 Page 4 of 6 Created By: s.holstlne Printed: 9/16/2015 12:47:00 PM Order: 36793-06 Doc: KC:2015 20150904001488 . ~,,,,,1, .. ,, ~v ,, 11 :\)"4i I €1,, .-.. • ~· ,, 0 •' ........ ~·_, .,, c; .• •. 0-.. .• ~~: ~~ ·.~!, ... . 1)/! . -:~: -~.: :<-: ... ~. •Of ... · ':. ':.-King County : l · .. ·':;, . . . . . . .. .. ... , .;. ......... c"' •' *',,"'SHING'\ ,•' ·. ,,,,,,,,,, > Page 5 of 6 Created By: s.holstine Printed: 9/16/2015 12:47:00 PM PST • EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description 20150904001488.006 That portion of Government Lot 3 and the northwest quarter of the sou1heast quarter in Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, In King County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point which is 325 feet south and 35 feet west of the northeast comer of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 22 (said point being located on the northerly line of that certain tract of land conveyed to Andrew George Elliott, Jr. and Betty Jane Elliott, husband and wife by deed recorded under recording number 5635570, being a point which Is 35 feet westerly from the northeast comer of said tract); Thence north 89'17'39" west (north 89'17'4r west) along the northerly line of said Elliott Tract and the westerly extension lhereof a distance of 675 feet; Thence north 01'41'41" east to the southerly marginal line of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR 169); Thence southeasterly along said southerly marginal line to a point of intersection with a line which is 35.00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of the said northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 22 (said point being the northwest comer of that certain tract of land conveyed to William and Ruth E. Veenhulzen, husband and wife, by deed recorded under recording number 8303080882); Thence south 01'41'49'' west (south 01'41'41" west) along the westerly line of said Veenhulzen tract to the point of beginning; (Being known as Parcel A, King County Boundary Line Adjustment Number L95L0113, recorded under recording number 9510179023); Except any portion thereof lying within the Renton-Maple Valley Highway right of way. 4 Order: 36793-06 Doc: KC:2015 20150904001488 Page 6 of 6 Created By: s.holstlne Printed: 9/16/2015 12:47:00 PM PST ... RETURN ADDRESS: Cedar River Lightfoot 14410 Bel-Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007 Attention: Jami Balint 20150902001721.001 1111161111111~11 20150902001721 am:AGO lIJlioGCD 74.11 =~ll12"11,14 KING COIDlff 1 UA E2753771 11/12/2'1111:13 KING COUNTY, 1111 •II.II Jel ·se ... PAGli:·"1 * .. I WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet(RCW65.04J DOCU111ENT TITLE(S) (or uansactions contained therein): Chic~ Quit Claim Deed Ref# REFERENCE NUMBER(S) OF DOCUMENTS ASSIGNED OR RELEASED: n/a D Additional reference #s on M-of document{s) GRANTOR(S) (Last name firs~ then first name and initials) Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc., a Washington corporation D Additional names on """e of document Dll'Ml11U -GRANTEE(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials) -·l~l!llllf ::=:=: Cedar River Lightfoot Inc., a Washington corporation ..... D Additional names on -·• of document LEGAL DESCRIPTION (abbn:viated: i.e., lot, block, plat or section, township, range) Pan:el A, King County Boundary Line Adjustment Number L9SLOl 13, recorded under recording number 9510179023 D Additional leeal i, on aaee of document ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL/ACCOUNT NUMBER 2223059004 0 Asses.<0r r .. # not ~1 assianed Order: 36793--06 Doc: KC:2015 20150902001721 Page 1 of3 Created By: s.holstlne Printed: 9/16/2015 12:46:56 PM PST 20150902001721.002 ... QUIT CLAIM DEED THE GRANTOR, Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc., a Washington corporation, in consideration of the transfer of the Property to an affiliated company with the same beneficial interest, and for no monetary consideration, conveys and quit claims to Cedar River Lightfoot Inc., a Washington corporation, all its right, title and interest in and to the real property legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property") situated in the County of King, State of Washington, together with all after acquired title of the Grantor herein. Lancaster/Cedarwod Inc, a Washingtpi,cr ration B 2 Order: 36793-06 Doc: KC:2015 20150902001721 Page 2 of 3 Created By: s.holstine Printed: 9/16/2015 12:46:56 PM PST 201so902001n1.003 , . STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. County of King ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that GEORGE REECE is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledge it as the President Lancaster/Cedarwood Inc, to be the free and voluntary act of such party, for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Order: 36793-06 Doc: KC:2015 20150902001721 (Print Name) NOTARY PUBLIC In ~or~ _State of Washington residing at U /,l,~ My Commission Expires: c;5p r,/ I (, 3 Page 3 of3 Created By: s.holstlne Printed: 9/16/2015 12:46:56 PM PST SUBDIVISION Guarantee/Certificate Number: Issued By: @. CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 0036793-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company RECEIVED APR 1 3 2015 C!TY o~ ii"~,!TON GUARANTEES PiAN:,i1r:c. r::vr.;J:JN The Cedarwood Group and King County herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Chicago Title Company of Washington 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2300 Seattle, WA 98104 Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 1 Chicago Title Insurance Company By: Attest: President Secretary Printed: 04.03.15@ 09:27 PM WA-CT-FNSE-02150. 6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE .IIPANY GUARA ... _E/CERTIFICATE NO. 0036793-06 Liability $1,000.00 ISSUING OFFICE: Title Officer: Commercial I Unit 6 Chicago Title Company of Washington 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2300 Seattle, WA 98104 Main Phone: (206)628-5610 Email: CTISeaTitleUnit6""ctt.ccm SCHEDULE A Premium $350.00 Effective Date: March 27, 2015 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: Tax $33.25 That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATIACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Lennon Investments, Inc., a Washington corporation, as tenants in common, doing business as The Cedar Wood Group subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page2 Printed: 04.03.15 @09:27 PM WA-CT-FNSE-02150.6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description That portion of Government Lot 3 and the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter in Section 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian. in King County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point which is 325 feet south and 35 feet west of the northeast corner of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 22 (said point being located on the northerly line of that certain tract of land conveyed to Andrew George Elliott, Jr. and Betty Jane Elliott, husband and wife by deed recorded under recording number 5635570, being a point which is 35 feet westerly from the northeast corner of said tract); Thence north 89°17'39" west (north 89°17'47" west) along the northerly line of said Elliott Tract and the westerly extension thereof a distance of 675 feet; Thence north 01 "41'41" east to the southerly marginal line of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR 169); Thence southeasterly aiong said southerly marginal line to a point of intersection with a line which is 35.00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of the said northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 22 (said point being the northwest corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to William and Ruth E. Veenhuizen, husband and wife, by deed recorded under recording number 8303080882); Thence south 01 • 41 '49" west (south 01°41 '41" west) along the westerly line of said Veenhuizen tract to the point of beginning; (Being known as Parcel A, King County Boundary Line Adjustment Number L95L0113, recorded under recording number 9510179023); Except any portion thereof lying within the Renton-Maple Valley Highway right of way. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page3 Printed: 04.03.15 @ 09:27 PM WA-CT-FNSE-02150 .622476-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE IIIPANY GUARA. _ _ E/CERTIFICATE NO. 0036793-06 SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page4 Printed: 04.03.15 @09:27 PM WA-CT-FNSE-02150 .6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE IIPANY GUARA. _. E/CERTIFICATE NO. 0036793-06 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS SCHEDULE B ( continued) 1. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Purpose: Recording Date: Recording No.: Affects: State of Washington and it's assigns Constructing and maintaining a drainage easement May 3, 1993 9305031378 Northerly portion of said premises and other property 2. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Puget Sound Power & Light Company Purpose: Electric transmission and/or distribution system Recording Date: December 21, 1993 Recording No.: 9312211687 Affects: The north 10 feet of said premises lying parallel with and adjoining State Route 169 (Maple Valley Highway), and other property 3. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Purpose: Recording Date: Recording No.: Cedar River Water & Sewer District Water system facilities May 28, 1997 9705280663 Affects: A northerly portion of said premises as described in said instrument 4. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. Purpose: Electric transmission and/or distribution line Recording Date: March 12, 1998 Recording No.: 9803121618 Affects: Five feet on each side of the centerline of the electric facility as constructed or to be constructed in said premises and other property 5. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. Purpose: Gas pipeline or pipelines Recording Date: March 12, 1998 Recording No.: 9803121636 Affects: Five feet on either side of the natural gas pipeline/s as installed or to be installed in said premises and other property Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 5 Printed: 04.03. 15@ 09:27 PM W A-CT-FNSE-02150 .6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE lt'IPANY GUARA. ___ E/CERTIFICATE NO. 0036793-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) 6. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: U.S. West Communications Purpose: Recording Date: Telecommunications facilities, electrical facilities and gas facilities August 3, 1998 Recording No.: 9808030223 Affects: A northwesterly portion of said premises as described in said instrument 7. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Purpose: Recording Date: Recording No.: Cedar River Water and Sewer District Sewer July 27, 2004 20040727001688 Affects: A northerly portion of said premises as described in said instrument 8. Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on King County Boundary Line Adjustment Number L95L0113: Recording No: 9510179023 9. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions disclosed by instrument: Recording Date: Recording No.: Regarding: Affects: July 26, 1996 9607260497 Sensitive area notice Said premises and other property 10. Agreement, including the terms and provisions thereof: Executed by: Western Savings and Loan Association, an Arizona corporation, dba WSLA Development corporation and Multivest, Ltd., a Washington corporation Recording Date: June 16, 1988 Recording No.: 8806160138 Regarding: Drainage facilities and payment of costs related thereto 11. Agreement, including the terms and provisions thereof: Executed by: Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Lennon Investments, Inc., a Washington corporation, as tenants in common doing business as The Cedarwood Group, Lennon Investments, Inc., Lancaster Homes, Inc., Molasses Creek, Inc., a Washington corporation, and Cedar River Lightfoot, Inc., a Washington corporation and King County Recording Dale: October 17, 2000 Recording No.: 20001017000484 Regarding: Construction and conveyance agreement Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page6 Printed: 04.03.15 @ 09:27 PM WA-CT-FNSE -02150 .6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793--06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE IIPANY SCHEDULE B (continued) GUARA .. _E/CERTIFICATE NO. 0036793-06 12. Terms and conditions of notice of charges by water, sewer, and/or storm and surface water utilities, recorded under recording number 8802220455. Said notice was amended by documnets recorded under recording numbers 9008241403 and 9304282240. 13. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 222305-9004-09 Levy Code: 2156 Assessed Value-Land: $486,000.00 Assessed Value-Improvements: $0.00 General and Special Taxes: Billed: Paid: Unpaid: $6,303.09 $0.00 $6,303.09 Note: If the tax amount is not evenly divisible into two payments, King County will require the half payment to be rounded up to the next cent. Failure to round up the half payment may result in rejection of the tax payment by the county. 14. Any rights, interests, or claims which may exist or arise by reason of the following matters disclosed by survey, Recording Date: October 26, 1979 Recording No.: 7910269006 Matters shown: Location of fences in relation to a northerly portion of the east line, and any adverse rights stemming therefrom 15. According to The Washington State corporation division records dated April 3, 2015 registration for Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc. expired January 31, 2003. 16. Any interest of the person(s) shown below appearing as assessed owner(s) of said Land on the county secured tax rolls. Name(s): Cedar River Lightfoot 17. Your application for title insurance was placed by reference to only a street address or tax identification number. Based on our records, we believe that the legal description in this report covers the parcel(s) of Land that you requested. If the legal description is incorrect, the seller/borrower must notify the Company and/or the settlement company in order to prevent errors and to be certain that the correct parcel(s) of Land will appear on any documents to be recorded in connection with this transaction and on the policy of title insurance. END OF EXCEPTIONS Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 7 Printed: 04.03.15 @09:27 PM W A-CT-FNSE--02150. 6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE i/lPANY GUARA .. _E/CERTIFICATE NO. 0036793-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: Note B: Note C: NOTE: A survey has been recorded: Recording Date: Recording No.: and Recording Date: Recording No.: 06/27/1984 8406279001 11/10/1998 9811109008 Note: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: Parcel A BLA Number 9510179023 Tax Account No.: 222305-9004-09 Note: Any map furnished with this Guarantee is for convenience in locating the land indicated herein with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance thereon. END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Pnnted: 04.03.15 @09:27 PM WA-CT -FNSE-02150. 6224 76-SPS-1-15-0036793-06 Page a i J ' " /f 2 --~-I 1 \ :-' ' r , .• ~ I ··/ . . • 0 -$_· .. ' 0 Qi 1',, -.,q . •. r-----,, I • C, , . . / ' . $. 1/ I ' i ,, f ' 1· I I 1 l " I l I "I I ·1 l I 0 r-U) ID (') '"' U)' ' "' Ill Ill Q . ' :,., c ti 't: ti ·~ i '.I I -' Ill ''Jr THE GRAXTOR s <$' ,;, I, I RECORDED, ~,. l.f!jr········-··-""··----0 -. , ..••.•.• h./'IZCWEsr"(jp- .f96J .S,P /Q w PM 5~ ~u 2 ii~ c RODIZ/q" ··\' -1~ .• -. ~-~ ~ING 'cOiir~TY'{1XSftC"~ ~, ~ ._ ___ OEPiJi.r,Y ~~8 ~ Statutory W~anty IDeed A.G. Elliott ~d wife ~ J; Elliott Fo~ ... LS8 • <;!for'andJn consideiijtion u( I.rove ana affection \, a-·· in hand paid, conveys and warrants IV. Andrew Geol'"ge Elliott, Jr., and wi!e, Betty Jane"Elliott the following described real estate, sltu,ned in the Cnun!y uf King Wa.5hington: . . ' slate of y Q 'Tb.a.tportion~tbe NW of s. ~· Section ZZ, Towril!lhip Z.1N, Ranie 5 Ei:~t: W.M: described as follows:. Begum.!ng _at a._point 3Z5 feet south of the NE corner of the NW'-of the SE measllred al'Ong easterly line·o£°.said quarter Section, thence continuing south zzl) feet, -thence·wea,t Z:00 f8et, thence ;:u;irth ZZO feet, tlien.ce ea.s<ZOO£eett9 the point of beglnnlng. ,.F "'" "' __ ._ • · at.I.GS TAX ' lll!qlJlll!D AfJl. .,J:.'.52.'Z244i-- " SEPi, QllOOl , A i tit ,. Dated thii ,twent"y--tllird <Uy of Augus·~ 1963 .. "STATE OF WASHl~CiTON, C~un~ of '·King " " - On this day persol'llllly appeared ~lore?' A. G, Elliott and .. w.iie Anna'. J~ Elli~tt 'to ~ kl'!.,.,ll to 'be the' individyal 11 -d~ribed in and '!ho '·b~uted the Withil'I ~rv.l foregoina: inslrulllfflt', and adrnaW~ that they signed the llme.·as· their F~ee and ~otuntary act and' deed; For"1he uses and purp,)scs therein mentioned. _ .,,::;; 4J!. _ . GIVEN U!lder my band and official seal this 7 ~ .,,-day of Aug us -· /'tot;y Pdlii; i• re&iding al C(J ., SEP101963 APR 1 0 ' ' ' 1 r ·1 re ! , ! 0 I f ; . j I: i ! ' ; ! . f,, J '. ' . • .•·\• ~ ... , ·--N"'~,~~~8;,;~:;;iN"'~'A-l( 1 MARS 1983 S3/03/08 RECD F CASHSL #0882 8 5.00 QUIT CLAIM DEED ****5.00 22 THE GRANTOR, NU-WEST, INC., a Colorado corporation, for and in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration in hand paid, conveys and quit claims to· WILLIAM and RUTHE. VEENHUIZEN, husband and wife, the following described real estate, situated in the County of King, State of Washington, together with all after acquired title of the Granter therein: That certain parcel of property (called 0 Tract B" herein) described as follows: The East 35 feet of the NW l/4 of the SE l/4 of Section 22, T. 23 N., R. 5 E., W.M., King County,, Washington, lying Southerly of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway and lying Northerly of the following described parcel: BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of said subdivision; THENCE S 01°41'49" w, 325.00 feet along the East line thereof to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE continuing S 01°41 1 49 11 W, 220.00 feet along said East line; THENCE N 89°17'39 11 W, 200.00 feet; THENCE N 01°41'49 11 E, 220.00 feet; THENCE S 89°17'39 11 E, 200.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.25 acres (10,704 S.F.), more or less, as depicted on Exhibit X, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if fully set. forth;· RESERVING unto Granter and its successors and assigns a non-exclusive vehicular and pedestrian appurtenant easement of ingress and egress over, on, and across a parcel ten feet in width, more or less, situated within Tract B, being an existing driveway, and more particularly described as follows (called 11 Tract A" herein): A 10 foot strip of land lying within a portion of the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 22, T. 23 N., R. 5, E., W.M., Kino~ County, Washington, ,,ore ,,,;.i>t'\£\),,lf.i,t~1· particularly described as follows: · · ... ~1;\,\Jl\1·' 'f' .... % '311\.~ ' HLED for Record at Request 01 ~ame,,,,,,, 4>•ur/<;>,.'1-h~A ·--- lrldress..£2i.LY~« A(/'!, 'iliJal -J.- -or e~' ,HE 0tJrliVl()lt'i, R~c,it co\ilii ~ l' COMMENCING at the NE corner of said subdivisioni THENCE S 01°41'49" W, 325.00 feet along the East line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4; THENCE N 89°17•39 11 W, 21.86 feet along a line parallel with the North line of said NW l/4 of the SE 1/4 to the TRUE ~OINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE continuing N 89°17'39 11 W, 10.00 feet along said parallel linei THENCE N 01°46'39" E, 309.15 feet to the Southerly margin of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway; THENCE S 75°41'47" E, 10.24 feet along said Southerly margin; THENCE S 01°46''39" W, 306.74 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. containing 0.07 acres (3079 S.F.), more or less, as depicted on Exhibit X; AND FURTHER RESERVING unto Grantor, its successors and assigns, the right to make all necessary slopes for cuts and fills on that portion of Tract B lying west of Tract A. DATED February~' 1983. ..... ·~·,.\r\·;·::··-. ~--<~ .. ;~~;;;·~·:/·~:;;~ ···~·tt 0o"·.:.·.~~1M1····-.e, .,;,;. ;o ·~ \~ .. .:. ·.~·.:, ¥~.:li~ \ • ~-_P$/J1J\'dJE ;P,~WASHiNGTON ) \~_,:-.. 4 .... _ ,.:-~ ·. ~ · ) ss. ··,.'~"···COPN':11..Y''QF ~!!IJl8' Pierce) NU-WEST, INC • · ·· ... crw;.s\'· -· :·:_. .......... ·on this day appeared Sheldon A. Blue , to me · ,krtq_wn to be the Assistant Secretary of the Corporation who ex'ecuted the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the same to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation," for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on· oath stated that he w'a..s authorized to execute said instrument. GIVEN under February my hand and official seal this 14th day of , '¥.1'8£'1= 1983. //J • -- ~ ~ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for ·the State of Washington, residing at Buckley -2- j I ' • • EXHIBIT J\"' I"'"' \. ' 70 ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS '·, ', TRACT :4' ~REA "' 0. 07 ACRl!S (4()79 S..F.) TRACT '8' AREA• 0.25AC//ES -----,I (I0, 104 S.F.) FENCE 0 SHAIJtJWOOIJ l!asf .35' of NWY4 SE%# OF 22-2,-5 t'f),u~---l--£ OF AN EXIST- ~ ING LWIVEWAY I :f ~ -KINJ COUNJY: WA 0 ?11INGTON ·@-·'·' BQUND. A_~'i' tlJ LINE , , -· --··;.,,oJUsi'MENT No,!;_{l5LQ!).L__ ,,·' .. .. DECL,O,kA TJON KHOW ALL MEH BY TI£SE 'PmEflrs THAT WE w,::· . l,l,IOERSIGNED OIINER(S) OF 1HE I.Al<l :fO:EIN IDCRIBep DO HEREBY IIMKE A 90UIC)AAY llME ~1M~ : : Tl'IEM:CF PURSUANT TO RCW 58.17.040 ANO'OEa.AAE ::. ;s~~~ TOTHS:r -:0 ~":f~~TION-';. WllH THE FREE COISENT NIii IN ACCOfiDANCE WITH THE DESIRES Of" 1HE OMER(S). IN WITNESS ll1iEftEOF 'll'E HA\IE SET OUR HANDS ANO SEALS. -- stm~-~-.lM .. c-t)'of .. 1-w,,-1-... -~-..··M•- ...... tlllt ....... l...,.............,.lt1o .. ( ........... )--....,,t.yod,W ... _ ..... __ ....... - =--...:. ~~--.. , _._ ....... ----- APPROVAL A.PPAO~ TMIS ~DAV c,:-47,(P!j( 1~ HA+,,<~ / MANAl:£:it-UM> USE?' D.D.£.S. 1'Hl'-- KINO CIXMTY OEPNllMENT Cf' ASSESSMENTS [IOOfflk!ed and appr<M!ld ttii. 1.2.. dar ol __J12£___. 19.z( &err Me+!" KlrwJ County "-- :!.'23:!, :h2_'f . ~ RECORDING NO. [A._&t:;_ ____ _ Deputy KlnQ County ,_,.J"' Jr",·:c~ .:,·v1,t ~·.t-.·t •.r RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE tUA.t:7..IAi{.~ .. .,,.. .,.,._._J n11d for record thl.t..1 ...... dc,y cfa .. r., 1{1,..-.1(",.otJ! .. W n book/...oi.f. .• ol.arA',fot l)O'J41_..A .at the requeat of ~~,if,-=t•····· 4fii·/i.~~: ~'-. · ------·\GOV'T. LOT 8 1151011~u2a ~ I -I ~.~-----_, ... ,,~ ... 1. .• ~ ...._._ ... SECTION 22, TWP. 23 N .. R. 5 E .. W.M. KING COUNTY WASHINGTON -" •·• ,_, , .. .. -OM"" -i.'11"11 --· lll'l"«'H"I Wl"'lll'H'C ··-= "" ~" ~-U HD GOV'T. LOT 3 ~ it.~:·,, :· .. /' . '' .::-:-,,. :f' .,, l· ~ ,,··-~ ., ,,-'• -! --; ". ,' '' ' s'°l<ff.! .. f\2 --• _ Poree/ ,I I ""' , ,.>~ , ·-,. '"' "°"'· ·----;;.,• .' J •• VOL/PAGE 106 -..1-.ib .A.'l',~,,.,.. r:,'lr ~"'r., ~-\1--.,.. :--._ ".,,;;,, ,,' " ' ,, · ([[3) f~EW LIHE .;,;' '·' ' . ,;,\" •.·.'*:::%".-"k,, •~· ••oo .. ;ti·•' 1,'-.,,,,., "'•' ' ~00 ~. -~,-,~,-:,---.-..-,--,,,-.,~' lj!j ,~ :;:k ~ I -.... ,,., l['i</ _,_ ~ .. ~"-·;::;;;;;, • t -,, '·,•< . •a• \", ''~"~ .. _oo_ .... - ' • " Pore•/ , , ~· -,,.,,.,._ ... , ~..-. -"' ·~· " , , • .,,n,. ,· :' 1' /'!i ,i PONT ',1,' 8 ---- ',a· '""''" ~ ,· _j•'' ~ ,.,, .. ___ ,,.. ,-I /y~-·-. I ~' I ... , '\l a Eo1I Line ot the N.W. 1/4 of 5.E. 1/4 ,,S-C~_LE" I" : .i(ftf e.,1S1s OF Bf:Al{~i;\., ·:: ,J::,ist lil'I• q.l the Nor;lhwest 1/_4 ol ti.. ·saullteo~{l/4 of S.,"ctiOII 2::}~"2~~5, JMl"-- i:":•;:~rt! J,~~7.~l~-~-2 ~!-·'' . -·.,, ... ,,, .. LEGEND (IJ€Aq//lHJ a D1SrJ BEA-G ti, OUIT <Cl -:-. flOUNOAR/J.'iiN'JffD -' IKIUl'EoUIY J'IS CALCULATED C,t,LCULATUI LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE Thl9 BOUNDARY LINE AOJJSTMENT corrflctly r"P'-.ts a tuM)' m• by rra or un<ar my dhcUon kl confomlcmce wlttl state ond oounty etcnut .. In .~.l/~~~i 19 ... ?.~ .. ~~ Cllrtlflcau. No. .':'::'?~!: .. ~~ ~ .,o"l x-:: 0 ' ""-'-e-.t ... i ~ ~-,..,.,.n.,,.-. •:v. . . -_' --... ,; -<W'II' oao/ ----~ ~ .... "'""" 7 ~-.!.'-''---./ .. H.W 1;/4 oi ,$·.i; .. 1/-4 So!l"(~ Lin• ol:"4he · • i ' "" ' ""·" \ '·., .. .)too ,,· ~:·';· ___ ... 0 Built G. Goldsmith ci:D•ARW.OeiD f,,U.D. -· ·1·--8.0UNDARY UNE·-~S~ENT 1{ FOR ~ &: Associates, Inc. oov•r. Lor e. N.E.'i';,q:iF Ei.W. 1/4, ®°v'r. LO:f 3, WI lUll.._a ..._ .. _ ,, ... _ ...._ .. _ ,a, ., __,., .. ,.., (1M) --1- & W£5T 1/2 OF S.E. V4·S.Et:. 22. TWP. 23N.,_R.5E. OW<f. BY 011·, .. _ .. ..,. -·~.~OG.~·· '" 11/IZ/111 CHl. BY ""' '""' " r • 200' I ~ 2 .· KING/COUN;!/ WA?'iiNGTON BOtlNDAR.Y llNE ' ,, ·'ADJUSTMENT h'95LIT113 . .,. ... NO. ____ _ ,,·· .:· .. DECLARATION KNOW AU. MEN BY ~~--~°i,i,TS 1",'f<~ TH(/. lMOERSIGNEP O'aNEA(S) OF" M l..NilD ~EIN ~ DO IOEBY l,l,AK£ A OOIJNOAIIV I.If£ Al),.1Ji,:1t,1iNT :: 11-EREOf' PUR9JNH TO RCW 5&17.040 ANl DtCL.ARE . 11-IS AO.IJSlMENT TO BE THE GRAl'l;IC REPRESEHTATICff.": OF TH( SAME, AN) THIil SAID AO..USTMCHT IS MAOE 'MTH 1liE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCC VIITI-1 1HE DESIRES ~ TH£ OWNER(S). IN NDIESS WHEREOf WE HAI,£ SET OlJf;I HANDS AHO SEALS. &:@.Z -,r,._4 1' t{A•*; ---=,"'.,11c•c"c'"-'~'>" 0 ""1\,::c·:· __ ~ t:11:.,.x ·o r,n,;oz17 1 .......... -..... --.. •• ~,~Ji':"""') ....... "'?.~.::~h --~ . h ~' 4\,;,\~ ~~~/~ C •·• . '.--·· . !,~.-~ ... ~~-=--0·~?:6 f~i:t :::_r4,,J.\\;.~ n.t.rl • -.·.· ,-_·. \'!\ ,.,,,";;-::J;;;J lolJ ...-ti.~'. --.. ,.,, ... ;-z,.,, ~ /ctl ··., .. ~~.t,..n~"'? -°'--..·==-~~=-I -.,°: ~~~~~--• ,. ~-;l:, ,.,.' ....,_N,....__..._....... 1,,1,,o(',h,,,,_) __ ~oolfllfti,o, _____ LsV.--~ =:--,,,;. ---lolJ _.,.,, _ _._ APPROVAL L// u1_~ USE SER'o'I~ D.0£.S. JEl'lt.lllMEN_T..,d' ASSESSMENTS ~ .. _day of--~~ 19_ Doputy King c-ty "'- RECORDING NO. RECORDER'S CERTIFlCATE .................. .. R~ for r11i::ord thl11,. .•..•••... da~ of ••.•••.. ,19 ••.••• ot .••••. M In bocll .......... of. ,. .... at poge ......... at tti11 rll'qU-l of ai~'s'1t.u«'" ........ J.«.o":" •• .J:\," u~ --· SUpt. of Recarde l!. SECTION 22, TWP. 23 N., R. 5 E., W.M. KING COUNTY WASHINGTON PAJW![.:·e·li!:X18."'C"~J (8•0t10ft 22-23-15) .,-·· ····.... .-··""'"'"··· . TM! .,.,,1 .... 1 fM-,.. .. ,n ... , -··•.$ tft• So&lfl.-nl_.,..,,.,. AHO ilMI NttrlhMtl q .. r1., r,J fb• ::~==~~~#7"l4~h~c,f;u~;;.~r~~ ~: ~~ !::;::·j~:· c-1,, Wuhfo9l1111 ly"'9 ~::--'"B•il~·-~l 1ft, +~.:~~ .. , r,1 •o.d ~;1~~; q~-~~,.~i"ti.;$~\~ ••.~'•• "' BHllon ·.~ T~· S Of"41'~~·· W •1.niiM E•I kMi l~!,;:ii'~ ........ of !145.oo_.-jiii., •. ,{tM··Tr•.• PHlt •f·e.,_;,1ng ot la• liatHI '-':r..ll•i -: ... -i' _;, .,-·".-.~· . _-,- T-• It 8Q;"1'r'!19" 'I i' .. •t-, t.t.'.Jiio'.O() {ht; . Tl1•"'• If' 1'3'!\1'311," . .-·G •ttllM,:~ 171.&l! 1ff1;.. , n1..,...-li 21"0l'Sl"_,w o dl•t•e._,,., ttl.oo , ... i.;· '"-.,~• 11 80"!1r~• 11 o<lle~• e1 61'!1.IS~•t; T ...... • 9 69"0:6'!11" W a ~1,t1nc1, ol l&&.eat1.i; Tllo,nu N 7&'..W47" If• ... , ... of 47!1.sl IHI: ,:·· .: ., r-..nu I ~"q:~s· 'I -..-di••-• ot .i:q~ IHI to-~ Horn,.~;,.,, -~' ot 140lfl,t'lac•-&.£,, •.. -lllt,l111111-,1,a14-~:·' . ..:-... =· :=· .-:: .... ,··' TO&ETHER WITH 1•111 p11r1lon ar ,~ S.,~t••n(,i..1., ,,(ih• 800ttti.'!li•1 ~i.., ot ,md s...c.tton U ~.::.::;-::7".:: ::.·~=.,1r:.::·~riU,~=1=' ;tt:~:::~N=~-::: o::;.c;"f·-;,·, It\ 99"20'08" W• •... :·' :. ;· .• ·. • r-e. ·a 2e•u•,4r w a dlol-.. 1112.:t.2 1 .. 1 1iit~.Nor1~,;;~1M1J ~ ..... 01 1~11, Ploc• s.E. a!Mllfl•l•1nl11Mal1<11dlln•. ··=·.,{ :: :: E~lrtolff tro111 Klrlt C.u•,, ...... or, RH..-dl. =, ....... . pAJN:61::. A (EXISTING] {StcUOft 22-2~-51 n .. r,, .. ,1 .. ,,, a ....... ..,, 1o1, ?; on.s a ., a ... 11..., 22. T.....,.1,1, 23 N..-111, R...., , Eau, w.M.. K1a9 C•..,i;,,, Wa,~1,..10,, 1,111g Sou-ly ol Ill• Rulon Map" V•ll•J Mith••, -E.,,.,.,1, •I • 60.00 lo<>I rllhf••I•, -l>OU ... 140th P!o9• S.E. TQi,IEJIIEFI l'lnl O,ot i,MhOII al lht N .. 1tin1I ~-;., o1 lh• 8Nihffll q111rler ""d 1111 N .. 1-1 cpQr1.,:,;1 "* Sa""'•HI _,., r,f 1ol6 S.cllo1 2!, IJlftt MGrl~Hll••lr 01140th Ploc• S.E. •• Nor1Mrlr ol lh<t'ioltwln,g..•fiClo"elf·1111-. .,,,·'' ae~ ol 11,, N.,, ... ·~/~i...~r ol HI• Norlh•ul .,....,1., ol Ille B011t••ul .,...,,., ol ul4 ''9::.~:~. 9 .9f"ii49"''·ir ololl9 •~~··:E.HI Ill• ot 10,d 1wi1,111en o !11lanu of !!o~.oo ,,_.. •• tM rrv• ~o ... t .-t ,-....... ol:the -·111· ........... 111111; ·· ri....~.11 art1'3'."• a dl•latic• ,, <111,1,00"'llr<ll~··•·. T-... II 8!1*~1--" To dl&t<inH -~~l'f:!12 IH1t T"'"'°' II 27"~1" W a ..-.;..,,_i 10.00 !uh . ·._-, TM1,;.j :M.&O"°N'S4' II ,•1•• ot 875.IS j~fl._ · .. · .. -.::\ .. ~:::::~,~~:..:-:e:::=~~~::r.\\.. /i _ _._.: .. ··-··· ..... . ·t-11tt11"' 8 &1""!11,')5" W o d!-'-· o! ~O.oo IHI lo 1h··N!lr,t~111t•rl;E ........ ol.-.140lh PloH 9.E. olllll1 ... t0<lillt>Mo<l'foal~~••· .· ."· · _.. :' ::. L .. • h~t al llMI MG~nt .,.,~''-e,ol.•~:'f#lllwH1 ~..,.,, . .,:';, 1~, 11..;·~~•ut Cllfol!~i'~ ol ···\, 9 '"°11~.!;. a 0!"41'41" 11 a1,~~'.l¥. E .. 1 ~ ... __ ;:.-~·ditto .. •="~; 2!1.n ~·~, lo tM ~;111,n, _ _.:'· ....,gin '1 IM R11111..i M•• v ... , Kli'll!<!Jt. .,. tlMI r~...-Polnt ~:11 .. -1 . .i 1114-•••l(>.l.1..-•..i ;r,ut; i~::: :':~-:.::.:;;:;::I~:.· n!~.:;!1.!!11/.~";';.., .. ll,on ~:_dn-...,~;· 200.0~:1~~1; T-·" Ol"•9'49" E ti .U.h,-., •I 220.00 IHITl,-10• S ur11'!19" E'd'lridHC• .t 165.00 , .. 1; • Tllo,11H II or41'49" E o dl•l•H al 310.00 t .. 1 to .... &ut!IHI)' .. o:rillltl'· Tti.r,co & 1&"41'47" I! o ••loN• ot 3!1.11 , .. t lo IM T,111.P6'1nl·"Cli f!"9l.ning. EKtr.cl1d 11011111:~t c-1, Au,n•'• Rtoerllt. LANO SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE Thie BOUNOARY UNE AO.AJSTMENT COl'Nlet1y •l!IJH"llll9l1B g .....-vey mOOII by m1 or und., my dk-ectlon In conlormonce 111\th 1tota and county •totutH Qn9 Hugh G. Goldsmith \{1U & Associates, Inc. l&ll ll>ltll "'-. -·-N .. _ -·-In -~.~~~!. 111 .•. ~.~-· µ~4----- C...Ufb::ite No 10!19.2 ................. 1.11: {al) -.n11 m.i-1-1.a1 VOL/PAGE 106 s~ -----~ l· •• ~.OUNDARY UNE)bJU.~fMENT F..OR Ct1J,ARW.OC1b P..U.D. .. GOv"T. LOT 8, N.E.'i~.OF $.~·. 1/4. G(i°~·'T. LO:f\ a WEST 1/2 OF S.E. l/4"·S_l;!:C. 22, T\tl'. 23N .•. /l:.5E. -·· '""~ 1 ....... .,n ,-., .,, ~~ :t/ll!/1'& ....... o. :" .. °""' OY " """ 1• • 200' ·'··.·,~0!( '""' 2 " 2 , .... - co r- C') !ffi I ,· "' -· ] t;; " ~! ,. " o'.l 0- fl' d a;Ei • • ~. state Route 169, Cedar Grove Park Vicinity to Maplewood. Golt courae Vicinity 'l'be Grantor, MAPLE VALLEY LAND ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington Limi tad Partnership, f'or and in consideration of the awn of TEii AND H0/100 ($10.00) DOLLARS, and other valuabla conaideration, convaya and varranto unto tha STATE OF WASIIIIIGTOII and ita anigna an eas•ant over, under, upon and aero•• the hereinerter duerihed lands for the purpooe of conauucting and u.intaining a drainage eaauent. said lands being aituated in King County, state of Waabington, and described as tollovs1 see Exhibit A attached heroto and 11&de a part heraof. . It is understood and agreed that delivary of this Easement ls hereby tendered and that the tarma and. obligations hereof shall not become binding upon the State of Washington, unless and until accepted and approved hereon in writing for the State ot Washington, Department of 'l'ransportation bY its Director of Real Estate Services. Dated t1,orc h Accepted and Approved Director, Real Estate Services /. Date: 'IU.i 'tJ. . ' A , 19~ JIAPLB VALLEY LAIID ASSOCIATBS LIIIITBD PARTlll!RSBZP Sy: Inc. , a Washington SR 109( ) Parcal No. 1-14164 Page 1 of 4 pages EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIRED """°"'-- "" '( ~t> °"'"' r G: '.: ('.~/.: ' t-:\<-=if'.:': ·ii -:'i J:,:L] tft.,,,o;. ii Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1993 9305031378N53033 Page I of 5 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:01 AM 1ST - ...... ,, .. STATB OF IIASIIING'l'Olf countr of /f/1] ' \ ) : ... ) • • -,:-.... •--'":"" - On thia .....L._ day of /1:1 nl~&m 1993, befcr• •• penonally appaartld. J. Scott Griffin, Jr., 0 ab., Inc., a Waahington cor- poration, 1aid corporation Jcnovn to .. to be the General Partner or the fira ltnovn u Kapl11 Vallar Lancl Aaaooiotea LWta4 Part:narllhip, 11 Waabington Liait..s Partnenllip tllat uaClltecl tba within and foregoing instrwoant, and aclln-ledged aaid inat:rlmant tc be tba fru and voluntllr)' act and daecl of aaid tira, for tbe -and purpoa .. tharain Mntionad, and en oetb atat..s tbat be vaa autborhed to execute aaid inatruaant. GIVEN under ay band and official •••1 th• day and year last above written. 69811/141640 R~~or tha State of Wuh1ngton, Reaiding at /,y o"' c/n,(«/(e lly APPo1ntaant uplria R-//r/9(;( Pag• 2 of 4 pagaa BR 169( ) Parc8l lfo. 1-14164 Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC: 1993 9305031378N53033 Page 2 of 5 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:02 AM !ST - - • • llSIIIIBIIT All that portion of the hereinafter described. Parcel 0 A• lying northerly of a line begiMing at a point opposite Highway Engineer's Station (hereinafter referred to as HES) 394+00 on tba sR 159 BUrVGY line of SR 1691 Cedar Grova Park Vicinity to Maplewood Golf course Vicinity, and 115 feet southerly therefrom, when mea&ured at right angles to said survey line; thence westerly parallel with aaid suxvey line to a point opposite HES 406+10.oo thereon: thence southerly to a point opposite said HES 406+10.00 and 130 teat southerly thore~rom; thence westerly parallel wi tb said survey line to a point opposi ta HES 415+53.JO thereon; thence northerly to said HES 415+53.30 and the end ot this line description. Parcel "A" That portion ot Government Lots 3 and 8, tha northeast quarter of tb• southwest quarter, the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter, the southeast quarter ot the southeast quarter, and tha southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of section 22, Township 23 Norlh, Ranae s East, w~M., il'l King County, Washington, lying southerly of' the· Renton-Maple Valley Highway (Primary state Highway Na. 5) and easterly of 140th Place southeast aa conveyed to Kinq county by deeds r.a:corded under King County Recording Numbers 5596210, 6354693 and 6391312; EXCEPT that portion deacribed aa tollawa: Beginning at the northeast corner of 1-..ha northwaat quarter of the southeast quarter ot said Section 22; thence southerly alcmg the east lina th•raor to the southerly margin of tlle Renton-Maple Valley Highway and tho TRUE POill'l' OF BEGINNIHG; thence southerly to a point 545 feet south of the northeast corner of said subdivision; thence westerly 200 feet; thence northerly 220 feet; thence easterly 165 feat to a point 35 teat westerly ot tha east line ot said subdivision; thence northerly, parallel to said aaat line, to the southerly margin ot the Renton-Maple Valley Highway; Paga 3 ot 4 pages SR 169( ) Parcel Na. 14164 r / Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1993 9305031378-53033 Page 3 of 5 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:02 AM 1ST / \ • • I ··• BZBlBI:T "A" {Continued) thence easterly along said southerly margin, to the TRUB POIH'l' OF BEGINNING; AND EXCEPI' those portions conveyed to the state of Washington for the widening of the junction of the Renton-Maple valley Highway and 140tb Place Southeast by deeds recorded under King county Recording numbers 7707110208, 7707110209 and 7707110210; AND &XC!PT that portion thereof lying southerly of the following described line: commencing at the northeast corner ot eaid northwest quarter of the southaaat quarter of aaid Section 221 thence South 1•41•351n West along the oaat line of said subdivision 545 teat to the TrUa Point of Beginning ot the herein described line; thence North &9•17'351" West 410.00 feet; thence North 53•31 1 35• West 171.51 feat; thence North 21•01 1 s1• West 70.00 feet; thence North 80°52' 54n West 675.15 feat; thence south 69°06'51" Wast 155.87 feet thence North 75°41 1 47• West 476.00 feet; thence South 51°53 1 37" West 20.00 feet to the northeasterly mat'gin of 140th Place southeast and the terminus ot this line description. The lands herein described contain an area of .ao acre, more or less, the specific details concerning all or which are to be found in that certain Jaap ot detinite location now ot record. and on file in tha O.trice ot tl1e Secretary of Transportation at Olympia, and bearing data ot approval January 21, 1986, raviaed July 2, 1g92, tor Sheet 6; revised March 6, 1992, for Sheet 7. · It is understood and agreed that the State of Washington .· will reconstruct the existing road approach on tha southerly side of.said highway at or near Highway Engineer'o station 400+25.00, which APPROACH shall be tnaintained between the riqllt of way Una and. tba shoulder line ot said highway by the grantora, their heirs, or ass!gns. The grantor herein further grants to the state ot Washington, or its a.gents, the right to enter upon the grantor's remaining lands where necessary to reconstruct said road approach. Ravi I ' ; Page 4 ot 4 page• SR 169( I Parcel No, 14154 f ., . . . ~ r / • .• .. · .. Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC: 1993 9305031378N53033 Page 4 of s Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:02 AM !ST u ' -TA TIOII IUOIJS " 1M ,.,..,. ... ,i• 11. :io11 .. , oa.rt ,,,.,, ~ ..... _ ~ 1 /• '9.54' AT. CEDAR RIVER ,··r~· "·. RENTON CORPO NE '/, SEC. 22 SE 1/, SEC. 22 I T. T -····················--------·······:·······-·.--·--··············/··· ,, :; LEGEND .. .. IC.II.[ II ,m ( ..... ,, ) = Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1993 9305031378-53033 ...... _. _,. -l"Uctl, NO. .......... ...,,.,,. SO:ff1T .... ........ '"' .. ...,. .... CIT'I' Of MNTOff ... .... -HTM. WJ. ""' u. llllMINU 111. OWNERSHIPS Page 5 of 5 Created By: rahini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:03 AM 1ST --;-::::,.::, • 0 EASEMENT For and In COl'llld•l'ltlon Df One Ooa. ($1.00J and OIMI' valuabkl c.»nsldllrallon, th• r~I of lmlch fs horeby admowlldged, MAPI F \Ml I EY lAND ASSOCWES I MIEQ PABINEBSHIP e WMblrunnn I lmttqd Pnna,rnhfn ("Granlor" h•111rn), h•nib)t ;NUiis, convep and W,,,anlt lo PUGET SOUND POWER I. LIGHT COMPANY a Wa:shfngtOn COfPOrmkln ("G,anle1• llltei,), lor the~· h1,oflllffar set '°'1~ a pe,pafllal euoment over, aa'Oss and undartho fa6owlng daac,i)ad raalproJ)IIJ'ly (Iha, "Prcperty" benln) h King County, Wuhlno,on: that portion of Gove:cnment Lots 3 and 8, the Northeast quarter ot the Southwest quarter, the Horthweat quarter of the Southeast quarter, the Southeast quarter ot the Northweet quarter, and the Soi:thvest quartur of the Northea3t quarte:t" of Section 22, 'l'ownahip 23 Horth, Range OS £aat, H'.H., in King county, Washin!Jton, lying southerly of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway fPd1116ry State Highway No. 5) and Easterly ot 140th Place Southeast as conveyed to King County by de~ recorded under King County Recording•Nos. 5596210, 6354693, and 63919121 EXC&P?' that portion de:i:cribed as followi!I: I Seginnlng at the Northeast corner of the Northweat quarter of the Southeast quarter of ~aid Section 22; !l'HIWCE: aouthUl.y al.ong the Eaat line thereof to the Southerly margin of the' Renton-Maple Valley Highway o.nd the TRUE POIN'l' OF BE:GINNIHG1 THENCE Southerly to a point 545 feet South of the Northeast corner of :said subdivision~ THENCE: Westerly 200 feet; THENCE Northerly 220 feet: THENCE Easterly 165 feet to a point 35 feet We.l:lterly of the Ea.st line of !laid $Ubdivision: THE:NCt Northerly, parallel to aaid &aat line, to the Southerly margin of the R&nton-Kaple Valley Highway; THENCE Easterly, along said Southerly margin, to the TRUE POIN'l' o~ B£GINNING1 AND EXCEPT tho3e portion:,: conveyed to the State of waahington for the widaning of the junction of tha Renton-Maple Valley Highway and 140th Place Southea!lt by deeds :cecorded under King County Recording Noa. 7707110209. 7707110209 i1m.d 7707110210; AND EXCEP'l' that portion lying Easterly .ind Southerly of the following described line: Be9inning at the Southeaat corner of aaid Northeai!lt qua:cter of the Southweat quarter of Section 22; THENCE North 99°09'12'" ffei!lt along the south line or said subdivision a distance of 304.04 feet to the Northea3terly margin of a sanitary :sewer ea3emont recorded under King County Reeo.tding Ho. 628976' and the TRUE POIN'l' OF BtGINNING of the herein de:i:cri.bed line; 2'HENCE North 15°15'33'" We3t along said Northea:it.erly margin a distance of 435.00 feet; Tff£NCE: North 82"15'47• East a diatanee of 90.00 feet; 'l'HENCE North 75°45 1 52"' E:aat a dh1tance of 464.37 Ee-et t.o t:he Southwostce.1;.ly mi:irg.ln of u.id 140th Place Southeast. and the te't1ni.nu:, of said line (said line bolng the Northwesterly boundary ot the plat of Maple Ridge E:,tate:, u recorded in volume 134 of Plat:,, page:i 9 through 16); I.NO ALSO EXCEPT thol!le portion:i conveyed to the State of Wai!lhington for the widening of" the junction of the Renton-Maple Valley Highway aad 140th Place Southeast by deecb recorded under King County Recording Nos. 7707110209. 770711020,.f,,.,~~"!i',S.?110210. . ,f ·. )l.!"•0,:1 h.-~ ~:.::ay ::::= ':' .!::~ Grantn'I ri;hb 1hall ~,~~-~~~~{°"of Iha P,uporty (Ula A Rftlhl •• :,;, CHI In rr'd\11111;11" h:19 hat '111 .. ~;It mt~.11 fR ~t sld• d a ;"PAIOffhlP clcr;t"'.bed•1eU~N: ;-· · ' ·!-·, '°~ ~ ~ I A i!ltrip of land ten (10) feet in w.iilth, lying withirj ~e above described Property, described a:11 folloW9: ·· , ' The North ten (lOJ feet. lying parallel with and a~~oining State Route 169 IHaple Valley Ri9hway). 798.30 KJ-ACOOOt ·' ,, " ' ,,, ,,i Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1993 9312211687N53033 Page 1 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:24 AM !ST 1. PurpoN. Grantat 1hall hav• 1h11 right ID construct, opcirate, maintain. rc,palr, replaca and enlarge one or more eladric tranamlnlon andlordltlrlbutlon Hnaa over andobr undef th• Rlghl-ol·Way together with all neceasary or convenient appurtanancn lhenato, whi:h may lncluda but ani nol Rmlled to the followl'ng: a. OVtrhHd fecUllin. Poln and/or towers with croaaann,, brac:o,. guys and anehors, el&ciric lransmiaalon and dlstribulfan Ines: communication and signal ha; lransformerB. b. Undarground 1lcllhl1a. Underground conduits, cables. vaults, manholes, switches and transfmrnera; um\.burled or ground rnauntltd laclWH auch as pad a, ttansform11ni and swltchos. Followln; tlMI Initial c:oRSb'udlon of its faclflthil&, Granlea may lrom 1lme ID lime construct such addftbnal linas and other lacllllies u It may roqulfa. 2. Ac:ce ... Grantee shall havt Iha righl ol 8CQIIISI to the Rlght.(Jf.Wav over and acmSB Iha Property to enabla GranlH ID narcisa its righ11 hereunder, provldlMI, thal Gran!IIO shaD companaata Grantor for any damage to the Proptrty caused by Iha uerclu al said tight of accn:1. 3, CUttlna ol Tr.... Granln 11hall hava the right 10 cul or trim any and all brush or 1taM standing or growing upon the Alght-af,Way, and also the righl to Cit or trim any hlln upon lh• Propo,ty which, In falling, could in Grantea'll reasonable judgment. bl I hazard to Gran'lee'I fac:llltlts. 4. Granlar'a UN af Rlght-c::if•Way. Graritar reaervea lht right to use lhe Rlgh1-Dl•Way for any purposa not lric:onslstont with the tfghla haraln granted. pravlded, that Grantor shah not construct or maintain any bu!ldlng or other llruclure on the Right-of-Way and granlor ahall da no blasting wilhln 300 le111 ol Gran11111's lacililies wilhout Grantoo'a prior writlon conMnl S. Indemnity. By accopllng and reoording this easement. Gran!H agrees to lndemnlfy and hold harmless Granlor Imm any and all claims lor lnjurlas andfor damagn suffered by any person, which may bl causod by tha Grantee'I oxen:ise of Illa rights haniin granted; provided. that Gr.ffltff shal nat be raspansib'8 to Granter tor any injuries andfordamagas IO an, per,on caused by acts aromlsslons of Grantor. &. Abandanmont. The rlghta herein granted shall continua unlit auch time aa GranlCiHI ceasGS 10 usa the Righ1,of 0 Way lor a poriod al five (5) aucctSllve yaart1, In which evenl this .asament shall terminate and all tights; harG1und11t shall te'ler1 ta Gran1or, provided, that na abllndonmant shall be deemed ta hava occurred by reason of •• Grantee's I allure to lnillally Install Ila facilitlas on 1h11 Aight<lf•Way wilhln any period of lime from lhe da1a hareol. 7. succeuor end AulgnL Thi rfghts and ab11gatiol'lS of tfla paitiaa shall inure to the benefit of ;ind be binding upon their ra1pacllve auc:canort and a!islllns. ·_ DATEDlhls ____ day or __________________ ~ 1993. GlWITTJR MAPLE VAUEY LANO ASSOCIATES UMITEO PARTNERSHIP, a Washington Limited Partn~ BY C'ec" e +-i., <' ~ .,,,,. • ..IL Pu,.;,,.,_,._ BY )=,~ ~ ;>, C ~ !,1-, .. "'i:L... STATEOFWASHINGTON ) )SS CX>UNTYOFKING ) On lhla ~ day ol dtmt,'"?\aer-19-2,L belora me, lhe urxlersign&d, a NOlary Publlc In 1111d lar th• Stale ol Washington, duly commlUloned and awom, personally appeared ~~ .S.~a}-r,,.., lo makn~lobethl general partner of MAP! F VAi I EYI ANPAS59CJA1f$) iMrrEoJ:,A'HfNERSHiii.a' Washington Limited Partnership that necuted the forctgOlng IMtrumanl. and acknoWledgecl said Jnsttument to be the trea and wluntary ad and deed of said partr,ersh.,1or the uses and purpo,es lheraln menllaned. and an oath stated that $!-sir-: was authorized 10 e1ec:uta aald lnstrtimen1. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affix.Id th day and year In this certlflcala above wriltert. ' .. Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1993 9312211687-53033 c~e--~£ Notary Public In and for the S1ate ol Washington. Residing al ;,......a,c,..\V::bf' k) I\ Myc:ommlsslonoiqiires /O·/.S~-9¥ Page 2 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:24 AM !ST I,,,... ... , .. _ ---·~ ,{ ,;, ' ' " I ,.. . . _,,. . - ' • • • / ., ....... . Wlltn RKorded Rta1r11 To: • Cedar River Water a. Sewer District 18300 SE Lake Youngs Road RcnlOll, WA 98058 Documenl T'ltle(s} (or ttansl\CCions eontaincd lhemn): 1!11 Eoscment Cl BUI of Sale D Other i / ' Reren?nce Number(s) of Doi:uments l&gned or released: \ D Adiiilional rercrencc #'s on ~ or documca1 Granlor(s} (Last name rLtSt. 1hen fll'St name and ini1iafs) ,. l.ancnster/Cedarwood Inc. 2. 3. 4, D Addilionnl names on page or doeuroonL Grantee(s) (last name ruse. then firs1 name and initials} 1. Cedar Rlvet Wa,er & Sewer Dblrict 2. [J Additional TillltlC$ on Jqc or document. IV"' CHJC.IGO 1!Tll: INS, CO R!F# f{f?c,7/.s.:1 ... ,o Legal description (abbteYilllcd: i.e. lot, block, plal or so::cioa. 1ownship, tU11ge Section 21, Township, 23 N, .Raniic S Enst CJ Additional lepl Is oe1 pase or documct1t. Assessor's Property Tar Parcel/Accounc Number 181 Assessor Tu II noc )'Cl assigned. The Aud.ilor/Reeonlcr will n:ly on lhe inl'onnation provided on lhc t'otnl. "Die SUlff will noi. mid the document lO miry die aecura:y or ccmplelenesr of 1he iflllclinc infonnttdon providt.d hereJn. l'MOS1Sl.407 Page 1 oH EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIRED ~ Roc;ottl~ DMll1111 a1~Do1M1 \ l I 1 1 -~ ... { ' ' ' :Ii 1 t_-_·· ·_' .. ~.~ I i I ' ~. ,, Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1997 9705280663-53033 Page 1 of7 Created By: rohini.peOdineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:52 AM 1ST .•. ! ··~-~,,.,, .... :, I I • • • I ,' \ FORM C4 • CORPORATE/PARTNERSHIP WATER EASEMENT NAME OF PROJECT: Ellott farm (AKA Cedarwood) 1h9 und'ef'Slgned GRANTOR, Laneaster I Cedalwood, Inc .. a Washington Corporaelon and Lennon Investments, Inc., a Wahington Corporation as tenants In common, and Its suc:eessors, and assigns ("GAANTOfr), for and In coruildera!lon ol the sum ol One Dollar {$1.00) and olhef valuable cons$deration, the recolpt of wl1ieh Is hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys and gran1, to CEDAR RIVER WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT of King Counly, Washington, a munlClpal corporation, and Its successors and assigns ("01$TRIC1; a perpetual non-11xc;:luslve (unless otnerwlse stated) easement for tne Installation, operation, maintenance, replacement and repair of water system taelU11es located under, across, along, In and over the following described real property rProperty1 localed In Ktng County, Washlnglon: Legal Descrlp!lon of GRANTOR'S entire parceJ ls attached hereto as Exhibit .. A" which Is ncorporated by reference. Except as may be otherwise sM forth herein, DISTRICT'S righls are Hmfted lo that portion of the Property described as follows: 111 ,,, (3) Rlgl=II el Wa e II sb'eel a All Faad Figlll6 at • a,,,• as Ra vr hoHJafter EleslgRed. platted a11clf11r ;oA$ln.i;t~ed-4oHl&&-Pj-the-publla. a& 8~""' BR liahlbll "'i"' 'I hlGh $ altaitled her.ala aRlil IRiBFPBratelil ~ -Rrea ftdj9IRh Pfgh; gf 'ft'a . n ship ef laRd teR f&e1 IR width laeatolil rit*IIR Iha ~BFf)' lylRB pai:allel 1a aRlil adjBIRIRg Ula area deaarilaelil IA (1) ataoue; aRlil Area Qutslcfe ot Rlght:91-Way and Adlglnlng Area. All area ol land wtthifl the Property but Joeated outside of the areas described In (1) and {2) above, occupied by certain ol the DISTRICT'S water system fadlltles, whether e:dstlng or to be can61ructacl. as descrbed on Exhibit MC'" a1tac:hed hereto which Is Incorporated b)' refef'lflCe. GRANTOR further grams to D1STACT the rtght ol access over and across the Property lo and from Iha easamonl area descrlhed In such Exhlbll ~c". This portion of the easement shaU be axctuslve. GRANTOR undmtands that the desc:r~lons desc:r1bed In Exhibits .!8!!-aAd-.. C .. attached hereto may vary from the ac:tual loc:alfon of DISTRICT'S water system fadHUas. 11 Ute aetual locallOn or any ol suc:h tacBltles are materfaHy lfflerenl than as deSGribed herein. DISTRICT shall prepare amendments lo the 8'JP">Priale exhibit hereto ancj GRANTO A shall prol11)11y execute and delvar lo DISTRICT a modllcatlon lo this easement containing such amendments without ruquirlng payment of ackllUonal ~nslderat~n. sucn modlllcatton shall be tee0rded and shall modify this easement. This Easement shall be non-exc:lustve except es to the easement area desc:ribed ln Exhlbll "'C" attached herelo. whlc:h part shall be exc:luslve. This easamanl IS necessary In order !hat DISTRICT may Install or take possession OI water syslem lac:IHtles as and when needed ta tumlsh water servlc::e 'iO property wlhln and without DISTRICT boundaries; and for such purpose, DISTRICT may, a1 such time es DISTRICT detennlnes Paga 2ol7 - ,,. \ i i l ,! ; i r I Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC: 1997 9705280663-53033 Page 2 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:5~ AM !ST l \ . · ..•. ·/ I ~ •.. _J_ ---·-- , I necasaary to __ do so, lnstaJI, constNct. malnt8IR. operale. repair, ancUor remove and replac;e and/or make acldllans ta waler system fadllllea located on said easamant. DISTRICT -lhal w11on Ille work of Installing .-cons11Uc11ng, rernow,g Bild/Or n,paktn; and """""1g ancllor Idling to SUCh wator ,,atom facllllloa co1!11119ncos, the Woll< shall be pelformed co111nuous1y and ooffl)lelecl 1n a reaaonable tine and wllh ,._ clspatdl, laking Into account the _,. ol lUCh work; and DIS1IIICT agratS lhat upon ca~lttlon o1 SU<:11 work, 111, -of 8lldl ea1111Sl11"81 be reslor8d and roplacld IO a QJndrlan -ly equal IO that belonl tho WOik W1II oo11'1!11111Ced. to u,, -nt that t ~ pradicabla to do so, whk:h shd -de ~ of shrubs and Simi/at piantlngs. The GRANTOR shall haVI thl rlgl't lO use lha swfac:a or said easement are.a so Ieng as GRANTOR'S use dots not intllforo wllll 111e """' of repelrlng ancllor rsmovlng and Nplac:lng an<l'or aclclng to ll1e water -m •-and appunonances, provl<lad tltat .., pormanOl1 building or struclUre of 8fff kind 8halt be erecled an said easemef1'1. Landscaping within U,e easemenl areas s'1al be ....,.. .. ID low giuwlng slwubs (3 fool -m l!elghl, no trees), grass, beauty bark. etc. The conslnlcllon and lnstallalion ol a,pllaJt ..-co"'""' pa,klng su1facas by GAANTOR shall be a pannltted use. GRANT OR ag1Hs !hit no digging or olhlr COIISWctlon shaD oc:eur on thlt Property whlCh would disturb or endanger DISTRICTS ~er system lacllllie8 lncudlng lho COJq,aclJon al earth around SUCh laclllles. This easemem shall be a covenanl running wllh lhe land and shall be binding upun and 11111,e to ttNI blneJJt at the paltl'es and !halt succnsom and assigns. ft" IN WllNESS WHEREOF, said GRANTOR has caused lhls Instrument: 10 be executed this ~ di(yof Mat\ Hlgl. GRANTOR: GRANTOR: Lancaster I C8darwood, Inc. Lenoon Investments, Inc. By: By: Title Pap3ol7 ' 1 I ' I Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1997 9705280663N53033 Page 3 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:54 AM 1ST ...... )~!- I .... ~ .. .,,, ...... :!, 'i' , '. '·' II '· STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNlY OF KING , ., ·• • • \ I I I On 1111s2/!: my or rni...1 . 19[:zbelore me. the unoa,s~n,d. a Nola,y Pybllo In and for the state or was111~b1y ccmmlssfoned and swom. personalty appeared @:lmcldl, llt\/a""'-· me kr»Wn to be tne l?Jwidtrrt o1 Ctooo::a h:>v+Wrt!11a the Otpai"-.that e,:eeuted Iha foregoing lnstnJment 10 ba Iha free and volwrlary act and deed of said O::zt:f'!'?'*Jsz:o , for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. and on oath &fated that he ls authorized to axea.ale the said Instrument. IN WITNESS WH~~e hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal, the day aid year lrst Wfillan above. ,,~!. ~ .... .,. , .:.~········ ~ l,1_.·~ •. "' ~ /J l::i:(,# \-,. 'S A-J fr'.1 · Gkz1 ! i S ;' • ~ :e i tary Pt.lbllc In and for the Stale of Washington, S ~ ~.-.:0i residing al ':Stlt'l l{llk \:'it~. u-Nr...,,,i My wmm1s-,·~'"n "'.,~ .......... "'7'--,-M---Q~tO-----· ~,;,:~a,,·~~---......... STATE Ol' WASHINGTON COUNlY OF KING On tt11s,e'/~ day ol /Y};IJ.fu 1fil_ before me, the undersigned, a Notary f!Jbllc In and lor lhe State of Washington, \;1y tomirissloned and sworn, personally appeared&;h::id:...O .~ me known to be the/luft:wi;:1,P~t ol/4wJJAtqjU1@ 1t'Ttf &:,c lhe Ot:,ex:#r9? that executed the foregoing Instrument lo be 1 a free and vokJntlllY act and deed of said ~f':n , for Iha uses and pur,:,oses theteln menlloned, and on oath stated 111al he Is aulhorlted lo execute llte said instrument IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto sel my hand and affixed my seal, the day and year first written abovo. """'""' ,,,,,1111,,,4: "",. -~e.,,,,,,. .... ;..1., ••••••• ~ i ·r,;· ~-~ ,.. .. .. ~ :I; .,,.ti' ~ ,ii ..... sr-•" .~- ; ~'3 ,,,.. -"' !"j "' • ,,.,,., JJ,O. ~:: ~ ~. .t,·"':·"o.,~ I ~ .. '1/f•ai,·"il~.---.. ,,, ......... o1ary Pub; n and for the State ol Washington. re,ldlng al '1;.:/1Jj11 IP My COfTIT11sskln expires 1,, {p ]?;O Pa;a( al 7 ...... ,····~, .·.-, .. , .. ·:_·,:·. /. \ I J l l I. ~-~~--·_,_: ___ ·:.·. _· . ; ··:. -. .. --·-· .· ·-··---------- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1997 9705280663-53033 Page 4 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:54 AM !ST , . . 4t;...~...:...__..p.--1.,.,; .,· .. / I. . I . .~~-------·--···~·---·-·--' Aprfl 1 s, 1997 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A OF KING COUN1Y BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT Na. L95L0113 reeorded under Kklg County Recotdlng No, 9510179023, R""Rls of King County, Washington Q ~ HullhG.Gold<milh \(}""V .~1es;lnc. A.9'05'755.IIJ Pq. I of I HOO lac. April 21, 1997 El \ ·,, 1 , ~ .• Order: QuickVlew_ Doc: KC:1997 9705280663-53033 Page 5 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:15:54 AM !ST ,.. ... ··1111 .I \ ... I ' .:.1 __ ·--····--····-··-··--,. ·'-- I AprU 10, 1997 LEGALD~l'TION EXHIBIT °C' ~~~'ti~R~O;. OFFSITE WATER EASEMENT (LENNON) That ponlon of Govommont Lot 3, and of tho Northwest qu-r of the Soulheast . quarter orSect1on 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington descnllod as follows: . . . Begloolng at the lntelSOctlon of the West Uno OI the East 35.00 feet of Gild Nortflweat quaner OI tho Southeast qulll18r of Section 22 wfth the Southerly margin OI SR-169 (Ronton- Maplo Valley Highway S,E;): Thence S 01'41'41 W along said Wost lineadlstance of 15.37 flletfo a polnt which. Is 15.00 feet Soutnerly of, when measured at right angle to, said Southerly margin of SR-169 end the Trua Point of Beglnring of lhe hareln described tract; . . Thence N 75'38'59" W parali9I with Salo Southerly margin a distance of 288.07 feet Thence S 59'21'01'W a dls18nce cl 21.21 feet to a point which Is 30.00 feet Southerly · of, when measuned at rfllht angles to, said Southerly margin; . Thence N 75'38'59" W a distance ol 385.26 feet to tho West line of lhe East 710.00 feet of said Government Lot 3, said East 71 o.oo feet being measurud along tf1e South line of said Govemment Lot 3: · Thence S 01'41'41" W along said West line a distance of 15.37 feet to a point which· Is 45.00 feat Southerly o( when measured at right angtee lo, said Southerly m"1lfn; Thence S 75'38'59" E a distance of 388, 11 feet; Thence N 59'21'01" Ea distance of 21.21 feel to a point which Is 30.00 feet Southerly· of, when measured at right angles to, aa/d Souther1y margin: . · Thence S 75"38'59" Ea distance of 285.23 feet to said Wsst line of lhe East35.00 feet ol lhe Northwest quarter of the Soulheast quarter of Sec11on 22: Thence N 01'41'41' E along SS/d West Pne a distance of 15.37 feet to tho True Point of Beginning •. ~Paplvlt HOO Ille. April, 22., 1997 \ 1 I Order: QuickView_ Coe: KC: 1997 9705280663-53033 Page 6 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printec: 4/6/2015 8:15:54 AM 1ST 1--. ' I - ,,I ' .. I I /· ' . ,-~- ,- d Plot of Propose Elliott Form • • / I \ AO •• EXHIBIT "C* N 1"41'41" t 1$.)'l' eASENENT OFFSITE 1~~~~NJ ,•.•,.1,,,,.•,•'J; ,:.,·.,,·<" . ·-----~--·-......... __ ~--- \ - • ,. ·~ ~ II ;I • ;i _,:,.,· .1-t ;19 .~ j: If ; ll ,j JI • \ i; FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF: Pugel Sauoo """""· '"" RollE--OBC-11N P.O. Box 97034 llollovue. WA 98009-9734 REFERENCE t: EASEIIElfT GRANTOR: LANCASTERICEOARWOOD, INC GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND ENERGY SHORT LEGAL: NE11" SEC 22. TflN, ROSE. ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TM PMCfL: 2ZDOI IOIM OI & Z223ff.lCl21-DI For lftC9 Ira c:o,lilldi1lll&w1 of 0... 0--(11.00) and ohr nilulblil co,llldewelM,, the fflClipt of which ii hnbJ .du : LANCASlERICEOARWOOD, JNC., a W8lhlnglon CorpcnUor, rw hnln>, hntlr gr911111, CDrl'M)'S and warranll lo PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC .. 1 w.l*l(llon Corpar.alitln C-Oranlee" llereln), for 1118 putpONI hninahr Nl fafth; 8.,.,...... ....... QVS, CDU and under the falloMlg daatbed fllBI proparly (lho"--1 in KING COUNTY,_, Excepl II NJ be ohrwiN NI bl! herein OrantN'a rigtlll ..a be axmdMd wpon lhal podon ~ ProperlJ (h-e.....11 ArN" haaln) dNalied a lolbn: • &1111unl '"' fell IR rt• llla.'Wl1 flll 8' 111&tl rt• IA .... 1 1ntul111 •111euutt11 1 FIVE FEET ON EACH S10E Of THE CENTERLINE OF THE a.ECTRIC FACUJY Al CONSTRUCTiD OR TO BE CONITRUCTED IN THE ABOVE DUCRIIIE REAL IWJl'ERTY, t. PulpoN. GranlN ... ...,. a,. rtglll lO c:onN\ICI, °'*""· ,.....,, ....... ,.... ~ ,.,_., .,_. and ma one ar ffllDfll alamlc lrWllmlalian and.la!' clllrlllJllan ..., Olttll Mdlor Uncllr Ill E8IIIMftt Mta IDglda with al ---, ar mrnnllnl ............, '**· wHeh n, lndude bul .. l'ICII lln*td to flt -•. Onrtlwl" ,....., Poln wtil crouannl. lncel, ... aid anehon. tleclr6c , ......... Md dlllrtbl6,n Ines; CIMfflUllclllan wl ----=-................ ........ b. UftCllrgrDlad facllllN. UllderpOl.nd conduit, Clblll, VUII, ll'lldldN, IWllcta and ll•llfan1•1: llfflMluned or ground mauntecf fldlllN such• padl. liaub11•a Ind--,... Folowl!'lg 1h11 lnlllll conllrucUDn vf fta fac:IIIIIN. GranlN ma, hm ilma D h ___ IUCII ...._ i1nN ........... ..,,...._ z. ....... a.-a1a1 ............. ., ........ £....-... ___ .. ,....., .. lnlble°"'*tlo ..... lsllgllla........,,JIRMllld. lhllGrlrWIINlca I 1•0... lpraaw ...... lo ... .._-"' ... _"Nidrighlvl-. s. Culling of TINL Or.-......... rtgh IO CUI oi nn-, ln:I .. bn.llh or .... ltlndlng ors,uwtnv 1.-,n .. ENeRwll Alw. and ... right ta cut (I' .. lllf ..... upol\ .. Propaly wtllm, Ill ..... add In Oraran ....,...~ beahlHRIIOOrlalal"a faallal. Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9803121618N53033 Page 1 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:16:17 AM 1ST - I .•• Gtanlora UN of hNNnt Arla. Glaa IN8IWI .. rigllll llD UN lhe Elllmlri Iva b'...,, purpa11 nol i...aaflla• wWI .. dgNI herai llf"llld. prOllded. lhal Gllr*w .._. not COllllruc:I cw ffllinllm.., bUldirlg or ohr sllucul. on U. EalmlrCMa Ind..-1h11 du no tilllllng wlNn 300 fNt of GNMan--.. wllhaut ~priorwrlllanCOl*'1L L ,_..,_ lly_Md_ ... ___ .,,_, ... ..., _ __ _, .... _ ... _____ .,.., ___ ...... ., .. GnnliN'II __. ol lhe dghtt ..... ..-,; p,owlded. 11111 0-.. t1111 nol be ,......... la Qer1lor b' ll'IY ..... ~ dlmlga. ID mlJPlflOfl cauaed by .. GramilllontOf Glnor. I. ~ The ,WU hnln plied lhell conlnte unll sudl time a GtanlN L'Nll!I-IO me h EaMmenl Arel fat • pariod Of IIWe (5) l&ICClll9wt ..... in wNch t'ltnf 1h11 .....,.... .... letMnate: find .. nghll heNundat ""' rW9ft to Giana, PfMkllld, M na ._ .. ., •• shell t. dellned lo hna GCCllfl'8d by rwon of GfanM'• fllln 10 lnilllf lrlllll llfacllllN on Ill e..m.nt Ara wti\ any pMDd ofliml fram U.clliqi....,. 7 . ._._,andMllgnl. Grlnteeahll,-.lherlghllOIINlan,~or..._.....,.,_,o,al of II~ ....... pmllagN Ind lnt8rnla .... in lltld undar flll .......C. \WtlOUI lnlllng h.,.,.,.., of ... _ ... _ ... _,, .. __ ._ .................. __ _ ---- DATED ... ?,3,1,.,/ dor o1_,,.,J""-"W:Y,L""'="'-'?=,f'-------~''"'· ~~<)J- STATEOFWMU•tGTON .. COIJlflY OF - 0n .. -~ ...... btb9q .,,J,j 4i( j f C ifi~ JJl,tf~ 1nme1incw110m~ Ae«r«t<-r<r · °' .INC.,--.Dlo-hl_llo_ "'*-'I, and aT1 1 \ I llt Midi ftllnnllnl IO bl Ill ha and VOU1illly Kl ml dNd of 111d r.o,pcnlorl, far ltlli!Mlandpul'JIONl._...........,_.onflllll.w.d._twy:.._..tD......_hMld~ GIVEN-m,hanc1Md--lhlo0 2Vd ..... .,:;t~7J 11f18. ,~ ~~:a=;: ::;;::d/ tfOllry Nlllr:lnmdb::...of\.'1111•,ului• -.. !f,dC& M--::: .., ...... -.-ll-l-f1 NP!ND114:NII t , " Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9803121618-53033 Page 2 o/3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:16:17 AM !ST - ,· ,, .. ,. EXHIBIT A PARCEL ,M THAT PORTION QF GOVERNKE~ IDT •• THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF TUE SOUTHWEST QUUTE~ ANI( TIIB NORTHWEST QUARTER Of TUE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTI<;,:H 22, TOWNSHIP 21 HORTII, RANGE 5 EAST, M.". , IN KING COUNTY,· WASIIIHGTON, LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE RENTON-MAPLE VALLEY·HIGHNAY (PRIMARY STATE HIGIIWAY NO. 5) l\ND WESTERLY OF 140TJI_ PUCE SOUTJltAST AS CONVEYED TO l<lflG COUNTY BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER KHIC COUNTY RECORDING NOS• 5596210, 6354693 AND 6l9111ZI EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING E,,\STERL't AND SOUTHERLY OF THE FOLLOW INC DESCRIBED LXHE: ' · ." BEGINNlkG /\T THB 801ffllEAST CORNER OF SAID tlORTUtAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER ·or· SECTIOtl 22; THENCE NORTH IJ9 •oa 1 12" .HBST Al.ONG THE SOUTII LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION A 01STA.HC£ OP' 304 .04 FEET ·ro 1'11& NOATIIEASTEPLY NARGIN or A SAIIITARY SEWER EASEMENT RECORDED UIIDER KIHG COUNTY RECORDING HO, 6289766 ANO TUE TRUE POINT OF OECINNlHG or TIIE HEREIN DESCRIBED LINEI THENCE NORTH 15.15 1 3]" NEST ALONG SIi.IO ffORTHEASTERLY HARGIN I\ DISTAIICE OF 435.00 n&TI THENCE NORTH a2·1s 1 ,1• EAST A DISTANCE OF 90.00 FEET: THENCE HORTH 75•<1!5•52·n £AST . .\ DISTAHCE OF 'IU.J7 FEET TO THE SOOTHNESTERLY NARGIN or SAID 14DTII PL,\CE SOUTHEAST AND THE TERMINUS OF SAID LINZ (SAID LINE OEIHG TH& NORTIIW&STERLY' BOUNDARY or THE PU\T OF NAPLE RIDGE ESTATES AS RECORDED IN VOLlftlE u, OF PLATS, PAG~ 9 THROUGH lGJ; PARCIL Bl THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT lhrS :, ANO 8, THB NORTHEAST QUARTER OF m:o, SOIITHW&ST QUARTER, THE 'HORTIIW&ST QUARTER or fflB SOUTHEAST QUARTER, TIIE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND THE SOUT~HEST QUARTER or THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 2l HORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W,M,, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYINC SOUTHERLY OF TIIF! RENTON-MAPLE; VALLEY HIGHNAY (PRIMARY STATE HICIIWAY NO, 5) A.HO EASTERLY OF 140TH Pw\C! SOU1'HEAST AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NOS, 5596210, 6J~469J AND 6191812: EXCEPT TIIAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLIJ)WS: BEGIIINING AT fflE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TI!E NORTHN&ST QUARTER OF TIIE SOIITIIEJIST QUARTER OF SAID SECTIOII n; THENCE Swr!IERLY ALOIIG TIIE EAST LINE THERl10F TO THE SOVTffBRLY HAROIN OF THE RENTOM-HAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY ANO THE TRUE POINT OF 8£GINNING1 fflENCE SOIITIIBRLY TO A POINT 545 FEET SOUTH or THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF,SAJD SUBDIVISION: fflENCI! HESTERLY 200 FEET; fflENCB IIOR'l'IIBRLY 220 FEET I THENCE BAi'l'HLY 165 FEET TO A POINT JS FEET HESTERLY or THE EAST LINE or SAID SU8DIVISION1 THINCI: ffOlt'TflSllLY, PARALLEL TO SAib EAST LINE, 'rO THE &OU'l'tlERLY NAROtN or THE RENTON-MAPLE VALLEY IIIGIIWAY; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY HA.RGIH, TO TUE TRU!: POINT OF BEGJNNIHCr AND EXCEPT THOSE l'ORTIONS CONVEY ID TO TUB STATE OF WASRIIIG'l'OII FOR .ml HIDENIIIG or TIii JUNCTION or THE R!ll'!ON- NAPLE VALLEY· 11ICHWAY AND UOTH PLACE SOUTHEAST BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDIIIG NOS. 7707110208, 7707110209 AIID 7707110210. llO'l'II Sl'nlAU IN fflE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, -------- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9803121618-53033 Page 3 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:16:18 AM - r~--·. . ; ... ~ II I -' I 1! llTUIU(ADDPP@: PaptSou41ENrs7,IK. AU.: ROW Dlli•rtaeat 110S-IS6di An ffE 8'"'¥N.WA9'001 EASEMENT {Corporate) JOINO.: ffl8ltO NI ll-23-05 Thir: Granmt, U.NCAST!II/CEDARWOOD, INC~ 1 WuhllllWII Cc,rponliN, in C4111Sidoen11ion of ONE DOLLAR (11.00). iii h-' pad, and odllS" 1ood IJld vallllblc COMidmlioo, ,-ipl ~ is bi:ld,y ainotrlalpl, docs hcffby convey and Wlffllll lo PUGI.T SOUND f.Nr.RGY, INC., I Wahington CCll'JKlnltioa. ill sua:aaor, 111d mans,. herein rdaml to IS -onniee•, • non~dmifc eascnail for I ps pipdine or pipeliMiS undct, over, lhRIUlh ad aauu !bf. followiag dcsctilled p!UpCflJ ofdleGTwiblf 1oimit in it.: Cumty or~ seaccorw....-: Lf.CAL PfffllfilQN: Setulllllil: "A•, for the described ml pnperty, an.cw •eme a1d m1d11 part llerat f 4 f[Mlffl LOCATION: FIYe Im ot1 eilhr llde ortlle aat1nil p11 pipe II-,. .. 1u11111td or tll llr intalW NI tltt 1HN dacrikd ra1 propmy. 1M111 Md annlina lo OIWllclli .._ richl IO Qlllldn,ct, imtllf, opc,ate, ~ ~ imjllVft,. nipair, ..... md abandon ill plai:e said ps pipeline or plpelina., lagedler •ith lhc: rKW1-m:lusive ri&hl or IIClal ID n liom •Id pn,perty. As used bmin. the tam 'pipc:la" -it ~ pt lincl 111d scmc:a lopdm wilh SIICh -ra:c or......,,-.._. pipe.line ~ _, fldlkkl • • ~. m Ille jlllpml or Onntcc. ror Ille opctldoil tnd lllllinlaunal or aid pipdiae or plpelinm. B:, the sc:cpClncc of dlil c:aklllOll Grlntc:c apccs to hold ~ C-,nntor harmtcu f'nlm any loss. ,co,t or damp: ra&dlina &om the opcndorl or-'*'-of .di pipidiM or pipelines accpt a, IRI)' be attributable to lbe sole ~ of Gnnlor. Grmtor ... DOI lo erect Ill)' lll"'*9RI a. llid lll9allCnl DAllSD ... _~2~_..,., _ __,F:,N!,aa. ___ ~19..?Jl.. By: .. my IIMd ad lR'iud JnY offldal .... .,. _. ,_. finl lhllve wriam. ~..Z:ji:~.!::'w.:.;.;. ...... __ :~ ~ ;~t_lwzl' .., __ ,,,. .,_ ,, __ +_._,<!,'J~L-- ~...-;, ;,_-, Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9803121636N53033 Page 1 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:16:42 AM !ST ·.-. ·' . ,. ·~ EXHIBIT A PARCEL As THAT PORTION QI' GQVEmltlENT. IDT 8, THE HORTH EAST QUARTER OF THB SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND. THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWtlSIIIP 2l tJORTII, RANGE 5 EAST, N.M., IN K(NC COUNTY,· WASlllHGTON, LYING SOUTIIERLY OF THE RENTON-HAP'LE VALLEY-HIGHWAY CPRIHARY STI\TE UICIIWAY rm. 5) l'\ND WESTERLY OF 140TH. PLACE SOUTHEI\.S'r AS COHVF..U:0 TO KUIG COUIITY BY DEEDS RECORDED UHD£R KING COUNTY RECORDING NOS. 5596210, 6354691 AND 6391812: EXCEPT ThAT PORTION LYING EAS'rERLY AND SOUTHERLY Of THE FOLi.OWING DESCRIBED LIHE1.. BEGINNlUG AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER Of Sl\10 HORTIIEAST QUARTER OF THE SOln'HWEST QUARTER OF SECTIOH 2 2 ; THENCE NORTH n·oa•iz• .wEST· ALONG 'THE SOUTH 1..INE OF SAID S080IVJS1DN A 01STliffC£ OF lD4. 04 FEET TO TIIE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF A SANITARY SEWER EASF.MEHT RECORDED UNDER KIHG COUNTY RECORDING NO, 6289766 AND THE TRUE POIHT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED LINE; THENC& NORTH 15•15'll" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH£AsTERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 05.00 FBETI THENCE HORTH e2•15'47" EAST A OISTANCF. OF 90.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 75•45 1 52" F.AST.l\ OISTAtlC& OF 46.4.]7 FEET TO TUE S0UTJl1rfEST£RLY HA.RGilf OF SAID 140TH PLACE Sotrl'HEAST MD THE TERMINUS OF SAID LINE (S.\10 LIN£ DEIHC TUE NORTIIWEST&RLY BOUNDARY OF TlfE PUT OF MAPLE RIDGE ESTATES AS RECORDED JN VOUIHE 134 OF PIATS. PAG~ 9 THROUGH 16); PARCEL 81 THAT PORTION or GOVERNtlENT LOTS 3 AND 8, THE NORTHEAST QUARTER or TH~ SOUTHWEST QUARTER, THE 'ffORTHKIST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUfllEftST QUART£R AND THE SOUTJ.INEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 2J NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W,N., IK XINC COUNTY, WASHJHGTOH, LYING SOUTHERLY OF TH& RENT'ON•MAPLE VALLEY IIIGHKAY (PRIMARY STATE HIGIIHAY NO. 5) ANO &ASTERLY OF 140TH PLACE SOUTHEAST AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING HOS, 5S9&2l0, 63,4G9] ANO 6)91812~ EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLU>IIS: 8£GUINJNG AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TIIE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF 111£ SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTJOtl 221 THENCE SOUTll!RLY ALONG THE tAsT LJHE THEREOF TO THE SOUTHERLY IIMGIN or THE RENTON-IIAPtJ:: VALlJ::Y HICHIIAY AND THE TRUE POINT or 8BGINNINGI THIHCI SOUTHERLY TO II POINT 545 FEET SOUTH OF TH£ NORTHEAST CORNER or SAID SUBDIVISION: 'l'KENCB lfUTZRLY aoo FEET' THEHCB IIORTHERLY no FEET; THENCE BAIITBRLY 165 FEET TO A POINT 35 FEET HESTERLY OF THE EAST LIPB OF SAID SUBD1VIS1011t Tll'EflfCE lfORTfftRLY, PARAI..LEL TO SAID EAST LINE, TO 111£ IIOIITHERLY IIAIIOlN or THI REHToN-IIAPtJ:: VALLEY IIIGIIIIAY' THENCE BASTERLY • AIDNG SAID SOUTIIERLY MARGIN, TO TUE TRUE POINT or BBGIIIIIIIIGI AND BXCEPT TIIOSR PORTIONS CONVEYID TO 1111 STATE OP lfASfflllG'l'OII FOIi THB lf1Dtfl1NG or THB JUNCTION OP' THE R!lfTON• NAPlJ:: VALLEY HIGIIIIIIY AND UOTII P~CI SOUTHEAST DY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NOS, 7707110208, 1107110209 AND 7707110210. 80TH SITUATE IN THE COUNTY or XING. STATE or IIASHINGTOII, Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9803121636-53033 Page 2 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:16:42 AM 1ST • ij 0 I .. AJl'TIR. R.IC.oR.blNt.. P&.n<(C b"l'I.IAN n: lt.'t,, A TI( IN S 1~3't1 5i'RI\G.U~ D,?, l.\orMl'U..1 klA, qgDIL ROCORDINO INPORMATIONAUOYB DOCUMBNTPRBPARBDDY g,p, AIXINJ Tlll.llPIIONBI ------- NIW I fjt.{ll ltJ IMf= EASEMENT AOREEM6NT ii ' ! g !I ' I; TI1c undmianed Ora11lor(s) TK 4i4tt< l••UIOP ~ 11:PrrfHc i" U'1' 4, .... w , _for ~ . andln""'1Sldenllonol Mt.J'1't./,ff, k>v~,rr Dollm(S -l 1ml olhor good aml •1ddablc con,ld.,.llon, Ille ,-1p1 wl.....t ls hetoby ll<knowledaed, do llereby granl and conYcy unlo U S WBST Commook:alions, lnc::., 1 Colurai.lo cwporllioa, hereinafter rc- (cncd lo u ''Oranlee", whoae addrcu is fA( f,ZJf,t 7qaM1Nd,t<.,, 4:'n&:.fiP; (o,A.I~ ils sua:caor1, assigns, lessee.s, liccnsc:es and agenlS a pe,pelual cascmcnl to <:OJ11truct. recons1ruc1, modify, change, add IO. upc:ralc, ouiintai11 ancJ reaawYe such ldccommunicalions (acllilics, cJccli<:11 fitcililies and gas facililiu, and appurtenance,, fro~ lime to lime, 111 OnanlccJD111 n:quiR upon. over, under and across the folfowlna dc$cribed laud 1i1ua1cd lu Ibo County o!-,K...,,,.,.,,"'c.&.... ___ ~ S1a1e ol WA!IH JnloJb/!/ • wl1icl1 Uoe Oronlor....,. or In wloicb Uoc Orlator liu any h11ere11, lo wit: LOT_~BLK _________ _ S6CTION .:ZR TOWNS\111' @N RAN08 ~,z 4fr....- TAXPARCELI 2ZZ.3eti-9APV Sl!ll BXHIBIT ~ AITACHED HBRETO AND BY IBIS REl'l!RENCI! MADB A PART HBRl!OF. Onunor further conYeys lO Otalllc:e lhc following incidental ria)11s: k,,_09 A lem ri1hl ~lo be uring~I ~ of~· """"111fuelioo. rol · and....., a stllp of ~ "'.'.~ "': the side or, a strip or feet w on lbc, side uf Aid (2) Tbo ri&J,l o[.....,. ...i e..-v-md ..,.. Ille I-of Onntar lo nl fn,m lhc ....... -described pmpa1J .... u .. rJahl lo clear .... keep ........ all .... and - obslructimn u .,., be ,-y for doe-·· Ille ond eqjoyminloflloe-..... Oranleo shall Indemnify Orla1or for ell damage caused lo o.....,, a • raull of Oranteo's oeglipl ...,.lse ord,e ripts and privilega heroin aranled. o..-ahall -no raponsiblll17 lor pro,afsll,,a cnvirunrnemal -or llabllllloo. Clratto< r-.-vet the rigl,I to occ:upy, IIIO and cullinle Aid eaxmcnl lor ell plUJJOIOI not inco-..C wllh the riabll ben,Jn granled. Oraotor co......,. Iha! ~ la/an, tho foe ample ....., of aid land or In wlucb lhe 0""'°' bu any inleralond wlll -aoddefond dlleto lhe land apinllallclalm,. . lhat Tho rijlds. condlllons .... pro•lslons orw. -•hall inun, lo doe boneftl ol aad be binding upon doe hol.., executor1, admlniJ1ra1or1. 1UC<eUOS11 aad aaips of doe ....,...ive par1le, hcn:to. l'lploll --~-"~-...... Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9808030223N53033 Page 1 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:06 AM 1ST J I I en ~~-~- ... --5 RECORJ)ltkl INPOIMATIOH ABOVE. AJry clilm controversy or dispute arisin1 Old of thii Aareernatl shall be scUled by arbitralicu in ~ with lhe applicable nda of d,o Anlorican Albi.lllliou Aaaci11ioo: ...I j~I upon dte 1wud rcndeml by lhe arbilnllor 1111)' be en&crctl in any cvurl havm1 Jlirialtdlon diaeof. TIie arbi1111ioo llllll be coaduded in lhe<0111ly where d,e pn,porty Is localed. Dated lhi, ___ .;tz,u.;:;! __ dayoC .::/llL7 , 191.i.... Oranlor OIIIIIO< . (lndMdual Acknowlqmenl) S111e ofWASHINOTON I Jss Counly or _______ , 0a dda day penoeally appe,ue,I -...... ________ _ knowq. lo me lo \Ms lhe indiYidual who i,x~ Ibo fon,1oln1 1--. and ~ 1h11 llpd the Nll1I • free end volw1lary 1c1 111d deed, ror lhe u,es 11111 ..._, IIO!dll menllorlOd, OIWII under Ill)' hand ...t offlc:lal ...i 1hl, __ d1yor _____ ~ 19 __ . Le711NfJA/ IN~r.> INC. (Olllclll 1101110 orcamf'"l1)' or C~) By -c.K 0. Lffll'IO•f 11, ~•P8!'1T [SEAL) AlleSI ----------Secrelll7 or Corponlioa (C...,...10 Acknowlcd1.-11J S111eorWASHINOTON I ... C01D1lyol /;'.'.{a,f ) On ~ l'"'r."'!!IY _. befo<o '"° lfl;l:IUrl'. o. ~ who did.., hellf1111.C111t _________ otdlO co,por111oa 1h11 ""-'"" u.. foreaoPII l-,ad ocloiowtc,f&cd 111d , .......... lo be lhe ......... ,olwillly ad 1111d daod of aid ..........., for lhe - 111d .,.._ therein· n,eoilcinid, .... ,o Old, lllkdlhll ha--.. d ...... ,.._..., __ ~' ..... I -=.~~~h..i..r-:rw ------ NoWJ Public of U.. S11te of Wuhlnaioo Reakllna11 ______ _ Myeommlalonuplra: __ _ --·. -.. ; .. 1!--·::.~. Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9808030223N53033 Page 2 of3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:06 AM !ST --•---·-·-• --~ -• _.T. ----"--•--~-~ --·------·--- ' PAGIJ LEOAL DESCRIPl10N PARC!lL#:~- 10Bt: IIWD361 C IDIA . illtboinla IClino(tboSoalhalylillu(tllefl ifopi Vllioyltood and tho west Hao or111o Elll 35 tie! or tho Nmlb_.....,.or111e &< , _..,or -22, Towmbip 23 ~hap5 Eal, wm...-Maldlaa, KDIIIC-,, W•sbinpn; lboaoeN7S"31'WWelllagooidSoalbalJ-aina ........ of6'1.'19 tiel1othoT.P.OB.ordlil~ lboaoeSaalb01'41'41" Wacllelillooo(30fillot; 1bmoe s 7S"J"9' E 1clillllwoClO&o!,I; tbenc,~Ol~l~!.'lt•L!'l!.r '!l~-• momorlm&otbeS0ud1111111F,ofdlelenf • lhpf:Vallly; tlm:eMu.dt I ly e1oag !lid 1111rp1, dislanoe or JO men or less 10 thorn. Pailll otB'li · 1 This ..-being.... . :, 30'lOO' ......... " ~ .. ,-. ,.-,..;-·.·...r..:.=cc,.-..:------····-·· .. -· Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1998 9808030223-53033 Page 3 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:07 AM 1ST 20040727001688.001 When Recorded Return To: Cedar Rrver Water & Sewer D1stnct 18300 SE Lake Youngs Road Renton, WA 98058 1111111111111111 20040727001688 CIDAR EAS 25 11 PAGlilll OF 197 17/27/2994 11.47 KING COUNTY, UR ORIGINAL Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein) 181 Easement (Veenhuizen Offs1ta Sewer) D 8111 of Sale D Other Reference Numbe,{s) of Documents assigned or released: D AddrtJonal reference Ifs on page of document Grantor(s) (Last name first, then first name and ,rntrals) 1 Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc 2 Lannon Investments, Inc D Add1t1onal names on page of document Grantee(•) (Last name firs~ then first name and m1t1als) 1 Cedar Rrver Water & Sewer D1stnct D Additional names on page of document Legal description (abbreviated , e lo~ block, plat or secbon, township, range) STR 222305, Parcel "A" of KC BLA No L95L0113 D Add1bonal legal 1s on page 4 of document Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number D Assessor Tax # The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the 1nformabon provided on the form The staff will not read the document to venfy the accuracy or completeness of the indexing 1nformat1on provided harem EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIRED ~~~T. .a.llV Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688N53033 Page 1 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:28 AM 1ST FORM C4 -CORPORATE/PARTNERSHIP SEWER EASEMENT NAME OF PROJECT. VEENHUIZEN OFFSITE 20040727001688.002 The undersigned GRANTOR, Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc and Lennon lnveslments, Inc. Corporat,ons, and rts successors, and assigns ("GRANTOR"), for and 1n cons1derabon of the sum of One Dollar ($1 00) and other valuable cons1derat1on, the receipt of which IS hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys and grants to CEDAR RIVER WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT of King County, Washington, a mun1c1pal corporation, and ,ts successors and assigns ("DISTR1Cr) a perpetual non-exclusive (unless oth81Wlse stated) easement for the ,nstallat,on, operabon, maintenance. replacement and repair of sewer system fac1ht1es located under, across. along. 1n and over the tollowmg descnbed real property ('Property") located 1n Kmg County, Washington Descr1pt,on of GRANTOR'S parcel ("Property;. IS attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which ,s incorporated by reference Descnpbon of the easement granted harem. 1s attached hereto as Exhibit "B", which 1s incorporated by reference A graphic representation of lhe easemenl ,s attached hereto as Exhibit "C" wh,ch IS incorporated by reference GRANTEE shall also have the nght of access over the property to the area of the easement GRANTOR understands that the descriptions descnbed ,n Exhibits "B" and "C" attached hereto may vary from the actual location of DISTRICT'S sewer system fac1hbes If the actual locabon of any of such fac1ht,es are materially different than as described herein. DISTRICT shall prepare amendments to the appropriate exh1brt hereto and GRANTOR shall promptly execute and deliver to DISTRICT a modification to this easement containing such amendments without requ1nng payment of addruonal conslderabon Such modification shall be recorded and shall modify this easement This easement 1s necessary 1n order that DISTRICT may install or take possession of sewer system facilrt1es as and when needed to furnish sewer service to property wrthm and without DISTRICT boundanes. and for such purpose. DISTRICT may. at such time as DISTRICT determines ,t necessary to do so, install. construct, mamta1n, operate. repair, and/or remove and replace and make add1bons to sewer system fac11bes located on said easement DISTRICT agrees that when such work commences, rt shall be performed conbnuously and completed 1n a reasonable time and wrth reasonable dispatch. taking into account the nature of such work, and DISTRICT agrees that upon completion of such work, the surface of such easement shall ~e restored and replaced to a condrt1on substantially equal to that before the Work was commenced, l! the extent that ,t ,s pracbcable to do so, which shall include replacement of shrubs and similar pjanbngs The GRANTOR shall have the nght to use the surface of said easement area so long as GRANTOR'S use does not interfere with the work of repamng, and/or removing, and replacing and adding to the sewer system fac1lrt1es and appurtenances, provided that no permanent building or structure of any kind shall l>e erected on said easement Landscaping wrthm the easement areas shall be reslncted to low growing plants and shrubs, (3 foot maximum height,) and grasses The construct1on and 1nstallabon of asphalt and/or concrete parking surfaces by GRANTOR shall be a C4-1 Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688N53033 Page 2 of7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:28 AM !ST 20040727001688.003 permitted use GRANTOR agrees that no digging or other constructJon shall occur on the Property. which would disturb or endanger DISTRICTS sewer system fac1ht,es 1nclud1ng the compaction of earth around such fac1hbes This easement shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefrt of the parties and the,r successors and assigns "J ,;i.-d, IN WIT&ESS WHE~EO~ said GRANTOR has caused this instrument to be executed this ~dayof Y":\-• o!Qo GRANTOR a corporation, partnership, or hmrted partnership (designate applicable enbty) By~_;? Signature b?,tc-; ( -r ~,,,._.,,,._.,,;IV ~v4.r,r.,..,~-r,,r /-"'· Trtle C4-2 Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688-53033 Page 3 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:28 AM !ST STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )SS ) 20040727001688.004 On thts£ day of~. c>;hO't before me, the undersigned, a N~ry P~bhc 1n and for the State of Washington, dtlfy comm1ss1oned and sworn, personally appeared -ftLlr fW O .. ,1-u.tJ.-. Lerinlfl'\. to me known to be the £re5id~ of l.er,rii)(I (Jw•es.-J-111e,Js the ~"~!-.t- executed the foregoing instrument lo be the free and voluntary act and deed of sa1d.,Seulu C~'Mr' the uses and purposes therein mentioned. and on oath stated that he 1s authonzed to execute the said instrument IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal. the day and year first ·" .......... ,,,, A -M -· -~" ,. L '" . {//. ,ia:.:.11.,.,. •• ·~':~ <i. ~ ,/ \?,' .~\\\IO.Y i';·-~n-.,<-. ~ If .•·,t,• ~~.u· ,;.. l :· ~' ·\ \ .y,4,..~~ "'Iva~ i .,.' -'lllllG .:' i ..... _.... . .... ~"'-,,. -,•'.$t~ ,,..,. .. ;~ ~: •• l .... l' ~"", o;;·i. .... ~-...~1,.-''I<,,,,. WAS\\ ,,"'' 11IIIIU11t1\\\\\ STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )SS ) ·ia,J \ ,r On this .s&L... day ofl MN. . ,.:;i \lO L-t before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public m and for the State of Washington, duly comm1s~ed and sworn, personally appeared Gee <•s lj2LJ,. ~ -----to me known to be the I' rt:':,\ u.,..,_ + of Liw I' A«· fo "'-Or.;' r>"'Lthe l2q! .that executed the foregoing instrument to be the free and voluntary act and 1 deed of said l,0-rpc.......i.'P'for the uses and purposes therein meniloned, and on oath stated that he 1s authorized to execute the said instrument ,,,uu,,,, ,..,.,'.::..W:>.~~ ,, IN WITNESS ~~;t,·.ha~,hereunto set my hand and aff1><ed my seal, the day and year first -.. ~ • o"" ./\Pl?,_• , written above-~ •• ~~" ,..Rf~;. ":,. ~ ::-:~ o' ~ ,:, k -.~ ~ ,,.... . -~ kt ./ -•a....-• •z-r :: ; ... ~ C, : p: bC) -~ ' -. '\ ........ -=;, \• eu.~.~<f/0$ ~hcmandfortheStateof I.J\.)/,\:_V\(~~ ., ,(\.... \'j< •. ~, ... ,"':"~·········s'<',' ,,,;Jt 0F \/.J~,,, ,.,, ... ,,, Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688-53033 C4-3 Page 4 of 7 created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:29 AM 1ST EXHIBIT"A" PARCEL DESCRIPTION 20040727001688.005 Parcel "A" of King Cowtty Bowtdary Line Adjustment No L95LOJ 13, as recorded wtder recordmg No 9510179023, records of King County, W aslungton Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688N53033 Page 5 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:29 AM 1ST 20040727001688 .006 EXHIBIT "B" SEWER EASEMENT DESCRIPTION That portion of Parcel "N' ofKmg County Boundary Lme Adjustment No L95L0! 13, as recorded under recordmg No 9510179023, records of Kmg County, Washmgton, more part1cular!y descnhed as follows Commencing at the Northwest comer of srud Parcel "A"; Thence, South 01 °41 '4 I" West, 94 98 feet, along the west hne of srud Parcel "A" to the POINT OF BEGINNING, Thence, North 47°53'05" East, 68 47 feet, Thence, South 75°56'16" East, 170 77 feet, Thence, South 80°11 '46" East, 164 82 feet, Thence, South 76°19'51" East, 179 57 feet, Thence, South 75°05'50" East, 123 09 feet, to the east lme ofsrud Parcel "A", Thence, South 01 °41 '4!" West, 15 41 feet; along srud east hne of said Parcel "A" Thence, North 75°05'50" West, 126 45 feet, Thence, North 76°19'51" West, 74 56 feet, Thence, North 82°24'11" West, 102 22 feet, Thence, North 76°26'04" West, 167 20 feet, Thence, North 75°56'!6" West, 163 33 feet, Thence, South 47°53'05" West, 74 86 feet, to the west hne of said Parcel "A", Thence, North 01°41 '41" East, 20 79 feet, along the west !me of said Parcel "A", to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Contammg 12,082square feet or O 28 acres ofland, more or less May 25, 2004 Wntten by Doug Fisher -Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers P lPOJ\03256 OO\doc\SewerEasement-Exh1b1t B doc Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688-53033 Page 6 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:30 AM 1ST EXHIBIT •c• SEWER EASEIE,IT SCALE 1"=100' I a, 0 a. S01'41'41"W 310.44' I ... ... ... "' ., 20040727001688.007 Eng,neer,ng Pk:lnn.ng Surveyir,g Penhal/agon AnocialH Consulting EnginHrs, fnc. 750 sr.tti sar.a1 Snulh PH (~.2~) 827-201.$. ICfrlctand. "' 08DJJ 1-t00-045-8405 SCAL(, 1' -100' -FLE. \3256-[ASBENT-EXIIB!T d"J 9Nlfto DATE. 05/25/04 -. pOCNl'lljl'LOOffl FAX (42'5) U7-5043 ,..,,_ PROJ NO 03256.00 Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2004 20040727001688N53033 Page 7 of 7 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:30 AM 1ST KING:COUNTY:' WAsKINGTON .:,@· , ,·· BQ/JtDA~+ ,, !,.INE / _,,. "' .•. ······ l±r. -/,ADJUS'rME'NT .:·:· , Nq,lo_~J,.Q)J 3 ,·_· ''.:.S, .. _ .,·'' .: DECL,ARA TION l<HOW AU. MEN B'I' THESE'-i•RESENrs ntAT WE lHf.:· :·:· I..MlDt9QED OVfilEA(S) OF 1t£ LANJ cflER£IN ~ DO HERDIY MN<.! A BOIJNONtY UNt ~JMS,NT :: 1HEJl£0f PURSIJMtT TO RCW 51.17.040 AHO'Ol:Ci.AAE -.:-. THIS ~ TO 8[ THE GRAPHIC A£PM:SENTATION:. OF THE SAME, Mm THAT SAID AD..t.lSTMENT IS MADE •m THE FR££ CONSENT ANJ IN ACCOROAttCE: 'tllllH 1HE DESIRES OF lH£ OINER(S). IN 'MTNESS 'M£RCOF WE HAW: 'SET OUR HANDS J,HJ) SEM.S. ~ !A - ,a;; ~ ~-. .. ~°'~=--=-=-~""~· !!J'C..~·-· ~..!1 LtlVl">O _,, ~~------11 ... ~ .... _ .. __ ... --:;,,.., ...... ~ t'!IUtiCt,: .. -._, .~~\ .. r~J~) ?.:r,:..;. ~);,,. ..... ,ti'/ -··· ~,,?!.~ =.,.r.,~~_,·,s·-~=~~~"' I MrUI)< hi I"""'".._.~ ~··t,i,,t,·•"00 111111d !Ml ~ -__..,. It 1to .. {....-,) ..... IN ..... .., .... ,. .. ___ ........_ti ... _ APPROVAL ....... ....,_ -., __ "''"°""' lHlS lJ};y~,@TIMlt ,~ ~L / ..... ;;t/il:._...,;. ....... ~~ 0.0.E.S. l»t ... KINI; COUNTY 0£PAR'IM[NT Of .i.S$tSSME1HS ~ ~ ond ~ t11i. l1.. day of --42£__ 19.1il c,. /1jd;::::: 0.,Uty t<w,i C-ly A-.-, .. $.:ecc rt 1 r ~County~ .1_·.~J4,t· ''•~r· · •,• .}£,:,; .. ,:ifaN<' -·,'-•J' RECORDING NO. RECORDER'S CERTIFlCA TE t.r.t"A.<?..t~.a .• .Pc-r,1 fhd for r.cord lhla!..1 .. ~.~doy ot.O. .. .r.-.,19.~ .. ot.,,,: .. M In baok,,:Rlo~ •. oUtr..rwot pag•l,.A .. crt th• nK1U•t ot K~d~.,!1.""~•·· .O..,.·· .. ~ ... ,,, ... Su.e_L of Reeorct. .........__ V51017~1123 SECTION 22, TWP. 23 N., R. 5 E., W.M. KING COUNTY WASHINGTON VOL./PAGE 106 "::: ''.'. .-~----:---~: , t'I: ... /'~-······'"''··~ ., ,~·"'':<' .•... , .... , ... ;": UC -L-1 II l"ltWI L•I NM'JJW'II' l.•3 lffl"M'll"I: ..... -......... 1 .... Jel"M'N"ll --.... .. n ~~ ~ft -GOV'T. LOT 3 :--. -=--....... :.-. . . ~-.... -.1~.~ ,,,ft +.''t,:, • . ,,/; .. J· ·.·•· .,·. , .. ,,·· •.,,.,rr.;:-,,.-:,,.,.,·_··--.,::.· - .. ....... =;.. • "' • -~"!!,. !:!:, ~ !OIi • ::;~.:::.~ lla.j .._---..:::: -::-,_ ..J ~urco,,e .. i ,(·~···· ::·:·:.<::/'> -.... ~~-~ ,; ... ~#'OI ' <' , ~2 · • ---Parcel "A" 11.o .. ,a: .:. ., ' . . . ---,, ' " o' ~ ,It.;,; .., . . . ' . . . ,,,1-,• ... . . ...... .. ""' ••• •.•• ,l l'i ,_t,, ·' •. "-'--" • • • • • .,.. ,. . ,• "' . . . _,.,,.. "' . i· . • .;,.'J,, ·•· ,•' . . '::. • ••oo . . ~ ... ~ ;1··,,,.,,.,,.,,.; ·~ .. -· ' " il -..... ,,,,. . . "••t.,.--,.. --'!. .... ~.,..:--.·--,:._, "?:,. ........ ,i!; (8 . ' -.......... ,_ • ~-·-r, .,..,,. .. •• " .• ,~&, . ,...•.oir~ -...... 1 J. E~tstlli!G LfllitJ .,:· '°"'~:,.:._,,,~~.t~ t ~ ,oo.oo \f· • °" . • "'' ,.. ..,,. .. 00 .• • . ,' ' ... · ~--~ ' , .. -·-,=,-.,.. . r, . , ·"-l:-...... __ ,,, • .. ,, ' . ,.,-. ·. ·. ..~·"""~ • -. i/ POINT "A" .. ,,, ~ ,,,. .... .,,.. . . .. . .p '., 8 ~ ~ ~y ~i.. ,•; .• ' : '\..': ' ....... , i! Eoal Un, ol th1 N.W. 1/4 of S.E. 1/4 ~l\j.E'··i~'2ob'• ~_,,,,·~·$.'~ OF B~Al{tNG''::·. :-;; ' ~'fl•t Llri• o,l ftle ~or:ftlwett 1.(.4 ot tile :_Sovth•o-_f.'1/4 of ~·cuon 2~~"23-5, p.tr'"" ·"h, ;-R•cord .&ur,•r V,t. 20 to~257 ,,' ~~ i • 0 .,.... ,.,;/) ... -····' ···· ... ~'..N 1•41'~.". E •}l'l-41'41 ~/ ,,,·· l ,,,, ...... , •••• -•' __:_ ':.!,:;.:_ _._,_ ): ___ -.~~,l0-'0/1'..!!..!!!!!!!. LEGEND (BEAlltNfl 5 OllJTJ BEARINCi ll DIST '" •.:·,... .,,' /IQUNOMl~'~'ti{tffO •'' •' I 80UNIAltY AS CALC:ILATED r;.tll..C:1A.AT£D LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE Tha. BOIJNOARY UNE ADJUSTMENT cc,.,..etJy ,..._u, o -11 madD b)' m• « 1111dDr mr dWec:tlon In «informgnc• lnlh alot• and county 1llltut.111 In -~~~~~ HI ... ~ .• ~ -----.. . .......... . c.rtlfloot• No. .l:0392 ..... . . . ._li~.'l<l"w CllU ' "' ' "'"" . \ .. -/·: ,;·,oo.:· ~;, •... . ·.jlOUNOARY UNE 0 )b..usii..D1T f1! F'OR o cf? Buch c. eo1dsmith ctDARw.006 ~JJ.o. · \.(1\1 Jc Associates. Inc. GOV'T. LOT 8, N.E . .'i~1'.0F e· . .__ 1/4, G~V·t. LQ:f:$ • lit& u• ..... • &. WEST 1/2 Of' S.E. l/4'•S,:C. 22. TWP. 23N ... R.5E. -·-..... --·-7111 .. , 4'1-1'111 ,. (llfJ --·· °""·"" '" CffKD, BY .. ,.,. 9/lt/tS sc....: r • 200· ,KJB NO. .. ····-~4:0~.( SHUT I " 2 • :;; z ·o 3,_ "" L,J z .-,:i: . "' a: C( ' ··,\\, '.'':... ··.->:1,_:_."; '·:.,,.: .3 ;;i ' .., N C.: 3' .... -,_ NI- NZ z=> 00 _u .... (!) Oz L,J - "'" } • 11 ,ti !· •J i !1 'I i I! lh! 11 1~ Ii if ...J ~ 0 "' 0. 0. <( I i ! ® For Pennit Number: L96G<X;154 For Pan:el Number: 222305-9004, 2223os-9021, 222305-9013, 222305-9025 , more fully de3cn'bcd U (sm:et address) South & E.ist of the intersection of 140th Way SE & SR-169 This property COIDins !tllSitive amis and/or sensitive area buffen, u defined by the King County Sensitive Amu1 Ordinance, KCC 21A.24. The promions otthe Sensitive AteU Ordinance apply IO this property. Limitation may exist on actions in or affecting the sensitive areas oc their buffen present on this property. For further information regarding such limitation, please contact tlu! Land Use Services DiYision of King County or its successor qency. Thb notkic lhall run with the land and shall not be mnoved e,;cept upon apecific written aulhorizalion n:cordcd herein by King County. , hereby certify that I am SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this a day or .... C« fl.-. 199~ Atlaclunents f ;;i i ~ -::' 8 iii ~ -l'i ! I 8 i a •• f ' ' ~ ;, 8 ' Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1996 9607260497-53033 Page I of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:53 AM !ST ___ ., ___ .. _________ ...._ __ ® THAT PORTION OF GOVERNIIIENT toTS 3 AND B, AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER Of THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER Of THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSI-HP 23 .NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M, KlNG COUNTY, WASHINGTON LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY (PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5), ANO EASTERt Y OF 140TH PLACE S.E. AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 5596210, 6354693, AND 6391812. EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NOflTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22; THENCE S 01'41'41" W ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF, A OISTANCE OF 23.02 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SAID RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT; THENCE CONTINUING S 01'41'41" W ALONG SAIO EAST LINE, A OISTAl«:E OF 521.98 FEET TO A POINT 545.oo FEET SOUTHERLY OF SAID NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; Tl-lENCE N 89"1T47"' W PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUB01VISION, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FeET; THENCE N 01'41'41" EA DISTANCE OF 220.00 FEET; THENCE S 89°17'47" EA DISTANCE OF 165.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THe WEST LINE OF THE EAST 36.00 FEET OF SA10 SUBDIVISION, AND A POINT DESIGNATED AS POINT 'A' FOR THE PURPOSES Of THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE N 01'41'41' E M.ONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 310.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY: THENCE S 75'38'59" E ALONG SA1D SOUTHERl Y MARGIN. A DISTANCE OF 35.87 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; ANO EXCEPT THOSE PORTIONS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR THE WIDENING OF THE JUNCTION OF RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY AND 140TH PLACE S.E. BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 7707110208, 7707110209, AND 7707110210; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22 DESCFH8ED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POINT "A"; THENCE N 89°17'47' W A DISTANCE OF 675.00 FEET; THENCE N 01'41'41' EA DISTANCE OF 473.66 FEET TO SAID SOVTHl:RLY MARGIN OF RENTON MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY; Tl-lENCE S 75"38'59" E ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, A DISTANCE OF 691.70 FEET TD INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 35.00 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 01°41'41" W ALONG SAID WEST LINE. A DISTANCE OF 310.44 FEET TO THE P04NT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTlotl 22 DESCRteEO AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 89"20'16"W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF, A DISTANCE OF 439.26 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT; THENCE N 10'1 B' 40" W A DISTANCE OF 37 .66 FEET; lllENCE S 78'04'15" W A DISTANCE OF 50.75 FEET; THENCE N B0'03'07" WA DISTANCE OF 70.94 FEET; THENCE N 48'07'16" WA DlSTANCE Of 65.22 FEET; THENCE N 30"59'21'W A DlSTANCE OF 48.73 FEET;THENCE N 32'53'25"W A DISTANCE OF 58.82 FEET;THENCE N 73"23'29"WA DISTANCE OF 27.63 FEET;THENCES64'15'06"W A DISTANCE OF 73.70 FEET: THENCE S 85"01'18" WA DISTANCE OF 73.50 Fl:ET; THENCE N 57'5S'4!1" WA DISTANCE OF 80.73 FEET; THENCE N 89'21'61" WA DlSTANCE OF 42.46 FEET; THENCE 5 09"22'47"' W A DISTANCE OF 45.59 FEET; THENCE S 17°38'52" EA DISTANCE OF 52.25 FEET; THENCE S 22"28'41" WA DISTANCE OF 80.61 FEET TO SAIO SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89'21l'16' E ALONG SAID SOUTI-1 LINE, A DISTANCE OF 524.&9 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TRACT CONTAINS 73.51 ACRES. c> (owner's signarurc) Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1996 9607260497-53033 Page 2 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddlneni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:17:54 AM !ST • ···---.----·--~ ---..._ - ---· --._-:-: ~-:--.. .-. --',_. ~._:·· .... :-.·:! -. -:_-_--_J-----------._ .... _-::---/ ' D,' 00 I \...._..,~ .. I t ""' C CD ~ C CD a, r-. I Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1996 9607260497-53033 Page 3 of 3 , j ' -1 ! 1: 1ii !h11 ! , !! 1 liH ; !DDl)ll 1 I eP: !11•H 11.1[1 'J II J· !I J II u i,., iHiii ~ Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8: 17:55 AM 1ST .· Cl) ~ 0 "' ~ r.D 0 Cl) Cl) /.,----.·, \ DRAINAGE FACILITIES AGREEMENT ea,..,O,s/16 ~5CC-F CASHSL 7.0(1 THIS AGR£F.MENT, entered lnta this g t/v day of ~ 1988, •h+:ohri'. 00 !1 by and between WESTERN SAVINGS AND WAN ASSOCIATIOW, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, d.b.4 • WSlA DEVELOPMENT •Xl!U'ORATION, hereinafter referred to as YSLA, and MULTIVEST, LTD., A 1lAS1iDIGT0N CORPORATION, hereinafteC' referred to as Multi vast; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, WS1A, developer of Maple Ridge Estates, o lil. 79 acre plat recorded tn VolW118 134 of Plats, ?ages 9 through 16 records of King County, 'Washington, has installed all noceuary storm water drainage collection, conveyance, detention and discharge facilities in accordance with King County specifications to Cacilitate all stoTIIII water drainage fra~ said Maple Ridge escacos; together ..,ith oll or Lhe area wiLhlo proposed Ha11le Rld~e Estates Division No, 2, consisting of 29 .4 acres, being considered fer developmer.t by Hultivest: AND \lHERF.AS, Maple Ridge Est.ttes (YSLA) consists of 124 single faally residential lots (unlts) and proposed Haple Ridge Estates Division No. 2 (Kultivesc) consbts of i,3 single family resldc:mtial lots (units) which lies adjacent to and genarall:, souchwesterly of Maple Ridge Estates (YSIA); ANO ~EREAS proposed Haplc Rldge Estatl!S Di·vision No. 2 (MultiVl!st) gl!nerally lies at a higher elavation than Maple Ridge Estates (WSU.) with drainage patterns directed tovard said Maple Ridge Estate.Si (VSL\}; AND \lHEREAS atom vacer drt1fat1.ge collection o.nd conVl!l)'D.nce facilities for proposed Maple Ridge Eat.ites Division No. 2 (Hultivest) will be designed and constructed to direct th~ storm water toward and tllrough the previously constructed and existing stora drain facilities which wer~ constructed with the development of Maple Rid3e Est&tes (WSLA), with certain convoyan~e and retention facilities "ov~r-sized", as required by King County, in order to service future devalopae~t of the Area of proposed Maple Ridge Division No. 2 (Hultivest). AND WHEREAS a temporary rete~tion/detention pond has been constructed and in 5crvic:o cin o porcel of l.lnd Uf'ldcr the ownership of USU\ .~nd dc:ic:ribcd in attached Exh!bit ·~· easdment: NOW THEREFORE to provide equitable compensation for the above notf!d •oversb:cd• facilities that \o'ere con.;tructed by WSLA, Hultivest agrees to compensate. J WSLA by the formula am! .Jmounts as shovn on attached Exhibit •e.". Also • .i one tfmn f1fr sh1rc foe ~,r rctcntfon pend co-pacleA aRd ca aE \~~ pnpaE'~ llli!Bft U,eA {~ e1c1ttt,hs. : / . Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1988 8806160138-53033 Page 1 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:18:25 AM 1ST Cl) ~ 0 ~ CD 0 Cl) Cl) DRAINAGE FACIL1T1ES AGREEHEltr -page 2 IN \tly!.ss 'WHEREOF thAPn1es __ !'._~ __ day of ~ • / STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ~s. hereto have set theiL' hands and seals this , 1988, Co1.1nty of ~) On chis /JI day of -:---, 1988, before me, the undarstgne , a Notar; Public in anr1 for the State cf \lo.shington, duly co1111111.s,sioned & sworn, personally appeared Robort Butt, co me known to-bt:! the President of Multi-Vest, Ltd., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, &. ac:lcnowledg,1d the said insti:ument to bo the free £. voluntary act & deed of said corporation, for tho uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on 'Oath stated that he vas authorized to execute tho said instrument. W~tne~· m;··~nrJ··&:~fflci.al se.ol he;-e(;-;f~~i~e d f d YJ'a first above VC'i.~'ten .. : 1 ~ .:: . . . .. ' --,-....,, - ~ t-. ~ at : _--L----""'-'--"-"-'::S.--~,t..,,.1-- ~ •' .·-~J/; ~~1,;. ,_' (;:··, .. :; :,,..._ .. -~ .. ,,,' STATE Of YASiftN$j1,blt')''•' ,,,,,•' ' '' 11 "f11 " .JS. County ·of k,;r.f} ) On this ~day of :r , 1988, before me. the undersigned, a Notar;, Public: in and for tho State of Ya.shington, duly commissioned, sworn, personally appeared Sheldon A. Blue, to mo knolorn to be the A:ulstanc Vice-Presir.'len·.: of 'JSLA Development Corporation, the corpora• tion that executed the foregoing iruitrument, 6. ac:knowledged the said instru- 1DCnt to be the free 6. voluntary ac.t & deed of said corporation, fg-r the uses and purposes therein mentioned. and on oath stated th3t he vas authori~ed to execute che said inatt'UIJW,nt. Witnesa my hand 6. official above written. =-=-., ............ seal hereto .:affb.ed the day and yeu first z ' . ~ lf..~....._, Noi8r}' Public ln and for the State of Washington, residing at:~w..c.,c::..l:1 I ----·----------·-·-·--·-.. --··-·-···-·- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1988 8806160138-53033 Page 2 of 3 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:18:25 AM 1ST ", EKHJSIT "R" MAPLE RIDGE ESTATES STORM DRAINAGE F~CILITIES Detention/Siltation Pond Per Tri•State Construction Contr~~t 5/15/85 Storia Drain Interceptor Per Tri-State Construction Contract 5/15/85 TOTAL POND & INTERCEPTOR: Maple Ridge Esta.tea: Proposed Maple Ridge Estates No. 2: 124 Lots 63 Lots TOTAL LOTS: 187 Lots $135,030.20 divided by 187 -$722.0866 Maple Ridge Estates: (WSu\ Develop~ent Corp.) 124 {$722.0866) - Proposed Maple Rid;o Estates nivision 2: (Hulc.i,vest, Ltd.) 63 ($722.0866) .. o T 1 r Occ11pn:y r r (11 J.d, ase, I td TOTAL MULTIVEST SHARE OF COHHON STORM DRAIN FACILITIES: 1·L_. --,., ----- $ 29,222.00 105,808.20 $135,030.20 $ 89,538.74 $ 45,la91.46 $ J,§gg gg $ tB,99ld& Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1988 8806160138N53033 Page 3 of 3 i I i I i l i Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:18:25 AM 1ST Re~n A,ddress (") )I,_ ,__/ )J htf~---\..,\e(tt,ly' Kl'Na c6uNTY PRoi'fA'ffieRv1ces ' mo K C ADMINISTRATION BlDG. ,,,of OURTH AVENUE A i\M-('.,,C o5Du SEATILE, WA 9BI04 - t/-1'/'l-'i <'•'" JI ;;:i_ .,._,.. .. ,.,.,._,.,._., .. WASIDNGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Shed c•o'"'" Document Titlt(s) (or tr:10S:.ctiom coat:uoed thereto) {:ill aieu appbe:ible to )'our dO('Ufflent ~ 1:,e fi.U.ed "°' l C!.o,.; sf"Rvc..+-, o,v 11,,c/ <!o,Ji/E/19,./CG .4,.tsGl'l?e.vf- 2 l 4 Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Addtt.ional refen:nce #'s QD page __ of documcat Grantor(s) (Last name fim. tbeo fust aame and mitl:ib) I 71',. <!ed'11tt..wood GIUJ'-'f 2 J 4 0 Addiuonal n:une:i: on page __ of document Granlee(s) {L:1.!t """e first, !l,eo tu,1 "'""' 3nd ,mbal,) i K, wr.-<!o'-'"1 4 D Addlllooal oarnes oa page __ of document Legal descnptJOn (::abbn,1a1cd I e lot. block. pl:tt or sccttoo, towosb.ip, r.wge) S<o"c-fio....; i(~ ~W ..... '5 tr d<a D Am.fiuooai legal LS on page __ 1 of documca, A.fu,,l-l1 R10.,r.e 5 ~ 1- Ass~sor's Property Ta., Parc~I/A<:count Number D ~~~~:5"-9tJo'/ A.5:sessor Tax# ot:1t yet :1.1:11goed The Auditor/Recorder wtll ixly on the m!onnat.toQ provlded oo tbe form The staff wtll not read t.be documeot to v,mfy the accuracy or completeaess of lhc mde'U.O.g wfonn:inoo provided bereui Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484-53033 Page 1 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:02 AM 1ST .... = -~ = = = = = = c-.. Filed For Record At Request Of '--/;;' [}rk 1i>«/J;1tr,lf' AFTER RECORDINGhl.ETURN T ~ Kmg County Property Services 500 4th Ave, Rm 500A ADM-CF-0500 Seattle, WA 98104 9-1·N~-i»5 ",::;,_ CONSTRUCTION AND CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT THIS CONSTRUCTION AND CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") 1s made as of th,s ':5 \ day of }1a,,,3 , 2000, by and between LANCASTER/CEDAR WOOD, INC, a Washington corporation and LENN N INVESTMENTS, INC, a Washington corporation, as tenants m common, domg business as THE CEDAR WOOD GROUP, LENNON INVESTMENTS, INC, LANCASTER HOMES, INC , MOLASSES CREEK, INC , a Washington corporaUon, and CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC, a Washington corporation, (collecllvely, "Cedarwood") and KING COUNTY, a poh11cal subd1v1Sion of the State ofWashmgton ("Kmg County" or the ''County") Recitals A Cedarwood IS the developer of the real property which is legally described JR Exh1b1t A, attached hereto {the "Cedarwood Properties"), 1s 1Jlustrated m Exlub1t A-1 and which mcludes the three d1v1s1ons of The Cedarwood Plat. Cedarwood D1v1S1on No 4, real property located adjacent to D1v1S1on No 4 which 1s owned by Cedar River Lightfoot. Inc and real property located adJacent to the easterly of Cedarwood D1vmon 3, Tax Parcel No 222305-9004, which IS owned by The Cedarwood Group, a tenancy in common The Cedarwood Group ,s the fee owner of real property on which IS located a storm drainage water quality treatment pond, which IS a portion of the Cedarwood, D1v1s,on No 4, and which ,s illustrated in the drawing attached hereto as Exh1b1t B (the "Existing Pond Area") The storm dramage pond and conveyance system located within the Ex1stmg Pond Area have been designed to manage and treat all of the ant1c1pated storm runoff volumes from all of the Cedarwood Properties described m th,s Recital A, which are illustrated m Exh1b1t A-I B The County will be w1demng 140" Way Southeast, and m connection therewith will be 1nstalhng certam improvements As pan ofthts construction project, (the "140'" CIP"), 11 will be necessary for the County to provide storm dramage water quahty treatment faciht1es, mcludmg a storm drainage water quahtypond C The parties wish to coord10ate construction ofstonn drainage water quality fac1l1t1es with sufficient capacity to service the Cedarwood PropeI11es and the 140th CIP, as we11 as a portion of the Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable cons1derat1ons, the receipt and sufficiency of which 1s hereby acknowledged by the parties, the pan1es agree as follows Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484N53033 Page 2 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:03 AM !ST • Construction and Conveyance Agreement 1 General Ma1ntenance Agreement. The parties wtsh to relocate the Extstmg Pond Area and construct a larger stonn drainage water quality pond with sufficient treatment capacity to service all the Cedarwood Properties, a portion of the Maple Valley Highway and the 140"' CIP (the "New Pond") The New Pond ,s illustrated u, Exh1b1t C, attached hereto In order to relocate the Ex1st1ng Pond Area and construct the New Pond, the County bas obtained consent ftom the Washington Department of Transportation to locate a portion of the New Pond w1thm the State nght-of-way for the Maple Valley Highway, which consent 1s governed by that certain Agreement GMOl33 I between the County and the State dated as of January 26, 1999 Cthe "General Maintenance Agreement"), which 1s attached hereto and refe1Ted to as Agreement GMO 1331 and IS hereby mcorporated by th IS reference 2 Construction of New Pond. The County hereby directs the Cedarwood owners, on behalf ~ of and as agent for the County, to construct the New Pond, substantially m accordance with the tenns of the = General Mau,tenance Agreement and with the engineenng plan which has been approved by the County and = the State and which IS attached as Exh1b1t D to the General Maintenance Agreement (the "Pond Plan"), a = r--copy ofwh1ch ts attached to this Agreement as Exh1b1t D. which m 111corporated herein by this reference The New Pond has been designed with capacity sufficient to accommodate the volumes provided by the :;; County and the volumes generated by all of the Cedarwood Properties, and both the County and the State ~ have reviewed and approved the projected volumes and have reviewed and approved the Pond Plan The County acknowledges and agrees that Cedarwood shall be proceeding to construct the New Pond pursuant to ,ts ex1Stmg gradmg penn,~ Land Use Penn1t No S9101004, Act1V1ty No L98GR066, Project No L96G0054 The County specifically acknowledges and agrees that after conveyance of the New Pond from Cedarwood to the County, Cedarwood shall be entitled to connect to the sto1TO drainage fac1ht1es and to use = = = "" the New Pond for disposal and treatment ofstonn water runoff from all of the Ccdarwood Properties, mcludmg without hm1tallon ,ts planned Cedarwood Apartments, conS1st1ng ofup to 201 multifamily umts to be located on Cedarwood D1v1S1on No 4/Lightfoot and the proposed muit1fam1ly pro1ect to be located on real property located adJacent to and east ofCedarwood D1v1S1on No 3, Tax Parcel 222305-9004, without cost or charge to Cedarwood J Acceptance of New Pond. Pnor to the acceptance of the New Pond by the County, Cedarwood shall provide all engineenng plans and calculanons used to Size the fac1hty Cedarwood shall schedule final mspecbon w1th Department of Development &. Environmental Services (DDES) and County Roads D1v1s10n Staff Cedarwood, at Its sole cost and expense, shall correct all construction defic1enc1es which do not substantially conform with the approved Pond Plan attached hereto as Exh1b1t D, and which are noted by DDES or County Road D1V1S10n Staff at tune of field inspection 4 Conveyance to County, Upon Cedarwood's completion of construction of the New Pond and acceptance of constructmn by the County (which shall not be unreasonable withheld provided constructmn substantially conforms wuh the Pond Plan and required corrections, 1f any, are completed) (1) the County shall reunbwse Cedarwood the amount of Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000), which rhe parties have allocated as the County's share ofeonstructron costs, and (n) The Cedarwood Group shall convey that portion of the New Pond which IS located on real property owned by Cedarwood to the County, by Warranty Deed, ftee and clear of monetary encumbrances, and other encumbrances except those reasonable acceptable to the County The County shall not obJCCl to encumbrances of record which do not materially interfere with the use and operation of the New Pond for its intended purpose The County shall be responsible for prepanng the conveyance documents, at the County's sole cost and expense If the County falls to reimburse Cedarwood the S75,000 w1thm 30 days following completion and acceptance of the New Pond, interest shall commence accrumg on the outstanding unpaid balance at the rate of 1% per month, unul paid Durmg construction of the New Pond 2 -------· ----····- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484N53033 Page 3 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:04 AM 1ST -= _, = = = ~ = c:..-, = L"> <~ Construction and Conveyance Agreement and prior to acceptance by the County, Cedarwood shall not be required to post any bonds other than the Construct10n Perfonnance Bond normally required by ODES for construction of plat improvements, which the County acknowledges has already been provided by Cedarwood Upon acceptance of the construction of the New Pond by the County, after Cedarwood's correction of any noted defic1enc1es, the Construction Perfonnance Bond shall be released by the County and a two-year maintenance bond shall be provided by Cedarwood for that ponion of the New Pond which 1s not located on State r1ght-of-way After conveyance of the New Pond from Cedarwood to the County, the County, at County cost and expense, shall be responsible for perfonmng all of Its obligations set forth m the General Mamtenarice Agreement and for mamtammg, repamng and replacmg that portion of the New Pond which 1s located w1thm the State nght-of- way. mcludmg any related facthtJes and appurtenances Durmg the tenn of the two year maintenance bond, Cedarwood shall be respons,ble for mamtammg, repamng and replacmg that poruon of the New Pond which was conveyed by Cedarwood to the County and which 1s not located w1thm the State nght-of-way, mcludmg any related facdmes and appunenances Upon release of the maintenance bond, the county shall be responsible for mamtammg, repamng and replacing all of the New Pond, including any related facll 1ttes 5 Authority. Each person signing below represents and warrants that execution of this Agreement has been duly authonzed and that no further action on the pan of any party IS necessary to make this Agreement b1ndmg m accordance with its terms 6 Attorneys' Fees In the event of ht1gat1on between partJes hereto, declaratol)' or otherwise, in connection with thts Agreement, the prevadmg party shall recover its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, mcludmg for appeals, which shall be detennmed and fixed by the coun as pan of the Judgment 7 Bmdmg. This Agreement shall mure to the benefit of and be bmdmg upon the hen'S, personal representauves, heirs, successors and assigns to the parties hereto LANCASTt1fCEDARW00D, INC, a Wash1;)on ~rporatlon By // ( Ge6rge Reece Its President LENNON INVESTMENTS, INC, a Washmgton corporation ---, /, , // By {.2 -.d4,/~ ---'-<" ,. Patrick O Lennon Its President 3 ------------------------------------ Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484-53033 Page 4 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8: 19:04 AM 1ST .... = ...,, = = = <-- LANCASTER HOMES, INC , a Washmgton corporation <-)(_ By_~~~~~~~~~~ Gd6rge Reece Its President MOLASSES CREEK, INC , a Washmgton corporation By ;·(_ 7 ~,._·~ Ai.L:L-£ (Printed Name) Its Uc e:· ,._c;,---.,c; ~/,;)LcA·,- CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC, a Washmgton corporation ---, By/_,,b4~/d d_;_,- ' Pab1ck O Lennon Its PreS1dent KING COUNTY, a political Subd1vmon of the St.ate ofWashmgton By .-i~ dlti~ (Printed Name) Its Manager, Property Service D1v1s1on Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484-53033 Construction and Convcyante Agreement 4 Page 5 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:05 AM 1ST -·, .-' r.-, -~ Construction and Conveyance Agreement STATE OF WASHINGTON ) Ss COUNTY OF KING ) On the :f:t:, r day of /lf /l r· , 2000, before me, a Notary Pubhc m and for the State of Washmgton, duly comn11ss10ned and sworn, personally appeared GEORGE REECE to me known to be the PRESIDENT of Lancaster/Cedarwood, Inc and Lancaster Homes, Inc , the corporatrons that executed the foregomg mstrUment, and acknowledged said mstrument to be free and voluntary act and deed of said corporations for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he 1s authonzed to execute said mstrument Given under my hand and official seal the day and year first above written , ............. . ,,,,,~ ,,. .... ,,_,_ .--~ ....... ~~--- . .:: .. ~·~~·· #i·· ~\ ; I.~•'••~~\ \ ! 1• ... 'Ii, •• ' \·· ....... . i ".\ '"IIDl.r-/: ,,__ ...... , .... ~ ....... '<, ~ 0 ••••... ,fl. '•,,,,, ll' WAS.~.•' ,,,,.,,,, ....... . STA TE OF WASHINGTON ) Ss COUNTY OF KING ) NOTARY PUBLIC 19,apd fo e .S!ll!e ofWashmgton Res1d1ng at t"'(/,K./'_:~,;r /VD My Appomtm;nt exp,res fa-i" ?-V/ On the 1'/ ~·r day of /J4tJ f , 2000, before me, a Notary Pub he m and for the State of Washmgton, duly comm1SS1oned and sworn, personally appeared PATRICK O LENNON to me known to be the PRESIDENT of Lennon Jnvestment, Inc and Cedar River L1ghtfoot, Inc, the corporations that executed the foregomg mstrument, and acknowledged said mstrument to be free and voluntary act ard deed of said corporations for the uses and purposes tberem men honed, and on oath stated that he 1s authorized to execute said mstrument Given under my hand and official seal the day and y first above written Ifft£ Ju Y'7JA' Res1dmg at --=====-;.,......c:: _____ _ My Appointment expm:s -~~~,r~t~-~&-'~-- 5 Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484N53033 Page 6 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:05 AM !ST Construction and Conveyance Agreement STATE OF WASHINGTON ) Ss COUNTY OF KING ) ... On tho~::,~ay of /!1tf f , 2000, before me, a Notary Pubhc m and for the State of Washington, duly comm1ss1oned and sworn, p~sonally appeared ~,<>Gze, ;'?,?,LC,C; to me known to be thet£Z: ffij£1pt?Jr of Molasses Creek, Inc, the corporation that executed the foregomg instrument. and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of satd corporation for the uses and purposes therein menlioned, and on oath stated that (s)he 1s authonzed to execute said instrument Given under my hand and official seal the day and STA TE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Ss ) On the~ day of ~ , 2000, before me, a Notary Public m and for the State of Washmgton, duly commtss1oned and~~personally appeared DA V/D PREUGSCHAT to me known to be the MANAGER, Property Service D1vts1on of KING COUNTY, the entity that executed the foregoing mstrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed ofsa1d entity, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that (s)he 1s authonzed to execute said instrument \\\\\111111,,u,, Given unde~~~~-~-~D~&eal the day and year first above wnttcn ~ ....,.. ':!·:»-:-1,0N f.t~-. ( ~ ~ s~·~· ~·.~~ § !<S' •ou~r "'\ s == --i= % \. "'u11.\c:. J i ~tP\A'-~l~~ ~ ~·-.~. ,~ .•. •"'()~ ~J"·· •.. ,1 ... ·~~ 4'1: "o .... J •••• \,.: ,, ... '11,1 F WAS\\ ,,,, '''umu,n''' Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484-53033 6 Page 7 of 12 ·----·-·-------- Created By: rohini,peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:05 AM 1ST C. = = '"" l.EGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CEDARWOOD GROUP DRAINAGE AREA AT CEDARWOOD Elliott Farm according to the Plat tl>ereof recorded in Volume 180 of Plats, Pages 4 through 15, Records of King county, Washington EXCEPT that portion thereof lying within the Renton/Maple Valley Highway Southeast (SA 169) as dedicated on said Plat; TOGETHER WITH tltat portion of the Northwest 1/4 of the Socihea>t t/4 of Se<atlon 22, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W11lametta Mendoan, King County, w,sh1ngton descnbed as follows 8eg1nn1flg at Point A as shown on said Plat ot Elliott Farm, Thence N 89'17'47" W a distance of 675 00 feet. Thence N 01'41'41" Ea distance of 473 66 feet to the Southerly margin of Renton/Maple Valley Highway, Thence S 75•3a'59· E along said Southerly margin a distance of 691 70 feet to an 1ntersect1on w,th the West line of the l!,ast 35 feet of said Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4, Thence S 01°41'41" W along said West lu'\e a distance of 310 44 leetto the Paint of Beginning AND TOGETHER WITH !hat p()rt1on ol Government Lot 9 in ;a,d Section 22 lying Easterfy of the Cedar River and soulh of the Renton/Maple Valley Highway Southeast (SA 169), lhe Southerly margin be1r.g descnoed under Aecordmg No 6484109, ANO TOGETHER WITH that poroon of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southweott 1/4 of said Section 22 lying Southerly of the cedar River EXCEPT the Soutn 970.00 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH that poroon of Government Lot a 1n said Secl!on 22 lying Southerly of the A1111ton/Maple Valley Highway Southeast (SR 169) and Westerly of 140th Place Southeast as conveyed to King County by Deeds recorded under Recording No's. 5596210, 635~93, and 6391812, EXCEPT those portions conveyed to the State of Washington fer the widetimg of the JunCtlon of Renton/Maple Valley Highway and 140th Place Southeast by Deeds recorded under Re<:Qrd1ng No's no7110206, 7707110209, and T707110210 AND TOGETHER WITH that portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of said Seel1on 22 lying Westerty of said 140fh Way Southeast and Northerty of the Southerty marg,n of a drainage easement recorded under King County Recording No 8806270224 EXHIBIT A l',epnr<d by Checked by Q rf? Hu!!hGGoldsmlth \..b'1..I &"'5SOCl<1tes.lr>C ---· ---------------------------------------- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 2000!0!7000484N53033 Page 8 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:05 AM 1ST .,, Cl z 0 (L ~ 0 Cl • f-a ~ Cl 0 z 3: z a: -<l: <t Cl ~ a: w Cl u <f) "" <t "'> w ..,, a:: = <t = c-:, ,...._ -= I -1 I <::, I I c:, <..-:. ~ ; "" i 5 ' . ; ~ I , ~ i ! ! • i :: .:: ' . ' ! I I ae li' ~j J:! I-.. :: .~ !! .: " e ' '-.. .. ea I '-.. .Sf .. il . I / ,9. • I k-i• il i ~ I l""-i = <'lll !3: I' , 1--i -uj ·-· .____ -i--f.°5 ll 1 , ~ <--- I "--' ~ =;J i-~o :i:i . I P'-~ /~ / - / --• ·-··-------------------------- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484-53033 Page 9 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:06 AM 1ST E CD -=::::: • g i ! 7 H!O~I C, z 0 a.. >- I- _J 0 <( 0 :::,0 0 3= er cr w <( I-0 <( w 3: u (!) z --I- ex, CJ) -4 X = = I w 0 ,..__, I ~ I I ' C.> I c.::. .. ' I ! ~ -:·-1 X I S' ,:-, ., ,·, ;>: ,-,ll C ~ ! ! ' ; ~ : I ! ~ :, : g I .c I' .5; •• ·-;; .,,~ !!I .. •• . . !!~ ..i:;, .,.j C ,a. ~ !! t • ~ ! ·1 I --% -0 ~~ i .. i .. ~ 'C'. ~ .... ~ . .=iii =t,U C ,E] ~j~j / ~ Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484-53033 Page 10 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:06AM 15T .... = __, = '_::;., _-, -, -. Jt s "' S! > "' ., .._ i .. ' !! :ii Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484N53033 I I I J 'i ~~11 +'-',-i-lll+llf--1 ~ : ~· i I I It.I;. ~ ~' ~'; , e, i l: , . I . !; ' ! , f1 , I I !: I J; t 0 • Page 11 of 12 / .,,.. __ u I , ; :11 ... , ·I .,I: •;! • Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:06 AM 1ST -co .... = = = ,.._ ~ . :=i I- ~'" L,J ' " l • u • J • = ,;1 i ~, : i 'l ', I (• ! ' t '"'' ., ., '"' 0 "' 0 v-, --c,.. ' ' ~;3i1 1' rn i::1: · { -r ~ ,, u· -:--r ,.,r·\i-··1 ·' I; ~~'r:: -· '. i I • • ' !! . 1,1 · ii I .. I ~·~ I f .... ,- I •• '"' II P:1: f'!E)!; ! < " w !I • !I i • •• '8 0 • : § '! , • I ., 1 ,-- i' ,:11 I 1/ I I I • ! ----------------------------------- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:2000 20001017000484N53033 Page 12 of 12 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:06 AM 1ST MASTER FORM RECORDED BY fEe Z2 I 2; i If 'B8 CEDAR RIVER ~TD & SEWER DISTR:ICT NOTICE OF UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGES a.;.!_I'.~~ I R[,.1 ::,, ,, h./,\ _; ·:. -.', NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of Commissioners of the Cedar River Water & Sewer District have adopted: {1) Resolution No. 2285, as amended by Resolution Nos. 2403, 2404 and 2471, or as may be sul)sequently a~ended, establishing connection charges for properties seeking to connect to the District's water system, and (2) Resolution No. 1708, as amended by Resolution Nos. 2404 and 2471, or as may be subsequently amended, establishing ccnnaction charges fer properties seeking to connect to the District's sewer system. All real property within the land area described on the attached Exhibit A, for which a connection to the District•s water or sewer systems is requested shall pay the applicable connection charges in effect at the date of connection. Information on the amount of the connection charges and any other applicable charges may be obtained from tho District's office: 18300 S,E, Lake Youngs Road, Renton, Washington 99059 (telephone 255-6370), The recording of this Notice is authorized under the provisions of RCW 65.0B.170. D.\TELI this ;)..~ day of February, 1988, CEDAR IUVER WATER & SEWER DISTRICT OF KING COUNTY By dent By·=~~~-~;;:~~•,;•:::CJ~u,~~~>=== Samue1 w. Green, Secretary STATE OF WASHINGTON ,. r:r 'i·i ) )BS, ) '-•)·1'55 COUNTY OF KING '; .• 1),:, i=.ECC, F Cl6HSL .. ,.,, ....... ,:.,1)0 X certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that CHARLES TERWILLEGAR and SAMUEL W. GREEN signed this instrument, on oath stated that they were authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged that they were the President and Secretary of CEDAR RIVER WATER & SEWER DISTRICT, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes ~entioned in the instrument. OATED: Nedui i~e State of~siding at My Appointment Expiros I L -t l -r'l . ORIGINAL -···----------- 11 .. A Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1988 8802220455N53033 Page 1 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 8:19:33 AM !ST --, ~ j!: ,: .......... -~~_. .... ' ---------------------- Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1988 8802220455-53033 Page 2 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 B: 19:33 AM 1ST ...... :-· ,:: ·,.'i_i: '/i~; ~:>i;,..~.,.1:l,ol RECEl°fl.o lH~~ DAY Return original to: Aue 21 2 01 l ll '90 Jonson & Jonson, P,S, (REJ/ev). .. 90.t"1Je..-24 3000 Bank of California CenterrJf:.lT;:1:: l :> ·1 '~ ~r.-RECFEE 900 Fourth Avenue .... L·ii .. ,.,,. l . ,,.: RECO F Seattle, WA 98164 r, .. ,.• ... ·• · CASHSL AMENDED NOTICE OF UNPAID WATER CONNECTION CHARGES RECORDED BY CEDAR RIVER WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT NOTICE IS GIVEN that the Board of Commissioners of Cedar River Water and sewer District recorded a Notice of utility connection Charges under King county Recording No. 880222D455t that subsequent thereto, property has been annexed to the *1403 e District to expand its boundaries, therefore, District hereby amends such notice to include additional real property outlined on the map attached as Exhibit A. All pr~perties within the land area outlined on Exhibit A seeking to connect to the water system of Cedar River Water and sewer District shall pay to District the applicable connection charges in effect at the date of connection. Information on the amount of the connection charges and any other applicable charges may be obtained from the District's office at 18300 southeast Lake Youngs Road, Renton, Washington, 98058-9799 (telephone number 255-6370). The recording of this Notice is authorized under the provisions of RCW 65.08,170. Dated this :;;>.../~"iay of August, 1990, STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Dated: J/9241-l/oaox:1,;p,.890 •• CEDAR RIVER l!ATER AND SEWER DISTRICT OF ~:- By:~ Secretary OR\G\NJ\L r .:· .h!!/·;:,:··:'·: !• •• " Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1990 9008241403-53033 Page 1 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 7:51:09 AM !ST ( ' 1 ... s "';r:c:~+-ltr ...... -+*1,-,,;~ .. .. . Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1990 900824!403N53033 Page 2 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 7:51:09 AM 1ST ) < . -- • Return teconled original. to: Richaro E. Jaison Ja,scn & JCJlSCll, P. S. 900 4th Avm.le, &lite 3000 Seattle, W\ 98164·1001 C&lllR RIVBR WA'.ll!R AlO) SSiiER DIS'JlUCI' OF I<IIG CIUm, IIISllimICN /lMEWm ICl'ICB OF Ul'IL1'lY a:tllllCl'ICN ClW!:lllS Lplatin!I ~ !bl. 8802220455 and 9008241403 IDi'ICB IS HEREBY GIVm that the Boam of Camdssialere of Cklar River io.ter and sewer District of Kin;J cnmty, 10iShlngt:al, a l!lllliclpal caq,otatial, reomled a Ittioo of Utility o.mectlon Clm9"S umer Kin;J camty Recording No. 8802220455 and an ill!B>led notice urrlP...r King CbJoty ReoortliJlg No. 9008241403; that lllllleeq.1ent thexeto, ptq>ert:y has been anwced to the District to e,q,aa! its ~. tlle%efore, District hel:eby "'1l!IDI such notices to inclooe the additicmal. 1""l pn:perty rutlined en the -attadled as Exhibit A. All p,:q,ert:ies within the .l.al'.ld area a.ttlined Cl! l!Xhil>it A -.lng to oormect: to the District• s ""ter and sewer B)'Bl:F.m ehall piy to D!strlct the applicable oxirectia, d1a<,JOS in effect at tile date of eamectia,. InfoxnatiCII en tile a!!OJDt of the """10<:tial chol:geS and any other aipl.icab!e cha%ges nay be obtairBI fmn the Distrlct office at 18300 S. B. Lake Ya>rgs Roa<!, Rental, 1111. 99058-9799 (tel,;pme mmt,er [206] 255-6370). '!1-., reamilng of this not:ioo ia autl>crlzod umer the prt>dBials of RO< 65.08.170. Il,.te:\ this .1£.!!1 day of C1JJNI"i OFIC!Nl I ) 8S ) April , 1993, =a RI\IBR WA'.llm llNl SIHIR DISlIUCT ;.~ I oettify that I lax>< or have satiafacto<y evideDce that llllte:" M. amter and Cllarles E. Tend..Ui,gar sign«! this iJJat:mrent, cn oath stated that they """"' aut:lmized to e>ecute the ina"""""1t am a"1alawle:lged that they """"' the pr,,sident am sec:et:azy of the Bau:d of O>rndseialeta of Celar River water and Sewer District, to be the free and vollD"ltat)' act of such party for the uses am ~ m?nt:imed in the instture:m:.. n..te:1: April 20, 1993 l/92U•l/util•cn,,.4:93 r !ii I % i ~ li ;JI ~ I "' i ~ ;; ~ 8 /.: Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC: 1993 9304282240-53033 Page 1 of 2 created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 7:51:43 AM '.·:·1 ' ~ o I I / ~ = i r <=l ~1i~ I ~I © < §11 !:: el ~, i © e ~ ~I • • ' 1 ~ "' • "' a • E-u -~ "' • • / -<=l "' 0 E "' ,r ,1/l N N "' (XJ ~ N ,r ~ 0 :') "' ~ ~ ., "' i ~ " . i·-.. 1.:.-- '·~~'~:}/:.,){ ; ... iJtt Order: QuickView_ Doc: KC:1993 9304282240-53033 Page 2 of 2 Created By: rohini.peddineni Printed: 4/6/2015 7:51:44 AM !ST •O ., .. ... :E ... ' ~ 0 ... " .... It) >-a: LiJ c~ > z I- a:: .., (!) (\J z ::::, . :i: en o.. 31: U) LL I-; 0 C a:: 0 frl a:: cJ> (\J I- z~ 00 i= 0 0 .... U) u. 0 z Q I- ~' o..,· (!) z i: W:t::::: ·,.,,,, ··,,,~ . .., .-. .u.," RECORD OF SURVEY ..t:&2Iff_ 1) ..... ,. -•• AA1/4NJ,JI •• U,.,f1.D ,IJ A,U, r¥¥ nt 11Mt:~Nr6 Altl--ftW ATA _.,~~. n>T-,,,_TY.t.-. 10-15'1·.A . PORTION OF SECTION 22, TWP. 23 N., R.5 E., W.M. .1)-...CT n>"I --1"-lt.¥-"r Aa /11.i/lCOR-O _,,_ A/Nl4 <!:-TY ~~ ~--_,., .. ,· .t:·.-, .. ···· '""" ~;::::« Se.isH••rf~ Z / i ----~?T:>~ ... ~._.;.r ---.:.:. '; --~-/!:~;~r • ~ I • ~ RHJN04i•D,C,o1. CONC1tnl!. .-r "'¢X "' MP N,.EtJ'f# ~ ~ ! • ' ,. ,• NM'i!.Z'.JlrW .z •. #Q. i rlc~e-r'.~-rf' I I . ii/ lf·) . ..... ~ ''"•,,,,_,.. il NOl'¥-ID"t! 4.(1()· KlNG COUNTY, WASHINGTON :~ I• .. "'"•--,. ~ -,,,,,•' *,'f'"M"6'd"W ~ _., ,~_,a• , ..... _.,.,; .,.····· .. ... , ...... A,l<,pllt.-HO. -1-7941 -A _,._ IA_IH,.NT A.I_, __ -·A A/IWI ~,.,, lflHI--,.,,.._ -•79¥, ~ ,t1r,w1,v _ _,.~,_-,-,o--n1w11 Jtl-WfN4JtL4 --NTI _,_ T#I ·~--,,. ' ' • • • SCALE: f'• 200' WE!!R. FDV,VD ALUMINUM CAP $Q.ltl':lfC,e ..,_I/M,:NT """""1t;I ltf6HT·~·Wl!f'; MONIIM~NT -- A,t#VO 1•,1JION,ri"Wt .t.ll.*'Ua ·- • S£T ~-..... .e--,or /,::,ti" .ts. •ll!M,66 0 TH~~LA:IINT ~; ·,, -"""'-.. .· l (,#~~LIPT AS NDT4D) ---~~ _...... __ fJ~lh-z- ,...· ................ >_)1],.-··-·., .. : .. , ..... - ·•·· r=;~· -sv··. _,,. ~---.~ .. ---.HI" j ,, . . . i ~"~ .•••• ,···•,;. ~ ~ .. ,..., RNNOJ"IRCJNPl,; 8 <V/J~OJ:5c DETAIL "A• _. *~ I \ I ,·.' =~~=·~-= :/;---'"~:~.·-·.-~~·"'~-~ .,. ,IJ ~\.: ,? Mo111tl<\l!"o, * HOT TO si;,ilt IS:Sl w 'It .. ,,,,.,·· 3/ n • ~~~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (t4S/ltf0YI060S'r .$4....-ECO mu·-~r~~.4NC£ CfJM,.,_'jJN' SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE THf:NOATKWHT QUAAT!R 0,: Tli£ IIOUTIIU9T OUARTIUI, TIii: S~tl'l'l!AST·'~TliR :; /.KO UC.EPT ntl,y..-,p,nrrioN Of' .i~E NORT)Wl$T QUARTt:R OF This map correctly repreunb. D surwy mode ~ THI IOUTIIUST QfMIITl!:R I THE. SOUTtfWl!ST OUARTt:ft 01'" TH! 80UTHUST OUART£ta:i •. TIC .,ouTM£A$T QUAlt:A!:R OF .SA10 Sf:CTJoiil 2"i :· I IX.$Ct'IIIIECI ~ 1M ot Ulldi!r ffl)' dlr1ctlot1 1ft confOMIIOncl. TH! NOATHU!IT QUAATt:R OF THE SOUTIIWE:ST QUAftTER AND THU PORTION Of< ·•. "Ae•··~Ot;. .. ows: .:· _,. .,· .-:· with the N1qwrernenl1 of th• Svm;; lffl:onhn~ Q011!11NMUtT t..OU S ANO •• 1.Ylllt SOUTHEJIL1' DI'" TME RENTONP MAPLE VALLE'f HININIKI ·-~-THl:.:~RTifEA~f---.:ORll!II _,;· Solltl S:uita:V111(!!t~---.,...... Acl ol It.I nqunt of (/NIT'l!QNdM S HUltrlM't, ALL Ill H:CT!ON u, lOWNSHIP u IOIITH RANH s EAST, W.llt., IN ... ,, THOCE ,IIOOT11t:R.l:--'f JiL~-.,·ntt E•s:r.="LINI ,:,,ffll,o, ,:i:H l'"ltT, in OCTO .. t"! 197..!... 1( .. 1 CDUNT'f I WQl11NllllOH1 '"tr9,-,.1',. TIIUE .PDIIIT Of' ~OINNINIII(. •.• . ." :i., ('.'""'\ Ex<ll!PT tHAT POflTIOtl CONVE'tEO TO KIMG COUNTY FOR ROM PURPOSES , TIIUICI" IOUTHi'RL't ALgNi(. '-.~!>,,G':n ~:·no -~HT; ... :-. v..,.. I'll, Uh: c,r,. no.15850, COMIIOHLY ICNO*N "'' uoTH PLACE' souTHIEAST. 81' on IHI ucDftOEo u..oEA TI11Nc1 WIISTl.~Lv 200 ,-.:tt, .-.-_.. :, .. ····oANN.Y P HALLIN llliliO COUfllTY R(COROIND NUllllt:RS &S9l2IO, Sl1Mtlll'?I Af«I fl:5'"112, THIENC€ NOflT~Y 220 Fil~,. :··" :· ;.:· . 1~. ' ' THENCt £.UTl:RL't-"tQO FJ,H''~ THE T.11\E l'Ollfl' 0/f' IEIPflllfflH, ·: ANO EXCEPT TH•T PDfl1'10N DI'" TNI IOUTN-.OT OUARTIR QI TIC souniuST CONTAININI 1H.H AcilEi tlOll't 011 t..t•I. : · ~-·-RECORDERS CERTIEICATE 7'IIOZ09IJ06 QUIUITIII Of' SAKI HCTION ti, UESCINND A$ fOLlOfl: ' ' ·-~. · :: ·: 11 ......... U A POINT Olf TIil WUT UC OF 8Al0 SU80l\ll8ION ·7!17.00 l'"EIT .. F~d for ~ lblt····"'dfty'af.:...,..___J97_ NOIITff Of" TIE SOUTNWIIT CORNER THERl:Of1 ,-.'• -~· .,... •'.,,. THENCE EAST eu.110 Fin 1 .-At~. la: \lo1 • ..z'2.ot Surveya DCI 'P.all• THENCt NORTH II.DO P"fl!;T; .:·.-'.:"• }' • .,,•·"'':;. 1 '.', • THfNCt UtT 17:S.H Fin·, ot tl)I' ,., ...... of ft:' 1Mcr • 1 '$1,,....,.,, 'tMRNCI! SOUTH 792.00 FttT TO Ttlt !IOU"Tff LINE or BAIO IIU81M\llatON i ,;' .... ~-:'·' •• • .• • THtNllE WUT ALONG SAID SOUTN LINt M THli IIOUTHWIIIST COflfllll OP" u..... • ,-.io11ei: BAIO IUMIVIIION l TKINCE NOll'THlfll"Y At..°"41 POINT 01'" B£81Nt1IN8 i TNI!: ft8T LINE or SAID SWOIVIIION TO THE , .... ,· S{0627II001 40·242 .,,· .,,,· .. , .... RECORD OF SURVEY A PORTION OF THE SE 114 OF SECTION 22, T. 2l!N., R.l!E., W.M . l<ING COUNTY, -NGTON .. /' .. , .. ,// <t.·· . ,.,··· '""". ~ ........ ,.,· C ~t./ N=r•J'~•• . ,• i( ....... ~:-~''.--ff~-~~--,·~_:.· [$1 :;,:.··::'::.,,._.....--·.·.··,)· --------·~-\. ~q. (:il'#,'.;.:t1" .AicM,!i;·,. • 9:9' ... J·,/' ··: .. ·· I ..... -:.,,._ ' ........ , ... ,.,,,J .,· ,/ ,,,... /'· /' LEGEND • .,..,... lw ._. u.1MMJ· Cl ,.. .... ,OIi' -U.MU/1. '''.!-' ,)' {;· ! ii '· • "' ii ~: :, it ,t l I, ~ .. / .. :~;-'' I.Bl4L DESCIIIPTION Qlilr .,.,,,_,, --· # ,,,, •• # #tnJ/111 •• r:1,111., -·-=,;,;:=~-r.----.-~~ . ~ ,v t1111 IJMI Jt ..... ,, ... #01t1Nt ~ . .-.. ,r.,,•w. 1'111.N ,.,. -,... _,,,_,. UM ·-·141 II,~ IMtl II ...... r'Wlf¥....,NWllldl' N l!IM; .... il.Vll'Nw·w. IHI ,WTAd/llllJlllll'......UYUNI# Mm ~ ~ flC 11,r,. 1' ,11 J/1111/T Ill 7111 #tf/Mllll,I'" MM/11N #.U. /l/lt;mlll•JtNNI #KUY IIMIIWJfl' ... fll6 '111111 ,..,,,, ~l 1111/fq' (.'IN~ ~··· .111.11 JIIM' ~ MMMa'M.Y ~ ... --~"''''•·.-... 1l9#QI ,,,,-11'»"111, M.IHIWi"lf,' l//fillNf'., ,11 UHM .¥,# -~-~-""""""""'"' ,,,,,,_~'t'J.HM#111• ,. __ .t_lll #"'11 ... l'IIIJ.-,.. ·-:-. Jlililia' lf#'fl:fr,, .... h/lT '4lA/IO Mf# ~ U. W, :t:::::r-"/'.,'r"'.,,,"'1".,,..,.:~"· ~~~-~..,. :.:JlMIIIU ~-1.r,~::JI.M ..-,-..4W,W ,Jf/11 ~r ..........,,. _ _., '~~?:~;:>' . ' '",,, ... ,• ,,, ... ;·,· y· ,/· ,,,~·=---:'.. ,/ .IJ /fdi .4-'~ Ml#IJi,, 011tl ,~ 411! !#AT AICW OIi W1' IIR.U fN ~ IO _,,~~-IP_~~~ .-1#UffllH,-# ltlllll~Y,,,...,,1M411M- .,.,) Mf ~ #lllf*>',. II/IT # M qM#TMll/0 .. ,_.. AU MU~ tllll'6Ct'IIIO ,... /-.,«r~ ,. :? .. , ............. . ,, .,.,,,· ·, .. , ... G) - : . / ..... ,. ::····-- HAI.UN S ASSOCIATES SUAv£YORS l#IOI: iNflo AV£ &.W. l'fDDIA,l IIIW, llll NOS "'°" • taof;I ue• .... ........... ,, ..... ,.•'' ./· .,,' .)'-"' ··\\ ,, ..... , ·.-., ...... . SVBYEY9BS CERTIFICATE Thi• ma, con•clly ,.,,e .. flt& o lltl''laJ' mode br 1M o, lffldar my direction ln COllfOfflWll'ICI with the rlql,liremeM1 ol Ille S111'NJ' Reccwdlq Act ot lllt rtqllHI of Hl>wnr !'!· inn ,INf :~//.'mt.'°·,- BECOfli>EM -CE_BJIEIGAIE 11~4'.27$)01 Flied fpt ttCOtd thl~y of.lZIIIIL..J98' .... ,... ,• al ...... ~II Vol.-'4:."0f Sllr~p--an,PJi:ir.&U . .iir IM ~II o( ...;'.p;;·"re!!W,tl.W'!S(· . .. ,,,,.:;,,,,( j' LU(p-6:,.ffUU Mon_riar ·· · S t. df.·~11 .:•· ,IN'" • :/ \ ..... = e • I i ! • i ! ji ........... J ... -··' .. .. --······•, ... , ..... ,-·"'':,. :,. ... ,-·· , .... ,,, ..... ,. .. l!fl!l 109008 RECORD OF SURVEY Al'O&ffONOP THB 1W 1/4 OP THB NB 1/4 OP BBC. 22, TWP. 23 N. &OB. S B. OP THB W.11., ltINO COUNTY, WAIBINOTON. ,,.IJ;tf wesT EASEMENT NO. 82WD361 . .• ~ ,,•'"-":<' .( :>·..-_.:?'':,{/' .,,/···.,,£! J. .-{ . .. .{" ., ... ,···•;. A ,,::SJ ,,,,,·.,-.•. '::, ...... ,.-,,,,-····.,, JR~,.frir,,cw_,. '<.'M. ---._ -..... -···· u.;;:1t w II d ., . -.. ~! Ii:::' n,, ALL li:::'v N£ coii Nw11t i's i ,·, i '-,;;; •"" ,;;; I /1f.,A. «µ £ ~, • -.......___ c,i -....,(._J) }' •• T. ''"" ;' // ,/----+--._(t ~ -- 12·~·,7~~:.~:.<-·<.:;:5.J:1~ :: •. ~ .......... , ......• '·.,!' ---~-.... ,.. .• .... -,_,. -.• .... .. .... -·a: ·g,:_ . ---·-.· ---·.;., .,..... ../ ,, c'--.:..:C· '"'-. • ··02 fl)tJNO R/C-Si-·•,. ""''· °pf j;: , · , .. · · ··,.. . .. ' ':-,' - .L..iUi. 2..2.8. BASIS OP .BAllING PUT Cf auorT ~ RCaWOfD N KUii( 180 Cf Pf.J.r$. PNES ,J..!~ ll(tqll)S or Ill«; ctull7Y, IUStRlrtW Mi!!!~J?. ,!qP,!.P!,1~,~ NCI IIIIOlAL ~ 1lltntOOS. :!l.llhn IIU1'S OR ~ ~ OOHIMG IN WAC "'2.1l0.DOO. LEGEND * MQIMIOIT f"<iUNU AS 1t01UI • CALO.U.'llll ~ l'OillaQN • KT REIM • CAP LI.IIIIIOt 0 rOUND IUNt/llON PR ~ l<IO'ID) NO'l'J!S:"•, .i." 1HIS J.,,_y:i= l'l#lf'ClltT 10 SllOW NIY OIi ·.'" ALL~ ~ '"'5 SISE.. CONSULT .// -r Ml£ IIQ.JC1" '°" SI.IOI iu.nors. ,; I.EdAL DB1CRIPTION ~ Ar n£ N~CffCW Of IH[ sruna.r lff ~ H lillfflJIMIAPI£ Wll1£'t N(I 1HE iinT LI€ Cf 1H[ [AST J6 .Jin ()f H MJll:1HI[ CUN,11£,11 or 'h£ SOOMJIST QJARJ[R U" """" 11. ....., q;,ltl. RNI.'£ :i oor. w.11.. 1CN. crum. WA.9Ml'ON.; HNC£ 15"3B'59" 16T AI.IJrlG SAit ~'I' MMQlf A DIS1AHCE fT .70 f'E(l JO 1HE l'OtfT CF 11CGN11HG or 111$ WSDT; 1MENC11 SOUfN oi·•rtt" IEST A tl$T.u«:r <F JO ,U:T; KN(( SOUIPI 1$'31'!9" EASJ A IISTAMCI <T JO FUT; IIOCl" NORIN 01••1'41• l[AST A DIS1AHC[ (Y' ,0 lttt 1,1(11( OIi t£SS. m H SOUfN ~ or IHE AOrTON-IIAPL! \/AU.Er RtMO; ~M~~~:.,~ Cf~= A l»STA#CC (F JO rcrr, SUI.VEYOl'S CEI.TIPICATE 1MIS 1W' <X>IIRECTI.~ ,0 SURYEY WAD£ BY U£ al IJNCO lfY llll:CllCJII IC 111TH M RlQI.RIIOITS tf" TK[ SllMY IIEtXHIINCl ACT T M ACOUE5T (F T.E.S., IIC., N OC1UID, 1111. ... ~ "= i ·~ \ .• , .... ,./ ( \. .. / . 1iUM .. ;l.. ~ I \___ ~iM:i: PU1 !Ji' .l!.JJ!J1 I .'35' ~- .-···-.·-. I.ECOI.DEl.'S CEI.TIPICATE e FUEi fat RECCRO JllS ... ~ DAY or .d4~--'.. 1i_!!_. U ...-C:.-INJ'ES PAST.a~. ";J.>·--···~. -- \: ·-if.(j-';;;;,:: ·--... ;t;WJ I I I WUt/jJ) J GRAPHIC SCALE •-• .J-' t E3I ----(Dln:111') , ..... ft, .,;:.:·-,-~rrztr.. .11:./. ltllJ.d . :-... .J' :··=· .:·'.>· , ........... '.!" .,,,_·.·-....... · .. ::.::,m·: .. ·.· ·. ' ,· ).'•JOB ~~25139~ .· r--........ -ffi·--:----_ ... /_~~-ii.----i_ PA! :.:. 30! i.ii;..---. (20,J):~e:;-.~~'ah~~ .,, .. ,,..·· ·.· KINQ 'COUNTY;' WA~INGTON ·@, ' BQU~DARY. !,.h,E ,;· ,,· .,·· ...-1±r .; _<' .'.' . · .. ,_. ' ..•. ··ADJUSTME'NT .,·.,,· Nq.L-<!l5LbD 3,·.:::::: ' ' . ...... .. DECLARATION KNOW All. M£f,j av THtSE. .PR!SDITS ntA1' K ™l: .. UND£RSIGNEO O'tMR(Sl OF THE UNO .-fOEIN tlESCRl6eD DO H£R£8Y MN<£ A iKluHOARY UNE ~s,tl : : 1HER£0f PURSJANT TO RCW Ml.17.040 ANl'.>"fltC\..AA[ · .. \ THIS AOJUSTMtNT TO 8[ THE GRAPHIC RCPRtSENTA'IIQN Of lM[ SAME. Na) THAT SAID AD.JJSTVENT IS MADE •lH Tl€ fRa OONSE.NT AND IN ACCOftONolCC 'M'IH THE DESIRES OF THE OVINER(S). IN Wllt£SS 'M€REOF WE HA'-£ SET OUR HAHOS ANO 'StAl$.. - ... .... -·~···· ~," ,· ~:a-,,~"'°' ~ ...._1 ............... li.~)--~ ... 1: .. --....,...-.. "'"'IMl~t. L' '.,ClfZ>., .. ·' II&,·~~ !rgf. \i ~.\~,(> I w,-~!'-' .... ~~o::~ amg1~- ,,. ... , c-~ "--~·<'·-.,,=-~=~ I -'llfY WIit I .... • 9-~ _,.;.··e...,-•••'- :::c'wry""'. ~·= = :.:u:J-:1:)111~ -· _,,_ --------.... ---------- ia, ...... -t ..... ------ APPROVAL --lhl(~~!!~,,e:; .~/~)/ · USIE D,D,£.S. PH._. u/,.,,, ~ KING COUHT'I' DEPAANOIT OF A~TS ~N ondl apptO'o'ed t111to a.. dciy ot ...4J£__ 19N »er " • -c.,. 111.:t= K"'9 County ..._ Dtputy Kln,a Count)' .......,_. .. _7'~ • -~.!.a' _<i,·,:,." .:,·,,NO: ...... •,T RECORDING NO. RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE ,t.r.,(.it.<?:.t".u. •• ,Nc,r-.1 lhd for r«lOl"d thl•l.1 .. ~.~®y oft:l .. ~.,191.'G.' .• ot..#. .. M 11"1 book,,.'4.'-,.oUtr.6tat pag4A .. ot th• ~t of ~~t::t·· .... "" /1.,,.' ,._' ~i·orftecom ... ,. lt510171102:1 VOL/PA.GE ............ ' ·>·.GOV'T. LOT 8 ~ C:.:::::---. _____ : SECTION 22, TWP. 23 N., R. 5 E., W.M. KING COUNTY WASHINGTON --L.. 111"9f'On L•I ............. L•~ Nl'J'*u'll'i[ L ... -WI: L•• -~ ... •1 --,.,. "·" ~M kN -GOV"T. LOT 3 106 "'' ... ~~ .#,+;'1,,-t.: :t-~~~1. "" . /~• ···. ·>cj ~,;,:/.:. ,: '. ) · · --reel 111 A" "'R :.' .5\J ;ii ,}, ' ·"~7:tii<'.. ~ . ; i' ,.,,,P;'..H.,.,. t. '• ' . --• . ' . ' I • ' H ' ' -" -·"' . • .--' ' <9 • ""~ •· ,, -,..... --, " . ' . . . -" . ' ··=-·-.,. -. . ~ . ...,_,._ ... I ... , "-( -· , ,c< "' , c ' • '°"'' . ..... ' . -~~.:~:-;:.-:.1:~!;.l-·!!·.~-~--~~ ". J!~ Cl I . ,,, --.,,,._ . ,_ •' ---. ., ~-... ,,., .. .. ,·, , ·'~& ~ ... .,~.r.,e --1 ,. EXtSTfNGL/rit/ .,~: '\~\°1\.,,,-t.::.,~ ~ ~ toMO \f- -,"" •' ,--. '« .,,,., ,-~ .. ~-,· -: .... •"Pi eel "8. ;.·," ~-.,..,,~ •.•• , oo., ::---.. 8 ----~ i )'g~,;,;. .. ./ : ,~· ··.. ,.'.; ... "~·; ' .. ···y···· ... ~-,~· -f/. 1· ',~ ..... i I ~ • : £0.t Line ol U1e N.W. 1/4 ot SE. 1/4 ,SCA.LE'··j;;·~·2ob1 -.. .,· ·· eJ1IS1s OF BEAFftNG':.;,. ·:: E'O•I Line o-l the Not:01wHI 1/_4' of the :soulh.eoo•'l/4 ot S,.'ction 2~':°"23-5. jUH"·· ... ,,, ..• _:_;R•corct.Suruy v,t.: 20 po11.~:257:,,' ::N r-41'~.' t • _t•'J-'41'41 ~:' .,· . : ..... , -~)· ,,···': ., ... ,. .. , ... ,··' LEGEND (RAINNO ct MTJ IIEARING ll t>IST ICI .~;·j,'i,,,/Jff()., ... ,:.-:;·:· 80llN)AR'I' AS CALCULATED CALCULATED LANO SURVEYOR'S CERllFlCA TE Thill 80UNOllRY UN£ AOJUSTMtNT ~ly ,..._,ts o IIUtWY made by me or IIIIOlr rny dNctlon 11'1 conformonc. wltl, slot• ond Co.Jl'lty ,totulos Ir. .,.'!~!m, 10 ... ?l. fd/...,_.-~-~t ................. . ~m:,.e No. .~.~.?L .. .. ~-. {e~ (f[]J> .;1,\,····· ' ';";.,··· "' ' \ , ... , "':: ... o 111G :;HIii.; ~,-,,.··· .,,,, ·.-£!0UNDARY UNE .. i\b.RJS:l'MEHT !11·' F'OR Q rf? Hugh G. Goldsmith CtOARW.OdO P.JJ.D. · \.(1\J &: Associates. Inc. GOV'T. LOT e. N£.t,,.OF .... ~. 1/4, GO~'T. LQ:fi 111111• .._ a Cl WE5T 1/Z OF S.E.1 4'·S£t. 22. n1P. Z3N.,_R.5E. ~..... O\Wol. 8'I' Q,i,t 'JOB NO.£ .:· ........-ltJT "1t/!N!li ·".~0~ hll (al) tll-ffll "&I II*) ..... CHKO. 0'1' SCM.E IJ r ~ too' ~EET I J/f_ 2 ,,_./ ___ -.. .L-. . ,· .•. -.--· ~KING_.iCOUNT( WA$i'iiNGTON i@' / BQU~DA~Y' .,.Jli,,. !.INE ,( / . L!J. ''ADJUSTMENT ' k15L0113.<"· -~·9'-7--:.~- ··., . :-:'> DECLA'RATLON KNOW ALL Iii.EN 8Y MS( l'fi£S:EN15 ~t 11: THE",:· :·:· lMOEftSICN[I) °"10{$) Of TH£ LANO ip£IM o:£!iCftl~ DO H£MJIY MAI([ A eot.llDARY LINE ~T ·: neEOf ~T TO RCW 58..17.CJ.40 AND btcu.Rt . · M$ AO.AISlMDIT TO 1!1E "THC GtlAPHIC ~TA11Cltf.'; OF THE SAME, AND lllAT SA.ID ADJJS1MENT IS MAO£ 'MTH THE FR[[ CON~T ANO IN ACCORDANCE Wint lME DESIRES Of Tl« OWNER(S). IN Ml'NESS .,...EREOf WE HA'i'E 5ET OUR HANDS ANO SEALS. tifS#.2. ~ rm'(( .... ,,.,. - o;;; ..,,_,,.. .... ,~f::t:.=:!f-.i .. ptg/f'& 'LJP©Z ·.'' y ~i.,-111111..t~===!.~~~}:~ ~~·:.-::.,~~ ~-. . ,.· ,:}~.~~~ ....... ., . ~. /L)'b.JJJJ. .1_ ' i"f.•~, .... :'i~ = ~t&t. .. ;;;o ,~\ ;;:-.. J,;ii ..,._.._ .... ~~~ \~:,~~'jl ·· .. ~~4..o,..";: ... , .. ~ ..... .,~·-:., . ..,., ~, OluntJ., -,-,,--,•'·a· '""==~~ ,:::ur""",---~ ........ doif····' ..... IMl~lCllld~lttaM{l,6t,/hor)llw..-.l ........,..t,... .. _____ ...... _t. =--~ ---..,..,,....-.in ..... APPROVAL RECOROINC HO. RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE ................... . fll.O lot ~ Ulle. .• , ....... VQy ol ........ .,19 ....... at. ..... lll In boolic .......... of ....... ,"i!l PG11•·--·--... 11t ttw reqlj•t of ~NAME ....... .. ............ J ... ,: .. J:\, .. ,.,. ....................................... . ... SI.apt.of~ SECTION 22, TWP. 23 N., R. 5 E., W.M. KING COUNTY WASHINGTON _ _:,,Jt(ilEt."8" ll!:XIS.T!.~~! (8Htlon 22-23-~-~. ,,.,,,., ,. . Tho! ,...11 .... 1 tN·l"Ofl~NII •uort .. .,,1119 '"'"'"'', ... , .... AMII -NeolMHl ,.u.,1..-•I lfll $ktbw1\t.41M!'1olf •t s.an.n re, T~'ll Mwtll. RO!Mjt,:S E•t, w.M~ Ki11t c,untr .... ,..gt..., 1Jk1t ,..,tl!e,aU1<1J "1°:MOIIII Waf.:S.E. ~~IJ al IMI l"-t ..... i.n ~M; .,,· ..... ;: ,::.-,)•"'::.;' . -· ... _,_. ,,.-a.,.,.,..at tu Nl!(tt1'!_.:u...-... at""' lfQs_l!t,H1t ...,.1'V',,f1111 ao~l~ .... , ... •I :S.ot;oJn tt,; .-:' ;,' ....... ,_ ",'.: . ,•·' :_;" .,. (\ T~t;, I 01"4(~ .. II alt•1fiM E11t llM l~ol{ii' ......... •' ,48.00.,;..t 1tt~i-·Tf/l'.~ Pol•I 11·e.p1A1111 ol lMI ll,l,tffl -~ 11M; -,',. }· .,) •. ,,"'> . ..;.-' _,:/ .<'' TIIDnH N 8t"''r'39" ..... t_a o_t--0:00 , ... ,; ·--~-. .,:· ... ,· T'-'ulf,n,•-Y11S"."1"o••l-1.;'1 m.82 fa1;., \'." .,,,,._/; T~t-''N 21"'0l'af :W a dlll-::01 70.00 INtj' ,;· ,,• ''''",.KMIH N 80"12'~" We.,.~,,;. ol &715.15.,.11; , _.f ,,' Th ... ~a 8 &,-Q&',i• W D •,i:-1 ti !&I.II :tMI; .,, •. "*'" N 7&!#47" W a ,IIIIHII al 4TI!o41 IDIII ;: ,· •.' TMIIH t 5"'4S_'.~· W ~·-·'-., e~ , .. , •• !!i~ N«ttl~fllJ -_.;.·,11401~-'""-$.l,,,, 9N 1M, ........... , 111•-~= ,._:· :.' ,:' .-:: ,.,,· TOGETHER WITH""'' porllo,, DI 111~\0.111-.. ,1,i:.".r,., 1t.'1~ IMIII'!~; '""'i~ ol ,aid lftli.tl H 1, .... Natt11, .. , ... ,, DI 1401ft Way 8.E".-.-,ii N•tl\ft1111rty -~-'""' tollcl,lfoi .. ,,;_Ufold NIii: .,,·"'=:_.._ 819IMl"t Df IN NoflflHII 1:or .. r ol ,-..-~ .... tfwti IINIIII IINi N«ti,ut ••-:--1'"" N .'(. et-tO'oe· •; · · ~:·· .Y ::· _..:' ·= .. -.. TlllflC• 8 2e•s11'o17" W a dl1t1111H •' t2.9t 1"1 t!l-~ Norl~lflly !'!'l'IMI ol ~tft PloH S.[. ..,,,. Ir.I 1111 l•rml"'I If Hid 1M . ' . . .. Eatruld 1nm Klrlll c:,un1r .a11u1..-', llMaordL ·.,, .... ,-•: P:ci·~.A (EXISTING) (SHIIOII 22·2~-S) ,,.,.,, .. , .. ,,-•'' ,.~·:P ........ al GonrflfllUI .... 3 Md 1111 •• 8H11Dn H, To, ..... , U N..-111, RN .. 11 EH1, W.M.. ICIMj (OlllltJI. WHflMtlN IJll!g Swtfltrlr o1 lh1 Ru1o,o ......... ....., Hlfllli•r 9"d £11111,, ., a 60.00 toot r11111-,1-w-" ho"' fl 140f~ "*• S..E. T~THER WITH lflll ,1rt10R al Illa Norlk .. l """''" If 1111 BoulltH1I "'1Wlar ..,,1 1i. IWorlioH•I 'l.,.,t,t:-ill th• St11t11w11t •u•t" 11 ,.W S.clt.n U. lrlnf N11thn1tulr ol 1'011• lll,ic:e I.E . ..wl Ma,1111,11 ,, lllt'·fo11o~uffllli•'ot1a.ri, .. . ,,/·~~:.al u,. N«llleH 0 l 00 ~ ... 'l'I'" of"" No," ... t ~let 1111,. IHIIINII "' ..... , ,110 li:ulilnU; .. ,. ··. _.{Th.nu s_pr4"1'49'-). DINI ,~_:E"NI ..... , ,a1e1 Hlill¥11IIHI I"··-· al 5 .. 5-00 111110 lftl Trw Pelftl ............. "''"" h.,.tl'\'.•tc•il>..il ltil; :_: n•rtt:it·tt at•11'3tf • a dlel!l!'U ,, 4~oa·11N\~'· . Tltlflja N 53"31''1" W a lllet•11e1 •iJltH IHI; T ...... N !?"'O!'lll" W o ~• :ol T0.00 1111: 11tt11ffj,j.W)t'54" W ~:,iAII .. M et IITIS.15 !Ht• TMno• s &.-06'51" w,•,..MM• 11155~'1.,.t;··::·. ·.: ·:·· . .-_.. TIIIM1 N 15"4(47", ... ' 1 dl.~l'111e1 11 4:(tl.51 1111: ::, , . ..-:, / . ·• •..... -~-· $ 51"4!l')5" W D fi10MI II eO.oo , .. , ,, tilt,'·ft!if,'~''""' 11\o,ow, •'l_-.1110111 1'1ND 8.E. oo>4th1tu...,,..1'f'11lllllll1. ·· :::' ' (.' LH• ~ ......... at IM 1rtoi-,ih11HI Cll~, ••• ,fN~tlrlut qao,t.,;·., IMI ~1111111 qll~ar ., .. S.ClionH; •::. '···:.. .:' .y ,:' .,· TMIMI S 01" .. 1'48" W tl'"'f,l"-• 1o .. 11111, tllOfnl. ,, ... ,-~~, U,43 .. ~1 IO IM !"Jlrlhlrly .... 111•,gln of IN 1t111on llatpl• v•, ...-~r lfMI 111D T~R' "'*'' ~f .. ..,.,.ine.ot 1~• he11to-.M1er"•d n,,1: T11ena1 nnlll'llliftt s oro11·,.,· w o "'•-•·clt's.U!l7 t1;t1t: ;; .,,· .:: fltl!IH N .,..17•39• W ,er .... 1 IIH,, Ille Nolfllt 1111 DI I~ Mlllvl•I"'" dlll-1:al 200.0Q:_tul; T ..... OI It (N• .. t'49" I! I di&IIIIH DI 220.00 IHIT'"""'I $ 89"17'39"'1!:'"d-.dlfMla 11 .:· 16'.00 1111; ·:. n-• ft Ot"•t4ti" Ii! o •111-01 !IO.OO lfff to MIii k:vt!lt'•r ...,~~- T~ca s n•ol(47• Ea a,,_, at ,s.n 11111, lft• Tr~IP411nl·"91 '!'!'ifMlnt. f~lncl..t ,,_ 111"1 C11MIJ A111110,'1 flnord1. LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFlCA TE ·,·; .. ··· ·=:,,.,.·.· VOI../P.t.GE 106 8. nia. BOUNDARY UNE ,40.JJSTMENT COIT9Ct1)' repr...nt, a _.,.y mOOI by "" o, undlr my direction In conloffllonce, with 1t11te and ca,,inty atotuln . :$.0,JNDARY UNE··~..usfiii4ENT f..~ or8 Hqh G. Goldsmith CE!>ARW,OC!D vie. ,• \(j'\J & A!sociates, Inc. GOV'T. LOf &. N.E.'i;/)4_oF 8.~. 1/4, GO~-.T. LO:/l. wt ... ._• a WEST 1/2 OF S.E. 1/4'-s.e.e. 22, HIP. 23N .•. R.5E. 1n !.'.~m-rni 111 ... ?.~ .. µ~ c«"tlffeGl• Ho. .~.~11z .... , .. :: .. .1-D'flN, IY DA1t J08 NO. .• . ....... W,I -K.tT l/l2/H ··,·~."!O~:f hit (NI) -.nit 1111 (al) --la QIKO. IV """' r -roa• " """ 2~ 2 ·=·.,./.' AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 JEFF CURRIE being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the 13TH day of --'-A"-P-'-'Rc-=IL=-----' 20 15 I installed TWO public information sign(s) and plastic flyer box on the property located at (1) END OF PRIVATE ROAD & (2) SR-169 for the following project: ELLIOTIFARM Project Name CEDAR RIVER LIGHTFOOT, INC. Owner Name 2. have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 7 Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Signs Installation" handout package. ~g~ .. NO RY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at 'S;-eAv.>v-4 t G )"j Oc:\,(,A• i_0J~ My commission expires on ____ \ __ , ____ . -3 - H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\pubsign.doc 05/14 RECEIPT EG00036558 BILLING CONTACT Murray Franklyn Family of Companies Todd Levitt Brixton Homes, LLC 14410 Bel Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007 REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME LUA15-000242 Printed On: April 13, 2015 Prepared By: Clark Close r Cityof, ~ --------J -~11· !DJ1 111:,~_; TRANSACTION TYPE Transaction Date: April 13, 2015 PAYMENT METHOD AMOUNT PAID TOTAL $8,394.50 RECEIVED APR I 3 2015 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION Page 1 of1 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Lee Gregory <1greg8604@msn.com> Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:16 PM Cynthia Moya Subject: RE: Elliott Farms Cynthia: Our mailing address is: 14235 Maple Valley Hwy., Renton, WA 98058. Thanks. Leland and Joanne Gregory From: JOANNE GREGORY [mai1to:joannegregory4@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 2:30 PM To: Lee <1greg8604@msn.com> Subject: Fwd: Elliott Farms Sent.from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROJD --------Original Message -------- Subject: Elliott Farms From: Cynthia Moya <CMova@Rcntonwa.gov> To: ernil v@orncara. iejc;:,_;mnegre Qory4@rnsn.com CC: This letter will be sent out today. I am email you since I do not have an actual address. Thank yon. Cindy Moya, Records :vlanagcmcnt Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmova@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 I LAND USE HEARING SIGN-IN SHEET Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat/ LUAlS-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD August 9, 2016, 11:00 AM PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY ADDRESS Phone# with oreo code Email NAME (including City & Zip) (optional) (optional} -. . ' -I l·,_ ~/} _,./. J , -_, "/ · v g -/1_ '1-l.1 Y-~ , . /" .~ ; , /5/) l /'!{ ,tc {v(I(/ , /J-c' /)/i { fl .. I i ./ /i ,_:c. Inc, U1 I/ rJ;;u110':l"'Cl I? ~ I I. :J-_53-£9-0 PO,/ JC/<:l ')'7 /~;J.-33-/h#t:JL<i. U~/,.,J n49t1,ey· .,.,..,~ _.,, .,,,,,.._, 1- -. -0 rr>y117 I ,., \..---£. \ ¢ 'Zo?'\ C'--• rt..\.:,\\ A-~ /:T; ~~ '!)~ ,;..,.__ 0 17r'O? <o:J· 37 ~ ·'3 \ E. \ ·,..__\cl.@.,\~"<-\,~\,co•• E1. 44 Elliot Farms Preliminary Plat (LUA15-000242) Public Hearing Project Manager: Clark H. Close, Senior Planner Public Hearing presentation: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager August 9 ,2016 CITY OF 1 , I Presentation Outline • Project/Proposal (6 Slides) -Description -Location -Site Characteristics • Process to Date (1 Slide) • RMC Analysis (7 Slides) -Comprehensive Plan Compliance -Zoning Development Standard Compliance -Design Review Compliance -Critical Areas Compliance -Site Plan Review Compliance -Subdivision Compliance -Modification Compliance • Staff Recommendations (1 Slide) 2 r--·-, ,---------; ,"-' .. .. i., ', l ( ~ ...... '"'21 , < • ! , ~ .............. _, '1 , .. I I ---I I I I ' I I I •-... --. I •' 'It I 'Y{, ':"' ._,_ - . ..-·' ' -I .., it i 8 :, ! r , '( -. ...... ,,. ) I •: I , _, ,-·--_, I l -·-• , ...... , '' I I , j - J "" ., 1 i , " I "'-'1 .,, -n, h .. -::: .--• ,-- I I I ... -.. ' I t .. i i • I \. -, ! -a .. 2 -· a It ,. CD ,. 0 n It ,. ... 0 :s '--------· ~ l I MOLiSSES CRE COND0MINIU~S f I'~,!, <:,I \.\Oi~ Approximate Location NEIGHBORHO~D'B~A-P / EDAR RIVErR ___.,,--- ""'-"ssrs CR••• "°''°" 4 I'-'f''-,._c<c. v,o.,.E--~ Approximate Location 'Y Hwy RC: ·'· ... ' \ . . \ . \ ~. ·, ! I ! .-..... -., .. 4207 4 +' ~ .... ·-·-·-·-·J ,., -· &> \ ;.;., (\ 0 0 ':) 1 4 1 18 1 4-130 14142 1 4 154 ".., 141 60 ~ >1-.., 1 4 11 5 .. sE 1541h Pl 15401 '· 15405 14166 14172 I 4182 14 186 142J5 .,·-·,. _1-·-·-·-. .._ ..-•' I i i '· 1 5 418 ,., 154 09 '81 15426 14190 ~ 1 5417 '/ ,S'~ '9'o ~ tp, . ~), ... 15438 154:>e 154 66 1 4 198 15429 U461 15474 s~ ', '· 154 33 5441 1 15449 1 5437 '· '· ., 154 78 v., 1 5482 6 ' 15486 ,() R-4 '· ........ .... t54n "' 15490 154851 m 15494 5 1 501 (JJ Cl) (i!J) • Ron Regis I M 1531\ f 14504 1 5319 <( 1 5327 ~ 1S335 ;':= 1 45 11 1 !1343 'I 5J51 1 4 ~1 14512 14515 14:14 8 SE 153,c:1 p 1 14 5 4-1 '14 55! 1 453 4 1 4552 Sf I S4u 1 St 14 543 14 555 Molasses Creek Condominiums Critical Areas Tracts: Wetlands and Geological Hazards R-8 -Single Family King County Site Characteristics 6 - ', I \ ...._ ...._ -- ,_ --- I I _____ ) + :ai. ... -... --.. :·...., "' " ' ) '....-----, I "' 'lliarH + I I + _.,. ·• \ l + • + \ \ ... ... .. \ \+ ... .., .. I I - I I I .._ \ + + + L--, .... RE!IJTQN 11-14 ". ... ... + • "' . ' "'\+ "' ... ... + \ .. \ \ I \ L.. KOO COUNTY R-6 \ ------ ' .... .... ~ -------- ----.... ----!· . [X roe LL~L ------..: I I ,"t ,....;..,., .. Proposal I I ~ ~ L J u::;.:. ::·:;~~; ·R:.;,.: t, ~ :i,,~H.R :>;.:.:.l' ;..r-. z:-:..--:!>.":Z:::::;..",C~'\#. "' \ \ \ 1C:. ~~':" ~ ·R;..;,.-; J ~ ;,;:;::-~EF f,: ;..~ ; •. r-; z::;.-;~.::;:;;~".t.~.Y.. 11~~; .. ,,_ ---- .:= _£~" \i.y ,-JI ~ I'.~ I i'.t1·\t7\\1 I :i; · -~-.. ,,,f'/. 111\ I ...... , ~ ~---..... k(: 1 '<'\"'k°~\\ J ·4-~. -::1'.. ~~~~"." 'lit· \ \\\I I H >_ -"':r"z ~ 1 '0-;r.',1 ~~\ 1 11'1 ·~~~-·i:' \ , s~ /}'.;-...:_~-~Q~ " ... ;;!. 1:'-{].~r*•~~-,,:;~ '":'-/} ':-r-\ I ~ 1"A ,-z-~~~-_s' \ • ) '.::.._ i:,:;·,.!:S '• --t: -,, ' .,-' v-r ,,,, ,, -, ' ' I ..,-, . , , ..::..., . <· · 11t ti • -i~~;· " _;,-~ I~! !i , ~-·..;--· I " I I i.,. ( I \ I I I I .> l I I I .... < ....... C ~ ~ ;:p > ! rn ~ § I !~ ,-..... ,-..... ·1 rn '~ -< ] ::0 ~ Ii c::, ~ I I ~ I I I ~ I I 0) .,, ~ .. I 0 , I 'D 0 en It - ,, .. 0 n CD en en ,. 0 a m ,. CD Analysis Comprehensive Plan Compliance and Consistency • The proposal complies with the City's Comprehensive Plan goals and policies if all recommended conditions of approval are complied with. Zoning Development Standard Compliance and Consistency • The proposal has demonstrated compliance with the R-14 zoning classification if all recommended conditions of approval are complied with. 10 Analysis Design Standards Compliance and Consistency • The proposal is compliant with the Design Standards regulations if all recommended conditions of approval are complied with. -· y / UN,MAp·=·~~-=·~~~":_~- ·_;_ . 'L ~ I /:4L -------~-C Vj -----. . -. -, ~ .. ~. , L£y Ro ----~ --}~~--~ .. .. ~D(IA, . _Ji£4". ~ :~' -~ ·:--_ ,-vv'A,169~ ~ ·~·· ~~~~.,--~--n -A -~·· l T I r,---:-:---, '- ,,---. If • I • ... •· .... -J •. ... ' ---· .......... // .. ~ ·\ ::.--l' :tr~~:~ : \'-\~ J" J. . --~~~ ,l•i' ' _-.... """"': '-=·· 't.,, ··,v.c., .. • ·-• -'' i • ·-· ~ ;-e~ .. \ ,~":1 · f ' -;J..~?( \.~<~~: ... ,~ ' ,..,t:I ~~ \, '\. """..,_.~, c,1"'N:. • ""'-.',i, ,t'.';,;'" II~,~/' I ""'-'"'"' [' .. ,< """-""-'"' ,., • 1).-(' ~l, .....i.~. ~ ~lltlrJh!'~ -:~ i .("j 1:,.,.,1~~ ' -1 Of!~ ,:-...;.,",.tlf«; Iv ' "-,,.,.\..7~? I 1-k'"ll ·n·;.y<·"\-'1i' I' \1,. •• _ .1l\ ~-,.,..:·.:.-Pf~'/ 1~:.~:,,t,,\. .. 1 ·~\ \ ~ ~~ . . tt ("1' ·/1 I (. i °H; .,. /.._, ,.1 ,..r · , l , , , , / _ _, '1 , . I,;,_ '·'. ~,~~ .. .:..:..;_~ .. ":.1 __ -----· ---. --- r.,.,llf'lt,,,M(jMJ._r\C:'rN[ tfrC M'X'U.\~SIQfl~ Lots 1-13 Lots 24-26 Design Standards Compliance and Analysis Cons istency ~"· ~, BU I LDING C -SOUTH ELEVATIONS 30' •0 ' MAX !IUI\.DINC. MEIC,~T I ----------r----------- 1 "',' GRADE-~A;;/.:.-UNIT n'l'E Illa ~~ I J LOT44 ... "'b.., BUI LDING C -ALLEY NORTH ELEV A T IONS ~:------- Analysis Site Plan Compliance and Consistency • The proposal complies with RMC 4-9-2008, Site Plan Review for development in the R-14 zone if all recommended conditions of approval are complied with. Critical Areas: Geological Hazards and Category II Wetland • The proposal is consistent with the Critical Areas Regulations, if all conditions of approval are complied with. 13 Analysis Subdivision Regulation Compliance and Consistency • The proposal is compliant with the review criteria for the subdivisions pursuant to RMC 4-7 if all recommended conditions of approval are complied with. 14 Analysis Availability and Impact on Public Services • Police and Fire Prevention have indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to Code required improvements and fees. • It is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal. • There are safe walking routes to the schools and/or the school bus stops. • The site is served by Cedar River Water and Sewer District and has a water and sewer availability certificate (Exhibit 15). • A preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) has been submitted, a final report shall be reviewed with the construction permit for compliance with the City Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM 15 Modification Compliance and Consistency Analysis • The proposal is compliant with the modification criteria, pursuant to RMC 4-9-2500, if all conditions of approval are 1 1~;..; ;,#Cl 1r11o1NA I \ .; i OlulrlOII()()(~ i ,;---, .I-~ } ~ ~ J. \, .... ~· \ . r.-"":t "-"""'~ /, / i.. i\ . ...., j, ../ ,~, .,1 .. ~ ~~-0:-~-~' ... ~,~~--,, t~"il , ' . • ·-""'"· • .-L? ;-t.l-l~.. \ 1 . '\. ~ \ri,, ' -1:-::~c.:::-,?: \~ti1 ' ~~-. ·:,,,.;..;:. __ . ~,,i,trtl, -,~~ ,. ,,\' qi •t· ' ,":- ~l: -,l\·l,.':'t ffl",... • ,~ • ~ ~it~-~1~: ·a ,, I .. ,....,.., ! -~ .-,, .... .._,en ::,\\(1 ~(1 ' ~)~ ( ~ ..._ '$11£.~(JliSTNrGlilltO I ~~ \ "i... ,f,2i t)f-.. i. ,/ ' ' .:; 1 :;:_"~'Jl(tufC ,r-l .'\ i ... \'~\fri,h~~•~;'t'~ \ '-. ~~ ... 'fff' 'tl,iH~11~,.';1,1-.; , 't."' , .. , , , ·::i,~., ,~ ·n , ' ~ r ,,,· \ • ~ ·, · , t', Ii 't'tt-~· ... ". • ..... ..::, .... \.~ .. '1' t, ,., .. :' • ; . __ , f:•! I ' ''.\ •,• ' ' , 1-f',-:*~'.;.~---------·---,.-:------·---' r.,,,•~: .. ,,""\,\~; l ~ ,.,,an1,,tr,--..d...,..1,,t>1trrta:N1J •)'-.wa'lAl"SOft ~ v,,QCN'( ...... Mtl!!i.~ 16 Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Elliott Farms Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review, and Street Modification subject to 14 conditions of approval . . ---.:.::..·i·~~~r"'.' ,. .,,~ ' ~--llfNrON"'APr.t v;4 o-. • IIOAI) ltA ,11111· ~ ' .. -__.., ', ' ,_ --1 -------i. . . ~ ------' ,., ' \ ' I ~-----1 :· ~~· .l I \ C • '\ I I \• I \ l --.... RENTON A·\4 I '\ ~. \ -"- KHl COUNTY R·6 12 (, l""Y;, .. 1( .... 1~ ~I r 17 __J I-)\ -4-~ ..-.. ·:·r .. ~ •:• ..... ~-1 ' ., 17 ELLIOTT FARMS PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA15-000242, ECF, PP, SA-H, MOD APPLICANT'S PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITIONS OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AUGUST 9, 2016 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of NonSignificance Mitigated, dated July 15, 2016. Applicant concurs with condition as written. ~2. The applicant shall install or provide i,o,,esifinancial guarantees for all common landscaping and -f ,,-e,oMMD",.,,;w,',. open space amenities prior to plat recording. A phasing plan and final detailed landscape plan 0-•<-0-\o-cx:1"'=/'""J shall be submitted with the s.treet and utility c_onstruction permit~~.,. a.v ,el-V Ci.V\cl ~provo.. I b'/ av0 Oftl'l ~f'/1-lC-fl,te £uv-re,.+ Pl.:rn",i H·ll 1u.t'fA,i.Myr ?vio.r ..j,, lbvt<;-h-uc/iovi Pu»<; 1--1-s-;W\>ic.<_,.,, l).111trt i t,e<, Applicant requests revisiah to conditiofl as noted. \ 51",.1 3. The applicant shall incorporate into the landscaping plan a minimum of two (2) active fllay str~ct~res or ce~rts facilities that provide opportunities for physical exercise and social interaction and low level trail lighting per RMC 4-2-115. F.2.1 The details of these amenities shall be identified on the final landscaping plan and shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. l.,i>._ppn>"td k1 -1\...~ (,,i' ~ Applicant requests revision to condition as noted. 4. The proposed on-site seven-foot wide trail system shall be paved with concrete, except the trail system located directly behind the rear yards of Lots 34-45. The final detailed trail system and profile plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. Applicant concurs with condition as written. 5. The applicant shall orient the front doors and front yards of the attached dwelling units on Lots 1- 13 toward the street (Road A) or the common open space tracts. Each of these units shall provide a four foot (4') entry walkway that connects the front entry to shared common green space trail or sidewalk system. A note to this effect shall be recorded on the face of the Plat map. Each of these units shall be designed to the highest level of architectural detailing and articulation. Applicant concurs with condition as written. 6. The applicant shall relocate the shared common green space trail system, which runs north/south between Lots 3-18, to be located closer to the front yards of Lots 5-7 and 8-13 to provide more usable green space behind the lots. The revised plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. Applicant requests revision to condition as noted. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised plat plan that includes a pedestrian entry easement that is at least fifteen feet (15') wide plus a five-foot (5') sidewalk to the north of Lots 24-26. The revised plan shall be submitted with the street and utility construction permits. Applicant requests revision to condition as noted. The applicant proposes to make Tract Ea public alley. A five-foot wide sidewalk will be provided. . . • 8. The plat shall include a minimum of four (4) different building types (models) to provide additional character to the development. The detailed floor and elevations plans shall be submitted to the City of Renton Project Manager with the street and utility construction permits. 9. Prior to construction permit approval the applicant shall submit, to the City of Renton Current Project Manager, a site plan and a roofing materials board that identifies a variety of colors throughout the development. Applicant requests revision to condition as noted. 10. The applicant shall provide for the minimum standard of 24 feet (24') along street curves. A final detailed site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. Applicant requests revision to condition as noted. 11. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan and final detailed landscape plan to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager and the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. Applicant concurs with condition as written. 12. The applicant shall create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that retains or improves the existing vegetation within the open space tract aRd eRliirii iRlo aA agr~8>R8Rt witl:I Melasses- Creek HomeewRer's Asseeiatio1, for their propoFtieAate &Rai:e of meiRteAaRee af Uw eff site private Feaa Relwel'k. A draft HOA document has been submitted as part of the application. A final HOA shall be submitted to, aml appraved by, the City of Renton Current Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to Final Plat recording. Such documents shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. Applicant requests revision to condition as noted. 13. The applicant shall provide public easements for amenities that are outside of the right-of-way of the new public street. Applicant concurs with condition as written. 14. The applicant shall provide access signage that identifies the trails system throughout the development for public access. Applicant concurs with condition as written. Office of the City Clerk 5 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED C \_. (' \ \.--, < I \ /. / , .,'~.-~ 'I \ __ / '-· -~ \ (J'--' \ -Jl1 r / \\' I~ . . ,..--))lY \:-/ \ ' {x. ,.,\ s ~ ~,; ... ,: ,·.;<.·-~·---'' Stan Harrison 15150 140th Way SE, Unit T-201 Renton. WA 98058 Cl1Y Of RENT·· .-, · SE? 2 3 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFF! i=ORWARD T19rl:0 i,J,tl 1R3lN69 1~5 \~~~0D9 /Zl/lE HARRISON 'STANLEY 4100 LAKF WASkTNGTQN ~L.VO N APT B~02 ~FNTON WA Q~A~fi-1~R7 RETURN TO SENDER 98QlS7>3232 24 HRSONMP 91.30Si: 111 ,. ·'· ''Ill II 'I··'"·' ' -' '·\' '" ' '' '·" II j J1]1•d1l ) II :d,id\jfli'1til lklq\J!JH""l'!P\r.l ll 11 IH ! ; I l!l!ll li! ; l ; lll!I l .'.l • u L TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT FOR Cedarwood Subdivision Divisions 1 and 2 By: Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. July 1996 ::r\l::i 9N\H33N1 1 3 ) ' Revised August 1996 n r TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT CONSULTANT REVIEW To the best of my knowledge, this plan complies with King County Codes and Ordinances. FOR Date 1· '.t'f ,'M Phone %/ · 11110 Firm Cedarwood Subdivision Divisions 1 and 2 By: Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. July 1996 Revised August 1996 (. Q l O Hwtll G. Goldsmith L------------------\.()Qj & Associates, Inc. Page 1 of 2 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 1 PROJECT OWNER AND I PROJECT ENGINEER PART 2 PROJECT LOCATION I AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner Cedarwood Group Address 14410 Bel-Red Road Phone (206) 649-8668 Project Engineer ..,_T""om.:.:..:U.:..are""'n ________ _ Company Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. Address Phone 1215 114• Ave SE, Bellevue WA 98004 (462-1080) Project Name ~C=ed=a~rw~o~o=d ________ _ Location Township ~2=3~N~----- Range ~S~E~----- Section _.2::2 _____ _ Project Size 48.0 AC ___ _ Upstream Drainage Basin Size O AC I PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION , PART 4 OTHER PERMITS I a Subdivision CJ Short Subdivision CJ Grading CJ Commercial CJ Other CJ DOF/G HPA CJ COE 404 CJ DOE Dam Safety CJ FEMA Floodplain CJ COE Wetlands CJ Shoreline Management CJ Rockery CJ Structural Vaults CJ Other CJ HPA PART 5 SITE COMlvlUN,TY AND DRAINAGE BASIN I Community Soos Creek Community Plan Update Drainage Basin Lower Cedar Drainage Basin PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS I a River Cedar River CJ Stream -------------- CJ Crttical Stream Reach CJ Depressions/Swales CJ Lake ______________ _ a Steep Slopes ------------ CJ Lakeside/Erosion Hazard CJ Floodplain ------------- a Wetlands -------------0 SeepS/Spriiigs a High Groundwater Table a Groundwater Recharge a Other-------------- I ~AR-7 SOILS j Soil Type (See Soils Report in Appendix) a Additional Sheets Attached Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Veloc~ies 1/90 King County Building and Land Development Division Page 2 of 2 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIA} WORKSHEET PART 8 DEVELOPlvlENT LllvllTATIONS I REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT CJ Ch. 4-Downstream Ana!Ysis CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ Addttional Sheets Attached PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS I MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION II Sedimentation Facilities II Stabilize Exposed Surface II Stabilized Construction Entrance CJ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities II Perimeter Runoff Control II Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris II Clearing and Grading Restrictions II Ensure Operation of Permanent Faciltties II Cover Practices CJ Flag Limns of NGPES II Construction Sequence a Other CJ Other PART 1C SURFACE WATER SYSTEM ! CJ Grass Lined Channel 11 Pipe System CJ Tank CJ Vault a Infiltration CJ Depression Method of Analysis a Open Channel CJ Dry Pond 11 Wet Pond 11 Energy Dissipater CJ Wetland a Stream CJ Flow Dispersal a Waiver Compensation/Mttigation of Eliminated Stte Storage a Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation Closed conveyance to water gualtty pond. Discharge to Cedar River. Faciltty Related Stte Limttations a Addttional Sheets Attached Reference Faciltty Limttation PART 11 STRUCTURAL A \JAL YS,S , llkiy rnqu,re special stru:Lr 2 re,·,e'", I a Cast in Place Vault a Other 11 Retaining Wall CJ Rockery > 4' High CJ Structural on Steep Slope I or a civil engineer under my sup01Vision have visfted the sfte. Aciual s~e conditions as obs91Ved were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the inlonnatioo provided here is accurate. PART 12 EASEMENTS TRACTS I a Drainage Easement a Access Easement a Native Growth Protection Easement a Tract a Other 1/90 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Project Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II. Preliminary Conditions Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 111. Off-site Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 IV. Retention/Detention Analysis and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 V. Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 VI. Special Reports and Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 VII. Basin and Community Planning Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 VIII. Other Permits ....................................... 101 IX. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design ...................... 103 X. Bond Quantities Worksheet, Retention/Detention Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch, and Declaration of Covenant ....... 107 XI. Maintenance and Operations Manual ...................... 117 u L ':., - -I Section I Project Overview - ' __ , n r -j -J -' I. Project Overview The site is located in the Cedar River valley about 2% miles east of Renton at the intersection of SR-169 and 140'" Way S.E. The site is about 1 mile north of the Fairwood Golf Course. A vicinity _map of the site is shown on Figure 1 and an overall site map is shown on Exhibit 1, the Conceptual Drainage Plan. The property on which this project is located has been the subject of extensive environmental study as part of a previous land use application in the early 1990's, Cedarwood PUD. A project EIS was begun and substantially completed, although a Draft EIS was never issued. In 1994, the ownership of the project changed and the project was acquired by the Cedarwood Group. They directed a restudy of the property and, as a result, the development proposal has changed significantly. The original proposal was for construction of a 526 unit PUD with 4 acres of potential commercial use. The overall development proposal is to construct approximately 300 multi-family townhouse and apartment units and about 95 single family lots. The current development covered under this TIR proposes to construct Division 1 (39 single family residential units) and Division 2 (49 single family residential units). Both divisions are located in separate pods uphill of valley floor. The storm system connects these two divisions and continues downhill through future Division 3 and connects to the existing system at the northwest corner of future Division 3 which crosses under 140"' Way W.E. to the water quality pond, which was constructed as part of the grading permit for the site. General Project Information: Project Statistics: Total Site Area: Sensitive Area & Buffers: Future ROW Acquisition: Detention/Water Quality Net Buildable Area: Current Proposal: 114.8 acres 62.1 acres 3.2 acres± 1.5 acres± 48.0 acres 88 Single Family Lots (in two clusters) Future Proposed Uses: 300 Multi-Family Units (in two clusters) Proposed Density: Net Current Zoning: Permitted Unit Count: Minimum Sensitive Areas Gross . . . . . 3.5 du/ac 8.3 du/ac ± A-GP Maximum . . . . 689 du 245 du± Wetlands -There are approximately 7.78 acres of Class 2 wetlands contained within the project. Tax Lot 13 contains a single 0.8 acre Class 2 wetland. Under the 1987 t940S7ql.445 Page 2 of 118 HGG Inc. October l. 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. delineation methods the wetland would be reduced in size to 0.6 acre. This wetland is proposed to be filled and removed as part of the development and as part of the widening of 140'h Way S.E. by King County. Mitigation for its removal will be located on another portion of the site. Steep Slopes -The site contains 41.2 acres of steep slopes. Minor grading of steep slopes is proposed. Approximately 1.0 acre of steep slope in Tax Lot 21 is proposed to be graded out and approximately 1.0 acres of remnant 40% slopes from the former gravel pit operation within the bench area of Tax Lot 25 will be graded out and removed. Steep slopes will be preserved in a sensitive area tracts. Creeks -Molasses Creek passes through this parcel. Molasses Creek is classified as a Class 2 stream. No grading of, or impact to, Molasses Creek is proposed. Molasses Creek will be preserved in a sensitive area tract. Other -Tax Lot 4 contains the 6.07 acre Elliot Farm Historic Preserve. The Historic Preserve will not be developed as part of this proposal. Clearing and Grading Drainage The developed portions of the site are located primarily in relatively flat areas in existing open meadows. The developed portions of the site will be mass graded. Fills of up to thirty feet are anticipated. Structural fills will probably be created by importing select material from an off site source. All trees located within the area to be developed will be removed. The existing Class 2 wetland in Tax Lot 13 will be filled. Approximately 1.0 acre of remnant 40% slopes from the former gravel pit operation within the bench area of Tax Lot 25 will be graded out and removed. A map showing the site in relation to regional drainage features is shown on the Vicinity Map (Figure 1 ). The site is located just south of the Cedar River, between Molasses Creek and Madson Creek. SR-169 forms the north boundary of the site. From a regional perspective the entire site is located within the Lower Cedar Drainage Basin and drains to the Cedar River. From a local perspective the site is divided into three sub- basins: 1. Molasses Creek Sub-Basin, 2. Madson Creek Sub-Basin and 3. Direct drainage to the Cedar River. Sub-Basin boundaries are shown on the Conceptual Drainage Plan, Exhibit 1, at end of report. Madson Creek Sub-Basin Molasses Creek flows across the eastern edge of the site. About 28 acres of the site is located within the Molasses Creek Sub-Basin. All but 1.5 acres of this area Is proposed to remain undeveloped. Most of the area of the site within this sub-basin will be placed in a sensitive area tract. i'J40S7ql.445 Page 3 of 118 HGG Inc. October J, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. Molasses Creek Sub-Basin Molasses Creek flows across the western edge of the site. About 19 acres of the site is located within the Molasses Creek Sub-Basin. None of the developed portion of the site is located within the Molasses Creek Sub-Basin. Most of the area of the site within this sub-basin will be placed in a sensitive area tract. Cedar River Drainage Basin Most of the site, about 68 acres, drains directly to the Cedar River. This area is divided into two sub-basins, sub-basin "A" and sub-basin "B". The locations and boundaries of both sub-basins are shown on Exhibit 1, The Conceptual Drainage Plan. Sub-Basin "A" About 15 acres of the site, primarily from Tax Lot 25, is within sub-basin "A". Sub- Basin "A" is defined as the area which drains to the dual 24 inch culverts under SR-169 at the east boundary of the Cedarwood site. Runoff from this sub-basin eventually flows into a pond located on the Maplewood Golf Course and eventually into the Cedar River. Sub-Basin "B" The majority of the site, about 53 acres, is within sub-basin "B". Sub-Basin "B" is defined as the area which drains to the existing WSDOT road ditch along the north boundary of Cedarwood. Runoff from this sub-basin eventually flows into an existing WSDOT water quality pond which discharges directly into the Cedar River just south of the existing road bridge. The existing WSDOT outfall consists of 12 inch and 18 inch pipes. Conceptual Drainage Plan Runoff from all developed area on the site will be collected and directed to a single new water quality treatment pond to be located along the north boundary of Tax Lot 13. After water quality treatment, runoff from the site will be discharged directly to the Cedar River. The existing WSDOT outfall will be utilized for the site's discharge to the Cedar River. The size of the outfall will have to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from the site. Direct Discharge The Cedar River is designated as • A Receiving Water" by KCSWM (SWM Manual page 1.2.3-6). Therefore, direct discharge to the Cedar River is permissible. Diversions Two diversions, one major and one minor, are proposed. The major diversion is the diversion of about 1.5 acres from the Madson Creek sub-basin directly to the Cedar River. The proposed area to be diverted is located within Tax Lot 25 on a bench above Madson Creek. The area is physically separated from the Creek by a steep slope over 150 feet high. It would be environmentally dangerous, and costly, to attempt to detain and rJ4057ql.445 Page 4 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. discharge this area to the Creek. The area proposed to be diverted is a minuscule part of the Madson Creek Drainage Basin. The effect of this diversion will be unnoticeable. The potential for environmental damage would be high if this diversion were denied. The minor diversion is the diversion of about 9 acres from Sub-Basin "A" (Cedar River) into Sub-Basin "B" (Cedar River). The proposed area to be diverted is located on a bench above the valley floor. The area is physically separated from the valley floor by a steep slope over 200 feet high. Only the developed area will be diverted. The undeveloped/natural area of the site within Sub-Basin "A" will continue to drain as it currently does. It would be environmentally dangerous, and costly, to attempt to detain and discharge this area to the valley floor at its natural location. The effect of this diversion will probably be unnoticeable. There are no defined surface drainage courses from the site to the valley floor. The potential for environmental damage would be high if this diversion were denied. Conveyance All runoff generated on developed areas of the site will be conveyed, in closed pipe systems, to the new water quality pond in Tax Lot 13. The conveyance systems will be designed in conformance with current King County criteria. Where conveyance systems traverse steep slopes, or where failure of conveyance systems has the potential to overflow onto steep slopes, the conveyance system will be designed to accommodate the 100-year storm with an appropriate factor of safety. Water Quality Treatment All runoff from developed portions of the site will be treated prior to discharge to the Cedar River. Water quality treatment will be in accordance with the current SWM Manual. Water quality treatment will occur in a new facility to be located on Tax Lot 13. 100-year Floodplain No portion of the site is within the 100-year floodplain. This was verified in the field by survey, using the flood elevations determined and published by FEMA. r94057q!.445 Page5 of 118 HGG Inc. October l, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. I Wetl~ds Q rf? ~G.Goldsmhh \O'} &~es.Inc. ii, .l r =~ f/' \ ' f±:-4 w- -OpenW-· ------- ... ·-· 17 • . . SR 169 1 ··~ T'\ !,>-. l"'"-·~ !;....•~·:::.-~/;[·J'~ MADSON '· CREEK Ouwamish 4 Figure 1 ... , . ...J L ' 1 , :_x . . 1 . ' . ' Section II Preliminary Conditions Summary - ' . . n r . . II. Preliminary Conditions Summary 1. Compliance with all platting provisions of Tttle 19 of the King County Code. Not Applicable. 2. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion NO. 5952. Not Applicable 3. The plat shall meet the minimum density of the R-6 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone classffication or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary plat. whichever is larger. Minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. Not Applicable 4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department. Final Plat issue. 5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance wrth the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended. 140'• Way S.E. will be upgraded as per Condition of Approval #8.e. herein. Upgrade will be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards. 6. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. If all lots are 35,000 square feet in size or more, or if the subdivision is outside an Urban Growth Area and is developed at a densrty no greater than one residential building lot per five (5) acres, or a cluster development outside an Urban Growth Area with lots under 35,000 square feet in size and offsetting permanent open space and is developed at a density no greater than one residential building lot per five (5) acre§, the subdivision is exempt per KCC 17.08.030. Approval of fire hydrant locations and pettormance will be secured from the King County Fire Protection Engineer. 7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04 and the storm drainage requirements and guidelines as established by the Surface Water Management Division. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. The following condrtions represent portions of the Code and requirements and shall apply to all plats. a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual and updates which were adopted by Public Rule effective January 1, 1995. ODES approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. Road and Storm Improvement Plans comply with 1990 King County Sut1ace Water Design Manual and updates except as modified by requirements of the Conditions of Approval. b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by ODES Engineering Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans. ,94057ql.445 Page 8 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. All standard plan notes have been added to the Design Drawings c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: "All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios, and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file wtth DOES and/or the Department of Public Works. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permtt and shall comply wtth plans on file." Not Applicable 8. The following conditions specify the required road improvements to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards: a. Division 1: 145th Place SE, 146th Place SE, 157th Place SE, the easterly loop road off 14oth Way SE shall be constructed to the urban subaccess road standards. Division 1 roads (14$• Place S.E., 146• Place S.E. and 157' Place S.E.) have been designed to urban subaccess road standards and per any variances attached pertaining to that road. b. Division 2: 154th Street SE, 154 Place SE, the center of the loop road, and the cul-de-sac 154th Place SE shall be improved to urban subaccess standards. Division 2 roads (154• Street S.E. and 154' Place S. E.) have been designed to urban subaccess road standards except for the entrance portion of 154• Street S.E., from 140'• Way S.E. to the intersection of 154" Place S.E., which was designed to urban subcollector standards. The entrance road to this loop, 154th St. SE from 140th Way SE to the beginning of the loop shall be improved to the urban subcollector standard. C. Modifications to the above condttions may be considered by King County pursuant to the variance procedures in KCRS 1.08. Variances have been secured for portions of above meationed roads. d. Division 1: Install an interim signal and southbound left tum lane at the proposed entrance to Division 1, on 14oth Way SE at SE 158th Street/Access Road AH Division 1 is occupied prior to King County's 14oth Way SE CIP road widening project. The developer must submtt signal. channelization and illumination plans to the Traffic Engineering Section for review and approval, prior to engineering plan approval. Interim signalization and channelization plans for Division 1 entrance are included as attachments to the design plan set for review. e. Division 2: Construct a southbound left turn lane and merge-refuge at the proposed entrance to Division 2 if Division 2 is occupied prior to King County's 14oth Way SE CIP road widening project. The developer must submtt channelization and illumination plans to the Traffic Engineering Section for review and approval prior to final engineering plan approval. 14(1• Way road widening and channelization plans for Division 2 entrance consistent with this requirement are included as attachments to the design plan set for review. '94057ql.445 Page 9 of ll8 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 9. Delineate the 100-year floodplain on Tracts B, C, and D wetlands on the engineering plans and on the face of the final plat per Special Requirement #9 of the 1990 Suriace Water Design Manual. Delineation of the 100-year flood plain on Tracts B, C and D wetlands will be shown on the future Division 3 and Division 4 design drawings since this condition applies to their development and their exact design parameters have not yet been determined. 10. The applicant applied for and was granted a stormwater diversion variance (ODES File No. L95V0132). All conditions of approval for this variance shall be met at engineering plan submittal. All conditions of the Stormwater Diversion Variance have been included on the design drawings. 11. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording, unless otherwise approved by King County. Not Applicable 12. The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either: (1) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid"; if the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the date of building permit application. Owner will comply at appropriate time. 13. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 140th Way SE from those lots which abut it. There is no access from any lot in this project directly onto 140'h Way S.E. 14. The planter islands (ff any) within the cuH.ie-sacs shall be maintained by the abutting lot owners or Homeowners Association. This shall be stated on the face of the final plat. No planter islands are planned within the cul-de-sacs. 15. Preliminary plat review has identttied the following specttic requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21 A.24 shall also be addressed by the applicant. a. Class 2 wetlands shall have an average buffer width of 50 feet measured from the wetland edge. Buffer averaging may be employed so long as the total amount of the buffer area on site is not reduced and better resource protection is achieved. Buffer averaging was accomplished by the Grading Permit. No additional modifications are proposed by this application. b. Madsen Creek, a Class 2 stream with salmonids, shall have a 100-foot buffer measured from the ordinary high water mark. Complied with. C. The wetlands, streams, steep slopes and their respective buffers shall be placed in Sensitive Area Tract(s) (SAT). Separate tracts have been established for all wetlands, streams and steep slopes. r94057ql.445 Page JO of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. d. A minimum building setback line of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the SAT(s). A minimum of 15 feet BSBL has been established from the edges of all SA T's. e. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as outlined in KCC 21 A.24. Prior to final approval, the applicant shall provide notice on title as outlined in KCC 21 A.24.170. Permanent survey marking, and signs as specttied in KCC 21 A.24.160 shall also be addressed prior to commencing construction activities on the site. Permanent survey markers and signs will be installed prior to construction except in those areas where work approved in the SA T's will be accomplished, in which case markers, etc. will be placed after construction is completed. f. The applicant shall submit a final buffer enhancement plan for review and approval by DOES, prior to engineering plan approval. This plan must include planting details, notes, outline the species, size, condition and number of each species to be planted. Buffer enhancement plan will be submitted for approval prior to engineering plan approval. g. Prior to engineering plan approval, the applicant must post a performance bond to insure that the proposed buffer enhancement work is completed. Once the plan has been implemented, the applicant may replace that bond with a Maintenance bond, which will be held for a period of three years to insure that the revegetation efforts are successful and meet the performance standards outlined in the original approved plan. The Maintenance bond may be released by King County at the end of the period tt the standards of success have been met. Bonds will be paid, as required, prior to Engineering plan approval. h. The applicant will be required to mcnttor the enhanced buffer area for a period of three years following installation and submit monitoring reports to ODES following the first and third years. Noted. i. A minimum buffer of 15 feet shall be established along the top of the steep slopes in Division 1. The minimum steep slope buffer in Division 2 shall be 1 o feet. The applicant's geotechnlcal engineer shall review each proposed lot where uncompacted fill may be present and recommend tt and how much the minimum buffer wjdth should be increased. This report shall be submitted to DOES for review and approval, prior to engineering plan approval. A 15-foot buffer has been established along the top of the steep slope within Division 1 and a 1 a-foot buffer within Division 2. j. A buffer with a minimum width of 1 O feet shall be established adjacent to the toe of all steep slopes, including cut slopes, along the south and southwest sides of Divisions 1 and 2. A 10-foot buffer area has been established where required at the toe of all steep slopes along the south and southwest sides of Divisions 1 and 2. k. A building setback line shall be established a minimum distance of 50 feet from the top of the steep slope in Division 1. The buffer may be included within this 50 foot setback area. All other steep slope setback lines on the site will be located at least 15 feet from the buffers. Building Setback Lines, as required, are reflected on the design drawings. ,94057ql.445 Page II of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. I. All sensitive area steep slope buffers which have been or will be disturbed by development work associated with this project shall be revegetated. The applicant shall prepare a vegetation plan based on the ODES Basic Restoration & Enhancement Guidelines. This plan must be reviewed and approved by ODES prior to engineering plan approval. Buffer areas disturbed by construction will be revegetated and a plan will be submitted tor approval prior to Engineering plan approval. 16. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: All sensitive area tracts, including sensitive areas and their buffers ("Tracts"), identified on the recorded plat shall be held in an undivided interest by each owner of a building lot within the subdivision with this ownership interest passing with the ownership of the lot, or shall be held by an incorporated homeowners' association or other legal entity which assures the ownership, maintenance, and protection of the Tract(s). All such Tracts shall be subject to the following restrictive covenant, which is a running covenant, burdening and beneffting each lot within the subdivision, the parties, their successors, and assigns. The covenant imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of each lot the obligation to leave the Tract(s) undisturbed including, but not limited to, all trees and other vegetation unless otherwise allowed by law and approved in writing by the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or Its successor agency. This obligation shall be enforceable by the individual lot owners, the homeowners' association or other legal entity having ownership interest, or by King County as a condition of subdivision or other permit approval. Violations of this covenant shall constitute a sensitive areas violation and may subject the owner to imposition of sensitive areas penalties (or civil penalties) as outlined in King County Code Tltle 23. This covenant benefits and protects the public health, safety, and welfare by maintaining the natural environment and character of the sensitive area through the preservation of native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stabilfty and protection of plant and animal habitat. The common boundary between the Tract(s) and the area of development activity shall be marked to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on the lot adjacent to the sensitive area Tract(s). The required marking shall remain in place until all development proposal activities adjacent to the sensitive area Tract(s) are completed. - These notes appear on Final Engineering Plans and will be shown on Final Plat. 17. Sultable recreation space and improvements shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 & KCC 21A.14.19 and the conceptual plans received June 5, 1996. A recreation space plan shall be reviewed and approved by ODES and the King County Parks Division prior to engineering plan approval. Recreation Space Tracts are shown on the Engineering Plans. A separate recreation plan will be submitted by others for approval prior to Engineering Plan approval. 18. A homeowner's association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of DOES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation space and/or open space area(s)/SAT(s). Will be addressed on Final Plat. 19. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements of this development as mitigation. The applicants shall demonstrate compliance wfth these items prior to final approval. rJ4057ql.445 Page 12 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 1. The following conditions outline the design of the wetpond required for this proposal (KCC 21 A.24; KCC 9.04): a. The wetpond shall have a permanent pool volume equal to 3.0 times the volume of runoff (Vr) from the mean annual storm (pond volume=3.0 Vr). The mean annual storm for the site is equal to 0.47 inches. Runoff shall be estimated using a runoff coefficient of 0.9 for impervious area. 0.25 for till soil covered with grass, 0.1 for till soil covered with forest, and 0.01 for outwash soil covered with grass and forest. This condition was addressed and satisfied in the Grading Permit. b. The pond shall consist of two cells separated by a berm with the first cell containing between 25 and 35 percent of the total wetpool volume. Inlets and outlets shall be placed to maximize travel time through the facility. This condition was addressed and satisfied in the Grading Permit. C. The depth of the wetpool shall not exceed 8 feet. Pool depths less than 3 feet require emergent wetland vegetation plantings and pool depths greater than 6 feet require some form of circulation (aeration). This condition was addressed and satisfied in the Grading Permit. 2. A carwash pad connected to the sanitary sewer is required for the condominium portion of this project. The car wash area shall be in conformance with Activtty Sheet A-13 (vehicle washing) and BMP Information Sheet #2 (discharge to sanitary sewer system) of King County Stormwater Pollution Control Manual (July 1995). Will be complied with during design of Division 3 (condominium portion of the project). 3. The following conditions add drainage requirements to this development (KCC 21A.24; KCC 9.04): a. The new pipeline conveying drainage from the top of this development to the valley floor shall be designed to convey the 100-year, 24-hour design storm. Storm conveyance system has been designed to convey the 100-year. 24-hour design storm. b. Roof downspout infiHration shall be maximized on this development to the fullest extent feasible. A qualHied soils engineer, geotechnical engineer, or geologist shall certHy that the project design maximizes the use of roof downspout infiltration. Roof downspout dispersion systems or perforated stubout connections shall be required for all single family lots for management for roof runoff. Dispersion systems shall be required where the overflow can travel over at least 25 feet of vegetated area before leaving the property and does not pose a signHicant flooding or erosion problem. Roof downspouts were connected into the closed conveyance system as per recommendation of the soils engineer in a Memo (dated July 3, 1996) and in the geotechnical engineering report (dated September 21, 1995). '940S7ql.445 Pag• 13 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 4. The 31 o feet of sight distance shown on the revised site plan received by LUSD on 3/22/96 for the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead, shall be identified on the final approved Conditional Use Permit site plan and engineering plans. This view corridor area (northeast of the 31 O foot sightline) shall be restricted in use so that construction, fill or grading will not interrupt the line of sight between the centerline of Maple Valley Highway and the base elevation of the farmhouse (except for the berm & fencing specttied at the end of this condition). Areas B & C (shown-on attachment 5, page 2 of 4, of DDES's Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner dated 6/6/96) can be fenced or gated (emergency access road) with non-view restricting material, and may also be used as outdoor recreation yard area with appropriately scaled outdoor equipment and landscaping per the review and approval by ODES (KCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1 &2). The proposed berm and fencing shown on the 3122196 revised site plan shall be configured (as amended on attachment 5) in such a way that the entire house is visible from the groundline up with no obstruction from point C (105 feet east of the 310 foot sight distance line); that only 5.2 feet are obstructed above grade at point B (57 feet east of the 310 foot sight distance line, essentially the foundation); and that only six feet are obstructed at point A (the most westerly point along the 31 o foot sight distance corridor). To be addressed during Division 3 Design drawing submittals. 5. The 35-foot setback area shown on the 3/22196 revised site plan that is between the east end of building complex "B" and the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead shall be landscaped to provide a full screen (no less than a "Type I" landscape screen per KCC 21A.16.040) that functions as much as possible as a visual ban-ier (a narrow foot path is allowable within this landscaping tt access is desired to the rear yard area). The landscaping requirements for this area shall be reviewed and approved by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. That area fronting SR-169, east of the project access, is subject to DDES's review and approval with review comments provided by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. (KCCP/CR-202; Soos Creek CP/CR-1 and 2). When a threshold determination is appealed, the Hearing Examiner's review has two parts, an inquiry into the adequacy of the information used to make the determination and then an evaluation of the determination Itself. Under WAC 197-11-335, the standard for adequacy of information is set at that which is "reasonable sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal", any inadequacy may be remedied under the authority of KCC 20.24.080, which allows the Examiner to examine all available information. The evaluation of the decision is controlled by RCW 43~21 C.090, which decrees that the decision of the governmental agency on the signtticance (OS) or non-signtticance (DNS) of a proposal shall be accorded substantial weight. This standard places on those contesting the agency decision the burden on showing that the decision was not supported by the evidence on which it was based. WAC 197-11-330 lists factors that may be considered as part of a decision on the signtticance of a proposal's impacts. Generally, a OS is made only when, based upon the information before it, the agency concludes that there are probable signtticant adverse impacts associated with a proposal and there are no additional conditions known to the agency at the time of the determination, that would mitigate those impacts. Additionally, when the agency's decision imposes conditions (MONS), a further level of inquiry may be made into the adequacy of those conditions. To be adequate, the conditions must mitigate signtticant adverse impacts of the proposal that have been specifically identttied, must be based on policies identified by KCC 20.44.080, the Examiner may impose additional conditions, modHications, or restrictions as appear necessary to make the application or appeal compatible with the environment or in conformance with existing laws, plans, policies, etc. Under WAC 197-11-660, the policies used as substantive SEPA authority for an M DNS must have been in effect at the time the threshold determination was issued. ,<J4057ql.445 Page 14 of 118 HGG Inc. October 1, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. To be addressed during Division 3 Design drawing submittals. 20. The subdivision shall comply with the requirements of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. The subdivision shall comply with the requirements of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 21. For a period of five years from the date of approval, Tract N shall be designated as a tract for future development by Fire District #40. In the event this tract is not purchased by Fire District #40, Tract N will revert to permanent open space. Not Applicable 22. The PUD application (S91 U0002) shall be withdrawn prior to engineering plan submittal. The PUD Application (S91 U0002) has been withdrawn. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve Permit L95SH146 subject to the following conditions: 1. Nothing in this permit shall be construed as excusing the applicant from compliance with any federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project other than the permit requirements of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. Noted 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any conditions thereof. Noted 3. Construction pursuant to this permit may not begin or be authorized until twenty-one (21) days from the date of filing the final order of King County with the Department of Ecology or the Attorney General; or until all review proceedings initiated within twenty-one (21) days from the date of such filing have been terminated. Noted .. 4. TIME REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. The following requirements shall apply to all permits. a. Substantial progress toward completion of a permitted activity shall be undertaken within two years after the approval of the permit by the Department of Development and Environmental Services (ODES). Substantial progress shall include all of the following, where applicable: The making of contracts; signing of notice to proceed; completion of grading and excavation; and laying of major utilities; or, where no construction is involved, commencement of the activities. DOES may, at the request of the applicant, authorize a single extension for up to one year PROVIDED such request is made in writing at least 90 days prior to the expiration date. Noted b. Permit authorization shall terminate within five years after approval of the permit by DOES, except as modHied by 4(a) above, in which case permit authorization may encompass up to a total of six years. Noted ,940S7ql.44S Page 15 of ll8 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. C. The permit time period shall not include the time during which an activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of reasonably related administrative appeals or litigation. Noted d. DOES may issue permrts with a fixed termination date for less than five years. Noted e. When permrt approval is based on conditions, such conditions shall be satisfied prior to occupancy or use of a structure, or prior to commencement of a nonstructural activrty, unless otherwise stated in these condrtions. Noted 5. Development shall occur in accordance with the shoreline plans received October 3, 1995, known as Exhibrt D-6 in the Shoreline tile, EXCEPT as may be modified by condrtions of approval. Minor changes to this plan may be considered. Any subsequent changes to the approved shoreline plans may require the applicant to obtain a new Shoreline permit, or a revision to this Shoreline permit pursuant to WAC 173-14-064. Design plans are in accordance with Shoreline Plans (Exhibit D-6). 6. Copies of other approved state and federal permits from the Department of Fish and Wildlife (HPA), Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Natural Resources (Aquatic Lands), Department of Ecology (Water Quality Standards Modification), and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), if required, shall be submitted to LUSD -Shorelines prior to construction. All required permits will be submitted as necessal}'. 7. The applicant shall obtain all approval and/or permits from the Washing1on State Department of Transportation for construction of the conveyance and outfall prior to issuance of the grading permit. In the event necessary approvals and/or permits from WSDOT cannot be obtained and an alternative location is proposed for the outfall to the Cedar River, the applicant shall submit a new shoreline substantial development permit for review and approval. Outfall Permit from WSDOT secured during the Grading Permit process. 8. Excavations for the drain line installation shall include precautions to prevent the migration of fine-grain sediments, disturbed by the excavation, onto the adjacent bank areas. Any excavation on bank areas shall be backfilled promptly using material of similar composition. Grading Permit issue. 9. A detailed revegetation plan shall be submitted by the applicant for review and approval by LUSD prior to issuance of the grading permit. The plan shall include the following Items: a. A revegetatlon survey shall be pertormed by a qualttied biologist or licensed Landscape Archrtect. Grading Permit issue. b. Predominantly native species shall be used for revegetation within the stream buffer. Grading Permit issue. 10. A three-year maintenance bond shall be established as part of the grading permit application to ensure the successful establishment of vegetation and shall be released only upon demonstration to LUSD -Shorelines that said vegetation has been established. ,94057ql.445 Page 16 of 118 HOG Inc. October l, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. Grading Permit issue. 11 . Shoreline conditions shall be shown on the final road and drainage plans prior to LUSD approval. Shoreline Conditions added to drawings on Sheet 1 of 11. 12. A copy of the approved Shoreline plans and any necessary revisions shall be kept on-site at all times during construction. Grading Permit issue. 13. No shoreline development is authorized within the 100-year floodplain or below the OHWM, other than the installation of erosion protection methods, storm drainage pipe, and revegetation as shown on approved plans. Grading Permit issue. 14. A copy of the approved HPA, if required, shall be submitted to LUSD -shorelines prior to approval of engineering plan approval or construction of the drainage outfall. Grading Permit issue. 15. Work within Shorelines jurisdiction shall be done in a manner to minimize disturbance. Extreme care shall be taken during construction to eliminate dispersal of any debris in the river, or unnecessary site disturbance or vegetation removal. Grading Permit issue. 16. During construction, the applicant must use materials and construction methods which prevent toxic materials, petrochemicals, and other pollutants from entering the surface water of the Cedar River. This will be accomplished during all phases of the project. 17. The applicant shall implement preventive measures for protecting existing storm drainage systems, ditches, and all other existing utilities and shall be responsible for them during construction activities. TESC measures will be implemented for the duration of the project which include protecting existing drainage facilities from sediment laden runoff from entering the drainage system. 18. A notice of completion of the drain line/outfall installation shall be submitted to LUSD - Shorelines by the developer within ten (10) calendar days of completion. Said notice shall be accompanied by at least four (4) different photographs of the finished work taken from different directions. Grading Permit issue. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Development shall be in conformance with the site plan dated April 19, 1996. Development will be in conformance with the site plan dated April 19, 1996. 2. A building permit shall be issued within three years of the transmittal date of this report. Otherwise, this action shall become null and void. r94057ql.445 Page 17 of 118 HGG Inc. Octobe, 1, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. Noted 3. The development of this project is subject to all rules, regulations, policies, and codes which are not specttically modttied by this approval. Noted 4. This proposal is subject to drainage review at the time of building permit review to assure compliance with the standards and the MONS conditions. Noted 5. The applicant shall obtain necessary permits and/or approvals for access onto SR-169/Maple Valley-Black Diamond Highway prior to building plan approval. This permit will be secured during Division 3 design drawings. 6. The access to the west end of the site (SE 151st Place) shall be right-in/right-out if the required entering sight distance can be obtained, unless otherwise approved by DOES and the King County Department of Transportation, Traffic Engineering Section. If the required entering sight distance cannot be achieved, the access shall be right-in only, unless otherwise approved by the above departments. This permit will be secured during Division 3 and 4 design drawings. 7. Affordable Housing: The applicant shall obtain final approval and any necessary agreements from King County which specify the buyer eligibility and housing price requirements. prior to building permit submittal. A minimum of one affordable unit to be provided. Noted 8. Delineate the 100-year floodplain of the Tract B wetland on the engineering and the final CUP/building permit per Special Requirement #9 of the 1990 Surface Water Design Manual. The 100-year flood plain will be delineated and shown on the Division 3 design drawings when preliminary designs have been approved. 10. The CUP shall comply with the requirements of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Noted 11. Plat must be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. Noted 12. SEPAMDNS: the following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements of this development as mitigation. The applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval 1. The following conditions outline the design of the wetpond required for this proposal (KCC 21A.24; KCC 9.04): a. The wetpond shall have a permanent pool volume equal to 3.0 times the volume of runoff (Vr) from the mean annual storm (pond volume=3.0 Vr). The mean annual storm for the site is equal to 0.47 inches. Runoff shall be estimated using a runoff coefficient of 0.9 for impervious are, 0.25 for till soil covered with grass, 0.1 for till soil covered with forest, and 0.01 for outwash soil covered with grass and forest. Accomplished during Grading Permit. ,94057ql.445 Page 18 of ll8 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. b. The pond shall consist of two cells separated by a berm with the first cell containing between 25 and 35 percent of the total wetpool volume. Inlets and outlets shall be placed to maximize travel time through the facility. Accomplished during Grading Pennit. C. The depth of the wetpool shall not exceed 8 feet. Pool depths less than 3 feet require emergent wetland vegetation plantings and pool depths greater than 6 feet require some form of circulation (aeration). Accomplished during Grading Pennit. 2. A carwash pad connected to the sanitary sewer is required for the condominium portion of this project. The car wash area shall be in conformance with Activity Sheet A-13 (vehicle washing) and BMP Information Sheet #2 (discharge to sanitary sewer system) of King County Storrnwater Pollution Control Manual (July 1995). Condition will be addressed during Division 3 design. 3. The following conditions add drainage requirements to this development (KCC 21 A.24; KCC 9.04): a. The new pipeline conveying drainage from the top of this development to the valley floor shall be designed to convey the 1 DO-year, 24-hour design storm. Conveyance system has been sized to convey the 100-year, 24-hour design storm. b. Roof downspout infiltration shall be maximized on this development to the fullest extent feasible. A qualified soils engineer. geotechnical engineer, or geologist shall certtty that the project design maximizes the use of roof downspout infiHration. Roof downspout dispersion systems or perforated stubout connections shall be required for all single family lots for management for roof runoff. Dispersion systems shall be required where the overflow can travel over at least 25 feet of vegetated area before leaving the property and does not pose a signHicant flooding or erosion problem. Roof downspouts were connected into the closed conveyance system as per recommendation of the soils engineer in a Memo (dated July 3, 1996) and in the geotechnica/ engineering report (dated September 21, 1995). 4. The 31 O feet of sight distance shown on the revised site plan received by LUSD on 3/22/96 for the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead, shall be identttied on the final approved Conditional Use Permit site plan and engineering plans. This view corridor area (northeast of the 310 foot sightline) shall be restricted in use so that construction, fill or grading will not interrupt the line of sight between the centerline of Maple Valley Highway and the base elevation of the farmhouse (except for the berm & fencing specified at the end of this condition). Areas B & C (shown on attachment 5, page 2 of 4, of DDES's Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner dated 6/6/96) can be fenced or gated (emergency access road) with non-view restricting material, and may also be used as outdoor recreation yard area with appropriately scaled outdoor equipment and landscaping per the review and approval by DOES (KCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1&2). The proposed berm and fencing shown on the 3/22/96 revised site plan shall be configured (as amended on attachment 5) in such a way that the entire house is visible from the groundline up with no obstruction from point C (105 feet east of the 31 O foot sight distance line); that only 5.2 feet are obstructed above grade at point B (57 feet east of the 310 foot sight distance line, essentially the foundation); and that only six feet are obstructed at point A (the most westerly point along the 31 o foot sight distance corridor). To be addressed during Division 3 design drawing submittals. ,94057ql.445 Page 19 of 118 HGG (nc. October 1. 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 5. The 35-foot setback area shown on the 3/22/96 revised site plan that is between the east end of building complex "B" and the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead shall be landscaped to provide a full screen (no less than a "Type I" landscape screen per KCC 21 A.16.040) that functions as much as possible as a visual barrier (a narrow foot path is allowable within this landscaping if access is desired to the rear yard area). The landscaping requirements for this area shall be reviewed and approved by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. That area fronting SR-169, east of the project access, is subject to DDES's review and approval with review comments provided by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. (KCCP/CR-202; Soos Creek CP/CR-1 and 2). When a threshold determination is appealed, the Hearing Examiner's review has two parts, an inquiry into the adequacy of the information used to make the determination and then an evaluation of the determination itsett. Under WAC 197-11-335, the standard for adequacy of information is set at that which is "reasonable sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal", any inadequacy may be remedied under the authority of KCC 20.24.080, which allows the Examiner to examine all available information. The evaluation of the decision is controlled by RCW 43.21 C.090, which decrees that the decision of the governmental agency on the significance (OS) or non-significance (DNS) of a proposal shall be accorded substantial weight. This standard places on those contesting the agency decision the burden on showing that the decision was not supported by the evidence on which It was based. WAC 197-11-330 lists factors that may be considered as part of a decision on the signHicance of a proposal's impacts. Generally, a OS is made only when, based upon the information before It, the agency concludes that there are probable significant adverse impacts associated with a proposal and there are no additional conditions known to the agency at the time of the determination, that would mitigate those impacts. Additionally, when the agency's decision imposes conditions (MONS), a further level of inquiry may be made into the adequacy of those conditions. To be adequate, the conditions must mitigate signtticant adverse impacts of the proposal that have been specifically identttied, must be based on policies identified by KCC 20.44.080, the Examiner may impose additional conditions, modttications, or restrictions as appear necessary to make the application or appeal compatible with the environment or in conformance with existing laws, plans, policies, etc. Under WAC 197-11-660, the policies used as substantive SEPA authority for an MONS must have been in effect at the time the threshold determination was issued. To be addressed during Division 3 design drawing subriiittals. 13. Preliminary plat review has identttied the following specHic requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21 A.24 shall also be addressed by the applicant. a. Class 2 wetlands shall have an average buffer width of 50 feet measured from the wetland edge. Buffer averaging may be employed so long as the total amount of the buffer area on site is not reduced and better resource protection is achieved. Buffer averaging was accomplished by the Grading Permit. No additional modifications are proposed by this application. b. Madsen Creek, a Class 2 stream with salmonids, shall have a 100-foot buffer measured from the ordinary high water mark. Complied with. C. The wetlands, streams, steep slopes and their respective buffers shall be placed in Sensitive Area Tract(s) (SAT). '94057ql.445 Page 20 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. Separate tracts have been established for all wetlands, streams and steep slopes. d. A minimum building setback line of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the SAT(s). A minimum of 15 feet BSBL has been established from the edges of all SAT's. e. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as outlined in KCC 21A.24. Prior to final approval, the applicant shall provide notice on title as outlined in KCC 21 A.24.170. Permanent survey marking, and signs as specified in KCC 21 A.24.160 shall also be addressed prior to commencing construction activtties on the stte. Permanent suNey markers and signs will be installed prior to construction except in those areas where work approved in the SA T's will be accomplished, in which case markers, etc. will be placed after construction is completed. f. The applicant shall submit a final buffer enhancement plan for review and approval by DDES, prior to engineering plan approval. This plan must include planting details, notes, outline the species, size, condition and number of each species to be planted. Buffer enhancement plan will be submitted for approval prior to engineering plan approval. g. Prior to engineering plan approval, the applicant must post a performance bond to insure that the proposed buffer enhancement work is completed. Once the plan has been implemented, the applicant may replace that bond wtth a Maintenance bond, which will be held for a period of three years to insure that the revegetation efforts are successful and meet the performance standards outlined in the original approved plan. The Maintenance bond may be released by King County at the end of the period if the standards of success have been met. Bonds will be paid, as required, prior to Engineering plan approval. h. The applicant will be required to monttor the enhanced buffer area for a peliod of three years following installation and submit monitoring reports to DOES following the first and third years. Noted. i. A minimum buffer of 15 feet shall be established along the top of the steep slopes in Division 1. The minimum steep slope buffer in Division 2 shall be 1 O feet. The applicant's geotechnical engineer shall review each proposed lot where uncompacted fill may be present and recommend if and how much the minimum buffer width should be increased. This report shall be submitted to ODES for review and approval, prior to engineering plan approval. A 15-foot buffer has been established along the top of the steep slope within Division 1 and a 1 a-toot buffer within Division 2. j. A buffer with a minimum width of 1 o feet shall be established adjacent to the toe of all steep slopes, including cut slopes, along the south and southwest sides of Divisions 1 and 2. A 10-foot buffer area has been established where required at the toe of all steep slopes along the south and southwest sides of Divisions 1 and 2. k. A building setback line shall be established a minimum distance of 50 tee! from the top of the steep slope in Division 1. The buffer may be included within this 50 foot setback area. All other steep slope setback lines on the site will be located at least 15 feet from the buffers. Building Setback Lines, as required, are reflected on the design drawings. '94057ql.445 Page 21 of 118 HGG lno. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. I. All sensitive area steep slope buffers which have been or will be disturbed by development work associated with this project shall be revegetated. The applicant shall prepare a vegetation plan based on the DDES Basic Restoration & Enhancement Guidelines. This plan must be reviewed and approved by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. Buffer areas disturbed by construction will be revegetated and a plan will be submitted tor approval prior to Engineering plan approval. 14. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: All sensitive area tracts, including sensitive areas and their buffers ("Tracts"), identttied on the recorded plat shall be held in an undivided interest by each owner of a building lot within the subdivision with this ownership interest passing with the ownership of the lot. or shall be held by an incorporated homeowners· association or other legal entity which assures the ownership. maintenance, and protection of the Tract(s). All such Tracts shall be subject to the following restrictive covenant, which is a running covenant, burdening and beneftting each lot within the subdivision, the parties, their successors. and assigns. The covenant imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of each lot the obligation to leave the Tract(s) undisturbed including, but not limited to, all trees and other vegetation unless otherwise allowed by law and approved in writing by the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency. This obligation shall be enforceable by the individual lot owners, the homeowners' association or other legal entity having ownership interest, or by King County as a condition of subdivision or other permit approval. Violations of this covenant shall constitute a sensitive areas violation and may subject the owner to imposition of sensitive areas penalties (or civil penalties) as outlined in King County Code Title 23. This covenant benefits and protects the public health, safety, and weHare by maintaining the natural environment and character of the sensitive area through the preservation of native vegetation for the control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability and protection of plant and animal habitat. The common boundary between the Tract(s) and the area of development activity shall be marked to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on the lot adjacent to the sensitive area Tract(s). The required marking shall remain in place until all development proposal activities adjacent to the sensitive area Tract(s) are completed. .. These notes appear on Anal Engineering Plans and will be shown on Final Plat. 15. Suitable recreation space and improvements shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 & KCC 21A.14.19 and the conceptual plans received June 5, 1996. A recreation space plan shall be reviewed and approved by DDES and the King County Parks Division prior to engineering plan approval. Recreation Space Tracts are shown on the Engineering Plans. A separate recreation plan will be submitted by others for approval prior to Engineering Plan approval. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The subdivision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relating to grading on private property. Covered by Grading Permit. 2. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division. '94057ql.445 Page 22 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. Noted 3. Preliminary approval of this application does not limlt the applicant's responsibility to obtain any required permit or license from the state or other regulatory body. This may include obtaining a forest practice permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for tree removal. Accomplished during Grading Permit. r)4057ql.445 Page 23 of 118 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. ® KJngCounty Department of De.·elopment WITHDRAW /REISSUANCE and £mironmental Senices 3600 • 1JG1h Place Souchea,t Bcll"'TJc. tt~hin'l:ton 980Q6.Ii00 l\1ITIGATED DETERMINATION Of NONSIGNIFICANCE for Date of Issuance: Project: Location: King County Permits: SEP A Contact: Permit Contact: Proponent: Zoning: . Community Plan: Drainare Subbasin: Section/l'ownship/Range: 'l'.HE PLAT OF CEDARWOOD File Number L91P0025 ·April23, 1996· Residential development of,:J.5 acres proposing to create 242 residential units which consists of96 single-family detached residential lots and 146 multi-family (condominiums) townhouse, carriage & flat construction units. The single-family detached lots would have lot sizes ranging from 5500 to 7500 square feet within Divisions I & II of the proposed plat. The multi-family site is within Division m of the proposed plat and it would be processed concurrently with the pro_Posed plat through a Conditional Use Permit. The proposal also mcludes a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the discharge of treated site drainage into a redesigneo/reconstructed existing Washington State Department of Transportation (WSD01J outfall to the Cedar River. · The siie is ienerally located on the south side of SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway) between 140th Way SE and 150th Avenue SE (if extended). The associated Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is west of140th Way SE. on the south side ofMaple Valley Highway at the existing WSDOT drainage outlet to the Cedar River. Plat/S9IP0025, Conditional Use Pcrmit/L95AC01 l & Shoreline Substantial Development Pennit1L95SHI46 . Rich Hudson, Enviromnental Planner, 296-7157 Trish Clements Phone: 462-1080 Hugh Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 1215 114th Avenue Southeast, Bellevue, WA 98004 . Cedarwood Group Contact: Rick Lennon R-6-P (6 units per acre with site development restrictions) Soos Creek . Lower Cedar River NW/SW 22-23-05 Issuance of this threshold determination does not constitute approval of the permit. This proposal will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County codes which regulate development Cedarv;ood 4/23/96 Page2 activities, including the Uniform Fire and Building Codes, Road Standards, Surface Water Design Manual, Sensitive Areas Ordinance and the Shoreline Master Plan. Threshold Determination The respollSlole official finds that the above descnoed proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment, provided the mitigation measures listed below are applied as conditions of permit issuance. This finding is made pursuant to RCW 43.21C, KCC 20.44 and WAC 197-11 after reviewing the environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency and considering mitigation measures which the agency or the applicant will implement as part of the proposal. The respo11S1'ble official finds this information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the envirownental impact of this proposal. A. This is a reissuance of the SEP A threshold determination ( Determination of Significance) that was completed on January 7, 1992. A reissued determination in accordance with WAC 197-11- 360( 4) is warranted based on the applicant's resubmittal of the revised plat. The revised plat reduces the number of residential units from 526 to 242 units (mcluding 146 multi-family units). Additionally, studies were provided for ~ils, geology{mcluding groundwater), traffic, wetland assessment, plants & animals and drainage analysis reviews. B. The Cedarwood site lies within the Urban Growth Boundary Area as defined by King County pursuant to the Growth Management Act of 1990, and King County's 1994 Comprehensive Plan. C. Approximately 3 6.S acres of the site will be retained in its native state due to sensitive areas such as wetlands, steep slopes & associated buffers. Grading activity on Divisions I & II for construction of roads & lots will result in the placement of~ fill material on Division m D. Wat.er runoff from developed portions of the site will be collected and directed to a new water quality treatment pond which will be located in an easement on the applicant's property on the west side of 140th Way SE. After water quality treatment, nmofFwill be discbarged directly to the Cedar River (an approved receiving source per King Cpunty's Surface Water Design Manual). This work will be subject to review & compliance with the above referenced Shoreline Permit and outlet reconstruction approval from the WSDOT due to the upgrading of their existing pipe filcility. E. King County's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will widen 140th Way SE in the near future. If Division I is occupied priorto this road wideaing the applicant will be required to .install an interim signal.&: southbound left turn lane at the proposed entrance to Division I (140th Way SE & SE 158th Street). I!Division II is occupied prior to the CIP work, the applicant must construct a southbound left tum & merge/refuge at the proposed entrance to Division IL The primary access to Division III, the multi-family portion of the project will be via SR 169. Access to 140th Way SE from Division III, will be restricted to right tum movement(s) only. F. The Elliot Farm Historical Site is located immediately east ofDivision m KC's Landmarks Commission designated n·with an accompanying 6 acres (approximate) as a KC Landmark on October 25, 1990. This acreage designation by the commission was determined to be sufficient to provide an adequate visual context for the &rm buildings. The site is also called out in the Soos Creek Community Plan as a historic resource. Cedarwood 4/23/96 Page3 Mitigation List The following mitigation measures shall be attached as conditions of permit issuance. These mitigation measures are consistent with policies, plans, rules, or regulations designated by KCC 20.44.080 as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this threshold determination is issued. Key sources of substantive authority for each mitigation measure are in parentheses; however, other sources of substantive authority may exist but are not expressly listed. 1. The following condition outlines the design of the wetpond required for this development (KCC 21A24, KCC 9.04): a. The wetpond shall have a permanent pool volume equal to 3.0 times the volume of runoff(Vr) from the mean anmw storm (pond volume= 3.0 Yr). The mean annual storm for the site is equal to 0.47 inches. Runoff shall be estimated using a runoff coefficient of 0.9 for impervious ares, 0.25 for till soil covered with grass, 0.1 for till soil covered with forest, and 0.01 for outwash soil covered with grass and forest. b. The pond shall consist of two cells separated by a berm with the first cell containing between 25 and 3 S percent of the total wetpool volume. Inlets and outlets shall be placed to maximize travel time through the facility. c. The depth of the wetpool shall not exceed 8 feet. Pool depths less than 3 feet require emergent wetland vegetation plantings and pool depths greater than 6 feet require some form of circulation (aeration). 2. A car wash pad connected to the sanitary sewer is required for the condominium portion of this project. The car wash area shall be in conformance with Activity Sheet A-13 (vehicle washing) and BMP Infonnation Sheet #2 (di.<cbarge to sanitary sewer.system) of King County Stormwater Pollution Control~ (July 199S). J. The following ~on adds drainage .requirements to this development (KCC21A24, KCC 9.04): . a. The new pipeline conveying drainage from the iop of this development to the valley floor shall be designed to convey the 100-year, 24-hour design storm. . b. Roof downspout infiltration shall be maximized on this development to the fullest extent feasi"ble. A qualified soils engineer, geo-technical engineer, or geologist shall certify thai the project design maximizes the use of roof downspout infiltration. hof downspout dispersion systems or perforated stubout connections shall be required for all single-family lots for management of roof runoff'. Dispersion systems shall be required where the overflow can travel over at least 25 ti;et of vegetated area before leaving the property and does not pose a significant flooding or erosion problem. 4. The J 10 feet of sight distance shown on the revised site plan received by LUSD on 3W96 for the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead, shall be identified on the final approved Conditional Use Permit site plan and engineering plans • This view corridor area (northeast Cedarwood 4/23/96 Page 4 of the 310 foot sightline) shall be restricted in use so that construction, fill or grading will not interrupt the line of sight between the centerline ofMaple Valley Highway and the base elevation of the farmhouse. This area can be fenced or gated (emergency access road) with non-view restricting material, and may also be used as outdoor recreation yard area with appropriately scaled outdoor equipment and landscaping per the review and approval by DDES (KCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1&2). 5. The 3 5 foot setback area shown on the 3/22/96 revised site plan that is between the east end of building complex "B • and the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead shall be landscaped to provide a full screen (no less than a "Type I" landscape screen per KCC 21A.16.040) that functions as much as possi"ble as a visual barrier ( a narrow foot path is allowable within this landscaping if access is desired to the rear yard area). The landscaping requirements for this area shall be reviewed and approved by K Cs Cultural Resource Division, Historic Peservation Section. That area fronting SR169, east of the project access, is subject to DDES's review and approval with review comments provided by KC's Cultural Resource Division's, Historic Preservation Sections (KCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1&2). Comments and Appeals Written comments or any appeal of this threshold determination must be stamped received by King County before 4:30 PM on Wednesday, Ma:r 8, 1996. Appeals must be accompanied by a nonrefundable filing fee. Please reference the file numbers when corresponding. Appeals must be in writing and state the perceived errors in the threshold determination, specific reasons why the determination should be reversed or modified, the harm the appellant will suffer if the threshold determination rernains unchanged, and the desired outcome of the appeal. If the appellant is a group, the harm to any one or more members must be stated. Failure to meet these requirements may result in dismissal of the appeal. · Comment/appeal deadline: Appeal filing fee: Address for comment/appeal: Responsible Official: ~~&{4c· SEPA Section · Land Use Services Division · 4:30 PM on Wednesday, May 8, 1996 $125 check or money order made out to the King County Office ofYmance King County Land Use Services Division 3600 136th Place SE Bellevue, WA 98006-1400 ATI'N: SEP A Section bate / ~· I I --·---~-/ I I I I I I I I I I AgC . .. .. 14 ·1·. """"!. : " .. -... . " ,, • •,11 ·1;[ ... .: .. ..... ~ . ;' ,\~ E,B AkF DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LAND USE SERVICES DMSION KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PRELIMINARY REPORT TO TUE HEARING EXAMINER JUNE 6, 1996 • PUBLIC REARING AT 9:15 A.M. IN ROOM 111 3600 • 136th Place Southeast Bellevue, WA 98006-1400 Phone: (206) 296-6640 PROPOSED PLAT CONQWONAL USR PERMIT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, AND APPEAL OF TilRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF CEDAR WOOD A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION: Fil..E NOS: S91P0025, L9SAC0l l, AND L95Slll46 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: 96-421 This is a request for a subdivision of7J.5 acre.s into 96 lots for detached sinsJe-limily dwelfings, and two tracts; Tract A/Division 3, 146 multi-family condominium units proposed, and Tract N, potential emergency vehicle site. The applicant i, also utifu:ing the provisions ofthe King County Code (21 A.34) which allow residential density incentive.s, f'or the provision of affordable housing. The ovcrall proposed density fOr the site (subdivision and CUP) is J .2 dwelling units per acre. Sec attachment I for a copy of the proposed layouts. The above-referenced subdivision and conditional we appfications are being heard concurrently with a Shorelino Substantial Development Pennit Application (SOP), L95SHl46. The SOP i, proposed to replace an existing 18-inch stormwaterpipe with a new 36-inch pipe to provide · adequate capacity for the "Cedarwood" project, with the outfall terminating at the ordinary high water mark of the Cedar River. Sec Attachment 2 for a copy of the proposed drainage 5Yslem. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner/Developer: STR: Location: Zoniog: Acreage: Ccdarwood Group 14410 Bel-Red lloa4, #140 Bellevue, WA 98007 (206) 649-8668 Hugh Goldsmith & !Jsociate.s P.O. Box 3565 1215 114th Avenue Southeut Bellevue, WA 98009 (206) 462-1080 NW & SB 22-23-0S Generally located on the south side of SR 169 (Maple Valley Hishway) between 140th Way SB and ISOth Avenue SB (if' extended). The associated SOP i, west of 140th Way SB on the south side of Maple Valley Highway at the existing WSDOT drainage oudet to the Cedar River. R-6P 73.S PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEALOf lllRESHOLD Dl!TERMINATION OFCEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP0025, L95AC0ll, AND L95SHl46 Number of Lots: Density: Typical Lot Size: Prop<ised Use: Sewage Disposal: Wat<; Supply: F'ire District: School District: Application Dates: SEPA: Appellants: C. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: 96 single-fiunily lots (Divisions I and 2) 146 multi-family units (Tract A/Division 3) Tract N -Future development 3.2 dwelling units per aero Ranges from approximately 5,500 to 7,000 square feet Single-family detached & multifamily Cedar River Water and Sewer District Cedar River Water and Sewer District King County F'ire District #40 Renton #403 Plat application (Revision): October 3, 1995 Conditional Use Permit: October 3, 1995 SDP: October 3, 1995 Richard Wdson, Esq.,on behalf of the applicant Hillis, .Clark, Martin & Peterson 500 Galland Bldg. 1121 • 2nd Avenue Seattle, WA 98101-2925 Richard Barrett 25050 164th Avenue SE Kent, WA 98042-5232 Tho initial Cedarwood project (DDES File Nos. S9\P0025 and S9JU0002} was submitted in 1991. This project proposed both a subdivision and a planned unit development consisting of 426 multilimily units on JOO acres. In October 1995 tho new owner of the site Ccdirwood Group submitted a revised site plan, conditional usc permit, and shoreline substantial development permit This October revision reduced the total number of units ( 426 to 242), reduced the ovenill acroage to 73.5, and modified the proposal to conform with The 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan and King County Code 21A. The Subdivision Technical Committee ofKing County has conducted an on-site examination of tho subject property and bu ducussed the revised prop<lscd development with tho applicant to clarify technical details of the application, and to determine tho compatibility of this project with applicable King County plans, codes, and other otlicial documents regulating this development The applicant submitted a rcviscd site plan for the conditional usc permit (revision received March 22, 1996) and revised plat map (received May I 5, 1996}. The plat map was revised to include Tract N, which is a p<itential emergency vehicle sit~. The units in the eutern portion of tho CUP were revised to accommodate an unobstructed view corridor to the Elliot farm house (historic landmark) located on the property immediately east of tho site. (See Attachment 1.) D. THRESHO!D DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pursuant to tho State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C and WAC 197-11, the Responsible Official of the SEP A Section issued a mitigstod threshold determination of non- significance (MDNS} for the proposed development on April 23, 1996. This is a reissuance of a SEPA threshold determination (Determinstion of Significance) that was completed on lllXlary 7, 1992. A reissued determination in accordance with WAC 197-11-360(4) is warranted bucd on SPRS/S9IP0025.KC PLAT.fMT "20t'tS --2· )-'. ,, .. I:~· ,; .. .. ·, .... ':: . . i. '• ! . {· ,. :' PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OF 1HRESHOLD DE1'1:RMJNA TION OF CED ARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP0025, UlACOII, AND L95Sll146 the applicant's rcsubmiual of the revised plat. The revision reduced the numbet of residential units from 426 to 242 ('mcluding 146 multifamily units). Additional studiea were provided for soils, geology ('utcluding goumdwater}, tralffic, wetland assessment, plants and animals and drainage analysis reviews. The Reaponsible Official finds this information reasonable sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of this proposal and the reissued MDNS determination concludea that this proposal would not cause probable significant adverse on the environment proyjdcd the following measures are complied with: I. The following conditions oudine the design of the welpond required for this proposal (XCC 21A24; KCC 9.04): · L The wetpond shall have a pennanenl pool volume equal to 3.0 tlmea the volume of runolf(Vr) from the mean annual storm (pood volult!C"'l.O Vr). The mean annual storm for the site ia equal to 0.47 inches. Runoff shall be estimated using a runoff coefficient of0.9 for impervious area, 0.25 for till soil covered with grass, 0.1 for till soil covered with foreat, aod 0.0 I for out wash soil covered with grass and forest. b. The pood shall consist of two cells separated by a berm with the first cell containing between 25 aod JS percent of the total wetpool volume. .Inlets and outlets shall be placed to maximize travel time through the licility. c. The depth of the wetpool shall not exceed 8 feet. Pool depths less than 3 feet require emergent wetland vegetation plantings aod pool depths greater than 6 feet require some form of circ:ulation (aentlon). 2. A carwash pad COMected to the sanitary sewer is required for the condominium portion of this project. The car wash area shall be in conformance with Activity Sheet A-13 (vehicle washing) aod BMP Information Sheet #2 (discharge to Sl!lital)I sewer system) of King County Stormwater Pollution control Manual (1uly I 99S) 3. The following cooditions adds drainage requirements to this development KCC 21A24; KCC9.04): L The new pipeline conveying drainage from the top of this development to the valley floor shall be designed to convey the JOO-year, 24-hour design stonn. b. Roof downspout infiltration shall be nwcimized on this development to the fullest extent fC111ble. A qualified soils engineer, geotechnical engineer, or geologist shall certify that the project design ma•irnizcs the use of roof downspout infiltration. Roof downspout dispenion systems or perforated stubout coonections shall be required for all single family lots for management for roofrunof[ Dispersion systems shall be required where the over11ow can travel over at least 2S feet of vegetated area before leaving the property and does not pose a significant flooding or erosion problem. 4. The 310 leet of sight distance shown on the revised site plan received by LUSD on Jn2196 for the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead, shall be identified on the final approved Conditional U,e Permit site plan and cngineering plans. This view corridor area (nonheast of the 310 foot sishtline) shall be restricted in use so that the construction, fill or gradins will not interrupt the line of sight between the centerline of Maple Valley Black Diamond Highway and tho base elevation of the farmhouse. This area can be fenced or gated (emergency access road) with non-view restrictins material and may also be µsed as outdoor recreation yard area with appropriately scaled outdoor equipment and laodscsping per the review and aproval by DOES (XCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1 & 2). SPRS/S9lf0025.KC PUT.NT "21WS -3- PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OFlllRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF CEDARWOOD FILI! NOS. S9lP002.l, L95ACOl 1, AND L95SH146 S. The 3 S-foot setback area shown on the 3122/% revised site plan that is between the east end ofbuilding complex "B" and the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead shall be landscaped to provide a full screen (no less than a "Type I" landscape screen per KCC 2IA.16.040) that functions u much u possible u a visual barrier (a narrow foot path is allowable within this landscaping if access is desired to the rear yard area). The landscaping requirements for this area shall be reviewed and approved by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Prese,vation Section. That area fronting SR-169, east of the project accesa, is subject to DDES's review and approval with review comments provided by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. (KCCP/CR-202; Soos Creek CPICR-1 and 2). This MDNS wu appealed by two parties. When a threshold determination is appealed, the Hearing Examiner's review hu two parts, an inqui,y into the adequacy of the infonnation used to make the determination and then an evaluation of the determination itself. Under WAC 197-11-33S, the standard for adequacy · of information is set at that which is "reasonable sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact ofa proposal", any inadequacy may be remedied under the authority ofKCC 20.24.080, which allows the Examiner to examine all available information. The evaluation of the decision is controlled by RCW 43.2IC.090, which decrees that the decision of the governmental agency on the significance (DS) or non-significance (DNS) of a proposal shall be aeeorded substantial weight This standard places on those contesting the agency decision the burden of showing that the decillion wu not supported by the evidence on which it wu bued. WAC 197-11 ·330 lists factor, that may be considered as part ofa decision on the significance of a proposal's impacts. Generally, a DS is made only when, bued upon the information before it, the agency concludes that there are probable significant adverse impacts associated with a proposal lllll..there are no additional conditions known to the agency at the time of the determination, that would mitigate those impacts. Additionally, when the agency's decision imposes conditions (MDNS), a further level of inqui,y may be made into the adequacy of those conditions. To be adequate, the conditions nwst mitigate significant adveue impacts of the proposal that have been specifically identified, must be based on policies identified by KCC 20.44.080, the Examiner may impose additional conditions, modifications, or restrictions as appear necessa,y to ~e the application or appeal compatible with the envirorunent or in conformance with existing laws, plans, policies, etc. Under WAC 197-11-660, the policies used u substantive SEP A authority for an MDNS must have been in effect at the time the threshold determination wu issued. E. AGENCIES CONTACTED: I. King County Natural Resources and Parks Division: The commenu from this division have been incorporated into this report. 2. King County Planning & Co1M1Unity Development Section: The comments from this section have been incorporated into this repon. 3. King County Fare Protection Engineer: Fire protection engineering prellmiruuy approval bas been granted. 4. Seattle-King County Health Department: The comments from the Health Department have been incorporated into this report. 5. Renton School District #403: No response. SPRS.15911'001.5.KC ft.AT.N1' "2M'5 -4- I' •. , . -.. . . i. ., ': ·' ·. J •I. ".I . ,: . ~ . -' ~ I ;. 1·· ·~ . ·!" .• ~-·' .. ,· ... ' '/,. ; :·1· ·.· ... ..i· '·; ,!· ·' ,., . '· ;·,, · .. !: PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APP!!AL OF THRESHOLD DE1cRMINA110N OF Cl!DARWOOD FILE NOS. S9 IP002.l, L95ACOll, AND L95SHH6 6. Cedar River Water and Sewer District: The comments from this district have been incorporated into this report. 7. Washington Slate Department ofEcology: No response. 8, Washington State Department ofFISh and Wildlife: No response. 9. Washington State Department ofNatural Resources: No response. 10. Washington Slate Department ofWddlife: 11. Washington Slate Department of Transportation: See Attachment 3. 12. King County Conservation District: No response. 13. METRO: No response. 14. City of Renton: See Attaclunent 4. F. NATIJRAL ENYIRONMS1'JI: I. Topography: The areas lo be developed on Divisions I and 2, gradually slope from the west-southwest towards the east-northeast (Cedar River). The plateau areas were created u a result oflhe previous gravel pit operation located on the site. Inunediately ourrounding the perimeter of the lots, the slopes are 40% and greater, and exceed 100 feet in height. Division 3 is is relatively l1at, with slopes approximately S0.4. 2. Soils: Four surfaces soils are found on Ibis site per King County Soil Survey, 1973. L The western portions of Divisions I and 2 are classified and AgC and AgD. b. The remainder ofDivisions I and 2 is classified AkF. c. Division 3 is clusilicd Ng. L AaJ:. -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 6-IS% slopes. Runoff'is slow lo medium and the hazard of erosion Is moderaie. This soil hu a moderate limitation for foundations, due to a seasonally high water table and slope. It hu a severe limitation for septic lank filler fields due 10 very slow penncabifity in the substratum. Aal2 -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; JS-30% slopes. Runoff is medium and the erosloa hazard la severe. This soil hu a severe limitation for foundations due to slope, and a moderate slippage potential. It hu severe limitaOOl!J for septic tank filler fields due to very slow permeability in the substratum. b. Aki: -Alderwood and Kitsap soils; 25-70% slopes. Runoff is rapid and the erosion hazard is very severe. This soil lypC has a severe limitation for foundations and septic tank filler fields due lo slopes and high slippage potential. SPRSIS9IP001!.KC l'l.ATJMT f'l(W' A geoteclmical report was prepared by Terra Associates. This report identified the soil types, boundaries of the steep slopes, and provided recommendation., for a reduclion in the steep slope buffers, and teclmiques for road and home construcdon. The geologist for ODES and the applicant's geologists are currently reviewing additional infonnalion. Recommendation., regarding the buffers and BSBu will be provided at the public hearing. -S- PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF TiiRESHOLD DlmlRM!NATION OF Cl!DARWOOD FILE NOS. S91P0025, L95AC0ll, AND L95SHU6 3. Hydrography: Tho applicant submitted a well and study prepared by !ES Associates. dated September 20, 1995. The study delin .. ted and evaluated the wetland found on-site and off-site. The study delineated two wetlands located on-site, in Division 3 (CUP). The study indicates that these wetlands are classified as Class 2, which require 50 foot buffers. The applicant has utilized the provisions of the King County Code (21A.24) which allow buffer averaging, to provide a more f .. sible unit layout, road circulation/ace ... for Division J/CUP. · . The wetlands ecologist for DDES has moiewed L'>e site Lad the study and associated information provided by the applicant, in addition to the sensitive areas ordinance, and is in agreement with the delineation,the classification ofthe wetlands, and buffer averaging proposed by the applicant. Note: In order to achieve entering sight distance from the right-in/right-out only access for Division J (west, 140th Way SE), the applicant has proposed buffer averaging to compensate for the removal of vegetation in the wetland buffer. Tho justification for this proposal was received by DDES on May 16, 1996, and is currently under review. Further discussion regarding this buffer averaging proposal (i.e. limited clearing within the wetland buffer) will occur at the public hcaring. Tho site lies within the Lower Cedar River sub,basin of the Cedar River drainage basin. The Cedar River is a Class l waterbody and is located 1 ... than 1/4 nu1e from the subject property. The 100.year floodplain extends to within 400 feet of the subject property. There are no hydrologically co~ed wetlands on the subject property. 4. Vegetation: The area surrounding Divisions I and 2 (i.e. steep slopes, 40"/o and greater) are heavily wooded with a second and third-growth mixture of coniferous and broad-leafed trees native to the Pacific Northwest. Second-story vegetation and groundcovcr consists of Northwest native species including salal, sword fern, berry vines, and grasses. The area lo be developed is primarily covered in pasture grasses. Scattered evergreen/deciduous trees and brush occur in limited numbers. Division 3 is primarily covered in pasture grasses. Scattered evergreen/deciduous trees and brush occur in limited numbers. 5. W'ddlife: Small birds and animals undoubtedly inhsbit this site; however, their population and species are limited due to nea,by developmenl Larger species may visit this site on occasion. No threatened or endangered species arc known to exist on or RCS!'. the property. 6. Mapped Sensitive Areas: The Sensitive Areas Map Folio indicat .. on Maps No. 4 that the majority of the subject property is within Landslide, Erosion and Seismic Hazard Areas. The eastern portion of the subject property contains a Class ll stream with salmonids (Madsen Creek). The stream and the associated 100 foot buffer are located in Tract H, Sensitive area/open space tract. The Class 2 wetland located in the northern portion of the subject property (Division J/CUP) is a designated wetland, Lower Cedar ruver J (I.CR J). The Cedar River, a Class I stream, located 1 ... than one-quarter mile west, is within a Shoreline jurisdiction. G. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The property lies in southeast King County, in a urban/suburban area southeast of the City of Renton, and north of a developed area latown as Fairwood. The Maple-Valley Black Diamond Highway (SR-169) ad')Oins the north boundary of the site (Division 3/CUP) and 140th Way SE, a principal arterial, abuts the west boundary of the site (Divisions 1-J). The Maplewood Golf Course is located north of the site, across the Maple Valley-Black Diamond Road (SR-169). Tho majority of the parcels surrounding the site range from 6-20 acres in size. The Elliot Farm, a historic SPRS/S91P002.5.KC J'lAT.nn'-t.':?CW, -6- •i .. ::,·•'..:·." _.;: . . ' ±·_,,. ' '•i :·. ~· . :. "!. ,.: ~ ;"\~· -~ i.. ;, ·:_J))· • PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OFTHP.ESHOLD DE1'EIMINATION OF CEDARWOOD Fil.ENOS. S9IP00l,, u,Acou. AND u,SH146 landmark, adjoins lhc cut boundary of Division l/CUP. Tho developed plau of Maple Tree Estates with Jou ranging lrom approximately 6,000 to 12,000 square feet is size, are located west ofDivisions 1 and 2. The site itself is currently ~ndevdoped. However, there are structures (i.e., detention pond, swimming poo~ etc.) associated with the previous gravel pit activities and lhe adjacent home which will be removed with the development of this project Ii. SUBDMSION DESIGN FEATIJRES: 1. Lot Pattern and Density: The applicant is using the provisions oflhe King County Code which allow lot size averaging and residential density incentives. The overall density 'for the site is 3.2 du/ac. Refer lhe analysis section for further discussion. · 2. Intcmal Circulation: The proposed lots within Divisions 1 will be served by a subac:cess road lrom 140th Way SE. Division 2 will be served by a subcoUector loop road also lrom I 40ih Way Southeast. The roads within Divisions I and 2 are proposed to be public. The roads.serving lhe units within Division l/CUP are proposed to be commerciaVprivatc. 3. Roadway Section: The proposed roads will be constructed to urban standards in accordance wilh the 1993 King County Road Standards. It is anticipated that frontage improvements along SE 140th Street wiU be cons1ructed with the proposed King County CIP widening project. Note: The applicant has submitted a variance to the King County Road Standards for intersection spacing and length of cul-de-sac. This variance is. currently under review .by the Department of Public Works. It is anticipated that a decision regarding the road variance(,) will be available by the pubfic hearing. L TRANSPORTATION PLANS: I. Transportation Plana: The King County Transportation Plan indicales that the Maple Valley-Black Diamond Road (SR-169) and 1401h Way SE are designated as principal arterials. The subject subdivision is not in conllict with this plan, nor with the King County Regional Trail, and Nonmotorized Transportation plans. 2. Access: Divisions I and 2 will gain acc:as from l-40th Way SB, which adjoins the west boundary of the site. Division 3/CUP will have access primarily fi'om the Maple Valley- Black Diamond Highway (SR-169). Division 3 has also proposed a right-in/right-out access only to 140th Way Southeast. Emergency access to SR-169 and 140th Way SE are also provided. Refer to lhe analy1is section for turther discussion. 3. Traffic Generation: It is expected that approximately 2,420 vehicle trips per day will be generated with lull development of the proposed subdivision. This calculation includes service vehicles (i.e., mail delivery, garbage pick-up, school bus) which may currently serve this neighborhood, u well as work trips, shopping, etc. 4. Adequacy of Arterial Roads: This proposal hu been reviewed under lhe criteria in King County Code 14. 70, Transportation Concurrency Management; 14.80, Intersection Standards; and King County Code 14. 75; Mitigation .Payment System. a. King County Code 14.70 • Transportation Concurrency Management: The Transportation Certificate of Concurrency ind'icates that iransportation improvements or strategies will be in place at the time of development, or that 1 financial commitment is in place to complete lhe improvemenlJ or atrategies within six (6) years, according to RCW 36.70A.070(6) . • 7. PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APP!!AL OF TIIRESHOLD DETI!RMINA TION OF CED ARWOOD Fn.E NOS. S91P002', L95AC011, AND L95SH146 b. King County Code 14.80 -Intersection S1andards: The trsftic generated by this subdivision falls below the threshold requiring mitigation. The existing arterial will accommodate the increased traffic volume generated by this proposal. c. King County Co.de 14.75 -Mitigation Payment System: King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS}, requires the payment of a trsftic impact mitigation fee (MPS fee) and an administration fee for each single family residential lot or unit created. MPS fees are dctcrmir.ed by the zone in which the site is located. This site is in Zone(s) __ per the MPS/Quartersection list. MPS fees may be paid at the time of final plat recording, or deferred until building permits are issued. The amount of the fee will be determined by the applicable fee ordinance at tho time the fee is collected. 1. PUBLIC SERVICES: I. Schools: This proposal has been reviewed under RCW 58.17.110 and King County Ordinance 10162 (School Adequacy). 1. · School Facilities: The subject subdivision will be served by elementary, junior high, and senior high schools, all located within the Renton School District. b. School Capacity: The Renton School Board has adopted capacity 6gures which indicate their ability to accommodate additional students. The figures reveal the district has adequate capacity to accommodate the anticipated students generated by this proposal through 1998. c. School Impact Fees: No ordinance requiring impact fees for this school district has been a_doptcd. d. School Access: The District has indicated that the future students ftom this subdivision will be bussed to the elementary, junior and senior high schools. After construction of the 140th Way SE CIP, walkway conditions will consist of sidewalks. 2. Parks and Recreation Space: The nearest developed community park Is Petrovitsky Park, located approximately l mile southeast of the site. The Cedar River Trai~ a regional trail is located north of the site, across tho Maple Valley-Black Diamond Highway (SR-169). Maplewood golfcoune ls also located north, across SR-169. KCC 21A.14 requires subdivisions and multifamily projects in the UR and R zone classifications to either provide on-site recreation space or pay a fee to the Parks Division for establishment and maintenance of neighborhood parks. At this time, the appf,cant is proposing to provide suitable recreation space. Refer to the analysis section for. further discussion. KCC 21A.14.190 requirea subdivisions, apartment, townhouse and mixed use developments to provide tollchildrcn play areas within the recreation space on-site. 3. F"1t0 Protection: The Certificate of Water Availability ftom Cedar River Water and Sower District indicates that water is presently available to the site. Per the water availability certificate, construction details are required to determine the flow calculations in order satisfy King County F"tre Flow Standards. Prior to final recording of tho plat, the water service facilities must be reviewed and approved per King County Fire Flow Standards. SPRSIS91P002'.KC PUT.NT MOl'fJ -8- (·f_'.:, '' : ... 4 :•. ,· ·i. . .. . .. ~·.,. :( ~ ·: . _;. .. :''· I., .1 r '= • .... ·, ·;,·,•.·. ·,_ I 1 ••• l • .• •, ,. . •; ' )· PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OFTIIRESIIOLO DETERMINATION OP C!!DARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP0025, L95ACllll, AND L95SHl46 K. UJJLITIES: I. Sewage Disposal: The applican1 proposes lo serve the subject subdivision by means of a public sewer system managed by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Certificate of Sewer Availability, dated July 17, 1995, indicates 1his sewer district's capability to serve the proposed devclopmenl The Health Depanment has recommended preliminary approval of this proposed method of sewage disposal. The Department of Development and Environmental Services concurs wilh this recommendation. 2. Wa1er Supply: The applicanl proposes to serve the subject subdivision with a public waler supply and distn"bulion system managed by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. A Certificate ofWaler Availability, daled July 17, 1995, indicates this district's capability to ,crve the proposed development. Water ava,lability is subject to the owner providing an area for a water reservoir (tank). 'If development occurs in advanco of the District's schedule for building a tank, the developer may be required to build the tank or altemalive method for accomplishing fire flows and enter into a reimbunement agreement with the Dutrict.' The Health Department has recommended preliminary approval of this proposed method of water supply and the Depanment of Development and Environmental Services concurs with the Health Department's recommendation. L. CQMPREHENSJYE AND COMMUNITY PUN: I. Comprehensive Plan: This proposal is governed by the 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan which designates this area u Urban. The following policies of the Comprehensive Plan sre relevant to the proposed subdivision: CUP: U-501: King County should encourage new residential development to OCQII" in Urban Growth Area locations where facilities and services can be'provided at the lowest public cost and in a timely fashion. The Urban Growth Area should have a variety of housing types and prices, including mobile home psrlcs; multilamily development; townhouses; and small-lot, single-family development. U-504 King County should apply minimum density requirements to all urban residential zones offour or more homes per acre. U-505 Multifamily homes in the Urban Growth Area should be sited u follows: ... c. On smal~ scattered parcels integraled into existing urban residential areas. New multifimily homes should be built to the scale and design of the existing community or neighborhood, while contn"buting to an area-wide density thal suppons transit and allows for a range of housing choices. Over time, zoning should encourage a larger proponion of multifimily housing to be located on small scattered sites rather than on large sites . COMMENT: This proposal is consistent with the above-stated policies which encourage higher density and a variety of housing types and prices in an urban area where there are adequate facilities and services. SPRSIS'l ll'OOlSJCC PIAT.nff 91ZCWS -9- PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEALOFTIIRES!IOLD DETERMINATION OF CEDAR WOOD FILE NOS. S91l'0025, L95AC011, AND L95SH146 The proposed project (subdivision and CUP) is not in conflict with these po lid es of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Community Plans: The subject subdivision is located in the Soos Creek Community Planning Area. The following P-suflix conditions have been established for this site by the 1991 Soos Creek Community Plan: a. Clearing and Grading: The amount of clearing and grading to occur on the site is limited to road and utility construction to a percentage of the individual lot based on the lot size. This is reflected in the recommended conditions. b. Historic Preservation: The Elliot Farm (house and outbuildings on 6 acres) adjoins the east boundary of the proposed project and has been designated as an Historic Landmark. The P-suflix requires all permit applications/site plans for development proposals to be drculated to the County Historic Preservation Office for comment on the impact of the project on historic resources (see Attachment 5 for comments and refer to the analysis for further discussion.). The applicant has provided a view corridor along the eastern boundary of Division 3/CUP. The recommendations assodated with this area arc reflected in the SEP A MONS conditions. c. Cedar River Valley: This establishes building setback lines and drainage discharge requirements for single-family residences located within 660 feet of the top of slopes along the Cedar River Valley walls. This condition applies only to single- family residences or accessory structures. The remaining land use approvals/permits (i.e., subdivisions, CUPs, etc.) are to be reviewed per the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (KCC 2\A.24). The Cedarwood project has been reviewed per the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (KCC 21 A). Therefore, this P-suflix is not applicable at this time. The subject subdivision is not in conflict with the goals, guidelines, and polides of the Soos Creek Community Plan. M. STA]JJTES/CODES: The following state statutes and/or County codes are relevant to this proposal: CUP: KCC ltA.44.010: Purpose. The purposes of this chapter are to allow for consistent evaluation of land use applications and to protect nearby properties from the possible etrects of such requests by: A Providing clear criteria on which to base a dedsion; B. Recognizing the elfects of unique drcumstances upon the development potential of a property; · C. Avoiding the granting of spedal privileges; D. Avoidin8 development which may be uMecessarily detrimental to neighboring properties; E. Requiring that the design, scope and intensity of development is in keeping with the physical aspects ofa site and adopted land use policies for the area; and F. Providing criteria which emphasize protection of the general character or neighborhoods. · KCC llA.44.040 Conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall be granted by the County, only ir the applicant demonstrates that: SPRS/S9IP0025.KC PLAT.FMT fnM' -10. ' ' ,, ; ' .. ·:.-·\:. ···!' .,,, ·-·.1 . ' . -._:1 -; ; ;--·,:· ·;. , ... :~ ., PROPOSED Pl.AT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF TiiRESIIOLD DETERMINA T!ON OF CEDAR WOOD FILE NOS. S9IP002l, L9lACOll, AND L9lSHl46 A. The conditional use is designed in a manner which is compatible with tho character and appearance with the existing. or proposed development in the vicinity oflhe subject property; B. The location, size and height of buildings, S!Ncturcs, walls and fences, and screening vegetation lbr the conditional use shall not hinder ncighborltood circulation or discourage the permitted development or use of neighboring properties; C. The conditional use is designed in a manner that is compatible with the physical characteristics ofthe subject propeny; D. Requested modifications to srandards are limited to those which will mitigate impacts in a manner equal to or greater than the s1andards of I his title; E. The conditional use is not in conflict with Ihe health and safety oflhe community; F. The conditional use is such tha1 pedcsrrian and vehicular traffic associated with the use will not be hazardous or conflict with exiSling and anticipated traffic in the ncighborltood; and G. The condilional use will be supported by adequate public facilities or services and will not adversely affect public services to the surrounding area or conditions can be estab&shed to mitigate adverse impacts on such facilities. KCC l!A.08.030 requires a conditional use permit to allow constNction oftownhouses in the Urban Residential zone. · KCC l!A.16.0~0 requires 10 feet ofType III perimeter landscaping for the proposed townhouses along street frontages. SUBDMSION: KCC 21A.14.UO B 1-' SHORELINE: Revised Code orWuhlnpon (RCW) 90.58.020: Legislative findings• State policy eauaclated • Use pmereace. The legislature finds that the shorelines of the state are 1U110ng the most valuable and fragile of it.I natural resources and that there Is a great concern throughout the state relating to their utilization, protection, restoration, and preservation. In addition, it finds llult ever increasing pressures of additional uses are being plsced on the shorelines riecessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines of the state. The legislature further finds that much oflhe shorel'mes of the state and the uplands adjacent thereto are in private ownership; that unrestricted construction on the privately owned or publicly owned shorelines of the Slate is not in the best public interest; and, therefore, coordinated planning is necessa,y in order to protect the public interCSI associated with !he shorelines of the state while, at the same time, recognizing and protecting private property rights consistent with the public interest There is, therefore, a clear and urgent demand for a planned, rational, and concerted effort, jointly performed by federal, state, and local governments, to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines. It is the policy of the state to provide for the management of the shorelines of the state by plannins for and lbstering all reasonable and appropriate uses. This policy is designed to ensure the development of these shorelines in a manner which, while allowing for limited reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will promote and enhance the public interCSI. This policy conte/llplates protecting against adverse effects to the public health, the land, and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corolla,y rights incidental thereat. SPRS1S9IP002l.KC ft.AT.fMJ' WJMS . II. PROPOSED PLAT. OJP, SOP, AND APPEAL OFTIIRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF CEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP002.I. L95AC011, ANO L9SSH146 In the implementation of this policy. the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feaS1ble consistent with the ovenll best interest of the state and the people generally. To this end, uses shall be preferred which arc consistent with control of pollution and preventiOJI of damage to the natural environment, or are unique to or dependent upon the use of the state's shoreline. Attentions of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for single-family residences, ports, shorcfinc recreational uses including, but not Hmited to, parks, marinas, piers, and other improvements facifitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and commercial developments which· are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines and wetlands of the state shall be recognized by the department. Shorelines and wetlands of the state shall be appropriately classified, and these classifications shall be revised when circumstances wamnt, regardless of whether the change in circumstances occurs through man-made causes or natural causes. Any areas resulting from alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines and wetlands of the state no longer meeting the definition of"shorelines of the state" shall not be subject to the provisions of Chapter 90.58 RCW. Permitted uses in the shorelines of the state shall be designed and conducted in a manner to minimize, insofar as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and cnvirorunent of the shoreline area and any interference with the public's use of the water. (1982 1st ex.s. c 13 l; 1971 ex.s. c 286 2.) · WAC 173-16-060 (8) KCC 25.04.010: Purpose. The purpose of this title is to implement the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and to provide for the regulation of development which impacts those areas of King County under tho jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, consistent with the policies of Section 2 of that act, WAC 173-16, and the goals, po6cios, and objectives of the King County Shoreline Management Master Program. This title contains the regulations of King County's Shoreline Management Master Program and the procedures to implement those regulations. These rcsulations and procedures are consistent with and jmp)emeru tho goals, policies, and objectives of!Gng County's Shoreline Management Master Program which are contained in a separate document and adopted by ordinance. (emphasis added) KCC 25.24.010: Conservancy areas are intended to maintain their existing character. This ciosignation is clcsigncd to protect, conserve, and manage existing natural resourccs and valuable lutoric and cultural areas. The preferred uses are those nonconsumptivo of the pbysical and biological resources ofthe area (Ord. 3688 § 601, 1978) KCC 25.24.030: Gonenl requlremonu. A Non water-related, water-related, and residential development shall not be permitted waterward of tho ordinary high water mark. B. Except in. thoso cases when the height requirements of the underlying zone are more restrictive, no structure except agricultural structures may exceed a height ofl S feet above average grado level. C. All development shall be required to provide adequate surface water retention and sedimentation facilities during tho construction period. ... F. Collection facilities to control and separate contaminants shall be required where stormwatcr runoff from impervious surfaces would materially degrade or add to tho pollution of recipient waters or adjacent properties. G. The regulations of this chapter have been categorized in a number of sections; regardless of tho categorization of the various regulations, all development must comply with all applicable regulations. SPRS1S9tP002'-l<:C PLAT.PMT MGlt5 -12- '• . . ,.: .. -, • . ... I. .. : .. ~ :· .. ·,. ~ .. ) :: ~:-;. • . ~I , .. ,'.i. ... ,. , . '. . • 1 ·}_,· i· J ' · •. I N. PROPOSED PLAT, CUP. SDP. AND IJ'Pl!AL OF TIIRESJ!OLD DETERMINATION OF CEil ARWOOD FIL!! NOS. S9IP002$, L95ACOII, AND L95SHl46 H. Development proposed in shorelines of1he slate shall m&inlain setbacks, provide easement', or otherwise develop 1he sile 10 pennil a trail to be constructed or public access to continue where: l. There is a proposed 1rail in the King County !rail system; or 2. Pan of the site is prescndy being used and has historically been used for public access . ... J. The regulations of this chapter are in addition to other adopted ordinances and rules, Where conflicts exist, that which provides more protection to a sensitive area shall apply; provided, except that water-dependent uses shall adhere to the applicable requirements and poficies oflhe King County Shoreline Master Program and shall comply with other ordinances and rules to the greatest extent feasible. (Ord. 9614 § 114, 1990: Ord. 3688 § 603, 1987) If approved with Jhe recommended conditions in this report, the proposed development will comply with the requirements of the County and State Platting Codes and Starutes, and the lots in the proposed subdivision will comply with the minimum dimcn,iunal requirements of the zone district. ANALYSIS:. The Subdivision Technical Committee has identified the following issues involved in the preliminary review and recommendations of this proposal: l. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/RESIDENTIAL DENSITY INCENTIVES: The proposed 146 multifimily units are a permitted use in the Urban residential zone, subject lo certain conditions to CIISUCO compaubility with surrounding land uses, and the residential density incentives. The proposal is subject to a base density of 6 dwelling units per acre with a maximum of9 dwelfmg units per acre. The project includes 14 buildings containing a combination of two story townhouse units, "carriage homes" over garages, and I story patio unit', in addition to a r=eation/management building. In order 10 achieve the multifimily "style" buildings (i.e., stacked units) in the R-6 zone, the applicant must use the provisions of the King County Code (KCC 21A34) which allow residential density incentives. The purpose of the Residential Density Incentives is to provide density incentives to developers of residential lands in urban areas, in exchange far public benefits to hdp achieve the King County Comprehensive goals of affbrdable housing, open space protection, Cle. By providing public benefits on a site, 1 developer may be permitted to achieve or earn increased densities. However, for the Ccdarwood proposal. the densities have not been increased. Cumnlly, the Code docs not require the applicant/ROI project to achieve lhc maximum densities on I specific site. The applicant has proposed to provide only one benefit unit under the affordable housing criteria. This unit wiU be reserved for income-and asscc-qualified home buyers, with a total household income at or below 80 percent of the King County median. This unit will be limited to owner-()C(:Upied housing with price restrictions. It is recommended that dccails of the development agreement between King County and the applicant, which specify requirements for reporting buyer eligibility and housing prices of this uni I to King County, shall be provided prior to submittal afthe building pennit far Division 3. Based upon the surrounding uses (i.e., golf course), adjacent ancrials (SR-169 and 140th Way SE), sensitive area constraints (steep slopes and welland(s), and compr.ance with King County Code requirements (i.e., setbacks, rcqu.ired landscaping and fencing along the pub&c right-of-ways to minimize the visual impacts, etc.), the project has been designed in a manner which is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Refer to the analysis scction-SEPA Appeal/Historic Preservation, for further discussion related to the Elliot Farm. SPRSIS~IPOOlS.KC PLAT.fMT W.ZMS -13 • PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD DE1ERMINATION OF CED ARWOOD FILE NOS. S91POOl5, L9$ACOl l, AND L95SH146 2. RECREATION SPACE: King County code 21 A.14 180 requires residential developments if more than four units in the UR and R zones to provide recreation space (390 square feet per unit) for leisure, play and sport activites. For Division 3/CUP the applicant has proposed an indoor recreation building (which will contain one or more of the following: racquetball/handball courts; exereiso room, community meeting room with kitchen facilities,; and four common areas between buildings, including a patio area adjacent to the recreation building/management office. In addition, a small passive recreation/interpretative area is proposed along the southeast edge of the Class 2 wetland and 140th Way Southeast. Detailed review of the on-site recreation facilities for this development will occur with the review of tho building permit. As a result additional facilities and/or improvements (i.e., lot lols, etc.) may be required. However, these facilities will be limited to tho use by Division 3 residents. The applicant, however, has proposed to provide a trail to coMect all three divisions which wi'U follow a utility corridor. The trail(s) will be owned and mai~tained by the Homeowner'• Assoeiation(s). Divisions I and 2: The proposed subdivision identifies three tracts (Div. 1-I and J; Div. 2 -F), in addition to the proposed trail connection between the divisions. Based upon the location at the intersection of 140th Way SE (principal arterial) and SE 158th Place, tho limited size, tract raises safety concerns (i.e., traffic) and is not in tho public interest to utilize this area for active recreation. Therefore, does not provide suitable on-site recreational opportunities. Division I also contains Tract J, located along the western edge of this Division. Although this tract is larger in size, and accessible via the proposed trail, the frontage along 145th Pl. SE is limited and is not centrally located. This tract is located behind two proposed lots and visibility is obscured. The Subdivision Technical Committee (ST) recommends the applicant reconfigure Tract J and the adjacent lots (63 and 64), to make Tract J more suitable and visible for recreation purposes. In addition, the STC recommends the applicant submit detailed dimensions and calculations of the proposed recreation tracts associated with Divisions I and 2, for review and approval by DDES, prior to engineering plan approval to ensure suitable and sufficient area (390 square feet per unit/lot) haa been provided. Note: This may result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of lots. 3. SUBSTANTIAL SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: The subject shoreline site is located on the eastern bank of tho Cedar River, immediately south the SR-169 bridge, adjacent to the City ofRenton. The portion of the proposed stormwater drainage system located within 200 feet of the Cedar River falls under tho jurisdiction of tho Waahington State Shoreline Management Act of 1971 (SMA) and is classified a shoreline-of statewide significance (RCW 90.58). According to the King County Shoreline Management Master Program (KCSMP-Titlo 25), adopted pursuant to the SMA, the shoreline in ihis area is designated a "Conservancy" shoreline environment. Conserwncy areas are intended to maintain their existing character by allowing those uses which nonconsumptive of the physical and biological resources of the area. A coordinated stormwater drainage system has been designed for the three divisions of tho Cedarwood proposal. The system includes on-site stormwater collection and conveyance, incluamg a tightline down the 40-h and greater slopes, and water quality licilities, after which, the runoft'will be directly discharged to the Cedar River. No detention is required, aa tho Cedar River is identified a~ a receiving body per the Surfiice Water Design Manual. The tightlino and water quality licilitios will be designed in accordance with the SEP A MDNS conditions. The proposal within Shoreline jurisdiction is to replace an existing 18- inch pipe with a 36-i!ICh pipe at tho outfall to the Cedar River. The inereaso in pipe size will accommodate the additional stormwater runoff' from the Cedarwood project. The existing 18-inch out6ll waa installed by the Washington State Department of Transportation aa a requirement of the SR-169 widening project. The specific conditions of permit approval will ensure that disturbance within the shoreline area is minimized to the SPRS1S9IP00l5.KC PLAT.PMT "2MS ' i '. , .. ;\'· .( ' .•: ~ > . '.:'. PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND .APPEAL OF TIIRES!IOLO DET1!RM1NAT10N OF CEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S91P0025, L95ACOII, AND L95SH1'6 greatest extent possible, water quality will be maintained and proper site restoration following construction will occur. Together, these steps will continue to preserve the existing character of the conservancy environment and continue to result n a nonconsumptivc use of the physical and biological resoun:ca of the shoreline area, while at the same time allowing the installation/replacement of the stormwater out&JI necessary fur the Cedarwood proposal. With the construction, implementation, monitoring and approval of the storm water drainage system and outfall to the Cedar River prior 10 grading operations, along with the preservation and restoration of native vegetation along the shoreline, this development ia consistent with the King County Sensitive Areas Ordinance, King County Shorcfme Mansgemcnt Master Program and the State Shorelines Mansgement Acl. The protection and re-establishment of native vegetation is supponed by the shoreline Management Act of 1971 and King County Shoreline Mansgemcnt Plan policies. S. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION: a) Shoreline/Drainage Conveyance: The drainage system for the Cedarwood project proposes to utilize and upsize the cxis1ing conveyance system to the Cedar River. The existing conveyance system and outfall were constructed by the Washington State Depanment ofTransponation, in association with the widening of the Maple Valley-Black Diamond Highway (SR-169). Tho water quality facilities proposed for Cedarwood are located olf-sito (east of 140th Way SE) on a parcel owned by the Cedarwood Group/applicanL However, the c:onveyance system between the watcrquality pond and the Cedar River are located within right-of-way and property owned by the Washington State Department ofTra115ponation. The Washington State Department ofTransponation baa reviewed the conceptual drainage plans and proposed improvements, but baa not granted approval to the Cedarwood applicant to allow the construction to occur. The Technical committee recommends the applicant obtain the necessary approvals tram the WDSOT for the off-site improvements, prior to engineering plan approval (subdivision and building permit usociated with the CUP). In the event, permission, including required approvals/permits, to construct improvements within WDSOT right-of-way, is not sranted, the STC recommenda the hearing be reopened to discuss drainage/shoreline rdated issues, and if an alternative location is proposed for the out&ll to the Cedar River, a new shoreline substantial development permit application shall be required,~ b. Division 3/CUP Access: Currently, the primuy access for the proposed 146 multifamily units is from the Maple Valley-Black Diamond Highway (SR-169). There will be alternative access to 140th Way SI!, however, this will be limited lo . right-in or right-in/right-out only, due to constraints wociated with the signal at the 140th Way SE/SR-169 intersection. Al this lime, the appticant baa not received approval 'from the Washington State Department of Transportation for tho new access. It is lhc STC undemanding the WSDOT ia favorably considering this access; however, funher review is necessary. The STC recommends the access permit/approvals from tho WSDOT be provided prior to approval of any building ~IS associated with the CUP/Division J. 5. Ono Hurulrcd Fonieth Way SI!; Al this lime, King County Department ofTransportation, is in the procesi of completing engineering plans for the con,uuc:tion of 140th Way SoutheasL This CIP project proposes to widen 140th Way SI! to 5-6 lanes from SR-169 10 Petrovitsky Road. Prcfuninary plans indicate that a najority of tho widening will take place on the east side of 140th Way Southeast. Although the Cedarwood applicant has' been coordinating and accommodating the future widening project, the plans for this CIP have not been approved at this time. This may result in the reconfiguration and/or Joss of -JS - PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD DE1cRMINATION OF CEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP0025, L95ACOI I, AND L95SH!46 Jots in the future based upon the final design of 140th Way Southeast. It is anticipated frontage improvements along 140th constructed . . . . . 6. Tract N: Tract N is located in the southwestern comer of the site. The applicant has set a.side this tract for the future development of a manned emergency site for F'u-e District #40. Based upon the agreement reached between the applicant and Fire District 1140, the F'u-e District has five years to purchue ihis trsct. In the event is not purchased by tho F'1re District, this Tract will reven to permanent open space. The STC has no objection to this future development tract Tosues usociatcd with the proposed mll'.ncd emergency veJ,jcle site (i.e., access, sight distance, drainage, etc.) will be reviewed with the future permits. 7. SEPA APPEAL: As previously stated the original Determination of Significance that wu issued on January 7, 1992 hu been withdrawn due to the reduction in tho proposal and review of studies on soils, geology (including groundwater), traffic, wedand uscssment, plants and animals and drainage. Also analyzed prior to the reissued MONS was the EUiot Fann Historical site that is located immedialely east of Division 3 (multifamily portion). King County's Landmarks Commission designated it with an accompanying 6 acres (approximate) as a King County Landmark on October 25, 1990. This area designation by the commission was determined to be sufficient to provide an adequate visual context for the farm buildings. The site is also called out in the Soos Creek Community Plan as an historic resource. The SEP A received two SEP A appeals within the appropriate appeal period. Both appeals were regarding the Elliott Fann Historic Sito. (See Attachment 6.) The first appeal to addressed will be the one filed by tho applicant. the applicant's appeal calls out MDNS #5 which deals with landscaping of the JS foot area between the development and the Elliot Fann site, and landscaping along the frontage ofMaple Valley Highway. For the purpose of clarifying the appeal issue (based on the appeal Jetter), it appears that the appropriate appeal is of MONS condition #4 which acknowledges the 310 feet of sight distance shown on tho applicant's 3/22/96 revised site plan. The appficant's appeal discussions indicate the "sight distance setback" causing significant affects on the silo plan (refer to Attachment 6). Tho SEP A Section had several meetings with the applicant on the impacts to the historic site and encouraged the development design changes shown on the revised March site plan. Since tho applicant agreed to widen and provide a view corridor along maple Valley Highway so that 310 feet sight distance would be provided, tho MONS concfrtions wu . written to assure an unobstructed site distance/view corridor was achieved. Contrary to the appficant's position that this wu a "back doo~· attempl to acquire addili<!!'II area beyond tho 6 acres designed by the Landmark Commission, the condition assured the intended purpose of sight distance provided by the applicant would be unobstructed, and therefore uuly a "sight distance" corridor. This MONS conditions, u well as condition 114 were reviewed by Cultural Resources Division Manager and the Historic Preservation Officer. Additionally, the Soos Creek Community Plan was reviewed for restrictions deafing tho with Elliot Fann Site. Based on the consuhation with the Historic Preservation Office, SEPA's review concluded that sufficient mitigation hu been provided to adequately address impacts to the historic site. The applicant's appeal also addressed future modifications to the "sight OJJ!ance" MONS condition #4, which would lesson impacts to the site plan, yet still achieve mitigation to offset impacts to the historic site. The applicant pursued this through a minor revision to the condition which bould allow encroachment ofa fence and berm along SR-169 for a limited distance. This minor change i, acceptable to beth the applicant and the Office of. Historic Preservation (see Attaclunent 5 for a description of tho agreed upon terms). The SEP A Responsible Official has_ concluded that that minor change to the MONS conditions continues to accomplish the intent of the original condition and that it is appropriate to modify MONS condition 114 through the SEPA appeal process. SPRS/S91P002.!.KC l'LAT,PMT MOltS -16- · ... .... :·.\ . .;.-. ..:. : . ' ~ .. ! ., . ,. PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OF TIIRESHOLD DETERMINATION OP CED ARWOOD FILE NOS. 5911'0025, L95ACOII. AND L95SHJ46 The second appeal filed contends that the MONS conditions 114 and 5, dealing with the Elliot Farm site, do not adequately address impacts from the proposed development. The basis of this appeal is the noncompliance with the King County Landmark Conunission decision (l ln/90). SEPA's review of the repon, subsequent public hearing. and decision concluded that the Commission established sufficient area to provide adequate visual context for the farm buildings by d~gnating S acres (approximately 6 acres per legal description) as the parcel. The SEP A Section's view of the Commission's role through its expertise, was to establish appropriate area to maintain the "farm.setting" landmark. What is important to note, is the parcel originally before the Commission was IS acres. The Commission reduced it to 6 acres and this wu "detennined to be sufficient to provide an adequate visual context for the farm buildings".· The conclusion drawn from this action, is that the Commission had within it's authority, an opportunity to designate the entire 15 acres, or an additional acreage between S and IS acres, if ii was deemed appropriate. Also stressed by the appellant is the lack of procedural requirement to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Landmarks Commission pursuant to the provisions ofKCC 20.62.080. This process was not required through the review of the proposed development or the SEPA review, since the applicant's proposal does not include the designated 6 acre Landmark site. Again, the expertise used to evaluate the impacts, was the~ County Office of Historic Preservation and the acceptance ofa limited view corridor from Maple Valley Highway in combination with lancbcaping between the project and the historic site was determined lo be appropriate mitigation. To further expand on the issue of the Elliot Farm Historic Site, the Historic Preservation Officer will testify at the SEP A/Plat Hearing. The appellant also suggest new mitigation conditions which are not supported by the SEPA section due to the mandate under WAC 197-11-600, which qualifies that mitigation be reasonable and achievable. The appellant will have the opportunity to present the suggested mitigation at the hearing. with the ultimate decision on appropriate mitigation being made by the Hearing Examiner. The Issues rwcd over the Elliot Fann Historic Homestead site are valid reasons for concern. It is SEPA's position that if the modified MDNS Condition 114 is complied with, ii will adequately address impacts, and there will not be a significant adverse impact. The propoal complies with the Soos Creek Community Plan restrictions pertaining to the historic: lite and the SEP A procedures addressed in the WAC adequately address the appeal issues. Additionally, the appellant has yet to show the burden of demonstrating that the proposal will generate significant unmitigated adverse impacts. o. cONCLUSJQNS: The subject subdivision, conditional use permit. and shoreline substantial development permit will comply with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning Codes and other official land use controls of King County, based on the conditions for fmal approvals, P. SEPA RECOMMENDATIONS: I. Modify the MONS Condition 114 regarding the berm and fence provisions per the May S, 1996 memo from Historic Preservation. 2. Deny the Barrett appeal. Q. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the subject subdivision, revised and received May IS, 1996, be granted preliminary approval subject to the following conditions offinal approval: Sl'RSIS91l'0025.KC PUT.FUT~, -17 • PROPOSED Pl.AT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF lHRESHOLD DE1cRM!NATION OF CEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S91P0025, L95AC011, AND L95SH146 I. Compliance with all platting· provisions of Title 19 of the King County Code. 2. All persons having an ownership interest in 1he subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. 3. J'he plat shall meet 1he base density and minimum density of the R-6 zone classification. Ail iots shall meet the minimum dimensionai requirements of !he R-6 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger. Minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. 4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department 5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with. the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 8041, as amended. 6. The applicant must ob1ain the approval of the ~ing County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and lire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. If all lots are 35,000 square feet in size or more, or if the subdivision is outside an Urban Growth Area and iJ developed at a density no greater than one-residential building lot per five (5) acres, or a cluster development outside an Urban Growth Area with lots under 35,000 square feet in size and offsetting permanent open space and is developed at a density no greater than one residential building lot per five (5) acres, the subdivision iJ eicempt per KCC 17.08.030. 7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04 and the storm drainage requirements and guidelines as estabushed by the Surface Water Management Division. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location oflots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. The following conditions represent portions of the Code and requirements and shall apply to all plats. L Drainage plans and' anslysis shall comply wi1b the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual and updates which were adopted by Public Rule effective January I, 1995. ODES approval of the drainage and roadway plans iJ required priorto any construction. b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as e.,tablished by DOES Engineering Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans. c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: "All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains fi'oin all impervious surfaces such as patios, and driveways shsll be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DOES and/or the Depanment of Public Works. this plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with plans on file." 8. The following conditions specifies 1he required road improvements to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards: SPRMi9 lP0025.KC PLAT.FUT tl.!Gi9S -18 - . ' i' :r, l '' ·,.l . ' i :, ~ ., ' '·; ,:· PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL Of TiiRESHOLO DETERMINATION OF CEDAR WOOD FILE NOS. S9IP001', L95ACOII, AND L95SHI46 L Division 1: 145th Place SE, 146th Place SE, 157th Place SE, lhe easterly loop road off" 140th Way SE shall be constructed to the urban subacc":15 road standards. b. Division 2: 154th Street SE, 154th Place SE, the center of the loop road, and the cul-de-sac I 54th Place SE shall be improved to urban subacc;es, standards. The entrance road to this loop, 154th SL SE from 140th Way SE to the beginning of the loop shall be improved to the urban subcollector standard. c. Modifications to the above conditions may be considered by KingCounty pursuant to the variance procedurea in KCRS 1.08. d. Division I: ·1nst111 an interim signal and southbound left tum land at the proposed entrance to Division I, on 140th Way SE at SE 158th Street/Access Road A if Division I is occupied prior to King County's 140th Way SE CIP road widening project. The developer must submit signal, chamelization and illumination plans to the Traffic Engineering Section for review and approval, prior to engineering plan approval. · e. Division 2: Construct a southbound left tum lane and merge/refuge at the proposed entrance to Division 2 if Division 2 is occupied prior to King County's 140th Way SE CIP road widening project. The developer must submit chamclization and illumination plans to lhe Traffic Engineering Section for review and approval prior to final engineering plan approval. 9. Delineate the 100-year Ooodplain on Tracts B, C, and D wetlands on the engineering plans and on the face oflhe final plat per Special Requirement #9 ofthe 1990 Surface Waler Design Manual. 10. The appllcant applied for and was granted a stormwatcr diversion variance (DOES File No. L9SV0132). All conditions ofapproval for this variance shall be met at engineering plan submittal 11. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a li'anchi!e approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. 12. The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King county Code 14. 75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS). by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. the applicant has the option to either: (1) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording. or (2) pay the MPS fee at tho time ofbuilding permit iasuancc. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in elrect II the time of plat application and a note shall be.placed on lhe face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid"; if the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in elrcct as of the date of building permit application. 13. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 140th Way SE from those lots which abut it. 14. The planter islands (if any) within the cul-de-sacs shall be maintained by the abutting lot owners. This shall be stated on the face of the final plat . IS. Pre&minary plat review has identified the following specific requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21A.24 shall also be addressed by the applicant • 19- PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD DE1ERMINATION OF CEDAR WOOD l'ILI! NOS. S9ll'0025, u,Acon, AND L95S!ll46 L Class 2 wetlands shall have an average buffer width of SO feet measured from tho wetland edge. Buffer averaging may be employed so long as the total amount of the buffer area on site is not reduced and better resource protection is achieved. b. Madsen Creek, a Class 2 stream with salmonids, shall have a I 00-foot buffer measured from the ordinary high water mark. e. Tho wetlands, streams, steep slopes and their respective buffers shall be placed in Sensitive Area Tract(s) (SA'!1. d. A minimum building setback line of IS feet shall be required from the edge of the SAT(s). c. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as outlined in KCC 21A24. Prior to engineering plan approval, tho applicant shall provide notice on title as outlined in KCC 21 A24.170. Permanent survey marking, and signs as specified in KCC 21 A24. l 60 shall also be addressed prior to commencing construction activities on the site. f. Geotcchnical recommendations will be provided at the public hearing. · 16. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: RESTRICTIVE COVENANT All sensitive area tBCts, including sensitive areas and their buffers ("Tracts") identified on tho recorded short plat, shall be held in an·undivided interest by each owner ofa building lot within the short subdivision with this ownership interest passing with the ownership of tho lot, or shall be held by an incorporated homeowners' association or.other legal entity which assures the ownership, maintenance, and protection of tho Tract(s). All such Tracts shall be subject to tho following restrictive_ covenant, which is a running covenant, burdening and benefiting each lot within the subdivision, the parties, their succeosors, and assigns. The covenant imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of each lot the obligation to leave the Tract(s) undisturbed including, but not limited to, all trees and other vegetation unless otherwise allowed by law and approved in writing by the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency. This obligation shall be enforceable by the individual lot owners, tho homeowners' association, or other legal entity having ownership interest, or by King County as a condition of subdivision or other permit approval. Violations of this covenant shall constitute a sensitive areas violation and may subject the owner to imposition of sensitive areas penalties (or civil penalties) u outlined in King County Code nt1e 23. This covenant benefits and protects the public health, safety, and wcllire by maintaining the natural environment and character of the sensitive area through the preservation of native vegetation for tho control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, and protection of plant and animal habitat The common boundary between the Tract(s) .and the area of development activity shall be marked to. the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction, or other development activity on the lot adjacent to the sensitive area Tract(s). The required marking shall remain in place until all development proposal activities adjacent to tho sensitive area Tract(s) are completed. SPRS1S9 lP002'.KC PLATJIMT fllMIJ -20- '.· . • _! -':..;. -. /·I:'.·: . r - . ·1· ''1 '. ,. '.:; 1·.: ; ! ;• :•I· . ' ! ' '' 17. 18. 19. PROPOSm PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL Of THRESHOLD o~noN OF CEDAR WOOD FILI! NOS. S9ll'll0l5, L95ACOII, AND L95SHl4ll :-,.If JC\l }ti.~~r-7 Suitable recreation space shall be provided~cons\stcnt with tho requirements ofKCC 21Al4.180. A recreation space plan shalYbe rcvi~ and approved byDDES and the King County Parks Division prior to engineering plan approval. This plan shall include dimension/square footage details. A homeowner'• usociation or other workable organization shall be established to the SJtisw:tion ofDDES which provides fbr the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation 1pace and/or open space arcas(s)/SAT(s). The fbllowing have been established by SEPA u necessary requircmenta of this development u mitigation. the applicants shall demonstrate compfaance with these items prior to final approval I. The following conditions outline the design of the wetpond required for this proposal (KCC 21A.24; KCC 9.04): a. The wetpond shall have a permanent pool volume equal to 3,0 times the volume ofrunoff'(Vr) from the mean annual storm (pond volume-3.0 Yr). The ·mean annual storm for the site is equal to 0.47 inches. Runoff'shall be estimaled using a runoff' coellicient of 0.9 for impervious area, 0.25 for tiU soil covered with g,us, 0.1 for till soil covered with fomt, and 0.01 for outwuh soil covered with grass and forest. b. The pond shJU consist of two cells separated by a berm with the first cell containing between 25 and 35 percent of the total wetpool volume. Inlets and outlets shall be p1-ced to maximize travel time through the ficility. c. The depth of the wetpool shall not exceed 8 feet. Pool depths less than 3 feet require emergent wetland vegetation plantings and pool depths greater than 6 feet require some fonn of cin:ulatlon (aeration). 2. A carwuh pad COMected to the sanitary sewet is required for the condominium portion of this project. The car wuh area shall be in confofflWICC with Activity Sheet A•IJ (vehicle washing) and BMP Information Sheet #2 (discharge to sanitary sewer system) ofKing County Stonnwater PolfUlion control Manual (July 199S) 3. The following conditions adds drainage requirements to this development KCC 21A24; KCC 9.04): a. The new pipeline conveying drainage from the top of this development to the valley Ooor shall be designed 10 convey the JOO-year, 24-hour design storm. b. Roof downspout infiltration shill be maximized on this development to the fidlest extent feasible. A qualified soils engineer, geotechnical engineer, or geologi,t shall cenify that the project design maximizes the use of roof downspout infiltration. Roof downspout dispersion systems or perforated stubout connections shall be required for all single family lots (Qr management for roof runoff: Dispersion systems shall be required where the overflow can travel over at least 25 feet of vegetated area before leaving the property and does not pose a significant ffooding or erosion problem. 4. The JI O feet of sight distance shown on the revised site plan received by LUSD on l/22J96 for the Elliot Fann lfistorical Homestead, shall be identified on the final approved Conditional Use Permit site plan and engineering plans. This view SPIIS/S91P002'.KC ft.AT.FUT tn0n5 • 21 • PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OFTHRESHOID DETERMINATION OF CEDARWOOD FTLE NOS. S9IP002.l, L95ACUI I, AND L95SHl46 corridor area (nonheast of the 310 foot sightline) shall be restricted in use so that the construction, fill or grading will not interrupt the line of sight between the centerline ofMaple Valley Black Diamond Highway and the base elevation of tho fllrmhouse. This area can be fenced or gated ( emergency access road) with non- view restricting material and may also be used as outdoor recreation yard area with appropriately scaled outdoor equipment and landscaping per the review and aproval by DOES (KCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1 & 2). S. The 3S-foot setback area shown on the 3/22/96 revised site plan that is between the east end ofbuilding complex "B" and the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead shall be landscaped to provide a full screen (no less than a "Type I" landscape screen per KCC llA.16.040) that functions as much as poss,ble as a visual barrier (a narrow foot path is allowable within this landscaping if access is desired to the rear yard area). The landscaping requirements for this area shall be reviewed and approved by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. That area fronting SR-169, east of the project access, is subject to DDES's review and approval with review comments provided by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. (KCCP/CR-202; Soos Creek CP/CR-1 and 2). When a threshold determination is appealed, the Hearing Examiner's review has two parts, an inquiry into the adequacy of the information used to make the detennination and then an evaluation of the detennination itself. Under WAC l 97- l l-33S, the standard for adequacy of information is set at that which is "reasonable sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal", any inadequacy may be remedied under the authority ofKCC 20.24.080, which allowa the Examiner to examine all available information. The evaluation of the decision is controlled by RCW 43.21C.090, which decrees that the decision of the governmental agency on the significance (DS) or non- significance (DNS) of a proposal shall be accorded substantial weight. This standard places on those conlesting the agency decision the burden of showing that the decision was not supponed by the evidence on which it was based. WAC 197- 11-330 lists factors that may be considered as pan of a decision on the significance ofa proposal's impacts. Generally, a OS is made only when, based upon the information before it, the agency concludes that there are probable significant adverse impacts auociated with a proposal llllll..there are no additional conditions known to the agency at the time of the determination, that would mitigate those impacts. Additionally, when the agency's decision imposes conditions (MONS), a further level of inquiry may be made into the adequacy of those conditions. To be adequate,. the conditions must mitigate significant adverse impacts of the proposal that have been specifically identified, must be based on policies identified by KCC 20.44. 080, the Examiner may impose additional conditions, modifications, or restrictions as appear necessary to make the application or appeal compatible with the environment or in conformance with existing laws, plans, policies, etc. Under WAC 197-11-660, the policies used as substantive SEPA authority for anMDNS must have been in effect at the time the threshold determination was issued. 20. The subdivision shall comply with the requirements of the Shoreline Substantial Development PenniL 21. For a period of five years &om the date ofapproval, Tract N shall be designated as a tract for future development by rire District #40. In the event this tract is not purchased by Fire District #40, Tract N will reven to permanent open space. SPRS1S91P002.l.KC rt.AT.FUT tlJt,9S -22 • ,. !I:",.· "\· i .. : R.- PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OFTIJRESIIOLD DETERMINATION OFCEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S91P00l5, L95AOII I, AND L95Slll46 22. The PUD application (S9 I U0002) shall be withdrawn prior to engineering plan submittal. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT RECOMMENDATIONS; Approve Permit L95SHJ46 subject to the following conditions; I. Nothing in this permit shall be construed as excusing the applicant from compliance with any fedcnil, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project other than the permit rcquiremenl.1 of the Shoreline Management Act oft 971. 2. This permit may be racinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shorcfine Management Act of 1971 in tho event the permittee tails to comply with any conditions thereo( 3. Construction.pursuant to thi, permit may not begin or be authorized until twenty-one (21) days from tho date of fifing the final order of King County with the Department ofEcology or tho Attorney Gencrsl; or until all review proceedings iniliated within twenty-one (2 I) days from the date of such liling have been lenninated. 4. TIME REQUlREMENTS OF lllE PERMIT. The following requirements shall apply to all permits. L Substantial progress toward completion ofa permitted activity shall be undertaken within two ma aftcr the apprpval or 1be permit bv the Department or Deyelgpment and Egyjronmr,nta) Seryjcq (DDES}. Substantial progress shall include aH ofthq foUowjns, where appljcable: Tho making of contracts; signing of notice to proceed; completion of grad'mg and excavation; and tho laying of major utilities; or1 where no construction is inv0Jved 1 commencement of the activities. ODES may; at the request of tho applicant, authorize a single extension for up to one year PROVIDED such request is made in writing at least 90 days prior to the expiration date. b. Permit authorization shall terminate within live years alter approval of the permit by DOES, except u modified by 4(a) above, in which case permit authorization may · encompass up to a total of six yean. c. The pcnnit time period shall not include tho time during which an activity wu not actually pursued due to tho pemlency of reasonably related administrative appeab or litigation. cl ODES may issue permits with a fixed lennination date for Jess than five years. c. . When permit approval is based on conditions, such conditions shall be satisfied prior to occupancy or use of a structure, or prior to conunencement of a nonstructural activity, unless otherwise staled in these conditions. 5. Development shall occur in ~ccordance wilh 1he shoreline plans received October___, 199S, known u Exhibit 0-~in the Shoreline file, EXCEPT as may be modified by conditions of approval. Minor changes to !his plan may be considered. Any subsequent changes to the approved shoreline plans may require. tho applicant to obtain a new shoreline permit, or a revision to this shoreline permit pursuant to WAC 173-14-064. 6. Copies of other approved state and federal permits from lhe Department offish and Wildlife (HPA), Army Corps of Engineer,, Departmeni of Natural Resources (Aquatic Lands). Department ofEcology (Water Quality Standards Modification), and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), if necessary, shall be submitted to LUSD -Shorelines prior to construction. SPRSIS9ll'002$.KC . PLAT.FMT tlWtS • 23. PROPOSED Pl.AT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD Dlrlcl\MINATION OF CED ARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP0025, L95ACOII, AND L95SHl46 7. Tho applicant shall obtain all approval and/or permits from tho Washington State Dopanment 9fTransportation for construction of the coveyance and outfall prior to issuance of the grading permit. In tho event necessary approvals and/or permits from WSDOT cannot bo obtained and an alternative location is proposed for the outfall to the Cedar River, the applicant shall submit a new shoreline substantial development permit for review and approval. 8. Excavations for the drain line instaIJaticm shall include precautions to prevent the migration of fine-grain sediments, disturbed by the excava1ion, onto tho adjacent bank areas. Any excavation on bank areas shall be backfilled promptly using material of sinu1ar composition. 9. A detailed revogetation plan shall bo submitted by tho applicant for review and approval by LUSD prior to issuance of tho grading permit. The plan shall include tho following items: a. A revogotation survey shall be performed by a qualified arborist. b. Predominantly native species shall be used for revogotation within the stream buffer. 10. A throe-year maintenance bond shall be established as part of tho grading permit application to ensure the successful es1ablishment ofvogotation and shall be released only upon demonstration to LUSD -Shorelines that said vegetation has boon OS1ablished. 11. Shoreline conditions shall be shown on the final road and drainage plans prior to LUSD approval. 12. A copy of the approved Shoreline plans and any nocoJSary revisions shall be kepi on-site at all limes during construction. 13. No shoreline development is authorized wi1hin lhe l 00-year noodplain or below the OHWM. other than tho installation of erosion protection mothod5, stonn drainage pipe, and revogotation as shown on approved plans. 14. A copy of the approved HPA shaU be submitted to LUSD -Shorelines piror to approval to engineering plan approval or construction of tho drainage outfalt 15. .. Work within Shorelines jurisdiction shall be done in a manner to minimize di$)urbanco. Extreme care shall be taken during construction to olminate disponal of any debris in tho river, or.unnecessary site disturbance or vegelation removal. 16. During consuuction, the applicant must use materials and construction methods which prevent toxic materials, petrochemicals, and 01hor pollutants lrom entering the surfico water of the Cedar River, 17. Tho applicant shall implement preventive measures for protecting existing stonn drainage systems, ditches, and .all other existing utilities and shall be responsible for them during construction activities. 18. A notice of completion of the drain line/outfall installation shall be submitted to LUSD - Shorelines by the dovclopor within ton ( I OJ calendar days. Said notice shall be accompanied be at least four (4) dilferent photographs of tho finished work taken lrom dilferent directions. SPRS1S,IP0025.KC ft-.\T.ncr tnMS -24 • /·:_:' . ,. ' : •• , I ~-. .: 1· .• ' . I., ." ·.:, .. 1· ;,;_:l_· .. t,.'' l' ·; ... ·,., .. . . _,,•; ... . ·.: ',:. s. ··•. '1' PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD DETERMIIIATION OF CEDARWOOD FILE NOS. S91POOl,, u,ACOJ I, AND l95Slll46 CONDmONS I/SE PERMIT RECOMMENQATJONS: It is reconuncnded lhat the conditional use permit be approved subject to the following conditions: I. Development shall be in confonnance with the silo ?W! dated Mardi 22, 1996. 2. A building pennit shall be issued within three years of the transmiual date of this report. Otherwise, this action shall become null and void. l. The development of this project is subject to all rules, regulations, policies, and codes which are not specifically modified by this approval. 4. This proposal is subject to drainage review at the time of building permit review to assure compliance with the standards and the MONS condi1ions. S. The applicant shall obtain necessary permits and/or approvals for access onto SR 169/Maple Valley-Black Diamond Highway prior to building plan approval. 6. The access to the west end of the site (SE 15IS1 Place) shall be right-in/right-out if the required entering sight distance can be obtained, unless otherwise approved by ODES and the King County Department of Transportation, Traffic Engineering Section. If the required entering sight distance cannot be achieved, the access shall be right-in only, unless otherwise approved by the above departments. 7. Afl'ordable Housing: The applicant shall obtain final approval and any necessary agreements ftom King County which specify the buyer elig,'bility and housing price requirements, prior to building permit submittal. 8. Delineate the I 00-year ftoodplain of the Tract B wetland on the engineering and the final CUP/building pennit per Special Requirement #9 of the 1990 Surface Water Design Manual. 10. The CUP shall comply with the requiremenls of the Shore6ne Substantial Development PenniL 11. Plat must be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. 12. SEP A MPNS: The following have been established by SEPA as -=ary requirements of this development u mitigation. the applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval I. The following conditions outline 1he design of 1he wetpond required for this proposal (KCC 21A24; KCC 9.04): L The wetpond shall have a permanent pool volume equal to J.O times the volume ofrunoff(Vr) fi'om the mean annual stonn (pond volume-3.0 Yr). The mean annual stonn for lho site i.s equal to 0.47 inches. Runoff shall be estimated using a runofl'coellicient of0.9 for impervious area, 0.25 for till soil covered with grass, 0.1 for till soil covered with fores~ and 0.01 for· outwash soil covered with grass and forest. b. The pond shall consist of two cells separated by a bcnn with 1he firsl cell \'()ntaining between 25 and JS percenl of the total wetpool volume. Inlets and oudets shall be placed 10 maximize travel time through the facifity. • 25 • PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OP CEDAR WOOD FILE NOS. S91P0025, L9lACOI I, AND L95SH146 c. The deplh of the wet pool shall .not exceed 8 feet. Pool depth, less than 3 feet require emergent wetland vegeta1ion plantings and pool depth, greater than 6 feel require some fonn of circulation (aeration). 2. A carwuh pad coMected lo the sanitary sewer is required for the condominium portion of this project. The car wash area shall be in confonnance with Activity Sheet A-13 (vehicle washing) and BMP lnfonnation Sheet 112 (discharge to sanitary sewer system) of King County Stonnwater Pollution control Manual (July 199S) 3. The following conditions adds drainage requirements to this development KCC 21A.24; KCC 9.04): a. The new pipeline conveying drainage from the top of this development to the valley floor shall be designed to convey the I 00-year, 24-hour design stonn. b. Roof downspout infiltra1ion shall be maximized on this development to the fullest extent feasible. A qualified soils engineer, geotechnical engineer, or geologist shall certify 1ha1 1he project design maximizes the use of roof downspout infiltration. Roof downspout di&persion systems or perforated stubout connections shall be required for all single family lots for management for roof runoff. Dispersion systems shall be required where the ov.erflow can travel over at least 2S feel of vegetated area before leaving the property and does not pose a significant flooding or erosion problem. 4. The 310 feet of sight distance shown on the revised site plan received by LUSD on 3122/96 for the Elliot Farm Historical Homestead, shall be identified on the final approved Conditional Use Permi1 sile plan and engineering plans. Thi, view corridor area {northeast of the 310 foot sightline) shall be restricted in use so that the construction, fill or grading will not interrupt the line of sight between the centerline of Maple Valley Black Diamond Highway and the base elevation of the farmhouse. Thi, area can be fenced or gated (emergency access road) with non- view restricting material and may also be used as outdoor recreation yard area with appropriately scaled outdoor equipment and landscaping per the review and aproval by ODES {KCCP/CR-202, Soos Creek CP/CR-1 and 2). S. The JS-foot setback area shown on the 3/22/96 revised site plan that.is between the east end ofbuilding complex "B" and the Elfiot Farm Historical Homestead shall be landscaped to provide a full screen (no less than a "Type f' landscape screen per KCC 21A.16.040) lhat functions as much as p0SS1'ble as a visual barrier (a narrow foot path is allowable within this landscaping if access is desired to the rear yard area). The landscaping requirements for this area shall be reviewed and approved ~ KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservation Section. That area fronting SR-169, east oflhe project access, is subject to DDES's review and approval with review comments provided by KC's Cultural Resources Division, Historic Preservalion Section. (KCCP/CR-202; Soos Creek CP/CR-1 and 2). SPRS/S9IP002'.KC PV.T.l'M'T MMJ When a threshold determination is appealed, 1he Hearing Examiner's review has two parts, an inquiry into 1he adequacy of the information used to make the determination and then an evaluation of the determination itscl£ Under WAC 197- 11-JJS, the standard for adequacy ofinfonnalion is set at that which is "reascnable sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact ofa proposal", any inadequacy may be remedied under the authority ofKCC 20.24.080, which allows the Examiner to examine all available information. • 2G. ;.··. ,::·-1 :. '~ ', ... ~ .. ·, L. =:,. ·i·. I,.' ;·: 'I ... l ;, PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SOP, AND APPEAL OF TIIRESIIOLD Dl:raRMINATION OP CEDAR WOOD FILE NOS, S9IP0025, L95ACOII. AND L95SHl46 The evaluation of 1he decision is conlrolled by RCW 43.21C.090, which decrees that the decision of the governmental agency on the significance (DS) or non- significance (i:)NS) of a proposal shall be accorded substantial weight. This standard places on those contesting the agency decision the burden of showing that the decision was not supported by the evidence on which it was based. WAC 197- 11-330 lists factors that may be considered as part of a decision on the significance ofa proposal's impacts. Generally, a DS is made only when, based upon the information before it, the agency concludes that there are probable significant adverse impacts associated with a proposal lllllthere are no additional conditions known to the agency at the time of the determination, that would mitigate those impacts. Additionally, when the agency's decision imposes conditions (MDNS), a further level ofinquiry may be made into the adequacy of those conditions. To be adequate, the conditions must mitigate significant adverse impacts of the proposal that have been specifically iden1iflcd, muSI be based on policies identified by KCC 20.44.080, the Examiner may impose additional conditions, modifications, or restrictions as appear necessary to make the application or appeal compatible with the environment or in conformance with cxiS1ing laws, plans, policies, etc. Under WAC 197-11-660, the policies used as subS1antive SEPA authority for an MDNS must have been in effect at the time the threshold determination was issued. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: I. The subatvision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relating to grading on private property. 2. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division. 3. Prcfuninary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responmbility to obtain any required permit or license from the state or other regulatory body. This may include obtaining a forest practice permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for tree removal. MC:KC:lm TRANSMITIED to parties listed hereafter: King County Conservation District Steven C. Townsend, P.E., Supervising Engineer, Land Use Inspection Section Fairwood Greens Homeowners Association P.O. Bo" 58053, Renton, WA 98058-1053 Greater Maple Valley Area Council P.O. Box 101, Maple Valley, WA 98038 Darrell Off'e 13932 SE 159th Place, Renton, WA 98058 Ron Wendt 15416 -139th SE, Renton, WA 98058 WSDOT District I R. Allison, Cedar River Water and Sewer District 18300 SE Lt. Youngs Rd., Renton, WA 98058 Doug Gibbs, F'tre Chief, District 1140 14810 SE Petrovitsky Rd .. Renton, WA 98058 Richard Wilson, Hillis, Clarie Martin and Peterson 500 Galland Bldg., 1221 -2nd Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-2925 SPRSIS9tP0025.KC PLAT.NT MMS -27 - PROPOSED PLAT, CUP, SDP, AND APPEAL OF THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF CED ARWOOD FILE NOS. S9IP0025, L95ACOl l, AND L95SHl46 Richard Barnett 25050 • 164th Avenue SE, Kent, WA 98042-5232 City of Renton King County Hearing Examiner's Office Lisa Pringle,. Supervisor, Site Plan Review Section, LUSD Marlt Mitchel~ Pia.rum m Kim Claussen, Planner JI Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer Jon Hansen, Site Development Services Section Lany West, Site Development Services Section Rich Hudson, Planner llI, SEP A Section Leonard Garfield, Manager, Cultural Resources Division Hugh Goldsmith & Associates P.O. Box 3565, Bellevue, WA 98009 Gordon Phares 15432 • 139th Avenue SE, Ren1on, WA 98058 Mr. and Mrs. Ed Bowden 3939 SE 10th Place, Renlon, WA 98055 Orville and Nadine Nipe · 13307 SE 151st Street, Renton, WA 98058 Maurice Studebaker 13411 SE 159thPlace,Renton, WA 98058 Darvin Curtis 15010 • 135th Avenue SE, Renlon, WA 98058 William Rash · 1390_8 SE 155thPlace, Rent~n, WA 98058 Evan Roberts 13901 SE 156th Street, Ren1on, WA 98038 Fred Lorenz 14900 -135th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98058 Audrey WIiliams 13411 SE 151st, Renton, WA 98058 David Mitrners 16510 -133rdPI. SE, Renlon, WA 98058 Aqua Barn Ranch 15227 SE Maple Valley Highway, Ren1on, WA 98058 SPRSIS91P002'.ICC. n..AT.PMT ,,_.,, • 28 • , .. . ·•;. : ::•·!'·.:· .. . ·:' .. !. '!:. ,; : I' hr l d i· 11 Ir .. , .. ,ii: ii ,, i(,i I ' ll • lo I II if llfr ji I ,, a •I l!_!ff/l f ff :,, ,, ,·, l ,. 11 fl • t~ I I! 1'f , .:, f, 1 f if i!1 i 1111·1 1 1', ,1~~1.! ' '' !I 11 ;I ,, II , . . I ! I i I 11 .1 " ii 11 , . ,, I' 1 I " I ; ' '' ii : : ' , , ii " !! II : I : I ! : • i :! ii \I ' .. ii ii 1! ,, : I· t: · 'I' C,, ' " I I I I" f . ,J I I,: J J.,. I ,,. I I I \:-'!":/··· -.. • \ . ) I I I / r / I / I ' ::,/:, .. · . ·, @ J.;l•t f"J·~ .. ,·~ hrp•tfml"III "'IJt-n~'f'lllffll aN Mtiniai!IH'ftlal N°r¥ka La•f llM' Sn-,kni JNmi.. ~(,((I !.'\Nii, r,Kt ~ U~lk'1tr. Wult.iflJklll-9~~1.a'(I SURFACE WATER DESlGN MANUAL REQUIREMENTS/STANDARDS VARlANCE REQUEST P,qtiet Name: Cedarwood Prallmlnary Plat P,Ofed Addreu: 14001 s.e. SR-169 ...... , (206) 649-8668 I I •• A'l::l(lt11st.: ii)'. $111W. Zap COOII: 14410 Bel-Red Road #14D, Bellevue, WA 98007 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER: OOESF• No.: S9P0025 0."9"E- Tom Uren ~-· / ·.• .. S.../ : •• ~ Fifrn Name: DOES EnQiti.,.f/Plarv\lN' Name'. Phont: (206) 462-HlSO ~ .. : I •7·9 Hugh G. Goldsmllh & Assoclales, Inc. Addrfl.1: ~ly. SlQle. 2i,, CodP: P.O. Box 3565, Bellevue, WA 98009 PieaH be sur1 to w::tud• all plans, Ulld'IH. phOtos and maps wf'lic:h may u~st In complete 1evi1w and conaid1ratlon ol thil variance r•qu•SL F alur1 IO p<Ovial all peninenl inlorm&lion may r1SU11 ln deta,-.d p,oct,nlng or demal ot 'f01J' teqllt'Sl Pion submit lhls rtguHI and cpplic;t\bl• le11a lh1 lnllU Coun1er, at EutpcHn11 Pfau Buldfn;. 3800. 13Slh Pl~ SoulhHII, 8111,vu,, WA. .. 98006-1400, Fo, aodJ!ional lnlotmtiUOn. ~. 2Sl6•6&00, REFER TO SECTION 1.4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WA TEA DESIGN MANUAL FOR VARIANCES DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REOUEST: Th• C.darwood projtcl I• to dtYalop 48 •crH of 1 73.5 •ere sU• lnlo 06 single family Jots and 146 mutlifamHy unils (condominiums). Th• variance requasl Is to: 1) div.ti drainage from 1.3 acres in lhe Madso11 CrHk Basin dlrtctty lo th• Cedar Rl\'lr (shown as the halched area on Exhibit 1 and noled as .. OiversMln to Cedar Rlwr•J and 2J rtdhcl drainage lrom 10.32 · acres In sub-basJn A 10 sub-bHin s. •H cucrenlly wllhin lh• Lower C~a, River Basin (both sub-basins A and B drain directly lo the C~ar Rivtr). (SH allllChtd exhfbils,) APPLICABLE SECTIONIS) OF STANDARDS: King Counly Surface Water Design Manual Cora Rtqulrtmenl #1 -~~tvi?J : . -· .. •.: ,. . JUSTIFICATtON (s .. attaehmenrs. pap:• 2 1: SH Allachm4!nl A - . '' ~ : ... ~ .. ,. ·. ~ . ~1 SWM DMsaon M,inaelf App,owat I J Yn ( J Na Aft .. nad an dmlt) ___ by Oni.: sw"°"""".....,.. II-(JD...., Condlcontid Aci,,ov,11'" btolowl f I C1;1111dlJONICI App,oval (s .... bfWwJ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: $e---l 1.,rrrt..._ Z>1111t"I 11/r~/ff" ;· , .. ·~ -n -. L• '·-....... ··O t .... .... . . • ,l . --' : . .J -·· --· , ... _. COPIIS TO ~....._.II roc::.-11 ........,,, l'n..,1..,.._,, ' \ i ... -..... _,'. ,.... SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL VARIANCE REQUEST JUSTIFICATION CEDARWOOD PROJECT (DOES FIie No. S91P0025)_ RF.CE!VEO NOV O 8 1995 1,r.1G COU:'.TY 1. Madson Creek Diversion : .. J\J>!!i USE SER\-1(;i: $ . Madson Creek flows through the southeast corner of the Cedarwood project site in a deep ravine (150 ft. +) with steep side slopes (approx. 60%). The Madson Creek ravine and its side slopes are considered highly sensitive and erodible. One of the site areas planned tor development is a flat plateau at the top of the west side of the Madson Creek ravine. Approximately 1.3 ·acres ol this plateau currently drains ·over the bank" into the Madson Creek ravine. This variance request Is to divert this 1.3 acre area away from lhe Madson Creek ravine and discharge It dlreclly to the Cedar R!'!er. This diversion will eliminate the possibilily of negative impacts lo the Madson Creek ravine as a result of "over the bank" discharges or clearing and construction wilhin the ravine. The divened runoff wiU now into the proposed Cedarwood storm drainage system which wiH ultimately discharge directly into the Cedar River at the existing WSDOT outtail to the river (see attached Level One/Two Downstream Analysis). No change In Madson Creek flows will be discernable as a result ol lhis diversion. The proposed diversion affects approximately 0.17% of the 750 acre Madson Creek basin. See Cedarwood Exhibit 1, Conceptual Drainage Plan, attached. · 2. Cedar River Diversion In the vicinity of the site, direct discharge to the Cedar River occurs within two sub-basins, A and B (see Exhibit 1 ). Sub-basin A discharges to the Cedar River via the Maplewood Golf Course. The flow within this sub-basin currently drains to a ditch on the south side of SR-169, through a driveway culvert, and dual 24" culverts under SR-169, to a dilch on the north side of SA-169. Runoff then flows northerly in a broad swale through dense blackberry bushes and other vegetation, across the Maplewood Goll Course, and into the Cedar River. -Sub-basin B discharges to the Cedar River via the existing WSDOT outfall to the river at the SR 169 highway bridge. {See the attached Level One/Two Downstream Analysis submitted herewith and with the preliminary plat application.) The area of the site planned for development in sub-basin A is on two flat plateaus located at the top 01 a steep slope. Approximately 10.32 acres of the plateaus currently drains "over the bank" into sub-basin A (See Exhibit 1). This variance request Is to divert this 10.32 acre area around existing steep slopes and discharge II dlrectly lo the Cedar River. This diversion will eliminate lhe possibility ol negative lmpacls lo existing steep slopes as a result of ·over !he bank" discharges or clearing and construction on the slopes. The dive~ed runoff will llow into the proposed Cedarwood storm drainage system which wm ultimately discharge directly into the Cedar River at the existing WSDOT oull~il to the river (see attached Level One Downstream Analysis). No significant change in sub-basin A Hows will be discernabfe as a result of this diversion. Wilh the diversion, slorm water will enter the Cedar River about 2,700 feel downstream from its currenl discharge point. io'7ul.!71 l':isr : "' : ;c.; IIIIC. s.wnn1 ... , 1. ,.,._,, l">C. (~_.· r--· ~ ~o -. -,.... t : r. L -' r..J t.r. ~; . )t ; \ ·, :. '. ~: I ,i ,• KIIIJ:CUIIIHf 1..nntl U.r ... rnin'Ji uM .. Mln nc,1,,v111im1 nfllrwt.,-,1n11 llnd tn.Ynnnllll'fflM ="Tl'll'"' )lffl • lll"o1h N,,tt S.•Mlll':ll-f kllnur. l\~!IIVl,l" .. 1,u1i November JO, 1995 Ccdarwood Group 144!0 Bel-Red Road, 1140 Belle\'ue '. II' A 98007 RE: Ct'dan,-onct Prclimin;try Pl?I Vi]ri;mg: Rt*(l\JC:~[ {File Ng, L9SVQ] 32) Gc:ntlcmcn: The Lond Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, ho.s completed review of your vari•ncc request for die Ccdarwood Preliminary Plal. You ore rcquc,ting • vorionce from KCS\\'DM Section J.2.1 to allow diversion frcm one dninagc subbasin to another wiLhin the s:une dm:,hold dischorge are•. The preliminary plat is filed under activity number S9Jl'OO:?:i. Our review or the information provides die following findings: I} 2) 3) 4) S) 6) 7) S) The proposed project is for approxima1Cly 9S single-fomily lots in two clusters, plus .a condominium development in a d1ird clusu:r. Tlie site is generally located between 140th Way SE and the Renton-Maple Valley Rood (SR 169) cast of Renton. The siie is located primarily in the Ccd:u-River Mainstcm Reach 2, with two subareos l.:ahelcd A :md B idcnlincd within tl1C sitc. Jn addition. a l.Ja::acrc portion O( the Sile is localCd in die Madsen Creek Subbasin. Nllmcrous \\'Clland.s :ind s1ccp slor,cs cxi.Sl within and surroumlinp; the prnposcd projccl. 111c: prorosal i$ to combine :ill now into :a single tighlliuc: for disch:arsc direct!)' to the Ccd:ir Ri\·cr. Tiic: Cedar Rh·c:r Dr.:1f, B.uin Pl:i.n rccomrnends direct dixh;t.ric withou, dc1tm1ion (or L.his portion of the Ccd:ar Rh·cr M:iin.~1cm. · The Drat, D•sin Plan rccom01cnds s1n::1111 pro1CCtion dc1cn1ion sllndords for disd,:irce 10 this ponion of Madsen Creek. TI1e proposal is IO direct dl< dischor;c away from Madsen Creek. 10 the dcu:n1iOn rcquircmcnc would not appl)'. Th: proposal will :l\'Oid disch3rt::c ro s1ecp slap:s by pro\'idin: a 1i,h1Jinc conveyance pirc, The discharge: pain< will be downstrc:im or IJu:: currcn1 Oo\\' buo th: Ccd:ar River. The io:..11 \1)1umc of w:atcr nnwini:. O\'C:r the st"P 1k1pcs into M:tdsc:-n Creek and 01110 the M.:1plC\\11<ld Gui( Cour~ \\'ill he reduced h)• :a sru.:111 :unouni. No sisnffic:mc pmrcr1y d:i.112:c is fil:::-ly m occur on Uk! rror'lertic:s recch·he: Jcu Ocm· as a rcsuJ1 of the rffl{W')s~"tJ dh·crsion. The i:cou:clmlc:JI r1.•fl(lr1 pn:p:m:d by TcrrJ AS5(.lt'i:ui:s. Inc .• d;itcJ Scr,11:mhcr 21 • J 99S, st:m:s 1.h:1t :m in1mt:asur:ihlc loss (n111ch less lli;in 0.01 ~} uf n.'\'.h3r:,c U> 1he Cily of R.cn1un aqui((r n1:1y n:suJr from the pro(lOs:aJ. Lcu:irwoM lirrn.:p No1•om~cr 30. i 99S Pag.e 2 B:r.scd on these lindin:s. we :ippro\'e Lhis \'3riance with the following, condilion,:: 1) TI1e com•eyance c:iriaci1y or UlC proposed now mule In tl1c Cedar River shull be cv.ilu:ucd in accord:ince wilh Core Rcguirc:mcn1 /14: Con\'eyancc Sys1cn1. The applicant shall -dcmonsLr~le 1.ha1 :lt.lequ:uc c:1pacily exist.!'> for Lhc :idditiom1l nows frnm the diversinn. Any nt-cessary rights-nf-w:1}', e:1!.emcms, ur cmm.nn:tkm permits for the cnm•cyance sysrern and outfall sh:11l he ohL1incd by the ;1pplican1 :md :1rrrovcd hy· ODES :miff prinr IO c.-n:.inct:ring j"ll:in appruY:11. · 2) Wa1cr qu:llhy iilciihy dcsien must include 1ri::umcn1 c:ip:1ci1y ror the addllion:11 nows frnm the:: di\'crsion. lf you have furU,er questions rcgardinc U1c SWM \'ariancc or U,e dcslcn requirements, please contact Richard Lowe at 296-7207. Sinccrel1•. 9~~ Joe Males, P.E. Supcrvisin:, Engineer Engineeri::ig Rc,·icw Section JM:JO:RL:lm ,~.l:O'l.'l;\\'01,: ff. ~oS:~~ Si1e Eng.inL-cring and Plannin: Supcr,·isnr Building Scn·ices Dh'isicm cc: Tom Uren. Hu~h G. Goldsmilh & :\s~nci:11:.:.\ Brue~ Whiu:il:cr, Senior En~int.1::r. En~inc:t"rin~ RL'\'il·w Scc1ion, Land Use Scn:iccs Di"ision Richard LoY.'C. Senior En~intcr Curt Cr:m·rord, Supcr,·isin:, Engfoc:cr. Surface WJU:r M:magc:mcm Dh·ision \ '··! 1 : . '', I • 1i_ .'_:'.; I\ . .:~ .· './:' .. \;1\', ,, .• i .: ~ . ' '.' PRELil\1INARY PLAT OF ' ·.cEDARWOOD LEVEL ONE DOWNSTREAM: ANALYSIS September 19_95 Prepared for: Cedarwood Group l t ., i '•,. ·~ I 111~11 c;, .c.of<lsmi:h & :\SS<l('lclll'S. Ill(', The purpose or this rcpon is provide l conc.cpru:'.1.1 plln for lhc m:in:ii:cmcm o( dr.iin:igc on the proposed Ced31WOOC1 project :ind to fulfill lhc n::quiR:mcnis or l L.cvtl One Dr.iiruge An:ilysis as outlined in the K.C.S. W.M. }\fz,u:'.1.1 Section 1..2.2. · Svnopsis In the cxJsting condition virruaJly :ill runoff from lhis site is disch311cs din:ctly to the Ced:ir River .. It is proposed Ui•t ofter development runoff from lhe developed ponions or the Ccd:uwood project site will be collected :ind directed to • new w3ler quolity facility :ind then disch:trgcd directly 10 tl1e Ced:ir River utilizing an existing WSDOT oucf:i.U to the river. The size or outf311 will be enl:lrged to :iccommod.:i.tc runoff from the site. Toe Ccd:Lr River is dcsign:ilcd :i.s "A R~cdving Wa1tr" by the King Coumy Sud.ice W:itcr Design M::inu:l.l {p:i.gc l.2.3-0). Tnerc(orc. after w:u.er quality ~atmenl, din::Cl dis,hargc of stormwii.ter runoff, withouL detention, from the Ccd.:i.rwood project lO the Ccd.ir River is pennissible; T:ask t: Scudv Area Odinition and Maps • Project Description The site is loc:u.cd in the Ced:u-River v.J.lley about 2~ miles e~t of Renton at the inte~ection or SR·169 .md 14(1" Way S.E. The site is about l mile nonh of the F~rwood Golf Course. A vicirury m:3p of the site is shown on Figun:: I md :in ovemll site m:ip is shown on Exhibit 1. 1bc current development propos~ is to consuucl 146 multi-family condominiums :ind 96 single family lots on lhc 73.5 .icn: site. The cumnt development propos~ com.:tlns no commcrd:iJ uses. Development on the she will be clustcn::d on :ibout 32 :icrcs in three sep3J":lle ~:is :is sho,,_,11 on Exhibit 1. Project Statistics: TouJ Site ~:i: Sensitive Arc:a & Buffers: 7J_j mes 36.5 :icr.::s 32.0 :ic:rcs Net Buildoble Arc:i: Proposed Uses: 96 Single F.mily LolS (ill two clusters) I~ Mulo-Fomily Uni!S (ill one cluster) Runoff from :ill developed ;u-e:i on the si1e will be: collected. in a. closed convc):.mcc system. :ind di~tcd to a single new w:atcr quality· ~:itment pond m be looted illong the nonh t,ow,d:iry ofT:ix Lot 13. T:ix Lot U is• contiguous p:ircel under Uic ..me ownership 3S The Pl31 of Ced:uwQOd. Tile w:itcr quolity focili1y will be loC31od ill• pcrm30Cnt e.scment within T;., Lot 13. Mer w:uer qu:ilily tn:3ancnt. runoff from the she will be disch:t:t-td directly 10 the Ccd:ir River. The cxiSting WSDOT outfall to the Ccdu River wiU be cnl:u;cd 3!1d utilized !or the sites disdwge to the Ccd:ar River. \ • Hugh G. Goldsmith &. Associ:111:s. Inc. A-\bch~t 2. (.p of. q ''. . I' .. ' ; 1. ·• ,;} ; ··.· L~~·: • I• " I;: . ,. .' ' . . ' ' .· :;; ' ' :·t . ' ji L L r r ~vv.u• ,,.,., The new _w:uer qu:iJiry flciliry will disch.:lrgc lo 3 nc"· mJnholC; 10 be construclcd on the c,;isting IS'" CMP outfall :approxirn~cly SO' dcwnstn:.3ffl c! the u.islinc au.nholc with the bird c,ge top. The existing l.l5' of CM!' downstn:>111 of the new m:mhole Will be removed ond repl:iccd Willl 36" concreic or N-12 pipe. :utd Ille existing rock-lined ou<faJI ,o Ille Cedor River Will be utilized (sec Exhibit 2 ). Dr:ain::i.ge; Basins A m:ip .showing the site in relation lO n::gion31 dr.iin31:C fc.uun::s is shown on Figure 1. The Sile is IOQlcd just soulll of the Cedor Rjver, between Mol:isscs Creek and M:ldson Creek. SR-169 fonns the north boundary or the silc. From a n::cional perspective the entire sire is loc:ucd wilhin the Lower Cedar Drainage B.uin :uxl dr.iins to the Ccd.ir Rjvcr. From il loc:il perspective the site is divided into two sub· b:i.sins: I) M•dson Creek Sub-Basin ond 2) Direct dninoge ,o the Ccdor ruvcr. Sub-Bosin bound:lrics ore shown on the Conccpruol Or.,inogc Pion, Exhibit I. ottochcd. Modson Creek Suh-Basin M3dson Creek nows across r.hc wtem edge of the site. Aboul 18 acres of the site is loc:ucd within Ille Modson Creek Sub-Bosin. AU but 1..S acres of this =• is ciossilied as sensitive ~:is and is proposed to n:m:iln undeveloped. Most of the arc::i. of the silc Within this sub-basin will be pl:iccd in • sensitive = O':ICL Ccd3r River Dn.inau; B3.5in Most of the site, about SS acres. drains directly 10 the Ccd.ir River. This arc:i is divided into two sub-basins: sub-basin "A" :utd sub-basin "8 ", The lo=ions and bound:lrics of bolll sub-basins ore shown on Exhibit .l. The Conceptual O~e Pion. Sub-B;,in "A" About IS ocrcs of Ille si1e, primorily m,a, To., Loi 25, is v.ithin sub-basin "A". Sub-Basin "A" is defined as the orco which dr.iins 10 Ille duo! 24 Inch culvens under SR-169 •t Ille cost bound:uy of Ille Cedorwood si1e, Runoff m,m this sub•ba.,in even!U3lly flows into • pond loc:ucd on the Moplcwood Golf Course and eventually into lhc Cedar RJver. Sub-B;,in "B" The majorily of Ille siu:, :>bout 40 ocrcs, is within sub-basin "B". Sub-Basin "B" is defined as the ore, whicti drains to the existing WSOOT road dilch olong lhc north boundo,y of Ccd:uwood. Runoff from this sub-basin cvcruu:tlly flows into an existing WSDOT w:ucr quality pond which disch:,rgcs direcdy into the Ccdor RJver jus< soulll or the el<lsting mod bridge. The existing WSOOT outfall consists of 12 inch ond IS inch pipes (sec Exliibit 2) . Topogr.ipllically Ille northern ponion of die si1e is gr.iss posture. This bonom portion is n~ 311d dr.iin.s la twc wctl:utds :along ~ b3SC of the ridge. 311<1 thence e:islcrly lO the Ccdill' River. HW lac. .S.p:.-.U :1. 199J Husfl G. Goldsmilh &: ,.._;...,, Inc, ..... L!KU&&:SL A L 1222 au a -a \ .. -·--..... -.... •.·~------- The ridcc rises s1ccply to the south. with slopes rJnSing from 20% to 100~ :ind is hc:i.vily timbered. There lJ"C rwo ~;:,.s on the· ridge: th:u have been mined for s~ ill1d gr::ivcl in the plSl. 'These .irc:u :ire modcracly sloped ~ith g~ ~d bnl.sh ,rowu:1 cover. :o11-Js.a 1'11,., ;G In&. S..p ... t n_ 19'$ Hush G. Goldsnulll &: A=ci:i«s. Inc. A&di@!LLS:i .@ ;. I. \ . L .LU& i&&A!S fall Ad lb C ,.;,. !·• . r •. ... ,'! . ,·· ·'· ·,·1 :·~ ,· .. . . :. r, ,::. '1 I i,_:· ···f . ' •I.," . ,· : • 1; ,' i '1" ,. s I • • • II ' ... • I I • -1 • I • • Task 5: Mitigation To :iccommod:11c lhc runoff from lhc developed Ccd>rwood sioc rJic cxi,ting WSDOT JS-CMP outfall pipe mus1 be cnl:irgcd 10 • 36' concn:le pipe. This onl:irgcrncnt will provide 311 lncr,:»cd c,p:,ciiy from 4.73 c.f.s. (18' CMP) 10 39.58 c.f.s. (36' cone.). These c:ipocities wcr,: c:ucul:11cd ming H>cst:>d Mclhods Design Softw:>rc. The 36' culvcn w» 311:U)'?cd for gr.,viiy flow 311d bockw:uer com1i1ions os,umlng lhc J()().y= nood in lhc Ccd:ir River (sec Appendix El . The rcquin:d c,p:iciiy of lhc proposed oulf:111 pipe w» colcul:11cd using Waicrworts Design Sof\WOtc using• 100-yc:ir. 24-hour design Stotm scenario 311d =ing 101:,J development of lhc cntin: contributing basin. The entire conaibuting basin will gcncr31c a. 10()..yc:ir. 24-hour design smnn runoff now of26.S3 c.f.s. (sec Appendix E). SR-169 311d lhc existing WSDOT dr:ilnogc dlanncl olong SR-169 (sec E.xhlbil I) 311d ilS 1ribu1:11y dr.unagc =• will produce• l00-1=. 24-hour design siorm now of 4.06 c.f.s. Tocr,:forc, Ille 1ou1 runoff frooi lhc lribuury :ire, oflhc proposed 36' concrete oulfall pipe Is 30.89 c.f.s. Accordingly, the 36' concn:<c pipe wilh • capacily of 39.58 c.f.s. w» chosen IO :iccommod:11c lhis flow ;u'ld provide a. factor of s:Ucry. Hugh G. Goldsmilh & Associates, Inc . \ 1 -. -· w Washington State Department of Transportation Sid Morrison Kim Claussen King Couniy D.E.E.S. SEPA section 3600 136th Place SE Bellevue WA 98006 Dear Ms. Claussen: SR 169 MP 22.% CS 1734 Cedarwood Plat Traffic Analysis & Hydraulic Plans and Calculations Review Comments File No. L95ACU011 7 S9IP0025 This letter is to confirm that we will approve the developers proposed access location, subject to approval or a revised drainage plan discussed at the May 8th meeting. We had anticipated the revised drainage plan early this week. If received soon, we will try to review and comment by lune I, 1996 for the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions contact Don Huner at 440-4664 or Vickie Erickson at 440-4915 of my Developer Service section. VEE:vee -·-Attaclunent Manager of anning & Local Coordination cc: Vic Bishop, Transponation Planning & Engineering Paul Tollefson, WSDOT Real Estate Services Chuck Adams, Attorney General Office -....... -. -·"'' -. \. !· ··.-,· .. ·1;., ,• ; : 1-:· ·.~ .: ·., ·., ., .·, I.· . ''·.: ! ' ; '. _.,. .. December 20, 1995 Ms. lk.uno Masterson Manager, Environmental Oivi.skm CITY OF RENTON Plannin&IDuildini:/Public Worb Dcparuncnt Grq:g Zim.rnmnan r.E., Adraim51n11ar King CO<Jnty Capt. al OeveJopment & Environmental Services 3600 • 136th Place SautheaS1 Bellevue, WA 98006-1400 RE: POTl!NTIA~ A/<Nl!XATION AIIEA PRELIMINARY l'UTS FOR CEOARWOOD, TROV/TSl<Y PARK. AND MCGARVEY PAR~ Oear Ms Maste,:;on: Thank you far the opporlunlly lo comment on Iha above t11tee pmJects 1nat fall within Renlon's Soutneast PAA. We nave completed our review of these three praJects ana compiteo the following comments which, If at all po.ssJble, should be Incorporated inlo the County's response far them. Hopefully, In the tuture we c,an enter Into a 1110re formal wor!<lng relallanshlp with lhe County through lhe adoption af an lnterlocaJ agreement that will spell out respec:tn1e roles and responslbililies ror me joint review or sucn projects when located within a munidpallty's ldentmeo PAA. Below are our initial cammenls on lhese thtee ptojects: Ccdarwood Preliminary. Plat. Division #1 and #2 a. These plats art IOC3led dlrac:lly over the Cedar Valley Sole Source Aquifer, Which is lhe source of munldpat waler supply ror lhe Clly or Renlon. Our ground' ~ter mOdel lndlcatcs lhal the pla1s an= within a one year lime or ground water travel to out Maplewood production wens In ,n, go1r course. They are will1in a nve year time or Ir.Ivel to our pr-ctlan wcQs near City HaU (downtown wells). were th .. c pta1> la l>e annexed lo lhe Clly, ii Jo very likely that they waUIII at teas, l>e des~nated as Zone 2 at the Aquifer Pro1oct1an Area (Zone 1 being the more restridlve designation). As sueh, our s,orm water eode WOUid require 1h11 waler quality facilities be lined, 1nat Impervious surfaces be provided rar areas subject lo vehicular use or saorage of chemicals, and tha1 lntiltra1cd runoff originating from more than one acre of lmpervtous surtace be treated tirst. with a wtt pond, Our concern for w:ner quality is also pn,mpted by u,e proximity or the plalS 10 Jpnwning areas in the Cedar River. Because of our concerns for DoUt surface and ground wtterquallly, we recommend a high level of water quaUty control consis1ent willl your coces and policies and our own eode. Boch Slrudural and nonstructur.r controls are recommended. For exampe, covereo car wash pads ctrainino ta sewer for concsom1nwm residcn1s would help maintain _, ....... ,.J:t .... b. The plat map inellcates tha1 condominium buildings enct0•Ch upon tho weUand bufter. Encroachmeot al buildings. cleared areas far patios and land~ping. ano muna,gradfng used '"' •-c,nu:1~ cncmfd ,11Jf c:teat1v na ex.dueled (ram the buffer. c. Sclh of 1htse e1ivlsi0ns have ba=sic:t.Uy 1ong:-single ae::ess loop roads. one or which ends In a de~e:id CUI de sac. Allhcugh portions of lhe access is spfit the Clly of Renton dcvolopmenl saanctards would requite at Jeasa two soparale moans of ingre:.s and egress in both shualions ~00 Mill Avenue South • Renton, Woshing1011 98055 n1r.1,,.r(J1,,:::"r."A1~~1Ct'\."h."\.U'"'-'~IKl'O'CTC'O,,,J~CIII \ -I" ' I :Kuno fVlci:OiCI ~ ... , I Oecembef 15, ~.s,95 Page 2 unless all buildings at a distance greatc, lhan 500 feet from !he beQinning of cul~e.sac were 1prtnklered. If secondary acce:s.s is determined to be necessary we woutd !Ike 10 have an opponunlly 10 review Unr reviSed access plan. d. Because the development is within ·Renlon's Southeast PM and is llkety to be annexed Into the City wtlhln the next several years, staff recommend tnat streets In this Clevelopmen1 Include roadway wtdlhs; curt>s, guners. sldcwalkS, and streeUighling to City of Renton standards. e. Because the development is Irr an area which has been identified for HOV and transit lmprovemenls, staff recommends lhal 3 Transportation Management plan be required to encourage promotion of transtt and HOV usage to and from ttils development. This TMP should be approved by both King County .ind lhe City of Renton. Pedestrian and bicycle access to the Cedar River Trail should also be considered. f. In order lo comment ruuy en the lmpacts or this development staff would like to review a traffic .stucJy for IL. 01 panicular Interest would be the downstream traffic lmp.::icts on the Maple Valley Hiohway In Renlon, as a result of lhls pmJect. Project approval should be subJt:d to mlllgallon ol these impects. Mitigation should b1 in the fonn of lfansit and/or HOV improvemen\S. ti2!§: ll 15 assumed thal King Coumy wt11 be colledlng developer lmpad fees to mitigate the ·impact or this project on \he transponallon system. , 2. Cedatwood Preliminary Pl.it, Division #3, a. These plats ara located d1rect1y over thQ Cedar Valley Sola Source Aquifer. which is the source of municipal waler supply Jor tne City of Renton. Our ground water model Indicates that the plats are within a one year Ume of ground water travel to our Maplewood production wells ln the golf course. They :are withlft a five yHr Ume o( travel to our produdlon welts nea, · City Hall (downtown wells). Were tnesa plats to be annexed to the City. It is very likely that they would at least be designated as Zone 2 Of the Aquifer ProteC'Jon A,ea (Zone 1 being the · mof'9 restrictive desionaUon). As such, our sto,m water code would require \hal wale, qualhy racililies be lined, that Impervious surfaces be provided for areas subject to vehicular use or •••-•• .. , -........... 1 ... •nl'I 1ha1 i11n11r:llfld runoff orioin:atina lratn more than one acreo of 1-....... 1 .... ,. .... ..,,,,c,. h• lr1t•t11d l'il'$1 wilh a wet oond. Ou, concern for wate, quallly is also prompted IJy the proximlly of tne plats to spawning areas in the Cedar Rive,. 9eG3use of our concerns for bOlh surface and ground waler Quality, we recommend a high level of water qualily control consislenl wilh your COdH and pcHclcs and ou, own cpde. Bo\h strudural and nonstructural control$ an, recommended. For example, covered c:u w3sh pads draining to sewer for-condominium residents would help maintain watar quaNty. · !>. Tnc plat map indiC31es lhat condominium buildings encroaeh upon the wetland buffer. Encroachment of ~ildings, deared areas for patios and landSC3plng. and filUng/grading used In con...trudion should an clear1y be excluded from lhe buffer. c. Please nlso sett commen1s c •• cJ.. e .. and f. at,ove tMII apply hrre as well. 1 . !' 1, ;.,: ... ,; :,~~ . . (~_-··· '' :'· , .. ,.; .. I;·• : •.. :1, '· :i . ,. . ,,,:; .r-:;. .. . •' '. lkunc Masterson Dec.amber ~ s. i SSS Page3 M21t: It ls assumed lt:al King County will be collecting dtveloper impad fees to mitigate tile ,mpacl ol this project OIi the transportation system. 3. Tro•lt•ky Park. a. These plats lie Just outside 1he 1 O yeat time oc grgund water navel ror both the downtown and: Maplewood weUfieJds but ant Within lhe zone at capture. Were they lo be annexed, H is not clear whether they WOUid be designated Zone 2 of the Aquifer Proteclion Area alnce the City has not yel mace a aetermlnadon as to an outside ground water travel time nmh for Zone 2. Therefore, we Clo not l'\ave Sped.it recommendaUons ror water qualfty but would recommend that n,nolf De lntlftrated to the ma>dmum extent f)O$$(ble consistent with your OOdes and policiea. Re:cf'large of aquifers wtll replenish sources at public water supply as well as enhance base nows In streams and the river providing habllal during low now periods. 1nfittra1icn of stcnn water will also reduce erosion and sedimentation, reduce flood peaks. and pr0yjd1 acldhional 1,ea1ment ar storm water. b. After revlewfoo the Trame Impact Analysis for Trovltsky Parnronsportallon statr note that no lnterncllons lo lhe north or we.i of lhe SE Petrovitsky1140lh Avenue SE intersection were looked al, although lhese lntetsectlons wm be Impacted as 80% of the generated tnp.s fn,m the project are amiclpated to travel on these roadways. Downmam impacts on SE Petrovitsky and Maple Valley Hlgnway should be ldentmed and mitigated, M!Ugauon snould be In the form of tr2nsU and/or HOV improvements c. Clarification i.s also sought as Why the .site assump1ions for the nearby McGarvey Park project, Which was co'™dered in the analySiS as a generator of background 1ratric;, is d'1treren1 than In the Traffic ClrculaUon Study for McGarvey Part. Toe Janer Cloa.iment assumes 377 SF unils and 223 townhames, Whlle this report assumes 402 SF units. This results In around a 2s~, decrease In the number at trips assumed generaled from the McGaivey projed. d. A!though no transit servico is currenUy provided in Iha vicinity of this prgposcd subdivision, as Clevelopmen1 continues In the area. the potenlJal exists tor Klng county Me<to lo extencl transit sen,ice funher eost on Petrovitsky Deyond the projecl site. TherefOft. mitigation me3su,es and/or a Tfansportalion Management Plan to supµort the futun: transit se-rvlce 5n0UIO oa r'l:qUIICCI. e. As in th• case of CedarwoOd, above, since the sHe is within Renlon's S0u1neas1 PM we wculd encourage that ii De bUilt lO Renton .street developmenl standards, incluaing requirements fof widlh, curtls, gutter.s. sidewalks, and strecUighllng: tf2!t: It is assumea thal King County win bu collecting dcvetope, impact fees la miligate lhe ,-... --_, ... a-..-;·-....... _ ,-......... , .... cv.t•-· 4, McGarvey Park. a •• e, P1eas.e see commenls !or Trovi1s>.y Partc, abOvc. I, The nonh sedicn or 1ne suoclfvision. lots "4aS -tltsOO, have a single access paint. which, under Clly or Renton standards would be in~dequale far cme'9ency ingress and egress. --------·---• •---------•• "----,.,., .,._ '•-"'" -Mlvleln .. ••tGh •• INC • \ . IJ,,,UfH,) 1...-1d!llll.:I~""'' Deccrr.ber 15, 1995 Page 4 c. TransportaliOn s1aff note that post projca yi:rir 2000 LOS on Petrovitsky was found to be levul F. Whereas lnt.ersCcUan ITTlprovements are defined to improve LOS at 1ne affected intersections, only intersections on Pelrovitsky east of 140th were analyied. No analysis was prepared on Pctrovi1sk.y,west of 140th, or on 14oth ltsen'. This iS a cqnccm $Ince many of lhe 4792 anticipated daily llips to/from this develoQment wUI impact lhese road3, Downst.ream Impacts on SE PetrovHsky and Mopl• Valley Highway snould be 1uent1ncd ana mUlgated. Mltlgallcn should be In the fonn of lransll and/or HOV improvements. h. Another concern is 1'1at the development will not be transit accessible. The nearest existing or planned transit routes tra>1el through the ·Falrwood nelghba"hood. Because the preferred access altemaliv1t only accesses Petravitsky Road and Lak.e Desire to the south and not the Fairwood neighborhood to the west. future transit connections would be dlfficun. Congestion on P'ctrovitsk)• Read WIii continue to l!!cte85e and It fs Renton's policy ta handle future deniand using multlmodal solutions. Mltlgation and/or a Transportation Manogement Plan to s.upport ruture transit servtcc should be required. I. Specific delalls of nonmotorized facilities should be prcvkled. Also, residenUal streets should ideally be t>uitt to City of Renton stand11rds In terms of width, cul'bs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetl1gh1ing. Addilionally, safe, direct pedestrian enks to lhe Falrwood nelghbOrhood, which has transit service, would be de:slrat>Je. Whlle no planned regional trails border this development, access to nearby trails ldenttned In long f'3nge plans, should be considered, e.g. the Lake Young and Soos Creek Trails. Note: It ls assumed 1hat King County wilt be colledlng developer Impact leas to mitigate the 1 ... ,. •• , of thlc ,,,oJcu:;1 on Iha lrans;r,orbtlon SYS1flffl. AQaln, thank )'OU for lhis opportunity lo comment on these three preliminary plals. If you have questions aboul any of our comments please eonlad Oon Erickson, our lnterloca1 Pr0Jec1s Coordinato, a! 277-61 Bl. Very truty yourS, ~l\e11 ?Jl11t;Y..c{(~ Gre~m Zimmerman, ? .E. · Ad1ninistr.:uor \ !, ; • .-.. ... ·!. ·.1···: . 1 .. It ,. King Couar)' , Ci.Jt1&r.al a .. D\l"'f" 01~-t.ion Pa,lw a114 c..uwa1 I --Anll c--... ! Lo."~ alMt Haft•,r ~- 1"\iblk Al1, c-..a..,.. 306~'\-.~llll 11!11dl-,WhHl~U (2ot)JH-TIM, (Hl).aff-~trDD (.IK)lt~JtM May 5, 1996 i - TO: Marilyn Tox, Chief, SEPA Secxo: • .J. ~ FM: Leonard Partield, Manager FNY" · id"' U RE: .CS•ll(W2ba MDNS Lut week, I Jas contacted by you and ruck Lennon of Cedarwood Group, and asked to rcspqid to an clement in lhe proposed Cedarwood MONS. The issue in question relatds to mi1igation that seeks to preserve a view of !he landmark property from lrnl'fic mring on the Maple Valley Highway in an cas1erly direction. This ofice suppons !he proposed mitigation's goal of retaining views of the landma;k farnistead from approaching 1raffic as one way of helping preserve the · historic ~onte~I and setting of the propeny. The mitigation requires 310 feel of sigh1 distance las shown on the rev1Sed site plan received by LUSO. I was askod to assess the imppet of a berm and fencing on the proposed mitigation, as illuslratcd in the auached dfawings submiucd to your office by Mr. Lennon. hi my o~inion! the MONS mitigation will not be significantly effected provided that the pro:,oscd berm and fencing arc configured in such a way that the entire house is ,•isiblc from the groundline up with no obsltUction from point C; that only 5.2 feet . are obs!rllctcd above grade at point B (cuentially the foundation); and that 21il'' sj,; f:cl.arc Jbstrucled at point A (the most westerly point along the 310 foot sight disianc.: line).j Please note that this differs from the materials submitted for review by Mr. Leanen by providing greater visual access for a greater distance. But afler discuss.ons with Mr. Lennon, it is my understanding that the proponent is willing to meet this condition in order to address the goals of the proposed mitigation. i Please ,:.ill me at 296-8677 if! can provide further information. . i Attachments Cl) ' \. j ., • .... _ ......... .. ·, I' :_'f l 11 . . ... : ,-:1!1 ~ : 't i • · .. I 11: 5\ ~ l ; , 1-I : i II l ::. · 11 1:il :: i : .... ·'· .J I Ii Bl I I !'::. .. : 1· l! 1\ 1;. I . , I . I I I ; . I 1 , I : ( i · . · . l I : i "-~ @1 1' l \.'I I I =·., . ·. . .r I. i:. . · I ' I ' \ i : .. • ,tt . ' \· •, • I \ ... . ,\-~ ... \ ~ ·< ... ;.-. ·-· • • \ \ 3:lN'o' J.610 .1.Hf>IS OV3.LG:.11'40H 1v:>n:WJ.SIH ......... . ...... J~NJ.:l ,, il'IH38 ,P ' I X \ t .. ~ "' .. ..... w> ..... .... ~~ "'"' ~ \ I \ I I ii \ I 1~61•H 1l31 Jt&UIIHJ •1>1~•A .;·;: ~1 :I \ \ • -- I \ i\ a: '"\ !1 . >< "'I I " / / .. --~ .. ·~ -·· ------·---.. --.1 ...... '\ ) ~ -•• -"\I' --~~.] .~ nttl '" 1---z:1---1 I .. 0 ., !i i~ ll -f :r a: : ~ @ls . 0 . z ... 0 ... ... u % ... {~)~ . c:r ~ !E ... 0 ... ; :- '. "I" ;,;'., •• I '1 . f ' ~- ,; ,_ i' :, I'.' . ' . r.·; ... ~. 11 ., ·-:\ .. ·. ':,-.I :'; .. ' . ~: :·;. I:,-'. • • \ .. ;_..- ·•·. .1, .· :./!·j_ .·' I .. i;. .u~, ... ,, 1----~-==:...::=a.. -...... _ 3:lNV .LlilO .LH!llS . ·-· OV3.L S:Ji'iO~ 1V:ll!IO!SIH ""'"' .. ., \ J~NJJ ,t l't~:3V ,t ~x \ - \\ '6\ ~\ \ \ \ I I I I 1~61tH .,.I .ldUUUlif 11:,111•1,. .~·t •I [ii •I . \'· . . •·. 1: / •• -• -~ .. ·~ ---"~ -·-· -·-__ .... __ ,, .. " '\· ) / ~-C- '\!' ~-( :::I . <:S ··~··1:31t11 .--u ........... ....... ~ ....... .,.., _ .. -~--·j,f. llrfflll • """""' ... ,q1q h!II'*) $:i8 ""I '"l'l'"'l' , '11JClll'0 'O ~Ina 0 ----i:-.....11 i: z O 0 i .:: u i @! @) -.9 0 0 z w u z w "- "-0 D z w D ... :·· . . ·r . i(.' . (.: -/ .· . 1: j.· L.,: . . ' ' KING COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER Proposed Plat of Ccdarwood DOES ALE NO'S S9JP002S / L9SA0l1J / L9SSHl46 SEPA FILE NO. E93EOS02 -· "" ,....._ ,-. ')' ·u.·~ APPEAL STATEMENT BY APPLICANT FROM KING COUNTY DOES (LEAD AGENCY) SEPA SECJ10N MITTGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNJFTCANCE C'MDNS'1 IN THE MATTER OF "CEDAR WOOD" PRELIMINARY PLAT (S91P001S); CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (L9SAC01 I) AND SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (L95SHl46), TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR KING COUNTY BY APPLICANT THE CEDARWOOD GROUP BY THE CEDAR WOOD CROUP. A WASHINGTON PARTNERSHIP 11410 BEL-RED ROAD 1140 I \. BELLEVUE WASHINOTON 98007 (206)649-8668 AND HILLIS, CI..ARK. MAR'l'IN AND PETEl!SON. P .S. 500 GALLAND BUILDING, 1221 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101-2925 (206)621-1745 I. PmccdurJI Scning TI1is appeal Is in n:spon..•n: 10 the Mi1i,;au:c.l Dc1crmina1ion of Non Significance ( .. MONS"1 is.'iucd April 23. 1996 by the SEPA Section of King Cou111y DOES with rt.'ipc:CI to the :ipplica1ion kn<,"''" a.'i "Ccdarwood... The arrHcation is cnmruh;cd of 96 single family :md 146 mulliramily hou5ing unit,; (condominiums :ind townhouse$) lnlo lhrcc divisions on three separate contiguous p.irccls. Exhihil '"A" lndicaJcs the vicini1y of the Ccdarwnud project. and Exhibit "B"' (SllCCI 1/4) pmvidcs the Heuring Ex::unincr with a graphic depiction and the oricnt:uion of lhc lhrcc divisions (parcels). The Preliminary Plat :md Conditional Use Pcnnit (CUP) Applic:11ion..'i were made on the 2111111 ~r Oc1uhcr. 1996. nu:.~ applic:uion.oe; Included hCllh single family dc1achcd and multifamily (condominium and 1uwnhousc) portions or tl1c silc indic.ilcd on Exhibit .. 8 .. hereof pursu:1111 to the recently :adnptcd zoning code Tille 21 A . 11. . Specific Appeal l!..~C The :i.ppc31 in this ins1:i.nce is narmwly focu:;cd on 1hc Scclion· identified a.,; "Mitigation List .. in 1hc MONS. hcgir~ning un pa~c '.t ~'Uh·(lar.t!!rJph No. 5. (Exhihil "C'1 which reads :as follows: "!i. 11\C 35 rou, sc1h:11.:k .irc:i shnwn un the ~r-:~f-)6 rcvi!'>Cd si1c pl:m 1h:11 is l;."U11~(1.";.n.l l'ap ! nl' ' !l(i(i lne. M1y I. 19'16 hclwccn lhc ca.'il end uf huilt..ling cmnplcx "B"" and the Elliot Farm Historical Humcs1cad :dmll he lanl.lsc.1pcd m rmvidc a full screen (nn less th:in a '"Type 1'' landscapc ~rccn per KCC 21A.16.040) th:tt funL·tio118 a.,; much a.'i po~ihlc ~ a visual rnuricr Ca namlW fcK,t p::uh is alluwahlc within thi5 landscaping if act-·cs.,; le: dc.o;ircd 10 1hc rear y:arcJ area.). TI.1c lam.lscaping. requirements rur d1is a1C1 shall he reviewed and t1ppnwcd hy K c·s Cullur.il Resuun:c Dh·ishm. Hisioric PJC'icrv:i1ion St1.1ion. Ttml arc:a fnnttini:. SR·lffJ. ca..,1 of lhc pmjcct accw. Is suhjcct 10 DDES's l i ·.,;:;..;.. . -~. ' .:·:. '·i, ' ·~· (. ;;";__,!. .• ·t: j: ,, ::.;: i • . ·' . '. : -~.;, ,·. :~;.f :; : . ~ ! . •,'. ·'.J : /··; . ; i. '/"· ·. -_:.·. ·.;·-,i.•.:' -, ... • I rc,·icw anJ .1rpm,·al with n:,·icw commcnL111 rmwiUcl.l hy KC"!ii Cullur.d Rc.~urce Dh·ision·s. Histcuic Pn:scrv.ai:ion Sections (KCCP/CR-202, Soos Cn:ck CP/CR-1&:2)." As sho~n on ~IC Condilional Use Pennil (CUP) si1e pion (lox 101 4) [Exhihil D (Shccl 2/8)), ~le parcel •tiuis lhc Elliol Fann L.ondmark Dcsign,iion Sile 31ong lhc E.islcr1y houndill)'. During lhc SEPA Section n:vicw n( lhc a('lflliC3linn. lhcrc was cx1c1"1.<;ivc discussian n:ganling lhc public I111c~ in 1he pn:scrvation uf the EUiol Fann and huildings associated 1hcrcwid1, including 1hc Ellinl Fannhou..~c. The :applic:1111 suhminccl U,c preliminary plal anti condltinn:il use pcnnil hnwllJary ha.~ Clll pn:.o;crving 6.0 tacrcs in acc;:onJancc with the lca;ill <Jc.,i;criplion ll~t is pan nf dlC Landmark Decision dated Novcmhcr "f". 1990 (Exhihil E). The Cnun1y's Cultural Rc."iOun:c Division \Division'"), however, dispulcd Ute huund:uics of lhc landm:irk silc and whether lhcrc was sufficicnl pn:scrvalion and hu(fcring a.long the c:i.-.1cm houndary of lhc landmarl,;. site from dcvclopmcnl of U1c CUP 10 salis(y the public in1crcs1. Ultimately, lhc Division's impoundmcnl o( lhc arrJic:int ',; privaac pmp:r1y wa.'ii denied and the site planning cnufd cunt.inuc. TilC l:1nd111.&d: dcsig:n3Ucm silc was never prupo.~d ID he atacn::d a..'ii p.u1 of lhc CUP proposal, In addition. a 3!i' l.ulllscapc 1ro11;t ha.-. hccn pn1:puscd hy 1hc appl~c:uu :along the ca."ilCnl huund:iry ur the CUP 10 satl"ify 1hc rcquc~s fnr '"hufrering:· by Cullural Rc.~,urccs Division ("Division·). Hciwcvcr, the appUc.int's pmpcisal clid not aUcr the oris:iual pJ.an fnr a hcnn. fence a,1d J:uKJsc...apini: lu he cmt~ructcd adjaccnl to SR-169 fur U1e lcogU1 uf 111e C.U.P. fm1uapc. TI1e bcm1. fence :ind l:ultlsc:aping have alw•r• hccn pmfXL~ lo 3CI as mili~ion fn>na 1raffic 1Kiisc. lia:h1s alfdiauxJ wilh c:in. illKI t-:ar movement along SR-169 for UIC C.U.P. dcvck>JllllCOI. Mi1ig•U1"1 Cnndiliun S. however. Is lhc Dlvisiun's n:.<triclivc mclhud of 1cbievi11S' wJ1at 1hc Division cnuhJ 1101 achieve lhmugh other mc!hot.l:t. nic ''si;Ju distance se1hack" (CondiUon #$ of 1hc MONS) signiflc:1111ly :affcas.lhc appllc::uu's •ilc pl:u1. pn1pc,.<Cd ocSlhctlcs. :ult! lhc ru1un: n:sidcnfs ahili1y tn he pn11ce1cd fnm1 nnisc. ligh1. :and c31' movcmcru i1.1£SOCiaacd witJ1 SR-169 along dlC fmma~ or 1hc-C.U.P. It wouhJ also ruubihia lhc u1ili1.a1io11 or "'>";U'U area."' :&."-"""-"iillet.l wi1h BLrilding A. E4.IUS7GS~.a hrl' '.111( .• ll<'d> hs. May K. IIJ'Jt,, 1 \ The Di,·isiun ha.-. t:i1cd lhc King Cc1u111)· Cnmprchcn.-.ivc Plan Pnlky CR-102 ant.I Sou:,; Creek Community Pl:in Policies CR· t :ind CR·2 a., jus1Hica1iun for its restriction. (Exhihits .. r and ··0·1. H is I.he :1pplican1·s position lh:U Ute preservation of Ute ltisloric landmm ll!l.'l t,ccn achieved :ind that to runhcr restrict lhc sile in such .'l m:umer is not mlpponcd l'ly the policic.'i cited. 11 is merely ,1 method of g:Uning its ohjcctivc tluuugh lhc .. hack door". Titcrc is no mnnd:ilc in :my of tllC cited policies to regain such ''sight dimancc sclback..,;;"', Further discu.i...~i('ln took place hc:tween the :ar,rJicanl and Lcon3td Garfield, Cullur:tl Rc.,;;ourccs Division M:anagcr on May '.\"'. :&nd an :igrccmcnt wa.~ c.c:lahlishcd which would allow a hcnn 3Jld fence combin.ition to occur within the 3JO" sight dist:i.ncc 1.-orridor. Sec Exhihil H. letter from Lcon:ud Garfield d:Ucd May 5th. 1996. Two additional exhihil~ are included herewith which were used to come to lhc agreement and arc no1cd in the teuer mcn1ioncd above. Sec Exhibil 1 for 1he limits of sight restriction from SR· 169 to U1e Elliol rannhousc. Sec Exhihit J for 1hc effect of lhc view of the Elliol fannhuusc 311d lhc agreed aJ1em:iUvc. Ill. S1a1u1orv Fr:uncwnrt B0d1 RCW ,n.11CJ><,O :1.1KI WAC 197-11-660 require thal (I} mi1ig,a1ing mc:i.~urcs mu.<d he rca.wnahlc and C:?) rcl:itct.l tn a specific advCr.iC cnvlnmmcntal impad. The mili~tlling. n:~triclion lhat is lhc subject of this ap~:11 is ncilllCr. Prc."iCrvalion or the Ellinl Fann Landmark Designation Sile and tmi1ding u.~i:iiCtJ !herewith, includini the Fam1house ha.'( hccn achieved. Tu further rcst:iL1 1hc applic:uu·s pmpcny merely for a '"si~ll window" iii nol rc3.'linnahlc when lhc 1ruc ohjeC1ivc ~f the Oi\ision ha.,; hcci, achieved. Ncid1er is the restriction n:lalcd u1 :1ny spcdfic advcc;c envimruncnlal impact. 11te ap(llic:1111's prujcL"t ii nm :td\-Cr.;cly impacting. the puhlic's intcl"C$I in preserving the Ell!u• Fann·Landm:ut Dc.~ign:uiun Sile merely hy hcing. pmxim:iic tu ii. E~~r.s.::,1 l"ai:, ,1 cil ~ mm IK. :o.1 .. 1 a. 1n ' \ :· , .. i ;,;_.[. '/: ·. ·/·· ',·::· ; :· i ·, . .. , '. ' ' . . ~ '.f 1 . ; : ; i •. ,I•'. Titis ~ppcal is $Uhmi11cd wilh rcsr,cct 10 the Mi1ii,::11cd Dctcm1ina1inn of Non.Si,;:ninc:mcc. :ind for 1hc rcafflns staled herein the applica.111 requcscs lh;u 1hc condition cilcd in Parairnph JI he deleted or modified 10 allow for use of Lhc :an:a arrccd upon hy the Cullur:iJ Resources Division and Applicam. SUBMITTED BY: Hll.~IS, CLARK. MA~11N AND PETERSON, P.S. 1Ljj)fi>),J!-= BIUCHARD R. WILSON. ESQUIRE WSBA #6952 EIJ.IUS7f"1o'-..2:!.a 1-.,.. $ nl .S !IC.ti Inc:. Ma)' I. 19':16 t \· ~·.:it ,1 ·, ',., it'i~ ''!IJJ;·· ·:l:·.. ' \. ~.t~. r, .. : · · 11 ~.-• .. : .?!f,.1: : · . · vr, . ir.~-. ,._ ... '!· ,. ,; \<:t.!L.. . .. ,: :I_,· ' ~,;•, · ... ,.,,,,, ' ~ it,~'··~ ... i'.~ ).: t I :jl:j~ . •, ~ .·• l''J"' u~:~~l Ii, i ,.,·.··!:f: l • •}.!. i(~ , .. ·.r.:1.W·. . , .• ,-, ,.' ··t~1''. -·.:r},;, ' '~ti.I >' : •{i: .: ' ,_ .... ,, .. 1~11 ,p· 11 .~ :1.1. ,.1., ' ~:~.\,~!'~·,. i /·:::'1, :,,fJy1~J ' \li·ir,1,, ' •. : .. lir.··.·, ~ ' ,' i ,.,... ,' • "' •'1,'" ' ' • t ' • i•··, ' ,. ,,J' . ~i R•: . .. ~ ' 1-.• ~~~ ~ I ,'' .,~11--. ' ~~,:(; :. ':f ,t 11-.r,,· , · ,, · :: ::;1ii1'.: · :Jir . L.-t···· ,,,t ''"'":~ii~-.·: ... ~>. '·:. i ,'\{'('' • : ,:/(; .... J\&~:i::'.-:: ";'.''.' >:·J.t.lir·., . ;:, ;·l)r;;,·C"'· •;··,:.·.:·' '. :1t{~{:" I , f. ):.' :u~it\' ,:: . \8\'. .. ,,~~r:. :c. . /;:,;;._ . ,Jtl(< ·' .'f'\' ,·.·./i'!il : ,:?1:~·· . :jtti·'C". . l., ... .;;.,. . , ,;.i I ,' r,tV , A, •.. •. ·1.'P!·~j·j' ,.k ., ~'~ 11,~ j' ·•i"1'' \'/ ::i~.;i: ,·· ;~~~-; · .. ,,.r, ... .11'!'.i,.il1·41, . ·:..,~)·" . ·c' :• . . ~:;1 ~ ~" \··~~·. ' ,·); -,., .. ~ ~ .. r;'.ij '.'.'.Y:, .. ·'i ): ,•,, .. 'jt,,,... +· ... ·1~·,v,. . ::-• ,, ., '· ·.i·:,'i ',, I •ol, ,.. '. ,·, i' . . 1•·,1 ... · J;· I·· 'iii, .' . '''l. ~~~ ·,:.:: ';,.,;~1 ,.,; ,; . '•)Ii f":¢ ''. ,'I: ;'!'""1~ .!./ . ""' . i""'''." '· ,.q1··~.j.,( ::•1'.~4i; . :tl,( ~,~wJ-i- }:: :_;:};:::_·· ,/ _::. i. ', ·1, ,: ·',•, '·! .' ,. $101 q 11) 4-w;w~\I --C-· I -\ ' <71,!, I • s'.-··'·-?/,'., /.· _,_...,,"'.~..,?·>,:7' -:r··.-..,,1_. .. 9h_.t.. :· ·':'Y::'7~ ,.,...-l"'l..,...d"-:r;.;rrt,·,.,..,,...r :...-~~ ,.,..,. ,.. .. .,.~ 1 ' • / /'· ~ ' ·-.:Y , .-;y,,,-, :r-·.,.>6 ~ ·7,fr--~~,../r .. ),>,-~~ -~·-":·r-...J,-..-./_l, -,-,,-..r;r (7 f' a'-. . '/-:" /·/ •'l -. ' ~'JZ" ·-:-=~..i,7"1 ~ .il;?''·";Z"'..,._r.-,,..,...-......-1,.;.yy 7:1',,_.,.... ,.,,,.,,...f-r·t.· /'1·r---!r~-r"-:"':.,. tF-.z:-~!,1:7"' .. ,.,, ,1., ...,.,...rl-y.J"'...-~ ..,, ;.,,_,,,c ---r:,t.r"'c.,,,,u..,, ,-7n-r.J r" r»4-· ~·,7rY-. r ; .. -....::,rd"""t,1-~,· .... rf;.,, .:22::: , ,.,..,...':r,...z"'·'P'?.,. ,,,.,,,._ r7 l (""-r 1;:r:r ..., .,._,, ,.,..,.,.,...... :r ..,...,.,rf -;l .. ,....J.,,-,,-> ..J :..,. r~=ef 1"' . / ' . ' ' ' '71:;cz: ~, -,.,,,, /'' ,.,.. .. ,.,.,._.. ~"J?/ I/ 72:: -7 )·7"'"""' . ..,._.,,_ i}._'"';r "'l''l.1 r-,.,.,.., •. r•7r·""·,· J-·» , .. , .... ,y-.-t · ........... , .• -,,,r ' -,.....,,r r· -i.11' yr>,>? ~7?- •• • . ' • ' -· --" 7 . :,--~·"Y".,,c;z,;-:::72? ~ J""' c-:::r...:r-.r·,·r ~ -:--..:.-,_.'.:T.'"'=7.1,.,.,-.1 · JV-·--· ·"'-· · --, , ,. V . .,..,-l,.,,.,r->· ,, -..· 7.; ,d ''Y.>_:· · r,,,, =·'T ,..,...._, . ..,.,,..7.,. ,_, •. , -!r .--.... r .. ,.-,,_.,.. / +-.. . /~· ... .---,. 1 ---. : . 7.,./...7"' ~r ,r ,nu ·.r·,, Y()r·~~ ,-o-n,,:,,;, -/'-''!;Z"'°f7;""" ,z- . r'JP' T""' ,..-,."»;7 ..... '.,.,.:!::J J' )7 7 772" ~-'":"~-7,,,..-'b-.,.,..,..,.,...-(l'?-r,'\-r ,-,.~.,.,.r,,-......,,;.Jr );. . ?6J I ','1,< r) ('Y''""Y' _c-;;'C't?c/16 s.,. ;rl- ;r,_~.-,-,./%7 .f ,7;-r/ _:)2:7 >'NCI 1r ?;a-_)·,.._,...4/...-:r r.··-:.:7-:J r----.";,},_. ~-"vJ J (' ~ / S}h,y ;: ?·JIA~!J" "3S!l l1i\1V'1 .•. i ~._i:·'.t·.:·· _..~~:I\! .;66l ; fJ ;..~~~ <>.£1,--:"'~'r--A-J':' ../,.,~,..,li/ t--z. ,,...-... ,,,:r?Y v-c1 ::?.,;: :•:::2.?J.J ~; - ;,:11.1. ·"•'.:1.J'~ '--<rJZ, ,....,._'lf7Jl {13.i\l3~3H ·:7~ -;r,,7cf' /..L.. ?£'/ C.:J 7£ --~;:;c '??Y,,.,,.r-,,,,,» i---r--i'r,-,,-,,1 -£_.-,/ ..: . , /V~ er --.y ·/r ... · -76 ¢ /. c-::< -,( ":,,~ ' ' I J: ? i ' > I i. i 1 ~ • ' ~ ' t l ! ; .. ' " I· I ! :.~: ...... 1·; :.-,·' ! ~ . ·: .. ..... '• ,.····-· •.•• ______ ...... _____ ,.. ........... -:.,. ...... tt ....... _.i,,., ....... _ ........... _ .. ~ ........ _. R2 8 ~ 0 O") Ellloa Fann Designation Repon Page 5 Ftnnm:s or Sirnifh:ancc fe&IW'Ca of Slpuficance Include all cXll:ricr pcnions of the house, carnage house, feed house, hcrsc barn, milk house, and hay ham; all exterior and /nuri,,r fcoiurcs of the ml1lc barn; and, all natunl landscape f= Included within the boundaric, or the nollllnatod parcel Including crnamcntal plAntlngs, mnnant orchard 1rc:Cs, and open apace, PROTECTION MEASURES: To ISSWC condnued 'prcscrvadon o( spcclllc fca\W'CI and chanctcrutlc, of the t..andmatlc. the followin1 controls and Incentives shall apply: O,nrmls No significant feature (u noted abovt) may bo allettd. whether or not a building pcnnit I• rcquln:d. without first obtalnln1 a CcnlficalC of A!'Proprillcness from the l.andmarlcs Commlaslon pursuant lO the provisions of KCC 20.62.080. The following e:<cluslons arc tllowcd: ln-lclnd repair and roudnc maintenance. No new consttuetion may talcc place within the dcsigna1cd boundaries (as noted on. Attachment A), whether or net a building pcnni1 iJ required, without lim obtaining a CcnlflcalC of Appropriai,:ncss from the l..andmula Commission pursuant to the provldooa of KCC 20.62.080. . · · tnccndvcs The followin1 lnca11iv!'5 arc hereby noted as pcc«1tially available 10 the owner. t, Elllfblllty for P.!'' funds for buildbi1 rchabWtadon lhrouah the King : County Histonc PrcscModon Office. .. ',. .·. . . . 2. Elllfbility for !CChnlcal wbtance fn>m the King County undmarl<s Commission. · 3. Eligibility fer hiJtoric d"' mm.er. • 4. Eligibility for Special Valuation Tax Program. 5. Elipbllity ror federal tu cn,dlis, ahould the pmpcr,y be pla.ccd In commcn:ial UJC and lilted on the National Rcgui,:r of Historic Places. REPORT ISSUED BY: KING COUNTY LANDMARKS COMMISSION d-;i. Llj_ r-lt-B-P0 Richw Mcllcr, Actln~ Chair -,Z- ' \ 1 ' • .:t~~):t . )!.: •: !~~i> : (; i ·'.':!i{f \ ' \\' . ; ·; i:~d'I" . . -.,i..,;~'; ~it:'.'. ; ; :., . I 1·1 , • ,it·' .. . :~·''.:·.~ . :,1::::,! ., : : l{;~,: ,: ' ;J?f . ,, •,ll;J.,, . . . '. •· . f, :· j1-·. I~. : ''. ; .·· ... :·,~ . . 1''-~l·;.o:•· ·.· .·,;.,,: .• ,. : ~ ~,..t:::· . : .: ·; .".,, ·of.,.k·jl, -~ , ·t -l; -~'j:~L . ·:-:y '·>: •·;:~(";• '\:::· \!\r\1· .. . d,~·~_i. ., '· . ,'r' I~ Ii"~ ; :','. ! .. ! 1: 1t'I I••-~ -' · · "·, '.' . 'i<i·,: '•:: :.·,;.:::: • ·~1-':I • • -r-·;:.: :·~ ;t:'iui.t, ... :. :'.\-~ ; • •·.I ('i1;1 .:,. : ".,,., . \ .!i1((_:. ·. :, /:}\ . . ·. :1~:'i,T·.i-, · .\; : t· · .Jt)~ ·. ,:Wr .. ,·,. /'i~~( .. . ,,, ,.l:ii· '• : .. : f ~i,· l~olt .... ~~,-:.i · .... ~ .. . .... "•r· · .. . •-,1;."r.' t .. . I '~lt~f/ ,• ~ • ,i' ,.~., . . .,•. ~;~·I Ir ,,i. I {f~1,l'J,! !. L, . ' 1 ~'.~1'f.J " •\ •jJ ' . tlii·f . : ·;.' J ·.~J1~:· _: .. ;;; ~·' il1:_i,; ';• ... .it£,•, ... /:ih\'/: .·: :; 6 . ~.i'fli~-.. · " ~-.. !,\J1;i·-f.· :·:':\' ·. /~I·:~[.\: .. . /;f;', 1~ •1' ''l:): 11tfi (Je; ~ " . .il'l .;i., •r ,,• I ) . . ti'," ' .. I' ••• t:il·'~· , .. I 1 1 .. ··:dt ., " . "t,lt~·~:1rl j' -·~~ . •,! »1'.·!. " : :'"0t:· ·•••· I •• f)f\., · · ·..Jt.lflJr_,, .• •.'i''ijj, !;.,If, : . -~,i,_t, '} ' . ·-,~11:, · . "' :rr .. · .. :; . ~: L' . :;,,, .. u •. ,, >):'.-" '' \Y i·· ·· 1. ., .. : . ' '!: ,2 jO 'r. 1 ,;, q ~ .µ,oi.uVi')'O\W l \ --c .. .,--t..,.,.,,;r•?,_;r •""?7'-'~....-7,zr ~·;...-vf,'-f....77 n-q•y I• ' ,,,C..:. • i J .-• -77-.;7"""~ i.:4 ..-. ..... ~M-"""...,,,..,tZ" • ..,-;.....:J.r .... >r.-.":'7 7;(,Y 7,, 7-7•;...;-,.,..-,.....,.~-., ...... ?--.. ,. ... ;-· .-r y•·•r.-:1· r?" ~ ;r ..... ,,., . .,....,... 7,.,..,,.,.,,.,. ....J."",.r ~ -'T ---;re 7.'l'"'n-~ V t, . r.' . ' . . . . . , ·-,-,~ .7.,.,._,/ ~ -:::r...,... # /t,,..,....A..--.......v!r..,....., ,I""""' r..,..J..· ,rr ~ --:-.... ~?" T"r·· :!-·...,, ...,,.,.,,.,, ~~71-,,l ;./tr . ,.,...,.,.,__. p ,-n-~;-.,... ........... .::.r,../~ y>r.--~,. ....... ., ,..,.,..·;r r" ,....rr r~- ~,r r,..,..,.".,t ..,.,--,-..,."7 Yf :,-....,,,~y--,...,_,,..;J.~V .,, --1.'y;::J."'.;r~r· -r·l> 1)"'.,.....fi'?i"; . --,..,.,..,.~,:. ...... ,r~r,.,"..,,,..J.,.,,..--ii .::::;z~·r-'.:;77 ,,../_r,..,J.....,,...t .. .-r -:rA-'' .JJ ••• -r----~-~---..,,....Jr,;,~ -w.r ..... •>-,»<,-...,.,'l', -;i • -L-.... ---. t? /:..:.. (' /'&..... ~.y ~,.,..d.,.,.,....,..,./..., ;r-/ ~z-· ;rr-" ,/r ... ·--TV'~r:r" ?-7";:_._'""' A."!-:r;~ ;r ... :~ . p~-r-yr f, ,....,rn-,.,.-.,..r r-~lZ',...,....Tr;r--- ,,.....,.._,7_..L ,,..,,..,,1v_.,.r·r-, ..... :::z:""'"-·31.-'")'"-"" -y.,.,.. .. -. ..,,.J ..,..,.. -r--p , ,, /~ ,, " // t, .::z-· ,.,,..1..-:rrr -;cz: ...,.-,1.,..,""-;r ~ .... <-.,--r·,· ~"r "": ,-,.,,_/.,eh-~~ "JZ"/)7'7"' . ...., .::z:::w-·· tl'l·-r r>?_i""">V';Z:t; . .,,.-;:;.,·-r-;r ~--?V"--r· ,,., ...... "":/ ?-2:" ,.., .... -: -;.,,,..J,.,......,p ·ry,.,... n·7•»,:,, v.+.7 ·r,? · ,rt: ::i.;, f·..;;::r.:z-,;-.z::: F_r-,o--~.--;.-;.~~ -;zr.-,.-;,N•·c'"J-:,•,..,.-.,? t ~ .7/ l'::J ?,,V ..l""J'Z-• ··.~ -•'.7 • )"fl?-....,_. ..,..;.:..Jl'', , ,. . -~ : . -----r'-/. -, . :_;l."'""7"':"'" ,.....,.-!1...,..,c/ "X:2::'" -,..~ ... tr "Jr""'...,_(' t,' ..r--r-..iz" ,..-.1,,}f?) ~·-:,.;r~:;;_ -., / . . , • • ' I . (7(' t • ~ T"~~~ ;r~.,,,.-1,r~;--n.-r~?--n-rl .,.,,...,.,..,.,...../ -:-/'Y ,......,.., • rr. r..,,r ............. ..,...,., ,~· 'u,/ 7-r _7_ r-..,.,.. ~ " '-I' " ;, • . /" ,....,_...,'",L.~ -;r;.z·z:-""'T" ~-~ -·r•n-r.•·v--~T~ ...,.....,..,__17;:,, ' i \ . .-.,....,,__ ,•· .... -2?: .hz:...!., 1.:~,fk,., /tr~.--1' ::d -7.?r f.1.1c;_ ~;L_,,.yr ...... (- ....f.7d~,..;(;,, ""_;,:.,..._~ -"'L.j't"",( -/:,..,_ j3'•L_ . .,,_,_ .Jf..'J.,. .:;t& .....,.-,,.(. /?"" --. -s u ,.J ,,,.~..,..,..._.:.:.. t:-.:."1---.C -~ _.I-· . ..-v-c:-c.t. rt-,-/ ..d~-? ,:;,...~. -'-"--£-~,:...:.., -tA,.-..c"'J;.,., (i,._.{ .,cz.+·-,.,...,.2 _;,-.c...-LC:: ... -z...,.. ... ~t: .. h -~ .. - . \ ... .. , . ' ·- \ . .. , . ' ; i. •;. .i-I •. ··, . . ·,_, i· . ' . ·, ·;-' ./._-~.,..,,,. -pz: j., ,..,..,..,...,.,, ·;: s yr L" -:1..,:...., .. ........; ,,....,~ ... r ...,-1.,.,,.,r . y.::z:-;r,,-,...,/,-,,-;--p-:·= ~T~/7'·".7' r/?71'"" ro . I&-I?!· I?~· -/, ,,../.,.,-,.,,..,_ °7...2:'.. -fr 1/r~ ,,-f,,.r -~?"'" ."7.-~ 7" -!:?--'4 :'?'7 K· ... ,.,,.1 ~ }' .r-,..,.,.... -.L.r"..,.,,,. ""l( A!.'% l"--A..r7,w-,,,,---;a: .~-_):" .... ~-.,,.::2: r.-d ~p......., 7:--,Z:~t'r~·~n-,/,-vyr-)?7"'" ~'ll'P.,-.,.-;J'Z fO =~,~ -cS: - ·.~_.-,+/ -/ E,. •• :;, • ,,.,,t,; . -;;. (:-.·-~-7:"kv'.F'd -~,?,;,-;r·x -· ',?::; >-p ,Y(.k?/ -~'J'~·_g~ ~cl././"'Tc]l . ,.£__.r:r//Jz.,"'---=--w r""" ..-,-,.,L,:.,, rl"•»n--6__,,.fr??~'-,rn-y--,-r ;-7~r r 7,a--- -e.7";1~/;T';r' ._,..,..... ~J'Z :-·. ,..,.,..,_.,.. ~:1-L--;r;r· !':-.::7. ..,, ......... -.,..--_z:-· ,,...,,,.r ~ ~~--v-~,.,r;r-JI ;7,T.",ft ro . ~F."',..,.., . . ., ... ·~ ';· . I/' .· ,.i ',• •,,· .t .,·,,. ;;· ,·:·.-: .. ·· =-1. · '.·'!':I' ····:·i . . ·, 1,'.: t ~ · .. ','· ' O.ner: Cedar,,ood Group STII: 5£ 22.?J-05 Number of Lots: 96 Single-family l.ots & U 6 H.ll.ti-faniy unts 6.07 PROPOSED SUHDIVIS ION , CUP RENTON ( Cedarwood) 0' R-4 ................. , .... ~~--~~;;.-.a.3''::<·--··'"'"· .. ··-~, .... }. -·-..... UR-P R-6-P \\ \ ~------- ~ R-6-P / ? I R-6-P , RENTON / I '-, l /:,;: R·4·P ;1 I ,. 1· I I RA- R- RA·S·P R-4 D.i.D '!. : !' ., •.. l; ':j ':; . l ·' ! ·. ...J L . .. .. , . ' . . ' Section III Off-site Analysis . . . . , n r .. .. _.;; Ill. Off-site Analysis Upstream: There is no upstream runoff that will enter or be bypassed in this development. This includes Tax Lots 4, 13, 21 and 25. Downstream: The discharge from the developed site will pass through a water quality facility before it discharges into the Cedar River. No detention will be provided for the site. The discharge will be combined with the discharge from the W.S.D.0.T. detention facility located adjacent to SR- 169. The outfall will be upgraded to handle the discharge from both facilities. r.l4057ql.445 Page 59 of 118 HGG Inc. October I. 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. _J L -' Section IV . Retention/Detention I Analysis and Design -- .. n r- _, IV. Retention/Detention Analysis and Design Detention is not applicable to this site. Water quality facility has been sized for ultimate build-out of site and includes a portion of SR- 169. The design is as follows: Purpose: To determine the required size of a wetpond for the fully developed condition of Cedarwood and the tributary drainage area to the existing W.S.D.O.T. detention facility using the new King County S.W.M. Manual (interim). Division 1: Single Family Area= 10.50 ac., 40 lots~ 3.8 DU/Ac.= 40% Imp. Imp. = 4.20 ac. Perv. = 6.3 ac. Division 2: Single Family Area= 14.65 10.65 ac. single family, 56 lots~ 5.3 DU/Ac. = 49% Imp. Imp. = 5.22 ac. Perv. = 5.43 ac. 4.00 ac. forested Division 3: Multi-family Area = 14.26 ac. 9.22 ac. multi-family Imp. = 5.40 ac. Perv. = 3.82 ac. 5.04 ac. forested Division 4: Multi-family Area = 5.18 ac. Imp.= 2.70 ac. Perv. = 2.48 ac. W.S.D.O.T. Tributary Area: Totals: Area= 7.84 ac. 5.00 ac. road 2.89 ac. long grass Impervious Area = 22.50 ac. Till Grass = 18.03 ac. Till Forest = 9.04 ac. Outwash = 2.84 ac. r94057ql.445 Page 61 of 118 HGG Inc:. October 1, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. C = 0.9(22.50) + 0.25(18.03) + 0.10(9.04) + 0.01 (2.84) = 0 _49 52.43 VbNr= 3 R = 0.47 vb = vb R A. c (43 •560 ) = 3 (0.47) (52.43) (.49) (43 •560 ) = 131,500 cu.ft. v, 12 12 Volume Required = 131,500 cu.ft. Volume Provided= 132,000 cu.ft. cl40S7ql.44~ Page 62 of 118 HGG Inc. October 1, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. ., LJ L "1 . ' . -. Section V Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design - . . , n r . . . . . _, V. Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design This section verifies the capacity of the storm water conveyance facilities as shown on the Road and Storm Sewer Plans. The capacity analysis of the storm sewer is based on the following assumptio.ns. Assumptions: 1. For the developed site the Rational Method was used for the 100-year, 24-hour storm event. The 100-year storm event was used due to the sensitive nature of the site (steep slopes, etc.), and as a condition of approval. 2. C-factors used are: C = 0.9 for impervious areas (roof, paving, etc.); C = 0.25 for lawns; C = 0.20 for pastures; C = 0.1 O for dense forest. 3. Time of Concentration for each drainage area is given an initial wetting time of 6.3 minutes for impervious areas and 10.0 minutes for pervious areas. 4. Mannings roughness coefficients used were: n = 0.014 for concrete pipe; n = 0.009 for Drisco (HOPP) pipe. 5. The analysis is performed for the 100-year storm. The rainfall intensity curves used are calculated using a Type 1A storm with precipitation= 3.9 inches. 6. Backwater analysis was performed using Hydra Storm and Sanitary Sewer Design Software. 7. Drainage areas and the storm sewer layout for Divisions 1 and 2 are shown on the attached Storm Sewer Analysis, Exhibit 1. 8. Division 3 is included in the Conveyance System Analysis and Design assuming the future developed condition. '940S7q1.44S Page 64 of 118 HGG !no. October I. 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND SIZING TABLE USING THE RATIONAL METHOD LOCATION Sub Basin No. Area C C-A Sum Tc iR I Q Pipe n Slope Q V V L Tt From To (ac) C'A (Min.) (design) (In.) (ft./ft.) (FulQ (Full) atQ (ft.) (Min.) 1-SA 1-5 0.12 0.90 0.11 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.26 12 0.014 0.0200 4.68 6.79 3.20 24 0.1 1-5 1-4 0.50 0.53 0.27 0.38 10.1 0.608 2.37 0.90 12 0.014 0.1572 13.12 19.04 9.56 128 0.2 1-4A 1-4 0.28 0.53 0.15 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.35 12 0.014 0.1313 11.99 17.40 6.83 24 0. t 1-4 1-3 0.22 0.53 0.12 0.65 10.3 0.601 2.34 1.52 12 0.014 0.0660 8.50 12.34 8.19 225 0.5 1-3 1-2 0.77 0.53 0.41 1.06 10.8 0.583 2.27 2.41 12 0.014 0.0778 9.23 13.39 9.89 63 0.1 1-2 1-1 0.22 0.53 0.12 1.18 10.9 0.580 2.26 2.67 12 0.014 0.0354 6.22 9.03 7.62 24 0.1 1-17A 1-17 0.90 0.53 0.48 -10.0 0.612 2.39 1.14 12 : 0.014 0.0750 9.06 13.15 7.89 24 0.1 1-17 1-15 0.11 0.53 0.06 0.54 10.1 0.600 2.37 1.28 12 0.014 0.0233 5.05 7.33 5.37 148 0.5 1-16 1-15 0.39 0.53 0.21 . 10.0 0.612 2.39 0.49 12 0.014 0.0071 2.79 4.05 2.67 24 0.1 1-15 1-14 0.75 0.53 0.40 1.15 10.6 0.590 2.30 2.65 12 0.014 0.0076 2.88 4.19 4.17 25 0.1 1-14A 1-14 0.01 0.53 0.01 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.01 12 I Q.014 0.0100 3.31 4.80 0.94 24 0.1 1-14 1-13 0.01 0.53 0.01 1.16 10.7 0.586 2.29 2.65 12 0.014 0.0076 2.88 4.19 4.17 25 0.1 1-13A 1-13 0.87 0.53 0.46 -10.0 0.612 2.39 1.10 12 0.014 0.0329 6.01 8.72 5.82 24 0.1 1-13 1-12 0.18 0.53 0.10 1.72 10.8 0.583 2.27 3.90 12 0.014 0.0195 4.62 6.70 6.60 88 0.3 1-12 1-11 0.46 0.53 0.24 1.96 11.1 0.573 2.23 4.38 12 0.014 0.0180 4.44 6.41 6.41 88 0.3 1-11 1-10 O.Q1 0.53 0.0, 1.97 11.4 0.563 2.20 4.33 12 0.014 0.0180 4.44 6.41 6.41 135 0.4 HOA 1-10 0.51 0.53 0.27 . 10.0 0.612 2.39 0.64 12 0.014 0.0942 10.15 14.74 12.20 24 0.1 1-10 1-9 0.23 0.53 0.12 2.36 11.8 0.551 2.15 5.07 12 0.014 0.0240 5.13 7.44 7.44 50 0.1 1-9 1·8A 0.01 0.53 0,01 2.36 11.9 0.548 2.14 5.05 12 0.014 0.0240 5.13 7.44 7.44 48 0.1 1-BA 1-8 0.18 0.53 0.10 2.46 12.0 0.545 2.13 5.23 12 0.014 0.0267 5.41 7.85 7.84 24 0.1 1-8 1-7 0.48 0.53 0.25 2.71 12.1 0.543 2.12 5.73 15 0.014 0.0100 6.00 5.57 5.49 25 0.1 1-7A 1-7 0.01 0.53 0.01 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.01 12 0.014 0.0554 7.79 11.30 2.10 24 0.1 1-7 1-6 0.17 0.53 0.09 2.81 12.2 0.540 2.11 5.92 15 0.014 0.0100 6.00 5.57 5.49 25 0.1 1-6A 1-6 0.01 0.53 0.01 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.01 12 0.014 0.0896 9.90 14.37 2.49 24 0.1 1-6 1-1 0.01 0.53 O.Q1 2.82 12.3 0.537 2.09 5.91 15 0.014 0.0100 6.00 5.57 5.49 75 0.2 1-1 EXCB1 0.96 0.53 0.51 4.51 12.5 0.532 2.07 9.35 15 0.014 0.0265 9.76 9.07 9.06 100 0.2 EXCB1 EXCB2 0.00 0.53 0.00 4.51 12.7 0.526 2.05 9.26 13 0.009 0.1500 19.93 28.93 24.94 630 1.0 Project: Cedarwood • Div. 1 R 100yr. Pr 3.900 Cales. by: ETE Job No.: 94057 Location: King County, WA Date: 6120/96 Page 1 of 4 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND SIZING TABLE USING THE RATIONAL METHOD LOCATION SUb Basin No. Area C C'A Sum Tc IR I Q Pipe n Slope Q V V L Tt f<om To (oc) c•A (Min.) (design) (In.) (ft./ft.) (Full) (Ful~ at Qr (ft.) (Min.) EXCB 1 EXCB2 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.51 12.7 0.526 2.05 9.26 13 0.009 0.1500 19.93 28.93 24.95 630 1.0 EXCB2 2-15 1.07 0.10 0.11 4.62 13.7 0.502 1.96 9.04 15 0.014 0.1011 19.07 17.72 15.33 94 0.1 2·15 2·14A 0.18 0.62 0.11 4.73 13.8 0.499 1.95 9.21 15 0.014 0.0310 10.56 9.81 9.70 78 0.1 2·14A 2·14 0.08 0.90 0.07 4.80 13.9 0.497 1.94 9.31 18 0.014 0.0120 10.69 6.89 6.81 83 0.2 2-14 2·13 0.85 0.62 0.53 5.33 14.1 0.493 1.92 10.24 18 0.014 0.0120 10.69 6.89 6.88 86 0.2 2-13A 2·13 0.40 0.62 0.25 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.59 12 0.014 0.0091 3.16 4.58 3.09 22 0.1 2-13 2-12 0.25 0.62 0.16 5.72 14.3 0.488 1.90 10.90 24 0.014 0.0104 21.42 7.77 6.85 28 0.1 2·12A 2·12 0.02 0.62 0.01 . 10.0 0.612 2.39 0.03 12 0.014 0.0200 4.68 6.79 1.67 22 0.1 2-12 2-11 0.02 0.62 0.01 5.74 14.4 0.486 1.90 10.89 24 0.014 0.0050 14.85 5.39 5.17 28 0.1 2·11A 2·11 0.18 0.62 0.11 . 10.0 0.612 2.39 0.27 12 0.014 0.0273 5.47 7.93 3.57 22 0.1 2-11 2-10 0.12 0.62 0.07 5.92 14.5 0.484 1.89 11.18 24 0.014 0.0053 15.29 5.55 5.31 47 0.2 2-10B 2-10A 4.10 0.19 0.78 -41.1 0.251 0.98 0.76 12 0.014 0.0205 4.74 6.87 4.42 160 0.6 2·10A 2-10 0.28 0.62 0.17 0.95 41.7 0.249 0.97 0.92 12 0.014 0.0114 3.53 5.13 3.78 28 0.1 2-10 2-9 0.20 0.62 0.12 6.99 14.7 0.480 1.87 13.08 24 0.014 0.0061 16.41 5.95 5.80 74 0.2 2-9A 2-9 0.28 0.62 0.17 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.41 12 0.014 0.1305 11.95 17.35 7.09 22 0.1 2-9 2-8 0.04 0.62 0.02 7.18 14.9 0.476 1.86 13.33 24 0.014 0.0059 16.14 5.85 5.73 59 0.2 2-8 2-7 0.00 0.62 0.00 7.18 15.1 0.472 1.84 13.22 24 0.014 0.0074 18.07 6.56 6.28 27 0.1 2-7B 2-7A 0.69 0.62 0.43 . 10.0 0.612 2.39 1.02 12 0.014 0.0200 4.68 6.79 4.77 32 0.1 2-7A 2-7 0.36 0.62 0.22 0.65 10.1 0.608 2.37 1.54 12 0.014 0.1338 12.10 17.56 10.57 32 0.1 2-7 2-6 0.01 0.62 0.01 7.84 15.2 0.470 1.83 14.37 24 ' 0.014 0.0350 39.30 14.26 11.53 100 0.1 2-6A 2-6 0.06 0.62 0.04 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.09 12 0.014 0.0750 9.06 13.15 3.82 24 0.1 2-6 2-5 0.43 0.62 0.27 8.15 15.3 0.468 1.83 14.88 24 0.014 0.0241 32.61 11.83 10.41 135 0.3 2·5A 2-5 0.30 0.62 0.19 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.44 12 0.014 0.0104 3.37 4.90 2.99 24 0.1 2-5 2-4 0.59 0.62 0.37 8.71 15.6 0.462 1.80 15.71 24 0.014 0.0185 28.57 10.37 9.31 97 0.2 2-4A 2-4 0.10 0.62 0.06 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.15 12 0.014 0.0104 3.37 4.90 2.12 24 0.1 2-4 2·3 0.21 0.62 0.13 8.90 15.8 0.459 1.79 15.92 24 I 0.014 0.0060 16.27 5.90 4.08 25 0.1 2·3A 2·3 0.06 0.62 0.04 . 10.0 0.612 2.39 0.09 12 I 0.014 0.0113 3.52 5.10 1.97 24 0.1 Project: Cedarwood • Div. 2 R 100 yr. Pr 3.900 ca1cs. by: ETE Job No.: 94057 Location: King County, WA Date: 6/20/96 Page 2 of 4 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND SIZING TABLE USING THE RATIONAL METHOD LOCATION Sub Basin No. Area C C"A Sum Tc IR I Q Pipe n Slope Q V V L Tl From To (ac) c•A (Min.) (de~gn) Qn.) (ft./ft.) (full) (FulO at Qr (fl.) (Min.) 2-3 2-2 0.02 0.62 0.01 8.95 15.9 0.457 1.78 15.95 24 0.014 0.0060 16.27 5.90 5.90 25 0.1 2-2A 2-2 0.10 0.62 0.06 -10.0 0.612 2.39 0.15 12 0.014 0.0229 5.01 7.27 2.85 24 0.1 2-2 2-1 0.11 0.62 0.07 9.08 16.0 0.455 1.77 16.11 24 0.014 0.0075 18.19 6.60 6.54 98 0.2 2-17A 2-17 1.22 0.62 0.76 -10.0 0.612 2.39 1.60 12 0.014 0.0104 3.37 4.90 4.37 24 0.1 2-17 2-16 0.59 0.62 0.37 1.13 10.1 0.608 2.37 2.68 12 0.014 0.0200 4.68 6.79 6.16 67 0.2 2-16 2-1 0.50 0.62 0.31 1.44 10.3 0.601 2.34 3.37 12 0.014 0.0827 9.51 13.81 11.08 99 0.1 2-1 EXCB3 0.30 0.62 0.19 10.71 16.2 0.451 1.76 18.86 24 0.014 0.0215 30.80 11.18 10.30 100 0.2 Project: Cedarwood • Div. 2 R 100 yr. Pr 3.900 Cales. by: ETE Job No.: 94057 Location: King County, WA Date: 6/20/96 Page 3 of 4 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND SIZING TABLE USING THE RATIONAL METHOD LOCATION Sub Basin No. Area C C"A Sum Tc iR I a Pipe n Slope a V V L Tl From To (oc) C'A (Min.) (design) (in.) (fl./11.) (FulO (FulO at Qr (fl.) (Min.) EXCB3 EXC84 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.71 16.3 0.450 1.75 18.79 20 0.014 0.2000 67.86 93.77 32.55 400 1.0 EXC84 3-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.71 17.3 0.433 1.69 18.09 36 0.014 0.0024 30.34 4.89 4.48 63 0.1 3-1 3-4 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.71 17.4 0.432 1.68 18.03 30 0.014 0.0045 25.55 5.93 5.64 116 0.2 3-4 3·8 0.92 0.76 0.70 11.41 17.6 0.429 1.67 19.07 30 0.014 0.0045 25.55 5.93 5.71 135 0.4 3-8 3-10 0.80 0.78 0.62 12.03 18.0 0.422 1.65 19.82 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.00 150 0.4 3-10 3-12 0.83 0.69 0.57 12.60 18.4 0.417 1.63 20.48 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.04 135 0.4 3-12 3-14 0.79 0.71 0.56 13.16 18.8 0.411 1.60 21.10 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.07 153 0.4 3-14 3-16 0.97 0.70 0.68 13.84 19.2 0.406 1.58 21.90 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.11 118 0.3 3-16 3-20A 0.82 0.74 0.61 14.45 19.5 0.402 1.57 22.64 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.15 105 0.3 3-20A 3-20 1.00 0.70 0.70 15.15 19.8 0.398 1.55 23.51 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.18 25 0.1 3·20 3·22 0.32 0.70 0.22 15.37 19.9 0.397 1.55 23.n 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.19 100 0.3 3-22 3-25 0.42 0.70 0.29 15.66 20.2 0.393 1.53 24.00 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.20 48 0.1 3-25 3-26 1.17 0.61 0.71 16.37 20.3 0.392 1.53 25.01 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.23 105 0.3 3-26 EXC85 0.48 0.52 0.25 16.62 20.6 0.383 1.51 25.15 30 0.014 0.0050 26.93 6.25 6.23 120 0.3 WSDOT EXC85 7.64 0.65 5.10 -71.3 0.177 0.69 3.53 24 0.014 0.0145 25.30 9.18 5.70 116 0.3 EXCB5 POND 0.20 0.25 0.05 21.77 20.9 0.385 1.50 32.65 36 0.014 0.0137 72.49 11.69 9.99 182 0.4 ' Project: Cedarwood -Div. 3 R 100 yr. Pr 3.900 Cales. by: ETE Job No.: 94057 Location: King County, WA Date: 712/96 Page 4 of 4 -. . ' .. ' .. , •. ; ' "Hydra, Design Software" Data H:\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 1 ·------------------------------------------------------------=====---========= N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD NONE ~tatus of DEFAULTS at start of run. 9:33 23-Aug-96 Command file : N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD Input units are read as Warnings are turned Output sent to display Output sent to printer Output sent to file Paper width in inches String to reset printer String to set printer to compressed String to set printer to 8 lines/inch Name of printer Print heading at top of page Number of steps in hydrograph Step length in minutes Significant flow in hydrograph Infiltration Diurnalization Factor Maximum plot value Type of hydrographic plot Sanitary flow by Delay to start of actual storm Rational Method computations scs computations Continuous simulation computations Maximum d/D for pipe design/analysis Match point position on pipe Number of allowable diam drops Mimimum drop thru manhole Manning's n Routing technique Calculate sanitary flows Calculate infiltration flows Calculate misc flows USA ON Brief Brief Brief 8.000 27 38 108 54 68 27 40 115 49 48 72 17.16 27 38 107 48 56 72 8 27 38 108 56 68 Hewlett-Packard, LaserJet/LaserJet ON 96 15 0.010 0.980 Selected by HYDRA Compact Diurnal curve 0.00 Flow dependant OFF OFF 0.900 0.00 or Invert 999 0. 00-0 Variable Quick OFF ON ON +-------------------------------------------------------------------- 1: JOB CEDARWOOD 2: REM JULY 1996 3: REM REVISED AUGUST 1996 4: REM -, : \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 !ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 2 -----------------------------------------------------------------------======= ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 5: 6: 7: 8: 9 : 10: 11: 12: 13: 14: 15: 16: 17: 18: 19: 20: 21: 22: 23: 24: 25: 26: 27: 28: 29: 30: 31: 32: 33: 34: 35: 36: 37: 38: 3 9: 40: 41: 42: 43: 44: 45: 46: 47: 48: 49: CEDAR WOOD REM 100 YEAR STORM PER KING COUNTY REM BACKWATER FLOW ANALYSIS REM 100 YEAR/24 HR.STORM PER RAINFALL INTENSITY REM CHART/KING COUNTY= 3.9 IN/HR REM C VALUES: ROOF.PAVING =0.90 REM LAWNS[ROLLING] =0.25; LAWNS[FLAT] =0.20 REM ASSUME Tc =10.0(PERV. AREA) ;=6.3(IMPERV. AREA) REM REM RAI (0/3.90 6.3/3.19 10/2.39 12/2.13 14/1.93+ REM REM EPD REM REM CUD REM REM BLC REM REM REM NEW STO EPI HOL NEW STO REC EPI HOL NEW STO EPI HOL NEW STO REC REC EPI HOL NEW 16/1.77 18/1.65 20/1.54 22/1.45 24/1.37+ 28/1.25 32/1.15 36/1.06 40/1.00 50/0.87+ 60/0.77 70/0.70 80/0.64 90/0.60 100/.56) CONC PIPE MANNING'S "n" VALUE= 0.012 .012 2 .9 BACKWATER CULVERT DATA: CUD CMD .2 1.0 .0098 2.0 .0398 .67 2 BACKWATER BEND LOSS CURVE: BLC CMD (0/.02 20/.10 40/.32 60/.61 80/1.04 CONVEYANCE CB#l-17A TO CB#l-17 .90 .53 10.0 24 308.50 308.50 1 CB#l-17 TO CB#l-15 .11 .53 10.1 1 148 308.50 303.42 1 CB#l-16 TO CB#l-15 .39 .53 10.0 24 303.42 303.42 2 CB#l-15 TO CB#l-14 .75 .53 10.6 1 2 25 303.42 303.31 1 CB#l-14A TO CB#l-14 305.50 303.70 12 303.70 300.25 12 300.42 300.25 12 300.25 300_06 12 90/1.3) <283 <359 <56 <324 ~:\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD CEDARWOOD 50: STO .01 .53 6.3 51: EPI 24 303.31 303.31 300.31 300.06 12 <53 9:33 23-Aug-96 *** WARNING -Vel = 0.97 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe= 0.41 min. 52: HOL 2 53: NEW CB#l-14 TO CB#l-13 54: STO .01 .53 6.3 55: REC 1 56: REC 2 57: EPI 25 303.31 303.66 300.06 299.87 58: HOL 1 59: NEW CB#1-13A TO CB#l-13 60: STO .87 .53 10.0 61: EPI 24 303.66 303.66 300.66 299.87 62: HOL 2 63: NEW CB#l-13 TO CB#l-12 64: STO .18 .53 10.8 6 5: REC 1 66: REC 2 67: EPI 88 303.66 304.25 299.87 298.15 68: HOL 1 69: NEW CD#l-12 TO CB#l-11 70: STO .46 .53 11.1 71: REC 1 72: EPI 88 304.25 304.25 298.15 296.56 73: HOL 1 74: NEW CB#l-11 TO CB#l-10 75: STO .01 .53 6.3 76: REC 1 77: EPI 135 304.25 299.40 296.56 294.14 78: HOL 1 79: NEW CB#l-10A TO CB#l-10 80: STO .51 .53 10.0 81: EPI 24 299.40 299.40 296.40 294.14 82: HOL 2 83: NEW CB#l-10 TO CB#l-9 84: STO .23 .53 11.8 85: REC 1 86: REC 2 87: EPI 50 299.40 297.00 294.14 292.94 88: HOL 1 89: NEW CB#l-9 TO CB#l-8A 90: STO .01 .53 11.9 91: REC 1 92: EPI 48 297.00 295.80 292.94 291.79 12 <324 12 <53 12 <3 32 12 <335 12 <311 12 <193 12 <257 12 <206 :\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 4 ---------------------===---=----====-=-----==----=---===--===========-====---- ><:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDEW.CMD 93: HOL 1 94: NEW CE#l-8A TO CE#l-8 95: STO .18 .53 12.0 96: REC 1 CEDAR WOOD 97: EPI 24 295.80 295.80 291.79 291.15 12 <284 98: HOL 1 99: NEW CE#l-8 TO CE#l-7 100: STO .48 .53 12.1 101: REC 1 102: EPI 25 295.80 295.65 290.90 290.65 15 <194 103: HOL 1 104: NEW CE#l-7A TO CE#l-1 105: STO .01 .53 6.3 ·106: EPI 24 295.65 295.65 292.23 290.90 12 <284 9:33 23-Aug-96 ••• WARNING -Vel = 0.90 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe= 0.44 min. 107: HOL 2 108: NEW CE#l-7 TO CB#l-6 109: STO .17 .53 12.2 110: REC 1 111: REC 2 112: EPI 25 295.65 295.80 290.6j 290.40 15 <194 113: HOL 1 114: NEW CE#l-6A TO CE#l-6 115: STO .01 .53 6.3 116: EPI 24 295.80 295.80 292.80 290.65 12 <285 ••• WARNING -Vel = 0.90 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe= 0.44 min. 117: HOL 2 118: NEW CE#l-6 TO CE#l-1 119: STO .01 .53 12.3 120: REC 1 121: REC 2 122: EPI 75 295.80 297.75 290.40 289.65 15 <205 123: HOL 10 ·124: NEW CE#l-5A TO CB#l-5 125: STO .12 .53 10.0 126: EPI 24 334.10 334.10 331.10 330.62 12 <282 ·127: HOL 1 128: NEW CE#l-5 TO CB#4 129: STO .so . 5 3 10.1 130: REC 1 131: EPI 128 334.10 317.55 330.62 310.50 12 <13 132: HOL 1 133: NEW'CE #1-4A TO CE#l-4 ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 5 ---------------------------------------------------------------==-============ N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD CEDAR WOOD 134: STO .28 .53 10.0 135: EPI 24 317.55 317.55 136: HOL 2 137: NEW CB#l-4 TO CB#l-3 138: STO .22 .53 10.3 139: REC 1 140: REC 2 141: EPI 225 317.55 300.65 142: HOL 1 143: NEW CBl-3 TO CB#l-2 144: STO .77 .53 10.8 145: REC 1 146: EPI 63 300.65 297.75 ,147: HOL 1 148: NEW CB#l-2 TO CB#l-1 149: STO .22 .53 10.9 150: REC 1 151: EPI 24 297.75 297.75 152: HOL 11 153: NEW CB#l-1 TO EXCB#l 154: STO .96 .53 12.5 155: REC 10 156: REC 11 157: EPI 100 297.75 296.50 158: HOL 1 159: REM CHANGE TO DRISCO PIPE 160: EPD .009 2 .9 161: NEW EXCB#l TO EXCB#2 162: STO 0.0 .53 12.7 313.65 310.50 295.65 290.75 289.65 ••• WARNING -Area read as zero 163: REC 1 164: EPI 630 296.50 208.00 287.00 165: HOL 1 166: REM RETURN TO CONCRETE PIPE 167: EPD .012 2 .9 168: NEW EXCB#2 TO CB#2-15 169: STO 1.07 .10 13.7 170: REC 1 171: EPI 94 208.00 198.00 203.25 172: HOL 1 173: NEW CB#2-15 TO CB#2-14A 174: STO .18 .62 13.8 175: REC 1 176: EPI 78 198.00 195.00 193.75 310.50 295.65 290.75 289.90 287.00 203.50 193.75 191.33 9:33 23-Aug-96 12 <68 12 <335 12 <3 5 3 12 <289 15 < 279 12 <310 15 <355 15 <309 '': \APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 6 ---------=-=-=---------------------====---------========----=---====---====--- ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CEDARWOOD ·177: HOL 1 178: NEW CB#2-14A TO CB#2-14 179: STO .08 .90 13.9 ·180: REC 1 181: EPI 83 195.00 193.59 191.08 190.08 18 <331 182: HOL 1 .183: NEW CB#2-14 TO CB#2-13 184: STO .85 .62 14. 1 185: REC 1 186: EPI 86 193.59 192.75 190.08 189.05 18 <308 187: HOL 1 188: NEW CB#2-13A TO CB#2-13 189: STO .40 .62 10.0 190: EPI 22 192.75 192.75 189.75 189.55 12 <11 191: HOL 2 192: NEW CB#2-13 TO CB#2-12. 193: STO .25 .62 14.3 194: REC 1 195: REC 2 196: EPI 28 192.75 192.70 188.55 188.26 24 <270 ·197: HOL 1 198: NEW CB#2-12A TO CB#2-12 199: STO .02 .62 10.0 200: EPI 22 192.70 192.70 189.70 189.26 12 <351 ••• WARNING -Vel = 1. 52 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe= 0.24 min. 201: HOL 2 202: NEW CB#2-12 TO CB#2-11 203: STO .02 .62 14.4 204: REC 1 ·205: REC 2 206: EPI 28 192.70 192.75 188.26 188.12 24 <254 207: HOL 1 208: NEW CB#2-11A TO CB#2-11 209: STO .18 .62 10.0 • 210: EPI 22 192.75 192.75 189.75 189.15 12 <334 211: HOL 2 212: NEW CB#2-11 TP CB#2-10 . 213: STO .12 .62 14.5 214: REC 1 215: REC 2 216: EPI 47 192.75 193.25 188.15 187.90 24 <239 . 217: HOL 10 218: NEW CB#2-10B TO CB#2-10A 219: STO 4.10 . 19 41. 1 ·r: \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 [ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 7 ============================================================-================= ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CEDARWOOD 220: EPI 160 195.50 193.60 192.50 189.22 12 <58 221: HOL 1 222: NEW CB#2-10A TO CB#2-10 223: STO .28 .62 41. 7 224: REC 1 225: EPI 28 193.60 193.25 189.22 188.90 12 <315 226: HOL 11 227: NEW CB#2-10 TO CB#2-9 228: STO .20 .62 14. 7 229: REC 10 230: REC 11 231: EPI 74 193.25 194.32 187.90 187.45 24 <261 232: HOL 1 233: NEW CB#2-9A TO CB#2-9 234: STO .28 .62 10.0 235: EPI 22 194.32 194.32 191. 32 188.45 12 <16 236: HOL 2 237: NEW CB#2-9 TO CB#2-8 238: STO .04 .62 14.9 239: REC 1 240: REC 2 241: EPI 59 194.32 195.16 187.45 187.10 24 <288 242: HOL 1 243: NEW CB#2-8 TO CB#2-7 244: STO 0.0 .62 15.1 ••• WARNING -Area read as zero 245: REC 1 246: EPI 27 195.16 194.80 187.10 186.90 24 <345 247: HOL 10 248: NEW CB#2-7B TO CB#2-7A 249: STO .69 .62 10.0 250: EPI 32 195.82 195.50 192.82 192.18 12 <23 251: HOL 1 252: NEW CB#2-7A TO CB#2-7 253: STO . 3 6 .62 10.1 254: REC 1 255: EPI 32 195.50 194.80 192.18 187.90 12 <94 256: HOL 11 257: NEW CB#2-7 TO CB#2-6 258: STO .01 .62 15.2 259: REC 10 260: REC 11 261: EPI 100 194.80 189.20 186.90 183.40 24 <4 262: HOL 1 ., ; \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD CEDARWOOD 263: NEW CB#2-6A TO CB#2-6 264: STO .06 .62 10.0 265: EPI 24 189.54 189.54 186.20 184.40 12 <71 266: HOL 2 267: NEW CB#2-6 TO CB#2-5 268: STO .43 .62 15.3 269: REC 1 270: REC 2 271: EPI 135 189.54 184.40 183.40 180.15 21 <317 272: HOL 1 273: NEW CB#2-5A TO CB#2-5 274: STO .30 .62 10.0 275: EPI 24 184.40 184.40 181.40 181.15 12 <42 ,276: HOL 2 277: NEW CB#2-5 TO CB#2-4 278: STO .59 .62 15.6 279: REC 1 280: REC 2 281: EPI 97 184.40 182.61 180.15 178.36 24 <310 282: HOL 1 283: NEW CB#2-4A TO CB#2-4 284: STO .10 .62 10.0 285: EPI 24 182.61 182.61 179.61 179.36 12 <16 286: HOL 2 287: NEW CB#2-4 TO CB#2-3 288: STO .21 .62 15.8 289: REC 1 290: REC 2 291: EPI 25 182.61 182.51 178.36 178.21 24 <302 292: HOL 1 293: NEW CB#2-3A TO CB#2-3 294: STO .06 .62 10.0 295: EPI 24 182.51 182.51 179.48 179.21 12 <4 9:33 23-Aug-96 ••• WARNING -Vel = 1.89 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe= 0.21 min. 296: HOL 2 297: NEW CB#2-3 TO CB#2-2 298: STO .02 .62 15.9 299: REC 1 300: REC 2 301: EPI 25 182.51 182.61 302: HOL 1 "303: NEW CB#2-2A TO CB#2-2 304: STO .10 .62 10.0 305: EPI 24 182.61 182.61 178.21 179.61 178.06 24 <294 179.06 12 <14 ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 9 ----------------------=------------=--------------------=--------========--=== N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CEDARWOOD 306: HOL 2 307: NEW CB#2-2 TO CB#2-1 308: STO . 11 .62 16.0 ,309: REC 1 310: REC 2 311: EPI 98 182.61 184.89 178.06 177.32 24 <274 . 312: HOL 10 313: NEW CB#2-17A TO CB#2-17 314: STO 1. 22 .62 10.0 315: EPI 24 191.10 191.10 188.10 187.85 12 <62 316: HOL 1 317: NEW CB#2-17 TO CB#2-16 318: STO .59 .62 10.1 ·319: REC 1 320: EPI 67 191.10 190.24 187.85 186.51 12 <352 321: HOL 1 322: NEW CB#2-16 TO CB#2-1 323: STO .50 .62 10.2 324: REC 1 325: EPI 99 190.24 184.89 186.51 178.32 12 <84 326: HOL 11 327: NEW CB#2-l TO EXCB#3 328: STO .30 .62 16.1 329: REC 10 330: REC 11 331: EPI 100 183.40 183.50 177. 15 175.00 24 <355 332: HOL 1 333: REM CHANGE TO DRISCO PIPE 334: EPD .009 2 . 9 335: NEW EXCB#3 TO EXCB#4 336: STO 0.0 .62 16.3 ••• WARNING -Area read as zero 337: REC 1 338: EPI 400 184.00 87.80 176.15 82.75 18 <355 339: HOL 1 340: REM RETURN TO CONCRETE PIPE 341: EPD .012 2 . 9 342: NEW EXCB#4 TO CB#3-1 343: STO 0. 0 .62 17.3 ••• WARNING -Area read as zero . 344: REC 1 345: EPI 63 87.80 87.50 81. 60 81. 45 36 <316 346: HOL 1 ·'.: \APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 10 --------------------------------------------------------------------------=--- N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CEDAR WOOD 347: NEW CB#3-1 TO CB#3-4 348: STO o.o .62 17.4 ••• WARNING -Area read as zero 349: REC 1 350: EPI 116 87.50 86.00 81. 45 80.93 30 <354 351: HOL 1 352: NEW CB3-4 TO CB#3-8 353: STO .92 .76 17.6 354: REC 1 355: EPI 135 86.00 85.27 80.93 80.32 30 <271 356: HOL 1 357: NEW CB#3-8 TO CB#3-10 358: STO .80 .78 18.0 359: REC 1 360: EPI 150 85.27 84.52 80.32 79.57 30 <283 361: HOL 1 362: NEW CB#3-10 TO CB#3-12 363: STO . 83 .69 18.4 364: REC 1 ·365: EPI 135 84.52 83.78 79.57 78.89 30 <269 366: HOL 1 367: NEW CB#3-12 TO CB#3-14 368: STO .79 .71 18.8 369: REC 1 370: EPI 153 83.78 83.14 78.89 78.12 30 <275 371: HOL 1 372: NEW CB#3-14 TO CB#3-16 373: STO .97 .70 19.2 374: REC 1 375: EPI 118 83.14 82.50 78.12 77.53 30 <276 376: HOL 1 ·377; NEW CB#3-16 TO CB#3-20 378: STO .82 .74 19.5 379: REC 1 ·380: EPI 130 82.50 81.89 77.53 76.87 30 <276 381: HOL 1 382: NEW CB#3-20 TO CB#3-22 383: STO 1. 32 .70 19.9 384: REC 1 385: EPI 100 81. 89 81. 38 76.87 76.37 30 <317 386: HOL 1 387: NEW CB#3-22 TO CB#3-25 388: STO .42 .70 20.2 389: REC 1 ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates ij:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD CEDARWOOD 390: EPI 48 81. 38 80.63 76.37 76.13 391: HOL 1 392: NEW CB#3-25 TO CB#3-26 393: STD 1.17 .61 20.3 394: REC 1 395: EPI 105 80.63 82.00 76.13 75.60 .396: HOL 1 397: NEW CB#3-26 TO EXCB#5 398: STD .48 . 52 20.6 399: REC 1 400: EPI 120 82.00 81. 50 75.60 75.00 401: HOL 10 402: NEW WSDOT TRENCH TO EXCB#S 403: STD 7.84 . 65 71. 3 404: EPI 116 77.59 81. 50 75.59 73.91 405: HOL 11 406: NEW EXCB#S TO WET POND 407: STD .20 .25 20.9 408: REC 10 409: REC 11 410: EPI 182 81. 50 77.50 74.50 72.00 411: REM TAILWATER ELEVATION: OFE CMD 412: REM 100 YEAR FLOOD POND WATER SURFACE 413: OFE 76.63 414: HOL 5 415: END 30 <359 30 <O 30 <270 24 <194 36 <292 HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 11 9:33 23-Aug-96 'l: \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ !ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 12 ----====-----======---===============--======================================= ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD CEDARWOOD -----SUMMARY 0 F AN ALYS IS------ Run number on command file Number of links Number of hydrographs Total sanitary population Total sanitary area Total storm area Number of pumps Number of reservoirs Number of diversion structures Number of inlets Length of new pipe Length of existing pipe Length of channel Length of gutter Length of transport units Length of pressure pipe ~losing DBF and NDX Files 10 75 176 0 9:33 23-Aug-96 0.00 Acres 38.65 Acres 0 0 0 0 0.00 Feet 6047.00 Feet 0.00 Feet 0.00 Feet 0.00 Feet 0.00 Feet 't: \APPS \HYDRA \CMD\ [ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 13 -=====================----=====------------------==---==-==================--- N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CEDARWOOD ,I STING 0 F E R R O R S A N D W A R N I N G S ~or File:N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD WARNING at line 51 Vel = 0.97 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe = 0. 41 min. WARNING at line 106 Vel = 0.90 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe = 0.44 min. WARNING at line 116 Vel = 0.90 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe = 0.44 min. WARNING at line 162 -Area read as zero WARNING at line 200 Vel = 1. 52 Min Vel = 2.00 Time in pipe = 0.24 min. WARNING at line 244 -Area read as zero WARNING at line 295 Vel ~ 1. 89 Min Vel 2.00 Time in pipe = 0.21 min. WARNING at line 336 -Area read as zero WARNING at line 343 -Area read as zero WARNING at line 348 -Area read as zero H:\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ·rugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 1 ·------------------------------------------------------------=--=====-------- N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD '* * CB#l-17A TO CB#l-17 Analysis of Existing Pipes ·'\ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 1 24 0.0750 305.50 0.0 1. 1 1.14 10.49 308.50 308.50 12 303.70 a.a 0.0 7.45 10.87 305.76 304.06 0.26 2.74 4.44 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 '* * CB#l-17 TO CB#l-15 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 2 148 0.0233 303.70 a.a 1. 3 1. 27 5.85 308.50 303.42 12 300.25 0.0 0.0 4.97 21. 81 304.06 301.00 0.36 4.44 2.42 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 148 Upstream length= 172 '* * CB#l-16 TO CB#l-15 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 3 24 0.0071 300.42 0.0 0.5 0.49 3.22 303.42 303.42 12 300.25 0.0 0.0 2.47 15.33 301.00 301.00 0.30 2.42 2.42 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ••• CB#l-15 TO CB#l-14 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 4 25 0.0076 300.25 0.0 2.6 2.64 3.34 303.42 303.31 .. : \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 2 ---------------------------------------------------------=========-==-=====-- N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 12 300.06 0.0 CEDAR WOOD 0.0 4.21 78.99 0.75 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS 301.00 300.81 2.42 2.50 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 25 Upstream length= 221 ~** CB#l-14A TO CB#l-14 Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 5 24 0.0104 300.31 0.0 0.0 0.02 3.91 303.31 303.31 12 300.06 0.0 0.0 0.97 0.43 300.81 300.81 0.05 2.50 2.50 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 *** CB#l-14 TO CB#l-13 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 6 25 0.0076 300.06 0.0 2.6 2.65 3.34 303.31 303.66 12 299.87 0.0 o.o 4.21 79.28 300.81 300.62 0.75 2.50 3.04 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 25 Upstream length= 270 *** CB#l-13A TO CB#l-13 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 7 24 0.0329 300.66 0. 0 1. 1 1. 10 6.95 303.66 303.66 12 299.87 0. 0 0.0 5.38 15.86 300.96 300.58 0.30 2.70 3.08 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ••• CB#l-13 TO CB#l-12 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt u;\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 Ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 3 ---------==========---===----------===----------=------------================ ij:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 8 88 0.0195 299.87 0.0 3.9 3.91 5.35 303.66 304.25 12 298.15 0.0 0.0 6.59 72.97 300.58 298.94 0. 71 3.08 5.31 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 88 Upstream length= 382 ••• CB#l-12 TO CB#l-11 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 9 88 0.0181 298.15 0.0 4.4 4.40 5.15 304.25 304.25 12 296.56 0.0 0.0 6.63 85.53 298.94 297.35 0.79 5.31 6.90 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 88 Upstream length= 470 ••• CB#l-11 TO CB#l-10 Analysis of Existing Pipes .. ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 10 135 0.0179 296.56 0.0 4.4 4.36 5.13 304.25 299.40 12 294.14 0.0 0.0 6.59 85 .·01 297.34 294.93 0.78 6.91 4.47 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 135 Upstream length= 605 ••• CB#l-lOA TO CB#l-10 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Ste Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 11 24 0.0942 296.40 0.0 0.6 0.65 11. 75 299.40 299.40 12 294.14 0.0 0.0 7.00 5.50 296.59 294.93 0.19 2.81 4.47 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ''.: \APPS \HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 4 ----------------------===----------============-==============--==========--- ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD ••• CB#l-10 TO CB#l-9 ,ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 12 50 0.0240 294.14 0.0 12 292.94 0.0 CEDARWOOD Analysis Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp d/D QRem DiffUp 5.1 5.13 5.93 299.40 0. 0 7.66 86.39 294.93 0.79 4.47 of 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS Existing Pipes GrDn SrCh/Dlt HGLDn Parallel DiffDn Replace 297.00 293.73 3.27 --------------------·------------------------------- Lateral length= 50 Upstream length= 679 ••• CB#l-9 TO CB#l-8A Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 13 48 0.0240 292.94 0.0 5. 1 5.10 5.93 297.00 295.80 12 291. 79 0.0 0.0 7.65 86.10 293.73 292.58 0.79 3.27 3.22 Lateral length= 48 Upstream length= 727 '. * * CB#l-8A TO CB#l-8 Analysis of Existing Pipes ',ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 14 24 0.0267 291. 79 0.0 5.3 5.27 6.25 295.80 295.80 12 291.15 0.0 0.0 8.02 84.33 292.57 291. 93 0.78 3.23 3.87 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 751 '*. CB#l-8 TO CB#l-7 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 15 25 0.0100 290.90 0.0 5.8 5.79 6.94 295.80 295.65 .. : \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 5 ----------------------===--------------======---=--------==================== ~!: \ENGDATA \HYDRA \940 57\CEDBW. CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS *** CB#l-7A wink Long 16 24 15 290.65 0.0 CEDARWOOD 0.0 5.68 83.42 0.78 291.87 291.64 3.93 4.01 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 25 Upstream length= 776 TO CB#l-7 Analysis of Existing Pipes Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 0.0554 292.23 0.0 0.0 0.02 9.02 295.65 295.65 12 290.90 0.0 0.0 0.90 0.19 292.25 291. 64 0.02 3.40 4.01 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ••• CB#l-7 TO CB#l-6 Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCll/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 17 25 0.0100 290.65 0.0 6.0 5.97 6.94 295.65 295.80 15 290.40 0.0 0.0 5.73 85.93 291. 64 291.39 0.79 4.01 4.41 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 25 Upstream length= 825 *** CB#l-6A TO CB#l-6 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 18 24 0.0896 292.80 0.0 0.0 0.02 11. 46 295.80 295.80 12 290.65 0.0 0.0 0.90 0.15 292.81 291.39 0.01 2.99 4.41 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ••• CB#l-6 TO CB#l-1 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt :\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 6 =---======---===------=====----==-------=----------------=========---------=- N;\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 19 75 0.0100 290.40 0.0 6.0 5.96 6.94 295.80 297.75 15 289.65 0.0 0.0 5.73 85.87 291. 39 290.64 0.79 4.41 7.11 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 75 Upstream length= 924 ** CB#l-5A TO CB#l-5 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 20 24 0.0200 331.10 0.0 0.2 0.15 5.42 334.10 334.10 12 330.62 0. 0 0.0 2.72 2.81 3 31. 24 330.80 0.14 2.86 3.30 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ~,... * CB#l-5 TO CB#4 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 21 128 0.1572 330.62 0.0 0.8 0.78 15.18 334.10 317.55 12 310.50 0.0 0.0 8.87 5 ~14 330.80 310.79 0.18 3.30 6.76 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 128 Upstream length= 152 ••• CB #1-4A TO CB#l-4 Analysis of Existing Pipes .:,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 22 24 0.1312 313.65 0.0 0.4 0.35 13.87 317.55 317.55 12 310.50 a.a 0.0 6.75 2. 56 313.78 310.79 0.13 3.77 6.76 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 -: : \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 7 ~T: \ENGDATA \HYDRA \94057\CEDBW. CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD ••• CB#l-4 TO CB#l-3 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 23 225 0.0660 310.50 0.0 1. 4 1. 39 9.84 317.55 300.65 12 295.65 0.0 0.0 7.40 14.15 310.79 296.00 0.29 6.76 4.65 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 225 Upstream length= 401 *** CBl-3 TO CB#l-2 Analysis of Existing Pipes Jink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 24 63 0.0778 295.65 0.0 2.3 2.28 lU.68 300.65 297.75 12 290.75 0.0 0.0 9.03 21. 38 296.00 291.21 0.35 4.65 6.54 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 63 Upstream length= 464 ' .. CB#l-2 TO CB#l-1 Analysis of Existing Pipes -..ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 25 24 0.0354 290.75 0.0 2.5 2.53 7.21 297.75 297.75 12 289.90 a.a 0.0 7.10 35.13 291.21 290.61 0.46 6.54 7.14 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 488 '** CB#l-1 TO EXCB#l Analysis of Existing Pipes Taink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 26 100 0.0265 289.65 0.0 9.3 9.31 11. 30 297.75 296.50 u:\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates Page 8 ============--===-=-=============--====----------==========================-- ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 15 287.00 0. 0 Lateral length= 100 * •• EXCB#l TO EXCB#2 ~ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 27 630 0.1325 287.00 0.0 12 203.50 0.0 Lateral length= 630 ••• EXCB#2 TO CB#2-15 ,ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 28 94 0.1011 203.25 0.0 15 193.75 0.0 CEDARWOOD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS 0.0 9.22 82.33 0.77 290.61 287.96 7.14 8.54 Upstream length= 1512 Analysis of Existing Pipes Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 9.2 9.23 18.59 296.50 208.00 0.0 20.32 49.64 287.56 204.06 0.56 8.94 3.94 Upstream length= 2142 Analysis of Existing Pipes Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 9.2 9.21 22.08 208.00 198.00 0.0 14.66 41.70 203.89 194.67 0.51 4.11 3.33 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 94 Upstream length= 2236 *** CB#2-15 TO CB#2-14A Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 29 78 0.0310 193.75 0.0 9.4 9.37 12.23 198.00 195.00 15 191. 3 3 0.0 0.0 9.77 76.61 194.67 192.25 0.73 3.33 2.75 Lateral length= 78 Upstream length= 2314 •** CB#2-14A TO CB#2-14 Analysis of Existing Pipes .ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt :\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 9 --=-----=------==----============--=========================-================ ~1: \ENGDATA \HYDRA \94057\CEDBW. CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 30 83 0.0120 191.08 0. 0 9.4 9.45 12.40 195.00 193.59 18 190.08 0.0 0.0 6.87 76.21 192.18 191.25 0.73 2.82 2.34 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 83 Upstream length= 2397 •• CB#2-14 TO CB#2-13 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 31 86 0.0120 190.08 0.0 10.3 10.35 12.36 193.59 192.75 18 189.05 0.0 0.0 7.03 83.72 191. 25 190.22 0.78 2.34 2.53 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 86 Upstream length= 2483 ••• CB#2-13A TO CB#2-13 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 32 22 0.0091 189.75 0.0 0.6 0.59 3.65 192.75 192.75 12 189.55 0.0 0.0 2.84 16.23 190.06 189.86 0.31 2.69 2. 89 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 22 Upstream length= 22 ••• CB#2-13 TO CB#2-12. Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 33 28 0.0104 188.55 0.0 11. 0 11. 02 24.75 192.75 192.70 24 188.26 0.0 0.0 6.55 44.53 189.60 189.57 0.53 3.15 3.13 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 28 Upstream length= 2533 -1: \APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ !ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------===========--- ~:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD ••• CB#2-12A TO CB#2-12 ,ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 34 22 0.0200 189.70 0.0 12 189.26 0.0 CEDARWOOD Analysis Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp d/D QRem DiffUp a.a 0.03 5.42 192.70 o.o 1. 52 0.55 189.76 0.06 2.94 of 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS Existing Pipes GrDn SrCh/Dlt HGLDn Parallel DiffDn Replace 192.70 189.57 3.13 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 22 Upstream length= 22 ••• CB#2-12 TO CB#2-11 Analysis of Existing Pipes .. ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 35 28 0.0050 188.26 0.0 11. a 11. 03 17.20 192.'/U 192.'/5 24 188.12 a.a 0.0 5.09 64.13 189.57 189.45 0.65 3.13 3.30 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 28 Upstream length= 2583 .t * * CB#2-11A TO CB#2-11 Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 36 22 0.0273 189.75 0.0 0.3 0.27 6.32 192.75 192.75 12 189.15 0.0 0.0 3.51 4.22 189.92 189.45 0.17 2.83 3.30 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 22 Upstream length= 22 ... CB#2-11 TP CB#2-10 Analysis of Existing Pipes Gink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 37 47 0.0053 188.15 o.o 11. 3 11. 33 17.74 192.75 193.25 ·•: \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 11 -----------------------------------------=====--=-----====----=-----=-----=== N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CPS 24 187.90 0.0 CEDARWOOD 0.0 5.25 63.90 0.65 189.45 189.20 3.30 4.05 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 47 Upstream length= 2652 *** CB#2-10B TO CB#2-10A Analysis of Existing Pipes .wink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRcm DiffUp DiffDn Replace 38 160 0.0205 192.50 0. 0 0.8 0.77 5.48 195.50 193.60 12 189.22 0.0 0.0 4.12 14.00 192.79 189.58 0.29 2.71 4.02 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 160 Upstream length= 160 ••• CB#2-10A TO CB#2-10 Analysis of Existing Pipes . .iink Long slope Invert San Sto Qdes QllldX GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 39 28 0.0114 189.22 0.0 0.9 0.93 4.09 193.60 193.25 12 188.90 0.0 0.0 3.53 22.74 189.58 189.26 0.36 4.02 3.99 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 28 Upstream length= 188 *** CB#2-10 TO CB#2-9 Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 40 74 0.0061 187.90 0.0 12.1 12.09 18.97 193.25 194.32 24 187.45 0.0 0.0 5.61 63.73 189.20 188.78 0.65 4.05 5.54 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 74 Upstream length= 2914 ••• CB#2-9A TO CB#2-9 Analysis of Existing Pipes :..ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt :\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ Ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 12 ---------=======------=------------============-=======------=-----------==-- '!: \ENGDATA \HYDRA \940 57\CEDBW. CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 41 22 0.1305 191. 32 0.0 0.4 0.41 13.83 194.32 194.32 12 188.45 0.0 0.0 7.10 3.00 191. 4 7 188.78 0.15 2.85 5.54 Lateral length= 22 Upstream length= 22 •• CB#2-9 TO CB#2-8 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 42 59 0.0059 187.45 0.0 12.3 12.34 18.73 194.32 195.16 24 187.10 0.0 0.0 5.59 65.85 188.78 188.43 0.66 5.54 6.73 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 59 Upstream length= 2995 ••• CB#2-8 TO CB#2-7 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 43 27 0.0074 187.10 0.0 12.2 12.25 20.93 195.16 194.80 24 186.90 0.0 0.0 6.03 5 8 ;·5 0 188.33 188.13 0.62 6.83 6.67 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 27 Upstream length= 3022 ••• CB#2-7B TO CB#2-7A Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 44 32 0.0200 192.82 0.0 1. 0 1. 02 5.42 195.82 195.50 12 192.18 o.o 0.0 4.40 18.88 193.15 192.51 0.33 2.67 2.99 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 32 Upstream length= 32 -: : \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 13 ----=--------=----------------====------=-------=========-------------------- ~l: \ENGDATA \HYDRA \940 57\CEDBW. CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD *** CB#2-7A TO CB#2-7 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 45 32 0.1337 192.18 0.0 1. 5 1. 55 14.01 195.50 194.80 12 187.90 a.a 0.0 9.98 11. 04 192.44 188.16 0.26 3.06 6.64 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 32 Upstream length= 64 ••• CB#2-7 TO CB#2-6 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 46 100 0.0350 186.90 0.0 13.5 13.46 45.50 194.80 189.20 24 183.40 0.0 o.o 10.67 29.58 187.74 184.35 0.42 7.06 4.85 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 100 Upstream length= 3186 ••• CB#2-6A TO CB#2-6 Analysis of Existing Pipes -,ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qrnax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 47 24 0.0750 186.20 0.0 0.1 0.09 10.49 189.54 189.54 12 184.40 0.0 0.0 3.61 0.85 186.28 184.48 0.08 3.26 5.06 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 '* * CB#2-6 TO CB#2-5 Analysis of Existing Pipes T,ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 48 135 0.0241 183.40 0.0 13.9 13.92 37.74 189.54 184.40 ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 14 -----------------------------------------------------------------==========-- ij:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 24 180.15 0.0 Lateral length= 135 *** CB#2-5A TO CB#2-5 ' wink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 49 24 0.0104 181.40 0.0 12 181.15 0. 0 CEDARWOOD 0.0 9.43 36.88 0.47 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS 184.35 181.21 5.19 3.19 Upstream length= 3345 Analysis of Existing Pipes Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 0.4 0.44 3.91 184.40 184.40 0.0 2.80 11.37 181. 66 181.41 0.26 2.74 2.99 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 *** CB#2-5 TO CB#2-4 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 50 97 0.0185 180.15 0.0 14.8 14.77 33.04 184.40 182.61 24 178.36 0.0 0.0 8.75 44.71 181. 21 179.86 0.53 3.19 2.75 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 97 Upstream length= 3466 *** CB#2-4A TO CB#2-4 Analysis of Existing Pipes oink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qrnax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRern DiffUp DiffDn Replace 51 24 0.0104 179.61 0.0 0 . 1 0.15 3.91 182.61 182.61 12 179.36 0.0 0.0 2.12 3.79 179.86 179.86 0.16 2.75 2.75 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 '** CB#2-4 TO CB#2-3 Analysis of Existing Pipes ~ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qrnax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ~gh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 15 ----------------------=-------------------------========================--=== ij:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 52 25 0.0060 178.36 0.0 15.0 15.00 18.84 182.61 182.51 24 178.21 0.0 0.0 5.95 79.62 179.86 179.72 0.75 2.75 2.79 Lateral length= 25 Upstream length= 3515 •• CB#2-3A TO CB#2-3 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 53 24 0.0113 179.48 0.0 0.1 0.09 4.06 182.51 182.51 12 179.21 0.0 0.0 1. 89 2.19 179.72 179.72 0.12 2.79 2.79 Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ••• CB#2-3 TO CB#2-2 Analysis of Existing Pipes .wink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 54 25 0.0060 178.21 0.0 15.0 15.05 18.84 182.51 182.61 24 178.06 0.0 0.0 5.95 79 .·86 179.72 179.57 0.75 2.79 3.04 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 25 Upstream length= 3564 ••• CB#2-2A TO CB#2-2 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 55 24 0.0229 179.61 0.0 0.1 0.15 5.80 182.61 182.61 12 179.06 o.o 0.0 2.82 2.56 179.74 179.47 0.13 2.87 3.14 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 "'.: \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 16 ----------------------==-----------------------------------------=-=-===----= 111:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD CEDARWOOD *** CB#2-2 TO CB#2-1 ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel d/D 56 98 0.0076 178.06 0.0 15.2 15.23 24 177.32 0.0 0.0 6.48 0.71 Analysis of Qmax GrUp %Cap HGLUp QRem DiffUp 21.14 182.61 72.07 179.47 3.14 9:33 23-Aug-96 Cr'S Existing Pipes GrDn SrCh/Dlt HGLDn Parallel DiffDn Replace 184.89 178.73 6.16 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 98 Upstream length= 3686 *** CB#2-17A TO CB#2-17 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 57 24 0.0104 188.10 0.0 1. 8 1. 81 3.91 191. 10 191. 10 12 187.85 0.0 0.0 4.18 46.25 188.64 188.41 0.54 2.46 2.69 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 24 Upstream length= 24 ... CB#2-17 TO CB#2-16 Analysis of Existing Pipes -,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 58 67 0.0200 187.85 0.0 2.7 2.67 5.42 191. 10 190.24 12 186.51 0.0 0.0 5.91 49.26 188.41 187.07 0.56 2.69 3.17 Lateral length= 67 Upstream length= 91 '* * CB#2-16 TO CB#2-1 Analysis of Existing Pipes T,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 59 99 0.0827 186.51 0.0 3.4 3.37 11. 01 190.24 184.89 .. : \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 17 ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates ---------------==-----=-----====---=-----====---------=======--=------------- N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS ~** CB#2-1 ... ink Long 60 100 ••• EXCB#3 ,ink Long 61 400 ••• EXCB#4 ,ink Long 62 63 12 178.32 0.0 CEDARWOOD 0.0 10.43 30.59 0.43 186.94 178.75 3.30 6.14 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 99 Upstream length= 190 TO EXCB#3 Analysis of Existing Pipes Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 0.0215 177.15 0. 0 18.0 18.01 35.66 183.40 183.50 24 175.00 0. 0 0.0 9.80 50.50 178.28 176.72 0.56 5.12 6.78 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 100 Upstream length= 3976 TO EXCB/14 Analysis of Existing Pipes Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 0.2335 176.15 0.0 17.9 17.88 72.76 184.00 87.80 18 82.75 0.0 0.0 28.66 24.57 176.72 83.32 0.38 7.28 4.48 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 400 Upstream length= 4376 TO CB#3-1 Analysis of Existing Pipes Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 0.0024 81. 60 0.0 17.7 17.69 35.00 87.80 87.50 36 81. 45 0.0 0.0 4.28 50.56 83.29 83.14 0.56 4.51 4.36 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 63 Upstream length= 4439 ••• CB#3-l TO CB#3-4 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt 'c: \APPS\HYDRA \CMD\ :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 18 -------------------------------------------------------------================ ij:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDAR WOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 63 116 0.0045 81. 45 0. 0 17.5 17.50 29.53 87.50 86.00 30 80.93 0.0 0.0 5.46 59.26 83.00 82.53 0.62 4.50 3.47 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 116 Upstream length= 4555 '* * CB3-4 TO CB#3-8 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 64 135 0.0045 80.93 0.0 18.4 18.40 29.65 86.00 85.27 30 80.32 0.0 0.0 5.56 62.08 82.53 81. 92 0.64 3.47 3.35 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 135 Upstream length= 4690 *** CB#3-8 TO CB#3-10 Analysis of Existing Pipes .:.ink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 65 150 0.0050 80.32 0.0 19.1 19.15 31. 19 85.27 84.52 30 79.57 0.0 0.0 5.83 61.-41 81. 91 81.19 0.64 3.36 3.33 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 150 Upstream length= 4840 ••• CB#3-10 TO CB#3-12 Analysis of Existing Pipes .sink Long Slope Invert San Sta Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 66 135 0.0050 79.57 0.0 19.8 19. 77 31. 30 84.52 83.78 30 78.89 0.0 0.0 5.91 63.17 81. 19 80.54 0.65 3.33 3.24 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 135 Upstream length= 4975 ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA version 5.85 Page 19 ----==---===========--==========---=====--------==========---================ N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CEDARWOOD *** CB#3-12 TO CB#3-14 Analysis of Existing Pipes ,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 67 153 0.0050 78.89 0. 0 20.4 20.38 31. 29 83.78 83.14 30 78.12 0.0 0.0 5.96 65.15 80.54 79.81 0.66 3.24 3.33 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 153 Upstream length= 5128 ••• CB#3-14 TO CB#3-16 Analysis of Existing Pipes 1ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 68 118 0.0050 78.12 0.0 21. 1 21.12 31. 19 83.14 82.50 30 77.53 0.0 0.0 6.00 67.72 79.81 79.25 0.68 3.33 3.25 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 118 Upstream length= 5246 ** CB#3-16 TO CB#3-20 Analysis of Existing Pipes -,ink Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUP HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 69 130 0.0051 77.53 0.0 21. 8 21. 81 31. 42 82.50 81. 89 30 76.87 0.0 0.0 6.10 69.41 79.25 78.66 0.69 3.25 3.23 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 130 Upstream length= 5376 . * * CB#3-20 TO CB#3-22 Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 70 100 0.0050 76.87 0. 0 22.9 22.95 31.19 81. 89 81. 38 ":\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ :ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 20 -----------------------------------========------------------================ N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 30 76.37 0.0 Lateral length= 100 ••• CB#3-22 TO CB#3-25 .:,ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 71 48 0.0050 76.37 0.0 30 76.13 0.0 Lateral length= 48 *** CB#3-25 TO CB#3-26 ,ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 72 105 0.0050 76.13 0.0 30 75.60 0.0 Lateral length= 105 *** CB#3-26 TO EXCB#5 ,ink Long Slope Invert San Diam Up/Dn Inf 73 120 0.0050 75.60 0.0 30 75.00 0.0 Lateral length= 120 "** WSDOT TRENCH TO EXCB#5 :,ink Long Slope Invert San CEDAR WOOD 0.0 6.15 73.59 0.71 78.66 3.23 Upstream length= Analysis Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp d/D QRem DiffUp 23.2 23.18 31. 19 81. 38 0.0 6.17 74.32 78.17 0.72 3.21 Upstream length= Analysis Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp d/D QRem DiffUp 24. 1 24.14 31. 33 80.63 0.0 6.27 77.04 77.97 0.74 2.66 Upstream length= Analysis Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp d/D QRem DiffUp 24.3 24.28 31.19 82.00 0.0 6.26 77.84 77.45 0.74 4.55 Upstream length= 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS 78.17 3.21 5476 of Existing Pipes GrDn SrCh/Dlt HGLDn Parallel DiffDn Replace 80.63 77.97 2.66 5524 of Existing Pipes GrDn SrCh/Dlt HGLDn Parallel DiffDn Replace 82.00 77.45 4.55 5629 of Existing Pipes GrDn SrCh/Dlt HGLDn Parallel DiffDn Replace 81. 50 77.13 4.37 5749 Analysis of Existing Pipes Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt ~:\APPS\HYDRA\CMD\ ugh G. Goldsmith & Associates HYDRA Version 5.85 Page 21 -------------=======--======---================-==========================-== N:\ENGDATA\HYDRA\94057\CEDBW.CMD 9:33 23-Aug-96 CFS CED1\RWOOD Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 74 116 0.0145 75.59 0.0 3.5 3.53 29.27 77.59 81. 50 ••• 24 73.91 0.0 0. 0 1. 12 12.05 77.18 77.13 0.27 0.41 4.37 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 116 Upstream length= 116 •• EXCB#5 TO WET POND Analysis of Existing Pipes Link Long Slope Invert San Sto Qdes Qmax GrUp GrDn SrCh/Dlt Diam Up/Dn Inf Mis Vel %Cap HGLUp HGLDn Parallel d/D QRem DiffUp DiffDn Replace 75 182 0.0137 74.50 0.0 26.3 26.26 84.06 81. 50 77.50 *** 36 72.00 0.0 0.0 3.71 31. 24 77.13 76.63 0.43 4.37 0.87 ---------------------------------------------------- Lateral length= 182 Upstream length= 6047 LJ L .. ' . ' Section VI Special Reports and Studies - . ' -. .. , ., r • j VI. Special Reports and Studies Studies submitted previously to ODES as part of the Pre-application Submittal include: • Wetland Identification, Evaluation & Delineation Report by IES Associates, dated September 20, 1995 • Geotechnical Report by Terra Associates, Inc., dated September 21, 1995 • Traffic Impact and Access Analysis Report by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc., dated September 21, 1995 • Level I Drainage Analysis Report by Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc., dated September 1995 r94057ql.445 Page 97 of 118 HGG Inc. Ocrober 1, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. I •''1 I f~ I r o _ I ,.,. -~,.~ ,,., ] 7 o r,";(_) ,.) S/~ 3fl'a'd Project Name: Project No.: Location: Stations: By; Dale: Terra Associates, Inc. Pavement Design Cede,wood 2176-4 1"40lh Place SE AS 17-0ot-96 EWL COMPl1TATION (1) T rdic Data Year 1ss8 2016 AOT 20000 22000 (2) Truck Clasclflcation (Excluding pk:la,p$ & penels) 2AXle 3Axle 4Axle 5Axle 6Axle (3) ADT Calallationa No. at Lanes -2 2.0 %x350 • 1_0 %x 1050• 1.0 %x1850• 0.5 %x3300• 0.5 %x2320• Annual EWUADT • Design Life • AverageADT• 21000 Average One Way ADT • A,,,,.. One Wt:J AIYr on Heaviest Lan& • DesignEWL Trafflo Index • !PCE:lrl ~890<": •CJ 10600 10500 13041000 7.00 10.60 16.50 16.50 11.60 62.10 20.0 Yfll8 ?.,.""'{. ~,V\ -!- ~ea-) w:~ (..4"1' &e.c.k ..... o f:.-LI{ t> ../_!:: w~1 t.Je::. G!Je,.,... +,,. EJ.. At -1-c, ,~, r-, }1 i. f='k .... Page1 ·- S/E 3Db'd PAVEMENT THICKNESS COMPUTATIONS A-Value Total Swfaclng Thiekness (Inches) • PAVEMENT OPTIONS A. Tolal Surfacing ThlcJcness (Inch•) • Thklkneaa of asphalt (lnct.9) - Thidcness of ATB (lnchaa) B. Thldcness of ATS (i""'-) - Thlckneaa of 13-' Base (inches) • bEEIPl~8Bll1l~~a1 60 7.12 13.22 13.22 -1.29 Page2 ,1 '· ; .. 1 ij f •. I )' ~- -· .. --·-------. • 1511 ... w ~· lii14 ' ,.12 • •,o :i I· 15. ~4 2 0 . ..... I • • SOILS • LABORATORY &. FIEI,D · 329 l.a&lfelwoOd Road santa Clara, CA . 408-727-5010 I PROJECT No.-:J:-.,3/Zw""t CyAot1<t ? (llll'7, RECEIVED Se'r,6 . ~ "I V, ...... """ _,,. RESISTANCE.. R·VAU.IE TEST , / ITES1' HETIIOD: WSMO No. 611A / ./ / / '/ J / / '/ ./ ,I ./ 1./ , ,/ / I ,I I o 2 4 a a ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ M H COVllR TIIICKNl!H tr( £""-ON PRESSURE • INCHES - ,,_;....,. s>.uPt.E,.i~-14/odwfl.Ys:.t:-JI.a/I 4 $w';it tl.ttt·"° O!RCRIPTIDIV~,.t$Y s--rr c~.0,111 ,./ A-4-.,._~ ... • s,,£Cllf£N EXU04 T ION l'lll!SSUIUi (l!S.L) E)CPANSIOR DfAL (.oooJ•J EXP411910N PRESSURE (P.S.l!.l · RCS,ISTANC~ V,.LUE' • -a• , ORY OS:IISfTY •-r TEST tRCP,'J -U,1! AT 400 RU. !XUDATIOH PltESSUR! ······--~~~-~-~-~-~~~~-~9.~ .. .. IOO 90 IIO 70 so $0 3 . !ll 40. "' I 0 0 l j 110 ! I• j!: •• .. 84 -, i1 2 ,j 0 il ! ' q I 'l ' _i- 11 ! I t I B/9 SDWd SOILS -1.ABORATORY &. .FIELD 329 Lauretwood Ro.I ~ Clara, CA . 408-727.mtO PROJECT No.];.@;-./ C§O,&t';HJ {llv~ RECEIV£0 ~____!~ EXUDATION l'll!SSUII!! 11151.) ---&00 f500 ,4,v,t. WA--A lif'l#!li . ,!ESISTANCE, R·VAUJE TEST -; 7 l'EST H£ill0D: WSIIO No. 611A , / '/ ~ 7 - / , .r .r / / ., / ., ,., I.I / / , .I / I, o i • e e ro a M • ~ ~ tt N a cavt'it TH1Cl<N£$S •Y EXPAN$1DN PIIESSUJ!li: • INCHIS ·- '-- IOO 90 90 70 IO 0 SAMPU,:~~.M.,:n/4' Ct» '1#-HO _W<J#t,PAy 5~ 11£11c111PTICii,Gu,... s...,,.,. s .. --1,,.,,-~s~ P""'.1"'~ • SPEt:l .. 1!111 A • • .a, E11UOATIOH PltlSSURli! ll!s.1.1 3Jtf -'t3? .n-s:~ EXPANSION OIAL 1.0001·1 -0 3 ., 1!>< .. AN$1011 PR£S3UffE IP'A,l!I . 0 . " .... lll!SISTAIICI VAl,.UE • •R• s-=i 7.:., I.,"} 7/ % MOISTURE: AT THT "•"' , .... /b,.3 <P,2 °"" Dl!IIISIT'I' AT TEST IACF.l /4 1,1 IU..'1 , .... ,1, 14 "·' "It \al.II( AT 400 l!S. I, • C/,S> EXUOATIOH PRH!Rlltl: lr£E:1,"l~BBIIZIZ::2 QJ ' l ' i ' -, f l }. ' ' ; I I l I j j 0 8/B SOILS. IABORATORY &. FIELD »9 Laurelwood Road Santa Clana. CA "°8-727-6010 PROJECT No • ..,.: 217, .91 C,c;¢f%et IZtr 2, RECEIVED SE.er 1'- -~ II' JIIU"tl --.oo Mn 200 -.n FIESISTANCE;, R·VALUE TEST I,. ,. rEST METHOD: IISHO No. 611A I/ " / / , ,/ ,. I/ ,/ ,, ,, ,/ ,/ ,/ ,, I ,, ' ~ ,/ ,/ I/ 0 Z 4 6 e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W U N H COVER THJCIIN[SS 11'1' £XPM1$10W MHsutll! • INCMJ!:S ... ... .. •••11•1.E, 4~ -)JM.b WAl'K ~ s--11 ./ S~ il'l+!ie DESCRIPTIDN ... lft' 4',-,,. $,.r,..~,-SA,.p "SPECJIIIN DUDATIOII PRl!SSURl (l!S.1,) l!XIOANSION DIAi. (.0001") £XPAIIS10N Plll!SSUJIE IP.S.'-l RESISTANCI YALU!' , 111 tl'"' 'll, IIOUITUIIJi AT T£11T VAU,J!: AT 400 P.5.1. If XU OAT 1011 PRl!'SSUIII! 1rce: t,l .!!';BE10l: Ta 1 IOO 80 TO ... so 3 ;! 40 I C !O :zo I 0 0 -' u L . ' Section VII Basin and Community Planning Areas - •. I -j n r • I VII. Basin and Community Planning Areas The current development proposal includes approximately 73.5 acres located east of 140'" Way S.E. The site is zoned R-6 with P-suffix conditions under the 1994 Zoning Code. The site lies within the growth management area of the Soos Creek Community Plan Update and Area Zoning. According fo the P-suffix conditions listed on page 149 of the Community Plan, there are no P-suffix conditions that apply to this site as configured. The proposal is to construct 96 single family detached residential units within Division 1 and 2 of the preliminary plat. The single family lots would range from approximately 5,500 square feet to 7,500 square feet. The land use application for this project is for two single family subdivision totaling 96 detached residential housing units, and one large tract to be developed as a 146 condominium unit development. The condominium site will be developed within Division 3 of the preliminary plat, and would be a mix of townhouse and flat construction. The condominium site is being processed concurrently with the preliminary plat via a Conditional Use Permit. The current development proposal contains no commercial uses. r940S7ql.445 Page 99 of 118 HGG Inc. October l. 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. . ' _J L . ' ·.' . . , . . ' . ' Section VIII Other Permits . - . . • l • J n r '. i • J • j VIII. Other Permits • Preliminary Plat Approval; King County DOES File #S91 P0025 • Road Variances; King County • Shoreline Permit; King County DOES File #L95SH146 A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit application was submitted in conjunction with this application pertaining to the direct discharge of treated drainage from the site to the existing WSDOT outfall to the Cedar River. There will be no retention/detention of surface drainage on the site. A permanent easement for the water quality facilities will be located on the northern portion of Tax Lot 13 located in the northwest quarter section of 22-23-05 {adjacent to SR-169 and west of 140'" Way S.E.). The hydrologic analysis for direct discharge into the Cedar River is detailed in the Level One Drainage Analysis by Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc., dated September 1995, and is included as a separate document submitted with the preliminary plat application. t<J40S7ql.44S Page 101 of ll8 HGG Inc. October I. 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. LJ L ' ' . . ' ' . ' Section IX Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design - ' ; ' j '. r, r . . . IX. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design To prevent coarse sediment from entering the storm drainage system, storm drain inlet protection will be implemented during construction in Divisions 1 and 2. The following Erosion/Sedimentation measures were implemented and maintained during the grading phase of the project and are included in this report as reference. COLLECTION BASIN (PHASE 1 l Disturbed Area 8.10 Ac. Inflow 10-year, 24-hour Top Dike 4.14 els (See Basin I.D.: P1-A) Elev. 298.0 (6' wide) Emergency Spillway Basin Bottom Elev. 297.0 (L = 6.9') Elev. 292.5 Emergency Overflow Spillway Length: 0 100 = 5.91 els (See Basin I.D.: P1-B) H = 0.4' L = (0,00 / (3.21 H312)) -(2.4 H2) = 6.9' TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND (PHASES 1 AND 2) Disturbed Area Inflow 10-year, 24-hour Surface Area 8.10 Ac.+ 10.10 Ac.= 18.20 Ac. 8.58 els (See Basin I.D.: P12-A) = 2,080 S.F. per els oflnflow Top Dike Emergency Spillway Top Riser Pipe Pond Bottom Dewatering Orifice Surface Area Provided = 17,846 S.F. Required Elev. 184.0 (6' wide) Elev. 183.0 (L = 10.2') Elev. 182.0 (15" dia.) Elev. 178.5 1.29" dia. 19,065 S.F. PRINCIPAL SPILLWAY (RISER PIPE): O,oex,sT. = 3.10 els (See Basin I.D.: P12-E) H = 1' D = 12" (from King County, Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 4.4.7J Riser Inflow Curves) EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY LENGTH: r94057ql.445 Page !OJ of l18 HGG loc. October 1, 1996 Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 0,00 = 12.29 els (See Basin I.D.: P12-B) H = 0.5' L = (Q,00 / (3.21 H"2)) • (2.4 H2) = 10.2' DEWATERING ORIFICE: As -17,846 S.F. H = 3.5' T = 24 Hr. g = 32.2 ft/sec 2 A,, = (A8 (2H)°5) / (10.6 x 3600 T g05) = 0.0091 D = 1 .29" dia. TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND (PHASE 3) Disturbed Area 9.41 Ac. Inflow 10-year, 24-hour Surface Area 3.21 els (See Basin I.D.: P3-A) = 2,080 S.F. per els of inflow Top Dike Emergency Spillway Top Riser Pipe Pond Bottom Dewatering Orifice Surface Area Provided = 6,677 S.F. Required Elev. 81.0 (6' wide) Elev. 80.0 (L = 8.5') Elev. 79.0 (12" dia.) Elev. 75.5 1.00" dia., min. 6,790 S.F. PRINCIPAL SPILLWAY (RISER PIPE): 0,0 ex,sr. = 2.45 els (See Basin I.D.: P3-E) H = 1' D = 10" (from King County, Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 4.4. 7 J Riser Inflow Curves) EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY LENGTH: 0 100 = 4.62 els (See Basin I.D.: P3-B) eJ4057ql.445 Pago 104 of ll8 HGG Inc. October I, 1996 H = 0.3' L = (0100 / (3.21 H3 ")) • (2.4 H2) = 8.5' Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. DEWATERING ORIFICE: As = 6,677 S.F. H = 3.5' T = 24 Hr. g = 32.2 ft/sec2 Ao = (A8 (2H)0·') / (10.6 x 3600 T g05 ) '= 0.0034 D = 0.79" ~ 1" dia. min. required TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND (PHASES 1 2, 3 AND 4) Disturbed Area Inflow 10-year, 24-hour Surface Area 8.1 O Ac. + 10.1 O Ac. + 9.41 Ac. + 5.21 Ac. = 32.82 Ac. 13.66 cfs (See Basin I.D.: P14-A) = 2,080 S.F. per cfs of inflow Top Dike Emergency Spillway Pond Bottom Surface Area Provided = 28,413 S.F. Required Elev. 79.0 (1 O' wide) Elev. 78.0 (L = 12.3') Elev. 69.0 41,289 S.F. EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY LENGTH: '94057ql.445 Page 105 of 118 HGG Inc. October 1. 1996 Q100 = 19.62 cfs (See Basin I.D.: P14-B) H = 0.6' L = (Q,00 / (3.21 H312 )} -(2.4 H2 ) = 12.3' Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. 4/17/96 T.E.S.C. -T.I.R. EENSTROM Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. CEDARWOOD PRELIMINARY PLAT page 1 =------=-------------------------------------------=-=======--------- BASIN ID: Pl-A SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet L: TcReach -Shallow L: TcReach -Channel L: BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PHASE 1 -10YR/24HR TESC 8.10 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 8.71 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 8. 10 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres 300.00 350.00 100.00 CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.0500 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0933 ks:13.00 s:0.0714 PEAK RATE: 4.14 cfs VOL: kc:20.00 s:0.0600 1.52 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: Pl-B SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet L: TcReach -Shallow L: TcReach -Channel L: NAME: PHASE 1 -100YR/24HR TESC 8.10 Acres TYPE1A 3.90 inches 10.00 min 8.71 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 8. 10 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres 300.00 350.00 100.00 CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.0500 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0933 ks:13.00 s:0.0714 PEAK RATE: 5.91 cfs VOL: kc:20.00 s:0.0600 2.18 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: Pl-E SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Shallow PEAK RATE: 1.02 NAME: PHASE 1 -10YR/24HR EXIST. 8.10 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 19.96 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 8.10 Acres CN .... : 76.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres L: 200.00 L: 250.00 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.2100 ks:11.00 s:0.0640 0.64 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min ' 4/17/96 T.E.S.C. -T.I.R. EENSTROM' Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. CEDARWOOD PRELIMINARY PLAT page 2 --------------------------------------------------------------======= BASIN ID: P12-A SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF; BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PHASE 1-2 -10YR/24HR TESC 18.20 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 15.02 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 18.20 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres CN .... : 98. 00 PEAK RATE: 8.58 cfs VOL: 3.42 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: Pl2-B SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... ; RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: NAME: PHASE 1-2 -100YR/24HR TESC 18.20 Acres TYPElA 3.90 inches 10.00 min 15.02 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 18.20 Acres CN .... : 94. 00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres CN .... : 98.00 PEAK RATE: 12.29 cfs VOL: 4.89 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: Pl2-E SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION. · ... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Shallow PEAK RATE; 3 . 11 NAME: PHASE 1+2 -10YR/24HR EXIST. 18.20 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 29.67 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 18.20 Acres CN .... : 80.81 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres L: 150.00 L: 150.00 L: 90.00 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0933 ns:0.1300 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0933 ks:9.00 s:0.0220 1.86 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min ' 4/17/96 T.E.S.C. -T.I.R. EENSTROM. Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. CEDARWOOD PRELIMINARY PLAT page 3 --------------------------------------------------------============= BASIN ID: P14-A SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PHASE 1-4 -10YR/24HR TESC 32.82 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 24.33 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 32.82 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres CN .... : 98.00 PEAK RATE: 13.66 cfs VOL: 6.16 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P14-B SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: NAME: PHASE 1-4 -100YR/24HR TESC 32.82 Acres TYPElA 3.90 inches 10. 00 min 24.33 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 32.82 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres CN .... : 98.00 PEAK RATE: 19.62 cfs VOL: 8.82 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P14-E SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .•.. : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: NAME: PHASE 1+2+3+4 -10YR/24HR EX. 32.82 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 37.84 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 32.82 Acres CN .... : 84.46 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres TcReach -Sheet L: 300.00 PEAK RATE: 6.74 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.1300 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0083 4.01 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 4/17/96 T.E.S.C. -T.I.R. EENSTROM. Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. CEDARWOOD PRELIMINARY PLAT page 4 --=================================================================== BASIN ID: P3-A SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Shallow PEAK RATE: 3.21 BASIN ID: P3-B SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Shallow PEAK RATE: 4.62 BASIN ID: P3-E SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Shallow PEAK RATE: 2.46 BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PHASE 3 -10YR/24HR TESC 9.41 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10. 00 min 45.04 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 9.41 Acres CN .... : 94. 00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres L: 300.00 L:1000.00 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98. 00 ns:0.0500 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0067 ks:8.00 s:0.0065 1.77 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min NAME: PHASE 3 -100YR/24HR TESC 9.41 Acres TYPElA 3.90 inches 10.00 min 45.04 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 9.41 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres L: 300.00 L:1000.00 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.0500 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0067 ks:8.00 s:0.0065 2.53 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min NAME: PHASE 3 -10YR/24HR EXIST. 9.41 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 43.94 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 9.41 Acres CN .... : 89.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0.00 Acres L: 300.00 L: 300.00 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.1300 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0083 ks:9.00 s:0.0083 1.42 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min • 4/17/96 T.E.S.C. -T.I.R. EENSTROM. Hugh G. Goldsmith & Associates, Inc. CEDARWOOD PRELIMINARY PLAT page 5 --------------------------------------------------------------------- BASIN ID: P4-A SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach -Sheet TcReach -Shallow PEAK RATE: 2.32 BASIN ID: P4-E SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA ....... : RAINFALL TYPE .... : PRECIPITATION .... : TIME INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC ..... : ABSTRACTION COEFF: BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PHASE 4 -10YR/24HR TESC 5.21 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 19.25 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 5.21 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres L: 300.00 L: 140.00 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.0500 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0083 ks:8.00 s:0.0321 0.98 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min NAME: PHASE 4 -10YR/24HR EXIST. 5.21 Acres TYPElA 2.90 inches 10.00 min 37.84 min 0.20 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 5.21 Acres CN .... : 94.00 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA .. : 0. 00 Acres TcReach -Sheet L: 300.00 PEAK RATE: 1.88 cfs VOL: CN .... : 98.00 ns:0.1300 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0083 0.98 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min u L . ' ' ' . . ' .. '. Section X Bond Quantities Worksheet, ' Retention/Detection Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch, and Declaration of Covenant . ; . ' '' J n r _j ~-.l . ' u L . . ' Section XI Maintenance and Operations Manual - . ' ~ r . . -' K I N G C O UN TY, W A S HIN G T O N, S UR.FA C E W ATE R. D ES I G N MAN u AL MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES N0.1•PONDS ·--Owtflow/Spillwoy \ ' Truh & 0..ri• Poi11e11noue V9G41tation .. ...., ... Urmowed G,...o/ GNIWldCowr Rock r.tnln\1 ~ -Mai.,_,co -. E:q,1-Wllo,, lo -d M...-lo Pert..- Atrv -end deario which IXGffd 1 ouaio Truh and dobrio dNted 1,-, laac IJff 1,0CO -INC (thlo ii iibout equal lie.. to Ille mnaunt of trNh ic would ~ to fll up ..,. ICandOtd lin ofllc. gori,ego can). In Olflfflll, !hero llhould be no -. ollicl•nc• of dumpr,g. . Atrv poieo,_. -adon whioh mr, ao-1 hazard ID County peroonMI o, the publio. l:l<Mrl!JI" of~• -,.don lncfU<UI: w.y l'IQWOrt, pc,ioon ..._ sd~ n.tdee, dewa ckaa. ·3 ca. ;aaolne. or other aontaminantll of one ;allonwmoroat-,yanounttau,,dlhet GOUid: 1) -._ ID plenc, -. o, marine life: 2l ooned1uce • ff,. hazard: 0< 31 be lluahed d6w111a-durino rain oconno. If facillty la located In priYaa ~-..... mowing is needed when --18 lnc:Ma in heighc. In.---. Ille-"' pallcy io ID mal<o !he pond lico rnacch odfacant gn,uncl -end ..,..nu I-• theN i• no inca,f--.... ,.,......, of t!lo fac:ilhy. Atrv ....i-of rod--If laci1icy r. acdr,g -• dam o, IMffll,. ., ---of w-plpino ~ dam o, boftn .._ r<Nfonc -W!ion'-IUCh•w-llldhomea lntarfve, w;dl maintau•.ce ~. T-gro-d-nae allow....,_ -or'--with --Kd'"'V !Lo~._ mowing, lilt_,,., -no.., fiqlip ••IC mowament1J. 1f 1NN .. not LiCWW,g with--aw ..... ~"--: lnallN ~ .. ,.... -of~ lo otill p'9lllnt "' --1apocondalforoon---. A.........,_ Ndlmom !hoc oxceed• 10')1. of the dHigned pond d91lth. Any pore of dlb which 11M Nfllod 4 (nc:llff 1.-thon t!lo dHign elevodon. ontv ..... r..,., of tock --nedw IOil In .,. 11w oqu-,_ or lo,go,, or -,y -ofnedwllO!I. A•l Na d._, of poi-. -Ulion WMnl County .,.,......, or tho pub1lo might nonnally be. (Cooldlnadon wi1h S-,fell(lr,g County HMlth D"""""'°ntl Na..-pruentot!lor than • ...,,_ 111m. (Caonllnalion -Se«lieAClnQ County -D81l.,,,...ntl WMn mowino la needod, gruo/ground -•hould be mowed ID % lnchoe In height. Rod-d.uoyod Ind dam w benn ....,... cc-,dlnodon wi1h s..Ulal1Clno County -c_,,.,...., lnHCUI dee11owN or rwnowd --T..udanac-- ........_ so1,o11w1y ...- aw aiah • aid.,. ta, !Inwood. 5s--.id be 1ailiilbod by ...... opp,apriom --....-<ol: •·Go. tock IWlnfo.........., plondng of-. ~n. Sodlmem cl-ed out ta dNignod pond •hoc>• end depth; pond r,Heded if noc-ry ID comrol ,rollion. Dike """'1d be built back ID the c1eoiQn alevalion. Raplaoe tocl<I ID dHign -- KING C O U NT Y, WAS HI N GT O N, S UR FACE WAT E R D ES I G N MA NU AL NO. 3 • CLOSED DETENTION SYSTEMS (PIPES/TANKS) -c-pa.- Jainb-n Tank/Pipe s.cdcn Tank/Pipe Boni • Out of Shape ea.., not In Plue \ 01e-l!att of !lie czca -. of a vent is blcdctd al any point -daotts 111d -- R-E:<p 1 :llliCI wi---la Porlacnwd -NdlrMnt depth -.Ill secfiJnent 111d debris -'"'"1 1°' cf 111a --of Ille -.age aru """'II• area. lot 1/2 lengtt, cf saage -it ct any point d89ll'I 1XCNC1s 1S'ill, cf dlamnr, eampi.: 72-lncll saaue tank - roqulte deaning ---.. d89ll'I cf 7 lncMs lot men than I /2 J.ng!II cf tank. . kry aacl< allowing m-fa be .Ill Joints betwMn tank/pipe -..s aro ~ 1111D faclily. saaled. kry part of tank/pipe Is b4nt cut cf shape Tank/pipe repaired ct ,-placed fa dNign. men tllan 1°' of its dMlgn snap.. -,) ea-i. mlalng er Cllly pat1laJly In pla<:e. NI'/ open manhole n,qulrn mai-. Mocllanlsm connot boo cpenec1 by cne Meellanism -with -""""- malnt9nenol -with -!Cels.. Sola into fnme haw lea than 1 /2 Inch of tlll'Nd (may -apply to seff-klcldng lk!o). en. ----Cow,..,, boo rwncwcl 111d /llnstallod by 11d aftllt appfyfng 80 pGClllds of Utt. ntant ..,. rnalntananc:e per-,. la fa lcNp -from saallng off -1Dmalnlllnanc:e. IClng Ccunty Salety Olffc:e -,.. Ladd« -dnlgn --........,..,..per-,Judgestl!Uladd.,.ls allow.lmaimananc:eponcnssa- --fa miafng rungs, ~-ct- s.. "Cald1 Elains" Slanda<d No. s See "Cald1 Bains" Slanderd No. s KI N G C O U NT Y, WA S HI N GT O N, S U R FA CE WAT E R D E S I G N MANUAL ( NO. 5 • CATCH BASINS Genetal '· \ Trull & Cebris (tr,dudes Sedlmant) Structural Damage to Fram• and/or Top Slab Oadca In Basin w.Ala/BollCm FlreHantd Pallutian Cac,dlllona --la-.cl Trull or debris of mere 111an 1 /2 cubic ltx>I which is located lmmedla!aly in tronl of 111• calch basin opening or la blocking capacity of basin by more 111an 1~ Trull or debris ~n the buin) 111at exceeds 1/3 the depth from 111• bottom of basin to Invert of 111• lowest pipe into or out of Ille basin. Trull ot debris In any Inlet or oU!fet pipe bklcidng more than 1 /3 of its height. Coad animals ot vegetation 1llat coul<I generate odors that would cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., metnano). Oopotils of gasbag• OXC<M9lng 1 cubic foot ln vialume. Comer of frame extends mote 111an 3/4 Inch put curb ,_ into the -flf applicable). Tap slab has holes larger 1llan 2 square inches or -wider tnan 1 /4 Inch pnwnt la to make sure all mamrial is running into 111• basin). Frame noc sitting ffuah on top slab, I.e., separation of more tnan 3/4 inch of th• frame from the top slab. ClKlcs wfdw lllan 1/2 Inch and lcnger 1llan 3 fNt, any ... 1c1.,_ of soi pa,1fcles enwring caliOII basin tt,raugll craclcs, ot maintanenoo person judgn 111at SIIUCIUre ·-· Cracks wider than 1 /2 Inch end longer 111an 1 fool at the joint of any lnlel/oU!fet pipe or any -.-of aoil pat1k:fes enwring ca11:h buln llwugll craclcs. Bain has llllled men than 1 Inch ot has -men 1llan 2 inc:hn out of allgMMnt. PNMnoe of chemicals such u natural gu. aU, and g-11,,.. Vegetation growing acroos and blocking more than 10% of the basin apenillg. Veg-n growing In lnlel/ou11el pipe jcin1S 1llat is more 111an six lncha tall and lea 1llan lix incha apart. Nonflammabla ~ of more than 1 /2 cubic foot per tnree ·-of basin leng1II. A-S R-E,pect,od -Mal-laPwlomMd No trash ot debris loc:atad lmmadlatoly In front of C8lCh basin opening. No trash or debris In Ille cstcll basin. Inlet and outtet pipes free of trash ot debris. No dead animals or 'MgO!allon present wtthln 111• call:h basin. No condition present whic:h -,1<1 atlnld or support the b<Ndlng of lnaocta or rodents. Frame is ...,, wtth curb. Top slab is free of holes and crsd<s. Frame is sitting ffush on top slab. Buln replaced or rop-to dnlgn Olandards. No crackl more than 1/4 lnc:h wfde at tho joint of lnlet/oU!fel pipe. Eluln repl-or ropalred to dNign -- No ffammable c:hernlcals ~ No vegetation bloclcfng openjng to basin. No vegetation ot root growth presont. No pollution present othet than surface tllm. IJ')( K I NG CO U NT Y, WAS H I N GT O N, S U R FACE WATER D ES I G N MA NU AL NO. 5 • CATCH BASINS (Continued) Mal- Compa-Def9ct Catch Bun Cow< c;o.., Nat In Pl~ Lcddng Mechanism Nat 'Nc<lcing Cover Olfflcult to Remow I.adder l..addM Rungs Unlaf• Metal G,atea QI applk:oble) Trash and Debris Damaged or Missing \ Condlllon& wi-_,,__ la NHded Cow< ii mlalng ct only pattially In piac.. Hf'/--~_. ... -· Mocl1anlatn cannot be ope,Md by one rnaintanance -with ,,._ 1z>alo. Bcl1S 1nm frame haw lea titan 1/2 Inch of!IVNd. One rnainlenance -cannot l9fflCMI 11d -opplyfng 80 lbs. of 1111; iment ii kffp -from saallng off -to maintenanc:.. Ladder ii unaala due to missing rungs. misalignment, ruat, c:racka, or sha,p edges. Gtate with opening wider titan 7 /8 inch. Trull snd dlblls lllat Is bloddng more than an. of gral9 -· Go-ate missing or bnoken mernber(s) of Ille grate. A-6' RNult:I. E=q31:t1d. 'W!ten Mal--ii -·- CalCl1 bain -Is closed. Llddar meets design SW'k:Wda and allows maintenance person sa1e ace.as. .-Grala openings meet design standatds. ") Grala frN of trash and debrio. Gtate is In place and m-dasign standatds. ( KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL ( NO. 10 • CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS (Pipes & Ditches) ,.._ Condlllon• wi-Mal..-Reauftll!xp1:Nd Com_. DeNCt la-wi-~taPoclonned Pipes s.dlrnent & Oacris ~ NGlmant 1hat -• 20% Pipe deaned of all sedlmlflt and debris. of 111• d-of 111• pipe. Vegetallcn 1/egelallon 1hat rwdUCN frM mowment of >JI wgllWfcn ~ sa -llowa -· IM>ugh pipes. frNly lhrough pipes. Damagod ProlilctlW coming la damagod; rust is ~ mote than~ --to Pipe repalrod ot rw~. any par! of pipe. hry dent tllat d..,...... Ille ...,.. secticn ...., of pipe by mer• 1han 20'l'. Pipe repalrod or rwplacod • Open OitdlN T..-&OebM Trull and debM oxcoods 1 cubic -Trash and debris olearod from di!ches. per T IXIJ sq.,_ r..t of cfflcn and sklpes. Sodlment Ao::umulalod -lment that exc<Md$ 20% Ol!ch oleanod/flU811od of all sediment an< of t1te dNign deptll. debris so tllat it matchft dHign. Vegetation Vegil!atfon tllot rec1ucea'lrff mo..ment of -· ttvaugh dl!ch ... Water flows freely IM>ugh dl!chN. En,olan Carnage to S.. -·· Slandatd No. 1 S.. 'Ponds" Standard No. 1 Slapn Flock Uning Out of Mai-person can -11811w ,ci Repl-roolca to duign standard. Place or llhslng (11 beneath Ille rock lining. ~pllcable) ( Caleh Bulns S.. 'Caleh Buin1' Standan1 No. S S.. 'Caleh Buina• Standard No. 5 '-Oebrta Barrtera s.. 'OeoM Bantera· Standard No. a S.. 'Oeorls Barrtera' Standard No. 8 (e.g., Trull Rade) ( \ A-U KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL NO. 12 • ACCESS ROADS/EASEMENTS Shclulders and Ol1cna Trull and Oocris Vegetation ln Road SurlKe Trull and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot par 1,000 oqWIAI i..t, Le, trull and --ftQ up one standard size ~can. Oocri• which could dam--11r .. (g-or metal). My-which reduce clutence -road owface ta IMa t1w1 14 !Mt. My obstructfons reslrictlng the ecceso ta a 10-fQ 12./oot width ror a distance of more tlw1 12 feet or any point INUidlng ....,... ta 1 ... than a 1G-foot width. 'MlenanyowfacedefedOXCNC!a8 Inches In depth and 6 squa,e feet 111 area. In g8Mfol, any owface drilct which"•.) hinders or p,w,,nts maintenance acceas. -gJOWing In the road --that .,. more than 8 l"""'9 tall and INs than 8 lnclles apart within a ~ area. Trash and debris clemwd fram site. Roadway lrff of debris which oouid damagedrea. Roadway owrhMd clear ta 14 Ifft high. Road swf-U11ffcm11y smooth with no widenc:a of ~ potnojff, mush spotS, or rutL Ercololl within 1 !cot of the roadway mcro Sl1oulder lrff of ..-and matching tlw1 8 lnchff wide and 8 lnclleo deep. the """"'ndlng road. Weeds and brush oxceed 18 lnclleo In he4ght or hinder rNlntenance accno. -and bru8h cut ta 2 lnchn In hoightorclemwdlnouclla'd'fUID ----- _J L Appendix ' . n r .. ' ,- " ·--.. ,• ·-·-.,-~ :·_·~~-~~.:.'\ -.. ::·-~ *'..---f ..... ,., :. / Mr. Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 14410 Bet-Red Road Bellevue, Washington 98007 Subject: Plan Review Cedarwood TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences April 11, 1996 Project No. T-2176-2 King County, Washington Dear Mr. Lennon: As requested by Mr. Tom Uren of Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc., we have reviewed the project drawings pertaining to grading and retaining systems for the proposed development as requested in their memo dated March 4, 1996. We have also designed three soil-reinforced Keystone block walls located in Division 2 and have provided additional recommendations/information as requested. Our review of grading plans for Division 1 indicated significant fill thicknesses were being placed near the top of the slope to construct a retaining wall and the access roadway. No subsurface information was available for this area and there was also a concern for potential adverse impacts to slope stability. Therefore, we conducted additional subsurface exploration at the entrance wall location to provide recommendations for wall design and construction. Additional subsurface exploration was also conducted in the proposed retention pond area in Division 4 to evaluate wintertime groundwater conditions. We previously conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the project and presented the results in our report dated September 21, 1995. The purpose of our recent review was to determine if our recommendations have been incorporated into the project design and provide additional recommendations/design information as requested by the design team. The project plans we reviewed contained a total of four sheets numbered Sheets 1 through 4. These plans were prepared by Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. and dated March 4, 1996. We also reviewed drawings numbered Exhibits 1 through 6. Please note that we only reviewed the portions of the plans pertaining to our geotechnical recommendations. Based.on.our review of these plans,.it appears they generally conform to our recommendations. The recommendations and revisions that need to be incorporated are presented in the following sections. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 • Phone (206) 821-7777 • ·, -Mr. Patrick Lennon April 11, 1996 1111 ' ~ l!I • :-i r r r r , j ' • .., , 1 ~ j 1 -, j r l • DIVISION 1 A) B) The plans indicate considerable grading in the western portion of Division 1. Slopes with inclinations of about 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) and heights of about 40 feet are planned in this area._ A six-foot high rockery wall is also planned at the toe of this slope. Our subsurface exploration in this area indicates that the cuts will generally expose dense sands and gravels. However, due to the relatively steep inclination, clean sands and gravels, and slope heights of 40 feet, there is a potential for slope instability. To mitigate this problem, we recommend providing a break in the slope by creating a six-foot wide bench about halfway up the slope. A surface drain consisting of a shallow lined trench should be provided within the bench. AJ:iy water intercepted by the drain should be tightlined to a suitable discharge facility. Due to the steep, high slopes above the proposed rockery at the toe, we recommend replacing _ the rockery with a structural wall. We considered several options, including using a reinforced soil wall, a retaining wall, and a soldier pile wall. Both the reinforced soil wall and the retaining wall will require excessive oversteepened cuts during construction. Consequently, we · determined that a soldier pile wall is a more viable option at this location. Toe soldier pile wall should be designed to resist lateral pressures equivalent to a fluid weighing 55 pounds per cubic foot (pc!). To resist lateral earth pressures, a passive earth pressure of 350 pcf may be used across two pile diameters. Toe soldier pile wall can be provided with rockery facing, if desired. AJ:iother option can be considered if the lot depth at the toe of the slope could be reduced. This option involves extending the slope into the lots. A rockery wall up to a maximum height of three feet can be constructed at the toe. This will reduce the amount of encroachment of the slope into the lots by up to six feet. This short rockery wall can be constructed as a conventional rockery . Toe entrance wall adjacent to the steep slopes in the southern portion of Division 1 will have a maximum wall height of about 24 feet. In addition, a 2:1 fill slope is planned above the wall. Toe wall will be located adjacent to steep slopes with average inclinations of 71 percent. The backfill behind the wall will consist of structural fill soils. Our borings drilled within the wall alignment indicate there is about 11 feet of existing fill soils below the wall (Sec Figures A-3 · and A-4). These fill soils are in an uncontrolled condition. Our stability analysis indicates that a conventional retaining wall supported on spread footings underlain by the existing fills is not feasible at this location; therefore, we considered two options for supporting the fills. One option is to excavate the existing fill soils, remove the unsuitable materials, and bring the area back to original grades with geogrid-reinforced structural fill backfill. With this option, a conventional retaining wall with spread footings can be supported on the reinforced base. Geogrid reinforcement will also be required in the backfill behind the wall. Project No. T-2176-2 Page No. 2 \ I I ] J .J • r ; ) • r i r r i · Mr. Patrick Lennon April 11, 1996 We conducted analyses for the 24-foot high wall. Our analysis indicates that ten layers of Mirafi 1ST type of geogrid will be required for reinforcement. The geogrids will have a vertical spacing of about two feet. Seven grids will be located in the existing fill zone. The grids will extend horizontally from the face of the slope to about the northern edge of the proposed roadway. The bottom two grids will have grid lengths of 95 feet, and the two grids above will have lengths of 90 feet, overlain by two 85-foot long grids. The grid immediately below the footing will be 55 feet long. Three 50-foot long grids spaced two feet vertically will be required behind the wall. The fill beneath the wan and the fill behind the wall should be compacted to a minimum of 95 perce_nt of their maximum dry density as detennined by ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor). The material requirements and procedures for fill placement are provided in our geotechriical report. The general geogrid configuration is shown on Figure A-5. The second option is a soldier pile wall with tiebacks. The tiebacks should be anchored in native competent soils. Our preliminary analysis and design of the 24-foot high wall indicates that for a pile spacing of six feet, two tiebacks will be required at each pile location to support the wall. The bottom tieback will be located two feet above the ground surface and the second tieback will be at a height of ten feet above the ground surface. The bottom tieback should be loaded to 90 kips and the one above should be loaded to 78 kips. The tieback loads were detennined from local and general stability considerations. Both tiebacks are inclined at 15 degrees to the horizontal. A no-load zone length of 50 feet for the lower tieback and 65 feet for the upper tieback is required to place the anchor zone in the native competent material. For a 12-inch diameter anchor, the anchor length required is 29 feet for the lower tieback and 25 feet for the upper tieback. For the 24-foot high wall, 24-inch diameter piles need to extend 25 feet below the ground surface (14 feet below existing fill). In addition, a steel section consisting of W 14x109 or W 18x86 will be required. The pile and tieback configuration is shown on Figure A-6. For design of the soldier pile wall with tiebacks, we recommend the following parameters. To calculate lateral pressure on the wall, we recommend using an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf. In the anchor zone, an allowable friction capacity of 1,000 pounds per square foot (pst) should be used. We recommend an allowable passive resistance equal to 275 pcf acting over two pile diameters for the pile length within the native soils located below the existing fills. We recommend a minimum ten foot pile embedment in the native soils. The passive resistance hi the existing fill soils should be neglected. However, the lateral pressure imposed by the existing fill over one pile diameter should be considered. The tieback loads used for the 24-foot high wall should be proportioned to the wall height and should be considered minimum tieback loads. We do not recommend a pile spacing of more than six feet. A load diagram for wall design is shown on Figure A-7. Project No. T-2176-2 Page No. 3 • • !I • • I • r r Mr. Patrick Lennon April 11, 1996 C) The proposed wall located nonh of the retaining wall described above is supponed on the edge of a 2:1 slope. The maximum height of the wall in this area is eight feet. For bearing capacity considerations, we recommend constructing a six-foot wide horizontal bench in front of the toe of the wall footing. Due to existing uncontrolled fills to depths of about 11 feet in this area, the existing fills should be removed and compacted as structural fills if the retaining wall will be supponed on a strip footing. The lateral pressure of 40 pcf equivalent fluid pressure may be used to calculate the load imposed on the wall. In ponions of the wall with a backslope, you may use a lateral pressure of 50 pcf equivalent fluid pressure. If a soldier pile wall is used, a passive resistance value of 350 pcf may be used for native soils below existing fill soils. As mentioned earlier, we expect there is about 11 feet of existing fill soils below existing grades in this area. The passive resistance in existing fill soils should be ignored. Tiebacks for the soldier pile wall should be designed as recommended for the entrance wall. Finally, this wall may also be constructed as a geogrid reinforced wall. We will be pleased to provide detailed designs for this option, if needed. DIVISI0N2 A) We recommend replacing the two rockery walls planned along the toe of the 140th Way SE embankment in the southern ponion of Division 2 with a Keystone block wall with reinforced soil backfill. We have prepared designs for these walls. The design details of these two walls and the wall in the central ponion of Division 2 are presented on Figures B-1 through B-11. Standard block units as manufactured by Keystone must be used in the wall construction. Geogrids should consist ofTensar UX1400 or equivalent. Block construction and connection of the geogrid to the wall should be performed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. Figure B-2 is a generalized wall section identifying the various components of the Keystone wall construction. Figures B-3 through B-11 represent front profiles of the walls showing the geogrid reinforcing elevations. The lengths of the geogrids behind the wall for the various wall heights as well as the heights of the geogrid layers above the foundation are summarized on Tables A and B in Appendix B. The geogrid elevations shown on the Keystone Retaining Wall Profiles do not necessarily comply entirely with the heights summarized on Tables A and B. The geogrid positioning shown on Figures B-3 through B-11 satisfies the design requirements and also accounts for constru_ction consideratio1_1_s .. Howev_~_r, if_the_geogrid elevations shown _on Figures B-3 through B-11 conflict with actual grades in the field, the geogrids should be installed at the heights summarized on Tables A and B. Project No. T-2176-2 Page No.4 = -• -!<{r. Patrick Lennon r r r r r r 1 r 1 r -~ - April 11, 1996 Quality control during wall construction should consist of full-time observation and compaction testing of structural fill. The compaction of structural fill should be in accordance with the recommendations for structural fill in our geotechnical report. Observations should include · verification of adequate foundation support, drainage installation, gcogrid material used, and its placement in the reinforced earth fill zone behind the Keystone wall construction. B) The plans indicate fills of up to 24 feet in the eastern portion of Division 2. These fills will be placed on the existing deep uncontrolled fills in this area. Some stability problems can occur if the underlying fills are loose or soft. A close field evaluation of this area will be required before additional fills are placed in this area. We recommend that the evaluation be made during construction. C) The plans indicate utilities will be placed over steep slopes between Divisions 2 and 3. We recommend supporting the pipes on thrust blocks located behind the crest and beyond tile toe of the steep slope to minimize additional loads on the slope. The thrust block behind the crest should be located a minimum of ten feet or a distance equal to twice the depth of the block behind the crest, whichever is greater. The blocks should be supported on competent soils. The allowable bearing capacity and passive resistance parameters are provided in the Foundations section of our geotechnical report. In addition, to prevent flow of water through trench lines and over the steep slopes, we recommend placing clay/CDF dams at regular intervals in the trenches. DMSI0N3 A) It is anticipated that buildings in this area will require pile foundation support. Alternatively, the building pad areas may be preloaded after the existing topsoil is removed and fills are placed to bring the area to grade. We understand that rough grading will be performed in this area and that the buildings will not be constructed until about 12 months later. For this planned schedule, a preload of about three to five feet of soil (assuming an average unit weight of 120 pcf) will be required. If the average unit weight of the preload is less than 120 pcf, the height of the surcharge should be increased. We will make further evaluations once the actual construction schedule has been established. To monitor the progress of preloading, we recommend placing settlement plates on the building subgrade before the preload is placed. The settlement plates should be surveyed at least once'a month to monitor settlements. B) Average stripping depths of 18 inches are expected in this division. All fill placement should be completed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Site Preparation and Grading section of our geotechnical report. ______ _ Project No. T-2176-2 Page No.5 ... = .•·: 1111 ,. ' l r ' • • i · Mr. Patrick Lennon April 11, 1996 DIVISI0N4 A) Excavations of 12 feet are planned for the retention system on Division 4. Our recent test pits in the proposed pond area indicate groundwater at a depth of ten feet in the western portion of the pond, 8.5 feet in the central portion, and nine feet in the eastern portion. Based on this data, we recommend using a maximum seasonal groundwater level at Elev. 69 for design. B) The building foundations should be supported as recommended in Division 3. C) Average stripping depths of 18 inches are expected in Division 4. All fill placement should be · in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Site Preparation and Grading section of our geotechnical report. Earthwork operations should be observed and examined by Terra Associates, Inc. to verify that the recommendations given herein and in our geotechnical report are followed. The recommendations and revisions provided in this letter should be incorporated into project plans and construction. All geotechnical recommendations given in our previous geotechnical report remain valid. We trust this summary of our review is sufficient for your present needs. If you have any questions or need additional information or services, please call. Sincere! y yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC • Dinesh Katti, Ph.D., P.E. i9 Staff Engineer i ..., ,. j , r r Anil Butail, P.E. President DRK/AB:tm Encl: Appendix A -Division 1, Entrance Wall Appendix B -Division 2, Keystone Block Wall Design • cc: Mr. Glen Maurer, Pacific Properties, Inc. Mr. Tom Uren, Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. Project No. T-2176-2 Page No. 6 • • r r r r r '!."' • i .... l ,. • i ii" I r APPENDIXA DIVISION 1 ENTRANCE WALL I . J J .J .J • l ,j j 'J .1 ·r I j I I ! '° ------ _.,.,,< / \ -.\__ / • --7 / / / \ I \ \ \ _( ~ \ \ MAST ARM /"s POLE \ \ / \ \ \ :;:::::::; 'l • ~ ~'/-~~<' POLE :I \ \ ~,...--}:; ~ ,_,'I-~ ~MAST ARM \ \.~~-,._0,o~~o;:. . '!!J.OD ff_:-:: c;i. }-----::, ,, ,r:ie'~ _,,.,,. ~-\,o·l\...l y AP" s y' ·-z "\\-----. . -· ~ :;...---i --.. . ~ "'\' \ \ APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 '° l£GEND: -$-APPROXIMATE BOffiNG LOCATION 80 feet REFERENCE: TOE OF SLOPE EL. • 238.2 SITE P~ PREPARED AND PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GOlDSUITH ANO ASSOCIATES. INC., JOB No. 9<057, EXHIBIT 3, DATED 11/95. ~TERRA ~ ASSOCIATES ut0technical Consultonts EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN DMSION 1, c cNTIRANCE WALL CEOARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No.2176-2 I 0ot, 4/96 Figure A-1 ~ vi Cl LLl z < a: c.!l LLl (/) a: <( 0 u ~ 0 (/) 0 LLl z ~ c.!l LLl z u: ~ Q C z u1i MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAVELS More than 50% of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve. SANDS More than 50% of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve. Clean Gravels (less than 5% fines) Gravels with fines Clean Sands (less than 5% fines) Sands with fines SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit Is less than 50% SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit is greater than 50% HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS . LETTER GRAPH SYMBOL SYMBOL GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Wel~graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poo~y-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels, gra~sand-silt mixtures, non- plastic fines. Clayey gravels, grave~sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Poo~y-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. Clayey sands, sancklay mixtures, plastic fines. Inorganic silts and very fine sands. rack flour. silty or clavey fine sands or clavey snts with slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plastichy, gravelly clavs. sandy clays. silty clays, lean clays. Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, mlcaceous or dlatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic. Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. OH : : : : : : : : : Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, I I I l I I I I I organic silts. PT ---.... ,..,..,.. ---,.. ,.., ,.. ,... ---Peat and other highly organic soils, DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS Density .Very loose Loose Standard Penetration Resistance in Blows/Foot Medium dense Dense 04 4-10 10-30 30-50 >50 Very dense Consistency Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard Standard Penetration Resistance In Blows/Foot 0-2 2-4 4-8 8-16 16-32 >32 TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants I I p * sz Cl C Qu w pcf LL Pl N 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER SAMPLER PUSHED SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED WATER LEVEL (DATE) WATER OBSERVATION STANDPIPE TORVANE READINGS, tsf • · PENETROMETER READING, tsf MOISTURE, percent of dry weight DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot LIQUID LIMIT, percent PLASTIC INDEX STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 4/96 Figure /J..2 .:a: • ~ s} ~ -- Boring No. Logged by: ABK Date: Graph/ uses ML MH 3/21/96 Soil Description Gray-brown SANO and GRAVEL, fine to coarse, few to little silt, few clumps of clayey silt, occasional rusty gravel, moist to wet. Rusty-brown SAND, very fine, few silt, moist to very moist. Brown sandy SILT, rust-stained, fine, horizontal beds, occasional sand seams, very moist to wet. Gray.brown clayey SILT, prominantly bedded with silt at 0 to 20 degrees from horizontal, crumbly, occasional seam of dried organics, interbedded with fine sand with few to little silt, moist. Gray-brown silty SAND, very fine, rust staining, occasional zone of very fractured clayey silt at 45 degrees to horizontal, very moist to wet. Boring terminated at 49 feet. TERRA ASSOCIATES Relative Density Dense Very Dense Very Dense Hard Hard Very Dense 8-101 Depth (ft.) 10 20 30 40 ----.Approximate. Elev. (I) a. (N) Water E Blows/ Content 0 foot (%) Cl) I 44 3.4 I 51 5.4 I 50/5' 6.4 I 50/5' 10.5 I 78 27.0 I 50/6' 29.0 I 50/6' 24.9 I 82 30.3 I 50/6' 25.0 T 94 25.3 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD ">;' KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON -316 Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 4/96 Figure A-3 ·-- ~: j -~ ·n :r.:: .... Boring No. Logged by: ABK/DPL Date: Graph/ uses MH l 3/21/96 Soil Description Relative Density Medium Dense FILL: Gray SAND, fine, trace silt, moist to very moist. Medium Dense Gray SANO and GRAVEL. fine to coarse, trace to little silt, wet. Brown silty SAND, very fine, iron staining. moist to wet. Blue,gr,,y clayey SILT, massive, with interbeds of very fine brown silty sand to sandy silt, moist to wet. Borwn silty SAND, very fine, iron staining, moist. Boring terminated at depth 48.5 feet. •Poor sample recovery. TERRA ASSOCIATES Very Dense Very Dense Hard Very Dense B-102 Depth (ft.) 10 20 30 40 . Approximate (I) a. (N) Water E Blows/ Content 0 foot (%) (/) I 20 8.9 I 24 5.6 I 50/6" 20.4 I 50 3.2 = 50/6" 9.6 = 50/6" 20.4 I 50/6" 30.8 I 50/5" 25.4 I 50/5" -r 50 5• 26.8 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD Elev. 326 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 4/96 Figure A-4 _, • C ::1 ,1 ~ ! C ,l! I "' ;I ;, :~ r360 I T, = 78 kips I l-360 90 kips 1 Roodl T2 = Steel Section , W18x86 or W1-4-x109 J-40 -l ~ .--r--,--\ f-340 Proposed Structural Fill 320 C -------------~ ~ --------C SP / SP /SM ("'"I dense) J.. 0 ~ 300 71.5% averoge slope ~ N>100 12inch d'iameter (typ.) f ! ----------- ML/MH (ho,<1) N•82 to 100 + '-24 inch d;amelet p;te = 280 -l /-6 fl center to center maximum) t-280 -----------------~ SM (ve"f dense) N,,.9-4 to tOO 2BO l ~-1260 240 --U-1-2,0 220 220 o 20 40 BO BO 100 120 140 SCALE: I" 20' 1BO 180 ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnicol Consultants 200 220 240 SECTION A-A OMSKJN 1, ENTRANCE WALL CEOARWOOO KING COUNTY.!. WASHINGTON Praj. No.2176-2 f Doto 4/96 f cguce A-5 J 1 ~·-1 ~ ·.) J :I ! 1 ! 380 360 Mlrofi I ST (typ.) 340 i 2+' 320 300 71.5% avel'09e slope {) 280 260 240 jRoodj Proposed Struchlral Fill SP / SP/SM (,e,y dense) N>100 ML/IIH (hom) N:a82 to 100 SM ( very dense) N=-94 to 100 ·----- --------- 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 220 0 20 40 60 BO 100 120 SCALE: I" 20' 140 160 180 200 220 240 SECTION A-A OMSION 1, ~CE WALL CEDARWOOD KJNG COUNTY, WASHINGTON I ,g ~ "' ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnicol Consultot1ls J I I Proj. No. 2176-21 Oot. +/96 I r.guro A-6 I ' -. .= 11 ft. 275 pcf over 2 pile die meters T -----1 T 8 ft. ,; -----2 ft. Existing Fill 10' min. _l 60 pcf 60 pcf (in existing fill -over 1 pile die meter Friction = 1 ODO psf in anchor zone T 1 no-load zone = 65 ft., tie bock load = 13 kips/ft. width of wall for 24 ft. wall ,; -no-load zone = 50 ft., tie bock load = 15 kips/ft. width of wall for 24 ft. !'all Pile Sopcing -6 ft. center to center maximum NOT TO SCALE TERRA ~;,;,"-'-"' ASSOCIATES LOAD DIAGRAM FOR WALL DESIGN DMSION 1, ENTRANCE WALL CEDARWOOD KING COUNlY, WASHINGTON Proj. No.2176-2 Dote 4/96 Figure A-7 ·' :..·"1 APPENDIXB DMSI0N2 KEYSTONE BLOCK WALL DESIGN ·~ . '- .... L·\ APPENDIXB TABLE A GEOGRID REINFORCING SCHEDULE Keystone Retaining Wall Division 2, Central Area Wall Cedarwood King County, Washington Free Standing Wall Height -greater than 3 feet and equal to 4 feet Layer No. Geogrid !.,ength (W (feet) 1 Tensar UX 1400 4.0 Free Standing Wall Height -5 feet l.,ayer No. Geogrid !.eogth (!.) (feel) 1 TensarUX 1400 5.5 2 Tcnsar UX 1400 5.5 Free Standing Wall Height -7 feet Layer No. Qeogrid Length (!J (feet) 1 Tensar UX 1400 7.0 2 Tensar UX 1400 7.0 3 Tensar UX 1400 7.0 Free Standing Wall Height -9 feet Layer No. Geogrid !.,ength (IJ (feet) 1 Tensar UX 1400 8.0 2 Tensar UX 1400 8.0 3 Tensar UX 1400 8.0 4 Tensar UX 1400 8.0 Notes: Length (L) measured from back of Keystone block as shown on Figure 2. Height (H) (feet)· 1.33 Height (I:!) (feet)" 1.33 3.33 Height (HJ (feet)" 1.33 3.33 5.33 Heigh! (H) (feel)" 1.33 3.33 5.33 7.34 • Geogrid layer heights are measured from top of concrete pad as shown on Figure 2. Free standing wall height is height H' shown on Figure 2. Project No. T-2176-2 G - - -,•:. ;.. = APPENDIXB TABLEB GEOGRID REINFORCING SCHEDULE Keystone Retaining Wall Division 2, Walls 2 and 3 Cedarwood King County, Washington Free Standing Wall Height • greater than 3 feet and less than S feet Layer No. Geogrid Length CL} <feet} 1 Tensar UX 1400 7.0 2 Tensar UX 1400 7.0 Free Standing Wall Height · greater than S feet and less than 7 feet Layer No. Geogrid Length CW /feet} 1 Tensar UX 1400 9.0 2 Tensar UX 1400 9.0 3 Tensar UX 1400 9.0 Free Standing Wall Height· greater than 7 feet and equal to 8 feet Layer No. Geogrid Leng!h (L} (feet} 1 Tensar UX 1400 10.0 2 Tensar UX 1400 10.0 3 Tensar UX 1400 10.0 4 Tensar UX 1400 10.0 Notes: . Height OD (feet} 1.33 3.33 Height CID (feet}° 1.33 3.33 5.33 . Height CH) (feet) 1.33 3.33 5.33 7.34 Length (L) measured from back of Keystone block as shown on Figure 2. 0 Geogrid layer heights are measured from top of concrete pad as shown on Figure 2. Free standing _wall height is height H' shown on Figure 2. Project No. T-2176-2 ~- ' ,.l ,. i: c1 cl t· '-,I~- C i· .-1 ~~ ) I I ... ,.. ' ·, 50 REFDIDICE: ,-~ /~~~ . v ··v\._{ ~~ I """'·· ,--, \--= . ~ '--' t ~ I ,· , . ..._J . L __ :;..J ' '< L._ ....____ ·-·-i " . IT \ I . I / ' L_ ___ _J SITE LOCATOR MAP NO SCALE t .i( ~ APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 50 100 feet GRADING Pl.AA PR0\1100) BY HUGH G. GOWSt,UTH AND ASSOC~TES. INC., SHITT 3 OF 4, DATED 2/27 /96. KEYSTONE WALL LOCATION PLAN ASSOCIATES IONG COUNTY, WASHINGTON ~ TERRA OMSION 2 CEOARWOOO I Geotechnieal Consuftonts Proj. No.2176-2 Date 4/96 Figure 6-1 '.=..j ·,:;...,_ .1., ' .. ' . ~. . f,. .,. , ... WAll. BATTER STANOAAD BLOCK UNITS MIINUFACTURED SY KEYSTONE CONCREIE PAD NOTES: H' ;(/....-Y/,,";-Y/}Y/;y.,..\ Y>.. Y;'\ "-~-\ .. '.'.:",, \.,'\. '<.{'\ '<<\X6VAY.-<<"/./.{/ 1.33' , .. . . . . 1--1"""'!"!; --- •O.•O '1--J,••o• .... o•·ci• .... oo·o-o. .... o .. o .. .... •ooci .... 1---f''-il GEOORID (SEE GEOORID REINFORCING ElfVATION SHEETS B-3 THROUGH B-11 ANO REINFORCING SCHEDULE TABLES A AND B) ---LAYER 2 STRUCTURAL FILL (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR REQUIREMENTS) -----LAYER 1 1/':t MINUS WASHED DRAIN ROCK 4• PERFORATtll PVC P1PE TAKEN TO APPROVED POINT OF DISCHARGE NOT TO SCALE 1. ALL GEOGRID LAYER HEIGHTS ARE MEASURED FROM TOP OF CONCRETE PAO 2. KEYSTONE BLOCK CONSTRUCTION ANO CONNECTION OF GEOGRID TO WALL TO BE COMPLETED PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS. TERRA ASSOCIATES KEYSTONE RETAINING WALL SECTION OMSION 2 CEDARWOOO KING COUNi'l', WASHINGTON Proj. No. 2176-2 Dote 4/96 Figure 8-2 r-----------------------------------------, ~ J : I i I ~ ~ I "I .. ; l . -.I i ~ ~ ·1~ ~ =, a a' ,1 J -1 I ,1 .. , I C~GE IN WALL DlRECllON A SEE FIGl.llE 4 r-GEOGRIO lAYER '"'";cell 202 _ , '...!...J.. . ' , I O ::µ::::q; -r,-t--,--;-'""":-, I I ' • I , , : 202 _____j__:-r ' I I I I I ..!. ' ' l : I. :....i....!....:..:.~.,;,.. I . -1-.J.....+--i..+. ' cr:soRDiCE::BEB11i1D3Vill.'.~-+ I ' . ~ ' ' . ' ' I ..._; ' ~ 200-.--;-. ,-;...;.'.)....;....' p S.L ~ ::SURFM:c.,.--,I ~...l-.j ~.~~-~] ~ 1"1',J I:' 'I . ' -'--+r:::tt'.' ''~~-. ·. ' ' 200 ,,_., .. ·1:, ,. ''.........:--f'ONT·Of'--W~'-.L!.....I.•'' ·.···...;......· ,., j::l::i·-···· , j j ,·t-:-rh;_.._,, ., _:::;-:-,_:....,._...... , , : . · T--.-8. · , , : , 1, · '· , , . , · · .. I ·, , ·, , , , , ! I. , t . , •. , , : • , , 19a-==-._,,_,-:,;'Ifl--+-:-+t.,:;:·•: .,-: ,:·' > I, I I , J I• I, , 198 196-~· f-.~·i' --;t:::::;..µ:±,..1 r-L!..f r-+-:-;.!._.;.,1_.:, __ _._'.J, ----'";' ~-·-~-~--.:.-,--:---; ---1:..-_':' _____ :.. -1.--'-' , -·i-t96 19,4-~~r."!..ll.+ 1:f..L._; : : · ·, ~-. j, :ltit :-;-~ £-8:p~-+-.--~r!.--:-·-~~ -rj----~~___in=~--i-.:.--t_~ -,-1 i , · ~ . T~L~~~: tffr_+-:_~_-:-.; ~ 194 ] -'-'+'-i~h ' O ' ' -· ii"' ' -, I : i I I I I i I· =1-..-"-±:::±..-, ' I ' [ I : :::::'::j:j:;: ·t·. ' i I ' ' +,+-'."' -. I f ' I -- --LH-,.·+.-.!..!-t-+. _,_~;..++++ , ...;..._L.;...-f+ti r I' :fT!+ ... __ . ' ,--.--:--. ..!.~-n::.i: ' , , .. ,-,,---, , . 'n , :~~~"~~~~',;:~i;f~=--~~-~~:+=~'::~~:~,E~ .. :-: ~ -~: .. '' ;---;--' -·-, -;~ 182i: ~,·-'-+·++-. -,-. ___ , __ ·• ; ~~-,-~~~-, u:=~-:t-¢+r---7'; t: -12--! ~ ... _---,-. -:~ ; ~182 'l"I '1"1 11 111 1 1 111 1 11 1"1 'l"l"l"I' I' l"l"l"l"l"l"l"l"l 1 '1"l"l"i 1 ,j 11 J"l"l"I '1"1"1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1"1"1"1"1"1 I o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 -4-2 .« 46 4S 50 52 54 S6 58 60 62 &4-66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 HCR1201i!AL OlSTANGE (feel) SCALE: 1"=80" (6'8") NOTE: I. ONE G~O UNIT Of HOCHT IS REPRESENTATIVE Of ONE KEYSTONE BLOCK UNIT (OR B INCHES). 2. THE PROJECT CML ENGJNEER SHOULD YERJFY GRADES ON THIS DRAWING BEFORE REL£(SING THE DRAWING FOR CONSTRUCTION s' I -GEOGRID R8NFORCING ELEVATION SHEET 11 _,.,";•·· TERRA DMSION 2,KEYSTONE WALL NU"BER !(CENTRAL WAll) n .. ~;;-r CEDARWOOD ~ I ....... ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON j GeolechnttGI Con'"llonls Proj. No.2176-21 Dole 4/96 I flg,ro 8-3 1 r---------------------------------------. rl ~I : I i .1 SEE FIGI.R: ~ r GROUND SURFACE 00llNO WALL SEE FIGLllE 5 r202 200 •· J ;1 <C> I ! I I ~ ~ ]I ]I JI II J :i ;1 ]I _I I 202 200~ 198 ~ _,_ :, .c.;< ~ 'Fiffiffll!R:'F• Fi'i". E'c' F.8GR11l-t<c='ffiR"'j"""'ti.% .""· ~""§'1'' i:e"': •""• ·"'. ?'°""'• l...L.l · ,-,--c+,-~~PNA!J "' , :a , _ · " ' ' I I ' ~-+----! 198 --'--U..:~~~~-• ~:-;·: ~ :-!. ' I I Io :.~:; -~-, ,,,... .':~ -."7-~ --:~. •-,-:~·::.:·--~; ,-H++:;~~~. '~:H·: '+-H-+ , ,, 195 , , . ..!. , -!-i..' O , I ' ' , ' ' , '-'-, I , • -+++-+-+-, ,+=+HI ' 1 ' l • I ' I "": -;--=- 194--•,. ·-.-, . I-:: -'~ ~~-4-W-' 11' 'i: Ii.-~,. j, -~. --1---U •. --,-~'.I 11171 I I' I I....Ll....l....' ·-' '·V.-.:...W.. '..; ~ 194 .! '..J...!.' '.:.'. . ·~. -1 I'' . ,, ,, t;. --------c-1 '+·H-hll' II 'T"""IT;--1 I''' ·,·.:. ~-....... 192-~ •. ,""-: :~~: '':".:.~-·, .£.::: :+..:· :~,: "-H-· '.ttI.L'~:.; i; ;-•: ;~+i.jjJ_~:~; ~--' :-: : '-;'+: :-r,: I'.·~· 1 :_;~-~-•• • ' 192 z 190.' " : ". :~c+-r,-~"~~:::"-• ~:Tltf: .".: :=:-±~:::. !;!j,.-h-"~::~,,. -: '' .• : >,,:": -j~~ f+rtY"~' ~: ~ • .:-~·:-+-~~~· 190 ~ 188-i;: I:• ~w-:-,_:Llb __ • =+s-~c, · , ,_ .• .L~.L· :tTTfT]" ,-r-,. • · . · 188 ::: ~~~:?~-~;;;;~~:J:~.::~::=---~=!~: ~=~~i¥&~~W¥-~~~ . = :~:= ~::: , , 1 1 I ' I ' I ' I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I ' ' I ' I I I ' I l ' ( '---rr TT I -.T -l f 96 98 1()(} 102 104 106 108 110 112 114 116 118 120 122 124 126 128 130 132 134 136 138 t-40 142 1+4 146 148 150 152 15-4 156 158 160 162 164 166 168 170 172 174 176 178 180 182 184 186 188 190 192 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet) SCALE: 1"=80' (6'8') NCT8 1. ONE GRID UNIT OF HE~KT IS REPRESENTATlV[ OF ONE KE'<'SIONE. BLOCK UNIT (OR 8 INCHES). 2. THE PROJ£CT CML ENGINEER SHOULD VERIFY GRADES ON THIS DRAWING BEFORE Rfil.ASING THE DRAWING FOR CDNSlRUCTIDN ii I GEOGRIO REINFORCING W.VATION SHEET , -TERRA DMSION 2.KEYSTONE ~gm !(CENTRAi. WALL) I . . . ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON j · · C.Otechn"°I Consultants Proj. No.2t76-2 I Dote . 4/96 I Flguce B-4 1 ",-,,..-,------------------------------------------------, .J ,.j J i ~ -1 ' r .J • ..J i • .J ' J • .J ; '.J r " • ,.J L i CHANGE IN WALL lllRECTION B SEE FIGUlE 4 202 _ . , . c.JlEOORID~typ\cafi LOCATION OF ROCKERY CHANGED t------TO KCYSTONE BLOCK WALL -----; 200; 198·· '-H '-"4~'' -, ~-r .....!-.LLC ~-: ~ '.§/;" '' ,-~ili ' >lNO RfAeHEHIND ~c .=,' •'' [' ['' lj ··.''ff, j!ffi~illj:::f : • • • I , ! i ! i • I · l:it;-:"Et~]]' ' .~II:ffi+-i:P-+•l •• •i 1 l,:i!'!•:· :, ••. , •. 196· ,c,· • · · · , ' · !'"'I: ::;::j±j:' -,..:.+-C' -I "~@" 'T' i I : • '! I ' ~' I! i 11 I ' ' '' ,~- -.-:--~ ~ fill~ft:i;e:w ' -·-:-_~..:.- --'----~----~· 202 b_,__,.;_t 200 '.L...LJ.....i_ '---198 :I-196 '•]-? Lt-194 !_ ]_ 194 ~ : i ~ : :;:j::iffl ±11 i it I i i -~· ' ' I : ' : _:, ~:=~ ' ' ~ . ' '-' ' ~~cc, -. ,.., ~ .• ~ . , , I . -, ++++t··:j::;:tj:.-,., ---:r ·~. , . . . . , , ~=, . , ~ 192--i-+++-H+-H-+ .. -":'''' ''''It i '''I' I 1 't± ----, ~ ' '~ -:--. ,-_ '1"' ''.'' ''I.. ---. : . '':.:' '' -F '~ 192 ~ ~ ;:_ ~+~-: ~· c~~tt~:~~~~J~J~ :l;'.: ~ • :-~~~;~~~~-J~WS@~j::-:~:-"~:~;~~c; :; ~7~:-_;i;I; r ;:: ~ 186-·.c. -'-'-!· ·~•'Ii!' ' .. , I 1 ' "~C ·~-186 ~ ' L ' ' ' ' .' : ' I I L ' -++~ -H--c : ' ' c...; . ' ' ' , . . ' ' , -: ' .~;-~'. ~--'-'-' --• 184---i , , •: Ll.· ::::::~ ~mlM..()F-WAlf=-c--=---:i:l::::""~~-, .,..:._ ;".: _ ·~~·: • · , . 184 182 : I I' ;_._;_ _J.-~-, ,+-.: "---;..:j. .. J-:l_,..---.........7,... .....J... : ; .. ::~i-._.' ':, '' >, 'i ~--:-~I :... ,a2 192 19+ 196 19a 200 202 204 206 208 210 212 21+ 21s 21a 220 222 224 226 22a 230 232 21' 236 238 240 242 24 24s 248 250 252 254 2Ss 258 260 262 264 266 268 270 272 274 276 27a 2so HORIZONTAl DISTANCE (f..t) SCALE: 1'=80' (6'8') NOTIE 1. ONE GRID UNIT OF HEJGHT IS REPRESENTATNE OF ONE· KEYSTONE BLOCK UNIT (OR 8 INCHES). 2. THE PROJECT CML EN~NEER SHOULD \OIFY GRADES ON IBIS DRA\l1NG BEFOHE RELEASING THE DRA\\1NG FOR CONS1RUCTION . . . GEOCRID R~NFORCING El£\/ATION SHEET DMSIDN 2,KEYSTONE WALL NUMBER 1 (CENTRAL WALL) CEOARWOOD I _, ..... ,«: TERRA f ... . . . ASSOCIATES ~j ·: Geot~hnicol Con$ultonts Proj. No.2176-2 Dote 4/96 Figure B-5 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON • -, • I -, ' L I ~ ·1 206 204 -1 ,;, 202 • E ; -=-200 .. 1 e 198 i, ! 196 ! 194 C -r- +r1 -•4- L Sl.0Pf. -WALL TO BE NO :r~ :~ ~I ; 1 ,c.~~ p , GEOGRID IAYER (typ;eoJ) GROUND SURFACE IN FR0"1 OF WAll ·~ ~ :1 !'11111:111 ::tfffn _,,,, f4:tj+p:f[8+ ' ! ' I J I! ii m111T"too 11111 i +l'I ,,,1,.1,1111~ --. ---. -.. :~ ---~~1 : • : ;J<\ ! :i: 1?: ' I It #;i !I: 1! lifft.rm+:t+~+i ii: i ! :Thi I ILLL: ~L;': · :L' 1 11: !h --•. "-'".+-+ ,_ ·~·±+:"~~~" : , ~~~:r-:il"'TH-+Hi+tttmti-h+f+~J:L,'=r++H+H-°"fftt--':rcji:::±:±i+t:ti--'1±±±t+' , --· -c----, • , ' · ' ' · · · · , • · -,+:+·++-:-~::' : ': ':' '.~J..+.l..~,;,..:,..:,.:..; .... ..:_:_:..ffl;-~illi]. '':: r ' . : ._-.,;.: ·:---.~:-. r·~-r•;;, ~~-,-: , 1 ~1:.7"..:.f"7,·;-T~I , ? .. , .• 1 .. ,,, 1 ,., ,l1,H+4 -,-,,-.-, ....... ,,,11...1..L.i.-t-'.'-:--.--r-r+-tt,1,. ___ ,l_,,i ... ,ll::±:f~~ -''-· ,·i+L..!....!,...L.;.~ SEEFIGUlE7 206 ,±±±::t· 204 -'--·._,_.,,II, I I,,, . , , -, I, j-'-'-'--;..µ-'--'-'-'-'--'-'-'--'-Ll.-'-'-l-~ I,!' -'_--' • ' • · '-t++H-J+-+++f-~t+i++t-:-4-'' '' ' ' -'· '' feJiJ 1- EEr:1 ,, ., • ,, -= =le,/ i Q Ji ,-1-;,,, ---, ., -' ,-, . • ---, -, • ,,--rtt-~ ,---,--.---,,,, '.,., •.•. ,., ':': , I , ~···· •1 ,, [ U A ,,.,,rh,,· I ,. '--l .,, . , ,,, j,. ·~, ,, 202 -:=- 200 ! 196 ; 196 ~ 194 , ·J::t;-+-lij iii Iii i if:J:El ls;-:~ .:.u ~~: :.:, : , • -. +.-i+!~ -, • • •: --~ h-,+ -'+: i :_;_, '-',.._. · ' · · i?: ' 1 ' ' ~ ~+-,~~=~! i [ T --~? i I lfilII :µp::q:,+--H+' " -'---~ • , c+++n 190 ,: ••• :~~mrt;: · ;i:j:;;1-r~: ii ;:tttY:::: ::~;:: ;: .:~ :r~ ;~ 1 •• ::: !;·:!ii;:: ;Tt;::1~:;! ! ;: :;j :rt~i;;::;::j.~:.1 .. 1. lj i; .~47H1t,1: 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 J8 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 ' ·1 ' ii 192 192 . 190 96 1 .. , ' -, ~I • 1 a • ~, 1 -, HORIZ0"1AL DISTANCE (feet) SCALE: 1'=80' (6'8') NOTE: 1. ONE GfflD UNIT OF HEJGHT IS REPRESOOATl'IE OF ONE KEYSTONE BLOCK UNIT (OR 8 INCHES). 2. n<E' PROJECT CML EN~NEER SHOutD VERIFY GAADES ON THIS DRAWlNG BEFOllE RELEASING THE DRAWING FOR CONSffiUC1lON ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Ceotechniecil Consultants GEOGRID R~NFORCING ELEVATION SHEET OMSION 2, KEYSTONE WALL NUUBER -2 CEDARWOOD KING COUNlY, WASHINGTON Proj. No.2176-2 I Dot, 4/96 Figure B-6 .. I-,.,.-.. ~----------------------------------. / J 1 • ) r GROUND SURFACE IN r SLCll'E IBOvf. WALL TO BE NO FRONT OF WAU r GEOGRID LAYER (typical) / STEEPER lllAN 2'1 (H:V) / 206 " :::r:·~1 'tffiffFfl::'TTT '"TIR-lm~ i+"-Efff ! 1111 : : 'TffffF!I1°:3 mi:;a-1-+-H-' .Rffi 11 ' I : I i : ' I : ; : I :=++ts L 206 SEE FIGURE 6 SEE FIGLR 8 204 , , , [., , , . , , , , . I . , , 1 I•, , , , ~ ~,, , I , ·, · , , .~ , 204 l ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' : ' ±;:;:l:j::;:j:j:j:j:j I 11 : i 8:1 ' 11 +·':j:H ' ' ' ' ' +-+-t-H-' '-H--'+, u ' . , ++-+ I I ; ' ' ·+-+-" ~ ' ' ~ l ' I I , .,.. ' . II ' . l ' '----' ' " I " ' • ' ' ' I I " " I ~ ] 202 i __ .,:_,. ; '.!. ' -.:.--;-' -."-.. --~---~-' ,-: : :J, ~ ~+-'~:;:Ii till j 1-=-t:P:f-++++H=i+-t-l·•+:r, ,~ .~~ , , ', ~~::-:--4-;-r ,:j r .-, '' ,-"!,' , , , ';'~~202 j , '=-200• • .;J.w-1-1-+ ! I ! 11111 ' I I : I ! 11 I I i ir' I I ' 'J .. ;:J+;:::L.1....l.. : "-' ' .~ tt-,-+tr:r:~-+ ' f' :. "" --' ·-C :.:. '·-' ' -'"-' ' ' "TT' o.· ' ' ·~' ' '-'--' . ~ 200 '=-I ~.:.--ill-., .. :..-' __ .:,_.,:___ ~-_1 ...... ..:..: .. n -~--· .:..;.~,;~, , ,-, , , , , ,., , '·' , ,-i, , , , , , . 1 ,, , , , • , , •• , . • • , • ~ , ~ 19a ,, .... +,+h'' 1:. >'·±;:.,j)t'·H-,--'~-· , . :,_;__Fi:,.:... · ~-.. ;.:, /!:±!~198 ti' ' 1!l ' ·f_n,;-, ' , ' '-~:;::1rt+t+J+ , , ;.++-; ~" , . , . . Lu, 1!l • t:;;;l 196 -_ , _1.:rT; ;t , ~~ , , -t------, , ""·'-i---t---+-: 196 ci3 I . ~ ' • c • " • " " • " ' ' ->.Li+=!= ~ :1 ' C :t~-LI , , ' • ' ' ' 1 ,. ~.!~ .. ---1.'· ,~ • .;.,._:•·' ....:.....,.._; o, ,r , _LI I , I IL.. l 194-~-~---,-, ' TI+H' ,~' . ,,. ~.c.w.... ............... :;::.:;.~TID~ft i 11:' i 11-~.w ~-+i~rrm ' 'I ' ' 'Cl JJ.L.•o.q:r 194 ~ ,,, , ,]._:_..._:. L·~ · '': ''....!.':.· '' • ,,~ ... : ... : ..... l....L.,l .... LLi,..!..J. I '' ·~"TT"T, I ijl' "To ''.I' ~...l.---'.--1-.!. I 192• g;, '~JI • < • , • t ~' . , . . -~~~_;_ ' .. _...!..,.-,-.!.-:-T ~....L..J....,,~.i-... : 1 r --+ --; f , , -4:t:tt..._! + ·-, : , .... t-192 ..:.:(7: : I :~·-!+;--; : '~,-,. : ' : : : ,• : .. ' : ·'-t:j::±;::+-4 : : ' : : : I i : : : '' ++-rri+-r': ' . ' I ' ' ' . 1 190 1 1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 ·, · 1 1 •''I'' L 'I' I'' l 'I' I' ·1·• ,-, · 1 'f '1 I' I'' l 'I 'I 'I I I I 'J I 'I I I 'I 'I' I I 'I 'I 190 ii 96 9B 100 102 104 106 108 110 112 1H 116 118 120 122 124 126 128 130 1:32 13+ 136 138 140 1+2 14-4 146 148 150 152 154 156 158 160 162 164 166 168 170 172 174 176 178 180 182 18+ 186 188 190 192 l II '1 l J J HORIZONT.11. DISl»ICE (feet) SCALE: 1'=80' (6'8') NOTE: L ONE .GRID u..-r OF HDGHT IS REPRESENTATIVE OF ONE KEYSTONE BLOCK UN~ (OR B INCHES). 2. THE PROJECT CML ENGlNEER SHOULD VERIFY GRADES ON THIS DRAWING BEFORE RELEAS1NG THE DRAWING FOR CONSTRUCTKJN JI •1 --.. -GEOGRID RONFORCING El.£VATION SHEET -- TERRA DMS10N 2, KEYSTONE WALL NU~BER 2 I ASSOCIATES KING cJSi\W:"~HINGTON 1 1 Geotechnicol Consultants Proj. No. 2176-2 I O<tte 4/96 I F"tgurc 8-7 1 I " ii ~ J '"1 • ·1 ·1 ii ll •1 II II II ·1 ;1 '1 SEE FIGLRE 7 206 r+++ 21!-1 GtOGRJD LAYER (typical) ~ ' SLOPE "8f1lf. WAil TO BE NO STlIPER ~ 2'1 (H:1) ~rf,+rh jH:j:j:j·! I I I 11 i 11 i, i ---· -202-~.!.' ~~' :::.:W.::W.:.:....!...!..J....!, I , '.:...:.. ! 200 ' b~ I : ;~' " '--~--' ' ' ' 1 O ..J +-:·, ' ' ,t / / ,! Ci' I; ;I, 'C_u ' ' ' ' ~ 196 )--;-,r-t'" ' ' ...........!.. ~ .,C '-.b I ; ':'I I 196 , ... 1jj:E!: .-rr: ; I ; D 206 ~ GRoUND SURFACE IN FRONT OF WAlL 202 -z- 200 f 198 ; 196 ~ '·'--' rt-:-+ ., ,~' : ' '"T I i I 194• -4-!-l : ~~ , : ~-'·'+-I ; : : I ! , ! -----:--TT:~ j i·' 1 .• , .,., ..Li.•·,.,, ,, ,.,, 192· "+-'--:-.-'-'-l-1 · " ": ·-., ., · I +l-+.µft±:i.:..,+-· · ~", ":cI)::t..192 :.,."7 : : , '. , : , ! I ; t++i++-:--!..r, 1 , , , , • : +:--H-..! . '. , , , , 194 190 -I I • I I · I I I • I · I · I · l I , ·-:·, I ' I I I ' I I I I I I ' I ' I 190 192 194 196 198 200 202 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 228 230 232 234 2J6 238 240 242 244 HORIZONTAL DISfAHCE (1,.1) SCALE: 1'=80" (6'8") NOTE: 1. ONE-GRID UNrr OF HEJGHT IS REPRESENTATIVE Of ONE KEYSTONE BLOCK UNrr (OR 8 INCHES). 2. THE PROJECT CML ENGINEER SHOULD VERJFY GRADES ON THIS DRAWING BEFORE RELEASlNG THE DRAWING FOR CONSTRUCTION -- TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnicol Consultants GEOGRID R~NFORCING ELEVATION SHEET DMSKJN 2, KEYSTONE WAil NUMBER 2 CEDARWOOD _KIN~ ~®-~_WA.SHINGTQN Proj. No. 2176-2 I Dote 4/96 I figure B-8 ... r ::.... - 206 21}1 E +l.:1:~.' : .f-~ · n++-. = ·; , 1::::r:n ~ (tv,,J,., D t SLOP£ ABOVE +,":llCJ:Kiq-.l. S1W'ER 11i4N ~Alf TO BE HO -t+L '' .t-'+++:;~(H:\I) =rt -., .~+-4, '1]202 !.. ~ 200 -.... ~ .. ,-:'.:.· ~-...;-'-+ .• _.,..,,_::!:.,e;!!..'-+_...,..,.~3_+-l-1-ri i I ! i I ! i ! ! ! I : : u; L~+i:!-Hk :: : ±.-~1 : 'd:: ~·1-:' h+l++; --: ·, ·1 1 ! ; 1: 111' .. ., : 1 1 I : • + f+-H-'~-'+#H+++~'i-L(.U.'.J4-l-+-H' 111 '1111 H++~ i' I; ,1++'"' .-ti~ 1111 i •. '++' " I.' '.'" ' "" ++-:-H-tt ~· '7""t+t--~: ~,II ti+t-t+.'';. t-t++-,. . H+''.' ' '. . rrr-r-. I ' ' I ' ,T"f ; 198j·"' l._J i:i ++_ ; ti+! -~~ ±I , '"t°". I -~~ I : :. ' I 1 ' ~ • .J::T:'H", : • ~ -' _ '.•.-j"t-':"j-; I -, ii, , I ii'":' J , ] ;:-, I I ":' ; ,-, I ' I t i-,-'-~-;::.fi,++i+:+ : • , : . . : ~ 1 i I i I i I : i I ~ ; i :_LII1IL-:-' __ .-,.,--,.,---.,-,----. -, -,.,.,. I''' ~ ci 196 j ~ t:1Etrr ,I +f·H+H.;..,, ~11trtr' · · · · · 1Jb·HJ tlffl · · = · · ·J-· --· · -· --... l ;;_ '. I ,:. I : I • 1 :, . I : I ' 194 192~$41 ! i :f:'. ~" 190,,,· ji i ij'•TTTTT•. 0 2 4 B 8 10 12 14 . 'TPlT'"''""'. -~~ -. -, =::JlOJTOJA:l!L 0': : : : . ' -~--: ~ i: t+' ,_;_ +'-'--'-f H;., : :~ 't : ' ~,. : i I' • : : : ii I I ';'-+i--'--; ~' ":::;:: · ;4W:: ··1· ~~-r:~ .. -:: :::: ~: :._:. ~+;·_;: -~~~-+ 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 J4 J6 JS 40 42 +I 46 48 SO 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 HOR1ZONTAL DISTANCE (feet) SCALE: 1"=80" (6'8") NOTE: 1. ONE GRID UNIT or HOOHT tS REPRESENTATNE OF ONE KEYSTONE BLOCK UNIT (OR B INCHES). i llfr l>ROJECT CML ENGlNEER SHOULD VERIFY GRADES ON llflS DRAWING BEFORE RElOOHG THE DRAWING FOR CONSlRUCTlON SEE FIGUlE ID r GROUND SURFACE IN JIIO!!Sllf"" 206 204 ' '.' 202 -:=-• 200 ~ z 198 ~ 196 ~ 194 192 ' . . " . ' I ' ' I " I I I I I I I I) I ;r:r 190 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 GEOGRID REIHFDRC1NG ELEV,TION SHEET OMSlON 2, KEYSTONE WALL NUMBER 3 CEDAAWOOO KlNG COUNTY, WASHINGTON , I ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geottehtlieol Consultants Proj. No. 2176-2 I Date 4/96 Figure B-9 L SEE. FIGUlE 9 SEE FIGU'lE 11 r GROUND SURFACE IN GEOGRJD lAYel (typieal) SLOPE '8fNf. WALL TO BE NO / FRONT OF WALL STEEPER THAN 2: 1 (H;J) 2(K-.J-! -fi-1-1. , , :r-T""j..,.....,Tt ..:I..... TTTT'"""'T-, ~ 't p Tl ~-·: ••' ,, ': ' ' :;·,,, ,':,-• • :· I i -=:, 202 ·+ r , I I I' , , , I,• 1 i 1.J....V-1-.!-+---,-', "t"'t} i:.t:.r -:· . 202 '=' ·~-· :, ·_±H 204 206-r-206 ! :~.I"1_~~ -l. :',::::.~:-~~''' ___!_1 , -; -.-r' .: ,r ,!! 1 - 1 200 -tt!=/.,~=z±tt!=t11 i Ir: i 1, u :+e-+-'-L-cnn 111 , 1 · 11 · 1 -· .,--+BE• --H-44:' .• , , : 200 - : ~ , . . . . • • , , . , , 1 , • . . . . . I .. , , , . , . . . , .. , . , .... .:..· . , . . . . . a -o< 19B-m:+:7-i":-l+~t::::c,-W-/-1~-t'"-:;:;ii+H+++-++='. "··.!l 1 :j:/Lr1----.c_,-":1 • C". ' ' . ~-. --~ -rrW-W-;+-'-'-'-198 ~ ~ '1", :,":,1 '1:'°• ':" •:-,T--'{;,:....:;--:-.~.::::n1.,,ji,,,IJt-r-+-r+-,.µ+-~i'''~-.+-!+i--f'.·~ii-+-f' ',:,, '_._:, ;:---r+.i-'~~ t '--'--..I...,...·· , 1 --,-I•---;.....:...;. i?:; I L ' ' L L l l ~ i • i ~ j I • 1 ' -, cl 196 lil11[l;1lf·ff 1l,-ll-·1f ·rr' ·•,j'"'--Jliii:'r'·'•:.t',11•1· r-,-7'--rp:iii'''±j.f!f!i'l"i" 1 '!=-1 11?1 ~ 196 cl ::_ ·~.-~::'. ~:::.:.: •• :.:::: t,:~~L~~;TT":J~~~~~~: 1: i ! !-! : • i: • i~=~: 1 :-"ri l :i ·~~· 1 · :er •r -• '~: i 1t ::" :~-::; 190 . '-' , 1 ' I ' ' I ' . '~-' ! I . I . ' i ' ' cr--r+· -j-'-'-" ' ' ' . ' ' '.. . r:i+',' ' i ' . . . ' ' I I ' ' 111 ' I -----,-,--190 188 ,+.~+-+ ' : I ' ' ' . ' ' I ' ' r+-:-;-,..-'--f-,-...;. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' : I ; : ' . I : ' : ·: . ~ ' : ~.: : ~~-i,-1-1+' ' ' . ' . ' ' . ' ' __ ._~ ' . : I ' : I ' ' I I • " I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 18a 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 112 114 116 118 120 122 124 126 128 130 132 13-4 136 138 HO 142 U-4 146 148 150 152 154 156 158 160 162 164 166 168 170 172 174 176 178 180 182 184 186 1S8 190 192 HORIZONTAL DISfANCE (feet) SCALE: 1'=80' (6'8') NOTE: 1. ONE GRID UNIT OF H~CHT IS REPRl:SENTATM OF ONE KE'(STONE BLOCK OOIT (OR B INCHES). 2. THE PROJECT CM. ENGINEER SHOUUD VERIFY CRAllES ON THIS DRAWING &FORE REl£ASING THE DRAWING FOR CONSIRUCTION ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geoteehnicol Consultants GEOGRID REJNFORCiNG filVI.TION SHEET IJMSION 2, KEYSTONE WALL NU~BER 3 CEOARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. 2176-2 I Date 4/96 Figure B-10 .qi! GRID ENDS SEE FIGURE 10 F 204 202 200 198 s -:i::::::::::::::I::::::::::::::::::::::::=· ::j· ;;:iG~R!OOUlUNOiill::SSlUffiREA:EAl:Ct::E:INJN:~·...J::.=~J:'"204 ~-----l---~-----1''----Al=a•<L.0 '-'-'' ......_~Ll---1~----1----"---.--~,s'~-,___;_· ....;'.;.."c::."c::..:...'· V ::.:.\....-· ';,;;.NAl:±,.::;::c·.;..·~;.;..:.;.., '--1 ~1-202 j:::::::::::;c==tEOG~; ,77.,· "' • , ., . .. / . . , ,, . , 7 7 , 7. ,,, ,, , , ,, , ·~, I ,, , "" h-·~ 200 ~ i ·,. H:V i ~ . . . . '' '; 198 ~ 196 ~ • .7 I ~ 194-i=l------~ , , ., , 196 5 ~ • : 194 ~ , , uJ 192 ,. ' . . . ' 192 ' 190 . ·\. . ·~ . ' ' ' ' . 190 . . . x..: "0]:l"QM-!()~WAU. . i I 188 ''1-''l''I 'I I ;1~f-1''1~~1''1' l''l''I"·;· -j-: 188 192 194 196 198 200 202 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet) SCALE: 1"=80" (6 1 8•) NOTE: 1. ONE GRID UNIT OF HEIGHT IS REPRESENTATIVE OF ONE KEYSTONE BLOCK UNIT (OR 8 INCHES). 2. THE PROJECT CML ENGINEER SHOULD VERIFY GRADES ON THIS DRAWING BEFORE RELEASING THE DRAWING FOR CONSTRUCTION GEOGRID REINFORCING ELEVATION SHEET DMSION 2, KEYSTONE WALL NUMBER 3 CEDARWOOD KING COUNlY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. 2176-2 Date 4/96 Figure B-11 .. TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Mr. Patrick Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 14410 Bel-Red Road, #140 Bellevue, Washington 98007 Subject: Response to Plat Screening Letter Cedarwood King County, Washington Environmental Earth Sciences January 16, 1996 Project No. T-2176-2 Reference: Geotechnical Report, Project No. T-2176-2, dated September 21, 1995 by Terra Associates, Inc. Dear Mr. Lennon: As requested, we have reviewed the letter from King County Land Use Services Division dated December 22, 1995 regarding preliminary screening of the Cedarwood plat application. We reviewed the section pertaining to the geotechnical engineering study for the project. This section pertains to steep slope buffers and building setbacks on Divisions 1 and 2. King County requested an evaluation with reference to the Soos Creek Community Plan P-suffix Condition (Policy NR-14, page 167). Mr. Larry West, Senior Geologist at the King County Land Use Services Division, informed us that the evaluation was requested for Divisions 1 and 2 and not Divisions 2 and 3 as indicated in their letter dated December 22, 1995, We observed pertinent site features during our subsurface exploration, which included the steep slope areas on Divisions 1 and 2. As mentioned in our referenced report, the steep slopes drop down abou: 200 feet on Division 1 and about 90 to 100 feet on Division 2. The slopes were generally covered with vegetation. Shallow surficial slumps of limited extent were observed at various locations along the face of the steep slopes. It is our opinion that these slumps are a result of localized near-surface movements or sloughing. Our observations behind the crest of the steep slopes did not indicate any slumping or tension cracks, which are indicative of deep-seated movements. Also, our deep borings and test pits adjacent the crest of steep s)opes did not indicate past movements or materials susceptible to deep movements. The on-site native soils on Divisions 1 and 2 generally consist of dense granular soils. The soils above the native soils consist of fills which vary in depth and consistency. The test borings drilled and test pits excavated close to the crest of the steep slopes include Borings B-2 and B-4 and Test Pits TP-4 and TP-5, TP-7 through TP-9, and TP-14 and TP-15. Our geotechnical report provides a detailed description of the soils encountered on-site. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 9803-1 • Phone (206) 821-7777 Mr. Patrick Lennon January 16, 1996 We have also reviewed the test pit and boring logs from a previous study by RZA. Based on our observations, it appears that the soils on the steep slopes are predominantly dense native soils with fills of varying thickness in the upper portions of the slope. Due to the steep slopes on Divisions 1 and 2 and the observed signs of shallow localized slumping on the slopes, we have recommended a ten foot steep slope buffer from the crest of the steep slopes. We also recommend a 40 foot building setback from the edge of the buffer on Division 1 and a 15 foot building setback for Division 2. To eliminate surcharge loads above the slope, we have recommended that all buildings adjacent to the crest of steep slopes be pile-supported. The piles will extend into the dense native soils. In our geotechnical report, we also recommended that additional fills not be placed within the building setback areas, and that any fills in excess of fi\'e feet within 100 feet of th~ top of steep slopes be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Based on our discussions with Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc., we understand that grading adjacent to the crests of steep slopes will involve only cuts and that the grades will minimize surface water flow over the steep slopes, which will improve existing stability. Our geotechnical report also recommends diverting surface water from steep slopes and tightlining roof gutter drains to suitable discharge facilities. The development will also increase impervious surfaces on-site, thereby reducing seepage and improving the overall stability. Based on our observations and subsurface exploration, it is our opinion that with the project constructed as recommended in our report, we do not expect. the development will adversely impact the stability of existing steep slopes on Divisions 1 and 2. Based on our study, it is also our opinion that the building setback lines of 100 feet from the top of steep slopes as required by the Soos Creek Community Plan ?-suffix Condition (Policy NR- 14, Page 167, sub-section B-2) can be reduced for this project. The steep slope buffers and the building setback values presented in our referenced report are adequate. We trust the information presemed in this letter meets your needs. If you need additional information or clarification, please call. Anil Butail; PreS14iP1Rzs I DRK/AB:br /-//, -'Ji, cc: Ms. Trish Clements, Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. Project No. T-2176-2 Page No. 2 ., i -. -, . r r r r ii I ;J .- °"' -·1 ......... ____ _ TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc . Mr. Patrick 0. Lennon Lennon Investments, Inc. 144!0 Bel-Red Road, #140 Bellevue, Washington 98007 Subject: Geotechnical Report Cedarwood Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences September 21, 1995 Project No. T -2176-2 King County, Washington Dear Mr. Lennon: As requested, we have completed a geotechnical engineering study for the Cedarwood project to be developed in the Maple Valley area of King County. The project is divided into three divisions numbered 1 through 3. The approximate locations of the sites are shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure l. The purpose of our work was to explore subsurface soil conditions on the sites in order to develop recommendations for design and construction of roadways, residential foundations, site preparation, and earthwork construction. Based on our test pits and borings, soil conditions on Division 3 consist of two to_ nine feet of very fine- grained silty sands or low plasticity sandy silts followed by dense sands and gravels. Divisions 1 and 2 are underlain by uncontrolled fill soils with maximum observed depths ranging from 37 feet in Division 2 to about 15 feet in Division l. We noted significant groundwater below a depth of eight to ten feet on Division 3. Most of the structures may be supported on conventional spread footings afler the loose soils in the footing subgrade are recompacted or removed and replaced by structural fill. A steep slope buffer of ten feet (per KCC 21A.24.310.A) should be provided from the top and toe of steep slopes. In addition, buildings adjacent to steep slopes should be setback from the steep slope buffer a distance of 15 feet on Division 2 and 40 feet on Division I. Also, the buildings adjacent to the crest of steep slopes should be pile supported. A significant portion of the excavated soil on Divisions l and 2 may be used as a structural fill material. The attached report provides details of our study and recommendations for the pertinent geotechnical aspects of site development. 12525 Willows Road. Suite 101, Kirkland. Washington 98034 • Phone (206) 821-7777 "' ' • Ill. I I • • • • II • ~ ...... , .. ,,,.-, .. , .. · "' .•,..._. ·.,,· " , ••• , ?->'-..•• -~. ~- . , ...... ,.,, ......... ,,. .. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Cedarwood King County, Washington Project No. T-2176-2 Terra Associates, Inc. Prepared for: Lennon Investments, Inc. Bellevue, Washington September 21, 1995 ,. .. ?" Mr. Patrick 0. Lennon September 21, 1995 We have also evaluated the possible impact of the development on the recharge potential of the Renton aquifer. It is our opinion that the impact on the recharge potential will be minimal. Details of our evaluation are presented in the report. We trust the information presented in this report meets your needs. If you need additional information or clarification, please call. 9-ZJ-9$' • DRK/AB:tm • ... ,. . .. Project No. T-2176-2 Page No. ii , .. ] "' .. r r 1.0, 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Project Description Scope of Services Site Conditions 3.1 Surface 3 .2 Subsurface 3 .3 Groundwater TABLE OF CONTENTS Discussion and Recommendations 4.1 General 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading 4.3 Cut and Fill Slopes 4.4 Foundations 4.5 Basement and Retaining Walls 4.6 Floor Slabs 4.7 Site Drainage 4.8 Pavements 4.9 Utilities 4.10 Seismicity 4.1 I Groundwater Impacts Additional Services Limitations r Figures r • ·lt I .-.... • Vicinity Map Key Map Exploration Location Plans Appendix Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing (i) I I 2 2 3 4 4 4 6 7 8 JO 10 IO 11 11 11 12 14 15 Figure I Figure 2 Figures 3 through 5 Appendix A >' .. • • pr ' . :.:-t Ill ' 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Geotechnical Report Cedarwood King County, Washington The project will consist of constructing single-family and multi-family housing units on three separate divisions of the proposed Cedarwood development in the Maple Valley area of King County, Washington. These sites are designated as Divisions I through 3. The approximate locations of the sites are shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure I. Single-family residences will be constructed on Divisions I and 2. Division 3 will be developed with multi- family housing units (condominiums). The loads for various buildings were not known at the time of our study. All buildings will be wood frame with crawl spaces and/or slab-on-grade floors. Based on our previous experience with similar projects, for single-family residences we expect perimeter load bearing walls to carry one to two kips per lineal foot and isolated spread footings to carry loads of up to 20 kips. For two to three-story multi-family buildings, we expect perimeter load bearing walls to carry two to four kips per lineal foot and isolated spread footings to carry loads of SO to 100 kips. The building locations and lot layouts were not known at the time of our study. We understand that a significant amount of grading is planned on Divisions I and 2. The proposed widening of 140th Way SE by King County will also necessitate considerable grading adjacent to these divisions. The area covered by Divisions l and 2 was historically used for quarrying operations. Consequently, these areas are disturbed. Extensive fills remained on the site when the quarry operations were terminated. We understand that the excess soils generated from excavations on Divisions l and 2 will be used to raise grades on developable areas of Division 3. Fill heights of about five feet are expected over the entire developable area. Some grading may be required to maintain gradients for stormwater management. The developable area covered by Division 3 is relatively flat and was previously used for farming operations. If any changes are made in the proposed construction as described above, and as project plans are being finalized, we should be notified so we can prepare supplementary recommendations if necessary. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES The general scope of our services was outlined in our proposal dated June 6, 1995. On June 16 through 16, 1995, we drilled 11 borings and excavated 24 test pits on the property. The borings were drilled to depths of 18.5 to 54 feet below the existing ground surface and the test pits were excavated to depths of 9 to 18 feet below the existing ground surface. Using the information obtained from the subsurface exploration, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical recommendations for project design and construction. Our observations are presented later in this report. Project No. T -2176-2 ... Specifically, this report addresses the following: • Soil and groundwater conditions • Suitability of native soils for use as fill and recommendations for import fill material _, • Site preparation and grading • Foundation support alternatives • Drainage • • Utilities • Pavements • Groundwater impact !. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS The locations of the three sites (Divisions I through 3) are shown on Figures I and 2. The conditions at each site ·I are discussed below. 1 'I I .. .... J - 3.1 Surface Division I (Northeast of the Intersection of SE l 58tlt Street and 140th Way SE) (Tax lot 25) Division I is located northeast of the intersection of SE 158th Street and 140th Way SE. The site is irregularly- shaped and is undeveloped. The site consists of two level benches. The upper bench is located adjacent to 140th Way SE and extends a maximum distance of about 120 feet towards the east, beyond which the slope drops down about 40 to 50 feet to the second bench. The second bench covers a large part of the site. Steep slopes drop down 200 feet or more towards the north, south, and east from the edge of the second bench. A narrow corridor exists between the toe of the western slope and the crest of the eastern slope in the northwestern part of the site. The corridor leading from Division I joins Division 2. The site configuration is shown on Figure 3. This figure is based on a site plan by Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. dated September 1995 . Division 2 (North and Northwest of the Intersection of SE 156th Street and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 21) Division 2 is located east and northeast of the intersection of SE 156th Street and 140th Way SE. This site is irregularly-shaped and is generally undeveloped. The site is generally level with steep slopes rising towards 140th Way SE along the southern edge and dropping down towards the north and west. The change in ei~vation in the steep slope areas is 90 to I 00 feet in the southeast and north parts of the site. In the southwest part of the site, the slopes drop down towards 140th Way SE. The slopes are generally forested and the relatively level areas are covered with grass and occasional brush. A man-made pond is located in the northwestern part of the site. Page No. 2 II ' r Project No. T-2176-2 The site configuration is shown on Figure 4. This figure is based on a site plan by Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. dated September 1995. Division 3 (Southeast of the Intersection of State Route 169 and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 4) Division 3 is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of State Route (SR) 169 and 140th Way SE in King County. This site is irregularly-shaped, undeveloped, and relatively flat. The site measures approximately 1,300 feet along SR 169 and 700 feet along 140th Way SE. Approximately 40 to 50 percent of the southern part • of this site is designated as wetlands or wetland buffer. The toe of some steep slopes is located in the southern part of the site. The site was covered with grass at the time of our study. The site configuration is shown on Figure 5. This figure is based on a site plan by Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. dated September 1995. 3.2 Subsurface We excavated 24 test pits and drilled I I borings on the three divisions at the locations shown on Figures 3 through 5. The depths of fills or loose soils are also shown on Figures 3 through 5. Detailed descriptions of the soils encountered in the test pits are shown on the Boring Logs and Test Pit Logs, Figures A-2 through A-24 in Appendix A. Division 1 (Northeast of the Intersection of SE 158th Street and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 25) The site is generally underlain by 4 to 15 feet of uncontrolled fill soils followed by medium dense to very dense sands, silty sands, or sandy silts. Fills of about five feet were observed on the upper bench adjacent to 140th Way SE. In Test Pit TP-2, we observed deep fills which appear to be settled soils from an old sedimentation pond. The composition and consistency of the !ill soils varied considerably. The relative density of the fill soils varied from loose to medium dense. Localized areas were observed on the site where fill soils were absent. Descriptions of the soils observed in our exploration are presented on the logs of Borings B-1 through B-3 and Test Pits TP-1 through TP-9. The test pit and boring logs for this division are presented on Figures A-2 through A-4 and Figures A-13 through A-17. Division 2 (North and Northwest of the Intersection of SE 156th Street and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 21) 1 The soils encountered on Division 2 consisted of 10 to 37 feet of uncontrolled fill soils followed by very dense or hard silty sands or sandy silts. Fills of about 35 to 3 7 feet were observed in the eastern part of the site and about 19 to 20 feet in the western portion of the site. The composition and consistency of the fill soii; varied considerably. The relative density of the fill soils varied from loose to very dense. A description of the soils observed in our exploration are presented on Boring Logs B-4 through B-7 and Test Pits TP-1 I through TP-15. ] The test pit and boring logs for this division are presented on Figures A-5 through A-8 and A-17 through A-20. ' I Page No. 3 ~· .5 ; I • ' ' l .• , ;t i Division 3 (Southeast of the Intersection of SR 169 and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 4) September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 The site is generally underlain by very loose, very fine-grained silty sands or low plasticity sandy silts with occasional organic matter to a depth of two to nine feet below the existing ground surface, followed by loose fine sand to silty fine sand. The sand is followed by dense, medium to coarse gravel to coarse sand with gravel. Stiff to very stiff silts were encountered in Test Pit TP-16 below the sand layer. We observed Jogs at a depth of 8 to 12 feet within the loose to medium dense gravel formation in Test Pit TP-24. • Test Pits TP-16 through TP-24 and Borings B-8 through B-11 were excavated/drilled on this site. The Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs for this division are presented on Figures A-9 through A-12 and A-20 through A-24. 3.3 Groundwater We observed groundwater in the test pits excavated on Division 3. Groundwater levels observed on Division 3 varied from 8 to 11.5 feet below the existing ground surface. We observed light to moderate groundwater seepage in two borings on Division l and one boring on Division 2. The seepage zones were located at depths of 32.5 feet in Boring B-4 and 42 feet in Boring B-7 in Division I. In Division 2, the seepage zone was located at a depth of 32.5 feet in Boring B-2. We expect the groundwater levels to vary on a seasonal and annual basis. We also expect groundwater levels to be somewhat higher than the observed levels during wet winter months. 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 General Based on our findings, from a geoteclmical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that it is feasible to construct single and multi-family residences on all three sites, provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into project design and construction. General recommendations for individual divisions are presented below. Division 1 (Northeast of the Intersection of SE 158th Street and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 25) The soils encountered on Division I consisted of 4 to 15 feet of uncontrolled and variable fill soils. Due to steep slopes of about 200 feet and signs of shallow slope instability, we recommend a minimum steep slope buffer of ten feet from the crest of the slope (per KCC 21A.24.310.A) and a 40-foot building setback from the buffer. We also recommend that the residences adjacent to the top of steep slopes be supported on augercast piles. In addition, buildings in the old sedimentation pond area should be pile supported. In other areas, the buildings may be supported on conventional foundations on competent soils or structural fills. In areas where fill soils are loose, either in situ compaction or overexcavation and structural fill replacement may be considered. Where loose fine-grained soils are encountered, the in situ compaction method should not be used. Due to the close proximity of steep slopes in the area, we do not recommend infiltrating water from storm runoff on-site. Roadway subgrades should be prepared as discussed in the Site Preparation and Grading section. PageNo.4 9 II ll I I ! '''1 ·;J l September 21, I 995 Project No. T-2176-2 Division 2 (North and Northwest of the intersection of SE 156th Street and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 21) The soils encountered in Division 2 consisted of IO to 3 7 feet of uncontrolled and variable fill soils. In addition, steep slopes are located along the northern and western parts of the site. Some of these slopes show signs of previous near-surface slope movement. However, deep-seated movement has not been observed on the slopes. We recommend providing a minimum steep slope buffer of ten feet from the top of these steep slopes (per KCC 21A."24.310.A) and a 15-foot building setback from the edge of the buffer. The same buffer width and building setback values should be provided from the toe of steep slopes along the southern edge of the site. We recommend supporting the row of buildings adjacent to the top of steep slopes on augercast pile foundations. Based on our field exploration, we anticipate pile lengths of30 to 45 feet. Shorter pile lengths may be expected in the western part of the site and greater lengths in the eastern part of the site. All other buildings may be constructed on conventional spread footings or isolated column footings. In the eastern portion of the site where the upper fills are very dense, the footings may be directly supported on the fill soils that are recompacted in place. In the western portion of the site, the upper fill soils are loose and will also require significant in-place compaction to prepare the subgrade. Due to close proximity of steep slopes in the area, we do not recommend infiltrating water from storm runoff on- site. Roadway subgrades should be prepared as given in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Division 3 (Southeast of Intersection of SR 169 and 140th Way SE) (Tax Lot 4) The site is underlain by two to nine feet of very loose, very fine-grained silty sands or sandy silts. Foundations in these areas will undergo significant total and differential settlements. To mitigate this condition, we have considered four alternatives as follows: A. Overexcavate loose soils and replace them with compacted structural fill B. Extend foundations to firm soils C. Deep dynamic compaction D. Support foundations on augercast piles Foundations for Alternatives A, B, and C may be conventional spread or isolated footings. Details regarding Alternatives A, B, and D are presented in the Foundations section of this report. If pile foundations are needed, pile lengths of about 15 feet should be expected. Deep dynamic compaction is a ground modification technique of densifying the soil at depth by repeatedly dropping a heavy weight on the ground surface. The depth of densification and the increased strength ofihe soil will depend on the weight, height of drop, number of drops at a given location (maximum is generally ten), soil type, 8!1d natural moisture content at the time of densification (for fine-grained soils). After densification, the area generally requires some grading to smooth out uneven zones near the surface. We will be pleased to provide additional recommendations if this alternative is considered. Page No. 5 ., .... l ' ,. :iii ] J '1 I ' .. ;r : ' September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 The roadway subgrades should be prepared as given in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Excavations for utilities extending to depths of eight to ten feet below the existing grade should be expected to encounter significant water. Due to the presence of uncontrolled fill soils or loose soil conditions across all three divisions, we recommend that the buildings be constructed with crawl spaces underneath to minimize the potential for cracking of floor slabs. The· following sections of this report present more detailed recommendations for the various geotechnical engineering aspects of this project These recommendations should be incorporated into project design and construction. 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading The building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of vegetation, topsoil, and debris. A topsoil thickness of six to eight inches is expected. The stripped topsoil may be used as berms or in non-structural areas. Pavement and building areas should be proofrolled to determine if any soft yielding conditions are present. If found, the affected soils should be excavated to a stable base and then brought back to grade using a structural fill. If the area is large enough and appears to require excessive overexcavation, consideration could be given to the use of an appropriate geotextile fabric to reduce the required excavation depth and obtain a stable subgrade condition. Unstable areas will require field evaluation when encountered during construction. For preparation of pavement subgrades, in areas where the upper soils are loose, the upper 18 inches of existing soils should be recompacted to the structural fill requirements described below. Structural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soils' maximum density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be approximately two percent of its optimum, as determined by this same ASTM method. The upper soils encountered on Divisions l and 2 vary from silty sands to relatively clean sands and gravels. Based on the soil conditions observed at the time of our exploration, it appears that these soils would generally be suitable for use as structural fill material. Please note that the silty sands are extremely moisture-sensitive. Accordingly, unless their moisture content is relatively near optimum at the time of construction, they will be difficult to compact adequately as structural fill. With this consideration, we recommend site grading operations only be undertaken during the drier summer months. Where the soil's moisture content is above optimum, drying back by aeration, or using a cement or lime additive to accelerate the drying process and stabilize the soils can be considered. Excavated fine-grained' soils in Division 3 may be used in non-structural areas or in the construction of berms. Page No. 6 I j I ' • ' I i • September 21, 1995 Project No. T -21 76-2 If site grading operations are proposed during wet weather conditions or if they will begin in dry weather conditions and then extend into wet weather, the owner should be prepared to import wet weather structural fill. Material for this purpose should consist of an in'organic free-draining granular material which would meet the grading requirements listed on the following table. U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing Maximum Aggregate 100 3 inches #4 25 #200 5• *Based on the 3/4 inch fraction. We recommend that no additional fills be placed within the building setback areas adjacent to steep slopes. Additional fill heights in excess of five feet within 100 feet from the top of steep slopes in Divisions 1 and 2 should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Details pertaining to temporary cut slopes and permanent cut and fill slopes are presented below. 4.3 Cut and Fill Slopes All permanent cut and fill slopes should be no steeper than 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) in inclination. All fills should be placed in accordance with the recommendations given in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Fills placed on slopes of 20 percent or greater should be keyed and benched into the underlying competent native soils. The final slope face should be compacted with a bulldozer or roller. Surface water should be diverted and not allowed to flow over the face of any slope. As soon as possible after construction, permanently exposed slopes should be planted with an appropriate plant mix recommended by a landscape architect or provided with physical protection from erosion. All temporary slopes within the fills and loose soils should be inclined no steeperthan 1.5:1. Temporary cuts into dense native soils may be inclined at a slope gradient of I: I. We do not recommend making any cuts at the toe of existing steep slopes. If slopes steeper than those recommended are planned, shoring of the excavatioll' will be required. We will be pleased to provide additional recommendations, ifrequired. Temporary cut erosion protection and raveling maintenance should be expected during construction . Page No. 7 4.4 Foundations Spread Footings September 21, l 995 Project No. T-2 l 76-2 The proposed buildings may be supported on conventional continuous and/or isolated spread footings bearing on "! firm native soils. Where the upper soils are loose or consist of uncontrolled fills, we have considered the .. following options: "' •,; p -.~ I i - A) In-place Compaction of Foundation Areas -The footing areas should be recompacted in place with a trackhoe-mounted plate compactor. The compaction zone should be oversized such that the compacted area will extend laterally from the edge of the footing a distance equal to the width of the footing. After the in-place compaction is completed, an eight-inch thick compacted structural fill pad should be placed in the foundation area. The fill pad should extend laterally a minimum distance of 12 inches from the edge of the footing. This procedure will not be suitable for stabilizing the loose silts in Division 3. B) Extend Foundations to Firm Native Soils -Foundations may be extended down to the firm native soils through the upper loose soils. In areas where firm soils are noted at approximate depths of five to six feet beneath the existing ground level, it may be practical to extend the footing down to native soils and construct higher concrete stem walls for the footings. Excavated materials from the foundation trenches which are free from organics or debris may be subsequently placed back within the house perimeter walls and compacted after all interior and exterior footings are extended below the loose soils. Excavated silts from Division 3 may not be suitable for backfill in the building area. C) Overexcavation and Structural Fill Replacement -The existing loose soils may be overexcavated to their full depth within the foundation areas and replaced with compacted structural fill. The excavation should be oversized to allow structural fill placement to extend laterally from the edge of the footing a distance equal to one-half the depth of the structural fill below the footing. The structural fill should be placed back in the excavation in 10 to 12-inch thick layers and should be compacted to 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). As an option, clean, crushed rock or Controlled Density Fill (CDF) may also be placed in the excavation trenches as structural fill. Foundations may then be placed on the compacted structural fill, rock, or CDF material. All compacted fill should be tested by the soils engineer to verify that adequate compaction is being achieved. This option may require dewatering in areas where groundwater seepage is encountered in the excavation. Where wet conditions are noted, quarry spalls or clean crushed rock should be placed in the bottom of the excavation to provide a firm subgrade and a working surface. The quarry spalls or clean crushed rock should extend above the groundwater level. Footings should extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish grade. Continuous and individual spread footings may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). A minimum width of 12 inches should be used for continuous footings, and individual spread footings should have a minimum size of 18 inches. A one-third increase in the above bearing pressures may be used when considering wind or seismic loads. All footings should be provided with steel reinforcement in accordance with structural requirements. Page No. 8 "··~ September 2 I, I 995 Project No. T-2176-2 Lateral loads on the foundations may be resisted both by passive earth pressures and friction between the foundation base and the subgrade. A passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used when footings are poured neat against undisturbed native soils or structural fill. In addition, a friction factor of 0.4 may be used between concrete and native soils/compacted structural fill. We ~nticipate that the total settlements for the structures, supported on native soils or on compacted structural fill, will be less than 1/2 inch. The maximum anticipated long-term differential settlement should be less than l/4 "1 inch. The majority of the settlements should occur during construction. 'J '! :t • ... ,. Augercast Pile Foundations The proposed buildings adjacent to the top of the slope on Divisions I and 2 may be supported on augercast piles extending to dense and very dense native soils. The piles should have a minimum length of ten feet and should extend a minimum of five feet into the native dense to very dense soils. The depth of embedment into native soils will also depend upon the lateral capacity requirement. Augercast piles are installed using a mechanically driven hollow-stem auger which is used to bore a hole down to a predetermined depth. Subsequently, cement grout is pumped down the auger as it is slowly withdra,m. The resulting grout filled hole provides sidewall support against sloughing and can be used in loose fill areas or high groundwater conditions. We have conducted analyses to determine pile characteristics required to develop load carrying capacities for the pile. The following table gives the pile capacities for different pile diameters and various pile lengths and five feet of penetration into dense native soils. AXIAL PILE CAPACITY (TONS) Pile Diameter Pile Length (inches) 15-19 feet 20-29 feet 30-45 feet 14 15 20 25 16 20 25 35 18 25 35 50 All piles may be designed for the full load-carrying capacities recommended above, provided they are spaced at least four pile diameters apart. Settlement of piles extending into the dense native soils is expected to be less than 1/2 inch for individual piles. Most settlements should occur during construction . Page No. 9 • • • ii September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 The lateral load capacity of the piles may be computed using a passive earth pressure imposed by an equivalent weighing 350 pcf. Passive resistance should be considered only for the pile length embedded in the dense native soils. For pile lengths greater than ten feet, an additional uniform passive pressure equal to 1,000 psf in the embedded zone (in dense native soils) may be considered. The passive resistance for fill or loose soils should be ignored. The passive resistance values recommended above may be applied over two pile diameters. The parameters provided assume horizontal ground conditions in front of the drilled piers for a distance • equivalent to twice the pier depth. All pile drilling operations should be monitored by a representative of Terra Associates, Inc., who can observe the installation of the piles and assess if the piles have been installed to a sufficient depth to achieve the design pile capacities. 4.5 Basement and Retaining Walls No lower level basements are anticipated for the proposed buildings. Foundation walls may be constructed to accommodate crawl spaces. Foundation walls should be designed as structural walls supporting the lateral pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid weighing 35 pcf. Walls restrained from free movement at the top should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure of I 00 psf. These pressures assume that a horizontal backfill is used. Slope surcharges will need to be added to these pressures, if they occur. We will be pleased to provide additional information for these conditions, if needed. We understand that retaining walls may be constructed in the utility corridor area between Divisions I and 2. We will be. pleased to provide geotechnical recommendations for the design once the locations of the walls are finalized. Adequate wall drainage should be provided for all foundation and retaining walls . 4.6 Floor Slabs We anticipate that the building floors will be constructed as joist-supported wood floors or slabs. Where crawl spaces are proposed under the buildings, a vapor barrier should be provided over the ground surface to reduce evaporation. Positive drainage should be provided to eliminate ponding of water in the crawl spaces. In slab areas, we recommend placing at least four inches of free-draining gravel, such as 1/4 to 3/8 inch pea-gravel, beneath the slab to act as a capillary break. In areas where damp floors are undesirable, a plastic membrane with a thickness of IO to 12 mils should be placed above the gravel to act as a vapor barrier. The membrane may be covered by about one inch of moist sand to protect it from damage during construction and aid in curing the concrete. 4.7 Site Drainage Surface gradients on the individual lots should be created to direct runoff away from the residences and the tops of any slopes toward suitable discharge facilities. Perimeter foundation drains should be installed and tightlined ,;; away from the residences. Drains should be at the levels of footing bottoms or below the crawl space level, whichever is lower. Roof gutter drains should be separately tightlined away from the structures and not tied to the foundation drains. Page No. 10 "" _, . "" 4.8 Pavements September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 Pavements for roadways and driveways may be supported on subgrades as prepared in accordance with the recommendations given in the Site Preparation and Grading section. All subgrade areas should be in a stable, non-yielding condition prior to paving. You should consider using a course of asphalt treated base (ATB) to protect the subgrade during construction if the work will be performed during wet weather. As a minimum, we recommend that pavements on the sites consist of two inches of asphalt over six inches of crushed rock base • (CRB). The six inches of CRB may be replaced with 4.5 inches of A TB, if desired. 4.9 Utilities Where utility lines are to be excavated and installed in the paved areas, we recommend placing all bedding and ".". backfill in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications. Fill placement and compaction should be in accordance with the recommendations given earlier in this report. We do not expect any difficulties in excavating the granular soils or fills. Some unraveling may be excavated if excavations are made in cleaner sands or gravels. If trenches are dug to depths greater than about eight to ten feet on Division 3, some caving and excessive groundwater seepage should be expected within those trenches. 11 • • ... -. y i We understand that some utilities are planned in the corridor joining Divisions I and 2. As mentioned earlier, the corridor is located between the toe of the western slope and the crest of the eastern slope in the northwestern part of Division 2. The utility lines should be installed beyond the steep slope buffers described earlier. However, if an engineered retaining wall is constructed to support the steep slope and the utility excavation, a buffer is not required. The side slopes of the trenches should be excavated as described in the Cut and Fill Slopes section . Space constraints, economics, or other factors may preclude the use of open cuts at some locations along the corridor. For such conditions, using digging trench boxes or other methods of temporary trench support will probably be required to conserve space and to provide for worker safety. If required, trench boxes may be used to support the lower portion of the excavation wall, and the upper unsupported excavation may be sloped hack. If trench boxes are used to support the sides of the excavation, the outer walls of the box should be flush with the adjacent walls of the excavation. Stacking trench boxes up to two levels may be permitted on the condition that the inner walls of the two boxes are perfectly aligned and there are no gaps between the trench boxes. Maximum allowable heights for unsupported trench cuts should comply with prevailing Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. 4.10 Seismicitv The subject site falls within the Seismic Zone 3 as defined by the Uniform Building Code (UBC), I 994. As mentioned earlier, we did not observe sustained groundwater on Divisions I and 2 to the depths explored. We encountered a sustained groundwater table on Division 3 at a depth of about 8 to 11.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The groundwa1er encountered on Division 3 was observed in relatively clean dense sandy gravel or coarse sands. Page No. 11 ..... .• J ... ,r j • ~- I ·., y September 21, 1995 Project No. T -2176-2 Based on our observations, it is our opinion that liquefaction is not likely at this site. However, some additional seulements due to ground movements are likely in a major earthquake. Some damage to rigid utility lines and cracks in road pavements may be expected in a major earthquake. Some surface sloughing may occur on the steeper slopes during such an event. Based on our subsurface observations at the site, we recommend using a seismic site coefficient factor of 1.2 for structural design purposes on Divisions I and 2 and stabilized areas of Division 3. 4.11 Groundwater Impacts As mentioned earlier, Division 3 is underlain by very fine-grained sands or low plasticity silts followed by coarse gravel or coarse sands with gravel. On Divisions 1 and 2, the soils encountered generally consisted of 4 to 37 feet of fill soils followed by medium dense to very dense silty sands, sands or sandy silts. The hydrologic classification (based on the King County Su,face Water Design Manual) for these soils varies from group B for the sands to group C for the fine-grained soils. Group B soils have moderate infiltration rates and group C soils have slow infiltration rates. A predominant portion of the upper site soils fall in hydrologic group C. Penneabilities for the first soil group, fine to medium sands, are expected to be about two to eight inches per hour. The silty sands and sandy silts can be expected to have penneabilities of about 0.5 to 2 inches per hour. These penneability ranges are from Table 4.5.2 "Maximum Infiltration Rates for Soil Types" in the King County Swface Water Design Manual. Based on discussions with Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc., after site development 38.16 acres of the site will remain undeveloped, 19.11 acres will be impervious (with a CN value of 98), and 16.23 acres will be pervious (with a CN value of 81 ). The existing area of pervious ground is 73.5 acres, with a CN value of 85. The CN values are estimated from observed surface conditions and from Table 3.5.2b of the King Coumy Swface Water Design Manual. The CN value represents the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) curve number for runoff calculations and is dependent on the soil type and nature of the ground cover. City of Renton Well Fields The City of Renton well field is located adjacent to Interstate 405 and the Cedar River, approximately 2 to 1.5 miles northwest of the site. These wells, which currently provide a portion of the City of Renton water supply, tap recent alluvial deposits in the Cedar River Valley. The aquifers tapped by the City of Renton Cedar River well field are recharged from alluvium in the Cedar River and by lateral movement of water through permeable stratum from beneath the till capped uplands. Wells providing water to the Maple Valley golf course are located to the north of Highway 169. These wells likely tap the alluvial deposits in the Cedar River Valley. Although groundwater recharge is occurring beneath the site, in our opinion, the subject site is an insignificant recharge source for the aquifers tapped by the City of Renton and the wells on the golf course. The groundwater budget analysis that follows assumes that the site has an average recharge rate of 15 inches per year, per acre. This estimate is high and is used to provide conservative estimates of impacts. Page No. 12 • ' l ' l 1 i ' Anticipated Changes in Groundwater Budget Infiltration In general, the groundwater recharge potential will be affected by: September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 l. Reduction of infiltration due to replacement of some parts of the site by impervious surfaces 2. Addition of infiltration due to a reduced amount of evapo-transpiration presently occurring in vegetated areas The overall effect is expected to be a decrease in the groundwater recharge immediately under the site. With a gross area of 73.5 acres, using an infiltration rate of 15 inches per year per acre, the existing recharge quantity is about 29.9 millfon gallons. A summary of the groundwater budget is presented below. A discussion of the contributing factors follows . GROUNDWATER BUDGET REVIEW SUMMARY Existing Recharge 29.9 million gallons Loss Due to Impermeable Surfaces 7.8 million gallons Loss Due to Changes in Permeable Areas 1.8 million gallons Gain Due to Decreased Evapo-transpiration positive, none assumed Net gain/loss 9.6 million gallons (loss) Surface Runoff Development of the site will result in creation of impervious surfaces which will prevent direct infiltration into the ground and result in a reduction of groundwater recharge potential. However, all of this water will be conveyed into the Cedar River, which will continue to recharge the groundwater. Converting 19.I acres of site to impervious surfaces will remove 7.8 million gallons of water from the annual groundwater budget. This is based on the paved areas and roofs allowing no recharge and an annual recharge rate of 15 inches. This is a conservative estimate. ... Clearing the forest for landscaping and lavm areas will increase the Runoff Curve Number from 81 to 86, indicating that increased runoff will occur. We have assumed I 6.2 acres of landscaping. Assuming the landscaped areas will have a lower recharge rate of 11 inches per acre per year (a 25 percent reduction), then 1.8 million gallons cubic feet of water may be removed from deeper aquifer recharge. This estimate is conservative. Since the Curve Number change is small, no significant additional runoff should be created except in large storms. Page No. 13 -' , ' r 1 i -· " • September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 Thus, for both impervious and pervious areas, the proposed plat may lose a potential infiltration of I I .4 million gallons of water. Based on the existing site recharge quantity of about 29.9 million gallons, it is possible that the proposed development may reduce the recharge potential of the site by about 32 percent, due to the ground surface changes associated with development. This estimate is conservative. Actual impacts will be much less than these figures. Please note that the water from impervious surfaces will flow into Cedar River, which is also a major source of groundwater recharge for the Renton Aquifer. Therefore, the actual reduction in site recharge potential due to creation of impervious areas will be Jess than the impact discussed above. Interception/Evapo-transpiration A portion of any precipitation falling on a vegetated area is intercepted by the trees and stored for direct evaporation. The removal of portions of the existing forested area will increase the amount of precipitation reaching the ground surface and becoming available for infiltration. Near-surface perched water tables and near-surface vadose zones are tapped by trees and other vegetation as a source of water for life. Removal of portions of the forest will decrease the demand for soil moisture and near- surface groundwater. Thus, the seasonal ''drying" of the near-surface perched v.'8ter table will be delayed, increasing the amount of groundwater available for recharge of deeper aquifers. Due to the peak evapo- transpiration potential being offset from peak rainfalls, the near-surface perched water table should not rise following development. We have not calculated possible increases in the groundwater budget due to tree clearing. However, it will reduce the total potential losses of recharge due to development. Overall Assessment of Recharge We reviewed these aquifer recharge values in a regional perspective. We assumed the most extreme conditions in our analysis, as discussed above. This consisted of using high estimates for existing recharge and ignoring all additions to the groundv.'8ter budget due to changes in evapo-transpiration. If the site represents 0.06 percent of the total Cedar River watershed, it is possible that less than 0.02 percent of the recharge potential of the entire Cedar River watershed may be Jost. It should be noted that actual losses will be much Jess than 0.02 percent, because storm runoff is directed into the Cedar River, which is a groundwater recharge zone. The actual Joss would be immeasurable. 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES .•. Terra Associates, Inc. should review the final design and specifications so that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and construction. We should also provide geotechnical services during construction in order to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This will also allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction . Page No. 14 = • ""' ;-1 .. . .:! "'· :-;, I i !I i September 21, 1995 Project No. T-2176-2 Terra Associates, Inc. should provide the following services during construction: I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.0 Examine all stripped subgrade areas and proofrolling operations prior to the start of fill placement or earthwork Examine all foundation and slab areas prior to forming and concrete placement to evaluate if adequate foundation support is available Perform field density testing of structural fills as needed during placement Observe the grading and earthwork operation Observe pile installation LIMITATIONS We prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This report is intended for specific application to the Cedarwood project. This report is for the exclusive use of Lennon Investments, Inc. and their authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test pits excavated on the three sites. The nature and extent of variations in the test pits may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, we should be allowed to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report prior to proceeding with construction. Page No. 15 NOl~NIHSi/M 'MNnO::l ~Nl>i OOOM~li/03:) di/~ ,lJ.INl:)1/\ S3l'1IJOSS'9' ··· .. siuoi1nsuo::, 1001u4oaio~a5 : • • • • .. :.~;;-~. · '1clcl3l ·.~:,<, .: "NOl1103 ;ssl 'L;s ONV 9;9 S351/d 'N015NIHSVM 'Ai.Nno:i 5Nl)I '30ln5 S'fflOHl 3Hl :]oN3!:13.:!3!:I -i··. , is :: :,q ': .. mi--· t riiu1KD '- L , r ' '"' ' -· lS IIUl ---' , • rir ' /i ,. I i ; ' ' ' '' : 1. ',. ' ... " !~ 1; _j ,- I 1 I ' :~ l ·~ l 1--,-x ,~ l I f" .. .. S,lYU1 ,..,,, 9[ -l .. •• I ' •· ,; j ·: ~ • I ,,. ... • t J{ NO SCALE • ' • '· ·, • \ • J • I • I • I • I • . J • £ ____ _ REFERENCES: .. ' 1. EXISTING CONDmONS SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GOLDSMITI-I & ASSOCIATES, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 OF 3, DATED 4/21/95. 2. PRELIMINARY PLAT, OVERALL PLAN PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GOLDSMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 OF 4, DATED 8/95. KEY MAP CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. 2176-2 Date 9/95 Figure 2 . ' ., .. ~ ~ - . ~ ·] L ,r ~~f' ~~ i'.,;' '._ _:.,__,_ -· EB ··, .. _ _,--..., EB ,~ZA::, TP-8 RzA-TP-1 o· ,-...........______ , ___ /• REFi:RENCES: ..-.<-:. ~, a 'v "-;;- ..; ~ ,.__, 1. EXISTING CONDmONS SITE PLAN PRW9ED BY HUGH G. GCLDSMITH & ASSOCL<ITES, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 OF 3, DATED 4/21/95. 2. PRELIMINARY PLAT, OVERAl.l. PLAN PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GOLDSMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 OF 4, DATED 8/95. ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnicol Consultants 150 ~~ ....::: APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 150 LEGEND: !'ii APPROXIMATE TEST PO LOCATION OONE BY TERRA ASS0CL6.T£S EB APPROXIMATE TEST PO LOCATION DONE BY OTHERS -$, APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION DONE BY TERRA ASSOCIATES '*' APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION DONE BY OTHERS 300 ft. (15') lYPICAL DEPTH OF nLL/LOOSE SOILS ··~ I . ~~,co-··-.-... T . ----~~~:::.::::.::--- 1 KEY EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prnj. No. 2176-2 I Dote 9/95 I Figure 3 .I ,, .. .. ... • • ~ "' .. I,, .. ~'>;.-'7 (I , rJ-10') ,\/) ·; : .. \,j:J§\Y' · . , , TP-15 _,.,,,. ,v< '·""" , / . . (i!)j:"• .. -;f ,. C, )'' '\ / .:-' ~] ff:,,,,,·:::;, , '*'"fi<f,, " \, ,., · -e,,7 ',/ ·· '\ ' ,,_,;,;, ~~--' '"" " .,,,, -\ ··--. " '" •. ,., J;Je ,,,_,,_,. ' ~. --A,; .. ' ", -.. ' ~ ·t"' ,fl!;' <=20')" .>: EB "/ \ '-, ' ,:.~,", '0\, ··v > 'IM:f"'''"'':,; , ' I .'I-·'1, ' m,v: --~··"' \v' " ,,) " •• ' • j'.I ....,,,: .: RZA"'T_P:::-oRZA-;P;-22!!ll8~-~~ ,[; "j>,RZA,lE,-1'1 , {,{:;-\,, RZA-TP-"l /; '.,, __ ---, / __ ___,,,, // ' I .R ' --' ,, /• "v:<cn,, m ' , ,r.~, .-/-4,,0/'1' -,-' ~ ,/ ,· '"j' ·rl.?7/f cf'· 9 ~;F~/ .. RZA-W-1o'Z>:-~ . 1 ' 'vv. r{,., \. ,_ 1 "M' / _/ / ''r/ ", m C •· ,_' < Nf•"' . --,,-<A' /)' . ~" -.. ',,, I ,-'' /,/.;;---:.>A i/""wft-•', ~·--.. ..,~,' . .:::,~-w-»: , r·01 ' .< · •''m.-·. ,.~ • .-'''"",II " / ,-w• • ·, ·• .. ., . . ,,.,. --· ~ '"'. -... --. ' , 0 p,:,,.f·'·t' .-$,;;__,RZA_-;TP"1S-$:• TP-15 ·,'1._f/J:'Ji/;7 . -' ·-.~· ._, ~ /;'•' , • ""/•'J"i:. f/fi Of ''.f~-RZA-8-4r ~/j I /, ! ,". > • '~ 1 ,: '' ~·w-, m .! ,'F W,4 '"""' •. \ ' --"'f,--" ·-·1:1 '"'"! . I ~' /,c. Ell· ~ """ • / ·" ;-1 .---==-4 "' 150 ?' ii, ~ ~ 'u r "' ; I ~ "' t APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 150 300 ft. LEGEND, 1§1 APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION DONE BY TERRA ASSOCIATES EB APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION DONE BY OTHERS $ APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION DONE BY TERRA ASSOClATES $ APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION DONE BY OTHERS ., 7':.;:, -<•'-."-/ S ?'-Y ·.--'w-w:' :.-:' v / !;( ' -, i ,.,. r /;,;/er, :c:.-;:~1§1-1~'"' w TP-1,J/ ,,, ;;;,,;::;t' // ,, .. •" / ~ ; , _, ,x.0-1!:,-· / . I _-. ,_<,;~ ',,-., --' > ' ,-' ' ' •-. I' : " , ,\; o , '// I / , -~ CD / , -J I ~ • ,,,., ---_, -~-.. / -,, -' , i' ,~'f = 'i'~ZAJP-Z RZA-TP:-,• Ell \ ..-,'iefg7JJ -..,. " ~/~/-, """ ="' , . . --. . --. ' -~ -, ~ ----/ ,'.,· .,.,¢,-, "-''··' /"-' S-w.,f..' ''' '', · ~ A; ,,, ,, ,:,,, .. ,!, .. -. . .. .. -. -·· • ,< .,,', , ,,..,,, ,-,·c', , /. , , --, ,, j 1-,:'J ,_-=Hw-TP~-i~,,-/' ,or-,., o'---/ .:.!-"---,:: '-, · ·11- 0s. ,:;J ,:'iiWc" •, e('''"' -~-' ,.,. 'cc-,t.0 . (14') 1YPICAL DEPTH DF Flll/LOOSE SOILS -,., ,. . .,..,~ -----~-•-" = . . ,~ . I , -- .. .,_ ~----' ' ',' / ye":' -S~ : .,, .--e"""--"-' ---;,--"'HW-· / '.<-.._, , ." ;·,-fl/ .. I I. . B_;-1i 8-5 "\>' -" ,-~ :;;t-~'>,,, '----~~:. ~ :; l I /~~-., '.\'" </'\,\;',!'-, . 1,, Bl~ /:'\\:~ \· -:; .. ·. \ -·:',\--:-.1.1\.:,\.,..cc,"i;./}... _;.--------(55 1 ); RZA-TP-4 -,,-. :, :.· ,,.,,,,.,',:--.· ·,,___= / -;~:~':!Fl', ·:..; .,· , RZA'-;,]°f.?l..~1 UJRZA-TP ,~ ..... , , .. ,· , , o·se, -.:r-, -,, -2 ,., ,' = '·.·-·"'_1J/\:. r:\,s1«"'Bffi~\"\(IB') m /. / : "'"' """ ,,;s• HW-TP;,, ,,-..,. \ a! ' wRZA-8-t ' -;-_\1.~,.,.,.N"" ;1;, . , -a'0, "" , _ ~ ·.' .. \-·•,,·• . ,.,0,/ITPII ~-· ~~ ',1 · -11''" ·' ;:-· ,•, • (5 • 8-4 '~ .1'.'[_),·_:.:.. :it{<:·'.· ·.'-·-~-· • 7 i -- ' ·' :,;,-c-1 :;.,:. ' i0 ' RZA .4-i_ ~ '.,.,' J/< ,,• HW~.;,.:t19 \-.,_EB_.,,,.,q~# ._, ,,...----.; ,:. w'i-£ .. ,. ·"' * -;1 ;-,,-,,;· • .!-, -.-~ -4;?;} -';e' '/,1--J,, i ,-;?S ,{'' ,,' & ' 4,-:-/:fc 1' /7•h-, c ,-$$ .{'.}' '""~· ,,/Yf;,;;" I ,"·~/f-, )-" , ~-,\l •' , , ;; o){i)f!c I .::.rf_r;, .. ,.-z::-":-=.: /~'I .:. ~~s~<~:.~/:?7-;, ' ' """' "''' ~· --..\$ "'-::'_,' ... - -:-;--~,--.:.---j_ Y,/"';,----,_,, . ' _/ ,, /,,// KEY MAP REFERENCES, 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE Pl..PJII PROVID~O BY HUGH G. GOLDSMITH &: ASS0ClAT[S, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 OF 3, DATEO 4/21/95, 2. PRELIMINARY Pu\T, OVERALL PlAN PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GOLDSMITH & ASSOC1AT£S, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 DF 4, DATED B/95. ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnico! Consultants EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN CEDARWOOD KING COUNl'i, WASHINGTON Proj. No. 2176-21 Date 9/95 Figure 4 . J .J "' .. ... " ' .. .. ; ~ ~·, ,--~, ' : ~.-- J "-,~....,·· ,.,. -'(""-'-::---::-_ ----' - B-8 _ _,,/ ---- ' ~ /· / RZA-TP-g !'ij(6') ~,,,.___~~ ' ·- -_.· (6')!',;j -RZA B EB (9') t<· / EB TP-18 / /~--TP-20 C(J:) --1 RZA-TP::e ,,,,-·-/ -' ,_ ,J ' / ·~ ' ,--• $"' ,--· , -(4.5') '!lo TP-16/ _.---c', .--" ,-, _, LEGEND, APPROXIMATE TEST PIT I!!. LOCATION DON£ BY TERRA ASSOCIATES H3 APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION DONE BY OTHERS \ APPROXIMATE SCALE 150 a ,so 300 ft. REFERENCES, 1. EXISTING CONDffiONS SIT£ PIAN PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GDLDSMlll< & ASSOCIATES, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHffi 1 OF 3, D.i.TEO 4/21/95. 2. PRELIMINARY PLAT, OVERAJ.L PLAN PROVIDED BY HUGH G. GOLOSIAITH & ASSOClATES, INC., JOB No. 94057, SHEET 1 OF 4, DATED B/95. ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnicol Consu!tonts ....... , ".::3 ;:", / ~ ~ (7') APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION DONE BY TERRA ASSOCIATES APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION DONE BY OTHERS TYPICAL DEPTH OF FILL/LOOSE SOILS ILsi]-r "'~--==-----\-. --~--:::--. ·, ~--~-·, ---- ,: ~;;;:J ~"-~L=-- ----~~-----\ KEY MAP EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN CEOARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. 2176-21 Dale 9/95 I Figure 5 • • ! !W I I '.9 ; -.- • Cl) __J 0 Cl) Cl w z <( a: (!l LJJ Cl) a: <( 0 u {/) __J 0 {/) Cl LJJ z <( a: (!l LJJ z u: -' UJ iii' a: {!I ~ 0 C z c( (/"J :5 () ~ 0 !:; iii MAJOR DIVISIONS ~ GRAVELS Clean Gravels cu 'Ill) ~ . ~~ -·w "' ;:: cu .s a; m-E II) More than (less than 50% of coarse 5% fines) fraction is larger than No . Gravels 4 sieve. with fines ~8 ON L!l SANDS Clean Sands C: 0 "'z .s C: "' Q) .c: o'"' ~ More than (less than 50% of coarse 5% fines) fraction is smaller than Sands No. 4 sieve. with fines ~ SILTS AND CLAYS .;; :5! ~ ~"' .!L!! a, "' Liquid limit is less than 50% Ea ,.o ON "'.; cz " :5 fa SILTS AND CLAYS !!!= o~ :.. .!! Liquid limit is greater than 50% 1ii E "' HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS LETTER GRAPH SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT .. " ... •••••• •••••• • Wel~graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poorty-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non- plastic fines. Clayey gravels, grave~san<k:lay mixtures, plastic A fines. Wel~raded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Poorty-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. i I Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. Clayey sands, sand<:lay mixtures, plastic fines . Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sand)! clays. silty cl8)•S, lean clays. Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic. Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. ,.. ~:-: .... "'I Peat and other highly organic soils. ,., ,.. ,.., ,.., I --.... .. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS Standard Penetration I 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT Density Resistance in Blows/Foot SPOON SAMPLER Very loose 04 I 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER Loose 4-10 Medium dense 10-30 p SAMPLER PUSHED Dense 30-50 * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED >50 Very dense s.z WATER LEVEL (DATE) o WATER OBSERVATION STANDPIPE Standard Penetration C TORVANE READINGS, \sf Consistency Resistance in Blows/foot Qu PENETROMETER READING, tsf Very soft 0-2 w MOISTURE, percent of dry weight Soft 2-4 pct DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot Medium stiff 4-8 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent Stiff 8-16 Very stiff 16-32 Pl PLASTIC INDEX Hard >32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM TERRA CEDARWOOD ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-217&2 Date 6/95 Figure A-1 • ' 'I APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND IABORA TORY TESTING Cedarwood King County, Washington We performed our field exploration on June 16 through 20, 1995. Subsurface conditions on the three sites were explored by drilling 11 borings and excavating 24 test pits. The borings were drilled with a truck-mounted B-61 drill rig operated by Geoboring and Development, Inc. of Puyallup, Washington. The test pits were excavated with a trackhoe operated by Spoerer, Inc. of Kirkland, Washington. The borings were drilled lo depths of 18 to 54 feet and the test pits were excavated to depths of 9 to 18 feet below existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figures 3 through 5. These plans are based on site plans prepared by Hugh G. Goldsmith and Associates, Inc. dated September 1995 . A geotechnica] engineer from our firm continuously observed the field exploration and classified the soils encountered, maintained a log of each test pit and boring, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described on Figure A·l. The Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs are attached as Figures A-2 through A-24. The soil classifications shown on these figures represent our interpretation of the field Jogs and reflect the results of visual examinations and laboratory tests performed on samples obtained from the test pits. Representative soil samples collected from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. Moisture content determinations were performed on all samples. We also conducted grain size analyses on representative soil samples. The results of our laboratory testing are shown on the Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs and on Figures A-25 through A-30. Project No. T-2176-2 r d :..J " ... .; j ... • .. ~ r l ' J r 7 ' 1 :!II : ' • Boring No. B-1 Logged by: ABK Date: 6/16/95 Approximate (I) Graph/ Depth 0. (N) Water uses Soil Description Consistency E Blows/ Content (ft.) 0 foot (%) ti) Medium Dense I 21 1.9 Gray·brown fine to coarse I SAND with gravel and trace 35 2.8 silt, dense, moist. Dense 10 I 45 2.8 Gray·brown medium to coarse I SAND with some fine to coarse 38 3.3 gravel, dense, moist. Dense 20 to (Fine sand from 22 to 24 feet Very Dense I 59 5.0 followed by 2 foot gravel layer) I 47 2.8 Dense 30 Gray-brown fine SAND with I 46 3.5 occasional scattered fine to coarse gravel, dense, moist. Dense I 67 3.9 (Becomes finer with depth) to Very Dense ~40 T 82 8.7 Boring terminated at 44 feet. Piezometer installed. No groundwate.r seepage encountered. ~ ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants BORING LOG CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Elev. 347 Rgure A-2 •• ~ ·' '.J T J ~ •"" • ' ., Boring No. B-2 Logged by: ABK Date: 6/16/95 Approximate Elev. 322 Graph/ uses Soil Description Gray-brown silty SAND with fine to coarse gravel, moist. (Till/Till-like) ray-brown so ty SAND, vei moist to wet. (Thin lens of silt)' one SAND at to of sam le Gray-brown silty fine SAND with some gravel, moist. (Increasing gravel content with depth) Gray-brown silty SAND with fine to coarse gravel, moist. (TILL) Boring terminated at 42.5 feet. Piezometer installed. Consistency Very Dense Dense Very Dense Very Dense Very Dense Groundwater seepage encountered at 32.5 feet. TERRA ASSOCIATES Depth (ft) 10 20 30 40 Ql a. E g I I I I I I T ~ I (N) Blows/ foot 50/6' 50/6" 100/5" 31 50/6" 100/4" 60/6" 50/4" 50/3" Water Content (%) 5.4 6.3 8.2 10.9 10.6 5.5 5.6 6.0 10.9 BORING LOG CED ARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-3 • ill I ;a. I • I ' • I 'I Boring No. Logged by: ABK Date: Graph/ uses ML 6/16/95 Soil Description Consistency FILL: Brown fine SAND mixed with pockets of gray silty SAND, moist. Medium Dense FILL: Dark gray to black fine to medium silty SAND with fine to coarse gravel in the matrix, moist. (Mottled spots) Dense Brown fine SAND with some SILT, moist. Very Dense Gray-brown SILT with laminations of fine brown SAND, occasional organics, moist. (Hoz. mottling) Very Stiff to Hard Boring terminated at 29 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. TERRA ASSOCIATES [ B-3 Depth (ft.) 5 10 15 20 25 Approximate (l) 0. (N) Water E Blows/ Content 0 foot (%) Cf) I 15 11.6 I 47 7.4 I 71 7.0 I 25 23.3 I 22 20.6 I 44 15.6 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD Elev. 300 . . KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-4 ,,.. - ... '"" ~. - r- - "" -:.,s Boring No. B-4 Logged by: ABK/MFS Elev. 195 Date: Graph/ uses •••••• It I t t, • I I I t I I •••••• ·~·· • GP • • .... ' . 6/16/95 -6/19/95 Approximate Q) Depth 0. (N) Water Soil Description Consistency E Blows/ Content (ft.) 0 foot (%) (J) FILL: Gray-brown silty fine I 38 SAND with fine to coarse angular gravel, moist. Dense I (Sandy silt between 7.5 and to 6 9 feet) Loose 10 I 10 FILL: Silty SAND with gravel I 16 9.1 to silty gravelly SAND with Medium Dense 20 piece of wood, (some mottling). to Loose T 6 10.6 FILL: Dark gray sandy GRAVEL, wet. I 17 Medium Dense 30 I 21 10.3 I 26 14.3 Dark gray fine SAND with gravel, moist. f40 (Color varies from dark gray T 77 4.7 to light brown) Very Dense ~ ~50 I 58 13.4 T 50/6' 10.0 Boring terminated at 53.5 feet. Piezometer installed. Screen from 43 to 52.5 feet and sand from 31.5 to 52.5 feet. Groundwater seepage encountered at 32.5 feet. TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants BORING LOG CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-5 • • :i ""' "' 1 ., " .. . , ; j r r r r !W • ! Boring No. Logged by: MFS Date: Graph/ uses 6/19/95 Soil Description Consistency FILL: Dark brown gravelly SAND (crushed rock), dry to moist. Dense to Loose Brown silty CLAY /clayey SILT, Hard wet, (some mottling). Dark brown fine SAND, wet. Very Dense ... Boring terminated at 44 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. TERRA ASSOCIATES B-5 Depth (ft.) 10 20 30 40 Approximate ID Water 0. (N) E Blows/ Content 0 foot (%) C/) I 35 3.5 I 7 4.2 I 7 5.2 I 21 3.9 I 34 9.6 I 13 10.0 I 17 2.8 T 33 26.5 I 53 22.6 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Elev. 196 Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-6 -· , "" l 1. T J Logged by: MFS Date: 6/19/95 Graph/ uses Soil Description FILL: Gray-brown silty SAND with gravel, moist. FILL: Gray-brown sandy SILT/ silty SAND, moist. (Mottled) FILL: Gray-orange-brown silty CLAY, wet. Gray fine SAND with some gravel, moist. Gray silty SAND/sandy SILT with occasional gravel, moist. Boring terminated at 28 feet. Boring No. B-6 Consistency Medium Dense Loose Very Soft Very Dense Very Dense Depth (ft.) 5 10 15 20 25 No groundwater seepage encountered. Approximate Elev. 186 (I) a. E 0 Cf) I I I (N) Blows/ foot 26 6 1 I 50/6. I 50/6. T 50/6. Water Content (%) 12.6 21.2 56.2 7.0 10.1 7.7 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD '. TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants , Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-7 ·~ -, -. r, ~ ~ !I • ., ~ • • ;w r ,._ .. .;. " • Boring No. B-7 Logged by: MFS Date: 6/19/95 -6/20/95 Graph/ Depth uses Soil Description Consistency (ft.) FILL: Light grey-brown, medium to coarse sand and gravel and cobbles (occasional wood • chips and charcoal) Very Dense to Loose 10 FILL: Brown sandy GRAVEL (crushed rock}, moist, Very Dense (mottled) . 20 Light brown silty SAND, moist. Very Dense Light brown-gray fine SAND with trace gravel, moist to wet . 30 [ Dense 40 to Very Oense 50 Boring terminated at 54 feet. Piezometer installed. Screen depth from 38.5 to 58.5 feet. Groundwater seepage encountered at 42 feet. Approximate QJ 0. (N) Water E Blows/ Content 0 foot (%) CfJ I 50/6" 2.1 I 22 10.9 I 8 8.1 I 81/6" 4.1 I 50 9.1 I 54 9.4 T 50 I 50/5" 8.7 I 35 9.2 _L 50/6" 10.9 I 62 20.3 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD Elev. 213 TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geoteehnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-8 ' • "' "" :,\I. . ' r ' !" i r ,. i • r ry ::w • Logged by: MFS Date: 6/20/95 Graph/ uses Soil Description Brown/orange·brown, fine to very fine silty SAND to sandy SILT, damp. Gray-brown sandy gravel to gravelly SAND (cobbly), moist to wet. Boring terminated at 24.5 feet. Boring No. B-8 Consistency Very Loose Very Loose to Very Dense Depth (ft.) 5 10 15 20 Groundwater encountered at 10 feet. Approximate Elev. 84 (I) 0. E 0 (/) I I I I I (N) Blows/ foot 4 4 50/3" 50/5" 50/5" Water Content (%) 34.9 18.4 10.6 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD ... TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Rgure A-9 r ,... "" ' ; ' .. ... ' • I Boring No. Logged by: MFS Date: Graph/ uses 6/20/95 Soil Description Brown-gray silty fine to very fine SAND with some organics. Brown clean medium SAND, moist to wet. (Becomes coarser with depth) Brown coarse sandy gravel/ gravelly SAND, wet . Consistency Loose Very Dense Very Dense Boring terminated at 20.5 feet. Groundwater encountered at 8.5 feet. **Some of the_ blow counts are in heave. B-9 Depth (ft.) 5 10 15 20 *Not representative ~ sampler bouncing on large cobble/boulder. Approximate OJ 0. (N) Water E Blows/ Content 0 foot (%) CJ) I 10 34.9 I 50 7.8 I 43;9·· 5.8 I 32·· 7.4 -r-86 s· 23.9 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD Elev. 84 ~ TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-10 ~~ '~ ., -~ ; ' ,, Boring No. Logged by: MFS Date: Graph/ uses 6/20/95 Soil Description Brown-gray/brown silty fine to very fine SAND/sandy SILT with occasional organics, moist to dry, (mottled). Brown fine SAND to sandy fine gravel, moist. Boring terminated at 19 feet. Piezometer installed. Groundwater at 9.5 feet. TERRA ASSOCIATES Consistency Loose Medium Dense to Very Dense Very Dense B-10 Approximate (I) Depth C. (NJ Water E Blows/ Content (ft.) 0 foot (%) U) I 5 53.2 5 I 6 29.7 I 21 24.4 10 I 50/3" 5.4 15 T 50/5" 17.5 BORING LOG CED ARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Elev. 80 ... GeotechnicaJ Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-11 - ... fl' I - Boring No. 8-11 Logged by: MFS Date: 6/20/95 Graph/ uses Soil Description Brown-gray silty fine to very fine SAND. moist to dry. Consistency Loose to Medium Dense Very Dense Boring terminated at 19 feet. Groundwater encountered at 10 feet. r Depth (ft.) 5 10 15 OJ a. E ~ I I I I T Approximate Elev. 80 (N) Blows/ foot 5 16 65 86/5" 50 5" Water Content (%) 30.5 23.6 15.5 2.9 7.9 BORING LOG CEDARWOOD TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Rgure A-12 ' .. .. ' ' ' Logged by: ORK Date: 6/15/95 Test Pit No. TP-1 Approximate Elev. 318 Depth uses; w (ft.) Graph Soil Description o/c 0 ------------------~"""'c...--~ 5 10 15 FILL: Brown/reddish-brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, damp, loose to medium dense. (Pieces of old wire at 5 feet) (Considerable root zone at 9 feet) Brown clean fine to medium SAND with gravel and cobbles, (appears disturbed), damp to moist, medium dense. 5.9 1.6 Brown fine to medium SAND with considerable cobbles, occasional 2.2 boulders and occasional roots, damp to moist, medium dense. Test pit terminated at 15 feet. No groundwater seepage el'lCountered. Test Pit No. TP-2 Approximate Elev. 210 Logged by: ORK Date: 6/15/95 Depth (ft.) uses; Soil Description w Gra h % o~.,::;.:..;:;i:;:.;....-------------------,-1-""'-..,.---, 5 10 15 FILL: Brown SILT with considerable roots, moist, soft (silt is blocky and individual blocks are stiff, however, the stratum is soft). FILL: Brown fine to medium clean SAND, loose, damp. 28.8 Brown lean CLAY, moist, very stiff (laminated). 42.1 Test pit terminated at 17 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Sides caved in. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD ... TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-13 "" .. • 'I .. -: .. Logged by: ORK Date: 6/15/95 Test Pit No. TP-3 Approximate Elev. 308 Depth uses; w (ft.) G h Soil Description o _,..,;:;;.r;;:.a;::.,p:.;.., ___________________ ...,..Lo/c!!lo.t...,.. __ ~ 10 FILL: Reddish-brown sandy SILT wtth occasional gravel, moist, stiff. Brown-gray clean fine to medium SAND, loose to medium dense. Test pit terminated at 18 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Sides caved in . Test Pit No. TP-4 4.0 4.5 Logged by: ORK Date: 6/15/95 Approximate Elev. 314 Depth (ft.) uses; Soil Description w Gra h % o-..,;;:;,~;,,,-----------------...i..:!IJ..,-~ 10 FILL: Reddish-brown silty SAND with cobbles, occasional pockets of sand, occasional topsoil and voids, loose, damp. Brown-gray sandy lean CLAY wtth some root zones, moist, stiff, (mottled). Gray fine to medium SAND with silt to silty sand with gravel and considerable cobbles moist, dense to ver dense, till. Test pit terminated at 9 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 19.6 34.8 7.0 1..,.... ______________________ ___J TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-14 ' ' " .,. ., 9. I. I i ' ' Test Pit No. TP-5 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/15/95 Depth uses; (ft.) Graph Soil Description Approximate Elev. 314 w 0 5 10 15 FILL: Brown silty SAND with occasional small tree stumps, moist, loose. FILL: Gray silty SAND with some small tree stumps, moist to wet, loose. Brown fine to medium SAND with occasional gravel, medium dense to dense, moist. (Becomes fine grained with depth) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Sides caved in. Test Pit No. TP-6 0 8.3 11.6 8.4 17.4 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/15/95 Depth Approximate Elev. 298 (ft.) uses; Soil Description w Gra h ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--,.i.o/c~o"-r~~-, 0 5 10 Brown silty SAND with gravel, damp, very dense, (cemented), (TILL) Brown silty gravelly SAND, moist, dense. Brown gravelly SAND with silt, dense. Test pit terminated at 10 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD 6.3 4.5 . .. TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechrncal Consullants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-15 ·2 .' - ~ :a ., ..: '"" r :.i ; ~ • • Test Pit No. TP-7 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Approximate Elev. 267 Depth uses; (ft.) G raph 0 • • • _, • . --~..., • . \, 't • • . ', •• -o . -• 5 -. '!--• •• • . -GM --. • • • • • \. b • . •• 10-0 • -' Soil Description FILL: Brown silty sandy GRAVEL with cobbles and occasional boulders, medium dense, moist to wet. w 1%) 3.1 ... :,.. .... ,•r\• 7 -• • 4. :-l•)'.\~;%~· ·I··wr:B:::ro:::w:n-::v::er:::y:fi::ne::-:SAN:-;:;;:D:-:w:::it:-.:h-:s:;;ilt:-:t:::o-::s::an:::d;::y-;:S:;;IC-:;I,-:s::tif;;f.-:m:o::;i::st--l1a.1 15.-ll'iriM!Lil~:~~!~h:~~~;;:r::~~:~;~~d.,..,at~1~s~r-.e~t.----------------------.L.--L.----I 5 10 No groundwater seepage encountered. Sides caved in. Test Pit No. TP-8 Approximate Elev. 264 Brown silty SAND with gravel, very dense, damp to moist, (TILL). Gray SILT, hard, moist. Brown fine SAND, very dense, damp. Trackhoe refusal at 10 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD 7.2 7.5 8.3 22.2 10.6 TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-16 "' ~ i I -~ • Test Pit No. TP-9 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Approximate Elev. 238 Depth uses; (ft.) G h 0 rap ~%;I . i GM ' •••••• • t I I I I I • • • • • • • 5 • • • • • • -•••••• • • • • • • • -••® • • • • • • • • I t I I I I • t I I t t I -10 ~ •••••• •••••• ~ ,,. . A . [MD . 15 '%\ Soil Description w Brown silty gravelly SAND, moist, medium dense . 5.0 FILL: Brown sandy gravel with occasional boulders, wet, loose . 3.9 P'lrown verv 1 Tn ,;:annv SI 8.4 Test pit terminated at 11.5 feet • Sides caved in . Test Pit No. TP-10 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Approximate Elev. 194 Depth (ft.) USCS/ Soil Description W Q---i:,;:G;',lr,,,a .. ph"""' __________________ ,.i.c%e,...,---, 2.6 5 10 FILL: Brown silty SAND mbied with crushed rock, damp, very dense. (Smell of decomposing organics) FILL: Brown silty gravelly SAND, moist, medium dense. (Considerable wood debris at 7 feet) FILL: Brown silty SAND with gravel and occasional wood stumps, loose to medium dense, moist. Test pit terminated at 18 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD 5.5 4.6 TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-17 • g , ii .• J 1. II ' • Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Test Pit No. TP-11 Approximate Elev. 191 Depth uses; w (ft.) G h Soil Description o-,--v-r,:a,P;.:...,..------------------.,J-£%!U...,---, FILL: Brown crushed rock mixed with silty SAND, damp to moist, very dense. 5 10 15 FILL: Gray silty SAND with gravel and occasional wood debris, very dense, moist. FILL: Brown silty SAND with gravel and occasional wood debris, medium dense, moist. 4.7 4.0 Test pit terminated at 18 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Test Pit No. TP-12 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Approximate Elev. 220 Depth (ft.) uses; Soil Description W Gra h % frn,,r---------------------,-'-'!!.1--,-----, 10 FILL: Brown silty SAND with gravel, damp to moist, loose. FILL: Brown gravelly SANO, moist, medium dense to dense. (Root zones approximately every 2 feet) Test pit terminated at 16 feet. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD 3.4 3.9 ·, . TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-18 • Ill I I Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Depth USCS/ Test Pit No. TP-13 Approximate Elev. 188 w (ft.) Graph 0 :,;..,...-----------------,-L<ll..L..--~ Soil Description 5 10 FILL: Brown fine to medium SAND to silty SAND. loose, moist. (2 to 3 foot size concrete pieces and pieces of sheet metal below 12 feet) 10.3 12.3 Test pit terminated at 16 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Logged by: DRK Date: 6/16/95 Test Pit No. TP-14 Approximate Elev. 185 w Depth (ft.) uses; Soil Description Graph ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-,-1.~o"-r~~~ 0 5 10 15 FILL: Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist. 8.6 FILL: Brown SILT mixed with gray lean CLAY and large pieces of concrete, medium stiff, moist. 33.5 Test pit terminated at 18 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-19 .. '!I 'I . , ., Test Pit No. TP-15 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/19/95 Approximate Elev. 200 Depth uses; (ft.) G h 0 rap '%\ Soil Description w . FILL: Bluish-gray sandy SILT with considerable tree stumps. . wet, very loose . . . 5 ~ 15.0 -ML . . . . w-Brown SILT, moist to wet. stiff, mottled. 34.0 . 10 ~ GM Brnwn-,,ray silty sandy GRAVEL. medium dense, wet. 9.5 . Test pit terminated at 13 feet . 15 No llroundwater seena12:e e11eountered. Test Pit No. TP-16 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/19/95 Approximate Elev. 87 Depth (ft.) uses; Graph 0 5 ML 10 ML Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel and occasional organics, loose, moist. Brown cobbly SAND, moist to wet, loose. Gray SILT, stiff, moist . Bluish-gray sandy SILT. stiff to very stiff, moist. Test pit terminated at 12 feet. w % 19.5 29.0 13.0 ... No groundwater seepage encountered. 15;-L ____________________ _J TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ProJ. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-20 111 • T Test Pit No. TP-17 Logged by: ORK Date: 6/19/95 Approximate Elev. 85 Depth USCS/ (ft.) h Soil Description W Grap % O-ri'""""''9.'T--::-----:::--:----:------------r'-r-, Brown silty fine to very fine SAND with roots, loose, damp 5 10 •••••• •••••• ·~·· ·~· •••••• • • • • • • to moist. 21.5 -'-'-=='--------------------! Gray fine to medium clean SAND, loose, moist. Reddish-brown sandy medium to coarse GRAVEL (cobbles), dense, moist to wet. Test pit terminated at 12 feet. Groundwater encountered at 11.5 feet. 6.2 15__. ___ __.S~id~e~s~ca~v~e~d~in~·----------------------' Test Pit No. TP-18 Logged by: ORK Date: 6/19/95 Approximate Elev. 84 Depth (ft.) uses; Soil Description w Gra h,.,.. ____________________ ..,.,_o/c~o,_,_ __ ~ 0 5 10 15 Brown silty fine to very fine SAND to sandy SILT, damp, very loose. 27 _6 (Becomes black at 8 feet •••••• ....::.::.::.:==-=-="""'-"'-"'-'""',...._------------! ..... ' •••••• ''ISir ! ' • • • •••••• Dark gray sandy GRAVEL (cobbles), moist to wet, dense (murky groundwater). Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Groundwater encountered at 9 feet. Sides caved in . TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD 4.8 5.6 -. TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-21 :, j 1 J J ~ < .ii "f --' Logged by: DRK Date: 6/19/95 Depth uses; (ft.) 0 Graph ML 5 10 15 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/19/95 Depth (ft l uses; . G h 0 rap . lJ . n 5 -!I P! ti! } ;. r1]1t !:: \ . ' .... . • • • • • • . •••••• . : ·@· , GP , 10 -. • • • • • . . ••••• • • • • • • . . 15 Test Pit No. TP-19 Approximate Elev. 81 Soil Description Brown sandy SILT with signficant root zones, damp, very loose. Brown/black medium to coarse SAND and cobbles with occasional boulders, dense, wet. Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Groundwater encountered at 10 feet. Test Pit No. TP-20 w % 30.7 6.1 '!'. Approximate Elev. 80 1%\ Soil Description w Brown sandy SILT, damp, very loose . 14.4 Brown fine SAND to silty sand, damp, loose. Brown sandy medium coarse GRAVEL, wet, dense. 3.9 '!'. Test pit terminated at 12 feet. Groundwater encountered at 9 feet. TERRA ASSOCIATES TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultams Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-22 " f. J r r ... • "I' j • Test Pit No. TP-21 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/20/95 Approximate Elev. 80_ Depth uses; (ft.) G h Soil Description W rap % o-,-rr,-.,,.,.,-,------------------,J..!''L-r----, 5 10 15 Brown SILT with some organic matter, loose, damp. Gray fine SAND, loose, damp. (Mottled below 6 feet) (Cobbly at 9 feet) (Tree branches at 10 feet) Gray clean SAND and GRAVEL (cobbles), dense, waterbearing. Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Groundwater at 10 feet. Sides caved in. Test Pit No. TP-22 17.0 7.8 Logged by: DRK Date: 6/20/95 Approximate Elev. 80 Depth (ft.) Soil Description W o-,-r=r"-n"m-------------------....,..l.•.!!.rou...,. __ ~ 5 10 Brown SILT with some organic matter, loose, damp. Gray fine SAND, loose, moist. (Heavy mottling below 6 feet) (Small logs at 7 feet) Brown clean SAND and GRAVEL (cobbles). dense, waterbearing. Test pit terminated at 12 feet. Groundwater at 8 feet. 9.5 5.2 Sides caved in. 15,....._ ____________________ _J -• . TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Rgure A·23 ., ~ ., . :ir ; . pt I Test Pit No. TP-23 Logged by: ORK Date: 6/20/95 Approximate Elev. 80 Depth uses; (ft.) Graph Soil Description ~ o-rrn''Fn-,-----------------..,.1.L!!L..--~ 5 10 Brown SILT, loose, damp. Gray/brown fine SAND, loose, moist. (Mottling below 4.5 feet) f---------------------1 Gray sandy CLAY, so!t, moist to wet. Brown medium to coarse SAND with gravel (cobbles) and boulders, dense. waterbearing. Test pit termianted at 10 feet. Groundwater encountered at 7 feet. 13.3 15.6 36.5 15-'----------------------___J Test Pit No. TP-24 Logged by: ORK Date: 6/20/95 Approximate Elev. 80 Depth (ft.) uses; Soil Description w Gra h % o-.-rrr'i'TI,-----------------~(!U-,----, 5 10 15 ML Brown SILT, loose, damp. Gray/blue sandy GRAVEL to gravelly SAND, loose to medium • dense I moist. (Considerable logs between 8 and 12 feet) (Occasional sand lens below 12 feet) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Groundwater encountered at 10 feet. TEST PIT LOGS CEDARWOOD 12.8 .. TERRA ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-2176-2 Date 6/95 Figure A-24 -.... -:~ . ,ij .... •. -jij iii ...... ~--........ . J j ·J G) •• "' . 2-g l>-1 :':f en m o· en ;o e. 0 ;o n n l> 0 -~ l> C -I ii' m ,a. en ., -0 $. z ? ..., ~ ..... 0, I ~ i <D -<D "' ~ ~ C ~ 1° ..., "' ;,;; z G') G') 0 ~ o 0 z ~JTl (/) :::;/~ N • ::ti JT1 ::!:~ )> GjOZ :J:O~ -'-< z (/) G') --I (/) 0 z L "' 100 90 SIEVE ANALYSIS ~RE OF OPENING IN INCHES f4J ..... l"l N -!::!. .-a:a N a:, ............................ ---P')lt) ... ..., [ NUl,IBElf-OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD ~ -sf' 0 ~ ~ ~ g ~ g,o NC! HYDROMETER ANALYSIS GRAIN SIZE lN MM ~ ~ ~ ci~~ ~§ ~ ~ 0 10 , 20 -i:i I\ [Tl ,~ ::ti 80 ~~ -iJ ' ~ ' JT1 ' ::ti 70 • 40 O O , 0 JT1 )> z :::0 -loo ~(/) [Tl ::::!J ' ~ ::ti z ' ~ rri~ oom ::ti ' '-< m ' ::E ' '-<w mrri ~ ' I [Tl ' -I G') ~ ' -~ I -I 20 10 0 I Ii 11 I !;l ~ 8~~ !i~ ~ 0"' u, s \ , I , \. \. iJi ; ' I j! ... .., "' -~~ "":"'1 <'! I ! '1 ' -: G'J lO 0 0 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS . . I coBBLEs I =r ®kc f1NE I coiRSE r Mro1uMSAflo r FlH[ I Key • 0 Boring or I Depth " Test Pit {ft,l TP-1 TP-3 5 4 uses SP SW Description gravelly SAND with trace of silt SAND with trace of grovel ond silt ... .., "' q q q -oo u, Oc, g ·q . FINES .... .-, N 0 0 0 C! q C? Moisture Content (%) LL 80 90 _100 :§1 G') PL ·.11.·,-< .. • IJ 1Jil 0 -· i:r ~ -' ., .• ru;l,..;~ '"'"ltl &.,.;; .... • •• :.... a:..... .11,.;·<\,ill , .. ;·a :J ,.; .i .J 11"!1, I "1 ... SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIZE Of OPENING IN INCHES I NU OF MESH PER IN~H. U.S. STNIDARO CRAIN SIZE IN MM N ~ .:t.·~.:!:!. ~ ~ 8 g., c!i q 00 "' ... .., "' ij .... ~ ~ !f ~ "' q~ ~ ~~ ~ I -"' ... .., N -..... ,...,U') -,.., --• NC! q : {} 100 0 '. . ~.·, . ·-.. r!· 90 10 Cl • -J·· rt • ·.· 0 .. l> --i 80 20 \) g. en m ~· en ;:u \) ' l'T1 2.. 0 ~ l'T1 :::0 nn :::0 70 JO~ 0 0 -l'T1 z: :::, l> z: ' -l !1 --i -l 60 ' 40 O s-m ' ;a en ..,., 0 )> (II z :::0 l'T1 50 ' 50 (/) ' ' :::0 ' l'T1 OJ ' ;o -< 40 ' 60 ~ ' ~ " l'T1 ' ~ $. G) JO ' 70 l'T1 ' ' I G) z -l I !' -l ,,,, :;,;: 20 80 ...., z O> G) G) ~ I 90 ,,,, 0 ?; 10 -ls' o 0 z C ' ' .. ''' I I ' ' " . ... z: l'T1 (/) 0 ' . ' ' ' ' ' ' 100 :;/CJ -8 8 goo ~g 0 0 00 u, ... .., "' -«! "? ... .., "' -: «) fO .... "' "' -"' <O ... "' "' 0 )>N "' <O N -~~ 0 0 0 C?~ ~ ~~ 0 -:::0 l'T1 ..., "' -GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS C? C? <D -~ <D ~OJ> "' J>oz I I COAASE CRA~u FINE I COAASE I MEOl~M I FINE I I Vlo )> COBBLES $AND FINES I S: -z VJ .a1 G) - Moisture -l VJ Key Boring or Depth uses Description LL PL C 0 Content (7.) ;,i z: Test Pit (ft.) t • TP-5 7 . SW-SM SAND with silt and grovel ,,,, 0 TP-6 8 GP sandy GRAVEL with trace of silt O> • • :,Q ,. -·~ ,.i,,, r1ir,,MA ... -~--._ ... ~.. e.., .. ., "-""-NII "··'·'11' ,J ,j .ii ' ,, ' ; • SIEVE ANALYSIS I HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I I SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES I NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD I GRAIN SIZE IN MM I ~ ..t,a, N a:, ...-"' "' ... "' "' -8 o.., ij "' ....................................... 0 0 ~ ~ 00 ... "' "' q l:l l:l l:l l:l l:l I -"' ..t, r,r') N --:,n10--~ .... ...--"' -"' . ~ ~ ~ . .. l·~: 100 0 .. .. .;.;_ ': J ~,. 90 10 (;) \ :.ii,• (8 .. ·.·. 0 .. l> --l 80 20 .J g. en m ~-en ;:o ,J r, 2. 0 ;:o r, ::u (") () )> ::U 70 JO o 0 r, 0 -r, z ;:I )> z ' -i t--1 -i 60 40 o .; m ...., 0 ~ U> z ' )> ::u r, 50 ' 50 V> ::u r, CD ::u -< 40 ' 60 ~ :E ' ' ' ' ,, r, ' :E a G) JO ' 70 r, .,.... ' ' :r: G) z -i :r: p 80 -i N ;:,;: 20 ' ~ ' .... z (7) G) G) I ' 90 N 0 ~ 10 i-- ~ o 0 z C . .. ' . . . . .. .. ZJTI C/l 0 ' • ' I 1 I I J _100 ~0-g 8 8 il@ ~g 0 0., "' ... .., "' -tq ~ .... '"1 <"'! -: CC) tO ... n N -., "' ... a N N -00 q q C? qo o 0 0 . ?o~ N -GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS qq ~q q q <D -!E:EJ> <D "' J>OZ I COBBLES I =~ Fil!: I COAASE I MEDIUM I FlN~ I I (/)0~ FINES :r:o SAND ---< z (/) ~ G) --i (/) Key Boring or Depth uses Description Moisture LL PL C 0 Content (,;) ;;; z •. Test Pit (ft.} =t • TP-6 5 GM silty sandy GRAVEL N 0 TP-9 5 GW sandy GRAVEL with trace of silt .... • 41 ~,~ ·;.--w.,_ ••• -·· ..... -... --. . lliil .. ' l -~ . .,;;a I .] .. Lt SIEVE ANALYSIS I HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES I NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STNl I GRAIN SIZE IN MM I N ...... ~!!!.~!'!.. ~ "' "' ... ..., N -0 0"' N "' 0 0 !i 0 0 ~q ~ q ~ ci el el el el el el I -... "' N --l"">V'l..-n ,......,.. -N "' -100 0 ] . 90 ' 10 . . 0 lt J> -f 80 20 --o g. en m ' ~-en :;o "U r1 2. 0 ~ rT1 ;u ;u 70 30 CJ (') () CJ r1 0 -rT1 z ::, l> z ' -; [ -f -; 60 ' ' 40 CJ .=;-m ..,, ' ' 0 1} en ' )> z ' ;u rT1 50 ' 50 (/) ;u rT1 co ;u -< 40 ' 60 ~ ' ::E ' ,, rri ::E $. G') 30 ' 70 r1 :r: ' G) z -; ' :r: p -I "' ;,;; 20 BO --., z ' 0, G') G') I 90 "' ;u 10 -CJ )> l? OCJz C ' ' ' ' ' ' I• I I I ' I ' ' I I·• -zrriv, 0 ' ' 100 (D =<o_ g 8 82 la !i g 0 0"' <O ... ..., N -co'° ... ..., N --::g ~ ... ..-, N -"' '° ... .., N 0 )>N N q q q Oo 8 ~~ ~ C! • ;;o rri N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS ·~ . <D ::E ::a:)> -<D c.n ljgZ I I COIRSE GRA\ir( nfiE I C0AAS£ I MEDIUM I FlNE I I :r: 0 jl::: COBBLES s.¥m FINES ..__ --< z (/) :!I G) - Moisture <O -I (/) Key Boring or Depth uses Description LL PL C 0 Content (%) iil z ' Test Pit (ft.) > • TP-13 3 SM silly SAND with gravel I "' 0 8-1 7.5 SP SAND with gravel and trace of silt 0, ,.I -· "Ill -··,,. --·iii -·;.; .... • "-·. II .. ;,l,··t &'.u.. U...L.:-w r.·, , . ..,. SIEVE ANALYSIS I SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES I HUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD N ....... ~~~~ ~ -8 g<O p ~ N 0 :iq ~ 0 -<O ... .., N --n10 ..-..., .,... ..,. -<O -,...q 100 ., ,·.· '\,". ~"'-~ . ~1 90 C') •• -~· .. ~ j 8 0 .. l> -I 80 ' g. en m ' 1'l· en ;;o "U ' 5!. 0 ;;o rTJ 0 (') l> ::U 70 ' 0 0 -rTJ ' " l> z ~ --l -i 60 sm ' " ' a en ' .. z rTJ 50 ' ' ::u ' CD ' -< 40 ' ::E -0 l'T'l $. G') :so ' ' ' I z -i ? N 20 ' ~ ;:,;: ' ..... z ' "' G') G') ' I 10 N ::u -0 )> ~ o 0 z C ' ' ' ' ' '! t I ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' I I'! .. zrri (/) 0 =<o_ g 8 8 g :ii ~g 0 0"' <O ... .., "' --~ U'.? .... "? "! -:g "' )>N N -•. C! • ::u l'T'l N -GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS U) -::E U) =Ea)> "' )>oz I I COARSf GBkt1 flHE I CONlSE I MEDIUM i EJNE I (/)0 )> COBBLES $MP I S; -z (/) :!'I G) - '° -i (/) Key Boring or Depth uses Description C 0 cil z ' Test Pit (fl.) t • 8-1 17.5 . SP SAND with grovel ond trace of silt N 0 8-7 7.5 SM silty SAND with grovel "' ,. ' ;J •. 'ii HYDROMETER ANALYSIS GRAIN SIZE 'IN MM "' <O ... .., N .... .., N ci 1'! 1'! 1'! 1'! 1'! qq q ... .., N -00 "' .... .., N q C? q C!o o ~~ ~ qq FINES Moisture Content (%) 'J ij 0 10 20 "U rTJ ::u :so 0 rTJ z -i 40 O ~ ::u 50 (/) rTJ ::u 60 CD -< ::E 70 rri G') I -i 80 90 _100 0 q I LL PL ,!,.: 1 r ' :J a • PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT _J 0.. '1 0 ~ ~ S! 55 0 0 &"! 0 8 ioo·0 -"' ..... "' -100· -..__ ::l (/) lOO" lOO" (/) roo· roo· ~ ~ "' too· too· e~ <( "' ::,-., z "' Jii ~ :·, <( ~ 900" 900" o- " V, ::::E C: 0:: ia::l BOO" 800" ...., 0 :z 0 w vi io· lO" c;: ~. w I :::i: 0 lO" lO" 0:: 0 ro· re· ·i >-:r: to· tO' 90" 90" I .._ .... OOl -,__ -eo· J ! : l' (/) a:: OOl w ! z·w ... r • e C: "' :::i: 0 vi 09 :.:a •. ::I Q. ::, -·c: u ~ Ot t" :::i: ,_ ., r ., -,J c:, ~ -9· Z oz -g· ~ -w ~ r ili -l N .s:; ... vi "' i "' l:; z _J (/) Ol l ,_ ~ (/) i ii <( I ' ~ I, • a:: -(.!) (.!) j <( I, • t ~ z t .__ <( ..... -C t/1 -9 0 r w ., Gj 8/£ • 8 ... Ol % (/) 0: ::::E ~ l/l ~ (.!) 9? V, I = 0.. .• ! ~ t £ oz ,_ (.!) ~ l· :5~ u or I "' Z/1 c,..,.; ,-: ~ l Ot .,- I -c:,~ - j Is l • 09 08: l:; £ -08 '--..... "' I ' ia::l t ,-OOl c:- ~ ·c: ., II) v5 ~~ i 9 ..J II) II) ,. • ooz 0 1 0 ~ .._.__ ZI ooor '--"' • 8 g Ii!! 0 :i! Ii! 0 ~ 0 S! ..... ... N - r PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - -TERRA CEDARWOOD ' ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON • • •....!.-,, Geotechnicol Consultants 2176-2 j Dote T Figure Proj. No. 9/95 A-30 '·l • I -1-- 11 / 'i' ' X N w \ ' \ \ I /,, I / ~.;t,iJHj!IJZEJl ;>iJJ.)ll!l;J:11 I I TAXLQT18 ! ~!=1!:=~~ . -J.--\ ,..------ -- _,. __ TAXLOT25 lRACT 1-l I I I ',; ) r I I I I I r I I ~. \ ··-'"'"'"-"':!,-. /• -,r , : z-~- =~~-' ~'---•-<-~·-.. --]-.. , •:<. :-,:,:'·~~~' '<. \ · .. ~1~···:,:1i:'J!;j~~~:t~<0.~ 1t/f;,,,_..+ . \I J~.c;--l : ~~"-- ' ~\ l' • r· 1 1 / • \ · '0C'C-,,' S. •• ' '•i"- '1 I . , -, 'f"''-'"'-';/" .. °'l ·,, '. .. "-.,", 's '1· ""'"•• ··· • • , 1 \, ·. · · ·<z<c .• ·• "' . ·:1f-. ,. I . / :-~~, j) ,, I / '-. •.::r-. \ ' ~ ----1---....i....... / ' ' "' \ '\\ '~-;' ... ___ ,, 1--,Ii\.. ' ' ~-/ -~, I\ -'._ -• .J. ----' '' ./ , ' '\ ·, ~,-\ ;f· ."::·-·~<>_;;: ·.~,:,:·;:1, --,--le; \ / -~ ~ •\I , ''"·"""~11.sso,:; ~--~J!IU ,...__,.-,_W:-:-1 \';, ' •. I . ', 1 \ "\ \ \ ;__ ( \ ."' ' ... ,., CEO~"•ooo GllO'-"' OIVI~ .ION I ;:,uB-8ASIN MAP CEDARWOOD EXHIBIT I 1/2