Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Misc
, , , ! ,.~ I', ' :r l ~ i ~~~~~ ilI~; ~~~~~ §i.i~ . 1l~ ~.o;~~ n~ iil~>5'" e~~~~ !l-<~ ~~i~.~ ~~.M ~~~ §~ ~~ !i;;!! ~, .' 'IE 11'-1 ~QR1H SHORT PLAT LUM3-0Ql~3' 3506 'IE 7TH ST. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z IQ ~ < > I ~~~~ ~ -",g",,,, < 1-'. i !"ii;~ i ! ~. "' "'!i ~ E I ~ NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT I U13005672 ,. ." 0 ~ 0 Z 0 " -< :I: m > Z ~ " z m '" 0 m C AI;::! " (Jl '" m::T m m 0 Zz -< "U 0 m dO z ;:0 .'" s:: -< z::o 0 -I :!; ---i z 'It '" ~I :I: r '0 ~ C '1>(f) w ~ l' ~ WI ~ w , IO 0 " 0 m ~ Z::o ~ ~ ~ w ~--i ~ :-' - . UNIOO AV£'1UE NE l \ (Jl O-u ::E I ;: Zr . "U n r » =l :> --i 0 " ;u m Z -< 0 :?- II '" :I: Z ~ 0 z i, " ! L __ .9~_!':!2:.a .... :a~ __ j NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT I U13005672 1\ 1!1' " -",~6~ :s~"' ~ ~-, i ~ ~ ~ 0 , , , ~ § , ! ~ ! I , ~ , , ~I gl ~, ~I I, , i , ! I I.I.I! 1, i,. I " , n o Z 4 ~ o r i I NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT ----.. '" _ 0 133~lS HIL 3N --------,----- t , , /' !'$lits~-i-+--' -------, , L_-+ __ , , , I , , , , , , , , ------~--- U13005672 " -~ ~~ ~~ a " ~,., c:a 7 ~~ §B Ii i! ~ • . , i! a Iii z !~ 3il 8 '0 ,. ~~ ~E d ~§ ~;!i 2 I i'~ ~~ ~:1h 1! il " !' ~,.. e'ji'1 ~ 8~ ." :~ r ! 1"1 ! ! ,iE' 0 ~~a3 , iIf.~'1." , ~~-'--! i ~~~i , ! ~~i; ~iE:~ ! ~:~Q "I' i~l; ;:~~ \'! ~ .. NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT U13005672 rpl!' ""-1' ~~~~n~ § C-il> >z .tl~~~~;~~ ""~~~;;!:;:' 0 ZIC Fo U'"'g~:G~ =1"';' ~ 0""'--0_ ~U~ I """lVlC ~z ~$~~~s:z~ ~ ,,2 .... i' ;Z ~=i::::l ~o ~~,.5~';l'i'R "''"~~~~; g O"lr::::: 0< '" ~a~>!,",'" .".""." ~~;~~~~ 5 ~Vl~ 0° ~;mm ~~~~ 3~8~~~~ ~ oj;Vl ~~ nn c~ 0 0 ":"';;: !!'''' . c~ "I[Il~r!i'!<: w· ~. I1II I' gWg,,§~~ ~< z< Q ~~ 8~nii::;E",o o\,!-" z g:.~~~~~~ ",."'",." ::;! ~p ~i:;: 0 j~ ~",gL"'~"" u.:0!~;j. ~ V;c"""j!;~~ I~ ~~~oi!i!~:!!i un N'ii~~~ ~~ <fI'-' ~o'~Ql~ ~~~:;:.~~ ~~ """* !;-<"S iil!;' ~~ : :~~ ~~~~ ~ro ~~ ,...~ ~ ~~ "';nt;!il2 <::l~ ~ ~§ ~~~~ g~~~I~ .. ~;llF ~ 1111 ",~~~r~ ~~;~~~ ~§i' -<:;:, ;liB:;:' ,., • , ~ 0 P~O~EB~_..L~~ ," " ~. D. > 0 ~ C ~ " e. ~ " . CEN!ERL~N~ z • PAVED ROAD S § 0 ~ ! ! , , ! , , III 01 , 11 I'~ I;;: ! @ • ~ ! ;Ii J , i ~n ~=< Z~ ~ 00 , ; , , .)9<.45 , , i 394.&6 =.00 Z~ , ! ! ! ! ; i ~ zc m~ ~. ~" s ~~ ~~ ~~ <~ 6~ ,. ., m~ -~~ "' 5S ll~ , ! ~I I'; ;!-ii I r~ I j; i L· I :H • ~ I ~ i I ~'!' HW ,0 tdll to " i]~!i " if Ii!!! ~ ~ ~ ; 1~~H ii i:iH " r" ": ,Ii I .( n " iij, " H!i H ~Iij " I; ~d; , "fl NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT U13005672 1" ;1 " 'f j- 'I !. " I 0 0 < ~ i • • " " NE 7th NORTH SHORT PlAT 'f~ ~": ___ ~ _ ~-~"~~ _.~_"_';~~-. ~~-.::..1 --''>--~'~-'.-'I -~ l ~ B .#~~ ,~ ! , ! I, ." 18 1 I I L ________ j ";0;" •• it ". ~~e. 9.'"'~ , :n £! f! 0 MI :;1 tIl tIl o~· ~ ~n~ z ~"I~ tIl ~ Q tIl (g , , j I I 01 jl < ~ ~ ~ r ,~ ,. ~ ~ ~ < : ~ .i ~ ! il il!l! ,ilili ~ a~ I I " o '" Ul » ? , • ! NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT U13005672 , . . I , , ',', ! , , ~., . , , ! , , I , , II . , . , ! ! ! I , , , ! 'T" ~ qi ! m OC >~ I ,> ~~" ~ ',< m-z~ "" COW M ~-~ " ~-I~ m ~ m ~ ~ "= , H++-l-H! I , l , 0 ~ ! 0 i ; ~ ~ 11).1 1 ~ ~ i I ~ ~ "~ liP ! @ ~ '. ~ ~ , i i ~n i m" z-( ! ~ 00 z~ ! , ! -~ ", >Vl~ Zc~ D>C ><> 2S~~ ~~~ l';l"1g r.~ i'Jgg? ~Qf!" _"r ~ ~ ", , 1 ! " • , \ J " ~ , " 6 , , , , ,-"" (>Q-~;III-MJ N .... ~llVM .R .>0 El i::; ! , ." ! j ,,', j~~'--: , , i \ , i , G I NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT , i' L ________ ~ U13005672 , , l ~ e~ '.~ § d ~~ " "> .~ ~~ ;;~ , , , ~ ~~~H!~;~~,;~ir )/ f""'f'·;· ~~ ;i;~~~;j:,: • ~ J !.~"! ~I" '~ i' rI1~,) ~~ ~ll~i~!jm ~l f' I:~'i;! "I!I,,·.d 11.I!m,j- < ~ .-;; F'; '; ~~., ,r J W ~ '; 'il -'r' , io II ,,< ~5~ 1~lil z" l:1 II II do: ' ,., <~ il! i:9! "0 !i li!1 r" ~~ ~~ ~~I! <:" "cO "'z II: "" Illii ~ , '"Z c I :1 il -u-< 0 , ~~ ~I <n~ Id~ -;X -; ~ ... ~a ~ Z ~., ~ii a ~.(i)~ I ,I I 1I1!!1 IIlb i II ! I ! ,m\:I; ill' "J ~;i; 1 im :{ .. ~:~ i ~i~ I ? NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT U13005672 eijililii iii i ! I :~::::::~Riq ~,. ~"; Ilf II da'a~11 !~o.o" : ~" ~ Ii! i!l i' :1 ....! ;:: I H ;;,ll' !:;'ii;!~ ~~! ~ I\i"J II !!! I iiI; n 'i !o i~ I - . ! 0 i" 'I.: z . " jI . i n :: . ~. .i-~i '" :~ i ,.+ ~ Ji. J. -< ' . ~ "it' i i if; hi' '" ~~I !i ~ r r 0 "!'D ~ ! !; l!j~ . .11' " r n " ~II·I 'I'''f Ii! :1 z ! I I _ I r !If r " I. h ~ . .."" l !! ~rlU !!'I" 'I '" • I , •• ,';., '~ " N p.~ ,'.','. 17t.i; z . !Iii, ,': illil' ~ " " I' ; ., . " 0 " I l~ .+ 'Il ~ 0 c I '" p r1 "A'~ ~ ! I 1 I, '. " ! ! , , i " I '" ~ ~ y' " 1'111 [ , .. ,,~ --~ ;,.q ~ j~;;~ X r".'_ z ip ", ";':' ~ i :1 1 , ~ : , . ~ -¥ ~~ > ~ !f~::~ ~ m !~~~t Ii ~ ~ i~~' m ~\~~ ~ m . ,i ~ > I " "",,~..... NO.1~Ift,VI,\ NOJN~ :Ii:li ~I! OOl',,*-~l~""'" ""'~""JI'f"'" l1 ~~:r::~' ~;;~ d'; !-_----,,,.-;-:;--,--==7N\1"7::-:dC;lOCJ/C-:;;7JCCN\l7c-1~~=~~___1 ~Im ~ ~ r} w .f f E" ~ ~ HH _1 HH ,n " ~~~~ z~z o MONROE AVENUE NE ----li ... 11111 I II I 'I 1 , j' ! I'! Ilid !., • 1-I" .1 Ii I ,1 '~I'l! I II I ,iii -, TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY K~RV DEV. LlC 3506 NE 7TH STREET ><lNTON. WA 980~6 j I r---- I I \\ I \' NW 114, SE 1/4, SEC 09, TWP 23N, RNG 5E, W.M. ~. ,e",:. _ ---"-1:1 m Ss i t e ! -~ Sucvey & Mopping, _____ Inc,;,,,~ ... ""' .. _ .. ...., _ .... _.." • QUEEN AVENUE NE • l-c--- - - ----W1' • • ! . 'I ! I II i, II ! I Ii ~! I! I , .; Iw ;I . I II "I I' I I ! 1·1 I! II ,I Hi'!' ! iii !:! ! I "i II T ;'1 ! ~ !I • 'II q I!~ I ! PI i IiI II: ill !~ ~ ! , 6 L . ~ . • • J , , , I i ~ ~ I a i lfi • I ~ , ! ~ n ~ ~d i >-z i'i ~ f55~ I I ~ • D::a.z • i ~>-o i i 0"'1< ;;: ~~w :l OU)D:: ~ .~j 1M nil: ~ I g MONROEA'lEHUEKE , '- ", "._.- " )ti '.,: '" ,Ii , " , "$;" ... ,- , • • i! j ~ "I • ~ 0 ~I ~ I " ~i ~ ~ h I I ~-.. .j! , .". ; •. :! it li! n :.: . 'L f! I, '--', . \ ~ I • n II ' 0 p I i I ! ! i II ~ I • > "'-'''''''''r¥' ...... ');.,,, ""'< ,(, , .... 1'. '"-',~"f"',..,...'~1J" " .... ;~.~~y~~\.' :;~.~ ~~;I I o ---'. r-- .' I..' 1;' " " . ~i INld IcH;S:JIHl ,', ,. ~. ~ ~ ~ =< ... "" z I" Cl z I ~ Z a .... z UJ 0: u. I--a ~ « ~ u ...JZIl. ;; ;< (LoVi ~I--I-": '" c::: (9 ~ UJ 0 Z ...... Cl 0 ~ I I ~ iU)~< ~ ::J ~ IS:...J (J) I--'It z -~ c::: Z I- :;; 0 0 ~ 15 Z I-W ~ Z Il. UJ ..cW W (J) t __ c:::CI) I'--::J UJ 0 (J) W ,f z ~ Z ~ ~ UJ :I: .... u. a z a i= '" a Il. <: \ 3N :JI1N3"''' NOINn g Ii • ~ • I" • i ... B\'; j. '" ~51~ to; ~ ~~~ ~ h . II:, ~ ,± § '"~~ a ~§ r I, , .• 9:: ~"-~z~ ;::.." 5 .~tg8 ~~ l:J :~~~~ ~~ o ~~~~ll: ~~ ;;i. .,;~~~'I" ~8 ~ §~~§~ ~~ c:L9S00E;~n IVld H:lOHS HUlON 41l 3N ~ ~ • ,,~ 8 tI§~ :i: £E ~~-'i~ <> 3 'l'~ :i:'i!'~~! ::l t> ~ E ~ -~z",[:j :z:'" ~ 'Iof t:'-2~J, l' ." g'§" oi~:r: :~ wr;j:l:I;: ..:Ir":! L.J~ 'll:"'5~:lE'" ~ g~ ~I ~~g;;i~! ij::z .~ z.:..; W:i::::2~z 5 ~S~~ ~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ " ~ 0 ~ ~ r u ~ r Z 0 oS ".~ ~~o 1[z . " . U\~~~ i~~~ ~~~8 m"'in: 0,,-, .0 ~t;;1213 ~iD~<:i 5:o <3[l ~~~~ ~~~~ >-0-0 ... " ~ , 8 OW ~~ wO ~s: 0_ 0~$-,.' 5l:J: "'110 o w Q",Q. ~~g :t~~ :!r:io ~~ ~~ ~.~~;~ ;.0,0 oI!g~~1ii (:jii!':t:~ i;::: ..... ::l iil2:g~ ~~§~~ ~ ~ ~ 5~ :::g: ) ) II Ii .t .t t it 5~ ~~'::lt:l_ ~~ ~~~§3~ Uio.. Cl. ....... Cl.,~:::> tJ ~~~:;~~o..: (f) "l! 't;@~1;j03tJ~~ f-VI r.:> "-~ "-"'<SO':' z ",>-z"-":!",,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~S~~ z ~ 0-'''", ",,,,,,,,,,,,..::'r-o " ~ ; -"" ... , .. ~- , ,:' !o' ~; ;;1< °8,," ~'" 3l , .. , .. ., I !' <.l~i!i ,!",~ Cii'j" ~~ ." <I" ."' ", <,;. " ! 8",g ij;'o~ "~,,,o t; o _" 1(w:;j ir: ii'::>~ ::!~.!. hl;;:;:;i i1i ill :.tao:: ,l,§::! ,..);1 fil",t;l1;\ ~ ~~'" <::.~ ~~~ ~~~i ~ ""1·' ", w:' , 1," , • ". ,.,' , j:,,~ jl::wi;; "'Q~ ~ii!,'! 0 ~ .. ~~~ i~~ ir:~iI!: @ ~!! .'~ •• 8 'o!' i ~,i :j. ,:. ~:" ' il ,~" "~ ,I:' i . ~ i. ,,~ .,. ,1" !! S 'I' 1" j~~ ,"5 " z 6: 15 '1i'-' iIj:io o~z;ow ~" ,., ,,< e,,' 'I ~ 'D~t:i ~!;:!t;:; :;6:<:1 §::l~§ "w !Z! ... ,,1:j ~z'j !':iil~ 5~5;!5 ~5 t5 ..: , , lII.£t,8,.oQN "~·~~L r:-Ir----=;--3N3I1NiliNiiiiO ., " --./'-.- ., I ~!':~ , ~~~ I ,O~ 1.01.' , I~ ~J~ "I~ " . , ~:~ ~~.f~ ~~il!~ ". ~~i'5~ j '" ':;! ~ 0: ;;! I!f~ i'5 -~ ~ ",£ i!i ~ ,,~~ i);1~ §w" g~1!J ~ ,. ,-, ,~- '" ~o ~'.o:'i i':i~," 'lS HlL ]N 9DW 1~IIOO-£Ilf(1l f" wl~ I'U ,I,; ~ ~i ~g ~!:: 8 j:~ ~~t;:; 'S~ lYld J..!jOHS HlliON K1L ]N ",' I:; i~ " I I "!l j:,i "" ... " '8" ~ ~~~ai ~ ~~'i~ ~ug~ ~ 2~s~ ~ ww:i~ ~ ii5~ -c':i~ ~~~ ~ I~l i:!~~~ ~~;( ~ :'~ ."j "~!" • !~. =m i' ,;1 U 'j:::: ';;::" -c o~ .. ffi w~8 ~~~~ ~~8~ >.c N , I I <i' ~"'''c.. Z ~K.~M".EC~~ __ Yl'~'~ $ ~ ~ ~ =-: !i;;;~? , 0 " , 5u ~:j ~~~~ ~~~~ .... ga:;€ t5~~w z we:::! rOO!: 1::6: ~ w< z. ! ~z , °2 ~ >-z -~ S~ l i 11 , ,U: ~LJ > o u ~~ ~ I ~!I ~.i I" pg ,1'1'1 I , ! • ! g ~ ~~I.~ t3h~~ z§h~ ~~i~i ~~t< v ~-o liJ I , I I ~~ol!" _ .~E~~~ ;;;;;;~~ ~ o· ~ " I ~! I . , L __ :!'O.2!_~9~~ __ J , H I ' I , , l~ ,; ; ; ,; ; Ii "I,i Ili',\' I I 11111 ,I Ii,i! !,I U ! ! If! ! Ii!!! !ill! .t! ! ," i "!II ,hj, ~ [I f I ,1" 1,,,1 1 t.l ~, • It. :11 • f· 5 l 11' til' ill ,I < 1'1' '.1' 'l"'i"'n' Ifl , f, I I '!I!! lb! l I 1 { i;;io lii.1 NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT ~ __ ..QQ:t!'_----EJ_~H.J:C ~_----.:!iOtg, '. aQ ,! •• '. " §i ~. 0 a .a z ~~ ~ ~, ~~ ~ SE: z .~ ~ !: ." ;, '" ~ , ~ ! , .! , , , , ! f . ~ ! ¥ ~ I Yy , . , . , \ ! \ I , , \ I , \, ~ \j ~\ > \ "'. " .. :. " .,,\ ~ " . ' ~\ ! • , It , , * U13005672 ~I ~'I ~L , i " c '1 n o z ;ti o r F' ~--:1 .. '1 , I c:..:::j::: ==p I : NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT , • n3~lS H1L 3N' ---~".!.... ~'-.-•• -.--,.~ -•. ~~- , --_._~_,_",-.. "._-.J--,,_ . , I ~, ,~ ·r , / , , ' , ,. I':. I ' .' . ,-............ ---;;:-----:- , , , .. ~., L_-+-_, ......... , , I -j, ' J}' , "j , ,..,11 , , ~,c).~ ______ -'_....,;._ • U13005672 , i 0 , ~ I 1,1 ,I! " ! ~ I ~ ; I " ~ I!~ ! @ ) , , , ;& I , ~ 000 ~=i ! Z-< i ~ 00 Z~ ~ ~ ~i ?;j~ "~ <. ,0 ~~ m" iii=: ~~ 5. , . , , ., 'm ~~ .. ~£ ~~ -" " , F' iii nE i' ~ ~ II I' I' I' ~,;; ~~ -:j" ~ ~ .• _J>,=~O£,E.RTY LI!'I~ -' CENTERLINE -PAVED ROAD" Ii. 1N'n ST>.. 2ll+00, Ol .... .., ..... "E ----J\IO,I~ ! , ~B.O"'U< --"~"'--- J"2' JgUI J9202 , , 3112,"2 =.~ J'3J.2" ~.~ _,05 -." , ! , -,"" ~~,oo , 8 ! : ! ! ; , II ~ ~ ! i 3 rt ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ,b; , NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT Ul3005672 - = • • ; __ L ~oo~ _1.33lliS ~~ _ ~'" , .~'; , , j I I.I.I! ! ! I ' . I!~ ! @t NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT II , U13005672 r :1 " 'I !\ I, I , , i ' , ! I ' ! , , . !<" I NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT , ,. I " I ~ . i ~ ~ ". , ! I!~ ! @~ ; ", I , ~ u U f'l OJ f'l 0 0 z C) '1 0 ;;0 (f) » ~ " " i" , , , ! I NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT U13005672 i i 0 " . I , , ,,", i , , ~ ~ I ~ ;i ':i ! I , , > , i 0 , , o ! , i I i I , , I f!1 > -~ 0 F ~, ~~~ _"r1 ~ ~V1~ ~"r1 Zc~ ~~ ~c ~~Sj ". q z "',~ Oc~ O"i -~ c ~z Zc Or~ n~ -0 S!:'C5 ~~~ ~-N r,~ c~ ~g~ I ~@ ~ n NO> gm ~ ~~F Ol ~ a • I ~ ! i ~ ~ I I, I,ll ~ I 11 * " " , i!~ ! ! i @ • " ~ ~ ; ! \ i .. , i ,"0 ~-" z-< --< 00 z~ • , ! ~ ~s:ifiFi ~~~~ ~cz Z"'IJ~O m~m::D Slz5:i! It !f It !f (Ill!. "IJ ~ -< • ~~~~ '~; ~ m"'l1_ -t -<~5~ :J! -< ~ ~ 1; f i' i' Ii' ~ I' I' I' i' I , t;; 1 ;, 5 i ~ I ~ I ' I ' • NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT , j 1/ r ' I [9 " ~+ ~. ~-- ~ .' " , , , I ! ! , ! , El §~ '-~; ~~ .: ,~ I lJ.':;~ I~ ~~~~i '" ,I :,!!~ ,~". ~~ "":l!z::; ~~ ~:~: ~~ -". "' rh ~~ • -, ~ II I~ I, L ~>:I, r ., ----: ,'-:-.----, c:l1il~ fl~~Cl ~~;~ Il~-u g.-:'!;j ~ ~ , , ~~~ ~!!l\ d' l~i '.' lo! ~h -~O , U13005672 , , , , !I: iii Iii! m 'ill :!!I !!I I! II! IIII !! ~'II~;o>5 II: ~I I!i I;! Iii! II ',I "1"1 1~~7i~~: I '" ,~! I! I 12 I ,I' '!I! i! II, ~!~! ji ,,< i'l !i j' z" ) o~ 'II~~ ;, 0' jl~ m! I ~i ~ij~ I "!I !il I' <iii !I I' 'I .' "0 si lii~ I J~! I~ 111":1' '" t ~ t"K ~ ~Sti ,~ ~~Il ;1 '!l II! I' <=" ,{~J ,,=J I' i' ! I • "'Z A" • .j '! '. m ii ~ I '" i ~ r ~i i'll "'z !i !! Iii 'I c III i ,; !' ,,~ ~1!,I" 0 I 1:1 ",m ~x i: M II U I ! z ., SD Iii ~ !&,;j I 1,1,1 i ~.(t)~ II ! ,I ,-----" ~ ~ I jlll!1 ~ ul i, I!~ ~ ~ of of i ! I , ! , I ! ;a~ W~ III I Ii IIII ! ---------------------------------~ !(:;:.:)o ,- ;!' f'l-i ~ z-< f 60 , Z~ r NE 7th NORTH SHORT PlAT Ul3005672 iliIililii i i! iii' :~~:~, ... : R;i! t!Ii a; I j I I I Ia ~ '1]$ I §" Ii! iiI if P liIli1l~,' I . 'II ,'!' .,. I < ~ t I· I l' ;I ~ ill '1'!f1' t (f;l,lt ill () I. I· I I ~ I o "" .. Z "f '! () :., Ii·' , ~ ~. i . .:,..It- ~ , m NOm£! H ~'I .,-----~ ",'\1 C ~ I Ii MONROE AVENUE NE ----~-=---- I , 1"1' II I I Ii! TOPOG~APHIC SJRVEY KRRV OEV, LLC 3506 NE 7TH STREET RENTON, Wf\ 98056 i ! 1 r--- I NW 1/4, SE 1/4, SEC 09, lWP 23N, RNG 5E, W.M. __ Inc, .. "~ __ ",_,,, ....... __ ..." d z I -t I I I l-c--- - !'H i1il • i!i~ ~ I~!~. ,I il!U ; I I I • 0 g . lilr~ I~ ~~ -,hi'!· ~I 1-IiI'! ! I 1 • j ! I! • I h "I! I .. • • .e ~. ~~ ~ ~ ~ nUd ~ ~ ,. i~ ~ !<f3 ~ W -5 5 ;;~ -IF Li ~ . • en ~ ~ n 0::: Ow til J~ ! , , gj -I II " F I i ~ iw . • • I I 8~~ , ! wo-! I j ! I ! ! ill g ~ II ~ ~ ~ n ~~~ cj \'C) ::,:/,,;(J ::"''''j\I:r'~,-\j'~: irl ~\h . .J' -.11:> 1'v i'", t,r;1i -1 () Ai!:) , """", ~" '..! "~. , (; dd\1 -,I \ 2? t' ',~ ~i c! ',;,-,- "'''''' ! ! r to ,!'!l= ~ ! ,1-z ~5~ nnl~ ! n ~ " :> S -<"0 !!~~h ~ o-<~ i I .z -0;.0 !i! 5i~ai !fl ~ :-; , ill' ~ I II" "'>rn ; "iii! i i !l'"'! ,. ,.-<z ! !lill~ I z(j ! I' j -i , !§ Pz ' I II i '~'§' -, Ill!) I I !' i ~ '! , 8. II hid Hm I I ! I ~ I I ~ . ! ~ji'! i i!l!~ i ~I ! ! $ ·~!h -1"1 , I ~~"~ , Uill I !I nil ' ",I 11' ! ~lj' ~dij i' .ii: , ! • ! , < ~ '1 3 > 0 z • ~ • • :""!j\m fi ~§ ;u .0 rn r" ili 0 1 " ~ " r~ ~ < '" ~ I~ ~ ~ ::j ~ ~ ?5 ! ill~ ~ o. , ~ ffi~ , ~ ~~ .z ~ 0 ~ill~J:! ~ ~~~. ;1 ~e~ ~ .z uu~ z 0 • ""2;:1 ! §~~~ 0 ~i ~i~~ ~ -~ " ~~§ ... m ~ ,.~.>- z ~~:!! -z~ ~ ~ . :i~~ n1 , r;~~ , ~~~~ mm '\ en \ iij m! ! ~!: ~ i .1" ! 'r I s ... ~ L_ Ii ! 'I!!!j ~ ~~ oil j' , ,I i n. ~i§ U i I' '" ~ I;' ,I 0 II ~ • " z 0 ~ , ! ,~ I I < 0 ~ ~ m " • 0 o~ Z , " III . 0 • .. ~ o~ '" ~, .. ~ ! , I J ....10. ,~ , ~ ~ "il ," , ":1 '-" ~ ~i I :;: , " ~ OJ> l2 ~ "' i""O-FCT () " -r;;:< J> z c:: ~O GO Z"T1 "" 0;:0 "" "m "" $Z = '!2 ..... '-'-' ~O z ;::u m 0 m < m 0 ~::'..:::- -.~,," I I ~ --, '+CjJI &In CITY OF ~ RENTON "1on"'"01""'"'''';"''''' ~ock, 0,", .'D"", ...... ·,"D.(lON ----- , '-;'-:'61<. \& ~c:, I , r" ,'-:.~1'-:':;~A--" g ~,;-~:"i.o:./" _I' 1~ to '" 0.'..0::1 I!, "Oi' 1 v~~ J II '. . """ ____ _ "S()() _____ _ 7000· ___ _ '----- O·t~~v' ").} , -tth. ~ c-. ~~ ~~* ,,' ,10 ~~ ~~~ §~ ~~~ D'" 8 ,. ~: ~ ~ ~.~ ! i ~~ ~ ~ -, ' w i l ~ s ,., , , I , !""." ..... (,mooN , , , - , 7 -" ~~<>;'i<! Q~ ~ ~ ,1'1' F!'i" r" ~ "'1' (I," ,j'lI 7 " ~ ~ i~·z:gF ~"." 'Illi iii!l! Hi!! ~ • 'II • ., .• ' '!"I' ,i'" '1',;1 !;,' " _~;~ ~ ~~~n ~~ : .,~ "," ,.;f~ i~::; " ! NE 7th NORTH SHoJRT ;>LAT ReNTON, WASt-INGTON UA-13-"";" ·<:?,:,'o-" "0' ~ ". " 'I ""/':';,00 ~ ~ 5 z ~ " " m § .~ ~ m " ~ 15 z ," -----~,~j(J~---~ ~ ~ " ~ ,z ~ ~ m ,~ ~ < § ~ ~ .~ ~ " ~ -'--"1' , 1 "i'!,I'!!-! • ~ "I~ti~,- ! h'lIi~! i'" .,,_ ~ R~ g~5i~ -id!~!'i ! . !i!S~!' , !ilj'il i "','," 'I', II 2~~n!ii~>;; 'i~'~~"''" 3~!~Ri':~ g~5;~~i ~ " !ii ~ * ~ Ii ,ri ~ f ~' NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT ..,... OF~~17RS ! KRRV DEVELOPEMENT, LLC ..... ~=~-,. ;; 3"'" C:JN'.Nr !cH'C"06Y (EYe-I ~ I SITE PLAN ~ DL: "',,,,,' MTE , ~ ~ ~ \ I , , I . , ! , ~ I , • I ~ §l '" ~ " '" Q ~ '" ~- --""t;-"I, " ~;C~-<iI/ jOS_LOOl< , I I , , 1 , 1 , I I , -1"0 " "i'~ ~ I~~~ : ;:;::;:" Pi , 1 , 1 I , B , ! ~ , $ . ..c..=::.:-' ~ -. NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT ~, I KRRV DEVELOPEMENT, LLC i! -UTIliTY, GRADING, STORM PLAN » c = "" l'.:> C0 = ~ '-'-' ;;:v m 0 m < m 0 !.m CITY OF ~ RENTO]\ I ~E 7th NOVII S'I::)'<T rLA .-l N"U~ WAS,-'~Gr::>N Lli~ 'j-~~, , , , , , , ~ ~NU"'[NT[D_rT[RLlN!. /1: I , , : '" I ~~-\-I~ ,~ ,,~ ( ~ 0i \0 '-". ; ~8 I c ~~ II ,~ j " RjW -- () " -, ..... ];-< '"0 Z G"j'"" ~;JO ~m ~Z 6 -. zO z i'il ~ 3' I eni );> c G"> t.:> t.:> '" = '""' ~ ;;0 m () m < m a -~ 1,::: .. 11 ® :.., ... .=. ''IF p~ h ~i 7.8 ~" AID CITY OF ~ RENTON Pi"""'9/"",I.,,,,,/P,,,,, ....,"'. flop' /' \ ...... " ... ,~ / ... \ ~ .. -'\.!---..... ---~~------~r--, ... ~,- " 1 ' ...... ' ..• --~ ....... -"-----#'~, t"1 : --., ... ~__ ~ .... ~,~ ~ ... ~ , .... ~~ .......... ~ ~.... ".~ ..... ~' " ..... ~~... .~ .... " ,.~)...,-e , ' ....... ', ..... Nf 7th 'JO:·dH SHORT "'LAT R["JTON, WASHINGTOf, LUA-13-??? i"':'~ ';', /" ""'~~)-:" .- ll~_, i( ':_ ,~~ ~. ___ ~:--V~;;.t; §i I ~~ ,- ~c: r" X , , , ".'~ , . I ~/ , ~' .... l , • 8 ., , I! ~a 8,0 ~~ I~ ~ ll~ i'~ -".'5 M , g8 ,. 1 ~! j1 , .' , ~ c , ! § ~ ~~~~~ l~~~~"'~ ~~ ~ l>1 ,1'1' ri!'" iN! z ',il l i','I! ~"j;" ~~~ ~ ~~~f~~ l~~~~~ ~ o:iliffid ~;::~5 ... ~!l! •.. ::;: ~~ l> I , " .~ $ i"'; ... :' . ~=r' .. ts (~ ?' ... , ;; , ~~~~~ !!i~~·~~ ~ n ~~ ~ ~~~;; ~~~~~ ~§ R ," ! ,~, ~ . o " ,. m' , ~ , """,EeT NE 7th NORTH SHORT PLAT " KRRV DEVELOPEMENT, LLC 1 - ;1S><£,,",Cot<TE'" -I",,,,,,,,,,,,." k"'CKE~.V TREE RETENTION PLAN ~ t? ~ .\~'" 0 '" .... ''"''"' ...' .. , .. " ..... . OS/'~/20'J .......,......., ~ ii~~~~~:; , • Ifi'" I !"I 'I" g J~;~i~~ ~ ~il!li,J ' ,,),1' .1 I ~3~ ~;I;§g ::::ii$ ~ ... 3: ' !"!~I! ~ ~~~ ~ J ,I·lf' ~,"~ ... il:iII ·"1'1' E~i ~;~ d~~~~~j ~~~~~og " ; 'i ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ § "~ ~ ,. ~ n " " z ~ % , ~ z i ~ -~ ~ § ~ ~ z " ~ ~ " ~ __ ---' _____ -"-"---_--="" I '~'M '35" 8N~ 'N£l' dMl '60 ':)3S 'pH 38 'vn MN , I!,O ~l~~ ~~ II/~i~ ~~F-,I z ~n~ 0 !~ ~ I 0 ~ , ~ ! ~ , I ! I • • %Otlf 1'10 \(;INl;· j 13dlS Hli 3fj 9J'" ~ I , i h j , , , 'iii! , ! , § " ! I i ! I , ! , , ! ! , I • • • • IN Jflr-.JJf,\! =!G?-If,OI', o ill > ill U ill c:. J ;1 " , ~ t. ~ --~ u" Denis Law Mayor # r --~--~~~.~~~~-~ January 13, 2015 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Department of Community and Economic Development C.E. 'Chi p'Vincent, Administrator Subject: New Plats and Short Plats in the City of Renton Please see attached new plats, short plats and multi-building developments that have recently been addressed. Some of these have been recorded and I am supplying a list on new parcel numbers with the new addresses. If the plat is not recorded (NR), I am only giving you the plat map with the new potential addresses written on it. Please add these addresses to your City directories and maps. 2001 Union Short Plat (NR) NE i h North Short Plat N E i h East Short Plat NE i h West Short Plat Avana Trails AKA Fieldbrook Commons Cascade Greens Short Plat (NR) La Rosa Meadows Plat (NR) Limelight Short Plat (NR) Maplewood Park East (NR) Merlino Short Plat (NR) Renton 7 Short Plat (NR) Shattuck West Short Plat Stevens Point Short Plat (NR) Whitman Court Townhomes (NR) Sincerely, Jan Conklin Energy Plans Examiner Development Services Division Telephone: 425-430-7276 #1:platadd 3307~Lord Short Plat (NR) NE 7 North Phase 2 (NR) Ne in Middle Short Plat NE 24th 3 lot Short Plat (NR) Carpenter Short Plat (NR) Kline Stromberg Short Plat (NR) Lim Short Plat (NR) lund Lotline Adjustment May Creek Court Short Plat (NR) Piper's Bluff Plat (NR) Rylee's Place Plat (NR) Sheldon Short Plat (NR) Woodebridge Lane Plat (NR) ZK Short Plat (N R) Renton City Han • lOSS South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 1 <o.z I ~Ej , u'" f. ~:I ~., TT ;/l/b-7 fA-~-t:£ ~;&d-P~ 0UJ/h?!9'~ 3 t-u. 14-1 3-tJo )f~ t ... .-"""""..,.,. ....... __ ..... _,. _.,,_._~-'"'fI;I "-" ... ~ ____ ... IOeol_ .. 1IU. __ VlUTD_nl~ ~.., __ ._1>WI1U~ _ .... _____ 110 RECEIVED AUG 2 2 Z013 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION I -.--u-:;;:; ---: . t ... ~ ----, 1 1 , ' I~ ~ I' ",,:"" ~I , '1~o", -<;t'UJ "" ' -. ~~I~ 11 ' i 110, '''", .. " i .. /AI'l~ IJ ... oo~. '8 1 :2rrv-,-P.,p f if ~. I , " --~ --------_. ---------------------------------------N£ 7th STREET --------~-._--cau. ___ _ _. _.- -_ ... '""'~""" r.._' __ ------=..~~ ml~I_"" IIl'1M:.JmI_.ru IMliJUJII __ ---_---_II Lf!:.:tr WlP"'t'W UII' .. -.ugo;,.~ ___ 1'IUICt'I, _lOncl'Ut_~ .. ~"""""T1L_". ___ CIIIUOT'O', -_nr: .... UUIl'TW-'I'fU'l"_ ~»oIOI[""'~.~ __ IIIICCll;UlT'fhllC(l",KUU_ e -T- ~9P ~!II' ?iI-II ~,Ii o L -.-"'-7 51' "0-- GRAPHIC SCALE olD • ..otNO. __ _ R R -~----. ~ --, fZ} / ~~ ~~/r-j{;,~/ ~ ~~jOi1't~ • PIO PSTLAOORESS PSTlCITY 8011100045 702 Olympia Ave NE Renton 8011100046 708 Olympia Ave NE Renton 8011100047 714 Olympia Ave NE Renton 8011100048 720 Olympia Ave NE Renton Ne 7th North PSTLSTATE PSTLZIP5 PSTLZIP4 Lot Numbe WA 98056 3845 1 WA 98056 3845 2 WA 98056 3845 3 WA 98056 3845 4 M 0 N 5 E February 13, 2015 City of Renton Planning Department DONOGH CITY Of ~ENTON RECEIVED FEB 1 3 2015 BUILDING DIVISION Re: NE 7th Street Short Plat & NE 7th Street Short Plat North I LUA 13-000496, LUA 13-000514, LUA 13-000867, III? F pml!1i'" Dear Planner, This letter is intended to be a narrative of revised tree retention and replacement agreements between Scott Donogh Homes and The City of Renton. The short plats listed above had specified trees to be retained and unfortunately many trees were removed due to conflicts with building structure and utilities. These trees to be retained and were removed are all accounted for and will be replaced with 18" caliper replacement per tree, with one exception of a 12" replacement. The Tree Replacement Plan is intended to be an overview of the short plats listed above illustrating trees removed, trees removed intended to be retained and replacement trees. Per the Tree Replacement Plan, there are (9) trees that have been removed with an 18" caliper replacement and (1) tree with a 12" caliper replacement due to its poor health. Altogether the total tree caliper to be replaced is 174" that is being replaced in a variety of methods. First, the required street trees (2 trees at 2" caliper) required for the short plat have been upsized to 3" for a total of 24 trees upsized adding 24" of caliper replacement. Second, additional trees have been planned on the plats at a 3" caliper (36 trees at 3"=108") as well as a 2" caliper (21 at 2"=42") for a grand total of 174" of tree caliper replacement. Also submitted along with the Tree Replacement Plan are the revised Landscape Plans for each lot affected and a Tree Retention Worksheet that covers all four plats. Please see the next page for all the items submitted per short plat. 2806 NE Sunset BLVD #F, Renton, WA 98056 I Tel: 206.612.8647 I info@monsefdesign.com I M 0 N 5 E DONOGH Below is a list of items included with this submittal by plat: LUA 13-000496 1) (I) 24x36 Tree Replacement Plan 2) (2) 8xll Landscape Plans Per Lot -2W, 3W, 4W 3) (2) Tree Retention Worksheet 4) (2) Narrative Letter -This document LUA 13-000514 1) (I) 24x36 Tree Replacement Plan 2) (2) 8x II Landscape Plans Per Lot -2M, 3M, 4M 3) (2) Tree Retention Worksheet 4) (2) Narrative Letter -This document LUA 13-000867 1) (1) 24x36 Tree Replacement Plan 2) (2) 8x II Landscape Plans Per Lot -2E, 3E, 4E 3) (2) Tree Retention Worksheet 4) (2) Narrative Letter -This document LUA 13-001131 1) (I) 24x36 Tree Replacement Plan 2) (2) 8x 11 Landscape Plans Per Lot -2, 3, 4 3) (2) Tree Retention Worksheet 4) (2) Narrative Letter -This document Sincer~~ , , / l~l //"': ,./ :' ,/' I : t/: Paul ~on~f, Member MonSl!(ftDonogh Design Group, LLC 2806 NE Sunset BLVD #F, Renton, WA 98056 I Tel: 206612,8647 I info@monsefdesign,com I City of Renton TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET 4l~L-17£".1,.17 L-VA 13-0 (!)ODr'1it J L-UAl') 0 00 '5/4-, £,...UA 1~_DOD~",,(P/1..l»\ I}9Dlt,\ 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter1 on project site: 1. 9 1 trees 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 ~ trees Trees in proposed public streets ~ trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts '?;U trees Trees in critical areas 3 and buffers trees Total number of excluded trees: 2. ~(Q trees 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: 3. (Q ! trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones Re, R-1, R-4, or R-B 0.1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones 4. _--,-I ...... f>..L-_ trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proPosin~. to retain4 : 8 trees 6. Subtract line Sfrom line 4 for trees to be replaced: 6. __ l"'O-'---__ trees (H line 8 is less than here. No replacement trees are required). 7. Multiply line 6 "for umber of required replacement inches: / • ~ L 7. leo ~ '"e ,,#1 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting require am. en!:,,? ~\ (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) _~L .... ___ inches per tree 9. Divide line 7by line 8 for number of replacement trees6 : (if remainder is .S Or' great&!', round up to the next whole number) 9. _'_q-,---v ___ trees 1. Measured at chest height 2. Dead, diSeased or dangerous trees must be certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist. and approved by the City. :3 CrtticaJ Areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined In Section 4r3-050 of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC). ~ Count only those trees to be retained outside ot 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 RMC4-4-13{)H7a Ii. Inches of street trees, il1Ches of trees added to critical areasJbuffers, and inches of trees retained on site that are less than 6" but are greater than 2" can be used to meet the tree reptacement requirement. H:\CED\Dala\Fomls-Teroplares\Self -Help Handouts\Plaoning\TreeRet£lltioo Workslx':eLdoc [2/08 Vanessa Dolbee From: Terrence J. Flatley Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 4:51 PM Vanessa Dolbee To: Subject: Request by Robert Anderson for Tree Inspection at NE 7 Street Short Plat landscapejpg; Stumpjpg; Tree and Fencejpg; Trees behind house.jpg Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hi Vanessa, Follow up Completed I inspected trees that were to be retained at the subject development at 3506 NE 7 Street (not sure that is an official address). I had inspected this site previously during early summer when the parcel was first being developed at the request of a City inspector. During that previous inspection, the lot had been cleared, graded and fill-dirt spread. There was no tree protection installed at the time and I remarked to the inspector and the developer that tree protection after the fact has little value and that it is required before development. The retained trees were damaged at that time from the grading and filling activities through root cutting, compaction and filling. Mr. Anderson provided me with an arborist report from Arborists NW, llC. I verified their arborist certification. The report indicates that none of the retained trees should be kept and recommends removal. One house has been constructed out of a possible 6 or 8. The arborist report is not very well prepared and contains some errors and omissions. The trees were tagged with numbers 1 through 8. The report states that tree number 1 (report indicates tree "A") is the first tree. The rest of the trees are properly indicated in the report as 2 through 8. I agree with the removal of tree 2 as it has a significant canker, sparse vegetation and a lean that places tension on the canker. However, I do not agree with the arborist report justification in removing the other trees at this time. While they are all now edge trees, they appear to have protection from adjacent trees and stable root systems (note my comment above about the initial grading and filling of the site however). I don't expect these trees to thrive given the above circumstances but they should perform well for several years to come. Tree number 8 has a missing top and a broken branch that is hanging down over the new house. This tree could be removed due to its condition but appeared to be stable. Other problems I noted: • Trees 5, 6,7 and 8 are in a tight grouping behind the new house and from 10 to 20 feet away from the foundation of the house. This leaves no chance of having a backyard for the owner on the northern half of the back yard. • Near tree number 3 is a large, healthy Douglas fir on the opposite side of the new wooden fence. The fence should have been bowed-out at this point to accommodate future growth of this large tree, which is an integral part of providing protection for tree number 3. • At the entrance to the development, a stump was left on the west side of the drive into the development; it should be removed. • Conifer trees were planted in the planting strip along NE 7 th Street between the sidewalk and curb. Conifer trees should never be planted in planting strips between the sidewalk and curb -block visibility, creates access problems for pedestrians and cars, and have a greater windthrow potential into the street right-of-way. • A small hemlock was planted on the east side of the entrance to the development which will create pedestrian visibility issues as it becomes larger. I am attached photographs to help you visualize some of these comments. 1 I prefer you contact Mr. Anderson as t _ e seems to be other problems with this ( lopment other than just the trees and because I don't know what was approved forthe landscape design. His number is 253-486-5209. I will drop off the information Mr. Anderson left for me, which contains the arborist report. 2 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Joy, Vanessa Dolbee Friday, October 10, 2014 9:58 AM joyandscott@comcastnet' Angelea Wickstrom; Elizabeth Higgins; Terrence J. Flatley; Craig Burnell; Michael D Allen; Robert Shuey; Jennifer T. Henning Trees, NE 7th St. Short Plat Request by Robert Anderson for Tree Inspection at NE 7 Street Short Plat SHPl Approval NE 7th St..pdf On September 29, 2014 the City of Renton Community Services Department received an arborist report prepared by ArboristsNW, llC. On October 1, 2014 I received an e-mail (attached) from the City's Urban Forester, Terry Flatley, who inspected the trees at the subject site, reviewed the provided Arborists Report and provided a professional recommendation. Mr. Flatley has indicated that he agrees with the removal of tree #2 because it has a significant canker, sparse vegetation and a lean that places tension on the canker. Mr. Flatley did not agree with the provided arborist report for the justification ofthe removal of the other trees at this time. Mr. Flately states that these trees appear to have protection from adjacent trees and stable root system. The home site in question as it relates to tree removal is related to the previous approval of the NE 7th st. Short Plat, City file number LUA13-o01131. Pursuant to the approval of the subject short plat (decision attached) 10 trees were identified to be retained pursuant to Exhibit 4. These trees are required to be retained throughout the construction of the site infrastructure and the home construction. Pursuant to Mr. Flatley's site visit and e-mail it appears the trees were not protected during construction per Renton Municipal Code. In addition, the e-mail that was sent to Elizabeth Higgins on October 3rd provided images of the existing tree protection on site for the home construction. In both these circumstances it appears the trees were not being protected pursuant to RMC. The tree protection should be immediately updated at the project site to comply with the RMC, which includes but is not limited to a 6 foot chain link fence and mulch around the base of the protected trees (see exact code section below). At this point, the City is amendable to the removal of tree #2 based on the professional recommendation by Mr. Flatley, however the applicant shall take all measures necessary to protect and ensure the health of the remainder of the trees on the project site. The tree health is the responsibility of the developer and not the City of Renton. Because the removal of tree #2 is a direct result of non-compliance with Renton Municipal Code, this tree shall be replaced with 18 caliper inches of new trees. This can be accomplished within the overall Short Plat and is not required on the subject home site (lot 1). If you choose to replace this tree with 2 inch caliper trees 9 trees would be required. You could replace this tree with 3 caliper inch trees which would require the planting of 6 new trees. Once you have determine the appropriate location for the replacement trees. Please provide a replacement tree plan for review and approval. These trees will be required to be planted prior to final occupancy of the homes in the Short Plat. In addition to the tree removal, Mr. Flatley has brought to our attention that conifer trees were planted in the planting strip along NE 7tl> St. Conifer trees are not an approved street tree because they block visibility, create access problems for both pedestrians and cars, and have a greater windthrow potential into the street right-of-way. ·As such, these trees shall also be replaced. If you have any questions about the above response to your Arborest Report and tree removal question, please feel free to cali and/or e-mail me. Tree Protection Standards per RMC: 1 8. Protection Measures During Construction: Protection measures in this subsection shall apply for all trees that are to be retained in areas subject to construction. All of the following tree protection measures shall apply: a. Construction Storage Prohibited: 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. b. Fenced Protection Area Required: 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. c. Protection from Grade Changes: If the grade level adjoining to a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. d. Impervious Surfaces Prohibited Within the Drip Line: The applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. e. Restrictions on Grading Within the Drip Lines of Retained Trees: The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (i) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (ii) an area around the tree equal to one and one-half feet (1-112') in diameter for each one inch (1") of tree caliper. A larger tree protection zone based on tree size, species, soil, or other conditions may be required. (Ord . .5676, 12-3-2012) f. Mulch Layer Required: All areas within the required fencing shall be covered completely and evenly with a minimum of three inches (3") of bark mulch prior to installation of the protective fencing. Exceptions may be approved if the mulch will adversely affect protected ground cover plants. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) g. Monitoring Required During Construction: The applicant shall retain a professional arborist or other qualified professional to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover which are to be retained. h. Alternative Protection: Alternative safeguards may be used if determined to provide equal or greater tree protection. 'Vanessa (])o{fjee, Current Planning Manager Community & Economic Development Department Planning Division 10555 Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 {425}430-7314 2 -----Original Message---- From: Elizabeth Higgins Sent: Tuesday, October 07,20141:47 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: Trees --Original Message--- . From: joyandscott@comcast.net [mailto:joyandscott@comcast.netl Sent: Friday, October 03,201412:40 PM To: Elizabeth Higgins Cc: Mike W; Paul Monsef Subject: Trees In response to the trees at magnolia we are a disappointed about the city's response to our arboris! report . . Donoghhomes is concerned about the family's living in the homes we are building and don't want to be responsible for the possible death or serious injury to family's living in our homes but we feel better knowing that the liability is the city's now thanks Sent from my iPhone 3 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Elizabeth Higgins Friday, October 03, 2014 1:09 PM Vanessa Dolbee; Jennifer T. Henning FW: Trees Follow up Flagged I really am not happy about this coming to me. Elizabeth S61.d ~ -----Original Message-----• From: joyandscott@comcast.net rmailt6jO;andscott@comcast.n€.l Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 12:40 PM To: Elizabeth Higgins Cc: Mike W; Paul Monsef Subject: Trees /i.x;: ·'YI11' /) I c.~ f-"" '-Y' In response to the trees at magnolia we are a disappointed about the city's response to our arborist report . . Donogh homes is concerned about the family's living in the homes we are building and don't want to be responsible for the possible death or serious injury to family's living in our homes but we feel better knowing that the liability is the city's now thanks Sent from my iPhone 1 KRRV DEV. LLC. P.O. Box 908 Ravensdale, WA. 98051 aruoristsr,'\/~ ~_iC \VWV\I'. arbo r i s ~s nv/. CCI"il P.O. Box 909 Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 779-2579 I personally inspected the trees at your "NE 7th Street North/Magnolia Lane" project at 3506 NE 7th Street, Renton WA 9805. I was charged with evaluating the hazard potential of a group of trees located on the East property line. The trees are now identified and have metal tags numbered 1-8. What follows is a brief discussion on my findings and pictures are included of all the trees and the various issues that were observed. ~ TreeA is a 19.5 Diameter Breast Height 105' tall Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). This tree has bo~weep, a damaged top, major asymmetry towards homes to be bUilt, less than 30% live crown (below International Society of Arboriculture guidelines for a sustainable tree), branches -trunk with too much end weight and epicormic growth. The bow sweep and the asymmetry is largely caused by overcrowding. This overcrowding is no longer an issue but that creates new problems. Trees add tissue and roots to themselves in relation to the forces applied to them as they grow. Given that this tree was once surrounded by other firs especially on the windward side makes the tree now susceptible to wind throw having been recently exposed. The damaged/failed top is particularly important in that it triggers additional growth in branches that are off center from the main trunk leaving them increaSingly unstable and with too much end weight which affects ever branch on the tree. Evidence of past and ongoing branch failures is noted. One looks at the tree and see's all the green foliage and thinks the tree is fine; however at the point il) the trunk where the top is damaged it begins to rot down through the center;so nutrients run up afld down the outside/ ! f" . Cambium layer but the holding wood in the center rotsiaway. The epicormic growth is a sign the trees is under stress and forcing the sprouting of dormant buds in an attempt to supply its needs. It is my professional opinion that this tree be removed and replaced with a more appropriate specimen. !~lZ { ~ , Tree 2 is an,~':DBH 3] tall Douglas fir. This tree had been largely suppressed by its larger neighbors. The top is damaged, has major asymmetry and thin foliage. As explained during discussion of tree #1 re-guarding top damage and with the thin foliage my recommendation is removal and replacement with a health appropriate specimen. I v J ( Tree 3 a 23" DBH 120' tall Douglas fir the same issues as Tree # l,in addition to its proximity to an mostly finished home without the bow sweep. Recommendation is the same as #1. ) Tree 4, A Is a 28" DBH 124' tall Douglas fir with identicaJ jssues as #1 with the ~-------" addition of not just a damaged top but an actual past top failure without the bow ,----,------.,----------.------------'----. (;/':J . __ .---.,. -_. -. t-_:') sweep Recommendation for this tree is the same as #1 removal with replacement. Tree 5 is a 21" DBH 111' tall Douglas fir with same conditions as 2, 3,4 with the ",," ." ;:10 inclusion of butt and trunk wounds. Recommendation: same as #1. ' ~ Tree 6 is a 23" DBH 120' tall Douglas fir. Problems equal to 2-,5!1'Y~th the addition of an egg shaped tru~k,~. ~~ of ,ir~egulargrowthas this srecies. ~a!~ circular trunk growth. Recommendation: same as 2-5. Tree 7 is a 7" DBH 20' tall Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata). This tree has been suppressed by its larger Douglas fir neighbors with major asymmetry. The issue for this tree other than the deformity caused by overcrowding is its proximity to the home just being finish. This specimen can grow to 150' tall plus and wants to be 45' wide with its location just under 20' from the home branches and roots will be damaging the home. If the tree remains and become much larger, growing up s to a foot a year in good conditions its location will not allow structural roots to form in the direction of the home to the full extent need for long term stability. ~_ _.' _ _. >: J, 1 My professional opinion is it is better to remove it and replace with an .. . appropriate specimen in a different location. Different locations for all replacement trees will give the trees a future in that they won't damage the homes and give them the conditions to be health. Tree 8 a 24" DBH 82' tall Douglas fir has the same issues as #4 and so the same , .' . recommendation. ;:;',7.', /,' . . . . . Respectfully Submitted Neal Baker ArboristsNW.com ISA Cert PN1075A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PNW ISA CTRA #867 Member Arboricultural Research and Education Academy BUILDER. DQNQGH HQMES BUILDING CQVERAGE, LOT. 4,900 SF CQVERAGE, I .750' SF IMPEKVIQU5 CQVERAGE, lQT. 4.900 SF IMPERVIQUS. 2.285 SF PRQJECT ADDRES.S, LOT I. NE 7TH ST NORTH SHQRT PLAT 70'2 QLYMPIA AVE NE CQNTACT. SCQTT OONQGH CQVERAGE, 35.71% ALLOWED: 50% COVERAGE. "~.G,!!> ALLOWED, 75% TAX ID #00 I 10-0045 PHONE. (2O'G) 730'-0' I 14 lEGAL DESCRIPTIQN, LOT I. NE 7TH 5T NQRTH SHQRT PLAT MAX IMPER. SURFACE: 3,675 SF ~ ~ gf; N 89" 50' 2G"E ~ .---.,----~ "k ,. 70.02' I- (f) :c l-t--. IIIlil % '-', I I PQRCH B.5.B.L INTRUSIQN FER. RMC 4~2~ I I l:;' ~ II---:--~",~: ~ ,.-,:".":f·O~.-'.'.' I r, (Jl'--'. I A ' r-.:C .. QVERE.:,·: . ' r 3925. PQRCH " .,.' CQNNECT RQQF DRAIN _/ ,,7-" .~ TO STORM STUB ./ SITE TRIANGLE SETBACK , /' I}O&% ~~"""::" , ~I fiA~GJ" PER CITY CQDE '0"" 8<0'0';-I .' 1<0(" i :;: I ~ ~IM DIG -" " <l) -I z f; (') ~ (J> N (J> <i) ~ (J> ~ '1'-§ . r [Ji -~ <l! I ROCK CQNSTRUCTIQN ENTRANCE QUTLINE QF PRQPQSED FooTPRI NT RIvlC 4-2~ I ) ODx4<l EXISTING GRADE \ I" .• ,,~ .~ (Jl \;; OJ r- ~~~ 'PARALLEL TO REAR PRQPERY LINE -REAR B.5.B.L INTRUSIQN PER RMe 4-2-1 IOOx4 .. [ ABE, 392.5+393:393.5]-·~ +393.8/4 ~ 393.2 ===~l-----, ~--------------, MAIN FLOOR. 394.5 13.0'. GAR DR. 393.17 MID RQQF HT. 417.21 BLDG HT. 24,0'1 (417.21-393.2) S89" 50 2G"W ~ _ -/-.-----4< -~ ~ 70'.0'2' ~ NOTE, \. ALL EXPQSED SQILS WILL BE MULCHED WHEN NQT BEING WQRKED PARCEL NO' 80' I I I 0-0050' SILT FENCE CLEARING LIMITS AT ED PRQPERTY LINE. TYP. ~ No. Date & MONSEF design services {200} 612-86ot7 !l!!@rrpnsefd!t!!i!llcom --mM§!fdpSign. com NE 7TH ST NORTH SHORT PlAT SITE PLAN- LOT 1 SP·1N 14001 1" = 20'..0"' PROJECT ADDRESS, BUILDER, DONOGH HOMES BUILDING COVERAGE, LOT, 4,900 SF COVERAGE, 1,750 SF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, LOT, 4,900 SF IMPERVIOUS, 2,285 5F LOT I, NE 7TH ST NORTH SHORT PLAT 702 OLYMPIA AVE NE CONTACT, scon DONOGH PHONE, (20G) 730-0 I 14 LEGAL DESCRJ PTION , LOT I, NE 7TH ST NORTH SHORT PLAT ~ lLJ ~ ~ :r:: l- I'- lLJ Z IIIIil COVERAGE, 35,71 'lb ALLOf1IED, 50% / " / )f; COVERAGE, 4G.G'lb ALLOf1lED, 75% TAX 10 #80 I 10-0045 MAX'IMPER. 5UfifACE, 3. G75 SF N89° 50' 2G"E :--70.02'- I \ % '" I I I I --. ~ ~< "-' ~I(D °1° -'" o '" -I z f; n ", U1 '" U1 <l} [)i ;;:: -< '.-~-:;-l---~ ,,~ ---~ I -' r, '", U'I 1', ;;::. -< B.5.B.L -I .. OUTLINE OF PROPOSED FOOTPRJNT 3: ~I '" l.~~ b 0 r?",',l'~W'>;""~ I SIDE B.S.B.L. INTRUSION ~WL ~ PER RMC 4-2-1 IODx4a , '1 ' -PARALLEL TO REAR PROPERY LINE -I'" --- EXISTIN 1 <: GRADE ~\' l; '!.'---tOJ '-\L I ~'" -.",/-", is> --REAR B.S.B.L INTRUSION _ '-__ -OJ PERRMC 4-2-IIODx4. 93~39351 ' S89° 50' 2G"W -'---; 1+3938/4 ~~ . Ill!D - -70.02,7 )( -~)O-\ , MAIN FLOOR, 39}S _.-. NOTE, \ SILT FENCE B.O. GAR DR, 393.17 :l ALL EXPOSED SOILS WILL BE CLEARJNG LIMITS AT MID ROOF HT, 417.21 MULCHED WHEN NOT BEING WORf£D PROPERTY LINE TYP BLDG HT, 24.01 (41721-393.2) PARCEL NO ' . 80 I I I 0-0050 @ No. Date & MONSEF design services (206) 612-8647 DaulCllmoosetdesjgn com www.monsefdeSign.com NE7TH ST NORTH SHORT PLAT SITE PLAN· LOT 1 SP·1N 14001 1" =: 20'..0 11 BUILDER, DONOGH HOMES CONTACT, scon DONOGH PHONE, (20G) 730~0 I 14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION, BUILDING COVERAGE, LOT, 4,900 SF COVERAGE, 1,750 SF COVERAGE, 35,71% ALLOWED,' 50% IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, LOT, 4,900 SF IMPERVIOUS, 2,285 SF COVERAGE, 46.6% ALLOWEO, 75% PROJECT ADDRESS, LOT I, NE 7TH ST NORTH SHORT PLAT 702 OLYMPIA AVE NE TAX ID #80 I I 0~0045 No. Date LOT I, NE 7TH ST NORTH SHORT PLAT MAX IMPER. 5URFACE, 3, (;75 5F , IIlIll / " / " / , / , ~ ~:I ,._ J § ~ '" / / j / ~.-.. -~- I I \ <£ '" I I I I I I ;',. ,- --t- !Z06U03..(J114 inf9@donogllhomes.oom www.drmoghMmes.C()m @ MEDIUM TO LOW SHRUB. TYP. DAPHNE, EVERGREEN AZALEA, NE 7TH ST ~AGAPANITITUS, NANDIA, SCHIPKENA, NORTH LAURAL, SKIRNEREA, ETC.. SHORT PLAT -,------ SMALL TO MEDIUM I ~ 1/2" DIAMETER FLOWERING TREES/SHRUBS, TYP. /'(l~~L9!l·,···itJ :: <1 1 <j 1 ~!'!~d::1 CHERRY, CRABAPPLE, PEAR, RHODODENDRONS,PAClfiC DOGWOOD, ETC .. DAffODIL, IRIS, FERN, ETC .. G' TALL 2" WHITE PINES I /// / /-- LANDSCAPE NOTE5, ........ ' ..... ',.J "" ........ . . . . . . -. :-. -... . • • _. ___ ~. ___ J GRASS' . , , , . . -/. .. -.. -. -..... LANDSCAPE PLAN .LOT1 LP-1N " <fO'i// -..----""~ . ,"" "I :>' •••••• .. ': >?a4> /:: <:/MULCH 14001 [lill] ~~ .. ,..;... .. ~.-~-.:...:.::~::~:--~<:~::-4-- - 1" = 201 ..0" @ -C ':) U "-' ( " 0 j < ""- BUILDER, DONOGH HOME5 CONTACT, 5COTT DONOGH PHONE, (20G) 730-0114 LEGAL DE5CRlFTION, LOT I, NE 7TH 5T NORTH 5HORT PLAT I- I.U I.U ct I- If) , :r:' l- t'- I.U Z II CONNECT ROOF DRAIN,' TO STORM STUB If. BUILDING COVERAGE, LOT, 4,900 5F COVERAGE, 1,750 5F COVERAGE, 35.71% ALLOWED.' 50% IMrERVIOU5 COVERAGE, LOT, 4,900 SF IMPERVIOUS, 2,285 SF COVERAGE, 46.G% ALLOWED, 75% PROJECT ADDRESS, LOT I, NE 7TH ST NORTH SHORT PLAT 702 OLYMPIA AVE NE TAX ID #80 I 10-0045 MM IMFER. SURFACE, 3,675 SF N 89' 50' 2G'E ~ ) 70.02' ~ I , , ~t \ 8 ,s> ~ '" en 011'" f al Cl 01 oJ} f en f -'" 01 o (!) PORCH B.S.B.L. INTRU510N -I s:: .., PER RMC 4-2-I I ODx4e z '" " ~. ~ COVERED JEfReH ~ / //\,..-/ SITE TRIANGLE ,SETBACK I / PER CITY CODE ", It/' 'I,,,V "0 ~ <0 0'5/> v.( 'r 0 .0", LOT J ·ARAGE G722 SF -~- EXI5TING GRADE , , , , " ABE,392.5+393+393.5 +393.8/4 = 393.2 MAIN FLOOR, 394.5 B.D. GAR DR, 393.17 MID ROOF HT, 417.21 BLDG HT, 24.0 I (417.21-393.2) J'Q'Oct-//~ NOTE, r PROPOSED Sf RESIDENCE iooI' OUTLINE OF PROP05ED FOOTPRINT ty_-~. ___ ~-J-SIDE B.5.B.L. INTRU510N /1 IPATI~\7( ~ PERRMC4-2-IIODx4a I, 1393.8_ -.-J ___ / I' PARALLEL TO REAR , -REAR B.5.B.L. INTRU~'';''' J PROPERY LINE PER RMC 4-2-1 10 589' 50' 2G'W: > --; 70.02' \ SILT FENCE ALL EXPOSED SOILS WILL BE MULCHED WHEN NOT BEING WORKED CLEARING LlMIT5 AT ~ PROPERTY LINE, TYP. ~ PARCEL NO 80 I I I 0-0050 No, Date .. MONSEF design services (206) 612-8647 paul@monsefdes!!Il com www.monsefr:Jesign.com NE 7TH ST SHORT NORTH PLAT SITE PLAN- LOT 1 SP-1N 14001 1" = 20''''" Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Joy, Vanessa Dolbee Friday, October 10, 2014 9:58 AM Joyandscott@comcast.net' Luf-\ 13.-C0113/ Angelea Wickstrom; Elizabeth Higgins; Terrence J. Flatley; Craig Burnell; Michael D Allen; Robert Shuey; Jennifer T. Henning Trees, NE 7th SI. Short Plat Request by Robert Anderson for Tree Inspection at NE 7 Street Short Plat; SHPL Approval NE 7th St..pdf On September 29, 2014 the City of Renton Community Services Department received an arborist report prepared by ArboristsNW, LLC. On October 1, 2014 I received an e-mail (attached) from the City's Urban Forester, Terry Flatley, who inspected the trees at the subject site, reviewed the provided Arborists Report and provided a professional recommendation. Mr. Flatley has indicated that he agrees with the removal of tree #2 because it has a significant canker, sparse vegetation and a lean that places tension on the canker. Mr. Flatley did not agree with the provided arborist report for the justification of the removal of the other trees at this time. Mr. Flately states that these trees appear to have protection from adjacent trees and stable root system. The home site in question as it relates to tree removal is related to the previous approval of the NE 7th St. Short Plat, City file number LUA13-001131. Pursuant to the approval ofthe subject short plat (decision attached) 10 trees were identified to be retained pursuant to Exhibit 4. These trees are required to be retained throughout the construction of the site infrastructure and the home construction. Pursuant to Mr. Flatley's site visit and e-mail it appears the trees were not protected during construction per Renton Municipal Code. In addition, the e-mail that was sent to Elizabeth Higgins on October 3rd provided images of the existing tree protection on site for the home construction. In both these circumstances it appears the trees were not being protected pursuant to RMC. The tree protection should be immediately updated at the project site to comply with the RMC, which includes but is not limited to a 6 foot chain link fence and mulch around the base of the protected trees (see exact code section below). At this point, the City is amendable to the removal of tree #2 based on the professional recommendation by Mr. Flatley, however the applicant shall take all measures necessary to protect and ensure the health of the remainder of the trees on the project site. The tree health is the responsibility of the developer and not the City of Renton. Because the removal of tree #2 is a direct result of non-compliance with Renton Municipal Code, this tree shall be replaced with 18 caliper inches of new trees. This can be accomplished within the overall Short Plat and is not required on the subject home site (lot 1). If you choose to replace this tree with 2 inch caliper trees 9 trees would be required. You could replace this tree with 3 caliper inch trees which would require the planting of 6 new trees. Once you have determine the appropriate location for the replacement trees. Please provide a replacement tree plan for review and approval. These trees will be required to be planted prior to final occupancy of the homes in the Short Plat. In addition to the tree removal, Mr. Flatley has brought to our attention that conifer trees were planted in the planting strip along NE 7th St. Conifer trees are not an approved street tree because they block visibility, create access problems for both pedestrians and cars, and have a greater windthrow potential into the street right-of-way. As such, these trees shall also be replaced. If you have any questions about the above response to your Arborest Report and tree removal question, please feel free to call and/or e-mail me. Tree Protection Standards per RMC: 1 8. Protection Measures During Cons tion: Protection measures in this subsectio .. _.1all apply for all trees that are to be retained in areas subject to construction. All of the following tree protection measures shall apply: a. Construction Storage Prohibited: The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fiuids, 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. b. Fenced Protection Area Required: 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. c. Protection from Grade Changes: If the grade level adjoining to a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. d. Impervious Surfaces Prohibited Within the Drip Line: The applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. e. Restrictions on Grading Within the Drip Lines of Retained Trees: The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (i) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (ii) an area around the tree equal to one and one-half feet (1-1/2') in diameter for each one inch (1") of tree caliper. A larger tree protection zone based on tree size, species, soil, or other conditions may be required. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) f. Mulch Layer Required: All areas within the required fencing shall be covered completely and evenly with a minimum of three inches (3") of bark mulch prior to installation of the protective fencing. Exceptions may be approved if the mulch will adversely affect protected ground cover plants. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) g. Monitoring Required During Construction: The applicant shall retain a professional arborist or other qualified professional to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover which are to be retained. h. Alternative Protection: Alternative safeguards may be used if determined to provide equal or greater tree protection. 'Vanessa (])o{fjee, Current Planning Manager Community & Economic Development Department Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 2 -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Higgins Sent: Tuesday, October 07,20141:47 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: Trees -----Original Message----- From: joyandscotl@comcast.net [mailto:joyandscott@comcast.netj Sent: Friday, October 03,2014 12:40 PM To: Elizabeth Higgins Cco Mike W; Paul Monsef Subject: Trees In response to the trees at magnolia we are a disappointed about the city's response to our arborist report . . Donogh homes is concerned about the family's living in the homes we are building and don't want to be responsible for the possible death or serious injury to family's living in our homes but we feel better knowing that the liability is the city's now thanks Sent from my iPhone 3 Vanessa Dolbee From: Terrence J. Flatley Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 4:51 PM Vanessa Dolbee To: Subject: Request by Robert Anderson for Tree Inspection at NE 7 Street Short Plat LandscapeJpg; Stump.jpg; Tree and FenceJpg; Trees behind houseJpg Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hi Vanessa, Follow up Completed I inspected trees that were to be retained at the subject development at 3S06 NE 7 Street (not sure that is an official address). I had inspected this site previously during early summer when the parcel was first being developed at the request of a City inspector. During that previous inspection, the lot had been cleared, graded and fill-dirt spread. There was no tree protection installed at the time and I remarked to the inspector and the developer that tree protection after the fact has little value and that it is required before development. The retained trees were damaged at that time from the grading and filling activities through root cutting, compaction and filling. Mr. Anderson provided me with an arborist report from Arborists NW, LLC. I verified their arborist certification. The report indicates that none of the retained trees should be kept and recommends removal. One house has been constructed out of a possible 6 or 8. The arborist report is not very well prepared and contains some errors and omissions. The trees were tagged with numbers 1 through 8. The report states that tree number 1 (report indicates tree "A") is the first tree. The rest of the trees are properly indicated in the report as 2 through 8. I agree with the removal of tree 2 as it has a significant canker, sparse vegetation and a lean that places tension on the canker. However, I do not agree with the arborist report justification in removing the other trees at this time. While they are all now edge trees, they appear to have protection from adjacent trees and stable root systems (note my comment above about the initial grading and filling of the site however). I don't expect these trees to thrive given the above circumstances but they should perform well for several years to come. Tree number 8 has a missing top and a broken branch that is hanging down over the new house. This tree could be removed due to its condition but appeared to be stable. Other problems I noted: • Trees 5, 6, 7 and 8 are in a tight grouping behind the new house and from 10 to 20 feet away from the foundation of the house. This leaves no chance of having a backyard for the owner on the northern half of the back yard. • Near tree number 3 is a large, healthy Douglas fir on the opposite side of the new wooden fence. The fence should have been bowed-out at this point to accommodate future growth of this large tree, which is an integral part of providing protection for tree number 3. • At the entrance to the development, a stump was left on the west side of the drive into the development; it should be removed. • Conifer trees were planted in the planting strip along NE 7 th Street between the sidewalk and curb. Conifer trees should never be planted in planting strips between the sidewalk and curb -block visibility, creates access problems for pedestrians and cars, and have a greater windthrow potential into the street right-of-way. • A small hemlock was planted on the east side of the entrance to the development which will create pedestrian visibility issues as it becomes larger. I am attached photographs to help you visualize some of these comments. 1 I prefer you contact Mr. Anderson as e seems to be other problems with this Jopment other than just the trees and because I don't know what was approved for the landscape design. His number is 253-486-5209. I will drop off the information Mr. Anderson left for me, which contains the arborist report. 2 KRRV DEV. LLC. P.O. Box 908 Ravensdale, WA. 98051 aruorists P.O. Box 9()') Iv1ercer Island, VVA '3804(1 (206) 77')-2579 I personally inspected the trees at your "NE 7th Street North/Magnolia Lane" project at 3506 NE 7th Street, Renton WA 9805. I was charged with evaluating the hazard potential of a group of trees located on the East property line. The trees are now identified and have metal tags numbered 1-8. What follows is a brief discussion on my findings and pictures are included of all the trees and the various issues that were observed. ~ Tree A is a 19.5 Diameter Breast Height 105' tall Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). This tree has bow sweep, a damaged top, major asymmetry towards homes to be bUilt, less than fo% live crown (below International Society of Arboriculture guidelines for a sustainable tree), branches -trunk with too much end weight and epicormic growth. The bow sweep and the asymmetry is largely caused by overcrowding. This overcrowding is no longer an issue but that creates new problems. Trees add tissue and roots to themselves in relation to the forces applied to them as they grow. Given that this tree was once surrounded by other firs especially on the windward side makes the tree now susceptible to wind throw having been recently exposed. The damaged/failed top is particularly important in that it triggers additional growth in branches that are off center from the main trunk leaving them increasingly unstable and with too much end weight which affects ever branch on the tree. Evidence of past and ongoing branch failures is noted. One looks at the tree and see's all the green foliage and thinks the tree is fine; however at the point in the trunk where the top is damaged it begins to rot down through the center, so nutrients run up and down the outside/ Cambium layer but the holding wood in the center rots away. The epicormic growth is a sign the trees is under stress and forcing the sprouting of dormant buds in an attempt to supply its needs. It is my professional opinion that this tree be removed and replaced with a more appropriate specimen. ,I~'-/<? I ' .• l/ . /~-) Tree 2 is an 8" DBH 35; tall Douglas fir. This tree had been largely suppressed by its larger neighbors. The top is damaged, has major asymmetry and thin foliage. As explained during discussion of tree #1 re-guarding top damage and with the thin foliage my recommendation is removal and replacement with a health appropriate specimen. / r\ I '1 ',-I f: Tree 3 a 23" DBH 120' tall Douglas fir the same issues as Tree # 1 in addition to its proximity to an mostly finished home without the bow sweep. Recommendation is the same as #1. Tree 4, A Is a 28" DBH 124' tall Douglas fir with identical issues as #1 with the addition of not just a damaged top but an actual past top failure without the bow . '/ '" . . ." sweep Recommendation for this tree is the same as #1 removal with replacement. Tree 5 is a 21" DBH 111' tall Douglas fir with same conditions as 2, 3, 4 with the ... '--.----_.-.-,(') inclusion of butt and trunk wounds. Recommendation:same as #1. • I. --f'r[!) Tree 6 is a 23" DBH 120' tall Douglas fir. ~roblem~e.g.~aJto ~:5rwjth the addition of an .:~g~~aped trunk a.~!W of irregular growth as this species. ~a~ circular trunk growth. Recommendation: same as 2-5. Tree 7 is a 7" DBH 20' tall Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata). This tree has been suppressed by its larger Douglas fir neighbors with major asymmetry. The issue for this tree other than the deformity caused by overcrowding is its proximity to the home just being finish. This specimen can grow to 150' tall plus and wants to be 45' wide with its location just under 20' from the home branches and roots will be damaging the home. If the tree remains and become much larger, growing up to a foot a year in good conditions its location will not allow structural roots to form in the direction of the home to the full extent need for long term stability. My professional opinion is it is better to remove it and replace with an appropriate specimen in a different location. , ' Different locations for all replacement trees will give the trees a future in that they won't damage the homes and give them the conditions to be health. Tree 8 a 24" DBH 82', tall Douglas fir has the same issues as #4 and so the same recommendation. / '/ " .' Respectfully Submitted Neal Baker ArboristsNW.com ISA Cert PN1075A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PNW ISA CTRA #867 Member Arboricultural Research and Education Academy r I \ I , i Ell • • 81 • .NE 7TH SIREU !: ., III II II -; >( 'J -'" ~ '~ Ii ." It )0 "'-E ~ :::t ~ .~ tL ~ . j ~\t ~ '--CS...9 Ii +.* -a ---L ~ V) £ ~l \i\' -::j-- May 13, 2014 Darrell Offe Offe Engineers 13932 SE 159'h Place Renton WA 98058 SUBJECT: 11~) NE ito North final Short Plat, LUA-13-OOHH: (3506 NE 7th Street) The review on the above-mentioned short plat has been completed and the following comments have been returned. Please review these comments and make the necessary changes. Once changes have been completed please resubmit three copies of the short plat drawings and three copies of any other related documents. SHORT PLA T REVIEW COMMENTS: (These items are required to be completed prior to recording of the short plat.) Technical Services Comments " ~~te the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA13-001311 / _~ ~,nd LND-20-0S82, respectively, on the final short plat submittal. The type size used for '7 the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. 2. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be --I AYIt/" checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Although the coordinates shown ()y. purports to be based on the City's Survey Control Network (SCN), provide a direct tie to a SCN monument as well as its relationship to one other SCN monument. cdJVIt \/ 3. Correct the Basis of Bearing note; as it reads "City of Seattle." '$1fi,j/{J,f'j /4. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. A. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per,WAC32-1~0-10P. () 6. Provide short plat and lot closure calculations. -~ c.tp I-I#---a);tf-a.i'~ ~ Note what was found when visiting the existing monuments. /so Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. a~5 ~ ~ Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or ~ calculated, if any. ~ Note the Lot addresses from the attached on the final short plat drawing. tr#~,y 7JJ~ t:/)/l //Y1r Page 2 June 18,2014 tIl {f--ll. Do note encroachments, if any. ~2. Identify the line running along the eastern boundaries for which offset distances are provided. ft. Under General Notes Item No.1 it is stated that the survey was done without benefit of a / title report yet was submitted with the short plat. t/ 14. General Notes Item No.4 is irrelevant as no utilities are shown on the short plat. (/15. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record, if any, on the drawing. ~6. Note any relevant researched resources on the short plat submittal. vi7. Note the plat name and lot and tract numbers of the adjoining properties or note as "Unplatted." Do not use the tax parcel identification numbers. "The City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, is the only city official who V signs the final short plat. Provide an appropriate approval block and signature line . . Pertinent King County approval blocks also need to be noted on the drawing . .{ All vested owner(s) of the subject final short plat need to sign the final short plat drawing. /.1.::1. Include notary blocks as needed. ~. Include a declaration block on the drawing, titled "OWNERS' DECLARATION" not "CERTIFICATION" or other. 21. Note that if there are easements, restrictive covenants or agreements to others (City of Renton, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the final 1-: J short plat. The final short plat drawing and the associated document(s) are to be given to V I tJ/" //the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated I 0 document(s) are to be referenced on the final short plat drawing. Provide spaces for the recording numbers thereof. 22. The new easements for ingress, egress, utilities, etc. shown for the benefit of future owners of the proposed lots each need a note defining the rights associated with the easement at issue. Since these new "proposed private" easements aren't "granted and conveyed" until the benefited and/or burdened lots are conveyed to others add the following language on the face of the short plat drawing: DECLARATION OF COVENANT: The owners of the land embraced within this short plat, in return for the benefit to accrue from this subdivision, by signing hereon covenant and agree to convey the beneficial interest in the new private easements shown on this short plat to any and all future purchasers of the lots, or of any subdivisions thereof. This covenant shall run with the land as shown on this short plat. Page 3 June 18,2014 The preceding statement obligates the seller of the lots created to "expressly grant and convey" the lots "together with and/or subject to" any new private easements delineated on the short plat in the conveying document . .. . f7 ) 23. xh~ private ingress, egress and utility easements require a "New Private Easement for W 1.0 fJ; 7' ;~~ress, Egress and Utilities Maintenance Agreement" statement. Note the attachment ~v on the drawing. land Use Comments / ~ / . My preliminary review of the short plat did not include a landscape plan (although it was submitted with the application -Planner did not receive a copy). Therefore, this plan has not previously reviewed. Please see plan for corrections. I Fire Comments 1. Storz fittings are to be provided on the existing fire hydrant. 2. Complete all required construction improvements prior to final short plat recording. 7ering Plan Review Comments /\~ I 1. Need to label the private/City Utility Easements r JI-~~'-~j~. Water, wastewater, and stormwater related improvements -need the test results and > 'I-the tv tapes. ~ '* 3. Frontage improvements including curb, landscaped planter, and sidewalk need to be ~ built . p /-Deferral permit review request has been submitted only for the top lift on NE 7th Street. ~ The request is under the review process. The City will inform the applicant after the ~ff review process is complete. ;fs. Private road -paving work has to be completed. ¥: 6. AS Built drawings and mylars for the utility construction permit has to be submitted. ;lf7. Cost data form has to be submitted ~ 8. Bill of sale has to be submitted J ~. Separate documents are required for the access and utility easement that will be . Jl-n Jv~ provided to the City. ~JUV""' /to. Show a table with the separate stormwater BMP's that will be applicable on the lots. Page 4 June 18,2014 ¥' 11. Permit bond will be reviewed for release after the site work is more complete. ;If 12. Maintenance bond is required to be established after the permit bond is released. /'. Please add the following language on the face of the short plat where applicable: a) Declaration of Covenant for Inspection and Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities and BMP as recorded under King County Recording Number 14. Please confirm about the CC&R's for this short plat. Please contact Rohini Nair at 425-430-7298 for engineering plan review items to be completed including the storm water covenant document, if required. Please contact Elizabeth Higgins at 425 430-6581 for land use items, Corey Thomas for fire items at (425) 430 7024, Bob Mac Onie at (425) 730-7369 for technical services items, and Rohini Nair at 425-430-7298 for engineering plan review items Sincerely, Rohini Nair Plan Review Section Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton lOSS South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Title: UTILITY EASEMENT Property Tax Parcel Number: 801110-0045 Project File #: Street Intersection or Project Name: NE 7th North Short Plat Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page __ . Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1. Scott Donogh Homes, Inc., 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation a Washington Corporation The Grantor, as named above, for or and in consideration of mutual benefits, hereby grants, sells and delievers to the above named Grantee, the following described personal property now located at: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PORTION OF LOT 9, BLOCK 1, STEWART'S HIGHLAND ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 43 OF PLATS, PAGE 17, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THAT PORTION BEING MORE FULL DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A". ALL SITUATE IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. RECEIVED Additional legal (EXHIBIT "A") is on page 4 of document. JUN 24 ?014 C" " :"-:'·'0N ':-.j \j UtHity Easement Page lof5 FORM 03 0013/bhlCAl-21-97 That said Grantor(s), for and in consideration of mutual benefits, do by these presents, grant, bargain, sell, convey, and warrants unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns, an easement for public utilities (including water, wastewater, and surface water) with necessary appurtenances over, under, through, across and upon the following described property (the right-of-way) ·,n King County, Wash·lngton, more particularly described on Exhibit {fA". For the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, replacing, enlarging, operating and maintaining utilities and utility pipelines, including, but not limited to, water and sewer drainage lines, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto without prior institution of any suit or proceedings of law and without incurring any legal obligation or liability therefor. Following the initial construction of its facilities, Grantee may from time to time construct such additional facilities as it may require. This easement is granted subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The Grantee shall, upon completion of any work within the property covered by the easement, restore the surface of the easement, and any private improvements disturbed or destroyed during execution of the work, as nearly as practicable to the condition they were in immediately before commencement of the work or entry by the Grantee. 2. Grantor shall retain the right to use the surface of the easement as long as such use does not interfere with the easement rights granted to the Grantee. Grantor shall not, however, have the right to: a. Erect or maintain any buildings or structures within the easement; or b. Plant trees, shrubs or vegetation having deep root patterns which may cause damage to or interfere with the utilities to be placed within the easement by the Grantee; or c. Develop, landscape, or beautify the easement area in any way which would unreasonably increase the costs to the Grantee of restoring the easement area and any private improvements therein. d. Dig, tunnel or perform other forms of construction activities on the property which would disturb the compaction or unearth Grantee's facilities on the right-af-way, or endanger the lateral support facilities. e. Blast within fifteen (15) feet of the right-of-way. This easement shall run with the land described herein, and shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns. Grantors covenant that they are the lawful owners of the above properties and that they have a good and lawful right to execute this agreement. By this conveyance, Grantor will warrant and defend the sale hereby made unto the Grantee against all and every person or persons, whomsoever, lawfully claiming or to claim the same. This conveyance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. ~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this I ~ day of SUt-l€ 20lY-. L Utility Easement Page 2 of5 FORM 03 0013/bh/CA2-21-97 Notary Seal must be within box Utility Easement Form 840001/bh CORPORATE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING --l On this I ~ day of -lu Nt::. 20Jli before me personally appeared &crrr DONOC::t tI to me known to be 1?e.ES I DE N-r olthe corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and each on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) M !CJ1€.U£ L. eHOBTE My appointment expires: 04 //(.1>/ c;,o/:::f. , Dated: I Page 3 of 5 FORM 03 0013/bh/CA2-21-97 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE WEST 26 FEET OF LOT 9, BLOCK 1, STEWARTS HIGHLAND ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 43 OF PLATS, PAGE 17, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON 21923 NE 11th Street Sammamish WA 98074 SITE PROJECT # 13-296 PAGE 4 OF 5 Phone: 425.298.4412 N S GRAPHIC SCALE 25 0 25 50 ~-2" . I 1 INCH =50 FT. EXHIBIT B MAP I ~ 26· SEWER AND WATER EASEMENT LOT 4 gi~~7200LYMPIAAVE NE ~ -J~il 7.867 S.F. -(0.181 ACRES) LOT 3 CD 714 OLYMPIA AVE NE '" 7,872 S.F. ~ (0.181 ACRES) - LOT 2 708 OLYMPIA AVE NE 6.240 S.F. (0.143ACRES) LOT 1 I~~~ 702 OLYMPIA AVE NE 6.720 S.F. (0.154 ACRES) s~---NE 7TH STREET 21923 NE 11th Street Sammamish WA 98074 SITE PROJECT# 13-296 PAGE 5 OF 5 Phone: 425.298.4412 \ RECORDJNG REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CITY OF RENTON 1055 SOUTII GRADY WAY RENTON, W A 98057 DECLARATION OF COVENANT FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION OF FLOW CONTROL BMPS Grantor: ScoTT DONO~11 HomES, I NC.'I A WflS,H,tJc;.T'oIV C20r,PDR.ffTIDN Grantee: City of Renton Legal Description: Lorr q. 'BL.oc,i(, ',~6WAR.:CS H.C.,UI.ANO Ac.t.f!:flAcrs .. Ac.c.ol?DlI.:lC::! TO TH~ PI-I'll 7H F C£OF eE'-O~OeO II,) VOWfnc.1I3 Of Puus J PAC::!E 1+ f:ec.oe.o<, of Ib.JJC::! C.ouNTV (J)eSt://lYloITOt.,), StruMt: ItJ THe • ec,I)N;Y of!J" tJ"", 51',,'rE OF INASH/"'t>TotJ, Additional Legal(s) on: ________________________ _ Assessor's TaxParceIID#: ¥O///O -DD45 IN CONSIDERATION ofthe approved City ofRenton(check one of the following) 0 residential building permit, 0 conunercial building permit, 0 clearing and grading permit, 0 subdivision permit, or ~ short subdivision permit for Application File No, LUAlSWP 13 -00 113/ relating to the real property ("Property") described above, the Grantor(s), the owner(s) in fee of that Property, hereby RECEIVF::D JUN 2 4 ?:~:c CITY OF ~~F;.;ON PLAN~~ING DIViSION covenants(covenant) with City or Renton, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, that he/she(they) will observe, consent to, and abide by the conditions and obligations set forth and described in Paragraphs 1 through 8 below with regard to the Property. Grantor(s) hereby grants(grant), covenants(covenant), and agrees(agree) as follows: 1. Grantor(s) or hislher(their) successors in interest and assigns ("Owners") shall retain, uphold, and protect the stormwater management devices, features, pathways, limits, and restrictions, known as flow control best management practices ("BMPs"), shown on the approved Flow Control BMP Site Plan for the Property attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. 2. The Owners shall at their own cost, operate, maintain, and keep in good repair, the Property's BMPs as described in the approved Design and Maintenance Details for each BMP attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B. 3. City or Renton shall provide at least 30 days written notice to the Owners that entry on the Property is planned for the inspection of the BMPs. After the 30 days, the Owners shall allow the City of Renton to enter for the sale purpose of inspecting the BMPs. In lieu of inspection by the City, the Owners may elect to engage a licensed civil engineer registered in the state of Washington who has expertise in drainage to inspect the BMPs and provide a written report describing their condition. If the engineer option is chosen, the Owners shall provide written notice to the City of Renton within fifteen days of receiving the City's notice of inspection. Witbin 30 days of giving this notice, the Owners, or the engineer on behalf of the Owners, shall provide the engineer's report to the City of Renton. If the report is not provided in a timely manner as specified above, the City of Renton may inspect the BMPs without further notice. 4. If the City determines from its inspection, or from an engineer's report provided in accordance with Paragraph 3, that maintenance, repair, restoration, and/or mitigation work is required for the BMPs, The City shall notify the Owners of the specific maintenance, repair, restoration, and/or mitigation work (Work) required under RMC 4,6,030. The City shall also set a reasonable deadline for completing the Work or providing an engineer's report that verifies completion of the Work. After the deadline has passed, the Owners shall allow the City access to re-inspect the BMPs unless an engineer's report has been provided verifYing completion of the Work. If the work is not completed properly within the time frame set by the City, the City may initiate an enforcement action. Failure to properly maintain the BMPs is a violation ofRMC 4-6-030 and may subject the Owners to enforcement under the RMC 1-3, including fines and penalties. 5. Apart from performing routine landscape maintenance, the Owners are hereby required to obtain written approval from the City or Renton before performing any alterations or modifications to the BMPs. 6. Any notice or approval required to be given by one party to the other under the provisions of this Declaration of Covenant shall be effective upon personal delivery to the other party, or after three (3) days from the date that the notice or approval is mailed with delivery confirmation to the current address on record with each Party. The parties shall notifY each other of any change to their addresses. 7. This Declaration of Covenant is intended to promote the efficient and effective management of surface water drainage on the Property, and it shall inure to the benefit of all the citizens of the City of Renton and its successors and assigns. This Declaration of Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon Grantor(s), and Grantor's(s') successors in interest and assigns. 8. This Declaration of Covenant may be terminated by execution ofa written agreement by the Owners and the City of Renton that is recorded by King County in its real property records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Covenant for the Maintenance and Inspection of Flow Control BMPs is executed this /;;i H day of Iv t-:llS ,20l!:L. GRANTOR, owner of the Property STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KlNG )ss. On this day personally appeared before me: _"':)"'--'C"'-"O'-'1I'--'..._...,[="')=--"D:.ct-J=O'"'"'-'"<'::t=H-'--___ , to me known to be ?~ ES IDE ",r! of S('oJ!'" DON 0 (;;r 11 J-IomE.S, ''''''1 ...JA-,--_WI..l/...,e""':'uH:!..!I..rN",-,C:t"""f;.l...\,O,,-,,,tVL-...lC,-,,o::>e.."",e",O .. c.""A7'tU...l1c.<o"-,,,tVL... __ the corporation described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein stated. II-( Given under my hand and official seal this ~ day of :rvtY £: , 20 J!L.... ~,4 z(j M I C.H E:LLE L. CHOATE. Printed name Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at 13E..L( .. £ II U e My appointment expires: 04 ) IIp J;;?O I :::r r { EXHIBIT "B" PERFORATED PIPE CONNECTION MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS Your property contains a storm water management flow control BMP (best management practice) called a "perforated pipe connection," which was installed to reduce the stormwater runoff impacts of some or all of the impervious surface on your property. A perforated pipe connection is a length of drainage conveyance pipe with holes in the bottom, designed to "leak" runoff, conveyed by the pipe, into a gravel filled trench where it can be soaked into the surrounding soil. The connection is intended to provide opportunity for infiltration of any runoff that is being conveyed from an impervious surface (usually a roof) to a local drainage system such as a ditch or roadway pipe system. The size and composition of the perforated pipe connection as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval from the City of Renton. The soil overtop of the perforated portion of the system must not be compacted or covered with impervious materials. LIMITED INFILTRATION MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) called "limited infiltration," which was installed to mitigate the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of some or all of the impervious surfaces on your property. Limited infiltration is a method of soaking runoff from impervious area (such as paved areas and roofs) into the ground. Infiltration devices, such as gravel filled trenches, drywells, and ground surface depressions, facilitate this process by putting runoff in direct contact with the soil and holding the runoff long enough to soak most of it into the ground. To be successful, the soil condition around the infiltration device must be able to soak water into the ground for a reasonable number of years. The infiltration devices used on your property include the following as indicated on the flow control BMP site plan: gravel filled trenches, X drywells. The size, placement, and composition of these devices as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and deSign details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval from the City of Renton. Infiltration devices must be inspected annually and after major storm events to identify and repair any physical defects. Maintenance and operation of the system should focus on ensuring the system's viability by preventing sediment-laden flows from entering the device. Excessive sedimentation will result in a plugged or non-functioning facility. If the infiltration device has a catch basin, sediment accumulation must be removed on a yearly basis or more frequently if necessary. Prolonged ponding around or atop a device may indicate a plugged facility. If the device becomes plugged, it must be replaced. Keeping the areas that drain to infiltration devices well swept and clean will enhance the longevity of these devices. For roofs, frequent cleaning of gutters will reduce sediment loads to these devices. C.2.ll PERFORATED PWE COl\'NECTION (J TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) called a "perforated pipe connection~" which was installed to reduce the stormwater runoff impacts of some or all of the impervious surface on your property, A perforated pipe connection is a length of drainage conveyance pipe with holes in the bottom, designed to "leak" runoff, conveyed by the pipe, into a gravel filled trench where it can be soaked into the surrounding soil. The connection is intended to provide opportunity for infiltration of any runoff that is being conveyed from an impervious surface (usually a roof) to a local drainage system such as a ditch or roadway pipe system. The size and composition of the perforated pipe connection as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without wrinen approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development penmit from King County. The soil overtop of the perforated portion of the system must not be compacted or covered with impervious materials. FIGURE C.2.11.A PERFORATED PIPE CONNECTION FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TRENCH X-SECTION NTS slope ___ - V J" PkANY.I.eW.QFJiQQf. NTS 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix C C.sl to road drainage system 2' X10' level trench wlperf pipe 119/2009 C.2.2 FULL INFIl.:1RA 110N FfGURE CZ.2.A TYPICAl. TRENCH JNFlLTRA nON SYSTEM PLAN VIEW NTS r-4" rigid or 6"'.flexible 1 perforated PIpe ..... ~ ...................... -.. -.................... ': . ~ . it -roof • """n ·· .... ··· .. · .. ··i;;r;ii~atio~·~ .. ······ .. ····· sump wlsolid tid PLAN VIEW NTS fillet fabrie - _ ,. TL!....§:o· min I ~In fine mesh "-CB sump wJsoIlQ lid -- rt ---compacted back1m :":~~~--1 r~ 4~ rigid or 6~ flexible perforated pipe 24' r--I~-;:",.;:-" I '.2' LL 20051 Surf.:u;.;: W31.cr Dcs~n M3nual -AppcmJix C c .. , GRAVEL FILLED TRENCH 11912009 lCLOT 4 Lot Closure Report -Lot : LOT 4A ================================= file-C:\users\Eric Jorgenson\Desktop\site\2013\13296KRRV-NE7THST\SP\4-18-2014\SP13296KRRV North.msj\lc_LOT 4A.txt Friday, June 6, 2014, 10:08:52a.m. Starting location (North, East) = ( 183649.03, 1309451.87 ) (rn the table below, the Length of Curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearlng of Curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Bearing Length Front End_Northing --------------------------------- 1 Line S88'48'49"E 96.00 No 183647.04 1309547.85 2 Line NOO'09'16"w 81. 94 NO 183728.98 1309547.63 3 Line N88'46'40"w 96.00 No 183731. 03 1309451. 65 4 Line SOO'09'16"E 82.00 No 183649.03 1309451. 87 Ending location (North, East) = ( 183649.03, 1309451.87 ) Total Distance 355.94 5 End_Easting ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/perimeter AREA s88'56'33"w (from ending location to starting location) 0.00 1:249983.2 0.00 0.0 percent 7866.851 sq. ft. (straight segment added to close traverse) = 0.180598 Acres *********** page 1 lCLOT 3 Lot closur"e Report -Lot: LOT 3A ================================= file-c:\users\Eric Jorgenson\Desktop\Site\2013\13296KRRV-NE7THST\SP\4-18-2014\SP13296KRRV North.msj\lc_LOT 3A.txt Friday, June 6, 2014, 10:07:27a.m. Starting location (North, East) = ( 183567.01, 1309452.09 ) (In the table below, the Len9th of curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearlng of curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Beari ng Length Front End_Northing --------------------------------- 1 Line s88'48'49"E 96.00 No 183565.02 1309548.07 2 Line NOO'09'16"w 82.02 No 183647.04 1309547.85 3 Line N88'48'49"w 96.00 NO 183649.03 1309451. 87 4 Line sOO'09'16"E 82.02 No 183567.01 1309452.09 Ending location (North, East) = ( 183567.01, 1309452.09 ) Total Distance Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Distance Error of closure Frontage Frontage/perimeter AREA *********** 356.04 5 < 0.001000 1:INFINITY 0.00 0.0 percent 7871.764 sq. ft. 0.180711 Acres page 1 • End_Easting ----------- lCLOT 1 Lot Closure Report -Lot : LOT 1A file-c:\users\Eric Jorgenson\Desktop\Site\2013\13296KRRV-NE7THST\SP\4-18-2014\SP13296KRRV North.msj\lc_LOT 1A.txt Friday, June 6, 2014, 9:52:58a.m. starting location (North, East) ( 183431.97, 1309452.45 ) (In the table below, the Len9th of Curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearlng of curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Beari ng Length Front End_Northing --------------------------------- 1 Line s88'48'49"E 96.00 NO 183429.98 1309548.43 2 Line NOO'09'16"w 70.02 NO 183500.00 1309548.24 3 Line N88'48'49"w 96.00 No 183501. 99 1309452.27 4 Line sOO'09'16"E 70.02 No 183431. 97 1309452.45 Ending location (North, East) = ( 183431.97, 1309452.45 ) Total Distance Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA *********** 332.04 5 < 0.001000 1: INFINITY 0.00 0.0 percent 6720.079 sq. ft. 0.154272 Acres page 1 End_Easting ----------- lCLOT 2 Lot closure Report -Lot: LOT 2A ================================= file-c:\Users\Eric Jorgenson\Desktop\Site\2013\13296KRRV-NE7THST\SP\4-18-2014\SP13296KRRV North.msj\lc_LOT 2A.txt Friday, June 6, 2014, 9:56:14a.m. Starting location (North, East) = ( 183501.99, 1309452.27 ) (In the table below, the Len9th of curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearlng of Curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Beari ng Length Front End_Northing --------------------------------- 1 Line S88"48'49"E 96.00 NO 183500.00 1309548.24 2 Line NOO·09'16"w 65.02 No 183565.02 1309548.07 3 Line N88"48'49"w 96.00 No 183567.01 1309452.09 4 Line sOO"09'16"E 65.02 No 183501. 99 1309452.27 Ending location (North, East) = ( 183501.99, 1309452.27 ) Total Distance Total Traverse stations Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/perimeter AREA *********** 322 .04 5 < 0.001000 l:INFINITY 0.00 0.0 percent 6240.211 sq. ft. = 0.143256 Acres page 1 End_Easting ----------- lC_ENTIRE PARCEL Lot closure Report -Lot : ENTIRE PARCEL A ================================= file-c:\users\Eric Jorgenson\Desktop\Site\2013\13296KRRV-NE7THST\SP\4-18-2014\SP13296KRRV North.msj\lc_ENTIRE PARCEL A.txt Friday, June 6, 2014, 10:11:28a.m. starting location (North, East) = ( 183431.97, 1309452.45 ) (In the table below, the Len~th of curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearlng of curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg segment Bearing Length Front End_Northing --------------------------------- 1 Line 588°48'49"E 96.00 NO 183429.98 1309548.43 2 Line NOO·09'16"w 299.00 NO 183728.98 1309547.63 3 Line N88°46'40"w 96.00 NO 183731. 03 1309451. 65 4 Line 500·09'16"E 299.06 NO 183431.97 1309452.46 Ending location (North, East) = ( 183431.97, 1309452.46 ) Total Distance 790.06 5 End_Easting ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/perimeter s88°56'33"w (from ending location to starting location) 0.00 1:554873.6 0.00 AREA traverse) 0.0 percent 28698.597 sq. ft. (straight segment added to close 0.658829 Acres *********** page 1 May 13, 2014 Darrell Offe Offe Engineers 13932 SE 159th Place Renton WA 98058 SUBJECT: NE ]'h North final Short Plat, LUA-13-001311-93506 NE 7th Street) The review on the above-mentioned short plat has been completed and the following comments have been returned. Please review these comments and make the necessary changes. Once changes have been completed please resubmit three copies of the short plat drawings and three copies of any other related documents. SHORT PtA T REVIEW COMMENTS: (These items are required to be completed prior to recording of the short plat.) Technical Services Comments 1. Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA13-001311 and LND-20-0582, 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. 2. 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. Although the coordinates shown purports to be based on the City's Survey Control Network (SCN), provide a direct tie to a SCN monument as well as its relationship to one other SCN monument. 3. Correct the Basis of Bearing note; as it reads "City of Seattle." 4. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. 5. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32-130-100. 6. Provide short plat and lot closure calculations. 7. Note what was found when visiting the existing monuments. 8. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. 9. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. 10. Note the Lot addresses from the attached on the final short plat drawing. Page 2 May 27, 2014 11, Do note encroachments, if any, 12, Identify the line running along the eastern boundaries for which offset distances are provided. 13. Under General Notes Item No, 1 it is stated that the survey was done without benefit of a title report yet was submitted with the short plat, 14, General Notes Item No.4 is irrelevant as no utilities are shown on the short plat, 15, Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record, if any, on the drawing. 16. Note any relevant researched resources on the short plat submittal. 17, Note the plat name and lot and tract numbers of the adjoining properties or note as "Unplatted." Do not use the tax parcel identification numbers. 18. The City of Renton Administrator, PublicWorks Department, is the only city official who signs the final short plat. Provide an appropriate approval block and signature line. Pertinent King County approval blocks also need to be noted on the drawing. 19, All vested owner(s) of the subject final short plat need to sign the final short plat drawing. Include notary blocks as needed. 20. Include a declaration block on the drawing, titled "OWNERS' DECLARATION" not "CERTIFICATION" or other. 21. Note that if there are easements, restrictive covenants or agreements to others (City of Renton, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the final short plat. The final short plat drawing and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) are to be referenced on the final short plat drawing. Provide spaces for the recording numbers thereof. 22. The new easements for ingress, egress, utilities, etc. shown for the benefit of future owners of the proposed lots each need a note defining the rights associated with the easement at issue. Since these new "proposed private" easements aren't "granted and conveyed" until the benefited and/or burdened lots are conveyed to others add the following language on the face of the short plat drawing: DECLARATION OF COVENANT: The owners of the land embraced within this short plat, in return for the benefit to accrue from this subdivision, by signing hereon covenant and agree to convey the beneficial interest in the new private easements shown on this short plat to any and all future purchasers of the lots, or of any subdivisions thereof. This covenant shall run with the land as shown on this short plat, Page 3 May 27, 2014 The preceding statement obligates the seller of the lots created to "expressly grant and convey" the lots "together with and/or subject to" any new private easements delineated on the short plat in the conveying document, 23, The private ingress, egress and utility easements require a "New Private Easement for Ingress, Egress and Utilities Maintenance Agreement" statement, Note the attachment on the drawing, Land Use Comments 1, My preliminary review ofthe short plat did not include a landscape plan (although it was submitted with the application -Planner did not receive a copy), Therefore, this plan has not previously reviewed, Please see plan for corrections, Fire Comments 1, Storz fittings are to be provided on the existing fire hydrant, 2, Complete all required construction improvements prior to final short plat recording, Engineering Plan Review Comments 1, Need to label the private/City Utility Easements 2, Water, wastewater, and stormwater related improvements -need the test results and the tv tapes, 3, Frontage improvements including curb, landscaped planter, and sidewalk need to be built 4, Deferral permit review request has been submitted only for the top lift on NE J'h Street, The request is under the review process, The City will inform the applicant after the review process is complete, 5, Private road -paving work has to be completed, 6, AS Built drawings and mylars for the utility construction permit has to be submitted, 7, Cost data form has to be submitted 8, Bill of sale has to be submitted 9, Separate documents are required for the access and utility easement that will be provided to the City, 10, Show a table with the separate stormwater BMP's that will be applicable on the lots, Page 4 May 27, 2014 11. Permit bond will be reviewed for release after the site work is more complete. 12. Maintenance bond is required to be established after the permit bond is released. Please contact Rohini Nair at 425-430-7298 for engineering plan review items to be completed including the storm water covenant document, if required. Please contact Elizabeth Higgins at 425 430-6581 for land use items, Corey Thomas for fire items at (42.5) 430 702.4, Bob Mac Onie at (425) 730-7369 for technical services items, and Rohini Nair at 42.5-430-7298 for engineering plan review items Sincerely, Rohini Nair Plan Review Section 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. .~ lAg square feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets" Private access easements" Critical Areas' Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: -r-,--r-;-square feet f.: t tAl} square feet r ; ____ square feet 2. &J (g(p,! square feet / 3. 'k~ 03} square feet 4. o. t;Ov acres 5. --7-+---units/lots 6 . .:L!J--= 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_ RECFi\/FD •• Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded_ APR 2 ! • CITY 0:1'11 R:\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\Pianning\density.doc Last updated: 1110812004 1 Dep nent of Commun: Economic Development Permit Inform(Jtion Construction Permit: U13005672 IVR Number: 13005672 Permit Name: NE 7th Street North Short Plat Address/location: 3506 NE 7TH ST Parcel Number: 8011100045 Application Date: 10/29/2013 Permit Type: Engineering Permit Work Class: Construction Issue Date: Expiration Date: 02/04/2014 08/03/2014 Inspector: Dan Thompson (DO NOT USE) Plan Reviewer: Rohini Nair 425·430-7298 Description: UTIlITIES AND PLAT IMPROVEMENTS FOR A 4 LOT SHORT PLAT. Contacts Billing Type Name Address Phone X Applicant KYLE MiLLER PO BOX 908 B: (425) 432·5932 KRRV DEVELOPMENT LLC RAVENSDALE, WA 98051 X Contact MIKE LOMBARDO B: (206) 571·7660 Contractor JEFF & CAROLYN DENNiS PO BOX 658 B: (253) 863·1208 DENNY'S EXCAVATING INC SUMNER, WA 98390 C: (253) 381·9096 Construction Contractor: DENNYEI033DS Business Ucense Number: BL.036546 Engineer Darrell Off. 13932 SE 159TH PL 8: (425) 260·3412 Offe Engineers, PLLC RENTON, WA 98058·7832 Owner scorr DONOGH HOMES INC 1745 NilE AVE NE B: (206) 793·9424 RENTON WA 98059 H: (206) 730-0114 General CondItions & Signature 9,·s--1 • Permission Is hereby given for the work described on this permit according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and speCifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinance of the City of Renton • • This permit and plans must be posted at the Job site at all times. • I hereby certify that no work Is to be done except as described above and in approved plans, and that work Is to conform to Renton codes and ordinances. • Call (425) 430·7203 or go to; WWW.MyBuildingPermlt.com one working day In adVance to schedule an Inspections and for ANV work in the Right of Way. • Call 8 11 to locate underground utilities at least two full business days prior to any excavation • • In accordance with RCW 19.122.033(4) the permit holder is required to contact (Williams Northwest Pipeline at 425.868.10W) (Olympic Pipeline at 206.510.0S75)(Puget Sound Energv at 425.457.5816) to request a consultation with the transmission pipeline company prior to performing any construction or excavation activities . This reqUirement to consult with the transmission pipeline company Is in addition to the requirement to Call before You Dig as required In RCW 19.122. (Signature) (Date) THIS PERMIT AND PlANS MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES Page 1 of1 NE 7th North Short Plat LUA13-001131 U13005672 3506 NE ih Street Renton, Washington 98056 DRAINAGE REPORT October 29, 2013 (Updated December 18, 2013) (Updated January 14, 2014) Prepared for: KRRV Development, LLC Attn: Kyle Miller P.O. Box 908 Ravensdale, Washington 98051 (425) 432-5932 office Prepared by: Offe Engineers, PLLC Da rrell Offe, P. E. 13932 SE 159111 Place Renton, Washington 98058-7832 (425) 260-3412 office (425) 227-9460 fax darrell.offe@comcast.net f\N~l ~(:)"cc1 O\~4l20'<J Table of Contents • Technical Information Worksheet • Section 1: Project Overview • Section 2: Conditions and Requirements Summary • Section 3: Offsite Analysis • Section 4: Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design • Section 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design • Section 6: Special Reports and Studies • Section 7: Other Permits • Section 8: CSWPPP Analysis and Design • Section 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant • Section 10: Operations and Maintenance Manual City of Renton TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner: KRRV Development, LLC Address: P.O. Box 908 Ravensdale, WA 98051 Phone: (425) 432-5932 Project Engineer: Darrell Offe, P.E. Company: Offe Engineers, PLLC Address/Phone: 13932 SE 159th Place Renton, WA 98058 (425) 260-3412 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION Subdivision X Short Subdivision D Grading D Commercial D Other ________ _ Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name: NE 7t11 North Short Plat Location Township: 23 North Range: 5 East Section: 5 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS D DFW HPA D Shoreline Management D COE 404 Rockery D DOE Dam Safety Structural Vaults D FEMA Floodplain D Other D COE Wetlands Part 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community North Renton Drainage Basin Maplewood Creek/Cedar River/Lake Washington Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS D River D Floodplain D Seeps/Springs D Stream D High Groundwater Table D Critical Stream Reach D Groundwater Recharge D Depressions/Swales D Other D Lake D Steep Slopes Part 7 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Qgt 5 -10% o Additional Sheets Attached Part 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE o Ch. 4 Downstream Analysis o o o o o o Additional Sheets Attached Part 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION 0 Sedimentation Facilities 0 Stabilized Construction Entrance 0 Perimeter Runoff Control 0 Clearing and Grading Restrictions 0 Cover Practices 0 Construction Sequence 0 Other Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities minor LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT "Limited Dispersion" MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION 0 Stabilize Exposed Surface 0 Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities 0 Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris 0 Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas 0 Other Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM 0 Grass Lined Tank Infiltration Method of Analysis Channel Vault 0 Depression 2009 City of Renton 0 Pipe System 0 Energy Dissipater 0 KCRTS 0 Open Channel 0 Wetland X Flow Dispersal Compensation/M itigati 0 0 Stream 0 Waiver on of Eliminated Site Dry Pond Storage 0 Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation: Catch basins within curb line of street will convey runoff to existing City system downstream, limited dispersion of houses, perforated pipe connection to storm system, and sheet flow dispersion of driveways. Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Part 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Cast in Place VauH o Retaining Wall . Rockery > 4' High o Structural on Steep Slope D Other Limitation Part 12 EASEMENTSITRACTS Drainage Easement o X Access Easement Tract o Other Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site condi' s as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my ow edge the infonmation provided here is accurate. Si necVDate Section 1: Project Overview The proposal is to create four individual single family lots from this 28,699 square foot parcel located in the Renton Highlands near the Renton Vocational College. The property address is: 3506 NE ]'h Street; King County Tax parcel #801110-0045. The existing reSidence, and impervious areas, and out buildings on the property will be removed to create these four new lots. The property is located within the "existing conditions" area of the drainage basin map. There are no sensitive areas on the project site. The property has a gentle slope of approximately 3% towards the southwest comer of the property. The soils on the site have been identified by a Geotechnical Engineers as "gladal consolidated till" (Qgt). These soils are not suitable for Full Infiltration of storm water runoff. The soil logs indicate moist silty sands with no ground water within the holes at 4'. The drainage calculations within this report will show that the developed runoff from the project is less than 0.10 cfs during a 100-year storm event between the existing runoff and the developed (mitigated) runoff. Based upon this review and analysis, the project does not require stormwater treatment. The project does not add 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface and therefore is except from water quality treatment. Section 2: Conditions and Requirements Summary 2009 City of Renton Drainage Manual Preliminary Conditions of Short Plat Approval Section 3: Offsite Analysis The downstream system was walked on April 19th , 2013. The site drainage currently sheet flows across the property to the west and eventually entering the City storm system in NE 7th Place. The proposed development is to convey the drainage form the site into NE 7th Street and then to the west into the City storm system at Newport Court NE and NE 7th Street. This point of inflow is approximately SOO feet above the current sheet flow point. The drainage system is completely tight lined from Newport Court NE/ NE 7th Street through the City storm piping to an apartment site, Hilltop Homes Apartments downstream. The network of pipes runs 810 feet to a storm water pond within the Hilltop Apartments. The storm pipe system was visually inspected in three locations downstream; at CB #113111, CB #113118, and CB #113041. These are City of Renton storm water codes for City catch basins. The system of pipes were 12" concrete entering into Type II catch basins. There appeared to be no overtopping of the basins or capacity issues. The roadway area above these catch basins had no indication of overflow. The storm water enters into a pond within Hilltop Apartments, City node #145531. This pond is heavily over grown with trees and blackberries. A walk of the parameter of the pond shows no signs of overtopping or erosion. The parking lot to the south of the pond is about 4' below the pond berm. There were no signs of overtopping in this area either. The drainage leaves the pond and enters into Monroe Avenue NE about 200 feet north of NE 4th Street. The storm system is within the centerline of the road and was not inspected. The storm system continues to the south in Monroe Ave until it enters the City Shop Area at NE 2th Street. E5SW -09 T23N R05 ~9 "lld -t>H MS 390<l NEZ! 0 ~ -MS93 rn z m a co ;j w z ::u a c.n m z m ... en --' .... '------------ E5SW -09 T23N ROS ~ 1/4 -Pg,47 ~9 '6d -l>H MS 390!:! NEZl 0 ~ -MS93 ~ ~ , , ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \) , ~ • ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Strueturoa Renton Maintained • Type 1 Clliellbu/n or Inlel • Typtl 2. Calchbnln • Manhole =~ AcceSS Riser !Ql VluR ~ Unknown Privately Maintained • Calchbuln or Inle' e Type 2 Carchb .. III _ p.bnhole ~} A~"n Riser (QJ Vault Unknown own Maintenance m Cltchb .. !n Dr Inlel ~ C.lchbasln _Typ1l2 MH Culvert (Publlc) Olamatar =-=--Unknown ==-==-: 8".24- =-=-25"-48" :::I!::!I: 49"+ cuf~lIrt (Private) Diameter ~~-',,-, Unknown =-=-: 8-24 =-=-::: 25-48 ::::I:I 4t1 .105 Pipe (Public) !EEl Greenwood. Memorial Park Facllfty Rentan Maintained _ Pond • TIInk _ vault tit BlDSWIIIII Privat'lll\Y Malnlalned Diameter 'f!III Pond ____ Unknown ~tf'.2'" '" Tank ...... 25-:,,0-_ Vlult -.: 49". e BloSW1Il11 Pipe (Prfvate) e Rain Gilden Diameter Unknown Malntaln.nee ----Unknown 'vzJ Pond ~8"_2"· .- _ 25"· 4S" IllIZI PumpStaUon -.eg". c:::J REtffON . other Conveyance [:=:J PM Conveyanc.Type 10n Contour ___ PI"" (Unknown Malnl) -'.'-' Ditch ,-." F4NE -17 T23N ROSE NE 1/4 -Pg.72 't .. -I' -""'~ '; ,:r> Ij! ~.. ...~ ~ ,,1\1 I:t, 'S<" I')).'i,~" )154~ -"\ ~ , c! . .J ,~_> b ~~,;'l7'i' m:-Ill !,pi" """"' ~ 00 '" ; il4 :! ~ _ I-' ""~' I)'" ~ '1-ii I"""" J::'S Ill!, 0 .,1,1'1 -'" r.-t [" '~:ih, I· ,I .,,\,;.r;; I 5,6:L1 5;~''l.'<' Nf"1'I\ !11 .!d1? I ~J17 I 5768 -oJ;;. I ~ .: \. Disclaimer: This Inventory Infannatlan Is schematic only, It was complied from numerous sources. It Is the best information available at this time and should be used for general guidance only. The City of Renton Is not responsible for errors or omissions. When this information Is used for planning, design, andlor construction purposes, users are to field verify this Information. Pg.48 Surface Water Utility Asset Inventory May 2013 150 300 Feet 600 • 09 T23N R05E SE 1/4 5309 ESSE Section 4: Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design FLOW CONTROL REVIEW Based upon the City Drainage Manual, the following steps are required to determine the mitigation of storm water runoff of the developed project: Full Dispersion -N/G (no good) -the property does not have 100 feet of flow path available on each new lot; Full Infiltration -N/G -the available soils on the property are silty sandy (Alderwood) soils and do not provide adequate depth for full infiltration. Limited Infiltration -acceptable -no ground water was found in the test holes below 6 feet, therefore limited infiltration using gravel filled trenches will be utilized to treat 1,000 square feet of developed impervious runoff. The gravel filled trenches will be installed at a depth to bottom of trench of 3' (36"). The proposal is to mitigate all the Lots using gravel filled trenches located in the rear yards to treat 1,000 square feet of impervious area; to utilize sheet flow of the driveway across the front yards to mitigate the runoff from the impervious area of the driveway; to utilize perforated pipe connection at the connection to the storm conveyance system within the front yards. The frontage along NE 7th Street will be collected and conveyed into an existing public storm system located across NE 7th and west approximately 250 feet. A curb and gutter will be installed along the west side of the priVate access road (Olympic Avenue NE) to collect the runoff from the road. This runoff together with the connection to each lot will be conveyed into the NE 7th Street system. Based upon the attached analysis the following flows were developed to compare to existing runoff. Pre-Developed Condition (runoff) 2 Year 0.053 ds 10 year 0.087 cfs 100 year 0.186 cfs Mitigated Developed Condition (runoff) 2 year 0.112 cfs 10 year 0.134 cfs 100 year 0.243 ds The difference between 100 year "Pre-Developed Condition" and "Mitigated Developed Condition" is 0.243 -0.186 = 0.057. The "Mitigated Developed Condition" runoff if less than 0.10 cfs during a 100 year storm event than the "Pre-Developed Condition" runoff. Therefore, based upon the Oty Drainage Manual, no storm water detention is required for this project. The calculations for the above analysis are located within this Section. WATER OUALITY REVIEW The City Manual requires water quality treatment for projects that add 5,000 square feet or more of "new" pollution generating imperious surfaces (PGIS). The proposed developed (PGIS) condition consists of: DEVELOPED (PGIS) Access Road 5,309 Sq. feet Each Lot (D/W) ° Sq. feet (mitigated) Frontage Widening 1,536 Sq. feet Frontage Access Apron 160 So. feet Developed PGIS = 7,005 Square feet EXISTING Driveway Asphalt in Road Shoulder (PGIS) 1,088 sq. feet 1,406 sq. feet 240 so. feet Existing PGIS = 2,734 sq. feet The proposed "Developed Condition" generates 4,271 square feet of NEW PGIS. Based upon the City Drainage Manual this is less than 5,000 square feet and therefore water quality treatment is not reqUired. NE7thNorth (2) (3) Area Breakdown ** Impervious (1) Mitigated Impervious SUrface Developed Condition Lot Area Impervious Surfaces Runoff Pervious Area Breakdown (so. feet) {m. feet.} {m. feet} (s(/.. feet} {m. feet} (50% *(2)) (SO% *(2)) Lots Lotl 6720 House, walkways, patio 2300 1000 1800 500 Driveway 300 300 150 150 Road (PGIS) 1400 0 1400 Landscaping Q 2720 3350 3370 J.Qtl 6240 House, walkways, patiO 2300 1000 1800 500 Driveway 300 300 150 150 Road (PGIS) 1460 0 1460 Landscaping Q 2180 3410 2830 Lot3 7872 House, walkways, patio 1800 1000 1300 500 Driveway 300 300 150 150 Road (PGIS) 2449 0 2449 Landscaping Q 3323 3899 3973 Lot 4 7872 House, walkways, patiO 2600 1000 2100 500 Driveway 300 300 150 150 Road 0 0 0 Landscaping Q 4972 2250 5622 Frontage Sidewalk 330 330 Apron (PGIS) 160 0 160 NE 7th Street (PGIS) 1536 0 1536 Landscape strip Q 2026 14935 0.34 Acres ** -Lot mitigation indudes "limited Infiltraion" of 1,000 square feet of roof area (credit 50% impervious runoff) and "sheet fiow" dispersion of driveway (20' x 15') -each lot Mitigation of 1,300 square feet per lot Existing Condition Impervious Pervious Area Breakdown TotalAreas (sq. teeV (so. teeV Parcel 28699 House 1820 Driveway (PGIS) 1088 Walkways 512 Sheds (outbuildings) 148 landscaping 25131 Frontage 2880 Aspahlt (PGIS) 1406 Compacted garvel shoulder (PGIS) 240 Lawn 1234 5214 26365 0.12 0.61 Acn1S Acres 854 16649 0.39 Acres NE 7t11 North Short Plat (Pre Developed -pre-existing conditions) r··-="'"''''''I''::!:·-"''~Cc· .. ",' .. -, .. }4\£l!ID1;;¥mwW.\~~,1~;':.::'JiX-~~"·;" > -:.> . --: ,. Area -· .. --.c i : Till Foresti 0.00 acresl TIll Pa stu rei 0.00 acresi Till Grassi 0.61 acresl Outwash Fores~ 0.00 acres! Outwash Pasturel 0.00 acresi Outwash Grassl 0.00 acres! Wetlandl 0.00 acres! , ; Imperviousl 0.12 acres! '-------~----"--., . Total--· -, r 0.73 acresl '--! Scale Factor: 1.00 Hourly Reduced TIme Series: INE 7th North Short Plat (pre-ex) 1»1 Compute TIme Series 1 Modify User Input 1 File for computed Time Series (.TSF] Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:ne 7th north short plat (pre-ex). tsf Project Locatian:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flov Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.084 4 2/09/01 2 :00 0.186 1 100.00 0.990 0.053 6 1/05/02 16 :00 0.104 2 25.00 0.960 0.104 2 2/27/03 7 :00 0.OS7 3 10.00 0.900 0.041 8 8/26/04 2 :00 0.084 4 5.00 0.800 0.053 7 10/28/04 16 :00 0.080 5 3.00 0.667 0.087 3 1/18/06 16 :00 0.053 6 2.00 0.500 0.080 5 11/24/06 3: 00 0.053 7 1.30 0 .231 0.186 1 1/09/08 6 :00 0.041 8 1. 10 0.091 J Computed Peaks 0 . 158 50.00 0.980 . , I NE 7th North Short Plat (Developed Conditions) \?;~~=J:==~:~,~2r;":'T?: - ,-Area --~-, ! : Till Fores~ . I TIll pasturel Till Grassi , Outwash Fores, Outwash Pasturel Outwash Grassl , Wetland! 0.00 acresi i 0.00 acres! I 0.39 acresl I 0.00 acresl 0.00 acres! . I 0.00 acres! 0.00 acresl . j i Impervious, 0.34 acresl Scale Factor: 1.00 ,----------:------' r-Total----l_~ 0.73 acresl' Hourly Reduced Time Series: INE 7th North (Developed Conditions) 1 »1 Compute Time Series 1 Modify User Input 1 ., ~ --. File for computed Time Series [.TSF) Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:ne 7th north (developed conditions).tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Anaiysis------- FloW' Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period o _ll7 5 2/09/01 2 :00 0.243 1 100.00 0_ 990 0.090 8 1/05/02 16 .00 0.142 2 25.00 0_ 960 0.142 2 2/27/03 7 :00 0.134 3 10.00 O. 900 0_092 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.124 4 5,00 O. 800 o .ll2 6 10/28/04 16:00 o .ll7 5 3.00 O. 667 0.124 4 1/18/06 16:00 o _ll2 6 2.00 O. 500 0, 134 3 10/26/06 0:00 0_092 7 1. 30 0_ 231 O. 243 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.090 8 1.10 O. 091 Computed Peaks 0,209 50.00 O. 980 .( II C.2.3 LIMITED INFILTRATION C.2.3 LIMITED INFIL TRA TION Limited infiltration is the use of infiltration devices from Section C.2.2 in soils that are not as permeable as the medium sands or coarse sands/cobbles targeted for full infiltration in Section C.2.2. These less desirable soils include fine sands, loamy sands, sandy loams, and loams, which tend to be mOre variable in permeability, more frequently saturated during the wet season, and more prone to plugging over time. While full infiltration may be possible under the best of these soil conditions, in the long run, these conditions will conspire to limit average infiltration capacity to something much less than that of full infiltration. Therefore, using limited infiltration as specified in this section will not be credited the same as using full infiltration as specified in Section C.2.2. Applicable Surfaces Limited infiltration may be applied to any impervious surface (e.g., root; driveway, parking area, or road) subject to the minimum requirements and design specifications in this section. Operation and Maintenance See Section C.2.3.5 (p. CoSO). C.2.3.t REQUIRED SOILS REPORT In order to properly design limited infiltration devices, a soils report is required to identilY the depth to impermeable layers (Le., hardpan) and to the maximum wet season groundwater level. See Section C.2.2.1 (p. C-4I) for more details on this report. In many cases, this report will have already been prepared as required in Sections C.1.3.1 and C.1.3.2 forlots where full dispersion is not feasible or applicable to target impervious surface per Section C.2.1. C.2.3.2 MINIMUM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION The minimum requirements for limited infiltration are the same as those for full infiltration, except infiltration depressions are excluded and existing soils in the location of the infiltration device may be fine sands, loamy sands, sandy loarns, or loams as opposed to only medium sands or better. Note that gravel and medium sand soils usedfor full infiltration correspond to Soil Types lA. lB. 2A and 2B in the Soil Textural Classification system used for onsite septic system design; fine sands are Type 3; and loamy sands, sandy loams and loams are Type 4 soils. Silt and clay loams. and cemented till (hardpan) are nat suitable for limited infiltration systems. C.2.3.3 USE OF GRAVEL FILLED TRENCHES FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION The specifications for use of gravel filled trenches for limited infiltration are the same as those used for ;. full infiltration, except tha I im surface requires different _____ ~~ trench lengths as follows a) 75 feet if the soil is a fine sand/loamy sand, b) 12S feet if the soil is a sandy loam, or (c) 190 fee C.2.3.4 USE OF DRYWELLS FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION The specifications for use ofdrywells for limited infiltration are the same as those used for full infiltration, except that every 1,000 square feet of tributary impervious surface requires different gravel volumes as follows: (a) 230 cubic feet ifthe soil is a fine sand/loamy sand, (b) 380 cubic feet ifthe soil is a sandy loam, or (c) 570 cubic feet if the soil is a loam. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual-Appendix C 11912009 C-49 - SECTION C.2 FLOW CONTROL __ Ys C.2.3.S MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION ~D • 1/9/2009 Ifthe limited infiltration flow control BMP is proposed for a project, the following maintenance and operation instructions must be recorded as an attachment to the required declaration of covenant and grant of easement per Requirement 3 of Section C.1.3.3 (p. C-18). The intent of these instructions is to explain to future property owners, the purpose of the BMP and how it must be maintained and operated. These instructions are intended to be a minimum; DDES may require additional instructions based on site- specific conditions. Also, as the County gains more experience with the maintenance and operation of these BMPs, future updates to the instructions will be posted on King County's Surface Water Design Manual website. TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) called "limited infiHration," which was installed to mitigate the stonnwater quantity and quality impacts of some or all of the impervious surfaces on your property. Umited infiHration is a method of soaking runoff from impervious area (such as paved areas and roofs) into the ground. Infiltration devices, such as gravel filled trenches, drywells, and ground surface depressions, facilitate this process by putting runoff in direct contact with the soil and holding the runoff long enough to soak most of it into the ground. To be successful, the soil condition around the infiltration device must be able to soak water into the ground for a reasonable number of years. The infiltration devices used on your property include the following as indicated on the flow control BMP site plan, D gravel filled trenches, D drywells. The size, placement, and composition of these devices as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without writlen approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development pennit from King County. Infiltration devices must be inspected annually and after major stonn events to identify and repair any physical defects. Maintenance and operation of the system should focus on ensuring the system's viability by preventing sediment-laden flows from entering the device. Excessive sedimentation will result in a plugged or non-functioning facility. If the infiHration device has a catch basin, sediment accumulation must be removed on a yearly basis or more frequently if necessary. Prolonged ponding around or atop a device may indicate a plugged facllity. If the device becomes plugged, it must be replaced. Keeping the areas that drain to infiltration devices well swept and clean will enhance the longevity of these devices. For roofs, frequent cleaning of gutlers will reduce sediment loads to these devices . 2009 Surface Water Design Manual-Appendix C C-50 6" 12" : C.2.2 FUlL INFILTRATION FIGURE C.2.2.A TYPICAL TRENCH INFIL TRA nON SYSTEM PLAN VIEW NTS ~ 4" rigid or 6" flexible / perforated pipe .' ' .. _. ----_ ..... _ .. -_. -. _. _. - -_. _ ..... --_. _ ..... . roof drain infiltration trench sump wlsolid lid PLAN VIEW NTS ,'--U---"-' 4" rigid or 6" flexible perforated pipe . _ .... -_. -.. _ .. ---"'-" --- ---_.--. overflow splash block /Q <> ' : 0C:I!:'=======~~~===~ ~Q 0 Q washed rock c" (\ 0 Q 0 ~ (\ a-=------1 112"-3/4" . '--I ::. EI a '" ¢ : roof drain .... ':. ...... b; .......... _ ........ ~.o g.~ .. .0 •• 0 • 0 ~F . I I fine mesh CB sump wlsolid lid C!l'l'c.or"t varies A filter fabric-, H compacted backfill ~," .,~~~~~ r 0 4" rigid or 6" flexible perforated pipe 24" washed rock /<;------1 112"·314" I .. 24"-J SECTION A NTS 2009 Surface Water Design Manual-Appendix C 11912009 C-45 C.1.3 ~ PLICA nON OF FLOW CONIROL BMPS C.1.3 APPLICATION OF FLOW CONTROL BMPS Flow control EMPs are methods and designs for dispersing, infiltrating, or otherwise reducing or preventing development-related increases in runoff at or near the sources of those increases. Flow control BMPs include, but are not limited to, preservation and use of native vegetated surfaces to fully disperse runoff; use of other pervious surfaces to disperse runoff; roof downspout infiltration; permeable pavements; rainwater harvesting; vegetated roofs; and reduction of development footprint. For projects subject to Small Project Drainage Review, the application of flow control BMPs is mandatory for individual lot projects (i.e., projects not subdividing land) and is optional for subdivision projects unless otherwise specified by DOES. For individual lot projects, flow control BMPs must be applied as specified by one of the following two sets ofBMP requirements, whichever is applicable based on the size of sitellot: • "Small Lot BMP Requirements" (for sitesllots <22,000 square feet), Section C.I.3.1 • "Large Lot BMP Requirements" (for sitesllots ;,22,000 square feet), Section C.1.3.2 These requirements specifY both the order of preference for selection of flow control BMPs and their extent of application to the developed surfaces of an individual 101 project. This application of requirements is illustrated by the flow chart in Figure C.1.3.A (p. C-123). In addition, the implementation of flow control BMPs by projects on either size of sitellol must be in accordance with the "BMP Implementation Requirements" detailed in Section C.1.3.3. If the proposed project is a single family residential subdivision (i.e., plat or short plat project), the application of flow control BMPs for future anticipated improvements on the lots created by the subdivision may be deferred until an individual lot project is proposed for permit approval on each lot. Alternatively, the BMPs required for anticipated improvements on each lot may be installed as part ofthe subdivision project ifthe applicant so chooses. In either case, the required application ofBMPs, in terms of order of preference and extent of application to developed surfaces, is the same as that for an individual lot project (i.e., as specified in Sections C.1.3.1 or C.1.3.2, and C.I.3.3). Note: road right-of-way improvements constructed as part of a subdivision project may require implementation of flow control EMPs or other mitigation as determined necessary by DDES. C.1.3.1 SMALL LOT BMP REQUIREMENTS Any proposed project that is on an individual sitellot smaller than 22,000 square feet must comply with the flow control BMP application requirements in this section. A. MITIGATION OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE For projects subject to small lot BMP requirements, flow control BMPs must be applied to the projecfs target impe11lious sUrface according to the order of preference and extent of application specified in the following requirements: I. The feasibility and applicability of full dispersion as detailed in Section C.2.1 (p. C-26) must be evaluated for the roof area (or an impervious area of equivalent size) on the site/lot. If feasible and applicable, full dispersion of roofrunoffmust be implemented as part of the proposed project. Typically, small lot full dispersion will be applicable only in subdivisions where enough forest was preserved by tract, easement, or covenant to meet the minimum requirements for full dispersion in Section C.2.l.1 (p. C-26). If this first requirement is met for the sitellot, no other flow control BMPs are required for mitigation of impervious surface, and the remaining requirements below are optional. 2. Where full dispersion of roof runoff (or equivalent) is not feasible or applicable, or will cause flooding or erosion impacts, the feasibility and applicability of full infiltration as detailed in Section C.2.2 (p. C-4I) must be evaluated for roof runoff (note, this will require a soils report for the site/lot). 2009 Surface Water Design Manual-Appendix C 1/912009 C-13 SECTION C.I SMALL PROJECT DRAINAGE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS 11912009 If feasible and applicable, full infiltration of roof runoff must be implemented as part of the proposed project. If this requirement or the full dispersion requirement above is met for the site/lot, no other flow control BMPs are required, and the remaining requirements below are optional. 3. Where full dispersion or full infiltration of roof runoff as specified in Requirements 1 and 2 above is not feasible or applicable, or will cause flooding or erosion impacts, one or more of the following BMPs must be applied to (or used to mitigate for) an impervious area equal to at least 10% of the sitellot for sitellot sizes up to 11,000 square feet and at least 20% of the sitellot for sitellot sizes between 11,000 and 22,000 sqnare feet. For projects located within a critical aquifer recharge area,'0 these impervious area amounts must be doublecl The BMPs listed below may be located anywhere on the silellot subject to the limitations and design specifications for each BMP. These BMPs must be implemented as part of the proposed project. • Limited Infiltration (see Section C.2.3) • Basic Dispersion (see Section C.2.4), • Rain Garden (see Section C.2.5), • Permeable Pavement (see Section C.2.6), • Rainwater Harvesting (see Section C.2.7), • Vegetated Roof(see Section C.2.8), • Reduced Impervious Surface Credit (see Section C.2.9), • Native Growth Retention Credit (see Section C.2.IO). 4. Any proposed pipe connection of roof downspouts to the local drainagesystem" must be via a . perforated pipe connection as detailed in Section C.2.l L B. MITIGATION OF NEW PERVIOUS SURFACE For projects subject to small lot BMP requirements, no flow control BMPs are required for new pervious surface. Note, however, that KCC 16.82.100(G) requires amendment of the soil to mitigate for lost moisture holding capacity in any area that has been compacted or that has had some or all of the duff layer or underlying topsoil removed. The amendment must be such that the replaced topsoil is a minimum of 8 inches thick, unless the applicant demonstrates that a different thickness will provide conditions equivalent to the soil moisture holding capacity native to the sile. The replaced topsoil must have an organic content of8-13% dry weight and a pH suitable for the proposed suiface vegetation (for most soils in King County, 4 inches of well-rotted compost tilled into the top 8 inches of soil is sufficient to achieve the organic content standard). The amendment must take place between May I and October I. C. MITIGATION OF WATER QUALITY IMPACTS For projects subject to small lot BMP requirements, most water quality impacts will be adequately adclressed through proper application of flow control BMPs to impervious surface as specified above. However, if the project results in 5,000 square feet or more of now pollution-generating impervious sUiface from which runoff is not fully dispersed in accordance with Section C.2.1 (p. C-26), then one of the following actions must be taken: 10 Critical aquifer recharge area is the critical area designation, defined and regulated in KeC 21A, that is applied to areas where extra protection of groundwater quantity and quality is needed because of known susceptibility to contamination and importance to drinking water supply. Such areas are delineated on the King County Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Map available at DOES or on the County's Geographic Information System (GIS). See the definition of this leon in KeC 21A06 for more details. 11 Local drainage system means any natural or constructed drainage feature that collects and concentrates runoff from the site and discharges it downstream. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual-Appendix C C·14 Section 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design The analysis of the new conveyance system is attached to this Section. The new conveyance system was analyzed using the "Rational Method of Analysis" per section 3.2 King County Drainage Manual. The calculated 25 year storm event was 3.96 cfs from runoff of the existing upstream area and the developed site conditions (NE 7or. North Short Plat). Based upon this flow, a backwater analysis was performed on the new system (see attached). The analysis concluded that the storm system is adequate to convey the 25 year event. Rational Method Runoff from Basin 2S year event P(25) 3.40 inches (from attached Isopluvials Map) A(T) 4.20 acres Areas A(l) 3.50 acres single family residential1.4DU/GA -existing A(2) 0.70 acres single family residential 5.7 DU/GA -development (NE 7th North) A(T) Description of flow Path L1 250 feet L2 L3 220 feet 170 feet Composite Runoff Coefficient A(l); C(1) 0.33 A(2); C(2) 0.54 ......... ----- 51 s2 s3 0.05 0.10 0.08 C© 3.50*0.33 + 0.70*0.54/4.20 0.37 Time of Concentration T(l) 2S0/60*{(7.0)*(0.OS)**0.S)} T(2) 220/60*{(10.1)*(0.10)**0.s)} T(3) 170/60*{(20.0)*(0.08)**0.5)} Compute i® i®~(aR)*(Tc) i® ~ 2.66*7**-0.65 Compute 1(25) 1(25)~(P2s)*(i2s) I(25)~3.40*0.75 Q(2s) ~ C*I(25)*A Q(25) ~ 0.37*2.55*4.20 USE 0.75 2.55 -] [3.96 cfs I Lawn/landscaping Nearly bare ground Asphalt 3 minutes 2 minutes 1 minute 7 minutes k® 7.0 10.1 20.0 3.2.1 RATIONAL METIlOD TABLE 3.2.I.A RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS -"e" VALUES FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD General Land Covers Single Family Residential Areas Land Cover C Land Cover Density C Dense forest 0.10 0.20 DU/GA (1 un~ per 5 ac.) 0.17 Light forest 0.15 0.40 DU/GA (1 un~ per 2.5 ac.) 0.20 Pasture 0.20 0.80 DU/GA (1 un~ per 1.25 ac.) 0.27 Lawns 0.25 1.00 DU/GA 0.30 Playgrounds 0.30 1.50 DU/GA 0.33 "- Gravel areas 0.80 2.00 DU/GA 0.36 Pavement and roofs 0.90 2.50 DU/GA 0.39 Open water (pond, lakes, 1.00 3.00 DU/GA 0.42 weUands) 3.50 DU/GA 0.45 4.00 DU/GA 0.48 4.50 DU/GA 0.51 A .L 5.00 DU/GA 0.54 "- u)· 5.50 DU/GA 0.57 6.00 DU/GA 0.60 • Based on average 2,500 square feet per lot of impervious coverage. For combinations of land covers listed above, an area-weighted "Cc:x A," sum should be computed based on the equation Cc: x A, = (Ct X At) + (C2 x A 2 ) + ... +(C.x A.), where A, = (At + A2 + ... +A.), the total drainage basin area. TABLE 3.2.1.B COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD "iR" EQUATION Design Stonn Return Frequency "R bR 2 years 1.58 0.58 5 years 2.33 0.63 10 years 2.44 0.64 25 years 2.66 0.65 ~ ~ 50 years 2.75 0.65 100 years 2.61 0.63 TABLE3.2.I.C kR VALUES FOR T, USING THE RATIONAL METHOD Land Cover Category kR Forest wiHh heavy ground litter and meadow 2.5 Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation 4.7 Short grass pasture and lawns C0 Nea~y bare ground ~ Grassed waterway 15.0 --Paved area (sheet flow) and shallow gutter flow (20.0) 2009 Surface Water Design ManuaJ 119/2009 3-13 SECTION 3,2 RUNOFF COMPUTATION AND ANALYSIS METHODS i FIGURE 3.2.I.C 25-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS <0 "'. WESTERN KING COUNTY 25-Year 24-Hour Precipitation in Inches 11912009 q ," ., I ~ , , , , ' ,,' .\;; '\ "-.f,'~ .. ~-';--i ,~, " J o 2 4 Miles 1;;;' ==1' .... """'" 3-16 ---;;;-- " ",. <0 ",. '\ ",. '!> C) ",~. <::> 'J '1" 2009 Surface Water Design Manual STORMWATER CONVEYANCE BACKWATER CALCULATION SHEET I (1) I (2) I (3) I (4) I (5) I (6) I (7) I (8) I (9) (10) (11) (12) Barrel Entrance Entrance Pipe 125 year 1 Pipe Outlet Inlet Barrel Barrel Velocity TW Friction HGL Head Segment Q Length Pipe "n" Elev Elev Area Velocity Head Elev Loss Elev Loss ft) Size Value (feet) (feet) (SQ. feet) (fos) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet~ 0 12" 0.011 382.07 382.37 0.7854 5.04 0.39 382.20 0.0054 382.21 0.08 #1-#2 1 3.96 1 230 12" 0.011 382.37 384.67 0.7854 5.04 0.39 383.36 0.0054 383.36 0.08 #2 -#3 3.96 89 1211 0.011 386.30 391.12 0.7854 5.04 0.39 387.50 0.0054 386.11 0.08 #2 -#4 I 1.45 I 20 I 1211 I 0.011 I 384.67 385.60 0.7854 1.85 0.05 386.11 0.004 386.11 0.01 (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) Exit Outlet Inlet Approach Bend Junction Head Control Control Velocity Head Head HW RIM ELEV Loss Elev Elev Head Loss Loss Elev UPSTREAM (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) CB 0.39 . 382.68 383.75 0.39 0 0 383.36 385.40 OK! 0.39 383.83 386.50 0.39 0 0 386.11 389.30 OK! 0.39 386.58 392.00 0.39 0 0 391.61 394.12 OK! 0.05 386.18 387.50 0.39 1.3 0 388.41 390.50 OK! l.: oW c: .!! " IE .. 0 (.) .. .. 0 ...J 4.2.1 PIPE SYSTEMS -METHODS OF ANALYSIS FIGURE 4.2.1.K BEND HEAD LOSSES IN STRUCTURES 1.2 f----~~~..--+---_+--I 1.0 0.8 0.5 r f Bend at Manhole, no Special Shaping Deflector Bend at Manhole, Curved or Deflector I I I 0.4 f-----+---....:...,/t--+--f-_+---__+----;--I Curved Sewer r/D=2 ! 0.2 t----+---:;f-++-~,,£..--+---__+---+-_I Sewer r/D>S 0.0 ~'--'---~--'---:':-::--'--~:----'--_'_-:--..._L-:--___' 0" 20" 40" SO" 80" 90" 100" Deflection Angle 1', Degrees 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9/2009 4-27 SECTION 4.3 CULVERTS AND BRIDGES TABLE 4.3.I.B ENTRANCE LOSS COEFFICIENTS Type of Structure and Design Entrance Coefficient, K. Pi~, Concrete, PVC, S~iral Rib, DI, and LCPE (I: p " Projecting from fill, socket (bell) end 0.2 -'V ) Projecting from fill, square cut end 0.5 Headwall, or headwall and wingwalls Socket end of pipe (groove-end) 0.2 Square-edge 0.5 Rounded (radius = '/"D) 0.2 Mitered to conform to fill slope 0.7 End section conforming to fill slope' 0.5 Beveled edges, 33.7" or 45° bevels 0.2 Side-or slope-tapered inlet 0.2 Pi~e, or Pille-Arch Corrugated Metal and Other Non-Concrete or D.1. Projecting from fill (no headwall) 0.9 Headwall, or headwall and wingwalls (square-edge) 0.5 Mttered to conform to fill slope (paved or unpaved slope) 0.7 End section conforming to fill slope' 0.5 Beveled edges, 33.7° or 45° bevels 0.2 Side-or slope-tapered inlet 0.2 Box, Reinforced Concr!:le Headwall parallel to embankment (no wingwalls) Square-edged on 3 edges 0.5 Rounded on 3 edges to radius of '/12 barrel dimension or beveled 0.2 edges on 3 sides Wingwalls at 30° to 75° to barrel Square-edged at crown 0.4 Crown edge rounded to radius of '/" barrel dimension or beveled top 0.2 edge Wingwall at 10° to 25° to barrel Square-edged at crown 0.5 Wingwalls parallel (extension of sides) Square-edged at crown 0.7 Side-or slope-tapered inlet 0.2 • Note: "End section conforming to fill slope" are the sections commonly available from manufacturers. From limited hydrauliC tests they are equivalent in operafjon to a headwall in both inlet and ouUet control. Some end sec/ions incorporating a closed taper in their design have a superior hydraulic performance. 119/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 4-42 E5SW -09 T23N R05E S' -Pg.47 J !JI J I ~ M MS 3S0l:l N£l.l 0 ~ -MS93 I m '" z m a <0 ;j to Z ::c a '" m z m Section 6: Special Reports and Studies Geotechnical Study attached ------ GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTSJ INC. Geotechnical Engineering and Earth Sciences August 15, 2013 Mr. Mike Lombardo KRRV Development, LLC P. O. Box 908 Ravensdale, WA 98051 SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Proposed 4-Lot 7th Street North Plat 3506 NE th Street Renton, Washington Project No. 13-121-01 Dear Mike, This report presents the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the site of your proposed new residential development on the ·subject property. The purpose of our work was to provide geotechnical engineering evaluations of the site and geotechnical recommendations for the residential development including design of foundations, site grading, site drainage and erosion control. Our work was performed in accordance with the scope and conditions of our proposal dated July 22, 2013. A site topographic map and development plan (see Figure 2) was provided to us and was used as a reference for our evaluations. Based on our review of the plan provided and discussions with you, we understand that the property will be divided into 4 lots and the development will include a new 2-to 3-story wood-frame residence on each of the new lots. The structures will include ground itlvel garages which will have slab-on- grade floors and the remainder of structures may have raised floors with crawl space or slab-on-grade. We assume that bearing wall loads will be in the range of about 2 to 3 kif and maximum column loads to be in the range of about 10 to 20 kips. If actual structural loads exceed the above values by more than 25%, this office should be notified. Review of the Renton online Sensitive Areas Maps indicates that the property is not indicated to be within a Landslide Hazard, ErCJSion Hazard, Seismic Hazard or Coal Mine Hazard area. P.o. Box 276./ssaquah. WA 98027-0276· Phone: (425) 391-4228 Fax: (425) 391-4228 • KRRV Development, LLC August 15, 2013 SCOPE OF WORK Our geotechnical evaluation included review of geologic mapping, site explorations, engineering analyses and evaluations and the preparation of this report. The scope of work included the following specific tasks: o Review of published geologic mapping of the site vicinity and our recent explorations on the adjacent property to the east. o Performed a reconnaissance of the site as well as observations of the adjacent developed lots to the east. o Observed and logged four test pit explorations on the site (see Figure 2) to depths up to 4 feet below existing ground. Logs of the test pits and results of field and laboratory testing are presented in the Test Pit summaries of Appendix A along with log~ of adjacent explorations on the adjoining property to the east. o Performed geotechnical engineering evaluations of the proposed site development and developed our geotechnical recommendations for foundation design and site grading. o Prepared this geotechnical report summarizing our findings and recommendations. OBSERVED SITE CONDITIONS The property is bordered on the west, north and east by developed residential lots (we previous~ performed geotechnical evaluations for new development along the south side of 7 Street). At the time of our field exploration the property was developed with a residence and some small sheds and a hot tub as shown in Figure 2. The topographic mapping included on the site plan of Figure 2 indicates that the property generally slopes very gently down to the westlsouthwest at gradients that range from less than 3 percent up to about 6 percent in localized areas and overall average gradients across the property from n~rtheast to southwest are less than 3 percent with a maximum elevation difference across the property of about 8 feet from northeast to southwest. The site was well vegetated primarily with grasses but also included shrubs, ivy, elderberry and numerous evergreen trees to 3+ feet in diameter as shown on Figure 2. We did not observe any seeps or springs or evidence of current or past erosion on the site. Project No. 13-121-01 Page 2